The URL can be used to link to this page

06-188Council File # Q� \$ V Green Sheet # 3G��. Q b� 3 RESOLUTION CITY OF SAINT PAUL, NIINNESOTA PEiESEA'TED BY I�%F'ERRED TO CObI�fITTEE: DATE i Whereas, Ilya Konkov made application to the Boazd of Zoning Appeals (File #OS- z 216890) for a variance from the strict application of the provisions of the Saint Paul Zoning a Code for property located at 811 White Bear Avenue North, legally described as KiJHL'S 2ND 4 ADDITION TO ST. PAUL LOTS 29 & LOT 30 BLK 1; and s Whereas, The purpose of the application was to vary the standazds of the Zoning Code v pertaining to the minunuxn required rear yard setback in order to split the parcel and construct a s new single-family dwelling on the resulting vacant lot and an attached gazage on the west side of s the existing house in the R4 Zoning District; and io ii 12 13 Whereas, a 25 foot rear setback is required for the existing house and a setback of 4 feet is proposed from the west property line for a variance of 21 feet; and i4 Whereas, The Board of Zoning Appeals conducted a public hearing on January 3, 2006, is after having provided notice to affected property owners, and the Board, by its Resolution #OS- is 216890 adopted January 3, 2006, decided to deny the variance application based on the following iv findings and conclusions: is i9 1. 20 zi The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use under the strict provisions of the Code. zz The parcel was originally platted as two 40-foot wide lots. The existing house is zs located on the southern end of the site, probably to provide street access to the z4 house since most of the property is elevated so high above White Bear Avenue zs North. The applicant would like to split the property and build a new house for zs himself and his sister. His parents would continue to live in the existing house. z� This is a reasonable and permitted use of the properiy. The proposed new lots as zs currently laid out by the applicant would meet the lot size and width requirements zs and it only the placement of the existing house on the site that creates the need for so a variance. 31 32 2, 33 34 The plight of the land owner is due to circumstances unique to this property, and these circumstances were not created by the Zand owner. as The elevation and contours of the property as well as the placement of the existing ss house on the site are circumstances that prevent reasonable use of the property 37 under the strict provisions of the Code. These circumstances were not created by ss the current property owner. 39 �Z ;§�$:�, i 3. The proposed variance is not in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Code, and 2 is not consistent with the health, safety, comfort, morals and welfare of the �__, o+Sj �� s inhabitants of the City of Saint Paul. 4 . , s The White Bear Avenue Small Area Plan calls for widening White Beaz Avenue s at East Seventh Street in order to create turn lanes at the intersection. According � to Public Works staff, 20 feet will be taken from the property on the west side of a White Bear Avenue all the way from East Seventh Street south to Ross Avenue. s This will probably result in the loss of the existing house on this properiy since it io is located only 21-feet from the existing street right-of-way. However, if the i i existing house must be removed, the remaining 60 by 117-foot parcel would be ia similar in size to the other parcels on the block and lazge enough to build a new is home. This is an unfortunate circumstance but it is necessary in arder to improve i� traffic and pedestrian safety at this busy intersection. Subdividing the property at is this time would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Code. is io 4. The proposed variance will impair a�a adequate supply of light and air to adjacent is property, and alter the essential char'acter of the surrounding area and may is unreasonably diminish established property vatues within the surrounding area. zo z i The loss of 20 feet from this parcel would make the property too small to zz accommodate a second house without several large variances. The resulting small 23 lots would not be in keeping with the size of the other parcels in the z4 neighborhood. This in turn could have an adverse impact on the surrounding 25 property values. 26 aa 5. The variance, ifgranted, would not permit any use that is not permitted under the as provisions of the Code for the pr-operty in the district where the affected land is 29 located, nor would it a2ter or change the zoning district classification of the 3o property. 31 32 33 39 35 6. 36 37 The requested variance, if granted, would not change or alter the zoning classification of the property. The request for variance is not based primarily on a desire to increase the value or income potential of the parcel of land. as Whereas, Pursuant to the provisions of Section 64.205, Ilya Konkov, duly filed with the 39 City Clerk an appeal (File #06-005445) from the determination made by the Board of Zoning 4o Appeals, requesting that a hearing be held before the City Council for the purpose of considering 4i the actions taken by the said Board; and 42 43 Whereas, Acting pursuant to Sections 64.205 through 64.208, and upon notice to affected 44 parties a public hearing was duly conducted by the City Council on February 1, 2006, where all 4s interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard; and 46 4v Whereas, The Councii, having heard the statements made, and having considered the 4s variance application, the report of staff, the recard, minutes and resolution of the Board of 4s Zoning Appeals, does hereby so i Resolve, That the Council of the City of Saint Paul does hereby uphold the decision of the s Board of Zoning Appeals in this matter, based on the findings of the Board of Zoning Appeals �/ a and the following additional findings of the Council: �- tg p 4 s 1. The City Council finds no error in fact, finding or procedure with respect to the s Board of Zoning Appeals' decision to deny the rear yard setback variance of 21 � feet. s s 2. The City Council finds that the 21 foot variance from the reaz yazd setback also io changes the current the west side yard into a western rear yazd. The variance also i i changes the lot now facing south on Ross Avenue with an east side yard bordering i2 White Beaz Avenue to a lot facing east on White Bear Avenue with a northern ia side yazd bordering an alley. That would create an additional residentiallot facing i4 commercial property on White Bear Avenue. This proposal, as submitted to the is City Council, is not in keeping with the spirit and intent of the code. is iv is is zo zi zz 23 24 3. The City Council finds that the variance of 21 feet with only 4 feet remaining as a rear setback is large and not in keeping with the spirit and intent of the code. Further Resolved, That the appeal of Ilya Konkov be and is hereby denied; and, be it Finally Resolved, That the City Clerk shall mail a copy of this resolution to Ilya Konkov, the Zoning Administrator, Planning Commission and Board of Zoning Appeals. Requested by Department of: �-- �-- �"- / ��- - Form Approved by Cit� Attorney Adopted by Council: Date Adoption Certified by Council ��lo By: By: g Approved b� a r: Date Z`�� By: to Council � Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet � CA �tv Attomey Contad Person 8 Phone: Racf�el Gunderson 266-8710 on Council f�qenda 6y (Date): Date IniGated: ��I/ + "-' 07-FEB-06 Green Sheet NO: 3029643 � Deoartttient Sent To Person 0 �tv Attornev Assign 1 i Attorn e artmentDireMOr Number y ttorne For Routing 3 a or's ffice Ma or/Assistant Order 4 ncil 5 ' Clerk CS Clerk Total # of Signature Pages _(Clip Ail Locations for Signature) Action Requested: Memorializing Ciry Council's February 1, 2006, motion to deny appeal of of Ilya Konkov and uphold the decision of the Boazd of Zoning Appeals to ffie deny a setback variance in order to subdivide the property at 811 White Bear Avenue North. Recommendations: Approve (A) orReject (R): � Planning Commission CIB Committee Civil Service Commission Contracts Must Mswer the Following questions: 1. Has this person/firm ever worked under a contrad for this department? Yes No 2. Has this personffirm ever been a city employee? Yes No 3. Does this person�rtn possess a skill not normally possessed by any current city empioyee? Yes No F�cplain all yes answers on separete sheet and attach to green sheet Initiating Problem, Issues, Opportunitjr (Who, What, When, Where, Why): AdvantageslfApproved: . The Council is required pursuant to the City Charter to have its acrions reduced to a writing either in the forxn of a xesolution or ordinance dependent upon the nature of the matter befoze it. The decision of the Council in ttus xnatter required a written resolufion in order to comply with the Cl�arter. Approving the attached resolution fulfills the Council's duty under the Charter. Disadvantages If Approved: None. , ''' ", � ■ DisadvanWges If Not Approved: Failure to approve the resolu6on violates the City's Cliarter requirement. �otal Amount of Transaction: Funding Source: Financial Information: (Explain) CosHRevenue Budgeted: Activity Number: y t , . ,) � �' �' 1 i. " ��s�a �?^y�r�.?i �' �'��lR�?i F �� .�s � �Q�J OFFICE OF LICENSE, INSPECTIONS AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Bob Kessler, Director SA[NS PwU L CITY OF SAINT PAUL � 266-9090 Christophe�8 Coleman,Mayor AAAA 266-9124 www.liep.us January 12, 2006 Ms. Mary Erickson Council Research Office Room 310 City Hall Saint Paul, MN. 55102 Dear Ms. Erickson: COMMERCEB(IILDING 8 Fourth Street East, Suite 200 Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101 o�-� ga Telephone: 651- Facsimile: 6�1- Web I would like to confirm that a public hearing before the City Council is scheduled for Wednesday, February, / 2006 for the following zoning case: Appellant: Ilya Konkov Zoning File #: 06-005445 Purpose: Location: Staff: District : Board: Appeal a decision of the Board of Zoning Appeals denying a setback variance in order to subdivide the property at 811 White Bear Ave. N. 811 White Bear Ave. N. Recommended denial. No recommendation from the District 2 Planning Council. Denied on a 7- 0 vote. I have confirmed this date with the office of Council President Lanhy. My understanding is that this public hearing request will appeaz on the agenda of the City Council at your earliest convenience and that you will publish notice of the hearing in the Saint Paul Legal Ledger. Thanks ! xaricE oF rusuc �nxnvc Sincerely, John Hardwick, Zoning Specialist 'rne saurt ra,il ciry crn,ncil w;v conanct a public hearing on Wednesday, February 1, 2006 at 5:30 p.m."in the City Council Chambers, Tkiird Floor City Hal7, 15 We�t. � KeAogg Bpulevaid, St. Paul, MN, con- sider the appeal of Rya Konkov� to a deci- sion of.the Board of Zoning Appeais deny- ing a setback variance in order td subdi- vide the properiy at Sl l White Beaz Ave- nue North. (Zoning File 06-005445) Dated: January 18,�2006 - ' MARP EffiCEfSON o _ � ._. � Assistant Ciry Council Secretary - ,- (January 23) ' ___ ___. ST. PAUL LEGAT. i.F.iM:FR __ __ 22309185 , . _ - , . OFFICE OF LICENSE, INSPECTIONS AND ENVII20NMENTAL PROTECTION Bob Kessler, Directar Sw[NT P"° � CITY OF SAINT PAUL � 266-9090 Christopher B Coleman, Mayar 166-9129 AA11A www.[iep.uS January 12, 2006 Ms. Mary Erickson Council Research Office Room 310 City Hall Saint Paul, MN. 55102 Dear Ms. Erickson: COMMERCEBUILDINC 8 Founh Street Eart, Sssite 200 SaintPaul, Minrsesota 55101 I would like to confirm that a public hearing before the City Council is scheduled for Wednesday, February, / 2006 for the following zoning case: �Appellant: Ilya Konkov Zoning File #: 06-005445 Purpose: Location: Staff: Dishict : Board: Appeal a decision of the Boazd of Zoning Appeals denying a setback variance in order to subdivide the property at 811 White Bear Ave. N. 811 White Bear Ave. N. Recommended denial. No recommendation from the District 2 Planning Council. Denied on a 7- 0 vote. I have confirmed this date with the office of Council President Lantry. My understanding is that this public hearing request will appear on the agenda of the City Council at your earliest convenience and that you will pubiish norice of the hearing in the Saint Paul Legal Ledger. Thanks ! __ xoatcE�`rusuc:.��n�� Sincerely, �ohn Hardwick, Zoning Specialist 1he . > . i: ! TeZephane: 651- Facsimile: 65l- Web: i, sior�� of the-.Boar,d of Zoning,Appeals deny- ing a setback �+ariance in --ord"er to.s+�bdi- vide ihe piopesty at 8^1-1' White-�$ear-Ave- 'nu'eNOrth: (2o -`� _ Dated: Jana.iary 1�8; = �- � �. ; ,- '_ ... _ ...,,;, :: 'MAR,Y �RiCKSO'DT .: �: °. �-' :-: � �� AssistantCity�Councnl.Secretai3�"._:. -- r .: ':.,. -_:.. .[Janaary 231 . _.i .,. .. - - __ —==�'BT:, P9UL 3.EGAT. LEDGER =-�- -_ _22109185, _ _ " � -. __. : � � Zip ��1fl6 Daytime phone � �� l�gQ PROPERTY Address ��'� k�t�;�� v � S�, Q��I �� Q6 LOGATION � � � � Legal description: �--o� S �� q �„ �'� e K � �� U�,. �� S d 1„ � � rrl P� i •l� i� (atfachadditiona/sheetifnecessarvl "�'' TYPE OF APPEAL: Application is hereby made for an appeal to the: ❑ Board of Zoning Appeals �City Council under the provisions of Chapter 61, Section _, Paragraph _ of the Zoning Code, to appeal a decision % APPLICATION FOR APPEAL Office ofLicense, Inspections and Enviror�menfal Protection Commerce Buildzxg 8 Fout-th St E, Suife 2�0 SaintPaul MNSSI01 65I 266-9008 APPLICANT Name 1 �� _ g�„t<QV Address �{'� vy �,,;�� City ��. , �� St. Name of owner (if different) made by the on � v �� 200 f.. File number: ��— 2.� �� Q GROUNDS FOR APpEAL: Explain why you feel there has been an error in any requirement, permit, decision or refusal made by an administrative official, or an error in fact, procedure or finding made by the Board of Zoning Appeals or the Pianning Commission. Denial of the variance was motivated by the project that doesn't e�st. No, project, and no reason for a denial. Lot meets all the requvrements. I am asking you as professionals which know their task and ara oriented. I would be very thankful for the help. sheet if A (icant's si natuse �� — �`� PB 9 ti� c.�.. �� --�' G' V 4 l0 0 City agent_ o�-isg OCQ��Ba' BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS STAFF REPORT TYPE OF APPLICATION: APPLICANT: HEARING DATE: LOCATION: LEGAL DESCRIPTION: PLANNING DISTRICT: PRESENT ZONING: — REPORT DATE: DEADLINE FOR ACTION: Major Variance Ilya Konkov January 3, 2006 F'II.E #:OS-216890 811 WHITE BEAR AVENiJE i�iORTH KUHI.'S ZND ADDTTION TO ST. PAUL LOTS 29 & LOT 30 BLK 1 2 � December 21, 2005 ZONING CODE REFEREi�FCE: 62.321 BY: John Hardwick January 23, 2006 DATE RECEIVED: December 14, 2005 � � A. Pi3RPOSE: A rear yard setback variance in order to split tlus parcel and construct a new . singl�family dwelling on the resulting vacant lot and an attached garage on the west side of- the existing house. A 25-foot reaz setback is required for the existing house and a setback of 4 feet is proposed from the west property line for a variance of 21 feet, B. SITE AND AREA CONDITIONS: This is an 80 by 117-foot pazcel with alley access at the rear. The lot slopes from the north down to the south with the majority of land about 20 feet above the grade of the adjacent streets. Surrounding Land Use: Commercial across White Bear Avenue North and single-family dwellings on the other sides. C. BACKGROUND: The applicant is proposing to split this parcel and build a new single- family home. D. FINDING5: 1. The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use under the strict provisions Of the Code. � � Page 1 of 3 1�. �� • File #OS-216890 Staff Report This parcel was originaliy platted as two 40-foot wide lots. The existing house is located on the southem end of the site, probably to provide street access to the house since most of the properiy is elevated so,high above White Bear Avenue North. The applicant would like to split the property and build a new house for himself and his sister. His parents would continue to live in the existing house. This is a reasonable and permitted use of the property. The proposed new lnts as currently laid out by the applicant would meet the lot size and width requirements and it is only the placement of the existing house on the site that creates the need for a variance. 2. The plight of the land owner is due to circumstances unique to this property, and these circumstances were not created by the land owner. The elevarion and contours of the property as well as the placement of the existing house on the site are circumstances that prevent the reasonable use of the property under the strict provisions of the Code. These circumstances were not created by the current properiy owner, � 3. The proposed variance is not in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Code, and is not consistent with the health, safety, comfort, morals and welfare of the inhabitants of the City of St. Paul. The White Bear Avenue Small Area Plan calls for widening White Bear Avenue at East Seventh Street in order to create turn lanes at the intersecfion. According to Public Works staff, 20 feet will be taken from the property on the west side of White Bear Avenue all the way from East Seventh Sixeet south to Ross Avenue. This will probably resttlt in the loss of the existing house on this properiy since it is located only 21-feet from the existing street right-of-way. However, if the existing house must be removed, the remaining 60 by 117-foot parcel would be similar in size to the other pazcels ion the block and large enough to build a new home. This is an unforiunate circumstance but it is necessary in order to improve traffic and pedestrian safety at this busy intersection. Subdividing the property at this time would not be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Code. 4. The proposed variance will impair an adequate supply of Zight and air to adjacent property, and alter the essential character of the surrounding area and may unreasonably diminish established property vaZues within the surrounding area. The loss of 20 feet from this parcel would make the properiy too small to accommodate a second house without several lazge variances. The resulting small lots would not be • in keeping with the size of the other parcels in the neighborhood. This in turn could have an adverse impact on the surrounding property values. � Page 2 of 3 a� �� Fiie #OS-216890 Staff Report S. The variance, ifgranted, would not permit any use that is not petmitted under the provisions of the Code for the property in the district where the affected Zand is located, nor would it alter or change the zoning district classifzcation of the property. The requested variance, if granted, would not change ar alter the zoning classificafion of the property. 6. 77xe request for variance is not based primarily on a desire to increase the value or income potential of the parcel of Zand. E. DISTRICT COiTNCIL RECONIlVIENDATION: As of the date of this report, we have not received a recommendation from Dishict 2. F. CORRESPONDENCE: The applicant has submitted a petition signed by several area residents in support of this proposal. • G. STANT RECOMIVIENDATION: Based on findings 3 and 4 staff recommends denial of • the variance. � Page 3 of 3 l � e � 5 �� APPLICA7[ON FOR ZONWG VARt�INCE . � OPFICE OF LIC.LNSE, INSPECTIONS, AND °°"' ENVIRONMENTALPROTECTIDN 8 Fourth Street East, Suite 200 Saint Paul, MN SSIOI 651-266-9008- APPLICANT PROpERTY f Legaldescrfption KU4�1`S �vto) �n��{i4'itN �0 �t ��t� �� (affach additiona( sheet if necessary) �J� OC K Lot size �l� {�cg x �'� 7•� U Present Z Present Use �� 2 • ProposedUse �i�na�C S`CTvrilt/ C�@��G�QY�� 0�) �Zj U Variance[s] requested: �CI�ZC�� $e�ti�SE F�� 2S ��. � 2o�j se� �rac� uS. 2�i , �3 ��. �x�s�;r� Se��c �e�Uesk �oR 25 ��. tzear� sz��a�� s. �� g�f ��. Qx��l��r� Se� ac Supporting Information; Supply the necessary information that is applicable to your variance request, provide details regarding the project, explain why a variance is needed, DuplexRriplex conversions may require a pro forma to be submitted, Attach additional sheets if necessary. ��cac�ne� ` �s a \�o� 5�1;1 CQYZ�;��ca�e suV�ve�/ , �2�a�' t 1 �4SC��Q�iOv� �o� �q��-� � ah� Po�Y�Cei �, �J Attachments as required: �ite Plan � Attachments - Pro Forma Name of owner (if different) �q�Z ApplicanYs signature Date Cify �T, �Ltt,� � State� 1V Zip �J") �E Daytime Phone l^. � 2 "�� "1�g� Property interest of applicant (owner, confracf purchaser, etc.) ��{�n R^K � I ' ,. To the Zoning Board of Appeals Deaz Sirs and Madams: My name is Ilya Konkov and my reason for addressing you today is to secure a small variance and lot split for my residence at 81 i Wkute Beaz Ave. N. My intenfion is to keep my exi§ting home a single residence for my parents and then add a small home for myself and sister at tbe ba�k lot. I am hoping to con£orm as much as is possible to the codes of the area and do not plan to do anything other than a single famIly residence. As such I am hoping that when my sister comes back from serving in the U.S. Military that we can have a home for ourselves. The lot split will make for two bomes in an area that currenfly holds many nonstandard corner lots. The fact that my lot is very elevated above White Bear Ave. and will make a direct view of my prope�ty quite difficult, will, I hope work in my favor. As the final plan I have for my praperty will be in keeping with the family orientated neighborhood that it currently is. Thank you for your time and attention. Signed �� i �� Ilya Konkov � ,'="`';� �' �•c? 6s al 8� � u � � �/ I'� � :� `X.1'/ C� '� �� `r i ' ��" ': °� `-a1� I agreb wi�hh the p�rformance process of a 1��, �- ��e�nitior� of the barder af . tvro icts, as vreil as fus_ure residetatial devePopm�t�t f€�r the property of: Kul�l's 2na �c�c�ition to Sti. Paul Lot 29 � La�t 30 Black l, <�dci��s: 81 ��Vhite Bear Ave, St. Paut, �I5�106 Address of r�sid�nce N�� i�t r�nt Si � n / t q ..,� l� t. = . � j . �. � i ( f � 2 � � A''�' .� � _ . -' �! T ' 'i � a ✓ `•� �rZ .� � � , _ � : t 1 .i � . � �. �.r �I4'�...._ yt i'' �� 4�.- J' ._� _ i/ c.� � � � L. ? <_� ,i , r � �- �,r ._ � �q ' . - � .-7 .�_. $. . !. ,, � i ,_. ,. j �v' ". -��`�.�./-_ � �_ <<. . '� � � � � �- � _ ,�1� z,J � , .�`f � �h.t�-:�'.�'iv2 c,��:r� r�.�%� � i��1_, � -(�<� n t/�� ;� � i J � t ? %�� 1 i� \VY �`_ � � / . �� - - -_. y , , . r -!I� , __ . . . . . , , : ,<. �. -� , ; t.. � {;( ;3 � �_._..__. �� . �� _` ' i . ll.� � _ ��, : --�. —'°"`_.._.�._ - - -�...-_^-< �_ j � �� '� i _�� '-r / . . 4 L� j' � ' ( � 1 / /� J _C''�- / � ' 1-( �' � � G � }�� ! t C� ; - � =-' ; ; � , r � ��.- �- I .J � k��.� �/,�, � , --� ,� -� • _ � � L- 1 1Lf�r� �/ -t �� I t T'� .��C7!'l ` �� L� �vI G�- ��u ' 1 j�� ` y j/ / ,�} J �� Jf � � y /�� v 9C �� l �� / x ✓/, e. A 1� /9 1'� � � � .a � � r rr- � � � �� '-�a'� :_ i. � , ll, �_.�..-�-�_ � ,� � �, � t ( �. �' � ' � _ ;,� ,M c �,��-� L,_��f�� `� S _ � � � �� -� �� <. t/c� t.,, �: � - i ��.�� `�1 , / � i� 4` f�'1 ,f.! Ct__ �2� t.� �� , � ;� ��` Q . ;� � � �• j (�� i t� � yr . � rY� �J�?t�-� �z �tZ. �J�:- : r�� ` �:� f � ...� °�,� , , ;�;� � , , -> -; � /yl�� %'�ra � �,R/�/- ,��f//� TT _--�-,�, � ��; `�;� . ��s�'" °'� � � :-�a : �Py .� c<-aC�--e -- � �� l ��,��.�: �. . � . .� • .. a ,� . o � � � � H ( L �� ` � J C ` � a � M -3E—�� I � E C � � p t C V N � O — � 1 � C < < � ^ o-'o � ° \ � T N —.c< "--"°.�lY kIV38 3J1F7M . — m� 9 m v � 0 � i O w 6 - M N ~- M �h M �! � A N� O1 �� p � 1� _ a.e..,.,.,..�..,. A.___'__� �t � � o m � _ 3 � O -J N - J � � � � � � M � w '� � � U � N P � n,• �� m I N o � °°— v � m Me� , 9L'4 �� a v 1 � _ � �� N � T �[� � W N � W t�i � i� U �p O �° ° a �� r � � � m � .+.. ;. m5 f5'4S « -� 6 - ; �� __,.�_ J .. �`' sc � .Wy e � . �as R ��o U m ' e a �1 3 � �� . � f� g.,q � � � Y Q W �i w -�_.�� ^ V l 3 m a F � m ` o 0 F f/�I K ~ �� ' n �o m w Y ` e � m r� � 4� O j m V1 w� � o � m m o � o s o a �p, - e a�. c q C� m( V� m m �"'� m o m o c c c. `m m t., tn a o'o 'o o m N c O qq 6 � E E E E � r m . m m m o 0 o m`o a a g O��Nyf/1fnNN3 •O��O@O;�I, I � � ✓ ✓ �- rn.�+ s 5 � Q V y p C QI V G 6� � s� o � � J d O `�F= In T H O � r- 3a� o � O m Q m � � MZr � N 6 Y N 2 i n j � a m Y � � O i� � � � J Q O. Nw C ~ U z 0 � y O � � Y � o ¢� L o .._' ' N 0m N�" L 2.,, � 7 O Y ¢ r .= a o m� 0 o Y m` t- M -.�. V Jw�+� ��r c rn� N � m �_ C J O � 3 � 3 5 V y 0 t m 1A Q D w ¢ O a w * a o- V\ � o a � -� v� ° Z �,�- � 0 mw�� m ro > �, o Cc 1 S o � m m N � Z � � 0 O N N p a Y h f � N t�[J � � a � y a � �N � N m t� N � d N �" D z � � � � N � � P a t ((� N � n o H ` O m � N �m Q y L ° J LL � � x � N M v a o s w m � c v o' X o 3 � o m n` m w v�' mE �� o �m'� � � o `o � � v ° a 3 U� N 4 � C O L � � N N O � Q O �w 6� U m N� Y O m E 2r�. m m w 0 0 C U N N p � � > p_ D� O d C C 0 o m m °� O a z¢wo w° •' N yj � Y Y N W } } O � O O � � O O U 0 �> O � p � wm �+�,� u_ E�� m�yao �V� C�i L �Q o may c o o�oo E m m9� � � �N3t a � o v m�� m�.°o ., m . rn>o° 'ov�m `o, y a�v`�D V � }; W �N m % 90 = �O 6 Jym � c 4C � mv � c.cpdc`mia _m- �p mo �0E+-�� LN P N N Nm NJ �i�ti0 m�q mc �„ a �5 oo. w �. m �ma c � m��3 v = 'o�`o 00 �'s.E ��n�y `o,.�Lt 6 ��w». �»�.� o�.. � o m N � p� O L t • L � % OV WtJy� ` 0° -6 °'v w v o �mws LC y O� .. o•-. a m+-�-t L m— m m �6�vN F N O> O ;�� - al� �ll� PROPERTY WITHIiV 350 FEEl' OF PARCEL: 811 WHITE BEAR AVE�lUE NORTH �-��_��`��-.~�'--' i0��0I d� I =-�'�I I : N W � �REATED BY LI EP S � o� ��8 ,�� ° � � m � � �a. � j ,� �,...: --- —,�� CTTTZEN P�RTTCIPATT(aN PLAI�IVIIVC'., pISTRICTS 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. �. 9. 10. 11. i2. 13. 14. 15. lo. 17. SUNRAY HAZET, PARK ��[V�EN-PiZOSPERITI' HILLCREST WES"T SST)E DAYTt}N'S BLUFF PAYNf: l'�IALEN NORTH EI�TI? - THOMP,S-DtiLE SU�iI�rfIT-17NIVE22SITY . � zNESl SEVEl�1'�TI CO�IO �IAML.R3E-i9IIDW.4Y S'I'. ANTHO�Y PA?tK " MERRIAII�I i'ARK-LEn"INCTflN I3A1�ttI,II�TE-SrIELI.ING I�hiLINE MACALESTER CrRQVELANI; • HIGI-�.AND ,\ SLJ�IMTI' HILL � U DO�1 TE�W�d � � �� GS—�l�s�� •. :: � GITY OF SAINT PAUL BOARDD ClF ZONING APPEALS RESOLUTIOAt ZON7NG F1LE 1\TUMBER: 05-216�90 DATE: January 3, 2006 WE�REAS, Ilya Konkov has applied £or a variance from the sirict application of the provisions of 5ection 62.231 of the Saint Paul L,egislative Code pertaiunig to the mir,im�n required rear yard setback in order Yo splif the parcel and conshuct a new single-family dwelling on the resulting vacant lot and an attached garage on the west side of the existing house in the R4 Zoning District at 811 White Bear Avenue North; and � � WHEREAS, the Saint Paul Board of Zoning Appeals conducted a public hearing on Jannary 3, 2006 pursuant to said application in accordance with the requirements of Section 64.203 of the I,egislative Code; and WE�REAS, the Saint Paul Board of Zoning Appeals based upon evidenca presented at the public hearing, as subsfantially reflected in the minutes, made the £ollowing finclings of fact: 1. The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use under the strict provisions . of the Code. This parcel was originally platted as two 40-foot wide lots. The exisYing house is located on the southem end o£the site, probably to provide street access to the house since most of the property is elevated so high above Whife Bear Avenue North. The applicant would Iike to split the property and build a new house far himself and his sister. His parents would continue to live in the existing house. This is a reasonable and permitted use of the property. The proposed new lots as currently laid out by the applicant would meet the lot size and width requirements and it is only the placement of the existing house on the site that creates the need for a variance. 2. The plight of the land owner is due to ciYCUmstances unique to this properly, and these circumstances were not created by the land owner. The elevation and contours of the properry as well as the placement of the existing house on the site are circumstauces thaf preverit the reasonable use of the property under the strict provisions of Yhe Code. These circumstances were not created by the current property owner. 3. The proposed variance is not in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Code,"and is not consistent with the heaZth, safety, comfort, morals and welfare of the inhabitants of the City • of St. Paul. Paga 1 of 3 �� • i . / • � #05-1385'12 Resolution The White Bear Avenue Sma11 Area Plan calls for widening-White Bear Avenue at East Seventh Street in order to create tum laries at the intersecfion. According to Public Works staff, 20 feet wi11 be taken froin the property on the west side of White Beaz Avenue ali the way from East Seventh Street south to Ross Avenue: This will probably result in the loss of the existing house on tivs properly since it is locatect onlq 21-feet from the e�sting street right-of-way. However, if the existing house must be removed, the remaining 60 by 117- foot pazcei would be sunilar in size to the other pazcels ion the block and large enough to build a new home. This is au unfortunate circumsfance but it is necessary in order to improve traffic and pedeshian safety at t�is busy intersection. Subdividing the property at ihis time would not be in keeping with flie spirit and intent of the Code. 4. The proposed variance will impair an adequate supply of Zight and air to adjacent property, axd alter the essential cTzaracter of the surrounding area and may unreasonabty diminish established property values within the surrounding area. � The loss of 20 feet from this parcel would make the properiy too small to accomxnodate a second house without several lazge variances. The resulting small lots would not be in keeping with the size of tke ot$er parcels in the neighborhood. Tlus in turn could have an , adverse unpact on the surrounding pmperty values. S. The vttriance, zfgranted, would not permit any use that is not permitted under the provisions of the Code for the property in the district where the affected tand is located, nos would it alter or change the zoning district etass�cation of the propesty. The requested variance, if granted, would not change or alter the zoning classificarion of the property. 6. The request for variance is not based primarily on a desire to increase the value or income � potential of the parcel of land. NOW, TFiEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Saint Paul Board of Zoning Appeals that the request to waive the provisions of Section 66231 to allow a reaz yard setback of 21 feet, in order to split this pucel and coustract a new single-family dwelling on the resulting vacant iot and an attached gazage on the west side of the eausting house on properiy located at 811 White Bear Avenue North; aud legally described as Kuhl's 2nd Addition To St. Pau1 I,ots 29 & I.ot 30 Blk 1; in accordance with the application for variance and the site plan on file with the Zoning Admiuistrator. IS HEREBYDEIVIED. �J Page 2 of 3 ' � rr ,. •. , File # OS - 216890 Rasolution J.i�IO`6�ED BY: GaYtes SECONDED BY Bogen IN FA�OR � AGAINST: o MAII.ED: January 4, 2005 TIlVIE LIMIT: No decis3on of the zoning or planning administrafor, pIanning commission, board of zoning appeals or city wuncil approving a site plan, permit, variance, or other zoning approval shal[ be valid for a period longer than fwo (2) qears, ixnless a building permit is obtained within such period and tLe erection or alteration of a building is proceeding under the terms of the decision, or the nse is established within such period by actual operatiori purs¢ant to the applicable conditions and requiremeuts of fhe approval, unless the zoning or pianning adminisfrator grants an extension not to e$ceed one (1) year. • APPEAI.: Decisions of the Board of Zaning Appeats are fmal subject to appeal to fhe City Conncil within 10 days by anyone affected by fhe decision. Bailding permifs shall not be issued after an appeai has been filed. If permits have been issued befare an appeal has been filed, then the germits are suspended and eonstrucrion sfiall cease until the City Council has made a final determination of tfie agpeal. CERTIFICATION: I, the unde'rsigned Secretary ta the Board o£ Zoning Appeals for the City of Saint Panl, Minuesota, do hereby cerfify that I Have compared the foregoing copy with tLe original record in my office; and find the same to be a true and correct copy of said originai and of the wkole thereoF, as based on approved minutes of the Saint Paul Board of Zoning Appeals meeting heid on January 3, 2006 and on record in the Office of I.icense Inspection and Environmental Protection, 8 Fourth St E, Saint Paui, Minnesota. S T P�UT. BOAIZD OF ZONING APPEALS � � J � /(�l � Debbie Crippen � Secretary to the Board � Page 3 of 3 � � . / • %. MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE SOARD OF ZONII�G APPEAL5 CITY COUNCIL CAAMBERS, 330 CITY HALL ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA, JANUARY 3, 2006 PRESENT: Mmes. Maddox, Bogen, and Morton; Messrs. Courtney, Faricy, Galles, and Wilson of the Board of Zoning Appeals; Ms. Rachel Gunderson City Attorney; Mr_ Hazdwick and Ms. Crippen of the Office of License, Inspecfions, and Environmental Frotecrion. ABSENT None The meeting was chaired by Joyce Maddox, Chair. II_ya Bonkov (#OS 216890) Sll White Bear Avenne North• A rear yazd setback variance in order to split this parcel and consuact a new single family dwelling on the resulting vacant lot and an attached gazage on the existing house. A 25 foot reaz setback is required for ffie eacisting house and a setback of 4 feet is proposed fxom the west p'roperry line for a variance of 21 feet. Mr. Hazdwick showed slides of the site and reviewed the staff report with a recommendarion for denial. No coirespondence was received opposing the variance request. No conespondence was received from District 2 regazding the variance request. The applicant ILYA KONKOV , 811 White Beaz Avenue North, was piesent. Mr. Konkov stated they have the property and had purchased it in order to build on it. He only found out about the project to widen the street when speaking to his neighbors about the lot split and house building project. He spoke to the District 2 for the Ciry Planniug they said they did not have anything l�e that and were in the decision makiug process for that project and it was not certain that project would go tluough. He requested that the Boazd approve his plan to split the lot and build a new single-family home on the lot. Viadimir Sivriver, 6480 Wayzata Blvd. stated he is ffie surveyor for this project. Mr. Sivriver stated he is asking the Boazd for support of the lot split because he has been working on a lot of lot splits this year, but this one meets all of the City requirements m grant the split. The future project to widen the street in his opinion any future project in the next five to ten yeazs should not affect this project. There was no opposition present at the hearing. Ms. Maddox requested that Mr. Hardwick offer some further input about the plans of the City if he knows. Mr. Hardwick stated that the small azea plan was adogted in 20Q1. It calls for widenin$ the road and providing turning lanes at all the busy intersections, Maryland Avenue, Seventh Street, and Minnehaha Avenue he believes, so it is going to be done. White Bear Avenue is a state aid highway or county aid road. The City has to apply through the County in order to do these grojects. Right now there is the widening of Mazyland Avenue and White Eeaz Avenue is on ihe Council Agenda. In that case they bought the entire parcel on the southwest corner of Maryland Avenue. According to Mike Clausen the Traffic Engineer, this project will be done in the next year or two probabiy. It is not a question of whether it wilI be done it is a question of when they can get the funding in line through the � i • �� AA-ADA-EEO Employer .. � • �► y � File #OS-216890 Minutes January 3, 2006 Page Two granting approval. This is a particularly unusual case in that normaily they wouId take ten feet of right of way from each side of the road. In this case ott the east side of White Bear Avenue there are commerciai buildings that aze built right up to the right of way witfi no setbacks so they cannot take ten feet without teazing dawn all these cammercial buildings. So they are going to take rivenry feet off of the west side here. Twenry feet again as mentioned in the staff findings would make this a sixry-foot deep tot with a rivenry-five rear setback and a twenty-five front setback that would leave a ten-foot wide house so it is not practical ro build on this property is it is going to be subdivided. Nor is it practical or fair to the applicant to have him go titrough the expense to build a new house on the site and then to have that house torn down or to hava the City pay the extra amount of money to teaz down the new house when the Ciry takes this right of way. At this point this project is premature untIl the Ciry decides how much of this right of way and how much of this property is going to be taken. He thinks that the applicant needs to put his pians on hold. Aearing no further testimony, Ms. Maddox closed the public poriion of tha meeting. Mr. Galles moved to deny fhe variauce and resolution based on findings 1 through 6. Ms. Bogen seconded the mozion, which passed on a roll call vote of 7-0, � Submitted by: John Hazdwick • Approved by: Gloria Bogen, Secretary 1 AA-ADA-EEO Employer C��' I h II23/2006 City Councii Cdy Hati 15 W Keliogg Boulevarci Dear City Council Official, Aeasons for Appeai: • Board of Zoning Appeais refused to provide us any time to eacplain ourreasoning in this case. 7hree minUtes which were given to us show how ignorant city of�ciais approached this vital for us issue. • Denial of the variance was supported by the aty project that does not have compiete pia�s, surveys, deadlines, and budget. Accordmg to the St Paui pianrting department "The City has NOT authorized the acquisition of aH right-of- way needed in canstruct new left tum �anes at White Bea� and 7""'. • White Sear Avenue SmaN Area pian was adopted in 2601. �nce that time oniy 3r Street intersection redevelopment was compteted. City avoids giving us any dates for possible ftrture project. It means it can take up fi+re, ten, or fit�teen years. • Knowing about Yhe existence of White Bear Rvenue Smalt Area P}an Mr. Hardwicic initial{y advised us to start lot subdivision process. We spent n�arly about $5040 preparing a0 required dauments. Oniy severai days before the Board of Zoning Appeats meeting we have leamed from our neighbors about city future plans in this area. . The proposed new lots meet eii tot size and widifi requirements. We know khat certain conditians can be piaced on rear yard setback variance in order to accommodate the signalization project in future. • Our family acquired 811 White Bear Rve properry onty with the reason to buiid additional ho�se for my sister's family and renovate the e;dssFiny one. It wouid create a place to live for three families. My sister is currenUy serving in United States Armed Forces and retuming home soon. • There are several ways ta a�ommodate our family needs and future aty pfans with minimal e�enses, pain, and legal actions for both parpes. •• i� Proposecl Solution: We undersCand Gty of St Paut intentions to widen White Bear Ave at East Seventh Street in order to create tum lar+es at the intersectian. City considers buying 20 feet from our properEy sometime in future in order M accomrrrodate this project. We wartt ta keep and canfrxm to heaith, safety, mmPort, arid spirit of our singte family neighborhood. We want ta work togetlier vdith City of St Paul on reaching mutual agreement on this issue in the nearestfuture. These are our proposed soiutions: 1. To set speciai mnditiorts to Yhe rear setback variance in order to split the parcei, construct new singlefamily dweiling further away from White Bear Ave, and accommodate possibie future Gty project. 2. To Set specia! conditions to the rear setback variance in arder to construct new single- family dweliir�g (guest home} further away from White Bear Ave, and accommadate possibie future City pmject. Lot would nat be subdivided in this case. We are asking for your understanding, professionalism and open mind! Thank you for your time and consideration. Sin[ErE�Y, Ilya Konkov �lu� � � New House -- -i.� __��__'� e�usnNC ' cnRace ` BLOGI� ; � � i � ;-;; � � S � �`�`� ' �, ,y a a s ."-« .a.3 t � ; x � , �. : : a��.. :c�y� ,.. s�i ' �T` , .-'._N..4!_.- � �-� , : '�. , 7 __-_. _.�_._ .. � �� — � � ` i. � � __ _ 1 � - i � New house plan, where the the White Bear Widening Project is not ef fected. Building dimecion 4T x 3D ft. EAST L1NE OF SEC. 27 729N R22W ' "� �,gT.r.F.'1' - _ ---. — - -' _"` Qy !_" S89°56'23'E , - �t �� - i >� ' � � � � D L�T $P��i ' , 1 . � � t; � ��,_ , ; j � � ._ i ; ; � I ( ; ' 6'. � � � � t t = � � � � ' x _ ! i � , � i ' t Y 1 � ,z ' l i f � • 1 3 �. � � r '_ _30 ` :30 ; � : " k ____ 4 _. �..�� ._.___ � S: �� t � t��an � � New Hause � __ —_' _ -- T , „-- ; BL�}�K I 1 � � � �� e °� � — >;�,`- - _�, . � EYJS7ING ; , GAftAGE � _._ ��_, : 25 � EASF UNE CF SEG D P29N R22w _-, � 7.A�T.FY_ .v:— �_ _._._ . . S89°5 6`z3'E � � � " Pri11 �JL� �, �0 LOT SFJT . � � � n � � r � � f ' � ' . ; ; ; , � � � SE'i�A UNE ' � � A� -: - � 0 V i ( �.h � 3� �'" � rs ; . w , . i wi i � °- ao� � �! � � � i N F � w � i w 1 , � �° � _�.L°� I i ' i i i ' .: � ^ a tc. '-�.- � . zs. s x , , . i { � i g � � �__ ". 2i 27 � � � a.. m E'%(57IS�G o ' ^ F j + � i .$-c a i ��' si tr 'fC, HWSE! m �` , .s z,, _ a�.w` .... .:{ .� . � i ' ,� � ` � " �,-', L _ G3 � � J ' � i I a r � i Y�a. ' �"^a �� `4� �: 'F ._ ` � � � y N +� I � � � , . 4,t a.'- u �� u � ,"�' � � YHi11iP.tla tl c I . ; ��. y I � � 6 I:N � � � : I N �� . � a � r • �: :, i 1 � __ _ ' � ; .� f�l'ID01C iltt @ 65 tQS � � Z� �' � i _. � 3 � i 3t} � - - - — �' �.�. � . � . �, __. # __-__�— -- . _. k __ ,....___._ �, . A_ _.__, � � _ n.3 � w ° � BOSS AVf_ _ ' ° " . .m_..__„__-_,__—._ -__..._... ___ _..__�_ .____�_�_ °�._ `a' —�-- , � � f ; - - -- - —�� , �� { ; s. � � f � � � This plan is 10 £t, further away fram 4Vhite Hear Ave, than the F1� #1. New hbuse dimencian 4� x 2d it.. r�an �� _...__ � ____ _._ � _ _ ; � ��@W HOUS@ ��€ASr uxE oF sEa zi rzar+ r¢zw � � - - - -- zn � - _ � . - : 7�� -_ — - S89°5b`23"E � , _ „ � ��i�:��,. - - 80;08 � , � � E:CSANB ' rv . , �_ � � ' GlRAGE . i : ` � ' � PA�CELL� B �- P � �oz s�� ° � _ ____�_ � , i r( � ; �! �L�/�� , � � .. 4666 ` a j � � . � I � �, � 'V3" . �. b A 1 � � � � I �l� � �' , 1 S_�! ) I �il �,( h � 2AA O ' 1 i [� � �� Fi � � � i � _28._. o� 29 3� � t�� ' � � �_.— �n „ � ; . � � O p o Y i � � f �'I K- �'�� "s' '� � � O a� J , � �, i 3 . � g 1 �"`" � . I t � °u ,, .28.�5 � � t "+� . �, t � F �� ! � � �_'-��-� 27 2t � I , l � � � � E%ISTIl�G g --s. � - � r _`�t. : ��... py K . x' y " Z Z i� ! HWSE � ' a : t�v I � � ; � i c`5� ., v, t x w ..^_� Li � �; � � i = � i 1 i q � 5 �?�� 8� � � b .. (°� ��p/��tT q t7 1 t _ � ��.,s' '��.i �. = i� a�i .� -+-�.`- H11LSW lf f m i � ! & ; �� : I � :; q � • � � ; ; .�r,,�, �.�,.n.m�� ` � i — � �� o ' �o t— __ --k a -- t ��:�._ � - ; -�;N? � __.._w._. , ...._.__,_ .__. �; _.._,_ __. � , _._.__..._.__ y ___._____�__ � ___ �� , ° �� __ ROSS AVE. 1 '• �__.,._- ;�,--�. _.. _.�._. .._,_...� __x..._._..�-L , , y __ __ _ :, '°"�"�,. r} ..�. - ,� � ti., . __ ,� ___ _ ,��Ci „\ ` � . � .n � _ __ __ � � 1 "_ � � r : � The new dwelling *reould be build on the first 1rat�Lrrt 29) entirel�� and is in complience,. if the White flear Ave widening Project is ag- groved. New hause dimencion 32 x 32 ft. ria �� _...__ � New House EASr �N= �_ ��_ � Tz�N �`-� � ` — — --.--os :., ar� ;:;�-, — = _ "--_= _- - S89°56'23 `� � ' > .. — __.,._..�. . , _ , , ' � , � E)7571NG ( N . � � . . . ' � . GARAGE 1 �� i ___.._...»., � , 'i � BLO�K , � � 24aa ' 1 1 ' 'L4�' � � 4 �, � , � �`` � i � �� _�g_ � 29 ; �; , i Y L � o ', , w� y� r: z .�. �.� � z � x� � i j y ,. , i � ; j f � ' '`s �" � x' � ; £ �,� � � � �� ! � � j ._ I , � � 1 ' � I � � ' � , z � e , � �; �� ..:� � � i � 3. i�� #�.£ 9 e an� S� .e.�� , � �\ , j � i O ` I � N ' � � } ., j � I 9 / l � � � I � i __ _ _ �. �� 1 �o ' 30 � — � ` S � 4 __ _ � . _ —:�'�'" a ._.._,,., y _„ 'r : �.RV t ; � �.....,_ ,..._._..'_'_.�. � �..___..,_...w. �: ......_,....._..... k; __..___...,. ed .,..v.a..S � ..e. ....... ._.._ � � \ AdSS �iV�.''. " \_�' r '�� ,....�........_.��..�._.._._..�_..,..._._....._.......�, y �__�__._�...��__e_�,__._...,:z.-�._ „ __i,..�e.;.��_._ -.,� _. _— ? � C:d � � - , --- - .� - - '--.�-�'' i \ � � ( � i - � � ; � �— H�re, is when the house is built on the remaining one and a half Iat, after the appraved City project, and after existing hc�use has h�en fl�malished.