03-1131Council File # O�J� `�
Green Sheet # � b0 �'� `-� �
RESOLUTION
CITY OF SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA
Presented By
Referred To
Committee: Date
��
2 WHEREAS, Robert Clapp made application to the Boazd of Zoning Appeals,
3 (hereinafter `BZA") for a variance from the strict application of the provisions of the Saint Paul
4 Zoning Code for property located at 1016 McLean Avenue and legally described as contained in
5 Zoning File No. 03-326083; and
6
7 WHEREAS, the purpose of the application was to vary the standazds of the zoning code
8 so as to split the parcel described above and build a new single family house; and
9
10 WHEREAS, the BZA conducted a public hearing on July 28, 2003, after having
11 provided norice to affected property owners, and the Board, at the conclusion of the public
12 hearing, laid the matter over to August 11, 2003, because the applicant, Mr. Clapp, did not
13 appear at the public hearing and there was opposition present at the public hearing; and
14
15 WHEREAS, on August 11, 2003, the public hearing was reopened for the purpose of
16 having the applicant, Mr. Clapp, appear. Given that Mr. Clapp did not appear at this hearing, the
17 matter was closed and the Board of Zoning Appeals voted to deny the variance application based
18 upon the following findings:
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
2.
The properiy in question can be put to a reasonable use under the strict provisions of the
code.
The property owner states that when she purchased the vacant lot next to her house, she
was told that it was a buildable lot and at one time apparently had a house on it. After she
bought the lot, she combined it with the lot her house sits on. She would now like to sell
the lot and has found a prospective purchaser who intends to build a new single family
home on the lot. However, the existing house at 1016 McLean Avenue was built 2.8 feet
from the property line between the lots and separating these two lots wouid create a
nonconforming setback as well as two nonconforming lots instead of one conforming
parcel.
The plight of the land owner is due to circuxnstances unique to this property, and these
circumstances were not created by the land owner.
Once this lot was combined with the adjacent lot, the current setback requirement
prevents separating the lots again without a variance. This is a circumstance that the
applicant should have investigated before she combined the two lots.
03- ����
3 3. The proposed variance is in keeping with the spirit and intent of the code, and is
4 consistent with the health, safety, comfort, morals and welfare of the inhabitants of the
5 City of St. Paul.
C�
7 Saint Paul has set a goal to create 5,000 new housing units within the City. The proposed
8 variances would allow the crearion of a new housing unit in the City and are consistent
with this housing goal.
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
4. The proposed variance will impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent
properry, alter the essential zoning chazacter of the surrounding area and may
unreasonably diminish established property values within the surrounding azea.
The applicant has not submitted any plans showing how the vacant lot will be developed.
Depending on the location of the new house on the vacant lot, the reduced setback on the
existing house may affect the supply of light ar air into that proposed new house.
Without plans for the proposed new house, it is impossible to deterxnine what effect the
requested variances wiil have on the surrounding area.
5. The variance, if granted, would not permit any use that is not permitted under the
provisions of the code far the property in the district where the affected land is located,
nor would it alter or change the zoning district classification of the property.
A single-family home is a permitted use in this district. The proposed variance, if
granted, would not change or alter the zoning classification of the property.
6. The request for variance appears to be based primarily on a desire to increase the value or
income potential of the parcel of land.
The applicant has no plans to develop the proposed lot and apparently these requests for
variances are desired in order to gain the income from the sale of the lot.
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of Legislative Code § 64.205 Robert Clapp duly
filed with the City Clerk an appeal from the determination made by the Boazd of Zoning Appeals
requesting that a hearing be held before the City Council for the purpose of considering the
actions taken by the said Board; and
WHEREAS, acting pursuant to I,egislative Code §§ 64.205 - 208, and upon notice to
affected parties, a pubiic hearing was duly conducted by the City Council on October i, 2003,
where all interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard; and
WHEREAS, the Council, having heazd the statements made and having considered the
variance application, the report of staff, the record, minutes and resolution of the Board of
Zoning Appeals, does hereby;
Q Vy � ���
ItESOLVE, that the Council of the City of Saint Paul does hereby reverse the decision of
the Board of Zoning Appeals in this matter, based upon the following findings of the Council:
The Board of Zoning Appeals has ened in findings No. 1 and No.2. The property
cannot be put to a reasonable use. Disallowing the construction of a new home
simpiy because the previous owner had combined the parcels into one lot and the
owner of the lot abutting the combined lots had constructed a house too close to
the boundary was a situation not created by the appellant.
and be it
FURTHER RESOLVED, that the appeal of Robert Clapp be and is hereby granted; and
be it
FINALLY RESOLVED, that the City Clerk shall mail a copy of this resolution to
Robert Clapp, the Zoning Administrator, the Planning Commission, and the Board of Zoning
Appeais.
. _ _ � . 03-�t �
� Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Shee.t �
DepartmeMlof(ce/council: PaEe lnitiated:
� -L;�,�enes��tlo�„��o�t OSDEC-03 Green Sheet NO: 3008795
Co�tact Person 8 Phone:
DeoartrnerK SerkToPerson Im t � /6 �
Peter Wamer 0 icevse/Ins fi n/Environ Pro
2 ���� pssign 1 'ceosellns ctiodEnvironPro De artmentDire Mr
Must 6e on Council Agenda by (Date): Number 2 • A � m �(
For
Routing 3 a or's ce Ma dASSisfa t
- O�� 4 ouucii
5 " Clerk C" Clerk
Totai # of Signature Pages _(Clip All Locations for Signature) �
Action Requested:
Approval of a resolurion memorializiug the City Council decision to grant the appeal of Robert Clapp from a decision of the Boazd of
Zaning Appeals. Council acrion date was October 1, 2003.
Recommendations: Approve (A) or Rejed (R): . � Personal Service CoMracts Must Answer the Foliowing Questions: ,
Planning Commission 1. Has this persoNfirm ever worked under a co�tcact for this departrnent?
CIB Committee Yes No �
� Civil Service Commission 2. Has this person/firtn ever been a city employee? -
Yes No
� 3. Does this person/firm possess a skill not normaily possessed by any �
, , current city empioyee? -
Yes No
' Explain all yes answers on separete sheet and attach to green sheet
Initiating Problem, Issues, Opportunity (Who, What, When, Where, Why): .
The BZA conducted a public heaiing on 3uly 28, 2003, after having provided notice to affected property owners, and the Boazd, at the
conclusion of the public heazing laid the ma4ter over to Augast 11, 2003 as Mr. Clapp did not appeaz. Mr. Clapp tkien failed to appeaz,
again, at the August 11 2003 BZA meeting so his appea] was denied for this and other reasons:
Mr. Clapp then appealed the BZA's decision to the Council on October 1, 2003. The Council gtanted Mr. Clapp's appeal.
AdvanqgeslfApproved: � �
Disadvantaaes If Approved:
DisadvatrtaStes If Not Approved:
Total Amoant of Cast/Revenue Bud eted:
Transaction: 9 � ��3�c7PCh Q?� wY
Funding Source: - Activity Number:
Financial infortnation:
DEC 3 � 2��
(E�cPlain) .
o3-ti3J
OFFICE OF ISCINSE, INSPECITONS AND
EN VIItONMENTAL PROTECiTON
Tmleers E. Rosns, D'vector
CTTY OF SAINT PAUL LOWRPPROFESSZONALBUILDA'G r��r,�„e: es�-zr�-�o
Rmrdy C. Ke11y, Mayo� Suite 300 �Paasimile: 651-266-9099
3505kPeterSneet . .«,,«�:,.
Sa�rPaul, Mmsiecota SS. � ��7'ICE OF PUBLIC HEARING -
September 11, 2003
Ms. Mazy Erickson
Council Reseazch Office
Room 310 City Hall
$ZIllt P3U�, IVIN, 551�2
Dear Ms. Erickson:
- The Saint Paul City CouncIl will con-
. duct a publie hearing�on Wednesday, Oc-
tober 1, �2003, at�"5:30 p.m. in the City
Council Chambers, 1`hird Floor; City
Hall-Courthouse, 15 West Kel�ngg
Boulevazd,�Saint Paui, NIIV, to consider
the appeal of R.obert Clapp, Itivei Run
Propertfes; to a decision of the Board of
Zoning Appeals denying three variances
in order to split-groperty and create a
new and buildable lot at 1016 McI:ean
Aveaue. - � � ,
Dated: 5eptember 1S, 2003 �
MARYERICKSON, - �-
Assistant City Council Seeretary
(September 25)
__' __— S7; PAUE LEGAL LEDGER =— —_
22070149 - ��
I would 1�1ce to confirm that a public hearing before the City Coimcil is scheduled for Wednesday,
October 1, 2003 for the following wning case:
Appellant: Robert Clapp, River Run Properties
971 Sibley Memorial Hwy.
Lilydale, Mn. 55118
Zoning File #:
Purpose:
Location:
Staff
District 8:
Boazd:
03-326083
Appeal a decision of the Boazd of Zonmg Appeals denymg three variances m
order to split this properiy and create a new buildable lot..
1016 McLeau Ave.
Recommended approval
No recommendation at the time of the hearmg.
Denied on a 7-0 vote
I have confirmed this date with the office of Coimcil Member Kathy Lantry. My understanding is that
this public hearmg request will appear on the agenda of the City Council at your earliest convenience
aud that you will publish notice of the hearing m the Samt Paul Legal I.edger. Thanks !
Smcerely,
Jolm Hardwick, Zoning Specialist
�
AA-ADA-EEO Empioyer
a�'i/3/
�
OFfTCE OF LICEVSE, LuSPEC70NS yYD
�VII20NiYEiv'IAL PROTECTtON
Jmreen E. Rosas. D�rector
CITY �F .Sa 1�1'T P�jJ7, LOWRYPROFESSIOTiAL3IilLDING Telephone: 651-266-9090
Randy C. Kelly, ;Ylayor Suite 300 Faesvmle: 6�i-?66-9099
3�0 SG Peter Street 6�1-?66-91??
Saint Paul, Minnesota 551 02-1 5 1 0 Web: www.ci.stpauZrcuslliep
�
�
September 11, 2003
Ms. Mary Erickson
Council Reseazch Office
Room 310 City Hall
Saint Paul, NN. 55102
Dear Ms. Erickson:
I would like to confirm that a public hearing before the City Council is scheduled for Wednesday,
October 1, 2003 for the following zoning case:
Appellant: Robert Clapp, River Run Properties
971 Sibley Memorial Hwy.
Lilydale, Mn. 5511$
Zoning File #:
Purpose:
Location:
StafF:
District 8:
Boazd:
03-326083
Appeal a decision of the Board of Zoning Appeals denying three variances in
order te split ±hss pmpe:-!;� �^� crA tite z_^.e�v buiidable lot..
1016 McLean Ave.
Recommended approval
No recommendation at the time of the hearing.
Denied on a 7-0 vote
I have confinned this date with the office of Council Member Kathy Lanhy. My understanding is that
this public hearing request will appear on the agenda of the City Councii at your earliest convenience
and that you will publish noiice of the hearing in the Saint Paul Legal Ledger. Thanks !
ohn Hardwick, Zoning Specialist
AA-ADA-EEO Employer
0 3-�13/
t�4£� c;�y rzatt �nnea 1 �
25 West PoAnh Streer ���j`� �� .� �,
Saint Paul, .YIN ��ID2-I534
(S�I) 256-5559
����������� ��� ������
➢e,�artment o:"PZanning and Hconomic 7�evetoprnent
Zoning Section � ii � ���„' ' i l �
APPLIC�NT
���
4 E - -f�
z�frzg ��,�;�,-�r�ty
� �
�i��'� ��£a:- � � .. _
���: �� � ���� �
TeniatGUe `-tearinc� �ate:
. �i��r�l°�4 ,�-- _
f �
iVame � �'. , j ,;- �
Address_" ;'i � /Y;z?°�izF:€ f-{� }I
Ci3y +���' :"it' �t..n�r�% Zip ��''_ � Daytime�hone v`;-4;c^ a 1� �
1
Zoning Fide �lame �
AddresslLacat:dra �vl(, ;�1t ,`r'�:,z.:' �'.v� !
TYPE OF APPE�L: Appiication is hereby made for an appeai to the:
� Scaard oi Zoning a�ppea3s ��ity Counc6l
Uasdes tize provisiors of Chapt�r 84, Sec3ior. �-� � Paragraph �' of the Zonir,g Code io appeai a
decision made by the ��'��� � ��-'�` �'d ? �1,��J'{�
on �f' �� , 20 � J , �ile Number: � � " �� � � �
(date dec9sion)
GP..;!*;DS �tJR ;�c!�FAL: �xpla::: wiay you feel ahere ha� �e�^ an arr�r ]n =,^.s reG•.��:�srr;en*, �srmit, decisier:
or refusa3 made by an adminisirative oi€icial, or an error in faci, proceduse or
firadin� rr�ade by the 3aard oi Zoning Appea9s or fhe Planning Cssmmission.
J��
(�itaoh addiiienal sheet if neaessary)
.���licani's �"sgnaiu;at;;�
7T� ° �" ; `
4�f' ; �;C �_ ,�'' ; � ��
� f, ' ✓ �
i
_ .
�'a� �: i � `-' '� �IL}7 �C$R� __ �
r
�
03-��31
� �,
°.JS t `�
� To Wnom It May Concem
The foilowing potnts are my grounds ior appeal on the variance thai was denied
for 1016 �/Iclean .=�ve. in Saint Paul. Tne var_ance was ior a 1.8 foot side yard setback and
minimum sqnare foot requirement.
�
✓ There was originally a home there before.
✓ The buyer of the lot was told it was a buildable lot.
✓ The buyer did not know that by combining the two lots to save money on taxes
that sne would create so many hurdles.
✓ Tne zoning board has ac.knowledged that "Saint Paul has set a�oal to create 5,000
new housing units within the ciry. The proposed variances would ailow the
creation of a new housing unit in Yhe city and are consistent with this housing
goal."
✓ The zoning board made an ar�ument that the new proposed house would impair
the amount of air and sunlight to the existing homes. We have drawn the home on
a survey to show that the new home would be eight feet away from the lot line
next to 1016 Mclean, and four feet away from the other neighbor, and this
neijhbor is fifteen feet away from his property line.
✓ We have various letters from surveyors appraisers, builders, and nei�hbors
stating their support and acknowledgement that a new home would increase the
value of surrounding homes.
✓ The zoning board has acknowledged that "A single-family home is a permitted
use in This district. The proposed variance, if granted, would not alter the zoning
classification of the property."
✓�Ithough it seems like three variances are a lot to ask for Two of tnese variances
(minimum square foot requirements, proposed 4,000 sq ft, needed 5,000 sq ft)
every other home on the block has the same squaze footage. The last variance is
for one foot eight inches, because the original builder did not build the home in
the correct spot.
� One last point about the square foot requirements, since there is a vacated alley
behind these properties, they aze larger than 4,000 sq ft, and feel much larger than
most 5,000 sq foot lots.
I appreciate ever�one taking the time to read this letter and consider the poinYS I have
addressed.
Respectfixlly,
Roben Ciapp
s
��
;
03 �13 / �
_ , � ; S � �
r�ll� ��, Z�dJ �
I uade�staud t33at new cansrrut.tian housi�ag in the area wauld �nefit �e aei�rho�d
aad c�uld add ta � he �roper[y vaines. 3 have no objeciions with a home being builLnext
to 1t315 Mc�.eaa Ave. ST. Paul, Minn�sota.
Name
A{�t17eS5
Sianature
f/ j , � .
5 Gt' �' �" Name y.�, `,° �L-z��,�-�-�-�'.c
/ i /� j q . �
.
'�� ° �(��ZESS r� 0 �'S �1t�C � � LLu2_
� c
� ��lf � ; � ��r',.�J �� 1��;
/ �
' Sigraxure
//
N7731C�lI � i�. t'1Y'.!liR�
Address l��-`f 1M:,�� �-_w J.L...i__.
S3gnaturel� ]
1/ � i. ,'
—i\ � /'
Name \ � l,�ci�� 5 �"I"�
Adtiress � � �`����' <'�" �` g �-
/
- � -�r t �/'�. �ti= 5 51 � �
�
-1 �
s���� �•" '�,��'�-=
�
�
�
�
�-0�-2�= o : �o�r�
FR�M H5J_..�,UR��EYOR� 96�+88d=63d4
����j�(� �. ���i V�t..11 \E
��� �LJ������''i�
Bepze:nbe: �, 200�
Robb Clapp
River Run Properties
9�1 5ibley Memorial Highway
Lillytialc, Mtti 5511$
a3-l13J
� � �
/'' =c:�
�..i;n5
R.e: Tn£orznation re�az�d'ang possible new house layout, 1012 VieLean Avenae, St. Paui, MN.
Bear S2obb,
.At your request I a�n cummenting on existing house loeaCions on the adjoining azid adjacent
Lots to th�; above rs.fcrenced site for the p�ssibl� eonst*uetzon o£ a��ew home on said Lai.
�J
i'hc adjoining home at 1(316 Y1cLean tavc;nue, St. Yaul lscs w�thin 2,8 feet of an existinn Lot
!zne, also a n�w hume being built on 1024 MeLean, Fi�hich was approved by City, said szew
h�usa lies wiihin 4.fl feet of an axisting Lot line. Also the adjqining house to 1 fl24 NIcLeari
zs tivi#lzin 4.2 feet uf adjainino Lat line and 8? feet from uew home bein� built,
?a: co:;>!i:sion it seems th<: the requested iocatzo� c�a N:ap�sed l:o�.:;e cn ;u:d 1 QI2 McLean
wuuld be 10.8 fcet from one existing house and 19.9 f�at from oCher adjac�nt existin� house
this tivc�nld seezn to be wnsistent with tlie siurounding neighburhood t�ome layouts, boti�
existing homes antl new houses being built prasently.
Uus firxxx rias several stlrveys in ihis are3 and ihese surveys would be availablz for review if
requeszed. ,3ny questiozas or additional reGuests please contact our office.
�
xhank You,
�� �,�
1'hamas E. Hodorff; L.S.
Harry S. Johnson Go., Inc C
Q063 Lyndal� qvenue Sou� �
�ioomingcon. Ui�� 55�20
:e!e {9b2)884-534',
fax (9a2}ggd_g344
e-maii�. :or�^, n�hs)su�veycrs ccm
o3-/i3/
��� �7�T <_
������� ��� �_,
To
rROM
DATE:
Planning Authorities
Greg Kuntz
CEO
River Run Properties, I.LC
September 8, 2003
Re: 1016 McLean
Saint Pauf, Minnesota 55106
PID #3329-2234-0145
��
��
� �,; �
��� ,
! have been asked to write this ietter to comment on our company. River Run
Properties, LLC was started in Aprif of 2002 and has had since iYs inception a focus an
providing quality housing through rehabilitation and new construction to many of the
Twin Cities urban neighborhoods.
We have cancentrated many peaple and monetary resources on helping to buiid strong
community relationships through home ownership. We are grateful and proud that we
have recently been awarded developer status for the Phalen Projeci ti�rough a joini
effort known as the LTRW Land Development, LLC.
Projects such as these, along with the continued goal to buiid fifty plus homes on
scattered lots throughout the Twin Cities, demonstrates our resolve to improve our
neighborhoods through quality, affordable housing.
Thank you in advance for your time and cansideration.
Sincerely, ,�
Y` �, j
�','�� a� . ^t ;
' ' t` 1 �'�' y_ ' '._-
Greg K��itz
CEO
River Run Properties, LLC
•
t
�� .
�-� �,��� ��.
Lii��eaie. �i'� ;; � ie
i+JWW.: I V L! L V 97 p f O. C O!'i3
ohone: 6� i • �52 • 620C
iax: 651 • d55 • 0480
�'iJl�
�
03 �//3/
1 j 10 E. Nighv�ay 9�, Suite =3v
�.7`�i:eB�i Lske, MV jj71Q
n�ice (6"Ji; 407.'
`.�: i�5:) 40�-> ��- �.
�� =;,� �
Septembe; C4, 2G0�
Tc �rVhoffi Z_ ?vlay Ccr_cern:
Reearding ;he vacznt loz directly �uest of 101 b VlcLear Avenue, St. Paui near Ylounds
Par.'z:
The hi�hest and best use of the vacant iot is as a sinaie family dweIling. The lots'
cenversion to 5in�ie family resident ;vould have no negatice impact on marketai�ilitv/
market value of the nei�hberhoad or sutrounding area. '
There is currently a single famiiy house being constructed tc�o daors to the east of the
vacant Iot. There is a currently a sirong demand for newIy conshucted dwellin�s within
the St. Paul city limits.
A new consmictzon dweIling on both of these vacant lots, in my opinion, is an asset to the
immediate market area,
� ��' �� ,�����
�
llichael P. V"ato
CRA-2002335I
c��sa�.��t�, inc.
� �
o3-ii3/
�,L�:
.r�i�ui�
s��
�� ,.,
��s��.��� � ��� ��� ������ �,�����c�
t3Ft�'ICE 3�'L,7�'1�..'Y.SE, ZlY.SPEL'iIDIY,l1.�'I3
E�'VIY'J_vY1,�'ivTaL P�G'3'BL'TI(lIV
sIItT L:: wry Pro, f'�=zon.ai 3uiZdir,g
3.i43t �e!arStreet
Saint Paui, ?vIN SSi �Z-.'SI+?
{55I) ZSb-90D8
�
-s=
:. .� l 1� i f �..
Name L. ! _ ' _ CamPany_
Address � � - � _ �-
� � �'
, -,.�.- - .� ;
Gi:y '"��'r� St ' .�''Zip ;'r� L'aytime�hone . - . -
r�rr�{�si Jntsrest �e App�icani {�wner, c�antraci purchaser, e2c.) -
Name m# C3rvner (ifi dit"ferent} �'� : �' -' �-
(aiYac.S a G�£�7tPO112( sneet ii n�c2ssary)
Addrass / Locatior� '
Legal �escr�Qtion - _ °.
�ot Size ?resera# Zaning � Present
i _7lm
,�� 3 � . �
�_': . .. e �
Proposerl t;se - ,� --
'!. Varianca{s) rzquesteri: .°,
-�
�� i S. �: _
5 . c_��'a „>Gt`.
2. Whaf pnysical characzer'sstics of the property prevent iis being used for any of the permitted uses in your
zone? (#opography, size and shape of lot, soi9 candit�ons, e#c.)
3. Explaira ho+,v the strict aopiication of iha provisions of the Zoning Ordirance wouid rasuit 6n peculiar or
excaptional practical di�cutties or excepiional undue hardships.
CASHIEftS USE ONLY
�. Explain how zhs gra�ting �f a varianca will not be a substaniiai detriment
• to #he p�blic �oad �r a sui�s:antia! ;mpairmenfi of the intenY and purpase
of the Zoning t3rdinancs.
�
��� �'" — � �- ;� .
'p�Eicanz'� aigna;ure. .�"'.i'� Date � _
n3-� /3/
t . ��I.�: .4 A
µ �,.�-^;
� Io w'r.on ii �na� conce.�,
�
Tne owner of 1016 �Iclean in Saint Paul is requesting two variances in erder to
suhdivide ner lot. The first variance is the lack of total square Yootage due to the 1en�h oi
the propertv only beinQ 100 feet, the seller feels this is a;ninor variance due to the iact
the rest of the houses on the block aze af ihe same square ieotaQe the other ��ariance will
be ior sidevard seibacks the esisting house is cioser to �he lot line than the four feet
required, by about 2 feet. The seller also would like to note that she bou�ht ine lot as a
buildable lot with its own address. The purpose for this lot split is a chance to bring in a
new home in the city ef Saint Paul, and maximize the neighborhood. �' .. � -
_ ,_
3 _ � , _ _ _, .�, e; �.-'� _ _ ✓ ., � ..� ! �. . - -`�C ,
� �
�ENT 6Y: RE/hlAX RE,�LTY ion, SNC;
o3-i/3 /
�.t4550a30; .JUL•8-03 ;7:'13qhia
!2
� � : � � .� �
7(t78/U3
I K:3s Ha�Sie.i au'tlicrizs Rcb Clapp ?n haizdla ali maner� pertaining 2o the subdavi: ir,a cf
ny properry at 1b1B �qcie3ex in S�int Baul. Thank You.
�
•
�2.
33.
�'.
35. ��r��
3S,
37.
32.
M15-A,°A (9iC�i
13 59 A.i�ff.;�diLL7 �IiiL7iNC� �i.�ON7SiAGT 9�i dlIEE7d SWT$A3 A�S�iD c�o a a�c
1P `di3'lJ �€SiRE S��iRL T?F'i TAX �IIYlGF.., �'+CH9G3LT A3V APPF3X5F�R[A'� 3
7 �.
` �,
l
�
r�M.�f t�u: te�n sv�u.i
03-//3/
�'S. 6EYCNMAiTH �
� pa �z�.
� _ :GO.M �� � "
__ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ^.r ^C
-../`T�' T�' v
.C�—____ _—_ _- _ ______ _ _. __ _ _ _ ._ ��'J,
' 'n � �
� / _ , \ ' __ 1 � __ _ _ _
v ." `. __ • C r . �._ � � __
� .<. X_ 1:.. y �.
. +,.. _ v � y _
G ^
� —J �9
. t
s '• c ``'^ �
. �,.. , �' c.
��___"_ _ _—s_ ______.--^ —__ ___— �E_—='__ _.�i '__' ' _'_ _'_'.
__' 'c, ; _ ro ,;.. � _
. x'-__--_ —'b x —�-:--._ � -�'`,c �`__ ___—_ __ "'.u:,
' - S 89'S6'3a" E ,o°. C-6G -
� — _ � . � �„�w.00 ---- x.;
� - - � ��
'--� • ::v _ �01 I' ^ �
� __ __' �'�, o . ,
r ; � v 3*- i
V �n '.•��� � I f .
` � (`� ' '" `Jn -� , ,
_ � ,,.� a;� r
p 23
� . z a ��j' p�
`� O ' s - -
O'
_ j � pJ _ _ _" y � �__ �
j ,, J 1 .
X JJ _.� � i �
� 3 Ho su:�iNC� au �ir �,N�� - s i e iy-
i � '� � � "— .. �3 ��
�- . a ,
�
- =_�ic� -�� '"<v
� � � . ` ' .:ea _.,` � � _ _ r , ,
. o ,�� n �
�: --x` .� : r`
z < `_ , v�
.. . � 1 ' O . i/1T �7 �O �(�,
__ _. `� � L_✓ i *._ y.� � ��� ��0.
_ G. � � -
v} �� �'� I r1T �� �� `
K. LV � I �
O,, 6' � p 1
� ^ 9 . J T�
T�ii�(, . O�n �
�_� - �,.. __ ��i�
`� a , •,.
— — — . N 83'.,6'34" w 86.pr; .? "�- --
, �a
� � p1,lEY UNILI�RII,YEl � �
+-�
v r�
(. p
C �- R
y � i �5
J
�
� �
C�3-i�3 �
LGEND
__ � "—
`a
s
t s_<�
P�� v Mo-v�_ .
Cx
oK -z.e =_
Nr �.a�� a.nn.
ca�
cae�no
��cn� "
_+�a ny Spa1 EiewOa
X
�
�
�� �� � 40 AD 00
SCALF IN FEET
�-- ,
LeGAL DESCAiPT70N
l;
- : �� - =,:c. �c o cFnnES �cn;.q>n� �x� cr e�aas z �.vo
1 ' E oasev�CO4ny dinnevo.a.
I ^a95'c9 lc"� 9ESCFIP3KKJ5
� _eaCC.a�a_
I _.. ,,n ":'s au��r..:,cuer. cv _�_ao:s z ar.a _
c
.�r eo_�b w =.oeo
i � :CEI =
j � - ' ��.,«_ �� :��.w�,- �: �.� ,> : �� �
;�, ���:
GcNER'1� NOTES:
;.:M,K .�.. 3 .K ,a,us ,H�. ,..� = c:az �-,
IOTSPLR SURVEY
for:
R1VER RUN PFOPERTIES
1016 McLEAN aVENUE SITE
ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA
�...;:ie6
HI�fi�Y 5 : pi:.$OW CO .'v�
>,..4..,.� =� y�•"o���� � �i�
�� �
��
�'����� �
�
r
�
i� �
� .
� . �V `������ ; �
� �3�flP�§�°� �IT�9� 3��3 �E�� fl� P�RC�L: 1�16 )Vf�LE,�i �iVENl3� � I
;
� � � t;-
:.� - .:N - - b3.:��
i
' " .-i s °
' � �
-.r, . � �` ; .
4 ~ � � � �' � "
�y � �
�" a " � aseF���r''�
C� � �'- ^�� � _
- s'.g� t i. "
♦
e
Z� s , , p
�k � � s-� � ""+a � -C ��a. �1 . - � � �1� 1 F , t ) • � '..
*±�., _ . _ . � �
� __� u*;
�I� i
�, � ;
i
� '
–� i
�
f I
i
�
tI
(120)
277
u
(�
0
�-^ .,.
1
�,
, �
;
� �
I
I
i �� I �
� �._�`
W 1 i
I �
I i '
� I
�
t
Ir _
I �
—�
�—
1V
W �
�
! '� �' � �' � s �
E
��
D3 -//3/
�
�
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
S.
1 C.
i i.
12.
13.
14.
1�.
16.
17.
S UNRAY-BATTLECREEK-HIGH W OOD
ILAZEL PARK HADEN-PROSPERIT'Y HILLCREST
WEST SIDE _
DAY'TON'S BLIJFF
PAYNE-PHALEN
NORTH Etv�
THOMAS-DALB
SUMMIT-UlVIVERSITY
WEST SEVEN'I'�i
COMC
HAMLINE-MiDLYAY
ST. Ai�I'I�IONY P�,RK
MERt2IAtvf PARK-LEXINGTON HAh'ILIi3E-SNEi.LING I-LAMLI?ti'E
MACALES'?'ER GROVELAND
HIGHL.Ai'VD
SUM;tiiI'I' �iI�iL �
DOWiv�I'O�xJ`i
� �" " ��" �'�� �" , -�-___E_��h
� ������ & g�.'�,�. �.� ;�i.
1 v t
� �,
CITIZEN PAR'FICIPATION PLANNING DISTRICIS
03 -�� 31
�
B�AR13 OF ZONii'VG �PPE4I.S S'TA3�+T" REP�RT
TYPE OF �pPLIC�TIaN:
APPLIC�NT:
HEARING DATE:
LOCATION:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
PLAt�'NTNG ➢YSTRICT:
PRESEN'3' ZONI1dG:
RE�ORT' I�ATE:
• DEAI9L3NE FflR AC'i'I�N:
�
Major V ariance
Rob Ciapp
River Run Propemes
July 28, 2003
1016 I�cLEAN AVENIJE
Z�NING �O➢E REFERENCE: 67304
DRAKE'S REARRANGEMENT OF BLKS. 2 ETC LOTS 11
& LOT 12 BLK 10
4
R-4
7uly 21, 2003
Septembez 12, 2003
FILE #03-32608�
BY: John Hardwick
�ATE RECEIVED: July 14, 2003
A. PURPOSE: Three variances in order to spiit this pareel and build a new single-fanuly house.
Existing house: 1.) A minimum lot size of 5,000 square feet is required and 4,400 square
feet is proposed, for a varianr,e of 600 sc;,,?rP fe?+.. 2.? ���est side yard se*.back ef 4 feet is
required and a setback of 2.8 feet is proposed for a variance of I 2 feet. .Neiv house: 3.) A
minimum lot size of 5,000 squaze feet is required and 4,400 sqnare feeT is proposed, for a
variance of 600 squaze feet.
B. SITE AND AI2EA C'Oie�'DITION�: This is an 80 by 100-foot parceL There is a platted but
undeveloped alley at the rear of tha property.
Surrounding Land Use: Primarily one- and two-family homes.
C. BACKGR�UI�D: The praperty owner is �roposing to split this pazcel into the original two
piatted lots.
D. F'INDINGS:
I. The properry in question cannoi be put to a reasonable use under the strict nrovisions of
the code.
Pa�e 1 oi 3
_ � �
�
D3 /� 3/
File t03-�2fi083
Staff Repor
The praperty owner states That whea she purchased the vacant lot next io her house she
was toId that it was a buildable lot and at one time apparently had a house on i#. Afrer she
bought the lot, she combined it wiYh the lot her house sits on. She wonld now like to seil
the lot and has found a prospective purchaser who in�ends to build a new single-family
home on the lot. This properry was originally piatted as two separate lots and
reestablisiung them as separaYe lats :s a reasonable proposal. However, the existing
house at 1016 McLean Avenue was built 2.8 feet fram the property line between the 1ots.
The lots cannot be split again under the sirict provisions of the cade.
2. The pZight of the land owner is due to circumstances unique to this property, and these
circumstances were not created by the land owner.
The origir.ai house at 1016 McLean Avenue was built in 1890 and like many homes built
durin� that era, it does not meet the current setback standards. Qnce this lot was
combined with the adjacent lot, the current setbac:� requirement prevents separating the
lots again without a variance. This is a circumstance That was not creaTed by Y'tie current
property owner.
!
3. The proposed vanance is in keeping with the spint and inlent of the code, and is •
consistent with the health, safety, comfot morals and welfare of the inhabitants of fhe
City of St. Paul.
Saint Paul has set a goal to create 5,000 new housing units within the city. With a iimited
amount of land availabie for development, it is important to make use of these lots to
provide in-fill housing. The relatively minor variances needed To create a new buildabie
lot wiil not have an adverse impact on azea residents and aze in keeping with the spirit
and intent of the code.
4. The proposed variance will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjaceni
property, nor will it alter the essential character of the surrounding area or unreasonably
diminish established property values within the surrounding area.
The vacant Iot will be 40-feet wide which is large enou;h to ailow a new house to be built
and sti11 maintain adequate sepazation from the existing house. T'he 2.8-foot side yard
setbaek on the existing house will not significantly affect the supply of li�ht or air to the
adjacent lot.
all of the lots on this block were nlatted with The same 40 by 100.foot dimensions and all
except two, have homes on iius size lot The pronosed variances will not change the �
cnaracter oi the neighborhood. The new sinale home oa the vacant lot should have a
positive impact on surrounding property values.
i
��
aee 2 0? 3 �
���/'�1
� File �03-326083
Jt3f2 K6pGZt
5. The vanance, ij granted, would not permit any use thttt is not permitted unde the
provzsions af the code for the properry if� the dist where the affected Iand is locctted,
nor would it aiLer or change the zoning district cZassijzcation of the property.
A single-family home is a pezmitted use in Yhis district. The proposed variance, if
�antad, would not chan�e or aIter the zoning ciassification of the property.
6. The request for variance is not based primarzly on a desire to increase the value or
income potentia7 of the parcel of land.
The applicant states that his primary desire is to use this lot as intended when it was
originally platted.
E. DISTRI��' CJL7N�3L I2E�01YI>'iEI`TDATION: As of the date of ttus report, we have not
received a recommendation from Aistrict 4.
. F. CDI212ESPONDEN�E: Staff has not received any correspondence regardino this maiter.
G. STAFF RECOMNi�NDA�'gON: Based on findings 1 throngh 6, staff recommends
approval of the variances, subject to the condition that the applicant obtains subdivision
approval from the Planning Administrator.
.
Page 3 of 3
� �
b3 �i3�
���' �' t�'�' S��i�"T I't� �I. �
B�AI�� flF ��NI�G AP�'��S �ES��,,IJ�'�flN
�DN��G �'I�� Nti�3ER: #fl3-325t�83
DATE: Augast 25, 20t��
tVHEREAS, Rob Clapp - River itun Properties has applied �r a variance from the suict
application of the provisions of Section 67.304 af the Sain# Paul Le� slative Code pertaining to
tbree variancas to split a lot and build a new single-family home on the new lot in the R-4 zoning
distriet at 1016 McLean Avenue; and
WFIEREAS, the Saint Paul Board of Zoning Appeals canducied a public hearing on August 2 2,
2003 pursuant to said application in accordance with the requirements of Section 64.203 oi the
Legislative Code; and
WHEREAS, the Saint Paul Board ofZoning Appeals based upon evidence gresented at the
public hearing, as substantially reflected in the minutes made the foYlowittg findings of fact:
1. The property in questiore can be pzct to a reasonable use under the strzct provisions of the
code.
The property owner states that when she purchased the vacant lot next to her house she was •
told Yhat it was a buildable lot and at one time apparently had a house on it. After she bought
the lot, she combined it with the lot her house sits on. She wou3d now like to selI the lot and
has found a prospective purchaser who intends to build a new singie-family ho*ne en the lot.
However, ihe existing I.ous: at 1016 P��c�;,�, �,aenne - w — as built 2.8 feet uom the propeny
line between The lots and separatiag these tu°o lots would create a nonconforming szTback as
well as two nonconforming lots instead of one conforming parcel_
2. The plight of the I¢nd owner is due to circumstances unic�ue to this property, and these
circumstances were not createcl by the land owner.
Once this lot was combined with the adjacent lot, the curr�nt setback requirement prevents
separating the lots again without a variance. This is a circumstance that the applicant shonld
have investigated before she combiaed The Ywo loTs.
3. The proposed variance is in keepzng with zhe spiri# and intent of the code, ancl is consistent
with the heatth, safery, comforz; naorals and welfare of the inhabitants of the City oj St. Paul.
Saint Paul has seT a goal to create �,000 new housing units within the city. The proposed
vanances would allow the creaYion of a new housing unit in the ciiy and are cor,sistent with
this housing goal. •
Pz�e I at : �
i S
�
o3ii3/
� File T03-326083
R�soiutia;.
4. The proposed variance will impair an adequate supply oj Zight and air to adjacent property,
alter the essential character of the surrounding area and may unreasorzablv diminish
estabZisherl property values within the surrounding area.
The appiicant has not submitted any plans showing how the vacant lot will be developed.
DependSng on the location of the new house on the vacant lot, the reduced setback on the
existing house may aifect the supply of light or air to that proposed new house.
Without plans for the proposed new house it is impossibie Yo determine what effecT the
requested variances wiil have on the surrounding azea.
5. The variance, ifgranted, wozslcl not perrnit any use that is not permitLed under the provisions
of the code for the property in the district where the affected Zand is locttted, nor would it
alter or change the zoning district classification of the pr�perty.
A singie-family home is a permitted use in this district. The proposed variance, if g�
wonld not change or alter the zoning classification of the property.
� b. The request for variance appears to be based primarily on a desire to increase the value or
income potential of ihe parcel of land.
The applicant has no plans to develop the proposed lot and apparentiy these requested
variances are desired i:: order �e gain t,e inco.��e from the sale of the lot.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Sain# Paul Board ofZoning Appeals that the
request to waive the provisions of Secrion 67.304 in order to allow: Existing house: 1.)
Minimum lot size of 4,400 sq. ft. 2.} A west side yard setback of 2.8 feet. New lot: 3.)
Minimum lot size of 4,400 sq. ft., on property located at 1016 McLean Avenue; and legally
described as Drake'S Rearrangement OfBlks. 2 Etc Lots 11 & Lot 12 Blk 10; IS HEREB`a'
DENTED.
��V�� �y: Courtney
���oND�� }�i�: Duckstad
IN FAVOR: �
AGAINST: o
�
Page? oi 3 � �
� �
D3-��3�
File fr03-32608:i
Resclurion
i0'IAILEI): r3a:-gust 27, 2�03
T71YIE LIlYIIT: No arder of the Board ot Zoning Appeals permittiag the erectian or
alteration of a building ar off-stree# par3dng facility shall be valid for a
periad longer than one year, vnless a building permit ;or such eseMion ar
alteration is obtained within such period and such ereciion or altexation is
praceeding pursuant to ihe #erms of such permit. The Board of Zoning
Appeals or fhe �ity Council may grant an estension not to exceed one year.
Yn granting such esYension, f�e Board af Zoning Appeais may decide to hold
a public hearing.
APPEELI,: Decisions of the Board of Zaning �ppeals are final subjeet to appeal to the
City Council within 15 days by anyone affected by the decision. Building
permits shall not be issued after an appeal has been filed_ If permits have
been issued betore an appeal has been filed, then the permits are svspended
and construction shall caase until the �ity Coancil has made a ftnal
deYerauination of the appeal.
�
C�RTIFICATI�N: I, tLe uudersignad Secretary to the Baard of Zoning Appeats for the City of `
Saint Paul, Mittnesota, do hereby certify that I have camparefl the foregoing
copy with the ariginal record in my office; and find the same to be a true and
correcf copy of said ariginat and of the svhole thereof, as based on approved
minutes of the Saint Paul Board of Zoning Appeals mesling held on Augnst
25, 2003 and on resr.rrl iza the OfficP n�';,icense Inspee*��n ac�
Environmental Protecfion, 350 St. Peter Street, Saint Paul, Minnesota.
SAINT PAUL BOARD flF Z0IVING APPEALS
�" `— f;, `�.'�
- — �, �—
Debbie Crippen
Secretary #o Yhe Board
�
°a�z � ot i �,.
� { �
�V
03-tJ3/
� �rL.�(.T�� OF THt VIEETLVG OF TEE BO_�RD O� ZONP�i iG ,'�PE'�T S
C?: Y COL:tiC� Cr �.�i1B�RS, �3fl CIT'r iiAi,L
ST. P�L'L, _1�I���IESOTA, AtiGI:Si 11, 2003
PRESEtiT. 1�1r.ies. Yiaddox, and ivloron; Mess:s. Courmey, Duc'sstsd, Faz Kiemdl, and Wilsor oi
the B�ard oi Zoning Appeais; Vir. Hazdwick and Ms. Crippen of the Office of Lic�se,
7nspec�ions, and Enviroiunentai Proteciior.
?�SE�iT Peter Warnerx
"Excused
Tne meering was chaired by 7oyce Mactdo�, Chau.
Rob Clanp - River Run Pronerties L#03-3260831 1016 �l'IcLean Avenue• Three
vanances in order to split this parcel and build a new single family house. The existing hause: l.) A
minimum lot size of 5,000 sq. ft, is reqwred and 4,400 sq. $. is pr000sed, for a variance of 600 sq. ft. 2.)
A side yard ,etback af 4 feet is required and a setback of 2.8 feet is proposed for a variance of I.3 feet.
The new house: 3.) A minimum lot size of 5,000 sq. ft. is required and 4,400 sq. fr. is proposed, for a
variance of 600 sq. ft.
Mr. Hardwick reviewed the case, noting that the Board had iaid the case over to grve the applicant a
chance to respond to the neighbors concerns.
� The applicant RpB CLAPP -RIVER RIIN P120PERTIES, 971 Sibley Memonal Highway, was not
present.
Hearing no furthez tesrimony Ms. Maddox closed the pubtic portion of the meeting.
Ms. Maddox stated that she had visited t, e site and s �c passed oct sales flyers from Yhe properry rhat had
been in the mail box. She pointed out that the flyer advertised a private yazd, noring that there really is
no yard. The occupants have been using the yard as a parking pad. Splitting off the yazd will eliminate
the off-street parking for the house.
Mr. Courtney questioned whether this c�se was the one nof attended by the applicant tha# had a neighbor
who did attend objeetine to the requested lot split. Mr. Hardwiok stated that this is that case. Mr.
Courtney questioned that the applicant still is not present. Mr. Hardwick replied that is correct, noting
that he had spoken with the appiicant and reminded him that he needed to attend this hearing.
Mr. Ducksiad queshoned if theze was n�re {han one person ob�ecting to the variances. He also asked if
anyone remembered what the nature of tne ob3ections were. Mr. Coar�ey explained that the neighbor
stated ihat the area was too crowded. He stated ai that time his intention to vote agamst the variance
request, and reaffirmed his decision.
�
.a�an.a-sao smDioy:.r � �
o3li3�
r�lg �� �z�os�
�Smutes August i 1, 20��
Page Ti�o
YIr. Courtney moved co deny the vanance and;esoiution oased on fmdings I 2, and o`, staTine Tha: The
property is already put to a reasonable 'SSe when the applicant purchased the property they Imew whaT
they were �etting, the variances :uve been requeste3 jusi to incxease the value of the property and for_no
other:eason.
v1r. Duckstad seconded �e morion, whicn passed on a roli caIl vote of 7-0.
.1ds. Maddox reaper.ed ?he hearing Yo 'near irom the appticani.
Mr. Clapp ,tated his apology to the Board that he was late. Ms, Maddox noted that ihey d;d hear this
matter and did deny the vanance. She noted that the iot is very small and it looks like thece is a pazking
nad on the second lot £or ±he existing huuse. She questioned where the off-street parking for the current
house will be, 14r. Ciapp stated that t,4e:e used io be a house on the vacant lot, and the parlflng you are
seemg is for the existing house but they aIso have a par!ang pad on ihe east side of the house with their
own separate driveway. IT is just easie: for them to park on the vacant Iot and run into the house. Mr.
Clapp noted that the iot wa, origmally platted as a separate lot and there was a house on fhe lot. He feeIs
that a new house on the lot w�ll improve the neighborhood.
�
Ms. ;Viaddox questioned Mr. Hardwick for directiar.. Mz. Hardwick explained that the Board;�as the •
optior= of reconsidering Ehe : esolurion. Tne Board can reaffirm their earlier decision, they can open it for
discussion or chanee their orignal decision, as lon� as the heanng was reopened the Board has ail their
options avaiIabie to them. Ms. Maddox stated that the hearing is open for further discussion.
t�:. Bucicstad queshoned w t�'�ey were going to revote, and if so do they need to set aside their
prev7ous decision. l�Is. Maddox replied that her mtent is to open che matter for discussion by the Board.
i�Ir. Courmey questioned wne;her the le? si2e was carrect bIr. Hardwick replied both lots are the same
so the figure should be 4,400 squaze feet for both lots, the variance for each lot is 600 sqnare fe,°,T.
Mr. Courtney noted that he will not change lus vote and is generally against cramming a house in
any�vhere they can. They are already crammed in like sardines. That is the pomt The neighbors made I
agreed with them then and I agree with hem now
Ms. Maddox called for any more diseussion. Bearing no further objections ciosed the public hearing.
Appraved by:
�bri D�Ic - a�;etzry �
-° �-SDA-F�`c0 Emaloyer ��
� J
�
o3-ti 3J
�
•
�
YIINtiTES OF THE YIEET�iG OF THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEAI.S
C::`_� CGtitiCii., tiri.-�:YIBERS, �3fl Ci �'Y r_AI.L
ST. ?AL'Z ��ti"ESOTA, TLZY 28, 2003
PRESENT: Mmes. Maddox Morton, and Or�eson; Yiessrs. Courhiey, Duckstad, Faricy, and V✓ilson
oi±he Board ai Zonin2 Appeals; YSr. 4Varner, Ass;s',ant Cifiy Attomey; i41z. Hazdw:ck and
Vts. Zacho of the O�ce of License Inspecrions, and Envi: onmental Protection.
ABSENT: Gregoryffieindl�
"Bxcused
The meecing was chaireri by 3oyce YSaddox, Chair.
Rob Clapp - River Run Prooerties (#03-326083) 1016 NIcLean Avenue• Three
variances in order to split this parcel ai�d build a new single family house. The exdsting house: l.) A
mmimum lar size of 5,000 sq, ft, is required and 4,400 sq. ft. is proposed, for a variance of 600 sq. ft. 2.)
A side yard setback of d feet is require� and a setback of 2.8 feet is proposed for a variance of 1.2 feet.
The new house: 3.) A minimum lot size of 5,000 sq. ft. is required and A sq. ft. is proposed for a
variance of 600 sq. ft.
Mr. Hardwick showed slides of the site and reviewed the staff report with a recommendahon for
approval, subject to the condition that �he applicant obtain approval from the planning administer.
No correspondence was received oppo:smg the vazianee request.
No correspondence was received irom Dish 4: egarding the variance request.
The applicant ROB CLAPP - RIVER RLTN PROPERTIES, 971 Sibley ibtemoria] Highway, was not
present.
There was opposit�an present at the heasing.
Mr. Leonard iVlealey, 1008 McLean Avenue, stated that the section of McLean Avenue between Earl
Street and Cypress Street, where the proposed house is to be built, has the hig'stest number of homes on
the street than any of the surrounding n��ghborhoods. There are I S houses on the north side and 12
houses on the south side, for a total of <7. By comparison the section of McLean Avenue and Frank
Street which is one block east has 12 houses on Yhe north side and 10 on the south side, for a to{al of Z.
The seotion of McLean beriveen Cypress and Forest a block to the west has 7 houses on the north and 12
houses on the south side for a total of 21. He noted that there is an apartment building that takes up two
lots and he counted it as two. If anothe� house is built on his block they v,�ll probably have the b eatest
concentration of nouses anywhere within a few mile area, on that one block. Even if they build the house
with a garage it wi31 still take up space c}n the street where oYher ears have parked. There are already
parking problams in the area. Rob Clanp ofRiver Run Properties is tne same Rob Clapp that is selling
the house at 1 �l b�ScLean and if the properry is split it does extreme?y mcrease the value of the
property. There is also a house for disabled adults across the sireet, they have vans picking them up
throughout the day and any addiTionaI t;affic in the a3ready c;amped neighborhoad wiIl create a more
dangerous traf ic situation than already ��sts.
�Ir. Courmey questioned chat ��1r. �viealey i; a neighbor and how long he has lived m the neiehborhood.
?.A-dDA-EEO Employer
� J
������/
Fi'.e #03-326083
.l�Imutes 7uiy 28, 2Qp3
Pa�e Two
�I*. Meaiey stated he has tiveti in his �ouse ior 6 years. Vtr. Courmey questioned w?�ai the sequence was
whe:� the hnuse was purcnased. Someone bought the t!ouse, now somebody is seiling i:. Mr. :YleaIey
;tated ,*hat whey he parchased his home 5 years ago, about a year later the property between the two
I:omes went up for sale. He �ied to pwci�ase the pronerry, he oife: ad $3,500 and he doubted that the
seller had purohased tha pronerty for much more than that. Right now River Run Prapemes is or"fering
�25,000 for any property they can put a house on, which is a lo� more than what rhe properry would be
worth if a house cauld be buiit on it. �fr. Courtney queshoned who the selier was and did they not ia�ow
that they cauld aot build on the prope;,ry. He questioned whether Mr. �Iealey thought the loT could 'oe
built on. Mr. Meatey stated 'na had atvrays beea toId thaf the lot couid not be buiI# on because it is too
smail. He staTe� that is one of the reasons he bought his house was because of the vacant io# in the
proximity allows him a little more space.
?VIs. Maddox noted that the applicant was not present.
Hearing no further testimony, Ms. Macldox closed the public portion of the meeting.
iVlr. Courtney stated rnat he would ask the apt�licant what made them think thaY they couid build on That
iot eta, because that is the hardsh;p Th�:t rhe Board must fiad in order to grarit ;he variance request., He
noted that if someone to]d Ghe owner tl.at perhaps they should have done some bac:cground work rather
than ta.king ,omeone's word ior it. Mr Courn7ey notec that'�e will be inclineci ta vote with Mr. Mea2ey.
Ms. Otteson agreed that she is also thirkmg aiong t�e same lines as ivtr. Courtney. She noted That if tt�e
Board grants zhis vanance then we wili have another nonconfornvng lot.
Ms. Maddox concurred that there are a 2ot of houses in the area and ihe 1ot ss small.
YIs. Otteson stated that rerhap< ihe appl:cz^; shoclu be Y:es�7t io address sor,ic of these concerns. iY1s.
Maddox suggested that they need a rnotion to contmue the matter.
NIr. Courtney moved to continue the variance request to allow the applicant to adciress the issue. Ms.
Maddox noted that would be August (1, ZOC3.
Mr. Hardwick queshoned whether the Board's inTeni is To reopen ihe publie hearing ai that time.
Questioning the Board whether they want to allow :vir. Mealey the opportunity to attend. Ms. A�Iaddox
repl�ed that Mr. Mealey has already speken but there would be no objection if someone else wants io
come down and testify. Unless he has �omething new to add. Mr. Wilson remarked that h�s comments
woutd be in the minutes so tfie Boazd could refer io the minutes..
:IYIs. OtTeson seconded the motion, whic7 passed on a roll call vote of 7-0.
c
Jo'rzn Hazdw3ck
Approved'oy:
n Ducksta�re�
-�:�-:1D 1-EEO Enpicye:
��
�
�
�
�
03 /i3 j
1 �� 6 �9c�D�n ��e��e i� �'t. �a��
�
� �w
�y;= �
. . .J:'�.r , � �
�. ' _
������� �
�� ��� ���
Lwing Room . ..... .._.. ....._ .. .... ........ ..._.._... 13 x 12
Kitchen . .. _ . .._. . ._ .. ... _._.. _. .. .. . 13 x 10
Dming Room . _ ..._. .. ... . _ ... .. .. .. ..... ......... 13 x 11
Den / Sedroom ....... ... . ... . ....... ..... .... ... ... . .. 13 x 10
Sedroom ....... ......
.......... . .......... . .. ... .. .
Bedroom ...........
_._. _. .. ..
Bedroom ......... ....
_.. ...... . ._ .._ ._ .... .. ..
14 x 13
14x11
12x11
roundation Size .... ..... _ .._.. .. .. .. . 825 Square Feet FinishedArea .. ....._ .. ...... ..... .. .... . 1,050 Square Feet
Year Built ...... .... . . . .. .. .._.. .. . . _ ....... . _.. ... 1894 Taxes ... ........ . ... ...... ...... $1,000.00 Homestead 2003
Lot Size .. _......... 40 x 100 Total 6aths ........ .....
-
_ _. Twc
WeJcame to this charming home located in sc�nic Mounds Park area. This two sfory fiome is perfect for the first
time buyer who wants to add their own personaf touch. You wrll be sure to enjoy the very private yard and nice
sized front poroh. Mature trees. Gose fo parks. Don'i miss this wonderful opportunity!
.��,
;�€ • � ,.,
E .
Act Today,!�
Don"t Miss 1'our Chance
This Home Is �
� Proudiy Markeied �y
Rob Claop
bl 2-508-b35u- Direct
b51-455-1256 Main
65 i -455-0�80 - Fax,��