192332ORIGINAL TO CITY CLERK
r
CITY OF ST. PAUL
OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
COUNCIL RESOLUTION — GENERAL FORM
PRESENTED BY
COMMISSIONER .-y DATE
1
COE NCIL NO. 199- 332
RESOLVED, that Mrs. Arthur W. Hagen, 1559 Sargent
Avenue, be permitted to construct a six foot high redwood
louvre fence at the rear of the lot at 1559 Sargent Avenue,
for a distance of approximately 20 feet, to be used as -back-
ground for a flower garden, said fence to be constxbcted
under the direction and to the satisfaction of the
Commissioner of Parks, Playgrounds and Public Buildings.
Council File No. 192332 —By Robert F.
Peterson —
Resolved, That Mrs. Arthur W. Hagen,
1559 Sargent Avenue, be permitted to
construct a, six foot high redwood
louvre fence at the rear of the lot at
1559 Sargent Avenue, for a distance of
approximately 20 feet, to be used as
background for a Hower garden, said
fence to be' constructed under the di-
rect ion and to the, satisfaction of the
Commissioner of Parks, Playgrounds
and Public Buildings.
Adopted by the Council May 15, 1959.
Approved May 15, 1959.
(May 23, 1959) `
I "
i Y
T '
- MAY 15' 1959
COUNCILMEN - Adopted by the Council 19—
Yeas Nays
MAY 15 1959
DeCourcy -
Approved 19
Mortinson
Peterson 4.. Favor ��-
b Mayor
Against
Mr. President, Dillon
5M 5.58 2
OFFICE OF CITY CLERK
BUREAU OF RECORDS
386 City Hall and Court House
St. Paul 2, Minnesota
M A
CORPORA rION COVNSFZ
May 12, 1959
Mr. Louis P. Sheahan
Corporation Counsel
Building
Dear Sir:
The City Council requested that you prepare a resolution granting the
request of Mrs. Arthur W. Hagen, 1559 Sargent Ave., for permit to
install a louvre fence across the alley end of her yard, as more fully
described in the attached letter of the City Architect.
JOSEPH R. OKONESKI
City Clerk
HAROLD J. RIORDAN
Council Recorder
9")t�ejoc
Very truly yours,
L -
City Clerk
MINNESOTA
W.PLA MONT KAUFMAN _ ALFRED H. SCHROEDER
Supt. of Parks _ City Architect
,}`,WM. W.-ROONEY Bureau of Public Buildings
Deputy Commissioner 445 City Hall
I
CITY OF SAINT PAUL
Capital of Minnesota
DEPARTMENT OF
PARKS, PLAYGROUNDS AND PUBLIC BUILDINGS
545 City Hall, Zone 2
BERNARD T. HOLLAND, Commissioner
a
May 11, 1959
Hon, Council
City of Saint Paul
Gentlemen:
ROBERT A. LOBDELL
Supt, of Public Recreation
The request of Mrs. Arthur W. Hagen, 1559 Sargent Avenue,
for a permit to install a louvre fence across the alley
end of her yard was referred to this office for report.
Our inspector reports that this will be a six foot red-
wood louvre fence at the rear of the lot or a distance
of approximately 20 feet, to be used as a background for
a flower garden. It will not obstruct the view and, in
our opinion, will not be objectionable.
Therefore, it is my recommendation that the Building Bur-
eau be authorized to grant this permit for the fence.
AHS..A
Yours truly,
Alf ,ad H. Schroeder
CAVI ARCHITECT
iCX/
May 1, 1959
1559 Sargent Avenue
St. Paul 5, Minnemw.a
City Council
C/o City Clerk
Court House
St. Paul 1, Minnesota
Gentlemens
I have just been advised ty +.elephon" message from *y home that a City
Inspector called at My homy; to no* i fy aim that a ca: plaint had been mnrie
about a louver fence- installeri ecronr tie 81107 at the end of my yard.
We moved to this address on August 24, 1459. We have been improving the
property in many ways since taking possession. We did not like the view
from our yard and could see ne way of making an attractive yard unless we
could screen out the garbage cans and trash burners, eta. in the alley.
Also, we have a maroon house to put up and we enjoy our yard and like to
spend Moat of our ties there in the sunnier and we wanted some privacy.
I called a lumber company and any mailed me a fence catalog. I selected
a good redwood louver fenee*listod in the estalop and hired their fenoe
Installer to Olt it up. llott.ing -as 4811 to ms about the restrictions en
the height of the fence. 1laturally, when I aslected a mtendard style of
fence shown IS a regular fence es „.alcg I thought everything was in order.
I as marry that there has been a complaint registered. We consulted our
neishboss an both sides and, in fact, they assigted my husband in locating
the property lines and every” so"and to be very pleased with the improvr-
Ment we were making. It.Ir an ettraetive fence, well back from the alley
line, and not obstructing anyone's view wbon dr.ving end not in anyone's
way, that I can see. I juc t !c, not understand why anyone should obi set to
It.
I do now request that you p.r,r • « 1,erm1ss1cn to re4ain the fence ns Installed.
The total cost is $11[) for 15 peg" of fence and It woulc be a real harda)ilp
If we had to lower it - it wo,_1 , `Ave to to cocap: r tely remodeled - end It woL.l d
cost considerable amount to Rio to.
We cannot appear in person in your ofrice as we are leavens the city an
Mcnday, MAY 4 to aeco■pany our daughter and children who are moving to
Pueblo, Colorado. W expect U return hoar about May 15th. I an working
eight hours ■ day at the Veterans Adainistratlen, tort inning, and would
have to take anneal leave to appear in person in your office, so I would
appreciate it if you can handle the matter through this letter of explanatioo.
Very truly yours,
Mrs. Arthur W. !'ia gee r
13
;i
May 1, 1959
1559 Sargent Avenue
St. Paul 5, Minnemw.a
City Council
C/o City Clerk
Court House
St. Paul 1, Minnesota
Gentlemens
I have just been advised ty +.elephon" message from *y home that a City
Inspector called at My homy; to no* i fy aim that a ca: plaint had been mnrie
about a louver fence- installeri ecronr tie 81107 at the end of my yard.
We moved to this address on August 24, 1459. We have been improving the
property in many ways since taking possession. We did not like the view
from our yard and could see ne way of making an attractive yard unless we
could screen out the garbage cans and trash burners, eta. in the alley.
Also, we have a maroon house to put up and we enjoy our yard and like to
spend Moat of our ties there in the sunnier and we wanted some privacy.
I called a lumber company and any mailed me a fence catalog. I selected
a good redwood louver fenee*listod in the estalop and hired their fenoe
Installer to Olt it up. llott.ing -as 4811 to ms about the restrictions en
the height of the fence. 1laturally, when I aslected a mtendard style of
fence shown IS a regular fence es „.alcg I thought everything was in order.
I as marry that there has been a complaint registered. We consulted our
neishboss an both sides and, in fact, they assigted my husband in locating
the property lines and every” so"and to be very pleased with the improvr-
Ment we were making. It.Ir an ettraetive fence, well back from the alley
line, and not obstructing anyone's view wbon dr.ving end not in anyone's
way, that I can see. I juc t !c, not understand why anyone should obi set to
It.
I do now request that you p.r,r • « 1,erm1ss1cn to re4ain the fence ns Installed.
The total cost is $11[) for 15 peg" of fence and It woulc be a real harda)ilp
If we had to lower it - it wo,_1 , `Ave to to cocap: r tely remodeled - end It woL.l d
cost considerable amount to Rio to.
We cannot appear in person in your ofrice as we are leavens the city an
Mcnday, MAY 4 to aeco■pany our daughter and children who are moving to
Pueblo, Colorado. W expect U return hoar about May 15th. I an working
eight hours ■ day at the Veterans Adainistratlen, tort inning, and would
have to take anneal leave to appear in person in your office, so I would
appreciate it if you can handle the matter through this letter of explanatioo.
Very truly yours,
Mrs. Arthur W. !'ia gee r
13