04-948Council FIle # lJ`�'"�`�
Crreen Sheet # J��a—� �0�--
RESOLUTION
CITY OF
Presented By
Refened To
PAUL, NIINNESOTA
Comxnittee: Date
2 WHEREAS, Tanothy Nichols, on behalf of Nichols Development, LLC, made an
3 application, in File No. 04-096265, to the Boazd of Zoning Appeals (hereinafter, the `BZA") for
4 variances from the strict application of the provisions of the zoning code for property commonly
5 known as 570 Asbury Street and legally described as: HAMLINE SYNDICATE ADDITION
6 NO. 3 TO ST. PAUL, RAMSEY COUNTY, MINN. VAC ALLEY ACCRUING & LOTS i l
7 THRU 16 & SUBJ TO ESMTS; VAC ALLEY & EDMCJND AVE ACCRUIIVG & LOT 17 BLK
8 2; and
9
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
WHEREAS, the purpose of the said application was to vary the standards of the zoning
code in order to build a 44-unit "senior cooperative" residential building where (1) a front yard
setback of 25 feet was required and a setback of 18 feet was proposed for a variance of 7 feet (2)
a side yard setback of 25 feet was required and a setback of 18 feet was proposed on the northeast
side, for a variance of 7 feet; (3) maa�imum lot coverage of 35°/a is ailowed with lot coverage of
43% proposed, for a variance of 8% (2,717 square feet); (4) sixty-six off-street parking spaces are
required for the proposed building type and 38 are requested, for a variance of 28 parking spaces;
and (5) the maacimum allowed density requirements permit 32 dwelling units while 44 dwelling
units aze proposed, for a variance of 12 units; and
WHEREAS, on June 21, 2004, the BZA, having provided notice to affected property
owners, conducted a public hearing on the project where all persons present were given an
opportunity to be heard. After the close of the public hearing, the matter was laid over to July 6,
2004 at the request of the City Attorney's Office for the purpose of preparing an analysis of
certain quesrions raised during the course of the public hearing regarding the previous zoning
history of the said property; and
WHEREAS, on July 6, 2004, after having received the information from the City
Attorney's Office, the BZA moved to approve the requested variances, based upon the following
findings and conclusions, as stated in BZA Resolution No. 04-096265 which shall also be
incorparated here in by reference.
"1. The in question cannot be put to a reasonable use under the strict provisions of the code.
The applicant is proposing to subdivide the northeast corner of this property to create a
35,000 square foot parcel to be developed as senior housing. The new building will have
44 dwelling units and 42 underground parking spaces, although only 39 spaces may be
counted as required pazking because 3 spaces are stacked spaces. The applicant has
submitted a copy of a proposed lease agreement with the owners of the adjacent parking
ramp for 16 additional spaces, 3 of which wiil be reserved for loading during daytime
�
p `�-`1,`�,�
2 hours. This would bring the total parking available to 58 spaces of which 52 spaces could
3 be counted towazd meeting the required parking. However, this information was received
4 too late to send out revised hearing notices. The applicant is also proposing to connect
5 the cooperative building to the adj acent pazldng ramp with a skyway but again the details
6 of ttus connection were received too late to include in this hearing and will need to be
7 addressed at a later time. The proposed senior cooperative building is a pernutted use in
8 this zoning district and is a reasonable use for this properiy.
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
2.
3.
4. The proposed variance will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent
property, nor will it alter the essential character of the surrounding area or unreasonably
diminish established property values within the surrounding area.
The proposed building will abut streets on the north and east, the parking ramp on the
south and the office building on the west. The street will provide adequate separarion
from the neazby homes and reduced front and side yard setbacks will not significantly
affect the supply of light or air to those properties.
The plight of the Zand owner is due to circumstances unique to this properly, and these
circumstances were not created by the land owner.
The location of the existing office building and parldng ramp limit the amount of land
auailable for development. Most of the requested variances aze due to the desire to build
a structure that is compatible with the exis6ng buildings and also addresses the concems
of the area residents. These aze circumstances that were not created by the applicant.
The proposed variance is in keeping with the spirit and intent of the code, and is
consistent with the health, safety, comfort, morals and welfare of the inhabitants of the
City of St. Paul.
The proposed senior cooperarive housing building is consistent with the goals of the
Comprehensive Plan as well as the Hamline Midway Small Area Plan. There are still site
issues that need to be addressed such as an access easement so the adjacent office
building can provide trash pickup and a signed copy of the parking lease. The survey for
the proposed subdivision should also reflect the change needed for the skyway, or in lieu
of this, a pedestrian access easement across to the pazking ramp. However, once these
issues have been resolved, the proposed project would be in keeping with the spirit and
intent of the code and would not affect the health or weifare of surrounding residents.
The applicant states that the proposed building was designed to screen the existing
pazking ramp from the homes across Thomas Street and also to compl'unent the overall
character of the existing development. The requested variances will not change the
character of the neighborhood and a senior cooperative on this site should haue a posirive
impact on the surrounding properties.
Page 2 of 4
��.-`���
�
5. The variances, if gr'anted, would not permit any use that is not permitted under the
provisions of the code for the property in the district where the affected land is Zocated,
nor would it alter or change the zoning district classifzcation of the propef-ty.
The proposed variances, if they aze granted, would not change or alter the zoning
classification of the property.
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
6. The request for variance is not based primarily on a desire to increase the value or
income potential of the parcel of land.
The applicant states that his primary desire is to create a development that is consistent
with the adjacent existing building and comparible with the goals of the Hamline Midway
Plan "
WHEREAS, on July 20, 2004, pursuant to the provisions of Leg. Code § 61.702(a),
Annette Sorensen, duly filed an appeal from the determination made by the BZA regazding the
Nichols Development LLC application and requested a hearing before the City Council for the
purpose of considering the actions taken by the BZA; and
WHEREAS, acting pursuant to Legislative Code §§ 61.702 -.704 and upon giving notice
to affected parties pursuant to Legislative Code § 61.702(b), a public hearing was duly conducted
by the City Council on August 4, 2004, where all interested parties were given an opportunity to
be heard; and
WHEREAS, at the close of the said public hearing, the matter was laid over to August 11,
2004, for the purpose of having the Nichols Development LLC and Annette Sorensen meet to
discuss the proposed project; and
WHEREAS, at the August 11, 2004, session of the City Council, it was reported that an
agreement had been reached between Nichols Development LLC and Annette Sorensen
regarding the variances granted by the BZA in this matter which, apparently, is mutually
acceptable to both parties and which will permit the said project to move forward with certain
modificarions made to the project consistent with the said agreement made between the said
parties; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT
RESOLVED, that the Council of the City of Saint Paui, having been informed that
Nichols Development LLC and Annette Sorensen have reached a mutually acceptable agreement
regarding the variances granted by the BZA in this matter, hereby finds, with the incorporation of
the Nichols/Sorensen agreement into the approvals of the BZA, that the appeal of Annette
Sorensen shall be denied and that the decision of the BZA shall be upheld in this matter subject
to the said mutually acceptable modifications to the BZA decision; and be it
FURTHER RESOLVED, that the appeal of Annette Sorensen is hereby denied and that
the decision of the BZA, as modified based upon the reported agreement between Nichols
Development LLC and Annette Sorensen, is affirmed and the variances granted by that decision
shall remain in force subject to the said agreement reached between Nichols Development LLC
and Annette Sorensen which shall be incorporated into this resolurion by reference; and be it
Page 3 of 4
i
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
�,
FCTRTHER RESOLVED, that a copy of the BZA resolution approving the variance
application of Nichols Development LLC, as modified by the terms of the agreement reached
between Nichols Development LLC and Annette Sorensen, is hereby adopted by the Council by
reference including the terms of the agreement reached between Nichols Development LLC and
Annette Sorensen; and be it
FINALLY RESOLVED, that a copy of this resolurion shall be mailed to the project
proponent, the project appellant, the Zoning Administrator and the Boazd of Zoning Appeals.
� Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet �
DepartrneM/officelcouneil: Date Initiated: 0� `� "
�P -���a�a�h��t 24SEP-04 Green Sheet NO: 3022762
CoMact Person 8. Phone• ueoarm�errz aerrt � o rerson �muavu e
Peter Wamer 0 'ceosdlns 'oNEnvi n /' �'
z Assign 1 iceose/In ection/Environ Rn De ar�ent Direcfor
Must Be on Council Agenda by (Date): Number Z �� 4 -ll-• ti
For
Routing 3 or's �ce Ma odAssi n
Order 4 un i�
5 lerk C" C7erk
Total # of Signature Pages _(Clip All Locations for Signature) '
Adion Requested:
Approval of a resolution memorializing City Council action wlrich accepted the terms of the Boazd of Zoning Appeals' (BZA) decision,
with modifications, to allow Nichols Development to buil& a 44 unit "senior cooperative" at 570 Asbury Sueet.
itlations: Approve (A) or Reject (R):
Planning Commission
CIB Committee
Civil Service Commission
3. Does this personlfirm passess a skill not normally possessed by any
current city employee?
Yes No
Explain all yes answers on separate sheet and attach to green sheet
Initiating Problem, Issues, Opportunity (Who, What, When, Where, Why):
On July 6, 2004 the BZA approved the requested variance for Mr. Timothy Nichols to build this "senior cooperarive." On 7uly 20, 2004,
Annette Sorenson appealed the BZA's decision, and on August 4, 2004 the City Council laid the matter over for Ms. Sorenson and Mr.
Nichols to come to an agreement. On August 11, 2004 an agreement had been reached with certain modifications between the two
parties. The Council then approved Mr. Nichols' development with modificarions.
AdvantagesifApproved:
DisadvantageslfApproved:
Contracts Must Answer the Following Questions:
1. Has this person/firtn ever worked under a contract for this department?
Yes No
2. Has this person/firtn ever been a city employee?
Yes No
Disadvantages If Not Approved:
Total Amount of
Transaction:
� Fundinp Source:
CaSURevenue Budgeted:
tr�� �aa���Tt';�l ��3'4,-�a,
Pinancial Information:
(Explain)
Activiry Number:
SEP 2 9 .�
O£FICE OF LICENSE, INSPECTIONS AND O ��
ENVIlZONMENTAL PROTEC'IiON W
Janeen E. Rosas, �irecto>
CITY OF SAINT PAUL
Rnndy G Kelly, Mayor
July 20, 2004
Ms. Mary Erickson
Council Research Office
Room 310 City Hall
Saint Paul, MN. 55102
Dear Ms. Erickson:
� � ^
�3'� S:�! ..., ,, _ ._ _
r : 111-
would like to co�rm that a public hearing before the City Council is scheduled for Wednesday,
August 4, 2044 for the following zoning case:
Appellant:
Zoning File #:
Purpose:
Location:
Staff.
District :
Board:
Annette Sorensen, et all
04-096265
Appeal a decision of the Board of Zoning Appeals granfing several
variances in order to construct a 44 unit senior cooperative building.
570 Asbury Street.
Recommended approval.
District I 1 recommended approval.
Approve on a 6- 0 vote.
I have confirmed this date with the o�ce of Council Member Jay Benanav. My understanding is
that this public hearing request will appear on the agenda of the City Council at your earfiest
convenience and that you wi11 publish notice of the hearing in the Saint Paul I.egal L,edger.
Thanks !
.S1Il ly,
.
J Har wick, Zoning Specialist
AA-ADA-EEO Employer
LOWRYPROFESSIO.NALBliILDING Telephone: 651-266-9090
3i0 St Peter Sbeet, Suite 300 Facrimile: 657-266-91?4
Sain[ Paul, Mmnesota 55102-I510 Web: www.cistpauLmn us1[iep
NOTlCE OF POBLIC HEARIIVG
The Saint Paul City Council wi}1 cbn_
duct a public heaiing on Wednesday, Au-
g�t 4, 20p4 at 5:30 p.m. in the City
Couneil Chambeis, �ird Floor, City Hall,
to consider the appeal of Annette
Sorensen, et al. to a decision of the Board
of Zoning APPeals g'anting several vari-
ances in ord� to construct a 44 unit sen-
ior �cooPesative building at 570 Asbury
Stieet.
Dated: July 21, 2004
MARP ERICKSON,
Assistant �4ty Connc�l Sm�etary .
- - (Juty 26)
ST: PAULLEGAL T+r..r.e.a �_
22083590
APPLICATION FOR APPEAL
� Department of Planning and Econo�nic Developrnent
. Zoning Section
7400 Ciiy HaZZ Annex
25 West Fnunh Street
Saint Pau1, .MN SSIO2-I634
(65I) 26b-6589
Name �htJf �i`Z�.}�'�j t'
APPLfCANT Address d�� � �Y�--��.� �'.
City ��:��Ji-' St.�� Zip
PROPERTY
LOCATION
Phone �''� � - �� � J
ZoningFileName l�tl�tl�i.-� ">4=t1.�i'G'���' Li..G--
3 --
Address / Location � �� � % � "�'��� �� � �"� _ ��`"''�'� �� � �=' a �
�.7
TYPE OF APPEAL: Application is hereby made for an appeal to the:
� 8oard of Zoning Appeafs � City Counci{
Under the provision of Chapter 64, Section Paragraph of the Zoning Code, to appeal a
decision made by the ��_'���'�--- ���� �� Uc�s �� ��L.`�
on �� 20 � . File Number. �� r �� - �� °°� ��;�
{date of decision)
GROUNDS FOR APPEAL: Explain why you feel there has been an error in any requirement, permit, decision
� - 7>��� D or refusai made by an administrative afficial, or an error in fact, procedure or
�� finding made by the Board of Zoning Appeals or the Planning Commission.
�l� lJ �ff'rllv�S�I✓�
�,�j�, Cs2unAHv��E
j�- � ft�t €"LG c s
��r.,�� �`pPR�z� �
,r�i„�,� �cwn�A�v
,4����� ��'s�-xl
B R.E� �d���
�,� ��- 7 s�
�,t��fl ��lC��.
.��� �Ruec�
:�ok�7ri y �'rt(E-2
�/-!�n � 1�'1 y �-t�. e-
,� -7�,4,�a � JZ E�fi
attach additional sheet if necessary)
�' "?�A-�--�.��
�
Applican#'s Signat � �� ,i.,16�P�fti¢°+r.�ate i - o�d -fl /'�City Agent
�.'���
b�-�'-9� �
The decision by the Board of Zoning Appeals and the staff findings are in error because •
�I�e intene oi the Special Condiiion Use l�ermit was far it to be paired with the parki�g
ramp and the office buildinp. The SCU�P providing the setback was a condition for the
consmzction of the parking ramp and the office buiiding and was intended to be in effect
for as long as the office buitding and or parking ramp continued to exist. Supporting
documentation enclosed includes statements from a Planning Commissioner who was
there in 1983 as well as a sitting City Councilmember aT the time these original decisions
were made. Additiona�ly, press coverage of the time shou�s the intent af the green space
which became the Sculpture Garden was intended to be a permanent fixture open to the
public. The oricinal intent of these decisions should not be superceded by arcane
manipulations of the aoning code by changing accessory ases To principal ases, especially
because the neiahbors involved never had a proper opportunity to understand that the
change from accessory use to principal use would negate the esistence of green space that
was promised to them in peipetuity, or antil the structures involved {specifically the
parking ramp and the office building) ceased to exist.
�
�
�
�--
�, .
•:� � * �'
�
WAL3ER PARKER srnr� wwrEtt
�
�,
SCO7TTNNSHt/STAFF PHOTOGRAPfiER
Garrison Keiltor, left, ctass of '60, re-
tumed Monday to his alma mater, Ano-
ka Senior High Schaol, to give the
commencement address to this year's
graduating class at Gnodrich Fleld in
Anaka. KeiBor recailed how he and his
future wife, then a Danish exchange
student, used to attend footbatl
games at the field, he in fhe back with
the C- students and she in front with
the honor students, 30 years ago. He
told the students that they are loved
greatly by their parents and teachers,
but that iYs time for them to graduate
and move on "because we need the
spaceforyoungerstudents."
I/'� steep drop in the fertility rates in
economicaAy slzessed �reas of ou#state
Minnesota, inciuding IIniutil, weIl esceed-
ed in¢eases in St Pavl and Minneapolis
from 1980 tkrough 1987, so that the ove:-
all fer�li{y rate of the sfate feII 8.3 per-
cent d�uing tye period� t�e State Planning
Agencyreported Monday_
The report aLso said that £een-age fer-
tility rates in the state - basea on live
births and not connting ahortions —
Pinaged 23 percent for women aged 15
through 19. The teen-age fertilitp rate in
Minnesota is about half that of the nation-
ataverage.
"Other statistics have indicatetl that
pregnancy rates for (Minnesataj teen_
agers aLso have dropped," said Barbara
Ronningen, research analyst for the agen-
cy. "Whether that's beeause there's better
education or more sxietal pressure, I
don't Imow, but I tLintc it's a real positive
RATES CONTINl1ED ON 3B ► �
• � :�
� �♦
• i`� �f"�'
SEAN T. KEI_LY STAFF WRITER
!
� `! � � � • i. +.
that it will narrow the
:candidates at a special
iay night.
s for the job include su-
n Indianapolis; Xansas
Coanty, S.C.; Hamilton
ichmond, Calif.; Fort
Gloncester, 113ass., and
perintendent of Dade
as 6een in St. Paul for
s $93,968 per year, said
:ee �ounty position pri-
is a "professional chal-
lenge and opportunity_"
His second reason for applying far the
job, he said, is that laws in Minnesota
make it "very unattractive for school su-
perintendenfs to remain in Uiis state."
Minnesota law limits Bennett's saiary
to 95 percent of the amount the govemor
earns. It a7so prohibi#s ius salazy package
from including a ear allowance and sup-
plementai retiremen# program and states
that Lis contract musi be renewed every
two vears.
$ENNETT CONIINUED ON 3$ ►
����'���
� -�_ r��a
� ■ he Garden of Scuipture, a priyately
developed neighborhood park boasting a
variety of outdoor art pieces, will open
today in the Hamiine Midway neighbor
hoai of St. Paul.
The sculgture pazk is part oF the rede-
velopment of the former Samazitan Hos-
pital complea at Edmund Avenue and
Simpson Street, w6ich includes a remod-
eled affice huilding, a 300-eaz parking
°'-�?n and a planned 24-uniE projeck
The northeast comer of the twablock
Samaritan property included unimproved
green space, and deveiopers David and
Terri Ann Van Landschoot were toid that
the local residents didn't want to ,ee
buiidings erected there.
"V4e respected the neighbarhood's wish-
es in pr�eruing the green space and the
idea of the scuipture garden emerged
from that," said Terri Ann Yan
_ GARUEN corvnnue� oN 3B ►
� . �
�
uota znxa i��fee
6�-q48 ���"�
�'�,�� s�
� - s- ���a
SAINT p.qliL PIONEER PRESS
CNUSOH/STAFFPNOTOGRAPHER
himsetf 6etween a rock
�'s visit Sunday. While
�ijaii.
iYs safe to say Dorotfiy is
ian of Mikhail Gorb2chev,
ad, Dorottiy got on a bus
� her way to the nursing
ider was reieased from
8 pm. and paid 50 bucks
lasi out of hock. He plans
the disorderly conduct
a the meantime, he has
�at a customer's right to
treatment ends where a
rricade be�ns. But he
also learned something
i Minnesotans act when
ay us a visit.
jriving cab in San Fran-
n tfie Queen came," he
y they didn't go haif as
: peopie here. In Minne-
pbody grabs onto som�
his and puffs Themselves i
3 iYs their one chance to
taut. Personallp I don't �
�y's visit was a big deal.
t I saw him go by from
a squad caz.°
'. the fallout £ram the
:t investigatious in 1988
..n.n,��,;,,,,,,,,;,,a� r;t..
�= � �`.
9 CG�:77NUEQ PRCM t B
Landschoot.
Tha Van Landschoots worked
with their architect, GeraId Ailan,
Fn designing tt�e park and with Mi-
chael &igger, an associate nrofes-
sor in t�e Fine ArLs Division af
Minneapous CoIlege of Art and De-
sign.
Bigger's sculptures are the first
to 6e installed in the park, but art
works by studenis from Yhe Minne-
apolis school will be on eghibit
thexe beginning in 3uly. New sculp-
tures will be introduced on a regu-
lar basis afrer that.
`The student scuiptures wiil be
chasen on the basis of theSr aatistic
quality, their safetp and t4eir abili-
ty to stand ap as pu6lic art," Terri
Ann Van Landschoot said.
The community will continue to
have a say in selection of future
sculptures for the park through
membership on an arts committee.
fihe space also will be avaitabie for
communitp events such as arts and
crafts fairs, she said.
The tree-lined sculpture park in-
clud� a central knoIl that can act
as a focal point for entertauiment.
A favored old tree that has died
will soon be converted into azt-
work by chainsaw artists.
"We're keeging the old tree be-
cause of neighborhood wishes,"
said Daaid Van Landschoot. "We
have also saved a cornice from old
Samaritan Hospital, which will be
Baby safe after being
lost by drunken mom
ASSOCIATED PRESS
!"� 6-week-old 6oy lost by his
drunken mother Fridap was found
ia a stroller Saturday Sn St. Paul,
being pushed through a sti€f rain
by anozher woinan — x*ho also
appeared drunk, officials said
l�ionday.
"The 63by's fine," said Carma
St. llar3rs, an advocate #or the
boy's moEher. "Aa's a flttle sick
yet, hut other than that he's doing
just fine."
Minneapolis Poiice Sgt. Lori Ol-
son said Xennepin CountY officiais
wIll �onsidet fiiing negIeet charges
againsc the mother, �vh-0 had aske3
poiiee [o look ;or the boy.
The mother to3d po3ice Saturday
rnat sF.e nad the babv with het Fri-
one of the eghibifs in the pazk."
IIirect investment in the paz�,
including its wrought-iran €ence
but not the land itself, is more than
�lOQII00, � sairi.
Cammuaitp reactiou has been
g��'��y favorable to #he sculp-
hu'e Pu'k grojeck said 1S�arp Jo
JungwirEh, actiag president of the
Ramline Midway Coalihon, the of-
iicial planning agency for the area.
"Z, far one, am deIiriousiy haFP9
about this project although there
aze those who are takiag a`wait-
and-see' attitude," said Triesta
Brown, a Hamline Midway board
member who has monitored its de-
velopment over the past Years-
"The developer was going to leave
the green space as it originally
was, 6¢t zve deeided we would tike
to see it upgraded a littie."
The Hamiine Playground locat-
ed adjacent tn the office portion of
the project is also scheduled for re-
furbishiag in 1991 and that will
provide unsupervised but active
recreation space to complement
the senipture gazden, Brown said.
The remcrleled Aazniiae Pazk
Office bnilding,including the park,
represents a $2 million investment,
according to the developers. The
Hamline Park Town Houses, on the
site of the Samaritan Hospital if-
self, mast await a t� credit fmm
the Sk Paul City Conncil but will '',
be annther $3 million.
If the council acffi this summer, �
canstruction of the 24 town houses
wIll begin immediately after, with
completion scheduled about
Tkanksgiving. The homes are
siated for fami3ies with taw or
moderate incoanes.
Thief
RHer
krks �i�
De�
Atexandru
B�mn �
, 0�
1
:��� Granite fa9:
��+ ��� RIiI�.l �►�1I111�
♦ COMINUmFROM IB
sign for Minnesota."
The feriiIitg rate is the annual
num�er of births per 1,000 women
aged 15 thrnugh 44. In Minnesota,
the rate dropped from 70.8 in 2980
to 64.9 iu 1987, the report said. In
2959, the peak of the baby boom,
the rate was about 144. The rate
dropp� �2 p�eent during fhe
1970s, so the rate of decliue slowed
consitierably in �lditutesota during
the 2980s.
Because the nuinber af women
of ehiid6earing age continued to in-
crease during the period,the actu-
al number af babies born each year
in Minnesota was relati�eiy con-
stant, ranging beLwEen fi5,000 and
fi8.7Q0. IZanninaea said.
in tlre 1970s, Itonni
Populatian esp�
about whether fe
poised Ea inerease
On one hand, fei
womeu aged 3Q-49
ing age grnup — r
198Q through 198
Conntering thaf, s
fact that o3der �t
have a child o#ten
reer advan t
Bllt j��Ui! r
their decisions cc
heavily an eeo
stauees, which in 1
is whp the fertiiits
� j�
�-��'
%� _ �-, '�
�, - � =' �
1 ETI'IZf3N NOT TO ?�VIE?�ID ?ONZ� CODE
T�Ve the undersigned are opposed to granting of tfie variances being requesied for
construction of the senior housing co-operative development to be built by Nichois
development, specificalIy:
18 feet setback where 25 feet are required, for a variance of 7 feet
52 feet height where 51 feet are atlowed, for a variance of 1 foot
44 units where only 32 units are allowed for a variance of 12 units
38 off street pazking spaces where 66 aze required for a variance of 28 spaces
43°lo maximum lot coverage vrhere anly 35% is allowed for a variance of 8°l0
�
�
�; � � �
, -f � �
��2 ?
�
r
,
�
O� P-Q �S'
� pETTi'ZQN NOT TO A.M�?ID ZQN�iG CODE
A..�
-� ; t �=
„ - ,,;_ y
r' -
We the undersigned aze OppOS� to granTing of the variances baing requested for
construction of the senior housing co-operative development to be built by Nichols
development, specifically:
18 fsat sethack where 25 feet aze required, for a variance of 7 feet
52 feet fieight where 51 feet aze allowed, for a variance of i foot
44 uniYs where only 32 units are allowed for a variance of 12 units
38 off sh�eet parking spaces where 6b are re�uired for a variance of 28 spaces
43% ma�cimum lot coverage where only 35% is allowed for a variance of 8%
�
�
�
�
�
NAME ADDRESS OWN/RENT
ay ���
• PETITIOi�' �IOT TO A�tiTD ZON�tti G CODE
We the undersi�ed aze opposed to granii�g of the ��ariances being requested for
construction of the senior housing ca-operative dev elopmant to be built by �iichols
development, specifically:
18 feet setback where 25 feet aze required, for a�iariance of 7 feet
52 feet height where 51 feet are allowed, for a variance of 1 foot
44 units where oaly 32 units aze allowed for a variance of 12 units
38 off street parking spaces where 66 are requiued for a variance of 28 spaces
43% maximwn lot coveraga where only 35% is allowed for a variance of 8%
C�
s r-�--_
�Z�"�n�1
��
�1
�
O��Q��'
Triesfa Brown
From: Triesta Brown [triesta.brown@comcast.net]
Sent: Thursday, July 15, 2004 11:2� AM
To: 'boo.fietcher@co.ramsey.mn.us'
Subject: Old Samaritan Hospi'tal History
H� Sob,
Pabe 1 of 1
Thanks for taking the time to respond to this. As you may recali, i asked you awhde back about the green space
agrsement ihat the r�eighbors negotiated in returr ior setback varrances that woutd atYow the parking ramp and
the office buiiding currentiy existing on the old Samaritan site to be buiit. You remembered this from your days on
the cdy counctl. and that along wlth the special condition use permit (SCUP) there was also a zoning change,
which you voted for as part of an ordinance in 1983.
At the time you voted in favor of ihe zoning change, was �t with the intent ihat the SCUP pro�iding massed
setbacks ailowing the parking ramp and the office buildi�g to be builf to remain in place in perpetuify? There is
some question regarding the legality of the continuance of the SCUP because at the time the hospital was torn
down, the office buildina and parking ramp remained in place The zoning code is silent on the issue ofwhether
accessory buildings remaining (which would otherwise not be there had the hospital not existed) are still covered
by the original SCUP. Therefore, the situation boils down to one of intent As a member of the city council of tha[
time and someone who lived in the neighborhood affec'ted, you would be in a position to respond with respect to
what the intent was meant 'to be
There are many neighbors who already have raised money to appeal a decision on this from the Board of Zoning
Appeals to the current city council lt is the opinion of the BZA staff that vdhen the hospital was demolished that
the gree� space was no longer required. On the other hand, after spending 30+ hours researching the zoning
history of the site, city attomey Peter Warner has determined that this could be interprefed in more than one way
and whil� he did not wish to advise the BZA on what to decide, he could say that the city would incur no legal
habdrty from the BZA ru6ng on fhe issue. "fhe BZA says 4haf fhe green space agreement that was negotiated as a
condition ot building a parking ramp and office building (that the neighbors did not want) is no longer valid The
neighbors, many of who were zround at the time the original agreement was negotiated, obviously disagree
i would like to point out that my only vesied interest m this issue is to allow the citizens involved to properly use
the city process to protect their property values as they see fit. Because this is such a technically di�cult case, I
have had to spend a great dea! of time assisting the neighbors with this. Since the nefghborhood district council
is m favor of the project the obvious mecharnsm for assistance is not at their disposal. The Hamline Midway
Coalition, oiher than two not very weli publicized design sessions which were held by staff, did not hear directfy
from the residents mosf atfected by ihis proposed projecf. The Coa)ition board took a vote relying on a statf
recommendation, without ever heanng directly from these citizens ThaPs when the neighbors came to me and
asked for help Since so many neighbors seemed to remem6er this agreement, my sense of fairness kicked in
and. well, here I am today trying to help them get the information they need to present Yheir appeat.
I would appreciate any assistar.ce you can give me
Most sincerely.
Tnesta Brown
(651)642-1 i 45
triesta. brown@comcast. net
�
�
�
�
?n e.�nn �
o�f-�yS
Triesta Brown
�rom:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Fietcher. Bcb [Bob.Flztcher@CO RaP�SEY MN.USI
R9onday, J�aiy �9, 2v^0� 1t04 AM
'iriesta. brown@comcast. neY
�tV: t71d Samaritan Hospi±al_ History
,-, ..._ �J,ccc-..c__---
� _____C_�.7, l __cl :_.�.....ay..
� _r�ii(.. __�...�._1.�� 'i'�`vv
7 S2n,�; i.SO�C�..cYc JII1Y 1�J Ll�iCz _.,....� :T_
> _... ` Lr=c5C2.,..YOW. ^ .aCO. ^ .1C85�.nE�
> JliDjECC: C-C JcIR8=1L'cP YOSO=LcJ. Hi5�0'_'�'
>
> zs � me,�,ber ef the S�. Paul r-ty Cou^c_1 l,-� 198s, ��epresented v��ard �
> wr-�ch �ncludeu �he Samar-tan Acspi�al -ocaLion. A� the t_me tna*_ *_re
> Spec�al Condidi�en Use ?ermit was issued for the cor.scruction oi the
> Ofiice �uiiding and Park_ny ramp, we reauirea a iarge amount of green
> space a�d szt back so as te o-�set _.� negative impacL ef �r.e new
> massive constr�ctior. _r: a res�der.�ial�neignborhood. �he in�er.t La=s to
, tie �he grzer, space and set bacx �o *he office cuiiding and parkina
> ramp cor.struction. Tne iarge set bacK ar,d green spac= was =o continue
> as iong as the neca offic° :ouilding ar.d parking _amp w2r2 in =xisteece.
�
�
V1
`
@
� _ .
Triesta 8rown
From: Gayle Summers �hdc@visi cam] �
Sent: iVlonday, Juiy i9 20G4 i2.22 PM
To: Triesfa. Bro�an@comcast. net
Su6ject: park letter
I` you wa^_ a pr;n�ed cc;y o£ �nls I w-_�_ leace or.e fcr vcu a;. the -ec. center des;c. I'hey
are opea until 9PP�
6ay'e Webc Sumtc:a-s
2252 Goocrich �?venue
St. Paal iKN SSI05
�aiy 19, �O:Jg
Dear Tr��s�a,
in response to yocr irqa�xy regardir.g tS;e park located on Thomss �etween Asburp and
Simpson, af�`er read�-ng ne�es on �h� act�.on .`.ere �s my memory or_" ��rhat took place_ The par1:
was _o be a dedica�ed g:eer. spa_.. cpe: ro tne neighbcnc�od as - assive area to iesser. �he
�o � p
impact of zhe office beilding and parking ramp tcat was planr.ed to be adjacent. The
Dlstric� 1i Co:emunity :�ounci'_, u��;,=1�� yedway Coai�tion, supported the dedicaeed passive
spacE. Aftiez G�1 0� the paasinq years, o�her aetaiis of the agreamenc s�e vagce.
I nooe thar tPiis helps the ne�ahborr_ood erfort co reta_n tne nark.
Sincerely,
��y_�
Gay'_e W. Sun,mers
Cor,uro�r:�cy Orga:i�zer
Hiy�'_a;id District Counci
http://www.higi!landdisLr-cCCOanc-l.org/
.
��
, /�
}�
p� G48
�
�
l
a `.
�
=c•:�:..� �c>.�.;:-��_ _,-.___ -,_,-___
-------- ---------- _ >°y,'-.�
----------------------
�:_� _-
.. ^p�,_.°^:�:_ �,-..�.. -- „ ;;r.�. _��L ...�c �F i`c�?zit;:. 7",3ius
�. ., ::�J....., � ....;. _. c��e. ....":�5$l�i: `�Sc
�, ::,i:,},I'_iiF: �OuLf> j'L.��. JI II'�Oliiv'] e'V�iIC uc'v!°_0'l J7�DSOt' d?�! �<itl;"y
i, �=6i�.L DESf�i:�?DP�: Le:s ?-'G 31cc; Z, :;a�aiia2 Syridicat� Adc�=icn �2
�. ?RcS£t�T =,^iii�u; Ri:-?; c..i; F_4 7pi;IC;�_ �GD� :i_F�R�rCE: Szc�ions o6.453;2} �
64.300 Su6d. 3 & 4
b- STAFF I�lll�S7SGtiT:GP; & ke?GR7: DA'�= I;i7;24 B't �airicia t�. James
,�. PURPiiSE: S}�ec�iai Condi�ion Usz Permit utiim m�d�fiications te co,�si�uct a medica7
o;fice bt;iiding an� parkina faciii*y.
(S• T:�n�t� .�.i��: �.�� cCY'25
t.. Eh?�itN6 LP�lt; U�t: Part or` eh2s s:te is currer,tly used fior sur�ace parl:in ; the
z�est ef chc �rop2rty 3s ioyi d2n�;ty residantia7.� ot tne�lois ar2
L. SUKFflIJPlGt±•JG I A'+�f, Ua�:
�o;�! � 1.o�,_v aer ity re�3qer�r,t�� {ft-Aj
C'as EoN: dr,i<�ty� resiaentie7 {�_q�
a�«z�;: Cx�sti�,g ;amar•itan Hospital; icw aen��ty rESider.tiai _{Ri�t-2� R-4)
6de�1: ;.o�.: tq ,�,r„^;�!�m Gen<_it3 retidentia� {R�1-2i �
,. LGNIIV:= �G�lL i;.s;t;I?:�d; Seci;on 6D.453(2) siai,es: "Noe�iials, and other heaith
and a�euica'�'insEi� :��,alii,ying as noa-prorit u�sti2u�ions �ndar tI� law�s ci�
ire3� ;�a�,2 +�i Ni�r.nescia, aTl subjeet to �ihti fol7oa�ing conditions:
!aj Ail sucl� nesei'ais sliall te develnped only on siies cara> „ting of at ?a�st
�,� acr�s ir- arro. There s�hal7 ba nc }oei9Y;t ]i�Stat;oos p7aced on sha p
5 1 . i ( !+'.'�:Y@.
r3? 7r�e proposec ,;Le sha;l have a�C I��ast one prc,per�y 7ine abvttina a major
tP�cr�oughf�:re ,�s desl�naieQ on t}3e ma��r rnoro!,�g�€are plan. kll aCeess :o
as5y off-;Lr�et garking area shal? b�; G�i;ect�,�/ firom a major thoraug{�Yare�
,, Tl�e miaiint,m �9s'�a��ce of aay mair� u� arc�ssfl���y vui idi��g ;rom �oui3dir�g 7oL
'ine.; ir str��eis shcl� be at lra�c �0 feet ir,t• Frar,z., :�ear, enc! side ya:•c15
i Oi nl �[.'i�=^. �-�u`:"J SLN4;CLi> �Jr °�:L"+J _fOr•y dDOV2 trt0 �hE IiI1t773ii1P7 yd'fti
;�s;:a;,c:. st:al7 he incr�aas2.i ��y at �a�s�; 20 �eeL," " �-,
.-�;e: :>�.36^ S;t.^,d. 3 stac:s� "Th2 ri; ��s:ir:�: :.a+:,�r,�.ssio�n or ihe P7an�;nq
:-,� ,_�rar.c� ;a;�Fre �'eiega�e: ::�aY i,r,00sc s�a:.h re4 ccnrJiz ors zr,d
;;,i;��as��n� :��o„�ci=:g aza ap�;Ea�,a.7 »=;•e �le.ar;i,�er' tc ca �eecessary co r�iFii7
�'r;_ ,; .��d p� of �he zc�:ar:n ,.,,dz a,.d i_,; r;rotec_ a�jacen"t propertics,
__.. � ��- ,�., .;�1,c _¢ai_= '?;;e _;.�ir�j •-n_;�.,��.5 ion r�er Ps�lic near�ing,
, ��s � iy cr� :. :,. �,. e Go(iL'i.iGfli- :l�I@!? t>•, _ ;pi� n{ 5UC;i 5�8£idi
._ ?7�?:,,�. ...�., - - _'h5:�d;�`� li�i�i, J^ (;:�- i_ �7Li::. .j52 �d'e'{TUl i:S' �° d `JSc'.^.L' �i
U€'c. .`�tJ. _ ..=�c'fl 7't� . _ �t: _ v�11;v? 1�r,u4? Ra":�34
-' -��� ° ��� > 1 �fU �'t�� t�`'., fiu� �i- c....?IUGi�li3t'J i,
"- ii� ..,...�_ _ f° ., , .. _ `?-,.�.. :.. .� �OGStnL2i'T
. . .. . .... ... ,_ _ . ,: . � _!.. '_
� 24. . - C _ ' "' v, J . .,
.__ .... . . � _
_, ..,.�_ _ _ , .,_. „ __ .� _ ,_, _,,. _..:_ 3. _..,�_�.:;�.._
a
,_
s �
1`'
o�} -�`� �'
, ,_r-:
t :
�
.. di SE�'iSdCt� 0; %f/` iS r2vu7� Ed T�Ot' t�7E i!if2E-52Qt'j� R12d7Gd1 6ffiCE b(17�dit1Q. ihL' .
3G' high ramp v�='7i a]so require a 70' setback. Hpp7icant �roposes matrhinc� 'thz � -
- ezisLiha setbacks at 18' {As6ury) and 75' (Simpson). The third ca�dition is �� �-, ,
r�ot iiet.: mo�ir�.�at�ons 3f 52' aad 55' arz needed. Aiong Ti�omas, �he oi;ice ... ,-,
buildina er971 have a 7�' s2tback and ihe ramp wi77 6e s2t bzck 145', m�eting =° �, - -
ih2 _.an�3�.ion. - - - ' _
_ 4`
.,. ?iPNi icant has �aet a ��unbar af e�raes ��tsh aeigt�tors arrd represerata+_i¢ of i.,he � .
`:;i;fi i� f.cal;�icr. rs�E c�mmi`_tee rev:evred a mm�ber �i proposals, 6ui have �, -� .
st�t reac`,ee� teca7 agrae�eni, App7�cane'S r,-oa�5a7 shows ±he main entrance to '
the or`fice hu;iciing on v::catEd Edmund ",:tenue. (E,nployees w;il ent2r the ramp ,- �
'rom Simvson.}
. ��. ?he D�stric� �i Cor„nittse �refer�s mc�ing tne ouit�in5 clos'er to the exi5*9ng
_ _ Y, ar�c+ hae•4eg Yne rr�ain ar,cess za the site osf� As6ury n�r•r_{� e� the �f€#ce
, - ,7ail�ina, 4at;:?e �bis is L�e preferred schema_, the r_ortsn9tt?e i; not oppasec� to
� - ir�a a�olic�nt's pi�n,
�rz�_R?;_ ric35%iTn�_i?9si
r. =iiyCi�luS C:it!T� �,
n��_ �
r,;, :,aE�_r;ac- a;nedi:�5 J7F1C2 �uildi7� :. v naekin� rarF, A�o:icani mus� eisr,
�;a=ain a Sa2cia? io.^.di�:cn U;2 ?2r�:i fiih aiociiPic�tion> in cr�2* =_c
cenc�;,��t tre prcjeci. 7hr2� candiiicns Tust be mGi.
2. 'v,'i�� tie acyu;siiion c, zhe res� af 4rs� iots i.r, Btcck 2 ef �ar;io� Syndicate
Addit,u�c {ti2 b7cci: bou$�de � by Tf�cmas, Si:ri:�o^, vacated Edmund ar�d As6uryj ihe
i�ta7 si`.e rer +ne ha,pi�al a;;i he 4e�9 acres. tihi7e tne 5 acre minimum is
r:ot met, the ap�7�cant is s'r,cri by ap�raximate;y 275 sauaee feet, Since the
c3at bo�45 fi°o;r, ra?afch the ���easuremeot; wcre tak2n m�y not be iGtatty accu:ate,
ihe area r2q�irPmen* is esseni;ai;y m�±,
3, Tf;e pr•�aesee ;ice anuts Thu�as Avenue s�.hich is a ceiteciar street, and Asbury,
C;�ar3es, a��d "aimpse� t=rhich are a71 3acai s�;zeis. }� addi*ion, the off-str2ei
�arkin tar_i9ity wi�l �erive itis access froc. AsGury Szres�c ana �unund Av°aua,
The second cond�ECion is not m?t. Flpolitaa� s2ates that ;t is phpsical;y
ir��;ossibl� to conply ,viz;� ckrs req�9rement s�nr,e the existfng hfls�9ta1 �annet
;e r,roven,
i, CtE<��;e efi Lhe loeacion of the ezis��ng hospitai, bath ir� relation to �aj�sr
Lh�rougii�ares ar.� ?o ih2 siting o# eX�sting davelo�me�L, strict application uf
ct.a vvadi�ions vtou7d ;�nr<asoria'sly limi! use of the land ao� tMe cffice
!w57d9n�. 13,�p3icant states tnaL t4�ey are limitei 9n �oteni9a7 Skyrray
�ar+�ectir.os �o the re;p�tai whic� "si,nits lacation of �h2 medical afPic�
builrii�:o ar.-c requires moai��cation c,� �h2 secbac; requir2meots,
., 7he ir�te�e of Cs�� a�uj t@�raugn�Fre cv+;cii:;m: is -o c,+sure �.� traifie is
lic�j)`.. :fF �GO.°,'� i9.1'E'C6S d.5 Ii�UCjl 35 .l�p5luip. �f't j)�il�i Cc$2 cil�ltl,fP'dp �f bl;:
n„�a;ial an<i af;ice l�uild;r.v ,,�11 ,_�, Si���;,s� sirtieC`, pat:arfs an�i �isitors
.<'i? I :a5z ,:iln!!TdJFsDar�y jLrfets,
.,, u'2=.c:!•E il: L IJC3Z1Q��5 Ci C2;iG2f "SIC�aS ✓.:.°_�ilY?C dY:G �R1Yk'CS ttiOS`-.
..r � . , i`Ji: �tl';? t � L(' $71A1-i{ 'A � { Gi`�\53L !.�i� .�. iUiTitj]�Q }f,4Qf2S.�L ; �iv1t Ii.�'. LIIQ$C
..:ni�� he r�o;-�;� :;i:7 us ��:nas a�� �s�c��:� ar,:: tho,e canina fro � tne eas�
., . ;,s� ,sh�a� ; ��ezra�e .aeekGay ,�ei:icle x 2n�s :cr a metl;ecl r,fificz
c�n i`=;:�, .:ri= - ...i 5;au;d Cc .;�prox�n;c=.��9 ' Ti;i= mearzs tnflt l,Z3J cars
, N!i �:i c, .._c .,._ �.3Ve f.^,. G�: �ulily GtiN ,. LG-flGrl." ,- � I6C1.
ib. '_ _c. .,_�i. :i:sl ?.,c. ;;Jq�9 �`.� i•_s� i�J�i"U:, i9'.y;iGi'rY3J'vC: li":!:`�;�3Gi ]. L'•scS2
. _ a , r� -:ec; ,a�h. ..�. � c,�7y i„D�Tas _...
.e �- _ _.. . :ci � -- - - - � .. _ .- -.
. . _- ..- _.' _ .._. _ �. ' :�a� �. -
_ ", . . ' � ., , -- t
: o.. , f... c_ . ., _ .. . . ,_.�-. i .�.,.- z�,. ...
^t
� �
�
04-�i��'
�
-?.(�:-, ;;1�.��: •��r_�: i�:�"=.
., =_`.i��;u� �'i;t;T'
ur.u- �
:�_ �rc�;cant•_ ��ov:,s�� cPGr��s co Y:ave �::f� !,2°� �ar::��j. T�,e n�s�'iai �s
('pai�7"23 CG �l"3iD�a_;� So S�dGcS. �cCKiuJ `C*' L�'c lcW `J: `t:i:: CB
anv�ez;�:,=�ety t40.=_qa.;e� 'c� 2�5 rzyu��etl saac2s. 'Foticant proPCSes �ograd�rg
i�e td�mozr of l;osp'�a; sPaces tio ne�� ca�e (225 sFac2s3 and so ;n11 7.^ov:d� =i
'east 3c5 spac2s ir, the ra�p.
3!�. Tiie Y1_nnirie_ Cor,n�ssicn mus� a75a deterar.rz ;.izi ihe Nro�ose� mecicai ofzite
ou�la�r�g_is an_zc_essorY_s�ru�t�� -- i�at :�oul� ee Permitied in tt;is Eaning
cistrici. - �
1�. :tpp?icant siatz� �r:at `or �he present iin�e thz r:o�pitai e+�S� c�m the 2ntire
u7in�c. 42 scme Lime in t'se future i7dividuz! otfices ��iay be sold ta
qhys:cians; no'�;zvzr tne hospiza7 vaiil rzna�n shz maj�riiy partn2r in the office
b..�9l�ing. 7his a9reem?nt v�ovld De si:ni1ar to �t�e aoraemenL that the
p7anning Cc,v�ission accept2d for tne hiidvaa,� hospital office bui'din�. St would
iher�efo�rz aapear tnat the p;'n�osed szJica7 office building is accessory ta the
main use as the has�i�al.
G. ","fAF� RECDt4htE'lUATiGN: Bas2d on findings 1 ihr�ugh 15, staff •°eco��nenas approval of
z�i2 S�ec��Co,� �t1on Use Permit svith �odificai9ons oF: (a� 275 square feet for tne
tiirst ccmli't,inn; fb) access co Che building and �amp trom loca3 str•eets for ihP secona
,;e;,cii,*.iori; un� (ci ^7' sevbGck ��n Asbury ifrom 70' re4�'�ed to;8' p��oposedj and !;5'
setbzck o^ »m�son {rron 76' r°4u3red io 75' propesed) `or the thif�d conditiun,
s�4J�ct tc zi3e f��ilovtiny additinnal cen�itior�s:
i.
J,
3�
A.
�,
;ubdue the ir�pace of the skya�a,� by chnice oi ear�htone �aSnc or finist� and
�9„r"!y matc}; medicai aifice bu3laing exterior �o i'�at af ihe hospita1;
Id�ir tt�e"�r�assE� se�Gack" atezi space and �t'�'3ide 1ar�dscaping wi;.t+_fbur-
season �o?ia,2 �,� -+'Eit as bculevara �rees as �pecif?�d by iite City Foresier;
P:cy7cle st;ad'in9 of par•I;3ng ra�p lu,�hts to shieid adjacer�C residential prnperLv
i'rr�i� �:a�re;
'rrovvtio apPro(e;�ate 5ecur�t.Y (e•9- closeG ci�°cu9c �fV) �For the parkin9 rarrp; and
;,stiaL�l�s� a cnmmitCee zempris�e o� ��rcpi�al c,anayemen't, 2manediata ne�yYtbo;s, ana
ilisk.ric�. ?i Coaiiiir�n ^eAres�'itat;v�s te ; ,ruv�ae on�oir�g planning and probte��
rt-so1��i�n_ Iss�.�es i� b° resolvea 3nc7uda w�rkin9 ����h "_he 6eparc�nenL o` PuS;1c
�;nrks to aesSg�+ an app7'n�ria�2 o�-sr�eet Fark�ng resC^i:;tion pl�n tha7.
eza�wrag2s a sax� irafrie gattern,
� �)
b����g
��i �� �
� ` �- -
THE FAI1L TO�VN MEE'TI�TG--
The annual Fall Town Meeting
will be held on Tuesday, October
16, 7:00 pm at the Jehovah Lu-
theran Church, 1566 Thomas
Avenue. We encounge a12
neighborhood residents and busi-
ness people to attend because
this yeaz there wi11 be no guest
speakers, no panel discussions ...
we want the neighborhood to be
heazd. Four short presentadons
will be �ven about issues the
community has worked on this
past year, and then all of you
will have an opportnnity to dis-
cuss the issues that ue meaning-
THIS IS YQUR CHANCE!
ful to you. The $amline Midway
Coafition wants to respQnd to the
neighborhood and we have
learned the importance of neigh-
bors having the chance ta speak
with each other and share stories
and information, Please attend
this event. We hope it wiII be
helpful, enlightening and fun!
If you need a ride to the meeung
or you aze in need cf chiid care
for the evening so you can at-
tend, cali the Coalition office.
We will azrange transpartation
for people, and a licensed com-
munity daycare provider has of-
fered care for up to seven chii-
dren.
The Coaiition wilI be presenring
the annual community awards to
peaple from the neighborhood
who have made outstanding
contributions in the areas of
Communication, �nprovement
and Fundraising. If you have a
person in mind you would like
to nominate, piease call the
Hamline Midway Coali[ion of- �
fice by Friday, October 12.
Hamline Park Townhomes To H�ld A Grand Opening
The fust of 24 newly conshucted
town houses in the Hamline Park
Piaza Complex will be �pen to
the gvblic for viewing at its
Grand Opening on Thursday,
October 25, from 4:30 - 6:00
pm. The new and atizactive
housing addition to the Hamline
Midway Community is located
at Asbury and Simpson Streets,
and Charles and Edmund Ave-
nues.
The Opening will provide a pre-
Halloween atmosphere with kite
flying, clowns, magicians, face
painting, dancers, balloon sculp-
tnre, and music. Cookies, appie
cider, juiees , apples, and coffee
will be served. Gifts for children
will also be provided.
Guest speakers for the Opening
inctude City Coancilperson, Pau-
la Maccabee; Joe Errigo, Direc-
tor, Westminster Manageme�t
Corporarion; David and Terri
Ann Van Landschoot, Hamline
Townhomes Developers and
dwners of 3usrin Properties;
Mary 7o Juna irth, Hamline
Niidway Coalition, and Dan Cor-
nejq Diractor of Planning and
Economic,Development.
The Van Landschoots, who have
worked closely with neigh6ors
and Hamline Midway CoaIirion
to provide a majar asset to the
commnnity, are also zhe owners
of Hamline Park Plaza O�ces
and Ramp, and the recentiy dedi-
cated Garden of Sculpture,
which they generausiy provided
for the communiry as a pubiic art
ser�;ng where neighbors can in-
teract in a creative atmosphere.
The Garden of ,Sculpture is co-
sponsored by the Minnesota Coi-
lege of Arc and Design, in coop-
eration with the Hamiine Mid-
way Coalition. The first of its
kind in St. Paul, the Garden will
serve as a pubiic place for Min-
nesota artists to showcase their
works on a rotating basis. Pres-
entiy installed in the t'sarden are
works by MCAD's teacher and
sculptor, Michaek Bigger and six
of his coHege stvdents. ;
�
Ham:ine 1Vliaway.,Neighborhood News �� page 1
Dctober, 1990 ��i�
A Quarterty Prlblic¢tion of the Hamline Midway Co¢lirion
0�-��8
! Applic�.tions a�e being Taken for _
� P�rk Townhomes
;
There are 24 townhomes being built in the Hamline ?4tidway neighborhood, and rental appiication aze being
taken now. The townhomes aze Iocaied'oetween Asbury and Simpson Street and Chazies and Edmund Ave-
nues. Priority will tae given to quali£ied persons ciurenfly living in the Hamline Midway neighborhood.
This is an opportunity for families to remain in this communiry and live in well designed, affordabie hous-
ing.
Rent can be no more than 50% of your monthly income and your income cannot exceed the Federai Gov-
emment guidelines:
2 bedroom: 2 peopie- $18,OQ0 3 people-$20,250
3 bedroom: 3 people-$20,250 4 people $22,500
4 bedroom: 4 people $22,500 5 people $24,3Q0 6 peopie $2b,100
The maximum number of people allowed in each different size unit:
2 bedroom: 2 adults — 2 children
3 bedroom: 2 aduits — 3 children
4 bedroom: 2 adulis — 4 children
Rental of the units includes heat and electric:
� The 2 bedroom units rent for $506.00 per month
3 bedroom units rent for $585.00 per month
3 bedroom handicapped units rent for $610 per month
4 bedroom units rent for $653.00 per month
If you are interested in filling out an applicarion please call 7ustin Properiies at 227-9842. Remember to at-
tend the grand opening on Thursday, October 25 from 4:30 to 6:00 p.m.
n� �` ^�dl� %1n��n
.� . . r�• •s . . . . � : � ���
�.�.� �..�� t�� !-f ..�� as ,a� ;�.. `_� ,.�, �� ri•ai;
�_ .�,: rn �- • :_ _ �._, ��� C�_ .z� �, _ :.�:.
[�1s _ _ .�� , . - - - �., ,.
The �a�den of Sc�lpture
Have you taken a walk through the Garden of Scvipture on Thomas Avenue? Each day there are several
neighbors, children and school groups that stroli through the Scuipture Garden, hold a meeting or sit
down with a book to relax. This Garden is a gift to the Hamline Midway neighborhood from Terri Ann
and David VanLandschoot, the owners of 7ustin Properties, and it appears from the ongoing use that the
people from ttiis commnnity feel it is part of the neighborhood. But your heip is needed in detemuning
� winter and sgring programs, in helping with ideas about the ari pieces and how to best use the old tree
which still stands in the garden. Dn Thursday, October 18 there wi31 be an arts committee meeting at 6:30
prn at :he Hamline Pazk Plaza, 570 Asbury Street. It is important that community members become ao-
tively involved in this committee. �
Hamline IvTidway.Neighborhood News /�, page b
October I990 ����
� ( �� {y -.�.3�.:iI= 7. .''3€JS7'h;o �u.73
� ��'� LC1S ECa;.S3U'rly
srF��
_ T ??UI� h,1N �5104i&}'s
��a t'.tYli � � /,
o�cc; c. - � !) .l�.c :r� ,�
S v --
_ y �1 ��
- .,, . � ,_ /; �T r ! _
�—
�.�����n� �
�5
-��o���y 15 i 0
�;� ' -l�� --�� .i�-
i 1 -�'
� �:�� ������l.
:�vt,��.�o ; ,� wT
�::�,� =�,�< �-
�:2R187i352e: 00�0�4779�i��
— Oi5i0
� � � £;o
.DOLLAkS LI � m�
� � ,��' vr .I
'� t s..
9�77
��
DOLL4RS � ,�
1�11�����y ����f.i8��0 sd��f( Areferr_ai y3..�
�� �C�pUp{
G.stome� ce�n«o5bE�y-�g�n
� �� �� IeGenNG;b62E-�pNK �
� � r `-x �
0 � 9 ���0�� I, '" ' ��1.�_ t '
� ' � � 26 Bp6��• 9077 ��
�S�-3yo- 7ssS - - _.
JOSEPH D. t',RUNpNpEFEq
z7�9�f 27 ST
VE`rN $ Gk N. A 5.. 6.g
�f� ` , S'�
'Y �:C tf:E ST� �aL.3 l � �}
Ge.ci ' S �� / / � � �
�_ - Q � , � _._._.__ Lrt J� �
`Gl.o�3 ? ; _ ,�lJ!? s�� ---
_—� °==__�
� 1'etlsFargoBankAriwr,a,NA_
� g7oJN_SrnttsdalcRd
-�vc
i. UN 55304
2274
,
}� '�. ' i V-TOCp/2g1p8
!Y . - l �' � �.i ' j-j ] 852t9834B
' � t ' {; ,1 1� � ' : �. . li i.uit
� ' r '�l ,' � j �,
j � . �— � � � ✓`,.
':, j _' . _'�t �;�:{ � ,.. ' ',, -_ _ �� "LJ'
: � . , -
� Y�111� ��+�a� Y J:,;t�:,-s � ,. -'
si �-�,s:,.a s.
'sr.icacci �saniv oi ��� "'�
. �'r%
�z<- �
Q �l�flU il. 't' ��� "� ' % ,;a � �° �,� :�
;si ar7 �•. , . �,„'
J
971�5p7802 n
838i �`�
�e ` l�
u� _---� �� �
"----DoI!?rs i�i :,a.;.�..a
�
; � 1 w ` '
1
�
�
�
ArIR. OR 1ViRS. RICHAR➢ H. j�..NSSEN —
�o05IMP$p�j Sig�ET 2-60/9W
sr. natiL, �,t�: ssio: , �zozca �
u,r� i i o —�
�
- - ---��--- �.. .. , � �., � ��..� �.�,.� ..��,
MRS. ticLEN S1PPqELL 8870
MFiS. EllZABETH HE3NZ
MNDL5464-302-46b310 r � �
14i3 THOMkS AtiE. PH.'o57-'045-72a`(1 1 �-bGl950
5T. PAUL. MN 55704-2452 / ���� �+e '
�J � � �� Z
� r �' ;�
��:;:���,�� ,�'� ,.� . ��i�.�� �� �l ;�
�
� � �; ' �
.2�J` ✓:v� i <t�✓�..- /. � , � ! . . ^,k�S-! '.R� 8 =:. -
, r- i , � , .. �
��t..'A.L�I BE�� �"`nt`Q" Gafa
,
is�a c;���ry a.� weu, sc rau4 av�r ssaoa i.
Te1657l2&2667 TII.ES.9aYK651-628-Ba1\'K � "�jy' �l/ � ��� , i
=^a �i�i,€terte �� � � '�.,✓�� � �J �
cCO R6000603�:2L5444?+�• 1 387� f�;
�
hAary 1:. Newman � 3 8 6 2
DI N-554-587-549-474 , i � � J � �
Ph.b51-645-8$63 �
148Q Thomas Avenue
St Paul, MN 55104 22a615)2980
�'
n� �� � ��E; � ���, ��_.�� ; $
,! . � � � �.. _ _I C!� i . _
� j�7{�TA���BbdmingtonOffice .
{; jfpi 87dt 34th Avenue South
Bloomington, MN 55425
www.nwafcu.org
� � ������ � �� ��
"- 1���-,-., t.
. _ ___ _ . _ �` -__.. .__
60 76 � 5 2p: 8 i00 3 2 5094��' 3��2� �
8 a�m�
�
:, .. .,., .. , _ �, � .. ,: r.�_.__
- � � � ���,, � ��-�
LUDMILLA M. BERG
t �� RQGER K. BERG � /J 6631 �
�, 8-620-74 -103 B-620-560-587-663 D te _��� 6 ✓ c7 �
i 1481 OMA AVE. PH.651-644-15
- ST P UL, MN 5704 .. zz-�ez izseo
� �
y � .,.
, �` ��: - - � � _
Pay to the - � � � �
x
Ocderof • � t � �,__• �a .,
...� /. . . , _,<::a %` n .s . -�'/.fJ� _'. _,.
� D�Ilars LI ,.,,,.,
SMV3� era�CmditUnion
h.651/J47li00 'e�" r "
91 Cope Avenuc ' -
aplcwooQMN55309 , // ��- �
Memo � �L�.t�cU.S-}�f��>t���
P.29 762049: 6�03006725� 663i u
9'<�N UBEAtt eNiEqPq{3Ei, MC.
�xr°��� a- �.:�� �;�4�«
?,asL���o-=m pa;�?a���:
=-.",ic-.��-QSSl._=J r^$h-i�S�S'-Lc
�-K Ji:."YJG1 �-
� ST. oq;1t a c-e-.
�.�7riE Yf.1�i / ° i � �� _ � �
OAD'eR OF U _ (_.L.r� �`.� .e�'� ' /.
-��:_,__•.
_� -r
IIdiE �'r f,`� _ ' � ..
�
I �1!iD
6152
(J =
8 �.w�
.� �������������
,�
� _.�.�_
/' / ,�
� �_„ � _� . _ � ��� � ,-, .. �
-�� , o r,
o�-���
� ��
i
_ ���$`$��
L1SA A 'f'fSK � �
` 2I�3 TEIvfF ���}� � .�_
�'$ S�'�#AU��35+'� �.. �i �
' ' SSi-91T$t�ft ;_ � �' - , �' ' # d�-�" 'j . �
FAY �97HE( �fJ � j
; OR� CF j� ����,„- ±
� ��� � � t t���� ���`,4��€�
�
�� ;:.
�t 2 9
fi3f-645-2147 -
N1-42&522-585-739
534 SIMPSQN ST
SF. FAt1R MN. 55104
� �,
(fl
i: 29 b� 7 5� 4�':
� � �
� g ,
G 7 �� S�t• $&'�'� 3
� fJ f `�rn n n ��i
Date °`C- t `=' . _ _- _
n-�s io - - - - ,
��f��Czu� C $ _ ���__ _� .
G ;�� ={
noa�s t
��"' " _ . _ .
.�. � � -�- -. � -
� ��
� - _ _ _ _ --- .
bD00 2 3 5 2 9��' 3060
�:zwo:,eEnrveN*_Fea�sES.ixc
� W ar�ce
� 5220
'�' %xi< :�i 13-r'"r�
�� 3�55t_�i�r�yy,qg �kti 224815/2960
1C _ : C;:.{� Pf2CJ ].�>:L'�
� AyT9 Zhf /'s j '}� 6m ���
OR�tAO� 9 !Ye.__Cd! ��' F�� I � _. �.�.o�
��� ���g� Dallatts B� :
� �
��c�
�-'�-��
������.
Bloamiagiqn Offiee
FaurApptetxee39uue- -
B[QOmiFlg#qx�,fl�it+�55�25 _
_ ' l t= � --._" " -- '� �
��F e i�c�sc��.3aa��� � � �a
-. , , aue=r.r
�ara�u �. Gi1�°7
rs=r i F:orv�a� Ave.
�t. Pcol, ,'.riN 55tOL'
- -��a:� $
��s�n —
;��i� . t � 1)Y
2sss
il �= r .--��+- ��� J�.; ,;� �� fi _ � �$� �
( , f J /
—}-` ip 'k'UQ � ` _J _ - . � �—_ � �.._�
t
1_n J
3.�'.F 3{,� U�.Fz'� ^ri�7+3C�iJ�1+.
;.c5; t cXE STnE�
... !:Ecr LeE. Mti E� ..o _.,i=
�-. -'� �. � , �` �:
- �.I� .. L � �_:�v\3�. y YY�;�..� S� `�._ `� ^���
�s' i�Q?�00 ��: �� 5� c��5 %���� c5��
s
\ 1 \ �
1
�'`'e
��'
l�
FYPN ' -c�7<---
s�� n� � ��� �°�r � : s��s <
�sus- �,s� ��� ��a�� ` �= �
s� Pa� - - - - �'�� t -.. u_to�e�,oe `� - _
. - - _ � '�.f f , ���� sa5a�rs - -
_ _ _ _ _ ` . , _ - _ - �_�€�`... , - _ .
�.� Cf`� -� ��C 1 :r ,��_nG
/ ,_' ,c-.,� �-. .
Ifi'"1�%�-r �- i f/s�._ _ ��r� �
�� Bf��� . � � - °,- ° -
e�axu�ecoma.e�usmx- ss.-�av.c - . . ��� {��! _
FnFt' ' 4x'�-. i��i - '.�/ssBL _ �--� .i xF�_ _._
i. 2�f�if�'�ET[l�a i1. _.28F'1' LI
�k i.? S
�� - _ _ _ �_- .-- �- _ � .�_._` ' ,__
ADAM C. REEF £ - � $47
PH 651-646-5136 � . ,
1479 TH6MAS AVE
ST. PAUt, MN 55104-2452 vao00/291a 8 ,
` Q t867932636
Date
Pay to rh� ���� ��� � � �� ,
Ort[erof � �
�-c��
i1..1= 17L'l.l�lg1
amm�esote's Mosf Canven�ent eank"
Do4ars � �� .
��I
T£(I3A�'
�� �_'-- - - - - �
r� — �-- -- - -�`_
9107000iae �861932636n� L847
�n,ya.ew?�aa., . _. -. , � _ . . , _ � - .. . ,.
��
r��.�'� ��/v��711 �'�..�
.� � �', � �r
`t� � � � �
�
o�-���
� �
�
�' • '
�
I.�_:1 � �►1► :"�_
ORIGINAL CASE
�
� ��
,
�
D�- 9Y�'
�
BOARD OR ZOVL�IG APPEAL,S STAFF REPORT
•
�
TYPE OR APPLICATION:
�PPLICAi�TT:
HEARING DATE:
LOCATION:
Iviajor Variance
Timothy Nichols
Nichois Development, LLC
June 21, 2004
570 ASBURY STREET
FILE #04-09b26�
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: HAMLINE SYNDICATE ADDITION NO. 3 TO 5T. PAUL,
RAMSEY COUNTY, MINN. VAC ALLEY ACCRUIlVG &
LOTS ll THRU 16 & SUB7 TO ESMTS; VAC.ALLEY &
EDNIIJND AVE ACCRUING & LOT 17 HLK 2
PLANNING DISTRICT: 11
PRESENT ZONING: RM-2 ZONING CODE REFEI2ENCE: 63.200 � 66.200
REPORT DATE: June 16, 2004 BY• 7ohn Hardwick
DEADLINE FOR ACTIflN: July 12, 2004 DATE RECETVED: June 2, 2004
A. PURPOSE: Several variances in order to build a 44-unit senior cooperative building. 1.) A
front yard setback of 25 feet is required and a setback of 18 feet is proposed, for a variance of
7 feet. 2.) A side yard setback of 25 feet is required and a setback of 18 feet is proposed on
the NE side, for a variance of 7 feet. 3.) A m�imum lot coverage of 35% is allowed and lot
coverage of 43% is proposed, for a variance of 8% (2,71'7 square feet). 4.) Sixty-six off street
parking spaces are required for the building and 38 are proposed, for a variance of 28 parking
spaces. 5.) The maximum allowed density requiremer,*s a11e=N 32 :?welling units and 44
dwelling units are proposed, for a variance of 12 units.
B. SITE AND AREA CONDITIONS: The entire block, bounded by Simpsan, Thamas,
Asbury and vacated Edmund, is under the same ownership. There is no alley access to the
property. There is an existing 3-story oYfice building on the west end of the site with a
skyway connection to a 3-story parking ramp on the soutllem portion of the site.
Surrounding Land Use: Mixed residential uses.
Page t oY 4
�
t'1 �
�-
p�-� - q�f �
File #04-096265
Staff Report
C. BACKGRQUND: The applicant is proposing to construct a 44-unit senior cooperafive
building with underground pazking on a portion of this siYe.
D. FINDINGS:
1. The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use under the strict provisions of
the code.
�
The appiicant is proposing to subdivide the northeast comer of this property to create a
35,000 square foot pucel to be developed as senior housing. The new building will have
44 dwelling units and 42 underground pazking spaces, aithough only 39 spaces may be
counted as required parking because 3 spaces are stacked spaces. The applicant has
submitted a copy of a proposed lease agreement with the owners of the adjacent pazking
ramp for 16 additional spaces, 3 of which will be reserved for loading during daytime
hours. This would bring the total parking available to 58 spaces of which 52 spaces could
be counted Yowazds meeting the required pazking. However, this infarmation was
received too Iate to send out revised hearing notices. The appiicant is also proposing to
connect the cooperative building to the adjacent parking ramp with a skyway but again •
the details of this connection were received too late to include in this hearing and will
need to be addressed at a later time. The proposed senior cooperative building is a
permitted use in this zoning district and is a reasonable use for this properiy.
The plight of the land owner is due to circumstances unique to this property and these
circumstances were not created by the land owner.
The location of the existing office building and parking ramp lirnit the arrio�znt of land
available for development. Most of the requested variances aze due to the desire to build
a structure that is compatibie with the existing huildings and also addresses ihe concerns
of the area residents. These are circumstances that were not created by the applieant.
3. The proposed variance is in keeping with the spirit and intent of the code, and is
consistent with the health, safety, camfort, morals and welfare ofthe inhabitants ofthe
City of St. Paul.
The proposed senior cooperarive honsing buiiding is consistent with the goals of the
Comprehensive Plan as well as the Hamline Midway Small Area Plan. There are still site
issnes that need to be addressed such as an access easement so the adjacent office
building can provide trash pickup and a signed copy of the parlang lease. The survey for
tha proposed subdivision should also refleat the change needed for the skyway, or in lieu +
of this, a pedest�ian access easement acrass to #he parking ramp. However, once these ��
Page 2 of 4 f j
� �.
1
c�`f-9�8
• File #04-096265
Staff Report
issues have been resolved, the proposed project would be in keepiag with the spirit and
inYent of the code and would not affect the health or weifare of surrounding residents.
4. The proposed variance will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent
property, nor wilt it alter the essential character of the surrounding area or unreasonably
diminish estabZished property values within the surrounding area.
The proposed building will abut streets on the north and east, the parking ramp on the
south and the office buiiding on the west. The street will provide adequate separation
from the nearby homes and the reduced front and side yard setbacks will not significantly
affect the supply of light or air to those properties.
The applicant states that the proposed building was designed to screen the existing
parking ramp from the homes across Thomas Street and also to compliment�the overali
character of the existing development. The requested variances will not change the
character of the neighborhood and a senior cooperative on this site should have a positive
impact on the surrounding properties.
� �. The variance, if granted, would not permit any use that is not permitted under the
provisions of the code for the property in the district where the aff'ected land is locatecl,
nor would it alter or change the zoning district classifzcation of the property.
The proposed variances, if they are granted, would not change or alter the zoning
classification of the properiy.
6. The rec�uest for variance is not based primarily on a desire to increase the value or
income potentiat of the parcel of land.
The applicant states that his primary desire is to create a development that is consistent
with the adjacent existing building and compatible with the goals of the Hamline Midway
Plan.
E. DISTRICT COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION: The Hamline Midway Coalition
recommends approval of the variances.
F. CORRESPONDENCE: Staff has received two letters in opposition to this reques# from
neighboring property owners and three letters in support of this pro}ect.
i..J
Page 3 of 4 � �
� �
J
o� q�f 8
File �+04-096265
Staff Report
G. STAFF RECONIll�NDATIQN: Based on findings 1 through 6, staff recommends
approval of a modi&ed parking variattce of 14 spaces ta aliow a tofaI of 52 spaces, 34 in the
cooperative buiIding and 13 leased spaces in the adjacent ramp. Staff also recommends
approval of the other variances subject to the following candirioas: l.) That a signed lease
agreement is obtained for 16 spaces in the adjacent parking ramp, 2.) That an easement
agreement is granted to the adjacent office building to allow for trash pickup and deliveries,
3.) That the applicant obtains subdivision approval for the proposed ]ot split artc3 4.) Tkat the
subdivision is amended to account far a zero lot line where the proposed skyway link will
connect to the ramp, or in lieu of this, a pedestrian easement is obtained for the residents of
the sanior buitding to access the adjacent parking ramp.
r
Page 8 of 4 /\ {
��
�
•
�
O`�-�i � 8
.
?.pplication for Zoning Variance
Co-�pplicants: Nichols_Development, LLC and Hamline Par6 Plaza Pannership
�ddress,'Location: Thomas an� Simpson
i.
Front �etb ': 7 feet
jyY Side S ack: $ feet
Lot o��rage: 7.01 %
ensity: ti10 units
� �� �
� ��
'� � -;ci{ -1��
>
Parking: �r parking spaces
r�
�
2. What physical characteristics of the property prevent its being used for any of
the permitted uses in yoar zone? (topography, size and shape of lat, soil conditions,
etc.)
A multi-family senior cooperative residential building is proposed for the site. This
building would be a permitted use in the zone. The site in question is a part of a
larger site that includes the Harraline Park Plaza office building and parking ramp.
The sitaation presented by the office building and parking ramp were not created by
the current landowner. They were built prior to the purchase of the site by the current
owner, the Hamline Park Plaza Partnership.
The office building and parking ramp are alse zoned RM-2. As part of a master plan
for the site, the senior cooperative building was desib ed to erillance the broader site
(including the office building and parking ramp). The senior cooperative building
was designed to restrict neighborhood views of the parkina ramp and the setback
variances requested are needed to aligz the senior cooperative building wiTh the
existing setbacks of the parking ramp and more fully restrict neighborhood views of
the parking ramp.
3. Explain how the strict application of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance
would result in peculiar or exceptional practical dif?�cu]+Eec_nr_axceptional undue
harrlships.
As mentioned above the senior cooperative building was desi�ed to fit into and
• enhance the master plan for the entire site — including the Hamline Park Plaza office
buiiding and parking ramp. Also mentioned above was that the intended use far the
site does not alter the pzrmitTed uses for the site or change the zoning distric#
classification for the site.
The seniar cooperatitie building was desi�ned to compliment the existing buildings
on the site. The setbacks were chosen so as to match the setback of the parkin� ramp
� at 18 feet. This creates a cohesive feel for the entire site and requires a side setback
��ariance of 8 feet and �ront s�thack variance of 7 feet.
�� �;
,
� i
o�f-9�(�
The building footprint was chosen to help fhe new building match the scale of the
e�sting buildings. The new building occupies 42.01 % of the comer site (zoning
requirement is no more than 35%), tzut the three buiidings (proposed senior
cooperative building, office building, and parkin� ramp) occupy only 33% of the
larger siTe.
� �_
��
��
�L� _ j " ! � r ' G ,-�
,�
�
A density variance is also required far the cunent desib — 34 units atlowed and 44
units proposed. The unit density requirement serves to limit ihe number of people
who may live in a proposed development. As our proposed development is a senior
building (restricted ior residents 55 and older), it is anticipated that far fewer residents
wili move into the 44 units than might be expected for a family proj ect.
The strict interpretation of the zoning code would also require 66 parking stalls for
the 44 unit building. The proposed development has SO parking spaces guarantaed
Monday through Friday. " rt-fotiii f these spaces are in neated underground
parking below the building and 16 are reserved spaces that will be available in the
adjacent paking ramp. On weekends and holidays, when the adjacent office building
is not in use many more parking spaces {over 100) will be available for use in the
adjacent pazking ramp. A walkway between the pazking ramp and senior cooperative
building will help to connect the two structures. Finally, as this project is restricted to
seniors it is expected to attract residents with fewer than 1.� cars per uniT.
Finally, a height variance of 2 feet is requested — 50 feet allowed. This height
variance will allow the building to be builT in a way thaT ensures proper water
dispersion aear the entrances, especially the drive into the underb ound pazising
space.
4. Explain how the granting of a variance will not be substantial detriment to the
puhlic good or a substantial impairmenY of the intent and purpose of the Zoning
Ordinance.
Three shado«� studies were conducted for the proposed site plan. They show that the
building would not impair an adequate supply of li�ht and air to the adjacent
properties.
The proposed buiiding type (including number of floors) and use is already permitted
un@er the RM-2 zonzng classification. The proposed building is in keeping with the
spirit and intent of the code. The requested variances would help to create a building
that better fits the site, matches the exisring site layout, and is an even a eater asset to
the nei�borhood. These variances would atiow for the consmzction of a
cooperatively-owned senior development — something the Hamline Community Plan
has hi�hlighted as a nei�hborhood need.
�
�, �
. l�
r
C�
�
I
.�2 " I
�
i
.�
i
�
i
�,!
' �I� ; � � � I I 3M NvH TIHtl3WWfS
z
0
}-
>
w
w
�
w
¢
O °
a _
� W
�n e
0�-��8.
a 3� �fmr�x������ �� � 9 Y � _
Q
;�� I��_���� ;
+r3,' ��'i° � t
- n:_�,� 1 l, - z`zh1�
e� �d !
S�°u � z - - - -
z
0
¢
w
w
�
w
¢
¢ �
E e
O ^
� s
_ _ _ , ��;t -,y �^ _� , r -, � i SIMPSON STREET
----�----.—_�.-�-- - . .__ ----
t� -- � � - ,. - —f
�;-i�� � � �I' � ��-��-, _, ..
II
i
e
i
< � �i
< 1 � ; � � ��lc�!��71 I
r i i r-r-� ��--� �; i�� i�
— �= �� ,i
�� ' am '
�.� -�,J�' I
_ _� , � � �;� � �
� s
w` � a� �.��, I
� � � �ez
N �.�Q
.L I
i 3 � t� �
� �� V - `�C �
f� �. .A]��� � c
� � � \ � �� �� � \ _—
-� �� �� -A �--
� � � � �
�. �
..� (�� � .
I �
���. _ � �i ��
� ;� �_
r— � , � � ��-�— �
�� , �o� �
��
w f� i � '
Z I S' L '
� ,i-- �� �a
>- � i — , ,
a�
Q u� � Z'l� -,5 � _
� f l j
� � � � _ � �
_ � �
F
(
� �
, a
i '
�� i
, �
ro � ii '� i�
m -, i � I , r
� � o-,a, n P
,'-�=� � �_ � . _���
I � I
� I i
i �
� I
� I
1
�' �
._� ��- 1 �_ - ,
� �_ _ � � � 2� ,
1 ,
w- � �q.' ¢��s
o m ` � �
; n.\\` �u�.��
v_
,� c _ �_ z'0� ' � m - . _
y_ - , _ �� 09�� ,� , '
�.Y
i+.� _ �� . m�a f�A} .
` � �m
` � . � _ � � ,c9 �. _
�
I _
3
f I
� � _
�
i �
� �
� �
/� ��
��
�
i
I;
II
� 1
� �
1 i j
i i Wi
� � N
N . �;
� � b' e , /t,, ��
� QIS 1 5 �
V /(- t
�� ✓
c�-I-Q� 8
�
x
- 63 �
�
� sz
' g�s
a �n
' �
.�
�
W
�
�
�
vd
�
•
� I !
I
i
�
' .
i a
� i . _
E ,
'; :
! _ Y
�
I �
�
�
a-.r
�
3 °�
v 3
-- .c
> +.
L
� O
� z
• L
� �
� O
L
�
�1- Xt� •-..
. i f- 'cl+ � a
\ I�� i c
�• i �
t �K
� ai`�'%
_ :a • •
. z R. � +:� • --�
j��i f •:e • -�,
�^���� ..• � ..
� i �• li
� _ � � �E, �.
• ,,, ::. -.
,=. •:. :.
i
• � =• •
, .�. . :�
`u,���
, ,_
� i�' w� � �.i]��f
• p =•
-� '• 1
. ::, -.
::. :=. :-.
�, m
w�s
( ddll S �(i ti45 y
-_�� �
�
�
i�
m
>
m
a�
�
�
L
Q
�
� �
� �.
�`{ � i ;
.�..m
,�°^m �. �
I •
� o
M-mtl,� �y ......,.. ��� � O
;ravrvH i�nsrNa�s� ��.,.'°., �,� .� _��,� i s r-
n
� ! -_ �
,� � C (' ' "E�
�
�
, � � �
� ��,
f�i
� ei�n n��. n�i
— ! .t.0 n.i. �ui
■ .�.�� ��.�. ��.�
, .._,. �,_.. ,,.,
.�_.. „_,. =
�I�O tlw1:
,.,�;:
•1�11 fl�li ' \`i�� �
�I�i� II�IR � �
�i��l f1�IS�
il�ll fl�h
� d1�Y1 �
il�ll ��7 ,,
. �I�11 II�i� �
.w1�11 8�12
�I�II 11�1�
� Ri�ii Il�ii
' �I�ti fl�ii
, !��Ii Il�li il�l!
, }I�1/ I1�1► (1�1�
"_ (i�i► tl�li '�. �
� ���� �
� �
i •
�i '
��. "�'
_. < .
■t�ars� :-- �:� .
`:J
C : �� :.:::a::.:: :: � y
Q _ ...
.;i 3�:;:' :.�:'t�::�:
s -. ..
-: o c9 -. .�� ¢:.:�:'�.
. �..� : ._ ; z.. ,.
� �K Z�' �: . O'�'-���.�,
.�::.Z...:�:,�i3.,' .:
;:.:�. ..�: Y': ...
�.: ...::
�.
: . ::'..� � : �,�. '� '�
1���l1S l.h,�18Sb
z' 0
�I
t
- _7 i �
�a
Fa
P
z
w
>
d
O ` �i
N ° �
��� �
z'
o�
N
>
�
ca
Ga
a
z
w
9
C
� :
6 �
oH
x�
N
�
1
� : ';
�
�
�
�j �
( �
�.... � �� ��
� }
� � ��� �iM
96:
o�f-9�8
� i
'`-) �
J
04-4��' -�� �._
_. � �=:�:r
�� �c��a�s
PRQPQSEB �
SL7YIMERFt1LL OE H ANILIlYE PARK
DEVELOPiVIENT
Background
For the past year SrnRCSpazc has been working witli the property owner, David Van Landshoot, to explore the
possibiliry of developing housing on his gxoperry at the intersection of Thomas and Simpson. Together we evaluated
potential development ideas for two key factors: the ea�tent to which they met a stated need in the Hamline Midway
Community Pian and their £nancial feasibiliry. Dnring these conversations, it became cteaz that Mr. Van Landshoot
intends to develap this siYe. The key question for him Sparc and the neighborhood is what that developmenf will be.
Many concepts were considered over the past year. In the end, SPARCSpazc ag�eed with Mr. Van Landshnot that a
senioi cooperative building appeazed to be the project that best combined neighborhood need and financial
feasibility. Both SP.aFtCSparc and Mr. Van Landshoot spoke with and interviewedpotential seaior coogerarive
developers. Most were only 3nYerested in buildings with 100 or more units. Nichols Developmern, LLC was chosen
by Mr. Van Landshoot for their quality work, experience {they have financed over 27 senior cooperatives and
personally developed three others), and their willingness to adapt their concept to a small, innerci ty site. Nichols
Development, LLC, formed in Mazcfl 2000, is a developer with a broader perspecrive and a deep uaderstanding of
both the development and financing sides of the business and operates in the following areas:
Land and site location and acquisition;
Demogaphics , researcb and marketing;
Site planning and development;
Innovarive and effective negotiauons with municipalities;
Overall project management and direcrion; and
Management
Proposed Project .
Nichols Deve2opment and Sparc are proposing to build a five-story, 44-uniY senior (restricted to individuals age 55
and older) cooperative building. A cooperarive is ownerslup housing that provides maintenance-free living, while
guaranteeing a well-maintained building (inside and out). It is financed through a 40-year HIJD-insured mortgage.
The insurance by HUD allows for a lower interest rate that benefits the seniors purchasing homes in the developmenT
by making it even more affordable to them. Cooperatives also become increasingiy affordable over time (individual
units will appreciate at a pre-established rate - 2.5% per year in the case of Yheu Sununerhill of Apple Valley
cooperarive — compared to recent 20% annual appreciation in single family homes in the neighborhood). The reality
from other cooperafives in similar ueas of the metro is that Seniors from the neighborhood move in to these
cooperarives and free up more single familq housing stock for fanulies.
In addihon to SP.s2C, the development will have a strong teazn of experience bringing ihis cooperafive to reality,
including the architects at Miller Aanson Parhiers and the general contractor will be Frana and Sons, Inc.
Furthermore, once the building is open for occupants, Ebenezer, who �ve b�s :-��r=�g in the field of senior
services since 1917, will be the designated building n�anagement company.
In order to bring this high-quality, yet affordable, senior housing to ihis unique site in Saint Paul's Hamtine Pazk
neighborhood, a number of variances wili be necessary. This development of 44 units of senior ownership housing
and will pravide �eat vatue to tttis neighborhood aad the Ciry as a whote.
The building would feature:
i and 2 bedzoom uaiu$omes; featiuing full kitchens with standard equipment as well as dishwasheas, disposals and
microwave ovens. Lazge bedrooms and living
common areas.
common Am.enity areas for cooperarive residents, snch as a community raom woodshop, library, game room, etc. �
underground pazking, witfi over:low pazking in tr�e adjacen[ parking ramp,
As wefl the exterior is created of handsome and iow maintenance maYerfals of brick and James Ha:die, Cementitious
Siding. Metal Facia and rock balasted membrane roof. The Exterior Design has a human scale and fits into the r F �
campus setting rvith which it will reside. ,�, �
�
O�-9'�la�
�
44 units in 5 stories
�� ��
�_�� / C�2�s
This project wouid provide:
an altemative livin� anan�ement foi seniois who waat to iemain in the neighborhood
ownership housin�
housing that is affordable over the long-term
mulri-family senior housing on one of the few sites :n Yhe neighborhood that is appropriate for such a development
Shadows
Shadow studies compiled by the architects, conducted for the sun's position in 7une (longest day and highest sun),
September and December (shortest day and lowest sun), show that flris project will not adversely affect any of the
neighboring propertiesthroughoutthe year.
Parking
While a vaziance for parking must formally be requested and granted to allow for the 44 units, the combination of the
demographics of the residents of this building as well as the fact that there is a highly underntilized pazking ramp
behind the building should elimniate any concerns regarding parking. As part of the purchase agreement for the
property, Nichols Development will enfer into a long-term pazking lease with Hamline Pazk Partnership (HPP). T'his
lease commences on April 2, 2005 and [emnnates on March 31, 2046 and provides for the use of 16 parldng spaces
withm the ramp at all rimes and aIlows for unlimited use during weekends and holidays which is when the vast
majority of visitors may come to the building to visit the owners. There w�ll be a covered connecfion between the
cooperative and the pazking ramp.
SenxcSQarc's Role
Nichols Development, LLC is the lead developer. As a community-based developer, SPARC seeks to develop or
� assist in the development of projects that fill community needs. SPARCSparc is a member of Nichols' development
team. SPnRC coordinates community input on design, assists with outreacU to local seniors, and will be availab3e to
assist fumre cooperative residents with the sale of their current house, especiaily those that need xehabilitation.
Varianexs
The site is zoned RM-2. In oxder to construct this building, Nichols Development and SrqxcSparc need to secure
several variances.
Briefly, these variances include:
Height: 2 feet
Front Setback: 7 Feet
Side Setback: 8 Feet
Lot Coverage: 7.01 %
Density: 10 units
Parking: 6 parking spaces
ComtnuniYy Input
Durin� the first week of April, Dave Gagne distributed fliers about the proposed project to hauses on adjacent
blocks. On April 8�' Dave Gagne hosted a meeting about the project that was attended by several community
members, David V"an Landshoot, and representatives of Nichois Development and Sparc. Community members
generally supported The idea and provided several key suggestions on The proposed design. The development team
spent the next four weeks making significant design alterarions per tl�ese suggesrions (including reducing the height
of the building by 23 feet). On May 3rd� severai community members Toured Nichols DevelopmenY's mast recent
project in Apple Valley. On May 12� a second community meeting will be held (with fliers again distributed to
houses on adjacent blocks) to discuss changes made to the initial dasign.
� Support from the Aamline Midway Coalition
On [DATE]May 18, 2004, Nichols Development aad SPARCSparc formaliy presented this proposed project to the
Hamline Midway Coalition and specifical]y requested their support for the above listed variances as well as the
overall development of this senior cooperative building. After len�thy ar>d insightful discussion, the Boazd of the
n
� " L,
t r', j
�
O�-
Hamline Midway Coalition voted unammously in support of the variances and the projecL
y � �: �
��.�—
rc�_�,����
�'_..
� v�
r�
u
�
JUN.16'2004 ii:i2 952895ii59 idiGHOLS FiNANGIAL
NICgI OtS�ETAI'NiEi�'�"
LfMI::E4 LIABiL17Y COM�RANY
�
� ...
�43i5 P.002i002 Q�—g��
. � -
ts�_ ; �' �
�-�� .•tG l�
- - — � �l 5 c��
Ius,e I i, 2004
DaviQ A. Van Laud�s.00t
FTBrixIiAe Pas� k'attne[ship
570 AsBuxy 5��, Suite 103A
gy� p�ui,1y13pnesotg 55104
Dea�' Aavi.d.:
'I'hzs ]cxier is t,� ton�zAa o�r dxacussions oR tba fullowing two topics as we ;procesd wiih
the purchasa of 3' PfOD�Y � which io d.evelop a senior r.o�ecative. If T do aot heat '
diSiare�t �ZOm. You hy Fiiday, June 18, I wiTd r.orssider yau ia agramen3�
..1) Halflday sa� �Veekend Psrkfng: ?be iimnliao Park Plaza ramp evfil
accommodato> at no ck�ai'ge, �d�itaon�l p��°mB ��'�ektnds an.d. ixoli:days for
. isitozs af r�siit�ts o�'thc scriior cooPerarive should the pa�king deman�d cxceed
ihe dcsignated. i G pexlaa8 stells 9n ino �l'amJi»e Puk Plaza ramq>.
Z) P�aperty lJdder SkyWay: 'I'txe �nmall sectfon of.pr+sg�xY ��� �
s7cywey from the coopc�ative to 4be remxs wall be iacarporated iato the p��rchas�
a�oeuzent'e legal dtseription. at tb;e time o£:ciosing. Th�re win. be nti ad.ditipnal
c}�ge far tbe puxche�se ut t3fis ls�d aad Nic�ois A����� LLC wilt be
respvnsib9.e £or Uia sucvey u°ozk aasd otlaer pro�'essional serviee necss'sarY for ibia
change. A'°aomman waU a�ement" paiai�rlg to tbe 5kycvay aonuectSon. w tbe
rair�p ivill. a�so be cntezed inm• et.or hefiore tbe clACSng. . •
:,, ,
3i.nccxaI , . .
! !
Ctnick
l]irectox af Busfucss Deve3aFsmeni
452-895.5200 '
��
��
�
�
e
�v
� � t �-b`�
��
� ' 35n.woeaw�^s-AilBrm'1n?ay,suls`-�'.a,ai+.�le,�e.sdssa�.��.t��•F.+UCt9�Jass715s
IJ: d Ei9�'�P!
S31i�3dQ�G t��l�ii"
�d�6� 9 f00t 'gl ao� r
,,, _1
�`
JL'N.iB'2C04 15:04 952847i154 NiGHOLS FLNANGiAL
O�-9�8
.������ �a. �
TCD P1C�C'I�A�E AG1�EM��"�`
k43$6 P.002
7I-�IS Amendment Nn. 1 to Purchase Agzeement ("Ameadmeat No. i") is made
ef�'ective as af � , 2004, by and between iiAN1Ir1N;E P,r�ZK PLAZf1
PARTNETtSHIP,aMinnes ageneraipaztnership("Sgller")andl�tICHC�LSINTLRESTS,
INC., a Minnesata corporation ("13uyer"}.
RECITALS
A, The Seller and Buyer entered into a cectain. Purehase Agzecmeni £or property loeated
adjacenY to 510 Asbury, SC. Paul, Minnesota, which Purchase Ag.ee�n.eqt was dated
to be e[3'ective February Zb, 2004 (the "Origina[ Purefsase Agrecment" )_
B. The parties have agseed to amend fhe Original Purchass Agreemenf by sul�stituting
a certairl exhibit thereto.
TI�:REF�RE, in consideration of the mutua! covenznts, representat:ions,
warranties, a►3d agreements conZained. herein, and iorot.her goqd and velu.able cons�desativn,
the receipt �nd suf.ficient ofwhich is hezeby acknazv3edged, the par�:ies hereby a�ree as
follows:
Tasement�i gr2ement. qttached hezero a Lxhibit T� zs a�orm of an Tasemexit
Agreement. T)ae parties agree tllat t3ie attach,ed L;cuibit D shaJl be subsYiYt�ted as
�xhibif D ia the Oribrinel Purchase AgeemenT.
2. iBther Tecros and Provisians. AIl other terms and provisions of the Qriginat
T'�archase .Agxeeznent shaiI xeznaan the seme and not be affected by tIxis Amendment
No. i except as expressIy statEd herein_
CQUnterparts. This Amendmeni No. l may be executed in counterparts, �acl.� a£
_., _. _
which shall be deemed to be azz o:iginai, A signatuze page za any counterpart may
be detaclzed from such cozuztexpartwirhoutimpairing the legal effeczofthe szgnatures
tiaereon, and, may tliaresi3er be aitached to anothex counterpart.
�
•
�
t
�� ��
1
�
�
JliN 16:0�1 552855i155
SF.LLER
13A.MLINF PARIC PLAZA
PAIt1NERSHTP,
a Mirinesota genezal pazlnershig
I7IC"r.OLS :iNANG?AL $4346 P.003
$UYER:
AtICHOLS INTTRESTS, INC.
a'ninnesota cotporation
»r��l'r. ���...�.,��--
pa�a �, v� �,as��QO�:
Genezai Partner
�Y.
Terri Ann Van Laz�dschoot
Generai Pan�er
F:lusersV07-1NtI�Plezo-24931Amrnd m NieFols PA.wpd
�
t
�
;y
: i;, , a�L t�i
,.•,,� __;
o�P- 9 �8
�
� � L��
�
�
NiGHOLS F_TNANGiA�
EAS�NIENT AGREEMENT
r43do P.DO� 0��7 Z�
This Ease�eat Agzeement (°GAgreeinen#"j is mede and entered into
by a.nd betweezt Hamline Park PIaza Partnershig, a 1VIinnesata generaI
partnerslsip {"HPP") and Nichots Interests, Inc., a Minnesat:a eorporation
("NichaIs'� to be efFective rl�te day of 2Q04,
RECTTALS
u
A. HI'P is the owner of a certain parcei of property located in th,e City of
3L Paul, Ramsey County, Minnesota, a legai description of wh5ch. is
attaclied b.ereto on E�chibit "A" ("IIJ'P Parsei").
]3. Located upozz the t-iPP Pa.rcel is a Certain tl�ree-story (four levei)
office sbuctwe (the "O�ce Buatding"}, and. a. three-swry parkin�
zamp (the "Parlung Ramp").
C. Nichols zs the ownex of a certain parce), of praperty located adjacent to
the HP�' Parcal., end, legally descritaed oza t.he attached Exhzl�it "B"
(2hz "lYie6oDs D'aree6").
i�. 77.�e parr.i.es l�ave a.greed that certain easements slaould be es�:abiished
over and upon., th.eir rsspecuve psrcels, an,d, have Agreed to
memorialize tl�is A.greemezz4: zn a wrftten d.ocu.wnneni,
NOW, THEI2CF�R�, the pai°ties heret� agree as fo9lows:
AGREER�f�le1Z'
I, dDrivevvav Easement. �'b.e Nicnols h�reby declazes an essement
over that parce) af property which zs descaibed on t3ie attaebed Exhii�it
"C" (d�e "nriWeway Easement"}. Ti�e Driveway Easetnent stzali i3e
prianari.ly for t{�e following purposss:
a. Provide acoess ta a �ermanent Iocation for a dumpster
e»closure area. for the exclusive beneft of tiae I�P parcel,
whicb enclosure azea s�.al.I be constructed of hzick and shaJl be
compatibie with the design and appear.ance of the Q�ce
Building and tlae Par�ing Ramp;
�
JUN.iB'2C04 i6:D9 95289:'!i�9
a
r'� V ,
; �
JUN.;B'200n ?6;p5 952845ll54
(}��9�8
��
c.
NiGHOLS FINANG?RL
#4346 P.00c
Prov%de one garking space for the ownez o� t�,e HPI' �arcel; anrl
Provzde .pedestrian and vehicvlar aceess to Thomas Avenue
&om the I�pP I'azce1. .
A1I costs relative to �ie coz�ss�craan of tJ�e llziveway Easemezrt as
deseribed above shall be tbe sole zesponsibiiity Qf the ar�rner of Lhe
NichoIs Parcat. T'his sha11 include the constxuctzon af tk�e dumpster
IocaCion which shaIl. be located on the HPP Pareel. In additzon ta the
above, security for the Driveway Easement Area shall be provided in
d1e form of mainrainlz� the existing exterior fencing and laeking gate,
or, auot�ser azx�angement which is acceptai�De to tbe owner of the HFIPP
Parcel.
Subsequeat to the initial constrvetion, all costs and exgenses of az�y
nature whazsoever associated wittz the maintenance and repair of t,he
Driveway Easexnent area skaell be the responsibility of the owner of
the Nichols Parr,el. The t3tiveway Easement {specifca2ty including,
but not Zizni9:ed ta the duznpsr�r enclosure) shall be znaizztained in a
reasonable �nan�aer. consis#ent with the maintenance of the ,A,djacent
Prr�perty. The r�aintenance shaJt. include, bu.i not be lim.ited #o, snaw
removal, iee build up gr.evention, asphalt sealzng and replacement as
apprapriate, cuzb maintenance, fence msintenance, tuck pointing, and
gate maintenence.
Aitaclied ]�.er.et:o as T��ibit D is a site plan o�the Dziveway Easerner�t
wliich slxows the approxirnate locarion vf the Arivaway Easement, the
duzrxpster enelosuze, and anticipated. landscapizag.
Tbe 1�PP Parcei Ov✓ner �er.ehy grants the Nichols a non-exctnsive
aasement over those portzons of the HPP Pazcel ne�essaty to consavct
and maintain the dumpster encl.osure area. -
The Driveway Easem.ent sbaJl be pezpetual in d.�uation az�d, shaIl be
appurtenanY to and be foz the benefif of and i�e l�inding upfln, the NPP
Parcel and the Nichols Farcel and ttieir zespective oumers.
2• The Greem Space ]Easement. Nicho�s hereby declazes an. easement
over that portion af the Nichol°s Parcel descrihed on the attached
�
•
�
� �'
JUN.iB'2004 26:05 952895i15? NZGHCLS EIYPNGSAL #434o P.007
Exlubit D for tiae pur�ose af �roviding an area foz "green space" as
S more specifically descabed below (ihe "Green Space �asement°)_
Speoifically, t6.e gurpose af ti�e Green Space Easement sha1l be to atiow
Fii'P to pla�t grass, flowers, shru6s, and other sz�rall scaIe landscaping
items £ox the isen.efit of the occupants of the tenant spaces Jocated in the
4ffice Building which are adjacent to or ovezlook the azea of the Gzeen
Space Easement. HFP's rigl�Ts heFeunder shali irccIude ti� zaght to
instali an undergrowad 'urigatzan system. Tbe initzal const�trction and
seiI preparation (xncluding r�e laying of sod) af, the Crreen Space
Easemem shall be the xesponsibility of Nichois_ Thereafter, the
planting, maintenance. and repair of tbe Crreen Space Fasem.ent shall be
the r.es�onsibility of HPP. Nicl�ols shali give HPP reasonable access
to the Gzeen Spaee Easeme�t to eonfluct sach activity. HPP's
respoz�sxbiliti.es l.�.ereunder. xela.te solely to the maintenance of ttae surface
of the Green 8pace rasement. Prior to sc�dding of the Greett S�ace
Easement (the "Area"), F�P sl�ali have the right to izsspect the Area_
Said inspection sh�11 occur wzt;hzn seven {7) da.y,s of Nicbct)s notifying
HPP that grading has bee� compteted, 71�.er.eali:er, J�'P shall then. havs
seven (7) days to raise any objecYion ta the site �reparat�on af thc Area.
If no written objections are raised by HPP, che Area sl�sall be deemed
a�cegtable and N�chols shall have ttie right to eomplete sodding of the
� I�rea. Jf nbjectio�s are made, N7C�.O�S 5118�I J1s1V� 2�99e Plg�)1 14 either
make reasonable objectioxis and resoive tlxe mar.ter tbmugh. direct
negotiatians, or complete sodding of the Area and sul�mit the d�spu.te
to binding arhitration. Nichols, t:o che exten.t th.at Nicb.ols has
distvxbed the Crreen. 3pace Eas�men.t Area, sha11 be responsibie for the
correction af an.� soid condiCions 3�elow th� topsoi), the correction of any
settling of the soil, providing adeQuate dz�.inage, con.stzuction,
maintena�ce and renais of adjecent retaining walls tl�.at are located on
the Nichols Parce�, and the like, un.less such condition is the r.esult af
the condact of Yl�e HAP Parcel Owner..
The parties ac3cnow3edge that ti�e �'ireer� Spaer ��sd,•nent and U�.e
7�civeway fiaseme�t ouerIa.p eacli ofiher. The locati.on of the aatual
paved or surfaced driveway is indicated on th.e attacl7.ed E�Yiibit F. To
the exEent that �tie actual paved az surfaced driveway encroaohes onto
the Gxeen Space Easement, the rights graziied. un.der th.e ]�rzveway
Easement shali be superior to those rights granted under the Green
Spaee �ase�ent. The e�ent of the encroaehm,ent sha1l be as in.di:cated
an the atta.ched ��ctzibit E. �'Jhe desi.gnated azea af said encroac�unezrf
�
��y ���
� �.
JtiN.iB'200'v 10:05 9528951:59 idIGHOLS FIt7RhG:AL �434o P.POS
� � i
shail not thereafter be modified tivithoa�t the express wri.ttea consent of
tFze I-�I'P Parce] CDwneA. CTther �h3n the actua3. �aved csr sur£aced
driveway area as indieated, Ni��oIs shail not place any Psermanent
struchues (including any fenee} Qr ptantin.gs (otlier tban grass) in the
area af the Green Space Easement without the expzes� wrilten eonsent
of the HPP Par.cel Owner.
Tlie Green Space Easement ska31 i�e perpetua3. in duration and shall be
appu.�tena�t co and be for tha bezze�it of and be binding vpan =he I�3PP
Parcel and the Nichols Parcel and the'u respective owners.
fiach pazty, a�d/or its sucoessors and assigns, �ereby abzees ta
indemuf fy fl�e other against any claims made ageinst said other party for
personai injury or property damage oecua�ing within the Green S�ace
�asement area azising out �f the use of the G�raen Spaca Easement by
the indemA.iryin.g patty's sexvants, agents, employees, tenants, guests
and invitees. Seid indemnifzearion shall include any attarneys fees
incurred by the indemni�ed party.
3. T-i3'P Parcel Maintenaace Eaa�eeemen#s. The owner of the Adjacent
Paz'cel hereby gzants the �IZ'P ParceI the fallowin�:
a. A permanent non-exclusive easemenS over Yhe sout�ter.ly ten (l 0)
£eet of the Nachots Parcel in order to provide access to tl�e
Pazk�ng Ra.mp for the purpose of providing maintenanoe, repair,
andJor. xeplacement o; tt�e Parking Ramp (the "Ramp
Maiuteaxanee Access Ta�em�nt"� No perznanent sfiactures
(including any fence) shatl be constzvcted in ihe axea of the
Ramp Maintenance Access Easement without the express
written consent of t�e �'P Paxcel Owner and,
b. A permanert aon-exelusive easeranent pvex the westexly ten
(1U) feet of ihe Nicl�ois Farcel in order to"pzuviae access to the
Of.fice $uilding for the purpose of providing maintenaztce,
repai.r, and/or replacement of the Office $uiidimg {the "Offiee
Suilding M�inrenance Aceess Easement") No perman.ent
struchues (including any fance) shail be constt.ue�d in the area
of the O�ce Building Maintenance A�cess Easement wii:t�auY
the express w�itzen cQnsent of tt�e HPP Parcel t�wner
s
�
�� �
JUN.18'.004 16:05 9528951159 NiCHOLS FINANGIR�
�19396 e.009 QC/
'1 7 d'
• The Ramp Maintenance Access Easement aad rhe Q�ice $ui.lding
Maintenance Acerss $asement .are sametimes re£exred to herein as tlae
"iViaint�nanre Access Easemer.ts". All costs and expenses assaeiated
wizh the maintenanrz af the Maintez�ance �.ccess Easemenu sha.iI be the
responsibitity of the owner of the Nichols Paxeel, provided, however, that
the owaer af the HPP Parcel. shall be responsihle for en.y damage ox
repair resulting from i.ts use of the �tamp Maintenance Access Easement
The Maintenance Access �asements shall be pexper.ual in duzatian, and
shaIl be appurtenant ta and bind'ang upon and bene£t the HPP Parcel and
Nichols Parcel, and thei.r respecrive owners, as described above.
4. Eatfre Asreement. Except as atherwise speei.fi.cally staied above, the
parties acknowledge and represent Chat there are no other agreemen.ts or
undersY.andin.gs with respect to the su{�ject matter and that shis agreement
coztstztvtes th:e entire agreement bet�veen them wztb zes�ect co the above
ref.erred ta matters.
l�
5. $indin� Effect_ 'Tl�is Agreement shail l�e binding upon. and inure to �he
bene�t af 2txe parties and 19�ei.r zespecxive lieirs, assigns and Iega).
representati.ves.
5. Gavernfn� Law. Tl�is Agreement sliaH be conswed and 'zntez�reted i,zr.
a.ccordence with subskantive Mizsz�.esota 1aw a�pHcabie to agreements
executed in.lblinn�sota.
7. �Ie�dia��. The headi.ngs of various sections of tlais Agreement have
beez� insezted. for re£erence only and slzali not lse deemed ta be a gart of
this Agreement.
tLmendment and Wa'over. Neithex dzis A.gceeznent nor any pr.ovisi.on
hereo� may be mad.ified, svaived, discharged or terminated ar.ally� but
on.ty by an instrument in writin.g signed by th� pac�y against wl�om
en�orcement vf the change, waiver, dischaxge Qr terminat%on zs sought.
�
9, Warranties and Reoresenf�ations of Tetle. ra.ch party heceby wazxants
and represenzs to tl3e other that it �olds £ee title to their res�ective paxeels
and theze are na hoiders of any liens or other encumbraaces from wliom
Gonsent to ttte easements g��nted herein must be f rst obtained, or, i.f ihere
aze such Iiens or encuznbz�a�.ces, appr.opriate consenis will be obtained.
j � �
�,�
JUN."_8'20C4 1a:05 R52895i159
V7����
idIG$OLS FLN.aSdGiRu
#�34'o P.O10
I�z �vitness whereof t(ie pazt%as ha.ve execut2d this ,A.gzeement to be
ezfecxive the date set £otth %n the iniroductary paragrapb hereof
�iamline Park Fiaza Partnership, a Minnesota
genera3 partnershig.
ay
sTA� o� �vEsaTa
COUNIY OF
�
>s�
)
The foregoing was acicnow�edged before me this � day of
— - 2Q0 , by the
, af Hamiine Park P1aza Partnezshzp, s Mina�esota
general parl:nership, on 6eIialf of tbe partnersi�ip.
�
•
Notary Public
��
�
s
, iUN.18'2004 16:05 >
NSC:OLS FiNANCiP.L
Nicliols Interests, Inc.
�y-
z�
i9346 P.01i ��Q
Y�r
STAT'E OF MIi�TNESOTA )
)ss
courir� oF �
Tl�e foregoing was ackzzowledged before �ne tliis � day of
2d0� by the
, of Ni.chols Interests, Inc., a Minnesota corporat9on,
on. belxalf of ihe company.
Notary Pul3li.c
�
- rr.3is mTSr.r�u�rr�rr Dx��� r�x:
Jolm Michael Miller, Esq.
Peterson Fram & Bergman.
50 E. 5'" Street, 5uite 340
St. F'aul, MN 55 ) Ol
(65t)29A-8955
Attpmey dD No. 7326X
F:lu.eersUGHNlJ3PPleza-20031nichols.easement.v4.doc
��
� r
�� �
!
JUN.iB'20D4 18:U5 452855ii59
oy=y�8
��zB�� a
NIGHOLS FiNANGiAL
Lega1 Descriptinn of HI'�' Parcel
Tiie fotIowzng descr�bed property (PareeIs 1— 4}:
PARCEL 1:
„4346 e.012
i,ots 1 thraugh 2Q, inctusive, }31ack Z, The Hamiine Syndicate Addition No.
3 w Bi. Paul.
P,�RCF.T. 2:
'That portion of the Fastem Alorth-South alley 9n t3Iock 2, The I3amline
$yndicaze Atidxtion �To_ 3 tq St. Aaut, Ramsey County, Minuesota, vacaterl,
lying SoutherIy of the NorthErly line oi' Lnt 20, said Slack 2, extended Eas�.
�'AJ2CEP 3:
T'dmund Avenue, vacated, lying betwaen Asbury 8treet: and. Simpson
Street; alsa, alt that part of �xe Vdestem Nozth-South alley in l3lock 2, 7'[�e
Hsanline Syndica.te Addition No. 3 to St. Paul, Ra.msey County, Minnesota,
vacated, lying between the Westez�y e�ension of the North line a£ Lot 18,
said Block 2, and tkze �Itr�th line of Edmund Avenue.
PARCrL 4:
�11 of the alleys as ori�inally piatted Iying NortJierly of the extensions of
the Nor.fl�erly lines �f Zots 1$ and 20, �all in Block 2, '�e H�mline
Syndicate Addition No. 3 to Saint Paui
Lxaegt Yhe Nord�exly 13 7.54 feet of the �asterly 257.85 feet ittereof
All )ocated in Ramsey County, Minn.esota
Note: It is anticipated that izgon the completzon nf a pend'zng sube4'rvisioiz
appiication, tlais pazcet wali be descril�ed as :
Lot 2, Block l., Yan Landscl3oots Additon
C.:
�
�
� � �
�-
r
JUN.18'2009 �0:00 552895ii59 i�iGHOLS FIN&vCIAi �4346 P.013
�
EXHIBIT B
Legai Description afNiahoIs Parcel
Tlxe Northerly 13I.50 feet af the Easterly 257.$5 feet af the fgilowing desczibed
PmP�Y �
PAI{Cr.ri, I:
Lots 1. thcougk 20, inclusive, T3�octc 2, The H4mline Syndicate Addition No,
to 5i. Paul.
PAIZCEL 2:
That pertson of. tlxe Eastezn North-South alley in T31.osk 2, "Z"he kIamline
Syndicate Addition No. 3 to St. Paul, Itamsey Count:y, Minnesota, vacated,
lying SQUtherty of tl�e Nortl�exly Ixne of. Lot 2Q, said �lacl� 2, extended F_ast.
PARCEL 3:
�dmund Avenue, vacated, lying between Asbury Stceet and Simgson Suees;
� also, a(.l tUat part of the Westem North-South xiley in Block 2, Tl�e �-Iamlfne
Syndicate Addit:iQn No. 3 to St. Paul, Ramsey Coun .ry, Minnesota, va.cai:ed,
lying betvoeen the Westerly extension of the N�rrb l.i.ne qfLot t8, sa.id BiocR
2, and thc Nozth Iin.e of Bdmund Avemxe.
ra.�ccr-_z. a:
All of ihs alleys as originaUy pJatted lying Nartheriy of �ie extensions af itie
Noztherly lines o£�.ots Z 8 and Z0, all in Black Z, The Hamline Syndicate
Addition No. 3 to Saint Aaul.
All located in Raz�sey County, MinnesoPa.
Note: It is antici�ated that ugon fhe completion of a pen.ding subdavision
appii.cation, this pazcel wiZl be described as :
T at 3, Block 1, Van LandschooYS AdditSoa
�
0`f�9��
1 ?
JUN.10'2�C4 io:0a 9528951159
v'F`���
NLGHOLS FiNANGiAL
���8��' �,
T3escziption of l�z%vewa� F.asem�nt
�934o P.a14
'I'he WesYeriy 24 feet of the Nichols Parcel, r.ogether. u�ith an
additiOZtal area adjacen.t t�ereto xe atiow for tbe znaneuuering Qf a
trash zezu.oval vehicle, and together with a designated �,otor vehicIe
perking azea adjacent to HI'P Parcel in order to allow for the deliuezy
af materials and suppliss to the HPP Parcel
�
i
��
V
�
JUN.18'2074 io:06 9�2895115° N:G'r,'OLS FIN.'4NGiAL $4346 P.015
, . - , . D�->��
, E�Jx �
DIAGRA�v1 OF THE DRIYEWAY EASE�:v AREA
LJ
,�
'`"t
JUN.18'2004 So:05 3528951i59 NIGHOLS FiNPNGiAi, #4?4b P.Olc
�
�
�
u
�
�
�
a
0
a
s
�J
�
� �`�
t-, �
�J
JtiN.iB'2004 i'n:0; 952895ii59 ?aICEOLS FiNPNCiRi �9346 P.Oi7 ��' ���
� BXHIBIT E
LEGAL DESCR�PTTOI�t OF THE GREEN SPACE FASENIENT
'I'be Souti�erly 60.20 feet of the Northerly 13I.50 f.eet a€the �Nesterly 5�3
feet of the Ni.chois Parcel.
`
�
r'
;
��
,� - _ . _
� � � - -- ---� - t-
_. -
� ----- ----- � — T -
� � � � .:.-. -._ " �— . _ !�: .
� ..: �_- - ���� : -- � � .
.. �.- — y - _- -_ .
. . . . . . . . _. . .' . _.:..-_ � .
_ � � . � . . � ��: .• . . .
... . � - - .� .� � � .
�� ' . .`� ._ `�;; . .
t�� � �
__��� _
a
S `�-
�
JUSTIl`I PR�PERTIES, I�±C.
JJiiB i7�J i�/�2dre t�-3i k t'cC=.- ^'�^ ."�.1D�EY Ci-=ci S�. �aui. .'vlinreso:2 55 i� i
-_, _` _ _ ._ __�, ,_>.- 12iepnere 22; -98�2 =AX No. 297-52_5
3une 28, �990
Ms. Triesta Brown
1?91 B1air
s�. Paul, NIIV 55104
Dear Ms. Brown,
We would like to thank you for attending the dedication of
The Garden of Sculpture and would like to present to you chis
� gzoup of pictures from the event.
Public art is an important part of the community. The Garden
of Sculptuxe wili continue to provide an opportunity for
residents and businesses to enjoy art year round.
Again, thank you for your support.
Yours Truly, „�---- ,
���i'��i�' � �' /� .�� .._���:�.�� W:,� ::;;�- �=�_.r_..� ��
ti-=-ti ,
David A. Van Landschoot Terri Ann Van Landschoot
Enclosures
�
�
�
•
.
��,
���� :
� �
' :_. ���
� �� �:�
_ ����
� �s
r �
� -.
= �;.- .-�
� ��� ;
����_-
�
_ i ., �r
; � �
�; ��
__ �`�;��
.. �
'�
' " � ��� ` � `
' i
z i:
� l �� � ' !>
1 ��
Z � g �
�
� I�'
��^`�° �
� �
��;
��
��<
� 4�
��� -_
���
�
_,��
�
� _
� ,�� _ �
;.w
€���� � '� _ ;
' �.� - -
�
�� .-�_� r �, A
��
�
� -
�_
-� '�'
� ..� _
-�-._ _
� ��
��_ `.�` .__-
�� i � - �
Il �
_
���
�� 4 ,:
$}�`
. �� F � a ; -�z
�{�°�� r J -�- � ..'-i -� < . �.
•
..� �.,, at 4 S FI � � .
/ �t�^ � �� ��� .
� �� 9
'-t m i
� � �
�ri�� __ = � . . _
�A'^it
_ �
_�
�3y =, �
_ - �.�
� , �
�. - g ,, .4t,.�
� � -�. �
f � .�, � �
_ . . . . _ . . is :..:. :
` ��_ $.
i
� -,q � c ,� �.' � . - ;,�„ ��'
! ' . "'� -c��x= : is�, �-.t� : ,,-*
� ' �i
�,� �� _ �� a `""�`��� -- , r;
I ��� � �
��
� �' = �� ���`
. i � .�;'` . Y �'.�':�� ��_e-.. �. �
-�� A �n. $,'�i ..
� x
� ._�
�i ,� ',
Z�
�
; _=�-£ . -
_ _ .. i
-:` r „
' � -
��Y 4
'� _:�'
�±�. I '
�� �t�
�
�" c � �+a�-�L ,
�����
�
�'a'+sr
_c � '�
"+..
� _"
_,s:
��'`:`
u.� - �
�< �
��
�� � Y i
�M'�iE!. � � d Y' ��. �
C`
s�� ��'�
� eYYY
t �" ^ �
#� "�"a
� � � � f�� _. ,
;;' � _�~�_'
� ��
� x.=
�
�`
�a,.���;,4 �
;.y: �._ .- �`�-
� �� ��
* �r�....�
s-. � '
� ��� �
�
�, � = g f
.� .a� � 7{ "' _
- - 0 � �
a yA � _ ! �.
�� '
i ° ='
, � �' � ��
� – . ,�w .
� �� –
_ -- �
_.�
���
�=����-
� � x "_
.� >
— _ ` ,
'� � ' ,
�,�
-��'� ;� `=
�. � � � � � _ � --�..:.�«. .
_ ��
a
»c '=� ?��y .
..� �' i ��:. x .: � -- � �:
. �.. x4.$ 1 : " _
� � Y �;
� ai °
q � (�' t
t
} � �
� �r! � �
' ._ .-r. } �'� ' -�
.� `�. � �a3e t• a _ �
_�
3 -
�� f ��,�� - 1 s " a. `<
� u
" y '
„a`,r .. 'f .
�: '
F �
� a
�
� _ �`' _ ---�� � � � � -
y �
f _�, � =- ,��
,," , �' � ,� � �. -� ��� �
i �� -��, �-�� �� ���
� _ � � � �� , ��-�. - ?
� - � � °4 ,�� ��' �
k - � ` � �&� -� '$ - _ -
�
_ � � � � �.i �
, � ,. .5„>'. -. .v s '.._ .4 _ ._ , _..
T
�
, �"..- ;_� - - :.-� . _ ��e
b, � �'�` , .a � t 1
�_
.��` � � I�-�
4 ��
� 4' � Y �� 'r _ �_ � K �
; t�' i _
F {_.
— r �� _
� � �'
� "� ` },y
e+ ° d:
. �
� -' �
� " � � � � �I r � '�.
�_�� . � , �
i
± ij y�.� _ `� 'r
� � - 'l �i �' ; �
: �� } I i�.��
¢
f :
a .
; � `� i �� a� � �1t� � � -
l ����� ;'� ��'�.-z��� {_ ,
t a i �t.
����� '»� _ e
�
� '��� � F � �` � �Y
� � �+ ��,:_ �. � �
"� ��, �� ��� ��
._� � � .. ` �
� _ �
-�.
�
��� � _
�� �Gw
,
. ��fi .'..:����� �� ' .
"�. { F ` R a �a.�, Y � +'t�i S� .
:r ', � ° � ��� , -�.� - .
� : X
� ,a '" �: . �t� �a :x;.+ _ .
. 'E sF� �i A .� � i
!� p�� }�,.�' . u �g� ��� ; ;�:
,'� ; E5 F _
1 � 7�� �"`^.'t q �� �
x y. ;�
g — � 1��' "�"g.i"� --. � � ' �1
` e �,�s - - �� � C� .— ,�� ,.
� —' ��1 - �` `� ��. i: IJ 't�
: � , �: � _ ,� �; —
� ! °� '
�_ �,
�--` '� -- - :'-•��
� � __��� _
� _
,�..._..,-..e . ..m _
"=,� .=- � .► .
-�� ��,�° -
; , - n � ° �
_.-e
- r, .� __ . � , �_� - �< �
- -- -
i;tltl'__ ._- - ;: -
� _
_ -_° .-- __ - - >:,_
r Y .. -
� � (~ �`t a �, _ _ _
. s _��. • ; ` - 3__ .�:'. . y . _.. � �>"„ �_ _
. _� __ _ � . ! .. _ .. . �� ._._ ' . ' ' .
- . _ �� .� s.,i„_ .-�i-^- .
- ?`.�. � _ . _
� � ' i
ov=y �g
C:
CITY �DF SAINT PA�.'I.
Deadline for Action: o�-iz-oa
•
�
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS RESOLUTION
ZONING FILE N�TMBER: #44-096265
DATE: June 21, 2004
WHEREAS, Timothy Nichols - Nichols Development, LLC has applied for a variance from the
strict application of the provisions of Section 63.200 & 66.2Q0 of the Saint Paul LegislaYive Code
pertaining to several variances in order to build a 44-unit senior cooperative building in the RM2
zoning district at 570 Asbury Street; and
WHEREAS, the Saint Paul Boazd of Zoning Appeals conducted a public hearing on 7une 21,
2004 pursuant to said application in accordance with the requirements of Section 64.203 of the
Legislarive Code; and
WHEREAS, the Saint Paul Board of Zoning Appeais based upon ev�dence presented at the
public hearing, as substantially reflected in the minutes, made the following findings of fact:
1. The prcperty in question cannot be pu1 to a reasonable use under the strict provisions of the
code.
The applicant is proposing to subdivide the northeast corner of this property to create a
35,000 square foot parcel to be developed as senior housing. The neu building will have 44
dwelling units and 42 underground parking spaces, although only 39 spaces may be counted
as required parking because 3 spaces are stacked spaces. The applicant has submitted a copy
of a proposed lease ab eement with the owners of the adjacent parking ramp far 16 additional
spaces, 3 of which tivill be reserved for ioading during daytime hours. This would bring the
total pazking available to 58 spaces of which 52 spaces could be counted towards meeting the
required parking. However, this information was raceived too late to send out revised
heazing notices. The applicant is also proposing to connect the cooperative building Yo the
adjacent parking ramp with a skyway but again the details of this connection were received
too late to include in this hearing and will need to be a�idres�eu'ai a iaier time. The proposed
senior cooperative buildin� is a permitted use in this zoning district and is a reasonable use
for this property.
2. The plight of the tand owner is due to circums2ances unique io this properZy, and these
circumstances were not created by the Iand owner.
The location of the existing office building and parking ramp limit the amount of land
available for development. Most of the requested variances are dne to the desire to build a
structure that is compatible lvith the existing buildings and also addresses the concerns of the
area residents. These are circusns�ances t��at were not created by the applicant.
i'age I oi 4
� �
,_1 �
ay-4�! 8
File #D4-D96265
Resolution
3. The proposed variance is in keeping with the spirit and intent of the code, tznd is consistent
�Nith the health, safety, comfort, morals and welfare of the inhabitants of the City af St. Paul.
The proposed senior cooperative housing bnilding is consistent with the goals of the
Comprehensive Plan as weli as the Hamliue Midway Small Area Plan. There are still site
issues that need to be addressed such as an access easement so the adjacent office buitding
can provide trash pickup and a signed copy of the garldng lease. The survey for the proposed
subdivision should also reflect the change needed for the skyway, or in lieu of this, a
pedastrian access easement across to the parking ramp. However, once these issues flave
been resolved, th� proposed project wouid be in keeping with the spirit and intenY of the code
and would not affect the health or welfaze of surrounding residents.
4. The proposed variance wi11 not impair an adequate supply of Xight and air to adjacent
property, nor will it a_lter the essential character of the surrounding area or zanreasonably
diminish esZablished �roperry values within the seLrrounding area.
0
The proposed building will abut streets on the north and east, the parking ramp on thz south �
and the office building on the wesi. The street will provide adequate separarion from the
nearby homes and the reduced front and side yard setbacks will not significantly affect the
suppiy of light or air to those properties.
The applicant states that the proposed building was desi�ed to screen the existing parking
ramp from the homes across Thomas Street and alsa to compliment the overall character of
the existing developmenY. The requested variances wi11 not change the character of the
neighborhood and a senior cooperative on this site should have a positive impact on the
surrounding properties.
5. The variance, ifgranted, would not permit any use that is not permitted under the psovisions
of the code for the property in the district where the af fected,land is Zocated, nor would it
alter or change the zoning dislricl classzfzcation of the property.
The propased variances, if they are granted, would not change or alter the zoning
classificarion of the properry.
6. The request for variance is not based primarily on a desire to increase the value or income
potential of the parcel qf Zand.
The applicanf states that his primary desire is to create a development that is consistent with
the adjacent existing building and compatible with the goais of the Hamline tl�iidkray PIan. �
Aage 2 0: S j
���
� �
,�J
o�-���
� File �04-096265
Resolurion
NOW, TI�EREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Saint Paul Board of Zoning Appeals that the
provisions of Section 63.200 & 66?00 aze hereby waived to allow: 1.) A front yard setback of
18 feet, 2.) A side yard setbadk of 18 feet on the North East side, 3.j A maYimum Iot coverage
of 43% {2,? 17 square feet), 4.) ivlodified parking variance of 14 spaces to ailow a total of 52
spaces, 39 in the cooperarive building and 13 leased spaces in the adjacent parking nmp, 5.) A
maacimum allowed density of 44 dwelling units, subjec2 to the following eonditions: 1.) That a
signed Zease agreement is o6tained for 16 spaces irz the adjacent parking ramp, 2.) That an
easement agreement is granted to the adjacent ojfice huilding to allaw for trash picku� and
deliveries, 3.) That the applicant abtains subdivision approval for the proposed lot split and 4.j
That the subdivision is amended to account for a zero lot line where the proposed skyway link
will connect to the ramp, or in lieu of this, a pedestrdan easement is obtained for the residents
of the senior building to access the adjacent parking ramp, on property located at 570 Asbury
Street; and legally described as Hamline Syndicate Addition No. 3 To St. Paul, Ramsey County,
Minn. Vac Alley Accruing & Lots I 1 Thru 16 & Subj To Esmts; Vac Alley & Edmund Ave
Accruing & Lot 17 Bik 2; Hamline Syndicate Addition No. 3 to St. Paul, Ramsey County, Minn.
Vac Alley Accruing & Lot 6 Blk 2; Hamline Syndicate Addition No. 3 to St. Paul, Ramsey
County, Minn. Vac Alley Accruing & Lot 7 Bik 2; Hamline Syndicate Addition No. 3 to St. Paul,
� Ramsey County, Minn. Vac Alley Accruing & Lot 8 Blk 2; Hamline Syndicate Addition No. 3 to
St. Paul, Ramsey County, Minn. Vac Alley Accruing & Lot 9 Blk 2; Hamline Syndicate Addition
No. 3 to St. Paul, Ramsey County, Minn. Vac Alley Aceruing & Lot_ 1�J Blk 2; Hamline
Syndicate Addition No. 3 to St. Paul, Ramsey County, Minn. Vac Alley Accruing & Lots 2 thru 4
& Subj to Esmts; Vac Alley & Edmund Ave Aceruing Lot 1& Lots 18 thru Lot 20 Blk 2;
Hamline Syndicate Addition No. 3 to St. Paul, Ramsey County, Minn. Vac Ailey Accruing &
L,ots 11 thru lb & Subj to Esmts; Vac Ailey & Edmund Ave Accruing & Lot 17 Blk 2; in
accordance with the application for variance and the site plan on file with the Zoning
Administrator.
MOVED BY:
SECONDED BY;
IN FAVOR:
AGAINST:
MAILED: dune 22, 2004
�
h 1
Pzge 3 of 4 ? j
1�� �
D`f-��l b'
r�
��
File #Q4-096265
Resolution
"ITME LIlYR7': No decision of the zoning or planning administraYor, planning tommission,
board of zoning appeals or city conncil approving a site glan, getmit,
variance, or oiher zoning approval shall be valid for a geriod ionger than
two {2j years, unless a building permit is obtained within �uch period and the
erection or alteraHon of a buildins is proceeding under the terms oF the
decision, or ftie use is establis5ed wiE6in such period by actual operation
pursuant to the applicable conditions and requirements af the agpravat,
unless the zoning or planning administrator grants an eatension not to exceed
one (1) year.
APPEAL: Decisions of the Board of Zoning Appeals are final subject to appeal to the
City Council within 15 days by anyone affected by the decision. Building
�ermits sha� not be issned after au appeal has been fiied. If permits have
been issued before an appeal has been filed, then the permits are saspended
and constraction shall cease unfil the Cit,y CounciI has made a final
determination of the appeal.
CERTIFICATION: I, Yhe undersigned Secretary to the Board of Zoning Appeals for the City of �
Saint Paul, Minnesota, do hereby certify that I have compared the foregoing
copy with the original record in my offtca; aud itnd the same to be a true and
correct copy of safd original and of the who[e thereof, as based on approved
minuYes of the Saint Paul Board of Zoning Appeals meering held on June 21,
2004 and on record in the O�ce of License Inspectio� and Environmental
Protection, 350 S� Pefer Streef, Saint Paul, Minnesota.
SAINT' PAUL BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
Debbie Crippen
Secretary to the Board
�
Page 4 of 4 ��Y�
PROPERTY WIHTfN 350 FEET OF PARCEL: 570 ASBURY STREET
� � i
f i ,�
i `���.��'i
��
�
� i
�
� � �
�
�
��
�
z
m
r
r
Z
G)
� , -
I
�I� ���� �
' _' =-' a
.,. �
�` � �
''' �� : (� � �
�� �
a�=��
o o�
�
EDMUND
i
�
Y � �
� � � 6
�1
E
_ � t � � �
�
�
��
O�F-�/�f �
�
�
T.
2.
�.
�,
J.
b.
7.
2,
0
iC.
i i.
Y�
i �:.
SU�:�i � Y-�.�_TI 3 ECP �'EK-HIGH1VflOD
�? �ZE ; PARi{ ���EN-PROSPE#�'i'TY i
�,�'EST SII)E
!�.�'fTtJt�'S BLL�F�
s�A�F,-��,�..�.�'� . .. _......
NORT!3 END
'IuOMAS-DnI,E
SUPv;iYtIT-UNI VE RSZI"i
'�IE�T SE�JE.�.''? �I
C��v��
r z%(T Ti��'�I�F�I�':
S � . �.�'ti`IT�C7I PAic.�'
i�'�. �_=iFti�°Li �Nv iC`J1y ;L�"�.�':1.�1V�L'S�1C,LT l:iv i1-`'-.�rjL>��
�,L-.C.�ZESz�� G3Y0`d�Li�T
- I
� � �
,1.J :;.� � r �
l
CLi�s: ifi � � '.,
i :� � y r1�,=;Z
r
; ������� ��� � L y-�-«���
���
� z
c�����r �a.nTlcrp��ocl �; arrr�zt��+� �ts�rK:c�
b�-95� �'
�J
� ,,
./
�`
�-��1�,I�TE M�����4�' �����"���
Hamline Park Ba;7�in; + i 56 i La�`or,d �renae, Saint Paul }liS 5>104 m 65'-6�-1986 o F� L"> 1-6�1-6123 � dishic:i l�goiast.net
June 9, 2004
Board of Zoning Appeals
LIEP
Lawry Professional Building
JJV JC. 1�vLV1 �JLaVVi� JuiLG JV�
St. Pau1, NiN 55102
Attenrion: John Hardwick
Dear Mr. Hardwick,
On Niay 18, 2004, the Hamline Midway Coalition {HMC) - Planning District 11 - Board of
Directors, elected representatives of the Hamline Midway neighborhood, voted unanimously to
approve the request by Nichols Development for the variances to develop 44 units of senior coop
housing on Thomas Avenue, between Asbury and Simpson.
�
This unanimous vote by the Board was taken after two community consultations in meetings
(May 8, 2004 and May 12, 2004). AlI community members and ch�rches in the adjacent two
square blocks around the property in question were invited to both meetings.
Further, this proposed senior coop housing project meets one of the highest priorities of our 1999
Hamline Midway Community Plan, to '`Develop Alternatives to Single-Family Housing". The
Hamline Midway Community Plan continues: "While no one denies the need for a solid base of
owner-occupied, single-family homes, the Hamline Midway needs and benefits from a mix of
housing options". The Summerhill proposal for senior coop housing units significantiy expands
these options.
Hamline Midway Coalition urges the Board of Zoning Appeals to a�prove these variances in
order to build the 44 unit senior coop housing building.
Sincerely,
�
Richard Dreher
Chair of the Board of Directors
��
CC. Jonathan Sage-Martinson, Executive Director, Sparc
iViayor Randy Ke11y
Councilmember Ja; Benanav
��
r� �
�
Da�lica.>ec� tc nzr�iaing tr3e H,�r;2liz�a,3fiz�¢��a;� n.e.oYl�;,rh�od n vette+� piaie to live t�rt�i u�oa•k.
� ��
OaF2S/2009 10.�1 FA% 651 22a 5119 ST PAUL CHA�IBER C�2j001
�'.4INT �AjTL ��,g[y
CAAMBER OP COMMERCE � �3r'z6, 2OQ4
CFLiRITABI.E FOUNDATION r
�f41 Zvorth IIobert 8treet
s,acr iso
s� ra�, a�d,aou� ssxox
Pitane: 651.223.50 W
L•ux 6j1.z23.51T9
Suburhaa sQV3ca Gcnuz
32G2 Rice Str�t
LitLLe f"„n,y htmnesom 55126
Phonc 6�1_z5G.4770
i�: 631.256.4771
YOU1Z
Bi,'SiNESS
ADVOCATF
�� ;= .�:�: •
� �/-� .,,�c�
Board of Zoning Appeals
Atterstion: John Hardwick
Office of License, Tns�ons and Environmental Protection (LIEPj
I,o�rty Profession;al BaiIdina
350 5aint Peta Sh'eet, Suite 300
Saant Paul, MN 55102
1}ear Board of Zoning Appeals:
Qn behaLf af the Saiut Paul tirea Chamber of Commexce, an organizaiiou
representing nearly 2,200 area businesses, we would like to express our
support for t6e Summerhill Aroject proposed for the corner of Thomas and
Simpson in the F�amline ilTdway neighborhoad.
This senior cooperative would be a major addition to the Saint Paul
community and provide a needed housing option for residents who wish to
remain in the City but who no longer'wish to maintain their own home.
In addifion, the Chamber sup�rts ihe request for vaziances songht by the
developer for ttus project, including_
• a 2£oot height variance (�0' height pemutted)
. a 7.01% lot coverage variance (35% Int cflverage pemutted}
• a 10-unit c3ensity variance (34 uuits permitted)
• a setback vanance
• an S-stall paricing variance (66 required, 58 provided Monday
through Friday - mose than 100 provided on we�ekends attd holidays)
Nichols Developmettt has a strong track record and sigpificant
experience. They haue fmanced over 27 coaperatives and built and own 3
senior cooperatives.
tiecogvizing the importance of maintfdning good relarions with the
broader eosnmuuity, Nei�als Development has b�n a willing partieipant in
nameraus discussions related to the scope and design of tLis projee� And,
as a resuit htts made significant ahanges uA iis initial design to more c2osely
reflect neighborhood values.
'I'he Saint Paul Area Chambez of Coznmerce sirongly snpperrts the
Summerhill proposal and Nic�ols Development's commiroment to the
Midway area and Sa�nt Panl.
Sincerely,
��t�7/L'" --�
V Eilen Watters
Senior Vice President of Economic Develapment
�
r �
� �
i
s airxtpa �Ich �znb er_ e oaxi
Jun 18 04 02:24p S21 Raymond five Suite 150 6516418689 0 "�� p.l
�� `% ��;����
�.
�K / IM HUN _------------ ---
ry�s� ��(��.Zt�.Z 4 �J� 1?.L.L-C.. 8_��:.�='nac��t�nvr:tvti�=.�ul�r,c3o5 �nl�ri•nU�.,�tNS5i�4
`. J :•: 6ji-6,ji-nqy.o ��: 6;�-6i1-S68�
1V\N\N..4'(Mlll(K7�IiNf A\N.CUD7
JU77C 1H, ZOC�4
Boazd of Zoning Appeals
Attn: Jolm 1Tardwick
LTLY
350 St. Peter Street, Suite 300
St. Paul, MN 55102
VlA FACSIiVIILL� tc� 651-265-90J9
gc; SYimmerhill uf Tianiline Yaz'k
Dcar Mr. Hardwick,
� I am writing in favoa: of ihe abovare�erenced ��rojecc. My husband and I Irve just over cme blo�k
away Erom the developmenc site, and believe it wili add a valuabl� hcusin� resource that will
:iilow area seniurs to reanain in the neibht�orhood.
1�m impreSSCd by Nic:Iiois pevclopment's efforts tu adapt their plans to an urban site. T also
trust that SPARC's involvcn�ent in the deve�o�ment [cam will result ia a�roject design and
implementation th,3� the ncighb�rhood will be proud Uf.
I can be reacfied at G51-641-D440 during the clay if yc�u habe furiher questi�ns.
Sincexely yours,
�,.�1-``, �
Kim Hunter
Attorney at Law
� ��
�
o�-9zf`�
3une 17, 2004
Board o� Zoning Appeals
Attenrion; 3ohn Hardwick, LIEP O£#ice
L.owry Professianal Building
35Q St Pe#er Stz'eet, Seute 300
Saint Paal, MN 55102
Dear Mr. Hardw4c�,
� s
�� ����J�
I write in support of t3xe mLlti-famiiy senior eooperative residenriai build'zng proposed at
570 Asbuzy Street (Simpson & Thornas) iu ihe Hamline-Midway neighbozhood. Let me
briefly tell you who I am and why I whalehaartediy support Yhis worthy bousing pYajeet
My zaame es Bob Wicker and J am a residant homeowner at 1538 Engiewood Avezzue, a
few blocks away from the potential housing site, � hava owned my honse for 33 years,
stzaving to improve it continually thXOUgh my stewardship of it. Additionaliy I have been
iztvolved Yhorough3y in the commnnety over all these yeazs, voluutarily workRaxg for iTs
betYerment: I was a foundiug member of fihe Hamline Midway Coalit�on (FTMC) and
served on its board an and off for more than 15 years, parkieipating in a nvmber of short
teXZn and longeX ierm effOlfs Yo improve cur commercial ar.d residential secYors; Z�vas a
founder of the F�amline-Mzdway Local Developznent Company, which has morphed into
Universiiy Uni2ed; I was a founding board member of FIamline-tvlidway Area
RehabiiitaYion Corporafion (H-MA�2C� and served as iTs president�ornearly a dacade;
and finally I am a membar of the Ivfidway Chatnber of Commerce, serving hvo differeuY
terms on its boazd af directors and remaining active on two cqmmittees, including the
Economic Development Committee, rvhieh is very inYeresTed in multi-unithousing/mulri-
use buildings, particulariy on and near University Avenue.
Through ail this parcicipation and activity I have come to know and assimilate many of
the dreams, hopes, fears and goais of our community, particularly as it relates to housing>
its availab�kity, its diversity of options, its cost, its upkeep and so fortlt. And I wish to
assure yoa — based on several commnnity planning sessions 1've attended and hous9aag
quesrionnaire zesults I've smdied, along wiYh informai verbal feedback over the years —
that the proposed senioz' housing cooperative is a desirec� hotisiii� vpiion in the Hamline-
Midway and fits the district pian. Life eycle housing, affordable 3zousing, tawnhonses,
newer apartments, recycled housing, special n.e.eds housing, senzor housinb —}ust about
eve�tything but more high rise apartixte�ts — are thovght ta be needed and desirab�e in
appropriate places.
The senior cooperative proposat fzts well in ttAe community for a variery of reasons: it
hzlps filZ a need far local senzors to downsize without leaving the neighbozhood; ii frees
up housing stock for new families; it provides an sxample for newer multi-family
housing types; iC fits in a site that wil! be enhanced by a muiti-housing groject; it becomes
a tax generating properiy; it adds to the City's housing goais; the deve]opErs adapted
�
�� �
v I y � I �
.
�
�
initial plans to ftt the cancezns of site neighbors; and — very imponantly — it was
unanimousfy endorsed by the Tx board.
For all these reasons this project Sbould be a"slam duak" deczsion for the City, but
apparently there has been some critieism of it by a vaeal minority...a very snaatl
minority. I'd like to reznind readers of this endorsement that vxrtually everytlzing that
comes before the City has some oppositzon from projeot neighbors. I've ceztainly
experienced it ovsr the years here in the Midway:
• Some neighbozs and others in the community hitterly fought the development of 7�7
Nozvh Hamline Senior Higlt Rise; it was built over their objections and has turned out to
be a Jovely, necessary addition to the coxnznunity.
• Many of tbe same people fought the upgrading of tlze neighboring passive �orton Park
(HamIine and Minnehaha Avenues) znto a more groomed park with a mini-arboretum,
created as a doaatiop by St. PauI Companies. "Chis has become a comrr�v�ity gem and has
not caused any of the problems feared by objectors.
• Some zn the community were almost apoplectic when the vacant St. Paul Bibie College
buiiding at Englewood and AI6ert was proposed for use as a methodpne traatrrtent Ceqter;
it went through despite the neighbors' worst fears...and absolutely no2hing negative
happaned in the nei�hborhood after it commenced its service. It 95 no longer in opeXatzan
and a private school is in that space cu�ently.
-'J'he proposed Jo6 Corps schooi at the old Sethel Coilege campus was ec�ualiy opposed;
the center went through after zhe management made some community-pzoffered changes
to its plans; for years iY operated withouY any trouble until some slack z�ew management
let some issues festez. Those were prompcly taken care of when ttze neighbots objected
and the .Tob Corps center is again a good neighbor fulfiliing a very importazxt societal role.
• Most recenfly (and down the street from me) many neighbors fought HanrzlXne
Universzty tooth and nail againsi the development of its student apartment buziding on
Englewood and Simpson, ptomisina terrible traffic, student noise, parking ehaos, visua)
blight, lowerad water pressure and so forth. Abso3utely none of this has occurred and t}�e
buiZding is well-tended and its residents are good neighbors.
In closing, the co-developers af the senior cooperative are credib�e, experienced and
hanorable; our commu�zaty is fortanate to have them wozking on this project since we
know it will be done with taste and qual'aty crafismanship. I urge you fa approve this
project prompdy.
Th k you. �
��� � . � V L°C/��
Robert L. Wicker, resident
1538 Englewood Avenue
St. Pauf, I��I 55iO4
651-6q4�7477
; � � ���
�
� V�
��°J`
, c� R��
�3nj�� s arc
�
igniting ccrnmurPty deveicpmer.t
June 16, 2004
Mr. John Hardwick
Board of Zoning Appeals
Office of License, Inspection, and Environmental Protection
Lowry Prof ssional Building
350 Saint Peter Street, Suite 300
Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102
De2r Mr. Har�wick:
_� �.
- ��a�s
�
On behalf of the Board of Directors of Sparc, I am writing in support ofNichols
Development's request for variances for the construction of a senior co-op building at the
intersection of Thomas and Simpson Streets.
As you know, Sparc is a not-for-profit community development organization that seeks to
improve the Hamline Vtidway, North End, and Souih Como neighborhoods. Sparo's
Housin� Committee and Board of Directors are made up of community residents and
business owners with an interest in making the community a better place to live and
work.
Spare suppons the senior co-op project and the variances required to build it. This
support is based upon the fact tIzat the project fts wetl iato the existing Hamline Park
Plaza campus; tums an unused parceI into productive, attractive, nei�hborhood-friendly
housing; and does not deprive adequate light or air from adjacent buildings. Finally, the
project meets a need that has been recently articulated in the Hamline Midway
Community Plan.
Sparc ur�es the Board of Zoning Appeals to approve the requested variances for this
projecL and help brina much nee senior o•�vnership h^usi.-�a t� o=ar neighb�rhood.
Sincerely
� . .�`
i Alstead
President, Sparc Board of Directors
Resident, Hamline Midway Neighbornood
cc: Mayor Randy I�elly
Counciimember 7ay Benanae
•
� ��; �
i
�- - , -� - �- � .._ .— Main Ofr!ce Harr�l�n= U��cNay Office b51-4889039 tel
8�� Ri:e Sire2i i56=. laionG Avenue o5i iax
�dlllC }�dlll, �IN SS7ii J]Ipi PdJI, 6RI\ 55104 WUJW.S{12(CWECAfG
JUN-16-2804 16:10 FROM:UNIUERSITY UNITED
�
Iune 16, 2004
Boazd ofZoning Appeals
Attenrion: John Hazdwick
Office ofLicense, Inspections and EnvixonmentaI Protecrion {LTEP)
Lowry Professional Building
350 5aint Peter Street, Suite 300
Saint Paul, MN 55102
Deaz Mr. Hazdwick:
,x'� � ��-., --: -
�' �
� =
� `(-�� ( �,
I am writing to express my support for the proposed Nichois Development Senior
Aousing Co-op at Thomas and Simpson. T live less than two blocks away from the
proposed development, and feel that it will be a positive addiYion to the Hamline Midway
neighborhood. The provision of life-cycle housing was one of the key goals of the
Hamline Midway Neighborhood Plan completed less than 5 years ago, and aftractive
housing options for seniors and empty-nesters is a criticai need in the community.
Further, while I understand that some neighbors might have concems about ffie scale of
� the proposed building, I think thaY the proposed height and density are acceptable, given
the need for economies of scale in order to make the project a reality.
My wife's grandparents, who lived in St. Paul for many years, bought into a senior
housing co-op in Inver Grove Heights a couple of years ago, in part because there were
not compazable options here in the city.
Finally, as someone who has worked in the community development field in St. Paul for
several years, I am acuiety aware of the difficuities in getting urban in-fill developments
to work.
Thank you for consideration of these comments.
Sincerely,
Russell Stazk
1500 Charles Avenue
St. Paul, MN 55104
�
b�i°�i�8
651041`✓�293 T0:2669099 P.1�1
� l Z ,
,
C/'G Q�� Ingraham & flssociates 612-377-101� p.l
_ �
��� r �. ��
1454 Edmivad 3cenue
Sr. Paul, Z�LN 55204
)une 21,2004
John Hardwick
�tt. Jolm I-tazdwick
Office of License, Inspections, and Environmenral Protection
Lowzy Pxofessional Suilding
350 Sc. Peter #30D
Sc Paui, 1'LV S�IO2
Dear .i�ir. Hardwicb,
I am a cesident of rhe Hamline '�iidway neighborhood and T am tvating to indicare my suppozt foc the
resit3esval Cnoperatir-e being proposed for Thomas tiveauc �Sihougk there �re some concems, in parcicuiar,
the overalt height oE the Uuilding and its relarionslup to the neighbochood, I believe the devclopec has made a
good faith efiorc to meet the concerns of xhe cesidenis and has modified rhe building in sa�•eral waps co make ii
fit in better. I also helieve ttvs use is a good foz the site and needed in wr communiry. � use such as this wilt
stxengthen the neighbozhood as it is walking disrance to a park, the Hamline neighbor�ood or�ani�ation,
businesses on Snelling :uid Unieersity. If rhis project does not go thzovgh, ihe land could be sold [o a less �
cooperadve developec with a less desivaUle land use.
UnEortun:etely, I urill not be a61e to attend [he Citt• meeting ccgacding this psoposal.
Sinceccl};
`' . ����G . L t,���U� //��
Stephen ). �ensman
/-\ �
4 i Y �
�
o� � �l8
_z ,
,
f � _ (1 �. ,�� ./
� 16 June 2f04
Board of Zonin� Appeals
Attention: John Hazdwick
LIEP
350 St. Peter Street. Suite 300
Saint Paul,'vIN > j 102
Dear Members of the Board of Zoning Appeais
I wish to convey my stron� support for the proposed Summerhill Senior Coop development at
Asbtuy and Thomas. As a resident two blocks away on Asbury, I am keenly aware that many of
my neighbors are seniors who are forced to leave the neighborhood when they can no longer
maintain their homes. The Summerhill development will meet a dare need of our neighborhood
to provide senior housing.
As the soon-to-be fornler Saint Paul City Planner (effective 18 June 2004) for this area I also
thoroughly reviewed the development design to ensure its compatibility with the neighborhood.
know that within the limited land available Summerhill has achieved an appropriate design that
respects the adjacent properties. More than enough parking is availabte through the partnership
• using the virtually empty parking ramp. The height was reduced, perhaps too much, to respond
to perceived impacts. In short, I was professionally impressed by the design and believe it is
esactly what we should ailow in unique places like this site.
[ urge you to approve the variances requested to allow the Summerhill Senior Coop development.
This project will be an asset to our neighborhood azid the city.
Sincerely, � „r.
�c--�� � °°e,.'�
�j
Joel Spoonhei
680 Asbury Street
St. Paul, MN » 104
�
r n
�} �
,
o�t-�� �
�� �
��-�-�'� =`•--
Wadnesdap, Juae ]6, 2044
. :.. .. �� �, -..-
Atkevtion: Jokttt Hardwick
Re: Variaz�ce :for senior coop at Siutgson and'�b,ozz�as
Deaz Sir,
I am writing in su�pori for the variances that Nichols Development is seeking in urder to
Coustru�t the above menfio�ed senior coopesative.
I believe this development wiU be of great bene5t to the senioTS in tlxe ZIamlxue/Midway �
atea as well as to the community as a whole. I lzved in the Midway for tan yesrs and
cuaenfly still owz� a xeutal pxoperty clase by this developmeux
As a real estate Agent I lcaow first hand the number of seniors in the area tb.at wauld lme
to stay close by but cannot conrinue to live in a siztgle �'amily home. This coo�r would ba a
great attemative for a ntunbet ofpeop3e.
I thnnk yoa and Che Board af Zonin$ Appeals for your considez�ation of this request
SincerelY
G ��L��''�G✓�lG� ,
Sooit Brownlee
551-335^4861
�
1 1
o���y$
Page 1 of I
John Hardwick - File #:04-096265 - Nichols Development
•
From: "Bill Fricke" <frick002@umn.edu>
To: <John.Flardwick@ci.stpaul.mn.as> �
Date: 6/7/2004 8:56 AM
Subject: File #:04-096265 - Nichois Development �� �����
CC: "Joette P" <jpoehier@mpr.org>
i am a resident at 582 Simpson Street. which is located directly across from the proposed 44-unit senior
cooperative building by Nichols Development, LLC and Hamline Park Plaza Partnership. I am unabie to attend
the zoning hearing this afternoon, out i would like to voice my opinion and concern about this project.
My concerns are as follows:
1. ls the property in question properly zoned for residentiai living? There are no more than 8-plexes in our direct
vicinity.
2. I feel the building will harm property value in the neighborhood rather than enhance it. Simpson street is quiet
and the addition of a large residential building with offstreet parking will create unnecessary noise, congestion and
increase danger to the children that live in the neighborhood. I believe that future housing sales will be difficuit
with the addition of this senior complex. Again, it is a quiet street and the addition of this complex wIII make the
neighborhood an unappealing one in which to choose to liue.
3. ft wiii create an undue tax burden on the residents surrounding the compiex. Many of our families in our
. neighborhood range from working to middle class and increases of any taxes on properties or change in property
status for a project that has no direct benefit to them is highly unfair.
4. i ask that the variances that are proposed should not be passed as they do not meet the requirements of the
city. It is obvious that they are unable to construct this project without the var�ances and they will iose money !f
they want this project to go through, they should adhere to the requirements as stated. Particularly the requested
variance of 12 more units that allowed i feel that this could possibly create a situation in which the building wilt
create an unsafe environment for the residents, particuarly in cases of emergency and also the possibility of poor
apartment lay out and safety concerns.
My wife and i enjoy living in St. Paul and i have done so for 17+ years. I enjoy living in my neighborhood. I enjoy
the quiet, the safety for my neighbors chiidren and grandchildren. i am severiy dissapointed at this decision to
al�ow such a building to be built. It will seriously hamper my famiiies enjoyment of our once lovely neighborhood.
If you have any questions, or if i need to direct this elsewhere, plea�e let ,r� ::s;��:v
Thank you for your time
Bill Fricke
612-624-3111 (office)
651-644-1788 (home)
fsick�o2@umn.edu
�► l { �
,
file:/; C:\Documer.ts%20and%20Sertings\hardwic;\Local%20SettinaslTemp\G W} 00002.HTN1 6/7/2004
o�- r� �
3 1
��� ��� � �,� ' � �
�; -
� � ��- � , `-= .-�` �" . .
� °�x�� r�° � l � ` ''��--��� �.��
�-.i � �=� `� � �, i � _ `, `, '"�3 � �i � ; v
� � � ��� � ///'�' '� 1 �- -
(� =a }�` ) `'}
` �.' � ���`�y�C l-' ��'• \{ :�}� `'F t �'Vl�l�'�L�3 -... / � ���
�C� �5��'t:.��tl`\� y� �� �1.�•` ��.J �.li�.'`�� �Y�e:l �` �� l '
� 1 � �
i � `_'"'°,.T\
} ; `�� ' 1
� �`�.`�.� �,� i t. �°� �i� �"r� ��� '• 5 iF` � ;�>..�•� � \
, � j°�` l
��+. �
�� ^�n1;:7 F��t3 r :: � C.�'^: t� \ t Sc� ;� �-�- �f 1 � F �J�!'r(� �.t G `
1
��� \� �:. ��; ; i�`t � � �. � � \ C �� J � ,� �' � � � i �z , �, � � _ � �
� \
� `� \ ' h, �'
y,�='' �1 `^ �'�., �.�...: y � �� � 4� � �` t � i3 ��� �.��� �J \i�`�'1 �! J � ' -•
� t_ �
; � • � � E
� �`+�
�'�\ `�+:��_ "_ \ \ \�. `�� � ' . A' s ( ' �� � \
'� `' � � � �i, �'�C. :� �.��'4�. . � � r {�' �'\ `i� �- �. `'� c�
� �� 11��_ E' �n <` \ " \��§��' \,'t J 1
\
l "� `S a �i �;.,:� �- u� � %\, ��, � �?�`�ti �� �: V\ � � l; �'v��
� � ��� ' n� `
��c � �.� •, l � 1 �'td � .�'` :� s -.. � �, �. �� 1 � L-� `4G
i
`,�'+ ��� ' � � ( J
`° ��� ��� -�,,��,,. 3 \ i„� Z�`�` �C�;"`v
` �
� \. ��
_���f\�L� � 3'i
;
i.
," , ,
�, \ t3;'� �� �� �-°'
t�
Y � ~ J ��1J � i�`�`�� t� ��;�t�.
:
\
`�� f �' 1 J � `� '� � �
�L.i � �v� _� 'c. . �. ti����" " --'t '�V � j ��; ` z l
`- \ . `� �
_ _ _�
`����'� ; t �, ,
`� : � e
. y -`� � '
p r �
F
� �
o� ���
� Yllvt'�'Ec OF TFIE'_V�FETL'vC OF T.� BO_�RD OF ZO�'L�TG �PP��IS
CTTY COL'NCIL CHAi�ERS. 330 CITY HALL
ST. PAUL, NIIIVNESOTA, .T[JNE 21, 200�
PRESENT: Nlmes. �Iaddox, Bogen, iblorton; and Porter. 2vIessrs. Faricy, and �Vilson of ffie Boazd of
Zoning Appeals; Mr. Wamer, Assistant City Attomey; l�ir, Hardwick and Ms. Crippen of
the Office of License 3nspections, and Environmental Protecrion.
ABSEN'I': Dan Galles* Vincent Courtney"
*Excused
The meeting was chaired by Joyce Maddox, Chair.
Nichols I?evelopment. Lic (#04-0462651 570 Asburv Street: Several variances in order to
build a 44-unit senior cooperative building. 1.) A front yard setback of 25 feet is required and a setback
of 18 feet is proposed, for a variance of 7 feet. 2.) A side yard setback of 25 feet is required and a
setback of 2 8 feet is proposed on the NE side, for a variance of 7 feet. 3.) A maximum lot coverage of
35% is allowed and lot coverage of 43% is proposed, for a variance of 8% (2,717 square feet). 4.)
Sixry-six off street parking spaces are required for the building and 38 are proposed, for a vanance of 28
parking spaces. 5.) The maximum allowed density requirements allow 32 and 44 units are proposed, for
a variance of 12 units.
� Mr. Hardwick showed slides of the site and re��iewed the staff report with a recommendation for approval
of a modified parking variance of 14 spaces to allow a total of 52 spaces, 39 in the cooperative building
and 13 leased spaces in the adjacent ramp. Staff also recommends approval of the other variances
subject to the following condihons: 1.) That a si�ed lease agreement is obtained for 16 spaces in the
adjacent parlang ramp, 2.) That an easement agreement is granted to the adjacenY office building to
allow far trash pickup and delivenes, 3.) That the applicant obtains subdivision approval for the
proposed lot split and 4.) That the subdivision is amended to account for a zero lot line where the
proposed skyway link will conneot to the ramp, or in lieu of this, a pedestrian easement is obtained for
the residents of the senior building to access the adjacent parldng ramp.
Nine letters were recerved supportmg and two letters opposing the vaziance request.
One letter was received from District 11 regarding ihe variance request.
The applicant NICHOLS DEVELOP1tiIENT, LLC, Mr. Chuck Armstrong,350 West Bumsville
Parkway, Ste 535, Bumsville, MN, and Mr. Jonathan Sage-Martinson, SPARC, 843 Rice Street, were
present. Mr. Sage-Martinson stated that he is the Executive Direetor of SPARC a non-profit organization
working in the neighborhood. To bring to the neighborhood developments That meet needs of the
community. He explained that they have been working with the co-owner and applicant Mr. David Van
Landshoot looking for housing projects that meet community needs that fit into the neighborhood. Tfiey
decided jointly that a senior cooperative building wouid be the best way to meet those needs and get a
viable development on the site. This is a way to bring relarively affordable ownership that becomes
increasingly affordable over rime. As the appreciation is capped. They become increasingly affordable
� as people purchase them five, ten and furthe: down ihe line. .After they decided on that model they
wor?ced jointly with Mr. Van Landshoot and ;eiected Nichols Development as the developer. The initial
desi� oi the pro�ect w2s brought to a cammumty meeiing hosted by the HamIine-Midway Coalirion,
�� �l.
AT-ADA �EO &mpioyer � -
b�f���t g
File ?#�4-0952��
iViinutes 7une 21, 2004
Page Two
on Apnl 8, 2404. The feedback from that meeting over the next month of so changed the design
significanUy reduced the height of the building and changed some of the other €eatures, coming up with
the current design. Hamline-Midway Coalition notified the neighbors and held another public meefing
on the new desi� on 1b1ay 12, 2004, To seek additiflnal input from the comznaniry. Later in the monih af
May, the Hamline-Midway CoaIition approved this design, which is before the Boazd today. This project
goes a Iong way fonvard toward meering the need for affordable ownership, different types of awnership
and housing needed in the neighborhood, and in the Hamline-�i�Iidway Plan. Freeing up singIe-family
homes for young families in the neighborhood.
Lance Wilson, 1201 Hawthome, lYIPLS, stated he represents Miller-Hanson Partners, who aze the
Architects of record for this project. A complex project such as this creates a number ofgray areas when
it comes to variances. This is the fifth project that we have done for Nichols Development these all have
been senior cooperarives. This is a federal program that was enacted by congress in the late 193Qs,
durring the Roosevelt Administrarion. They are very popular on The East CoasY. It is home ownership
and what we are seeing is that most of the projects bring in people from about a ten block radius. It
really does free up single-family homes in the neighborhood. A project of this density in the dense
portion of Saint Paul does ereate some gray areas in variances. 3'he zero Iot line is to allow skyway
connection to the existing ramp. The ramp is under utilized at this time. There aze about 210 parldng
stails on the site, few of wh�ch are used by this office building. The connecrion to the ramp to tap into
this is a crearive way to create senior housing on the site. This is a very friendly agreement between
Nichols Development and David Van Landshoot. Property lines had to be drawn in order to make trns a
Iegal document to bring to the City. 'I'his campus has a tremendous amount of green and open space, Take
this into consideration when considering the densiry of the project, which is based on imaginary lines.
The office staff, senior living staff and senior residents can use a b eaT deal of the apen space. There are
shazed legal easements between the two owners of this project. That there will be a three-hour fire door
fire separadon between the housing and the pazking garage. There will also be a voice & key access so
that visrtors and residents can easily use this existing ramp. There are undergroimd parking stalls below
the residence building, with at least one parking stall per unit. The units will vary from 1,600 'to 1,800
square feet. Offenng a great range of economies for Iocal residences and their aeeds. This is a very
small senior development. We all wish to age in place, and bringing groups together on the scale of this
small project allow them io bring in a�ditional care services anc: :�. sr :;ces. A project smaller
than this would not be feasible.
Ms. Morton questioned the age requirements to buy into the caoperafive. �4ir. Wi�son replied that the
minimum age is 55 plus. The average age that he has seen in previaus projects are people in their 70s.
Mr. kuss Stark, I500 Charles Avenue, stated that he has lived in his home for about five years. One
piece that was not mentioned is that south of this s:te is a very nice town home development that David
Van Landshoot did a few years ago. It is a fairly high density developmeni buY it works in the
neiehborhood, it has made a posirive contribution. He supports thzs develapment because it meets a very
important goal oi the Hamiine Coalition, which is lif cycle housing. Many senior residents from
neighborhood incIudin� a former nexY door nei�hbor, he feels, would have jumped at this opportunity if it
had existad in the neighborhood years ago. H?s wife's parents wound up buying into a cooperative out ir.
:SA-AD.�-$E6 Employer
t
�� �
�
•
�J
o� y��
�
•
F:le �4-09fi2E�
Minutes June 2 i, 2004
Page Three
Inver Grove Heights because sunilar opportuniries were not available in the City a number of years ago.
Some of his neighbors are concemed about the height of the building and he agrees to some extent that
ideally the building could be a story shorter. In order to make the project work this density was required.
For him the goal of creating this type of housing ovemdes the disadvanYage of a five-story building.
Matt Anfang, 1635 Bayard Avenue stated he supports this project. Noting his experience with
redevelopment in ihe City of Saint Paul. He has seen the Nichols Development team over the months
coming forward with this plan and the significant changes that the neighbors have helped make a good
project better. The densifies are reasonable and the variances are necessary in making this affordable
housing option for seniors available. Not just an option but a desirable option. He had the opportunity to
tour some of the Nichols properties. He feels that they are first-rate, second to none developments. They
will be a welcome addition io this portion of Saint Paul.
Richard Dreher, 1727 Hubbazd, stated he is the Chair of the Hamline-Midway Coalition Board of
Directors. He reiterated that the Aamline-Midway Coal�tion has in its Strategic Plan and its Community
Plan, the desire to support and encourage diversified housing stock in their neighborhood. One of the
things noticeabiy missing is this type of senior transitiona] housing. One of the things about this
nei�hborhood is that people tike to move from house to house within the confines of the neighborhood
when their needs change. There is not really anything in this transi6onal housing market within the azea.
He argued that there is very little opposition to this project withm the neighborhood. The District
Council did two public hearing on this project encouraging the neighbors to come out and express their
concems. Those concerns were taken into account and major changes were made to the siructure to
address the concerns. Noting they had done a sfiadow srudy of the proposed building and they feel
comfortable with the results produced by the study and approved the project. They are very excited by
this new addit�on to the neighborhood and encouraged the Board to approve the variance requests.
Michael Zarnicic, 1159 Edmund Avenue, stated he is a neighbor. Mr. Zarnick is a former member of the
Hamline-Midway Coalirion in addition to being a member of the Hamline-Mid�vay Rehabilitation
Corporation, the CDC in the neighborhood and a former member of SPARC. He was part of the
communiry process that created the Hamline-Midway Community Plan back in 1997 which essenrially
created a process to decide what the neighborhood really neede�: On� ai t'.:� parts of that process was
that peaple came up to the members stating a need for Life Cycle Housing, not just housing fqr
homeowners but housing for seniors when their homes get too big and need to go to something smaller.
But want to continue to live in the neighborhood. While attending school at Hamline he lived in the
neighborhood and deoided he wanted to be a honeowner and at sorne poinT when he can kick his kids out
of the house he would like to have this oprion available for himself. He argued that there is a relativzly
iarge green area on the site. Even though some of the �een space will be taken by this project there is a
City Park very close to this site. He stated that when some of the neighbors support the pro}ect and some
of the neighbors don't, then There is a happy medium where no one is completely happy or sad about the
project.
� Mr. Zarnick stated that the height is now within the code and this variance is no longer needed by the
development.
.9.1-ADA-EEO Emnloyer
.-.
�� �'t,
1 i
`
O�f-R�f �
�il� �caa�cfias�
Minutes June 21, 2004
Page Four
Stephanie Alstead, 1206 Lafond Avenue, stated that she has lived in her home for the last ten yeazs.
Over this iime she some of the senior neighbors have been forced to leave the neighborhood_ Giving
them the ogporhmity fo live in a seaior co-op such as this and to be able To continue to visit theiti easily
rather than having to go to Maplewood, Woodbury, or Inver Grove Heights wouid be such a treat. This
is certainly something that is needed and qnite an asset. Nichols Development has heen worldng with the
neighborhood to come up wiih something ihat is going to work The variances do help this structure frt
into the neighborhood better. T'he way it aligns with [he building and it wiII give an urban characfer. A
good transition from Srelling Avenue which is only a b�ock and a half away ta #he residentia2 azeas on
the east. Also tying in the paridng struciure, which is under utilized at this time by the office building.
Using some of those parldng spaces for this facility is a nice way to take that into accaunt as well. She
supports this project.
�
Harriet Mednick, 1753 Thomas Avenue(?), stated she is a senior who owns a home in the neighborhood
and has family living in the azea. If and when she can no longer take care of her home and herself in a
house, she would iike to have an ogtion like this to move into. She has been on the Hamline-Midway
Coalition, she was on the Board of H-MARC and is now on the Boazd of SPARC. There are more than
I 1,000 seniors, according to the 2000 census, in the Hamline-Midway neighborhood. They believe that
something like this is needed in the area and will be appreciated. •
There was opposition present at the hearing.
Binata Warns, 1440 Lafond Avenue, stated she spent 10 years on the Board of Dirzctors of the Hamline-
Midway Coalition. Longer on that Board than anyone else in the history of the Board. She has a very
good history of this property and the issues conceming it. Ms. Wams submitted a peririon signed by
forty households within a 2 to 3 block azea of the development. These people aze opposed to granting the
variances associated with trus project. Most of the people within three hundred feet of this development
actually received the cards informing them about this heanng. If it were not for a coupte of the people
who did get the cards, the people who signed this peririon would not have even irnown about this hearing.
There were some flyers put out in the neighborhood to invite people to a neighborhood meeting. The
flyers again went to a very limited area. There was not wide spread publicity for the meeting.
Furthermore, there were a handful of people at the neighborhooii meefing: wniie there was a certain
amount of support expressed for the concept of the senior housing in the Community, there was giave
concern about the size of this developm�t. If only one or rivo varianees were necessary, than we might
be looldng at a different situation. In fact there are five variances required for this development. To need
that many exceprions to the rules to mzke This fit lead her to believe that it is too lazge for the site. She
saw the original drawings and will concede that the developer did lower the height of this buitding
subsfaniiaily from the first drawing. Ms. Wams attended both of the Community Meerings, Although
there was a shadow analysis done, there are still some detrimental shadows particularly during the winter
for properties direc#ly acrass from this site. The west corner of T'homas and Simpson that apartrnent in
the dead of wir.ter will now have shadnws that w�lI change the snow removal process for that building.
While it is not a huge issue it will stiil add cost to maintaining Ehat pmperty and keeping the walkways �
ciear in the neighborhood. The I�amline-Midway Coalirian, rlid not have a Land Use Cotnmittee.
AA :4DA-EEO Employe:
� �,
��
o� 9�8
� File �4-09626�
�finutes June 21, 2004
Page Five
They do not have an organized process to deal with these indiv�duat issues as they come up. 3'hey do
have a Community Plan which she was part of developing. However, they do not fiave an o e�anized
mechanism to deal with land use issues. Fhey aze wor3ang on putting something like that tagether. The
problem is that this came up for a vote at their May iVleeting. T"ne Coalirion Board does not post their
agendas on their web site in advance, so neighbors cannot log on and find out what these issues are.
Many of these ordinary citiaens who signed this petirion, the dirt would start flying and then they would
realize that this monolith will be built right across the street from their homes and they would be stunned
by this. Contrazy to what some of the speakers l:ere today said there was not wide spread participation by
the ordinary cit3zens of the community. Yes, the SPARC Board people were in on it, the Coalition Board
people were in on it. When u comes to ordinary people that are not normally involved in civic processes,
most of those people's voices were not heard. These are the ldnd of voices that for The most part appear
on this list. We need to take a step back, the neighbors did not laiow that the Coalition was going to take
a formal vote at their meetmg and the Coalition is supposed to be an inclusive erganization bringing
fourth the voices of the neighborhood. Yet there are forry people here whose voices have not been heard
and whose voices were nof taken into consideration. She suggested that this developer goes 6ack to
make this project a little bit smaller and not require as many variances in order to build it. Making it one
less story would go a long way toward ma'xing it easier to swallow. NIs. Wams mentioned that one of her
. neighbors who has lived in the area longer than she has been alive is here today and has a right to be a
little upset about this pro�ect. The neighbor hac in the past and cantinues zo give a great deal of her time
to volunteerism, and civic enterprises in the neighborhood. She does not feel that they are against the
whole concept of senior housing in the neighborhood. Nevertheless, they are against the sheer size of
this development. It is too lazge for the site. If th�s developer can come in with a Iittle bit smaller and a
little bit shorter, something along that line it will go a long way towazd making this work for the
neighborhood.
Ms. Morton questioned how the shadow effects the snow removal. Ms. Wams stated that right now the
sun gets to the site and allows snow to melt enough to be scraped off. When the site goes into shadow
for part of the day what will happen is there will be a partial melt then it will freeze. Than the person
will have to use a lot of salt to melt the ice, without the beneficial effects of Yhe sun light to help.
ivir. Wilson questioned that Ms. l�Jarns said she was a member c.` the lii�i.;ct ��uncil for 30 years? Ms.
Warns stated she was a member of the Distriet Council for ten years, from 1994 until May 7, s004. She
just resigned and this project came up at the next Board Meeting after she had resigned from the District
Council. She had not even been aware that they were going to take a formal vote at the meeting. It was
not clear that night and they did not do sn�cient outreach to the people of the neighborhood, those who
signed the petition, to oome to that Board Meering and have the opportunity to speak. They took a staff
persons word for the fact that the residents concerns were mirigated and did not hear direcily from the
residents. Mr. Wilson noted this has been several vears in the making. Of those residenTS that signed,
how many community meetings did they go to? To determine wnat was going on? Ms. Warns repiied
quite a few of these people had participated years back in the Community Plan, sa it is not like these
� peaple did not lmow that there is a Community Plar. But no where in our Community Plan did it address
land ase parcel by parcel. Nowhere, in that Community Plan which right now is a Sculpture Garden that
was supposedly g;ven as a�ift on fl-�e part of David Van Lar.dshoot zo the Community. 3'his great �
f;` y
� t
A �-A➢A-cEO Emoioyzr �
����
File �04-09b265
YIinutes Tune 2i, 2004
Page Six
gift, this wonderful Sculpture Gazden that �tr. Van Landshoot was presenting tc the neighborhood, aad
now, the Sculgture Gazden became the target of some vandalism so 14r. Van Landshoot clQSed ihe
Sculpture Garden [o the public. Now he wants to seIl this piece of property and the Nichols
DeveIopment people are caught in the cross fire. Nowhere did the Community decide that they wanted
senior housing on that site. This just recently came up. It was not co�non or wide spread community
Irnowledge, they have been talldng about it privateiy for several months before it was ever brougfit before
the community. This is something she heard directly from staff at the Caalition. Many of the people on
the list come to these Community Meetings.
Trista Brown, 1491 Blair Avenue, stated she is not completely against this project. However, she
ehooses to speak with the opposition because there is no mechanism for not speaking for or againsf the
projeet. She wants to give historical perspecrive on the site. It is very important that the Board be able to
make a decision with ali of the facts. One thing that has troubled her as she had first heard about the
project and as information begm to trickle into the neighborhood with the proposal far this site. This is
currently a Garden of Poehy, fonnerly the Gazden of Sculpture, formerly open to the public and now a
private site. Pnor even to her moving into the Community there had been a Hospital at that site. Whiah
was the Samaritan Hospital, formerly the Northern Pacific Railroad Hospital. The neighbors at that time
fought a hard won battle to preserve a substantial portion of that site as green space to minimize the
effecT of what was a substanrial commercial type of development in what was and essenfially still is a
residenYial area, with predominandy single-family homes. Ms. Brown submitted a copy of the Special
Condition ITse perrnit of 7anuary 27, 1984 for Samaritan Hospital as wetl as a copy of the minutes from
the heanng. Ms. Brown stated she wanted to direct the Board's attention to the January 27, 2004 meeting
of the Saint Pau1 Planmng Cammission. At ihat time the Zoning Cornrnitfee heard a request for a Special
Condition Use permit for Samaritan Hospital #9472. With modifications for property located on Souch
Side of Thomas between Simpson and Asbury (zoned RM-2, P-1, R-4) to construct a Medical Office
Building and paridng facility. Ms. Brown read from tbe minutes, the Motion: Mr. Bryan made a motion
to approve the request based on findings 1-15, subject to the five condirions listed on the staffreport.
Ms. Sumniers seconded the morion; the Discussion: "Ms. Summers conveyed District ll's concem,
wanting a guarantee or dedicarion of the green space. Mr. Levy asked if the Planning Commission of
Ciry could dedicate this d een space as was done in Energy Park. Ms. Reichert stated thai Yhe City would
have to own the property, that the dedication agreement for Energy Pazk was an agreement with the Port
Authority. Staff indicated that any other project on the property wouId have to come before the Planning
commission and the green space was addressed sarisfactorily in #2 of the five condifions in tlse staff
recommendation."; At which point Ms Brown tracked down a capy of the Zoning Committee Staff
Report. She stated that in the StafFReport there are severaI things. There is the Zoning Code Citation.
Ms. Brown read the pertinent sections to this discussion. "The minimum distance $om any main or
accessory buildine from bounding lot lines or stre�ts shall be at least 50 feet for front, rear, and side
yazds for a11 two strueiures. For every story above two the m;a;m� yazd distance shall be inereased by
at least 20 feet." These things �vere necessary Yo fulfil the spuit and pwpose of the Zaning Code to
protect adjacent properties. Zn Yfie findings �4 "A setback of 70' is required for the three-story medical
office building. The 30' high ramp will also require a 70" setback Applicant proposes matcning the
existiag setbacks of 1&' (Asbury) and i5' (Simpson). The third condition is not met; mo3ificarions of 52'
and �S arz needzd. Aiong Thomas, the office buiidine Gvilt have a 70` se?b�ek ar�d the ramp wili `ue seT
back 145', neering the condition. ' Further in the findings of the Staii Report 711 "The intent of the
A.y-ADA-EEQ Employer �
�
.
�
r�
0� 9�8
. File #04046265
Vlinutes 7une 21, 2004
Page Seven
setback condirion is to provide a bnffer between institurional uses and neighboring residential uses. By
maintaining the open space north of the ramp, appIicant's plan essentially combines the required setbacks
and concentrates them at the southwest corner of Thomas and Asbury." Ms. Brown noYed tbat is the
parcel thaT i; being discussed today. Finding �12, "The modifications are consistent with the general
welfaze of the coaununizy and reasonable enjoyment of adjacent properry provided that addirional
conditions aze attached to the permit and provided that the open space north of the ramp is mamtained."
The staif recommendation that thart pertains to fhis site is #2 "Maintain the "massed setback" open space
and provide landscaping with four-season foliage as well as boulevazd trees as specified by the City
Forester." She brought this to the attention of the Board today because there is a long troubied history of
Zoning concerns at this site. That predate almost everyone in this room with the possible exceprion of
Annette Sorenson who lives across from the property and has for 80 yeazs. l�Is. Brown stated the next
thing she wants to address is January 29, 1987, she read from a memorandum to Mayor Latamer from
Larry Soderholm who was at the time the District i 1 Liaison Planner. There was as a cunent issue in the
Hamline-Midway area "commercial parking encroachment." Businesses and some instiiutions have
bought houses and let them run down and then sought rezoning to create parking lots. The very first one
that is listed is Samaritan Hospital. Theze is a history of people in the neighborhood being very
concerned about the encroachment on the single-family character of their neighborhood. When David
Van Landshoot and Justin Properties first come to the neighborhood Ms. Brown was a member of the
� Hamline-Midway Coalition Board. Mr. Van Landshoot was a responsible developer and the town houses
that were built were a success. Ms. Brown quest�oned and encouraged the Board to look into whether ihe
prior findings from 7anuary 27, 1984, applied to subsequent properiy owners. She would Iike to lmow
the answer to that question. Mr. Van Landshoot came in and made a big deal of the Gazden of Sculpture.
Ms. Brown referred to an archival copy of documenting for the dedication of the Garden of Sculpture.
Ivls. Brown and Mr. Wamer discussed the Boazds need to keep any documentation referred to at the
Hearing. Ms. Brown read from the cover letter of the document. "Dear Ms. Brown, we wouid like to
thank you for attending the dedication of the Garden of Sculpture and would like to present to you this
group of pictures from the event. Public art is an important part of the communiC� the Garden of
Sculpture will continue to provide an opportunity for residents and business to enjoy art year round.
Again thank you for your support. Truly yours, David M. Van Landshoot." She then read from the
Hamline Midway Neighborhood News, OcYober 1990. She read the article. Part of the reason the
neighborhood agreed, well ok, we will allow a lessor setback for the parking ramp and the Office
Building. This was at the time it was still Samaritan Hospital later Health East acquired It. There was
going to be this substantial green space that .vould remain undeveloped. Whether or not That �iolds to the
subsequent owner which is Mr. Van Landshoot, she does not lmow what requirements and wha4
protective covenants would be on that, based on the documentation that she has presented here today.
There is a long, long troubled history of this site and Zoning issues, in part becavse the hospital was
there. Some oP the neighbors are indeed the same people who signed the most recent petition. They had
signed an earlier petition which is also part of Yne archives, however, she did not bring it today. Again
the neighbors said "we do not want the parking ramp, we do not want the office building." These same
people were not heard then and it appears zhey are not being heard now. Ms, $rown stated she does not
r.ecessarily think fihat this is a bad pro}ect, personally she thinks they may want ta tweak tha size some
� more. She stated that she takes very seriously the al�ility of citizens to be to have their concerns heard,
particularly when they are the property owne: s oi record that are the most immediately impacied by this
project. It is fine for someon� to come into a neighborhood and say leYs do this, but ii it is going to very (�,� �
� �
�
.SA .�DA-EEO Employer `",1
0�-Y`�8
File r"r44-096255
Minutes 7une 21, 2004
Page Eight
nega6vely impact people who have a long economic co�ihnent to a neighborhood and that has to be
taken inta consideratian when these Idnds of decisions are beiag made. The history of this site is not as it
appears, there is more going on here. Unfortunately for Nichols Development, who is a classy deveIoper.
They are Lmforhmately caught in the middte of long neigh6orhood hisYory and neighborhood history is a
very lazge part of SainY Paut.
Ms. Porter requested that VIs. Brow� summanze the relevance of the histoncal information and how it
effects the requested variance. Is it that the neighbors have not had a ehance to look at this informafion?
Ms. Brown stated that is part of it. The other reason is the fact that a long time ago the Zoning
Committee made some decisions. Those decisions aze what stuck and are now, depending on how long a
decision lasts, she does not lmow what requirements passed from owner to owner. Ms. Brown stated thaT
she does lmow if she sells her sing]e-family home it is R-4 and it continues to be R-4 and it cannot be
used for something else. This was originally to be used for open space and accord'mg to the staff fmdings
the protecrion of the green space £or the neighborhood was adequately addresseu in the staff findings.
Some of those same neighbors aze saying that the protection of tfie green space was not adequately
protected for the neighborhood because here we are. That is the relevance.
�
Annette Sorenson, 598 Simpson StreeT, stated she lives across the street from the Scutpture Gazden. In �
1984 she was on the Board of Duectors of Dishict 1 l. Although she does not have the memory she once
had she does remember part of the issues. When Samaritan Hospital wanied to build the paridng ramp
and the Medical Building, because of the zoning problems they wanted to put them right up to the side
walk, they promised the neighbors that site would be a park. How it got Zoned RM-2 she does not know.
But the Dish and the neighbors were promised a park. Mr. Van Landshoof pnrchase the properiy, he
has paid a lot of money to keep the property up and he has taken very good care of the pazk. The
neighbors have enjoyed the park. Now they want to buiid a very very lazge tail building on that site. She
also resents that they are saying that Midway ls an old neighborhood, it isn't. Noting that she is one of
the oidest and was bom in the house she Iives in, there are a few other old people but most of the others
are gone. There are many very young coupies with children, young very active people. Hamline-
Midway is not an old neighborhood ful] of old retired seniors that aze willing to just leap into this
building. Most of the people who wanted to go, have had a chance to go into the Ebenezer on Fairview
and University. They are building more and more buildings do�,. the_;, �? rvP fi�e. On Aamline there is
a senior high-rise that is subsidized, that is full and has a waiting list, she is sure. We are not �bsolutely
without oprions. The Ebenezer is three stories. On Sneiling and Larpenieur they aze building apar�ent
buildings all over the ptace, three stories. They aze all in comm�rcial areas. They want to put a five
story building in a sma12 smgle-family home area. She resents this very much. 3YIr. Van Landshoot wants
his money back, he would like a lo# of money back. But he has moved to Colorado, and he is not going
to be living in that area, she is, and intends to live a long time. Ms. Sorensoa stated she raised the
petition and only had three days to do it in, if she had more rime she could have gotten a longer list of
names opposing this project.
Ntr. Armstrong noted that this is a senior co-operative building a�d to his laaowledge there is only one
other senior co-op in the City of Sainr Paul. There has been additional senior housing buiit in the
neighborhood and the housing a1 Fazrciew and Universiry, a great portian is low income rental and with
L-i
AA-ADA-EEO Ex�ployer � j
� �
o�-G �8
A File �04-09625�
Minutes June 21, 2004
Page Nine
a long wairing list and the new portion going up now is rental, mazket rate rental. This is a unique oprion
in senior ownership. Given the way co-op's aze financed and developed, this project wili not be buiIt if it
is not pre-sold. It needs to be 90% sold by I-IUD (Housing & Urban Development} regulations. If there
is not a demand it will not be built, it is not built on spec, it has to be pre-sold before it can be built.
Certainly there is a lot of history with this site. When the Aospital agreed to keep that portion green
space there was a four of five-story hospital on the south end of that site. That was torn down by Vfr.
Van Landshoot and that is where the town-homes now exist. So as a campus the site has a lot more green
space today that it had when the ramp and adjacent buiiding were built because there was a very lazge
building on the south end of the site. In terms of community process the Hamline-Midway Coalition staff
did the fliering. Before the April and the May meefings the adjacent neighbors for several blocks were
fliered directly. Dave Gonyea(?) the staff inember for the Aamline-Midway Coalition talked to several
neighbors as he passes out those fliers and invited them to the meetings. On May 12, the second
community meeting, a question was raised as to what their new step was and it was announced at that
meeting that it was going to the Hamline-Midway Coalirion for a vote in about two weeks. We fried to
be as clear and open about that process as we moved forward.
Mr. Wilson questioned whether he ]mew of any kind of covenant (?). Mr. Armstrong state3 no, not that
• they are aware of. The land owner, David Van Landshoot, has searched extensively and City Staff was
also asked to look for any covenants and they did not find one. The Hamline-Iviidway Coalition staff
searched as well for such a covenant.
Ms. Maddox questioned the parking agreement which allows unlimited use on Holidays and weekends,
when ihe vast majority of visitors are likely to come ta the building. It does not say that in the iicense
agreement Mr. Armstrong replied that is true and that is why it was a subject of debate by Mr. Van
Landshoot and Nichols Development. That is why the letter was sent to Mr. Van LandshooY, which he
then approved it and signed. When we sign at closing 1he parking iicense will be included into it. Mr.
Van Landshoot has agreed to that lana age and that is what it is signifying as well as the property under
the skyway will just be inciuded into the legal description at the poinY of closing at no cost to them.
There will be a common wall agreement reached prior to closing.
Ms. Maddox questioned whether Mr. Anderson had any comme^t on *!�e. Gnecial Condition Use permit?
Mr. Anderson stated that again this entire site was rezoned, there were various zonings for thi�s site. The
entire site was rezoned in 1984. There was an ordinance that was passed in 1984 that rezoned the entire
site so it would be RM-2, which included the parldng ramp, the existing offiee building and where the
senior co-op is proposed to go. The 1984 ordinance is where they went to find the zoning for the site as
well as in consultation with City Staff, no other issues were raised in terms of over riding zoning
classification.
Mr. Wilson questioned whether this bmlding could not be built with less than 44-units. Mr. Anderson
replied that is correct. One of the things we did when deciding that a senior ca-op would be desirable,
was to interview senior co-op developzrs. Most af the people spoken to said it is necessary to have some
� common space to make the co-op's work. Which is part of reason seniors are ath to The co-
operat�vz developmea±s. Most peonle ;aid they wanted a hundred urits or more. The rea,on {ve were
happy to work with Nichols Developme�t was that they were ab]e to reduce ihat fo the smallest size ^�
feasibl� to make it fit an urban site. �-'
AA-ADA-EE4 E:nployer
O��g `��
Fale #04Q96265
Minutes Tune 21, 2004
Page Ten
Mr. Sage-Martinson, stated that is a good synopsis. We have looked hard at ttris, zt is a very small
development both for developmcnt purpases for building it and keeping the cost� at a reasonable amount.
Also for the long #erm viability of the buiIding financially. When the co-operafive which owns the
building themselves and manages the building themselves it sYays long term viable. It needs a certain
amaunt of synergy in number and that is about as small as you can get. Most aze larger, ta ga any smaller
than that, probably could not be done and would not be approved by IICTD. Or if it was smatlar it
probably would not be marketable so there would not be a development.
A�aring no fiuther tesrimony, Ms. Nladdox closed the public portion of the meeting.
Ms. Maddox requested fhat Mr. Warner give a legal opinion. Mr. Wamer stated that one of the questions
of those tesrifying was "what is the effect of the original Special Conditional Use permit that was granted
in the early 80s and the effect of thatT' that it does not ride along with the oumers but with the land. It is
interesring that in the originai Zoning Committee Staff Report, was that one of t'�e Yhings that was
necessary, was to rezone the property to RM-2 in order to build what at that time was the new addition to
the old Samaritan Hospita2. Because the configurafiion of the site was such that the buildings proposed
could not meet the set back requiremenYS the Zaning Staff went throu�h and ana!yzed the situation and
basically sald that if they move the new addirion from Samaritan addirion back 70 feet &om Thomas and
keep the pazking ramp 145 feet back from Thomas in essence it creates a buffer that is sufficient enough
to take the project as a whole and say that it has been buffered from the abutting residenfial proper[y.
The rational for building these two buildings and ihe green space that was created, those conditions
appeaz to still govern. He stated tha# he is somewhat aL a loss as to how the Boazd can ignore that
condition. Because that condition was created for the buildings that aze there presently. The buildings
have not gone away and the use may not be the old Samaritan Hospital but it seems that this is something
that he needs to look at and he needs some time to do that before he would feel comfortable telling the
Board that they have the authority to go either way with the applicalion for the variaaces. Mr. Warner
stated that his sense is that these conditions are still applicable and would haue to modified before the
Boazd couid proceed with the variance application.
Ms. Morton questioned would have to be modified by the Planning Commission. Mr. Wamer replied
yes, BZA does not have the autharity to do that. He stated he m.:; be-w*n. because he will have to ask
staff what the use is and there :s also ease Iaw out there that says if the use disappears than the conditions
that govem the use disappeaz as well. But that is a quesrion of degree. When looking at use it is not
I00% of the use, even if it is 10% of the use, the use is the use in the Zoning Code. Mr. Wamer
requested tbat they maice a mofion to lay this matter over for two weeks so that he has the time to look
into this and gain a comfort level in advising the Boazd what is appropriate.
tVtr. Wilson questioned the deadline for action on this case. Ms. Maddox replied July 12, 2004. Mr.
Wilson quesrioned whether there will be time? Mr. Wamer replied we will have time, unforiunately the
Court of Appeals now says that if :ve do not get everything done wiThin 64 days, the Ciiy losas aIl of i#s
regulatory authority. That ean be tweaked as well if it is necessary. -Far the purposes of the BZA we
have time to look at this.
A.4-ADA-EEO Employer
�
•
�
� �;,
D�-9�6�
A
n
L�
Fiie �04-09626>
Minutes June 21, 2004
Page Eleven
Mr. Hardwick addressed the Board, explaining rhat the deadline for action date is 40 days to allow ample
rime for a appeal. To have this matter heard again on July 6, 2004 will allow ample rime. He was not
aware of this Special Condition Use permit, so he did not have a chance to discuss this witfi Mr_ Wamer
before the meekng. Jast to give a different view point of the simation. The Condifional Use Permit was
for Samaritan Hospital and it allowed Samaritan to expand by adding an office building and a par2dng
ramp. Samaritan Hospital is no longer there so from staf#'s point of view. That Condirional Use PermiT
went away when the Hospital, the institurional use, went away. There is ao longer any insritution use.
The fact that these two buildings still remain simply means that these two buildings become non-
conforming buildings instead of confomung to the Aospital use. From staff s standpoint Mr, Hudwick
does not think that the Special Conditional Use Pernvt applies or has any baring on this. He stated thaY
he hesitates to advise the Board to go against Legal Council's advice. However, he did want the Board to
have staffls point of view. Noting that the appiicanYs are under some rime constraints here and would
like to proceed with this matter.
Ms. Morton questioned Mr. Wamer's comment that the Special Condirion Use pemut goes with the
properry not with the building, such as Samaritan Hospital. In ihe event that this has to go back thru the
Planning Cnmmission process this would add another rnonth to *.his, what daes that do to the time line?
Mr. Wamer replied it depends on what he finds out in the next two weeks. Assuming that the
recommendation is that the condition still applies, than it would be his advice to ihe Boazd that the
application be rejected. He assumes that the properry owner woulrl then go to the Planning Commission
and ask for modificanon of that condition and than reapply for a variance. If the conclusion was that the
condiTion was no longer applicabie than his advise would be that the Board could go ahead and act on the
appiication.
Mr. Hardwick noted that the other oppon is that the City has the nght to extend the deadline an
additional sixry-days, that could be done if necessary. That way the Board can, instead of simply
denying the application they can continue the matter.
Ms. Bogen moved to approve lay the matter over unril the July 6, 2004 BZA heanng.
Mr. Wilsan seconded the motion, which passed on a roil call vc'a-of �-(l.
Ms. Maddox expiained that the Board would not take any more testimony from those who have already
testified, They are already on the record and the public hearing has been closed.
nitted 1�: `
�- /,
ardwick
Approved by: _
/ Gio�4�Bogen, Secretary
AA-.ADA-EEC Emplo; er
���
o�P�9�8
• MINI)TES OF T'E� \�ETIIQG OF THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
CTI'Y COU�TCII. C13AMBERS, 330 CIT'Y HALL
ST. PAUZ, �VNESOTA, .)ULY 6, 2004
PRESENT: Mmes. Maddox, Bogen, and Morton; Messrs. Co�tney, Faricy, Gatles, aud Wilson of the
Board of Zoniug Appeals; Mr. Wacner, Assistant City Attomey; Mr. Hardwick and
Ms. Crippen of the Office of License, Inspections, and Environmental Protecrion,
ABSENT None
The meeting was chaired by 7oyce Maddox, Chair.
Nichols Develonmen� LLC (#040962651 570 Asburv Street: Several variances in order to
bui]d a 44-unit senior cooperarive building. 1.) A front yard seTback of 25 feeY is required and a setback
of 18 feet is proposed, for a variance of 7 feet. 2.) A side yazd setback of 25 feet is required and a
setback of 18 feet is proposed on the NE side, for a variance of 7 feet. 3.) A maacimum lot cQVerage of
35% is aliowed and lot coverage of 43% is proposed, for a variance of 8% {2,717 square fee#). 4.)
Sixty-six off street pazldng spaces are required for the building and 38 aze proposed, for a variance of 28
parldng spaces. 5.) The maximum allowed density requirements allow 32 dwelling units and 44 dwelling ,,
units are proposed, for a variance of 12 units.
Mr. Hardwick briefly reviewed the case with a recommendafion for approval. Noting that Mr. Warner
� had some questions about what the impact of a previous Special Conditional Use permit would have on
ihe Board's ability to rule on this issue. He suggested that the Boazd consult Mr. Warner.
Mr. Warner advised Boardmembers that there was some testimony at the last public hearing about a 1983
Speciai Condition Use Petxnit issued by the Planning Commission to the old Samaritan Hospital for the
purpose of building an accessory office huilding and parldng structure. There was some quesrion as to
whether or not those conditions wera still in effect. One of the conditions of approving the office
building and the parking lot had set aside a pazcel of land in the northeast corner of the old Samaritan
campus to provide some buffering between the residenfial structures, primarily the single-faznity homes
and duglexes along the north end of the campus. That parcel was set aside by combining some of other
setbacks that would have been applicable to the other buildings, primarily, the office building use.
Samarifan Hospital disappeared. The originaI hospital buitding was torn down. In order to answer the
quesrion Mr. Wamer reported that he had staff pull several wning staff reports for the Samari�tan "
Properly. Ten reports were brought to his office. Mr. Wamer started that this was perhaps most
confusing zoning history he has ever encountered and that he spent 30 hours on this on particular
problem aione.
Mr. Wamer stated that he distilled the essence of the zoning quesrion in this way. When the hosgifal was
first built, there was no zoning code. In 1922 the City adopted a zoning code which made the hospitaI
building a noa-conforirting use. That hosgitat conrinaed as a non-confornring use untit I975 when the
property it was locaYed on was rezoned to RM-2. That made the hospitai use a confornung use again.
There was some difficulty in between the early 1920s and the mid 1970s when there were several
� expansions to the haspital campus. Some of those esgansions appeared to be what lawyers would catl an
AA-ADA-EEO Empiayer
�����
File #Q4-09626�
Minutes July 6, 2004
Page Two
"intensificarion" of a non-conforming use. Case Iaw t3�at says tt�at iutensifications aze permitted,
Mr. V1Tarner continued an noting that there were some additions to the haspitat in 1969 which were
ptobfematia One addition on the northeast side of the building,_ the princigal Samaritan Hospital
bui2ding was a ctinic. On the west side of tlie building they buitt a hospifat wing: This seemed to be a
modification of the non-conforming use. That was prohabIy prohibited under the law. However, Mr.
Warner stated that he was not aartain about this because fie did not get a chance to go back and Iook at
those azchived records. It would have takeu too much time and effort to find these records an8 he dces
not know whether any of that becomes dispositive. What it does mean is that in 1975, the use became
conforming once again. There was nuw a non-conforming shucture with a conforming use.
When tfie application was made to build this office building on the west side of the campus the whole
block was owned by Samaritan Hospi#al. In 1983, for some reason the planning department looked at
that application as though it were a non-conforming use permit and the plauning comtnission issued a
non-conformmg permit. The difficulty with that process is thaY accessory uses, by defuution are alIowed
to be ]ocated in conjLmerion with the pernritted use.
C�
In 1975 when the Hospital again became again a confornvng use, by definition, any aocessory use tfiat
went along with it would have been pemutted. 7n 1983, when the Hospital was issued a non�onfornvng •
use pernut it was contrary to the generally accepted notions of the law. Mr. Wamer also stated that was
problemaric because in the staff's firtdings and in the adoprion of ttte Special Condition Use PermiY by
the Planning Commission It identified these uses - the office build'mg and the pazldng ramp - as
"accessory" uses.
Mr. Warner advised that the best way Yo approach this was for the Board consider what happened in
1983. When the Planning Commission allowed Samaritan to build the permitted accessory uses, the
Planning Commission saw fit to impose the condirion of the massed setback in the azea where today the
applicant wants to put this senior co-operative housing. Mr. Warner stated that he eannot definitively say
that those conditions aze stiIl in effect. It woald require that someone go back and Iook at what the
Planning Commission was looldng at. The canditions for a seYback appear to be premised on #fie tfiings
we are alt fanuIiar with, that is to give some separafion between an institutional use and residential.uses.
Mr. Warner advised to keep in mind that the Hospital was a principal use subject to special conditions.
According to Mr. Watner, the issue becomes: what happened when the fiospifal disappeared? Did those
conditions go away? If it is Iooked aY from tfie perspective that the specia] conditions were imgosed ta
separate the residen2ial use from the principal use, the hospital, the fiospital is na Ionger there. Then, on
one hand, it can be said that the condikons aze no longer apglicable.
On the other l�d, even thongh the principal use is gone, the accessory buiIdings aze st't$ thete. The
residential struct�ues across the street and those accessory buildings that are stiIl there. I3o they still need
some separation, esQeciallg wfien tke apptication before the Boazd today is to put in a residential
buildings a2thoug}i it is a muTti residential building? •
AA-ADA-EEO E�sfoyer
l''
• File �04-096265
Minutes Juiy 6, 2004
Page Three
o�-��c8
Mr. Wamer stated that is the issue the Boazd wilI have to struggte with Mr. Warner stated ti�at he cannot
definitely tell the Boazd that those conditions are in effec# because that was the way tha problem was
approached for more Et�.w fifly years which brings us this pmblem facmg the Board today. Mr. Wazner
advised that the Boazd will have to decide whether it is reasonable to make the accommodalions tt�at the
applicant is asldng for today. Keep in mind what the conditions were in 1983 aud what the conditions on
the site aze today.
Ms. Maddox asked whether the Boazd had any quesrions. She asked whether that was the short version.
Mr. Warner stated he has about a nine-page memorandum, what he has given the Boazd is this condensed
version.
Mr. Galles questioned Mr. Hardwick whether he were still comfortahle with his recommendation, given
Mr. Warner's information. Mr. Hazdwick replied yes, he had discussed this with Mr. Warner and the
planning staff. He also reviewed some of the old Planning Corrunission cases. It appears to him that as
Mr. Wazner said, it is quesrionable whether or not the Conditional Use Permit was ever required for that
accessory building. Furthermore, it is the opinion of the Zoning Administrator as well as the Planning
Administrator that even if those conditions were applicable, that those conditions were superseded by the
later non-conforming use pernrit which legalized the office building and parldng ramp. In fact changing
• them from accessory uses to principal uses, and on that non-conforming use pernuf there were no
condirions. He would like to reiterate staffls support for this project.
Mr. Galles moved to approve the variance and resolution based on fmdings 1 through 6.
Ms. Morton seconded the motion, which passed on a roll cal] vote of 6-1(Bogen).
Approved by:
Hardwick
.
Gloria ogen, Secretary �
AA-ADA-EEO Employer
Message
Page 1 of 2
� �' ��
Mary Erickson - Council File 04-096265, Public Hearing August 4, 2004
From:
To:
Date:
Subject:
CC:
"Wams, Benita B - Eagan, MN" <benita.b.wams@usps.gov>
<uvard1@ci.stpaul.mn.us>, �nrard2@ci.stpaul.mn.us>, <ward3@ci.stpaul.mn_us>,
<ward4@ci.stpaul.mn.us>, <ward5@ci.stpaul.mn.us>, <ward6@ci.stpaul.mn_us>,
anrard7@ci.stpaui. mn.us>
8/2/2004 4:03 PM
Council File 04-096265, Public Hearing August 4, 2004
<John. Hardwick@ci.stpaul.mn.us>
Council President Bostrom and Council Members Montgomery, Thune, Harris, Benanav, Heigen, and Lantry:
Please enter this e-mail message into the official record of public testimony for the Public Hearing on August 4,
2004, council file number 04-0962'65. This is an appeal of a decision of the Board of Zoning Appeais granting
several variances to Nichols Development in order to construct a 44-unit senior cooperative building.
I support this appeal. I oppose building anything on this particular parcei of land because past zoning actions by
the City of St. Paul. The site in question is the former location of Samaritan Hospitai. In 1984, the St. Paul
Planning Commission and the St. Paul City Council voted to allow construction of an office building and a parking
structure adjacent to the hospitai. These structures were each granted a setback variance, under the condition
ihat these two buildings would be placed on the site in such a manner as to be as far away as possible from the
single-family homes direetly across the street from tfie development. This condifion was intended to be in force
as iong as the rivo buildings existed, and the purpose was to provide a buffer to shield adjacent homes from tfie
intense use of the two buiidings. I have personally read the 1984 City staff report by Patriaa James with her
recommendation concerning the green space, as well as copies of correspondence from Gayle Summers, who
was a member of the Planning Cammission in 1984, and Bob Fletcher, who represented the Hamline Midway
area on the City Council in 1984, stating that this was indeed the intent of the City - to provide a permanent buffer
beiween the buildings and the homes.
Later in the 1980s, David VanLandschoot purchased the entire Samaritan Hospital campus. He razed the
hospRal building and built the Hamiine Park Townhomes, which still ebst. He did not after either the office
building or the parking structure. These two buiidings still exist, as do all of the same single-family homes (and a
couple of duplexes) that were present in 1984. Mr. VanLandschoot installed a lovely sculpture garden on the
green space, which he presented to the neighborhood with a great deal of fanfare. In the mid-1990s, he Gosed
the sculpture garden bec;ause of partying and vandalism. He still maintained 'R as green space, but it was no
longer open to the pubtic. He then moved to Colorado.
Now Mr. VanLandschoot wishes to seil the green space to a developer, who wants to buiid a 44-unit senior coop
building. This building would require 5 major variances in order to be built - 2 setback variances, a density
variance, a parking variance, and a lot coverege variance. The sheer number of variances required makes it
ciear to me that the proposed use is too intensive for the site. However, it is even more disturbing that the City is
being ask� to break the promise it made to the adjacent hom�wners back in 1984 - to provide a permanent
green buffer between their homes and the huge office building and parking structure that were built. These
homeowners took the City at its word when the promise was made. Now ttiey have dug into their own pockets to
collect the money to appeal the BZA decision to grent the variances. These hom�wners have to spend their
hard-eamed money to defend their property values against the very thing - a huge building - that they were
promised protection from.
The issue here is not about the need for such a development in our neighborhood, it is about the integrity of the
City. The City made the promise in 1984. The City should not go back on its word. How would any of you
current council members feel if you had voted on a similar proposal with the intent of it being permanent, only to
see your intentions wiped out several years later and damage done to people you thought you had protected?
How can citizens make informed decisions about buying and selling property if the City doesn't keep its word
conceming zoning matters?
file://C:�Documents%20and%20SettingsuVlaryE�I,ocal%20Settings\Temp\GW}00OO1.HTM 8/3/2004
Message
Piease vote to uphold the appeai and do not grarrt the requested variances.
Beniha Wams
1440 Lafond Avenue
St. Paul, MN 55104-2438
651 �41-1037
Page 2 of 2
��`Q��
file://C:�Documents%20and%20Settings�MaryE�I,oca1%20Settings\Temp\GW}00OO1.ITI'M 8/3/2004