10-331Council File # � ° � � �
Green Sheet # � Q �
RESOLUTION
CITY OF SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA
Presented by
_�
1 WHEREAS, Kim I�guyen, (PED Zoning File No. 09-511-754), pursuant to Leg. Code § 62.109(e), duly
2 applied for a permit to re-establish a legal nonconforming use for a duplex located at property commonly
3 known as 1784 Lafond Ave (PiN No. 332923120202) and legally described as FOREST LAWN
4 ADDITION TO ST. PAUL LOT 6 BLK 6; and
6 WHEREAS, the Zoning Committee of the Planning Commission, on December 29, 2009, duly conducted a
7 public hearing at which all persons present were given an opportunity to be heard pursuant to said
8 application in accordance with the requirements of Leg. Code §61303 and, at the close of the hearing,
9 moved to recommend approval of the said application: and
10
11 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, on 3anuary 8, 2010, based on the evidence presented to its Zoning
12 Committee at the December 29, 2009 public hearing, as substantially reflected in the record, made the
13 following findings of fact under Planning Commission File No. 10-3 which is incorporated herein by
14 reference:
15
16 "1
17
18
19
20 2.
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32 3.
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
On June 20, 2006, the property was placed on the City's vacant building list. Because the property
has been listed as vacant for more than one year, the property can only be used for a conforming
use (a single-family home) unless the Planning Commission approves a nonconforming use permit.
According to the County Assessar's records, the property was a duplex in 1928; in 1971 there was
no mention of an extra kitchen but an extra bath was noted. The use was listed as conforming until
1975 when the zoning changed from a"B" Residence district to R4 and a duplex was no longer a
conforming use. Ramsey County records indicate that the property is a two family dwelling and has
been taxed as such. However, there aze no records in the Department of Safety and Inspections of
building permits or a certificate of occupancy far a duplex, and no code compliance inspection has
taken place.
A 2006 rubbish complaint indicated that there were cabinets, metal, pipes, sheetrock and windows
on the property. This work was being done without permits and the property owner was ardered to
cease renovations until the proper permits were obtained.
Section 62.109(e) states: When a nonconforming use of a structure, or structure and land in
combination, is discontircued or ceases to exist for c� continuous period of three hundred sixty-five
(36.i) days, the planning commission may permit the reestablishment of a nonconforming use if the
commission makes the followingfindings:
(1) The structure, or structure and Zand in combination, cannot reasonably or economically be
used for a conforming purpose. This finding appeazs to be met. The applicant has stated
that the property is a duplex and has provided plans showing two units. Deconversion to a
single family home would require extensive remodeling.
�0-�3�
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62 4.
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
(2) The proposed use is equally appropriate or more appropriate to the district than the
previous nonconforming use. This finding is met. The proposed use as a duplex is the same
as the previous use as a duplex.
(3) The proposed use will not be detrimental to the existing character of development in the
immediate neighborhood or endangeY the public health, safety, or general welfare_ This
finding is met. According to the applicant this property has been a duplex in the past and its
continued use as a duplex will not be dehimental to the existing character of the
neighborhood.
(4) The proposed use is consistent with the comprehensive plan. This finding is met. The
Housing Policy Plan supports production of rental housing (Policy 53) and the Land Use
Plan supports a range of housing types (Objective 5.3). In addition, the District 11 plan
supports "the development of alternatives to single-family housing throughout the
neighborhood as opportunities arise."
(5) A notarized petition of two-thirds of the property owners wiEhin one hundred (100) feet of
the property has been submitted stating their support for the use. This condition is met.
The petition was found sufficient on December 10, 2009: 19 pazcels eliable; 13 parcels
required; 13 parcels signed.
The Planning Commission has established guidelines for applications for nonconforming use
permits for duplexes. While not themselves requirements, these guidelines lay out additional more
objective factoxs the Planning Commission wishes to consider in determining if the required
findings for granting nonconforming use permits listed in §62.109 of the Zoning Code can be made.
The Planning Commission's Duplex Conversion Guidelines state that for applications for
nonconforming use permits for duplexes in residential districts, staffwill recommend denial unless
the following guidelines are met:
A. Lot size of at Zeast 5000 square feet with a lot width or front footage of 40 feet. This
guideline is met. The property is 5,000 square feet with 40 feet of street frontage along
Lafond.
B. Gross living area, afYer completion of duplex conveYSion, of at least 1, 500 squ�re feet.
Neither unit sha11 be smaller than SOD square feet. This guideline is met. The applicant has
grovided floor plans that show 1,504 sq. ft. of gross living area and the units aze of a
sufficient size.
C. Three off-stYeet parking spaces (non-stacked) are preferred, two spaces are the required
rninimum. This guideline is met. There is a garage in the rear of the property with a single
garage door. In addition, there is room to park at least one additional vehicle on the parking
pad behind the home.
D. All remodeling workfor the duplex is on the inside of the structure unless the pdans for
exterior changes are approved by the Board of Zoning Appeals as part of the variance. This
la -�3l
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
b ideline is met. The applicant has stated that all remodeling work will take place within the
structure.
E. For the puPpose of protecting the welfare and safety of the occupants of any structure that
has been converted into a duplex without the necessary permits, a code compliance
inspection shaZl be conducted and the necessary permits obtained to bring the entire
structure into conformance with building and fire code standards; or the property owner
must, as a condition of the approval, make the necessary impr-ovements to obtain tke
necessary petmits and bring the entire sn-ucture into buildzng and fire code compliance
wathin the time specifzed in the resolution. This guideline can be met. The applicant will
need to work with the Department of Safety and Inspections regarding the certificate of
occupancy and code compliance issues.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Saint Paul Planning Commission, under the authority of
the City's Legislative Code, that the application of Kim Nguyen for Re-establisl�ment of legal
nonconforming use as a duplex at 17$4 Lafond Ave is hereby approved subject to the conditiou that the
applicant obtain a Certificate of Occupancy for two dwelling units."
WHEREAS, on or about January 19, 2010, Neal McMahon, pursuant to the provisions of Leg. Code §
61.702(a), duly filed an appeal (Zoning File No. 10-011-315) from the determination made by the
Commission in this matter and requested a hearing before the City Council far the purpose of considering
the actions taken by the Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS, acting pursuant to Leg. Code § 61.702(b) and upon notice to affected parties, a public hearing
was duly conducted by the City Council on March 3, 2010, where all interested parties were given an
opportunity to be heard; and
WHEREAS, the Council, having heard the statements made and having considered the application, the
report of staff, the record, minutes, and recommendation of the Zoning Committee and the Commission's
resolution, does hereby
RESOLVE, that the Council of the City of 5aint Paul granTs the appeal of Mr. McMahon and, accordingly,
ovex�luriis the decision of the Planning Commission in this matter, based upon the following findings of the
Council:
The Council finds enor in Planning Commission findings No.'s 3(1) and 3(3) as set forth in
Commission Resolution No. 10-3. Specifically, the Council finds that there was not sufficiently
compelling evidence presented to the Commission under finding 3(1) to demonstrate that the said
property could not reasonably or economically be used as a single-family home consistent with
the underlying zoning classification for this property, as the evidence indicated that ihe property
was once used as a single-family home. In addition, the Commission erred in its finding 3(3}.
The majority of the homes on this block are sinale-family homes as reflected by the single-family
home use classification for this property. The subj ect property was vacant for more than one year.
Under the City's ordinances, the property has now properly reverted to a single-family use
classification which is consistent with the intent of maintaining the ea7sting single-family use
classification for this neighborhood.
�o- �� /
132 AND, BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED, That the City Clerk shall immediately mail a copy of this resolution
133 to Kiru Na yen (Property Owner), Nea1 McMahon (Appellant), the Zoning Administrator and the Planning
134 Commission.
Requested by Deparhnent o£
�� ; Gp �-� �� ✓N
By� �
Apprsf�ed by the O ce of inancial ervices
By: — �� -
Adoption Certified by Council Secretary
BY� /' � i`GLGSi//
Approved �v Ma . Date � �`f �( r7
By:
Approved b ity Attomey
By: � d✓!✓ 3•� tT• /o
Approved ay for Su sy"on to Council
By:
� Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet �
• Department/Office/Council: ; Date Initiated:
10 ���/
�A_�,TyAtt°meY i 2qMAR2010 Green Sheet NO: 3103996
' ContaM Person 8 Phone: �
� Pefer Wamer
266-8710
Assign
� Must Be on Counci! Age_ nda by (Da�e); Num6er
07-APR-10 �i_,l�ivVtSl%v�:�J � For
Routing
��� Doc. Type: RESQLUTIQN ; Order
E-Document Required: Y
DocumerttCo�tact: �ulieKraus
Co�tact Phone: 2668776
I LStvAttomev � DepartmentD'uector -{� t ��
2 CitvAttomey CStvAttornev � � ���'
3 �Mayor'sO�ce I! Mavor/Assistant :.
4 'Conocil i � Citv CouucH ;
5 �'sN Clerk ,,! Ctity Clerk ' '
l.�
ToWI # of Signature Pages _(Clip All Locations for Signature)
Memorializing City Council's Mazch 3, 2010 motion granting the appeal of Neal McMahon and overhuning the decision of [he
Planning Commission in this matter to pemvt to Kim Nguyen to re-establish a legal non-confomvng use foZ a duplex located at the
property commonly known as 1784 Lafond Avenue in Saint Paul.
Recommendations: Approve (A) or Reject (R):
Planning Commission
CIB Committee
Civil Service Commission
Personal Service Contracts Must Answer the Following Questions:
1. Has this personffirtn ever worked under a conlract for this depadment?
Yes No
2. Has this persoNfirm ever been a city employee?
Yes No
3 Does this person/firm possess a skill not normally possessed by any
current city employee?
Yes No
Fxplain all yes answers on separate sheet and attach to green sheet.
Initiating Problem, Issues, Opportunity (Who, What, When, Where, Why):
The Council is required pursuant to the City Charter to have its acrions reduced to wriring either in the form of a resolution ar an
ordinance dependent upon the nahue of the matter before it. The decision of the Council in this matter required a written resolution in
order to comply with the Charter.
Advantages If Approved:
DisadvanWges If Approved:
Disadvanhages If Not Approved:
ToWI Amount of
Transaction:
Funding Source:
Financiai lnformation:
(Explain)
CosVRevenue Budgeted:
Activity Number:
March 24, 2010 11:33 AM page 1
DEPARTMEN7 OF PLANNING & 10-331
ECONOMIC DHVELOPMENT � -
Cec+(e Bedar, Drrector ���������� -
CTI`Y OF SA1NT' PAUL
Chr�stopher B Coleman, Mayor
January 25, 2010
Ms. Mary Erickson
City Council Research Office
Room 310 City Hall
Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102
Dear Ms. Erickson:
10-011-315
Neal McMahon
1754 Lafond Ave,
I would like to confirm that a public hearing before the City Council is scheduled for Wednesday,
March 3, 2010 for the following zoning case:
Zoning File Number:
File Name:
Address:
Purpose:
Appeal of Pianning Commission approval of re-esiablishment of
nonconforming use as a duplex
25WesrFourthStree[ 7elephone_65/-266-6700
SamlPaullvlN55102 FacsrmJe 6�1-218-3220
Previous Action:
Zoning Committee Recommendation: approval with condition(s), 6- 0- 0,
Planning Commission Recommendation: approved with condition(s), unanimous,
I have confirmed this day with Counciimember Stark's office. My understanding is that this
public hearing request will appear on the Council agenda on or before the February 17, 2010
City Council meeting and that you will publish notice of the hearing in the Saint Paul Legal
Ledger. Please call me at 651-266-6570 if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
��_\VV�
Sarah Zorn
City Pfanner
cc: File #: 10-011-315
Applicant/Appellant: Neal McMahon
Paul Dubruiel
Wendy Lane
Samantha Langer
Alian Torstenson
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINQ '
The Saint Paul City CouncA will con-
duct a public hearing on Wednesday, Mar-
ch 3, 2010 in the Cfty Council Cliambers,
Third Floor, City Halt-Court House, 15
West Kellogg Bovlevard, to consider the
appeai, of Neal McMahon fo a decision of
the 3�lanning Commission�approving
re-establishment of non-conforaiutg use as
a duplex at 1784 Iafond Avenue. [ZF
10-pi 1=315]
Mary Erickson
Assi&tant GYty Gbuncit Secrekary
Dated: Jarivazy 28, 2010
- (January 28]
—= 38: PAIIL LF�}AL.7.EDCER ==__ _
22231L10 - .
AN AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNRJG & 10-331 �
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENf _ n �
Cecite Bedor, Director
�r
c t.
�� �AOAA
�
� J
CTTY OF SAINT PAiTL
Chrrstopher B. Coleman, Mayor
January 25, 2010
Ms. Mary Erickson
City Council Research O�ce
Room 310 City Hall
Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102
Re; Zoning File #:
� File Name:
Address:
Purpose:
25 West Te(ephone: 651-166-6700
SaintPaul,MN55102 Facsimile:651-Z28-3220
10-011-315
Neal McMahon
1784 Lafond Ave,
Appeal of Planning Commission approvai of re-establishment of
nonconforming use as a duplex
Citv Council Hearinq: March 3, 2�10 5:3� q.m.. Citv Counci! Chambers
Staff Recommendation:
District Council:
Zoning Committee Recommendation:
Support:
Opposition:
Planning Commission
Staff Assigned:
Recommendation:
Approval with condition(s)
District 11 requested lay over
Approval with condition(s), vote: 6- 0
1 person spoke, 0 letters were received
0 people spoke, 7letters were received
Approved with condition(s}, vote: unanimous
Sarah Zorn, 651-266-6570
Attachments: Planning Commission resolution:
Planning Commission minutes,
Zoning Committee minutes,
Deadline for Action Extension Letter
Correspondence received
Staff RepoR packet
cc: Zoning File #: 10-011-315
Applicant:
City Gouncil Members
District Council: 11
Donna Drummond
Wendy Lane
Ailan Torstenson
Petes Wamer "
AN AFFIRMATIVB ACTION EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
10-331
APPLICATION FOR APPEAl.
Depmiment of Safety ¢nd Inspections
375 Jackson Sireeg Suite 220
SaintPaul, MNSSIOI-Z806
65I 266-9008
APPLICANT
�� f
�
Name /l�u+l °�r„�u�i�.�.
Address��� ���-�,c�. #��vt
City SG.�+� ��\ St. �� Zip s �0 Daytime phone t�Si-33S-C�?
Name of owner ('rf d'rfferent)
.
PROPERTY Address `�'�a'� I��:,c� �y:w�,.e P'�ri.' �,�tt7c/
LOCATION Legatdescription: �rr5�- ��.� =�e�'�r`e�v� �a Sf-. Pcv
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 decisiott
made by the
on- .J ra-,� i5�'�' , 20Qo . File number: ��'i -�/� °`7J'�
GROUNDS FOR APPEAL: F�cplain why you feel there has been an error in any requirement, permif,
decision or refusal made by an administrative official, or an error in fact, procedure or findirig made by the
Board of Zoning Appeals or the Planning Commission. (c� ���
G� 3��
�
�
C( �S
additional sheet if
ApplicanYs
Date f l9 `�°/t'City agent
� ((�
� �� i
1
•
�
10-331
• RE: Application for Appeal for Nonconforming Use Permit Application 1784 Lafond Ave.
We argue our appeal to the decision ofthe Zoning Committee based upon two esrors within the Zoning
Stafif Committee Report and therefore the commission's �ndings. The two findings in question are Fi. 3.
(3) that the proposed use wili not be detrimental to the existing character of developmeni in the
immediate neighborhood or endanger the public health, safety, or general welfare and H. 3. (5) that the
petition for two-thirds of the property owners is no 4onger adequately met.
First, the Zoning Committee Staff Report
(3J The proposed use will not be detrimental to the existing character of develapment in the
Immediate neigh6orhood or endanger the public healtfl, safety, or genera! welfare. This finding
is met. Attording to the appticonY this property has been o duplex in the past ond its continued
use as a duplex will not be detrimental to the existing character of the neighbo�hood.
We argue that the historic nature of the properly as a duplex is �ot the case and written testimony to
the board stated that the property was in fact historically (last 30+years) a single family home. The
home, built in 1900, was only stated as a duplex in 19Z8. The 1971 inspection showed that there was no
additional kitchen. Taking this fact into account along with written testimony of neighbors that states
that the property has 6een a single family home since that time, indicates that there is little reason to
believe that the home fias been a dup{ex since earlier than 1971.
The block of Lafond Avenue in question has multifamily residents on each end, on the northeast corner
• of Lafond and Wheeler as well as the southwest corner of Lafond and Wheeler. In addition, renta�
properties at on the northeastern corner of fairview and Lafond have been rental properties with
multipte tenants. These multi residency rental properties have continua�ly shown to be problems for
law enforcement, the community, and our neighborhood. Problems with multi unit residencies are
exaggerated when landlords are absentee and when landlords do not properly care for their property.
In the Iast five years of the applicanYs ownersh+p of the property it has become derelict and the burden
of its management piaced upon the city and its tax payers. This is evident by the forty eight complaints
and city work orders between the dates of June 19, 2006 and as recently as January 14, 2010. The little
work that has been done on the property by the owner has been done without permit and not up to
code. While it is not withia the Zoning CAmmittee's charge to deal with these issues, it rather shows a
habituaf befiavior of neglect, even during tfie current application, that will likely continue if allowed to
become a duplex. This neglectful behavior will certainly impact the general weil being, public health and
safety of our neighborhood.
{n addition to the neglectfu4 behavior exhibited, we as a neighborhood believe that an additional multi
unit property within the center of the btock witl exasperate an already tumultuous situation in our
neighborhood. Multi unit rentals with absentee landlords have shown to be nucleuses for criminal and
deviant behavior. Whether shootings, drug use and sales, or noise disturbances, these units absolutely
disrupt the safety and general welfare of our neighborhood. Written testimony opposing the
application echoes this argument. Unfortunately the time line forthe public hearing, notice received on
December 19�' and hearing held on December 29 did not allow for due public discourse and therefore
did not allow for due process. This was due to the timing of the hearing falling between Christmas and
New Year's Day, a time in which many neighbors that are strongiy opposed to this application we�e
• unable to attend the public hearing andJor did not receive the notice in time to make written comment.
In light of our neighborhood's inability to properly mobilize on this subject within the allotted time
frame, the Distrid Council duly requested an extension ofthe hearing. This was denied. Therefore,
10-331.
many voices of opposition to this application based upon its potential to impact the safety and general •
welfare of our neighbor were unheard. We argue that in light of these facts, that the finding of ihe
Zoning Committee tfiat the appfication "wif( nofi be detrimentat to tfie existing character ofthe
�eighborhood" is arbitrary and ppricious.
(5) A notarized petition of twathirds of the property owners within one hundred (100J feet of
the properfy has been submitted stating theirsupportfor the use. This condition is met.
The petition was found su�cient on Decem6er iQ, 2009: 19 parcels elig+ble; 33 parcels required; 13
parcels signed.
While the signatures obtained by the applicant met the staodards of the application, the applicant often
misrepresented her intentions forthe property. The result ofthis act is that many ofthe original signees
of the application since wish to remove their approval from this application. With the removal of these
signatures, tha 13 required signatures are no longer met. Rather, the attached letter with signatures
from tfie original signees as weil as fetlow neighbors in opposition to this application shows an
overwhelming opposition to the application,
•
�
�
10-331
• City Council Members;
Re: Appeai for change in zo nino of 1784 Lafond Avenue for a nonconforming use as a
duplex.
The neighbors of 1784 Lafond Avettue aze requesting the City Council to review the
appeal in regazds to the Zoning and Planning Committee's approval for a Nonconforming
Use Permit-Reestablishment application with the intent ofi the re-estabiishment of legal
nonconforming use as a duplex on stated property. It is the belief of the neigfibors that
the zoning committee ignored the concems of the District 11 Council and the local
community's request that the public hearing tre postponed untii after the holidays, We
call into particular question the finding of the Zoning Committee Staff'Report sections G,
H-3, and H-5, file # 09-511-754.
We, the undersigned neighbors, are concerned that establishment of legal nonconforming
use as a duplex of tlus property will be detrimental to the existing character of
development in the immediate neighborhood, and endanger the public health, safety, and
general welfare of the local community. As a neighborhood we aze apprehensive of the
influx of additional new rental units, undocumented rental units, and an increase itt
serious crunes such as burglary, shootings, and the sale of illicit drugs. The undersigned
thax had greviously supported the application formatly chose to rescind their previous
support.
• Regards,
�
�
10-331
City Council Members; •
Re: Appeal for change in zon�� of 1784 Lafond Avenue for a nonconforming use as a
duplex. ,
The neighbors of 1784. Lafond Avenue are requesting the City Counc"rl to review the
appeat in regards to the Zoning and Pianning Committee's approval for a Nonconforming
Use Permit-Reestablishment application with,the intent of the re-establishment of legal
nonconfortning use as a duplex on stated property. It is the belief of the neighbors that
the wning committee ignored the concerns of the Dislrict 11 Councit and the locat
community's request that the public hearing be postponed until after the hofidays_� We
cali into parbicutar quesEion f�e finding of the Zoning Committee Sta�'Report sections G,
H-3, and H-5, fite #'09-$31-'i34.
We, the undersigned neighbors, are concemed that estaUlishment of 1ega1 nonconformiug
use as a duplex of this properly will be detrimenhl to the e�sting character of
development in the immediate neighbozhood, and endanger the public health, safety, and
general welfaze of the loeal community. As a neighborhood we aFe apprehensive of the
influs of additional new rentat units, undocumented rental units, and an increase in
serious crime§ such as burglary, shootings, and the sale of illicit drugs. The undersigned
that had previously supported the applicafion formatly chose to rescind tbeir previovs
�PPo�
Regards,
Date: Printed Nattie: Si Address:
f � /i
�` 6 G' r, %^+ c N dF , a: �3 �'.3 � e u�2,
�( �r c c•.L LT: Kt � �S 1(""t-
�
�'
Permit flnline
•
`Zlre CitJ o f Saint 1aat1
��
•w��ba n nlrm��uta1 Caplbl Ciry
��Ge w
https:ilwww.stpaulonestop.co�A�NDA5/ei3trapriselStPau�...
�� ,,_ ��
���u ; fs �'"��`-' -.` `= _:.�-.
1784 LAFOND AVE -- Property Ir�formation --
PIN
332923120202
Zonina/Use
R4 / R-Duplex Legal Non-Conforming-
Vacant Building Category 2
❑
�
Information disclaimer...
HPC District
Data Disclaimer:-
The City of Saint Paul and its officials, officers, employees or agents does not warrant the accu2cy, reliability or
timeliness of any information published by this system, and shall not be held liable fnr any losses caused by
re(iance on the accu2cy, reliabiliiy or Yimefiness of such information. Portions of such i�formation may be
incorrect or not current. Any person or entity that relies on any informatio� obtained from this system does so at
his or her own risk.
List of Activity...
Number Address Description Details
09 511754 Kim Re-establishment of P4anning Commission Cases
000 00 PC Nguyen nonconforming use as Type: Nonconforming Use Permit-Reestablishment
09 070414
RSN 00 SS
OS 207455
EXC �0 RW
06 099680
VAC 00 CS
a d�plex Work Type: Duplex
Entered on: 12/02/2009
1784 Water Utility hit and PW Sewer Permit
LAFOND repair. Type: Sanitary
AVE Work Type: Repair '
Entered on: OS/13/2009
Closed on: 06/25/20�9
1784 SYN# 0806804 PW Right of Way Permit
LAEOND G�PIiER# 80631488 Type: Ezcavation
AVE INSTALL 1" WTR SVC Work Type: Utility
SX6 SiREEiNOLE Entered on: 11/24/2008�
1784 VB Monitoring SPRW Complaint Date: O6/20/2006
LAFOND Shut Off tist S1J03j08Initial Inspection: 06/19J2006
AVE �5(22(�9: Doing VB CaYegory 2- Dup{ex
major rehab work Next Inspection on or affer: 01(28/2010
without permits. Inspedor: 362
*�7/27/09 dumpster
in the back has been Inspection Resuits (most recent first):
there for awhile
without moving (don't Ol/14/2010: Garbage/Rubbish (Unaddressed)
see permit) 07/29/09 Grass/Weeds (Unaddressed)
TG&W Ietter sent, G2ss/Weeds (Unaddressed}
dumpster overflowing. VB Monitoring (Recheck)
10(27f09 StoQ a[l
BDI/OTA activity per 11/23/2009: Garbage/RUbblsh (Unaddressed)
Mike K� Matt D.hl Grass/Weeds (Unaddressed)
G2ss/Weeds(Unaddressed)
. V8 Monitnring (Recheck) �
SO/27/2009: Garbage/Aubbish (Unaddressetl)
Grass/Weeds (Unaddressetl)
GrassJWeeds (Unaddressed)
VB Monitoring {Recfieck)
Status
PC
Approved
Finaled
Canceled
Under
Review
Move
io�
'� `� 1/18/10 7:50 PM
Permit Qnline
hups://www.sqiavlo�stop.co�`B '�h`DAS/eNtraprisGStPaut._
IO/07/2009: Garbage/Rubbish (Unaddressedj
Grass/Weeds (Unaddressed)
Grass/Weeds (Unaddressed)
VB Monitoring (Recheck) ,
10/07/2009: Garbage/Rubbish (Unaddressed)
Grass/4Veeds (Unaddressed) ,
Grass/Weeds [Urtaddressed)
VB Monitoring (Recheck)
09/28/2009: Gar6age7RUbbish (Unaddressed)
Grass/Weeds (Recheck) -
Grass/Weeds (Unaddressed)
VB Monitorim� (Rcrheck)
08/182009: Garbaqe/RUbbish (Unaddressed)
G2ss/Weeds (Unaddressed)
VB Monitoring (Recheck)
08/10/2009: Garbage/RUbbish {Work Order)
Grass/Weeds (Work OMer)
VB Mon"itoring (Recheck)
06/SSR009: Garbage/RUbbish (Unaddressed)
Grass/YVeeds (Ilnatldressed)
VB Monitoring (Recheck)
'.of4
06/11/2009: GarbageJRUbbish (Work Order)
Grass/Weeds (tiVork Order)
Snow/!ce (Abated)
VB Monitnring (Recheck)
OS/28/2009: G2ss/Weeds (Unaddressed) �
Snow/Ice (Unaddressed)
VB MoniYorirn� (Recheckj .
OS/20/2009: Grass/Weeds (Summary Abatement)
Snow/ICe (Unaddressed) �
VB Monitoring (Recheck)
04/13/2009: Snow/ICe (Unaddressed)
V6 Manitoring {Recheck)
03/02/2D09: Snow/Ice (Unaddressed) -
tB Monitoring (Recheck) � -
OZ/06/2009: Snow/ICe (Work Order)
VB Monftoring (Recheck) - -
�Ol/26R009: Snow/Ice (Recheck)
VB Moniboring (Rechedq
11/19(2008: VB Monitoring (Recheck)
08/1ZR008: G2s5/VJeeds (Abated)
VB Monitortn9 CRecheck)
08J04/2008: Grass/Weeds (4VOrk Order) �
VB MoNtoring (Recheck) � .
06/12/2008: Grass/Weeds (Redteck)
VB Monitorin4 CRediedc) � � �
04/23/2008: VB Monitoring (Recheck) -
.
•
�
k(18(10 7:50 PM
Permit Ouline
•
❑
i
https://wwwstpau]onestop.co�t�1�VDA51eNtrapriseiStPau�...
Boarding/Securing (Abated)
04/17/2008: VB Monitoring (ReCheck)
03l12J2008: Snow/Ice(Abated)
VB Monitoring (RecheckJ
OS/22/2008: VB Monitoring (Summary Abatement)
12{19j2007: VB Monitoring (Recheck)
li(10/2007: Garbage/Rubbish (Abated)
G2ss/Weeds (Abated)
VB Monitoring (Recheck)
lijO512007: 6arbageJRUbbish (Work Order)
Grass)Weeds (Unaddressed)
VB Monitoring (Recheck)
11/O3/2007: Garbage/RUbbish (Unadd2ssed-Comply
By: 11/02/07)
GrasslWeeds (WOrk Order)
VB Monitoring (Recheck)
10/25/2007: Garbage/RUbbish (SUmmary Abatement)
G2ss/Weeds (Summary Abatement)
VB Monitoring (Recheck)
�9(�l/2007: VB Monitoring (Recheck)
08/13/2007: Garbage/Rubbish (Abated)
- Grass/Weeds (Abated)
VB Monitoring (Recheck)
�8(�4J2007: Garbage/Rubbish (Work Order}
Grass/Weeds (WOrk OMer)
VB Monitoring (Recheck)
07/25/2007: Garbage/Rubbish (Summary Abatement)
GrasslWeeds (SUmmary Abatement)
V6 Monitoring (Recheck)
04/18/2007: VB Monitoring (Recheck)
OAJSD/2007: VB Monitoring (Recheck)�
03/14/Z�p7: Snow/ICe (Abated)
VB Monitoring (Recheck)
eoarding/Securing (Abated)
03/D4J2007: Snow/ICe (Summary Abatement)
VB Monitoring (Recheck)
Boarding/Sewring (WOrkOrder) ,
02/22/2007: VB Monitoring (Recheck)
Boarding/Securing (SUmmary Abatement)
11/27/2006: GarbageJRubbish (Abatedj
GrassJWeeds (A6ated) "
VB Monitoring (Rechetk)
11/16/2006: Garbage/Rubbish (Work Order)
G2ssjWeeds (Work Order)
VB Monitoring (Rechxk)
F 4 1/18/10 7:SO PM
Permit Online
httpsJ/www.stpaulonesNp.cou�.A�$1�DA5/eNtrapriselStPau�:..
11/08/2006; Gress/Weeds (SUmmary Abatement)
VB Monitnring (Recheck) � •
09/20/2006:V6 MonRoring (Recheck)
OS/73R406: Garbage/RUbbish (Aba[ed)
Grass/Weeds (Abated) .
V6 Monitoring (Recheck) .
08/21/2006: Gar6age/RUbbish (Unatldressed)
Grass/Weeds (Work O.rder)
VB Monitoring (Recheck) � .
08/iQ/2006: Garbage/Rubbish (Summary Abatement)
G2ss/YYeecls j5ummary Abatement)
VB Monitoring (Recheck)
07R0/2006: Ve Monitoring (Recheck)
06/23R006: Garbage/RUbbish (Abated)
Grass/Weeds (Abated)
VS Mortitoring (Recheck)
06/19/2006: Garbage/Rubbish {Summary Abatement)
Grass/Weetls (Summary Abatement)
VB Monitoring (Recheck)
�
�
�of4
UI8/IQ 750 PM
10-331
•
�i
,
��
10-331:
�.
�
CI7IZEN PARTICIPATION RLRNNING DT57RICT5
� 1. SUNR4Y=BA7'7�LECR�EK�NT6HWOOI7 � ••
� 2.6REATER EAST S.IIIE_ . �. � .
3.41EST SID��
• _4.DAYT�N'S BLUFF ,
5: PAYNE-PHkLEN. �•� �
6.NORTN EA�D '
7 THOMAS=DAL�'
� � B.SUMMI7-UNIVERSITY � - � � S
. 4(EST� SEVEI�TH _ . .� ,1. - j(� � O � �
. 1�. OF10� • -• �t '.
• .NAMLINE-MIDWAY .'. _
� � . 12.ST. ANTHOMY :
13.MERRIAM PK.-LEkIA�GTON HAMLINE
� ' �4..GRQYELAN➢=FIACALESTER- .. - •�
- - 15.HIGHLAND �' . '
. ' .. . 96.SUMMII' NI.LG ' �
- � • 17. �OWNT6WN � . : .
,
�
�
�
I
'
�
i
. �
CITIZEN PARTICIPATP-0 DI� E{ICTS'
• _ - . ' .. - � ` ` . .
APPLICANT ' " �'! r< <�11 a'�lOn '�'� � �
PURPOSc�1��"�'�' � //��
FtLE # �G"Ol !'� �5 DATE . � ! �^` v -
PLNG. DIST 6T— MAP # ` � -
�_ .. = __ :,., � ��'
—�— _ . . ___—
LEGEN�
� zoning district boundary
� subject propeity ��
��
o . one family • -� ^ commerc
c� hvo family ♦.e e industrial
��-Q.multipiefamiiy V vacarrt
�
10-331
city of sainf paui ._ � .
� planning �eommission resolution .
�le number ,o�� . .
date ��a��mo�s , �
WHEREAS, Kim Nguyen; File # 09-511-754, has applied for Re-establishment of legal nonconforming
use as a duplex unde� the provisions of §62.109(e) of tFie Safnt Paul Legislative Code, on property
located at 1784 Lafond Ave, Parcet Idenfification Number (PIN) 332923120202, legally described as
FOREST LA1NN ADD1TiON TO ST. PAUL LOT- 6 BLK 6; an'd .
WHEREAS, the Zoning Commiftee of the Flanning Commission, on December 29, 2009, held a public
hearing at which all persons present were given. an opportunity to be heard pursuant to said application iri
accordance with fhe requirements of §61.303 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code; and
WNEREAS, ttie Saint Paui Planning Commission, based on the evidence presented_ to its Zon+ng
Committee at the public hearing,as substantialiy reflected in the minutes, made the following findings of _
fact: �
1. Ori June 20, 2006, fhe property was placed on.the Cii�?s vacant buiiding list. Because the property .
has been listed as vacant for more than one year, the property can only be used for a oonforming use
(a single-family homej� uniess the Pianning Commission approves a nonconforming use permit.
2. According to the County Assessor's records, the property was a duplex in 1928; in 1971 there was no
mention ofi an extra kitchen but an extra bath was noted. The use was listed as conforming.unfii 1975
wheri the zoning changed f�om a"B" Residence district to R4 and a duplex was no longe� a
• conforming use. Rainsey County records indicate that t[ie property is a two family dwelling and has
been taxed_ as such. However, there are no records in the Department of Safety and Inspections of
building, permits or a cerfificate of occupancy for a duplex, and no code compliance inspection has
taken place. � .
A 2006 rubbish complaint indicated that there were cabinets, metal, pipes, sheefrock and windorvs on
the proper#y. This workwas being done without pePmits and the property ownerwas ordered to cease
renovations until tHe proper permits were obtained. �
3. Section 62.109(e) states: lNhen a nonconforming vse af a strucfure, or strucfure and land in
• combination, rs discontinued or ceases to exist for a confinuous period of three hundred s&fy-five
(365) days, the planning eommrssion may permif the r•eestabiishmen# of a nonconforming use if the
commission makes the fol%wing findings:
(1J The structure, or structu� and land in combination, canndt reasonably or economically�be used-
for a conforming purpose: This finding appears fo be met. The applicanf.has stated tFiat the
property is a duplex and has.provided pfans showing two units. Deconyersion to a single family .
home would require extensive �
(2) The proposed use rs equally apprapriate o� more appropnate to the district fhan the previous.
nonconformirig use. . This finding is met. The proposed use as a duplex is the same as the _
�previous use as a duplex._ . � �. ,
� moved, by Mo�o� � . �
seconded by . � , � �
�jn favor : � , u�a��mo�s �
� against � � �
1U-331• .
Planning Commission Resolution. � ' � .
_ Zaning Fle #0�51�-754 � �
Page.2 of 2 � � - .
(3) . The proposed use wil/ not be detrimenta! to the existirzg characterof deve%pmentin the ' .
. � iminediate neighborhood orendangerthe publichealfh; safety, orgenera! welfare: This finding
� is met: According to the applicanf this property has been a duptez in the past and its confinued -
use as �a duplex wilf not be detrimenfal fo fhe'existing character of the neighborhood.
. (4J The proposed use is consistent wrfh the comprehensive plan. This finding is m,et. The Housing
Policp Plan supports production of rentathousing (Policy 5.3) and tfie Land.Use Plan supports .
.-' a range of housing fypes (Qbjec6ve 5:3), tn addi�ott, the bistricf 11 ptan supports "fhe .-
� development of_altematives fo singl�family housing throughout tfie neighborfiood as .�
� � oRPorturfifies.arise ° � _ - . .
" (5) A notarized petifion of fwo-thirds of the. properly owners �vithin hundred (100) feet of the
properfy iias been s"ubmiffed staGrig their supporf for the use. �This conditioFl is inef, .TF�e -
. � pefition was found sufficient on Decembe� 10, 2009: 19 parcels eligibte; 13 parcels required; 13
.. � .parcefs.signed. ' • . �. "
4: The Plannirig Corrimission has esfablished'guidelines for applications for nonconforming use permifs .
.. for duplexes. While not themselves requirements, #hese guiiielines lay out additional more objective
� factors the Planning Commission wishes to consider in defermining if fhe required findings for �
- gran6ng nonconforming use pertnits listed in §62:709 of ttie Zoning Code can be made. The Planning
• Commission's Duplex Coriversion Guidefines state that fo� appiications for rtonconforrning• use .�
pertnifs for dup[exes in residenfiaf disfricts, stafPwi(f recommend denial unfess the foliowing guidelines ._
are met: . - . - � .
A� L t"" f t l t 5000 fe f ifh ! t dth fro
.
. o srze o a eas square e w a o tvr or nt footage of 40 feet Th(s gu�dehne- is .� � �
� met. The property is 5,000"square feeEwith 40 feef of street frontage along Lafond. .
B. Gross lnring area, after comple5on of duplex conversipn,.ofatleast 1,500 square feeL Neither �.•
unitshalt be smallertlian 500 square fee� This guideline is met The applicant has provided
� floor ptans thaYsfiow 1,504 sq, ft. of gross iiving area arid fhe unifs are of a sufficienf size. �
_ C. : Three off-street parking spaces (non-stacked) are preferred; fwo spaces are the r'equired '�
_' ` minimum: This, guideline is met There is a garage in fhe rear of ffie propertywifh a single �
garage door. In-addifion, fhere is room to park at least one additionaf.vehicle on the parking� �
� pad behind fhe home. - • . � �-
D. ."All iemodeling work for the duplex is on the inside of the sfrUCtuie unless the plans for exferior, �
changes are approved by the Board ofZoning Appea/s as part of die variance, This guidetine � •
is met, The applicant has stated that alI remodeting work witl take place within fhe stivcture.
._ E. .. Forthe purpose ofprotec6ngthe welfa� and safety of th� bccu,oants of any shucture that has �
�. been_ converted into a duplex withput the necessary permits, a, code compliance inspection �
. sha!/ be cbnducted and fhe necessary permits obtained fo 6ring.the enti� stn�cture into � -
conformance withbuilding and fire code standarrls or the praperfy owrrer mus� as a condition -�
�� of (�e approval, make the necessar}� improvem�Rts to obtain the necessary permits and bricrg :
� � the enSre sfructure into buildrng and fire code coinpliance wid�in the Sme specified in the
'� 7esoli�tion. This guideline can be me� The applicant wit! need to xrork.with the Depa+tment of � ."
� • Safety and inspecfions regarding the cerFificate of occupancy and code compliance issues. .
NOW, THEREFORE, SE IT RESOLVED, by fhe Saint Pauf Pfanning Cori�mission, vnder the authority ofi
� fhe City's Legislative Code, fhaf the app6ca5on of IGm Nguyen for Re-esta.blishmenf of Iegal �- �
nonconfoiming use as a duplex af i 784 Lafond Ave is hereby approvsd subjecf to the condition that tlie '
applicant obfain a Certificate of Occupancy for iwo iiwelling unifs. -� ' .
� : � . .�
10-331
MINUTES OF THE ZONING COMMITTEE
Tuesday, December 29, 2009 - 3:30 p.m.
�_ City Council Chambers, 3rd Floor
City Hall and Colirt House
15 West Kellogg Boulevard
PRESENT: Commers, Donnelly-Cohen, Gordon, Kramer, Johnson, and Morton
EXCUSED: Gobdlow, Margulies
STAFF: Sarafi Zom, Samantha Langer, Pafricia James, and Peter Wamer
The meeting was chaired by Commissioner Morton.
Kim Nguyen - 09-511-754 - Re-establishment of legal nonconforming use as a duplex, 1784 Lafond
Ave, befinreen Wheeler 8� Fairyiew
Sarah Zom presenfed the staff report with a recommendation of approval with conditions for re-
establishment of legal nonconforming use as a duplex. Sarah Zorri also stated District 11 requested a lay
� over and there were 0 letters in support, and 7 letters in opposition.
At the inquiry of fhe Commissioners, Ms. Zorn confirmed that the City doesn't have a recbrd of it ever
having been a duplex. The only records that indicafe that the property is.a duplex, are with fhe County.
Kim Nguyen, the applicant, explained that the house was a dupl.ex when she purchased it. Each unit has its
� wn meters and it has been taxed as a duplex. She stated that it has been vacant for the last few years
now she is in the position to bring the property up to code and have if occupied. ;
John Brandenburg, 8071 Suchanan Street, NE, Spring Lake Park, MN, spoke in suppo�t. Mr. Brandenburg
explaineci that he is Ms. Nguyen's husband and that they had difficulties keeping the vacant property code
�ompliant, 6ut now they are financially prepared to do so. He stated that they have contacted the neighbors
over the last six months to see if there were any concems and he said they overwhelmingly supported the
duplex. Mr. Brandenburg stated that some neighbors did oppose the duplex, buf he beiieves leaving the
property vacant would bring more. of a negative impact to the neighborhood.
No one spoke in opposition.
The public hearing was ciosed.
Commissioner Stephen Gordon moved approval with conditions of the re-establishment of nonconforrning
use permit. Commissioner George Johnson seconded the motion.
The motion passed by a vote of 6-0-0.
Adopted Yeas - 6 Nays - 0 Abstained - 0
Drafted by: Submitted by: Approv�d by: .
� � �
l ��h v a La ger arah Zom �� rto�`
ording Secretary Zoning Section Chair ,,
,,:,..,.
�reCt.
�
�R�AA
czz� oF sArNr PAUL
Cfiristopher B. Colemaa, Mayor
January 21, 2010.
DkPAA1TSsNT OF PLANLIING E
SCONOMIC DEVEIAPh1EN'P
CeCiI Bedar, BireCtor
25 h�est FouztH Street
Sai.nt Paul, MN 55102
10-331 Q
Telenhone: 651-266-6700 .
FacsimiZe: 65I-228-3220
Affn: Long B Nguyen
Attn: Ms Km Nguyen Long B Nguyen
700 E Glen Avenue 431 Fllmore St NE ��
Peoria Heights MN 61616 Minneapolis MN 55413-2506 .
t2E: No6ce of Appeal of Zoning File 09-511-754, fGm tVguyen
Zoning File # 10-011�15, fGm Nguyen Appeal
Qear Ms Nguyen:
I am writing to notify you that fhe Zoning Section of the Departrnenf of Planning and
Economic Developmenf has received an applicafion from Neal McMahon et al. appealing the
Planning Commission's decision to approve a Re-establisfiment of nonconfortning iase as a
duplex on properfy located at 9 784 Lafond Ave: The Saint Pauf City Council witl conduct a
public hearing on the appeal on March 3, 201Q.
No buifding permits may tie issued, and any permits that may have been issued priorto fhe
appeal being filed are suspended, and any constrvction must cease until tfie City Council
has made a final defermina6on on the appeal,
Minnesota Statutes i5.99 requires that all city aciion on zoning applications be completed
w'rfhin 60 days of the date the applicafion is made, but allows the Ciiy to exfend this period
for an addiSona160 days (tota! of 120 days). Jn order to allow time for a City Counci! public
hearing on an appeal while meeting deadlines established by 5tate Iaw, the Ciiy of Safnt Paul
is here6y extending the deadline for acfron from January 3t, 2010 fo March 31, 2010.
P(ease confacf ine af 651-266-6570 or by e-mait at sarafi.zom@cisipauLmn.us if you fiave
ques5ons.. -
Sincerely,
E'���r,���rv��
Sarah Zom
Ciiy Planner
cc: File #: 09-511-754
Zoning Administrator
License Inspecto�
Disfrict 1.1
�
u
10-331
•
January 06, 2010
Planning Commissioner Chair;
Re: 1Vonconforming Use Permit at 1784 Lafond Avenue
We would like you to deny the nonconforming use permit application at 1784 Lafond
Avenue. We believe the chosen date, December 29, 2009, for the public hearing was
inappropriate as it was between to major holidays with many neighbors unable to attend.
Our inability to attend the scheduled public hearing did not indicate a lack of interest in
this highly contentious topic but rather exemplified this scheduling conflict. We believe
that the consequence of not attending the public hearing resulted in our written testament
not weighted accordingly. Therefore, we would like to reiterate our key concerns:
I) Postponing ofthe public hearing, as requested by neighbors and the district,
council should have occurred.
�
i
2) As per written testimony, this property has historically been a single family home
and therefore does not qualify to be reinstated as a duplex.
3) The vacant property has been in disrepair for a minimum of five years and the
owners have shown little initiative to rectify this situation. Thus resulting in an
economic and aesthetic burden upon neighbors and tax payers.
4) We believe that additional high occupancy rental properties will exasperate a
tumultuous situation with renta] properties that are negatively afFecting the well
being of our community.
5) The applicant has given misleading and conflicting information as to the intended
propeRy use when eliciting signatures for the application.
6) A minimum of 6 of the signees ofthe application are from rental or vacant
properties that have minimum interest in the daIly well being ofthe community.
7) We call into question the validity of the signature list now that the following
home owners have since rescinded theu approval due to the applicant's
misleading information given at the time of signature: Harriet Mednick 1783
Thomas Ave., Corinne Hoover 1779 Thomas Ave., Janet Campanaro 1795
Thomas Ave.
In light of the above noted concems, we again ask that the application be denied at this
time. We as owner occupants and active members ofthe community would like to see
this property continued as a single family occupancy home. Ifthe board chooses to
approve this application we as neighbors, with assistance from the district council, have
agreed to formally appeal an approved decision.
Regards,
Edgar Rudberg
7ason Given
Mark Schreifels
Harriet Mednick
1783 Lafond Ave.
1775 Lafond Ave.
1779 Lafond Ave.
1783 Thomas Ave.
-A
- - 10-331
Corinne Hoover 1779 Thomas Ave. _ •
� Janet Campanaro . 1795.Thomas Ave. ,
Siri & Ryan Brown 1806 Lafond Ave.
Nea� & Liz McMahon 1804 L�fond Ava.
- Colleen Healy 1768 Lafond Ave: ' '_
7oe Kaczynski - 1769 Lafond Ave_
Duane & Pam Weiss 1763 Lafond Ave.
;
�
� � � I
•
_ .
. .•
. �:: . , . .
•
10-331
Saint Paul Plannuig Commi,ssion
� Cify Hall Conference Centef._ _
15 Kellogg Bonlevard West
` Minutes,January 8, 2010 _
A meeting of the Planning Commission ofthe City of Saint Paul was held Friday, January 8, 2010 at
830 a.m. in the Conference Center of City Hall. "
Commissioners Mmes. Donnelly-Cohen, Faricy; Morton, Porter, Smitten, Thao, Wencl; and
Present: Messrs. Alton, Commeis, Goodlow, Johnson, Kramer, Margulies, Nelson,
Schertler, Spaulding, Ward, and Wickiser.
Commissioners Ms. *Lu, and Mr. *Gordon
Absent� �
*Excused
ALso Presentc Donna Druv�ond, Planning Directoi; Cecile Bedor, Department Director;
Patricia James, Luis Pereira, Josh Williams, Sazah Zom and'Sonja Sutler,
Deparhnent of Plarining and Economic Development staff.
L Approval of minutes December 18, 2009.
•
•
MOTTON: Cammissioner Johnson mqved approval af the minutes of December I8, 2009.
Comn:i.rsioner,Ward seconded the inotion. Tke rizotion carried unanimozisly on a voice vote.
II. Chair's Announcements
, �
Chair Alton had no announcements. ,
III. Planning Director's Annonnceuments �
Donna Dzuwiuond reported that on Wednesday, December 23 at City Council the Design .
Standazds Zoning amendments were adopted and the District 4 Plan Summary was also adopted.
On Wednesday, 7anuazy 6, 201Q the City Council had a public hearing.on proposed assessments
for streetscape improvements on University Avenue and downtown for the Central Corridor LRT
proj ect. About twenty five (25) people spoke at the hearing. There was general opposition to this
potential new taz so the Cify Council laid it over to January 20�' and asked staff to look at the cost
of poteritially delaying the assessments untiT after LRT consfructiou is completed. �_
IV. Zoning Committee : . .
SITE PLAN REV7�W —List of current applications. (Tom Beaclg 651/266-9086) ,
I3one. . '
. 1
�
Q
. . . _ - . 1Q-33Y . :
NEW BIISINESS � � . . .
#09-425-531 Eastem.Hei ts tlnuoco — Conditional Use Peimit for auto convenience market with '
Whit A .
accessory car wash. 1770 OId Hudson Road, SW comer at� e Bear vanue. .
(Luis Pereirg 65I/266-659I) � - -
M07T01�I: Comrriisszoner Mor[on maved ihe Zaiung Co�Lee's recotmneizdatimi to apprave
�the conditional use per�nif sirbjecf fo arlditiarial eondikaas The trioYion cm�ried unanimously '
an a voice vote. - � .
#09-425-707 Carl Hanson — Conditional Use Permit for outdoornsed auto sales: 605 Como �
Avenue, 8E comer at Fmut (.Iosh �illiams;; 651/266-6659); -.
iVIOTION: Conmru•sionertLlartan maved fheZon.fag Committee's recommeridation to apprave
tfie conditioaal use permit subjed fn additianal conilitinns. _ The motian carried imm�imously
an a voice vof�
, #091F24-870'Gree Brendemuehl —Re-establisUment of legal nonconforming use as a 4-plex. _'
' 267 Front Avenue, between Matilda & Cmltier; (Sara Zorn, 65If266.6570) �
MOTION: Coraiinissioner tYlorton moved the Zoning Comrnif[ee's recommendation to -'
� approve the establishment of Iegal nnncanfornumg use of fwo (2) rocitr. . . � .
� Commissionet Kramer said thathe was not sure tlrat the Zoning'Gommittee's ilecision is the _.
best decision: The' applicauf proposes to purchase the property and wants to homestead tfie.
properfy. .The applicant is interested in doing the necessary rehabilitation Eo bring it up to
standards, but onIy two units will not worlc. So if it is approved as a duplex, nothing is gomg
to happen. The commtmity council organizer testified that if nothing bappens, 4he building
will deteriorate and eventiially be torn down: That is not fhe rigIit solution wfien there is ,
someone wilIing to make a sig�ificant in"vestment and has agreed to a condition on the �-
permit that one of the units is owner-occupied. Commissioner Ki�amer poinfed out fhat every
single.one of tfie s�srounding neigfibors signed the nonconfornung use petition for a 4-plex,-
- - and there was absoluteIy ao testimony from anyone adjacent to the property'or within the
natice azea ffiat was opposed to the permit The cozumimity council's decision was made �
through email and the app&caat did not fiave an oppoz[imity to taRc to ttie commuuity
cotincil._ He thinks this case.should be retumed back fo the Zoning Committe� to see if fhere
is some way to figure out how to alIow rehabilitatioa of the property that respects tlie
neighbothood . . .
Ci�air Alton noted a packet pfmaterials siibmztted to"the PIanning Co�.�isSion that appeazs _
�" to be informatibn fhat was not m fro�t bft�e Zoning Cominiitee, which aLso may be a basis ._
foi referring it back to the Zoning Committee. �. �, ;
Commissioaer Johnsbn said that he h2s given this some consideration'�d perhaps send'mg it
" back fbr reconsiderafion would be appropriate in light of the special crrc�stances.: .
MOTTON: Comnrissioner �ramer moved [n contsriue this mauer and refer the ease back to the
�._ Zoning Corrrmutee for f uw�tlxer public &earing with.ihe condition that the applicant waives the �.
' � 2 " ' . • - '
�
e
!
I
_ . i
�� �
- �
a
�
.
10-331
time reqzdremexts of Seckon,15.99. Co�am:issioner Ward seconded the mottan. The motian
carried rmaaimousfy on a voice vote
#09-511-754 Kim Neuven — F2�estabIishment of legal nonconforming use as a duplex 1784
Lafond Avenue, between WheeIer & Fairview. (Scmah Zorn, 65I/266-6570)
Upon a question from Commissioner Thao, Commissioner Morton stated that the applicant is
the most recenfowner. - �.
There was discussion about work done on the property without birilding permifs and the
ntimber of summary abatements done by city staff: ..
�,
There was dis6ussion about a request from the Hamline-Midway Coalition requesting a
layover. :
Commissioner Morton said that tli8 Zoning Committee felt tfiat they had the information
they needed Yo make a decision.
Commissioner Commers stated that the Community Conncil and Early Notification
subscribezs were notified shortly after the application was received in eazly December, and
the flearing was held 3!z weeks later, which is'enough time to have met and made some
decisions aboutthe application.
MOTION: CommisszanerMorton moyed the Zoxing Committee's recommendation to approve
the establishmext of legal noxconformiizg use status subjecf to additional conditiqns. ?7ie ..
motion cairied uxanimously on a voice vota
#09-423-996 Wal�reensBi� Top Midwa�Center — Conditional Use Permit for drive through
sales and service for a pliamiacy. 1460 Avenue West, corner of Snelling at _
Shields. (Sarah Zarn, 65I/255-6570) . '
There was discussion about the firiure for this lype Qf use along flie Central Corridor.
Donna Drummoncl, Planniug Director; added that this is a transition period, aud the staff is
working right now on some proposed recommendations for ahanges to the zoning aode. These .
changes will lead to revised regulations for the azeas azound LRT stations. One of the uses being
intemally'debated is whether drive through services aze appropriate neaz LRT stations.
: . V.
•
MOTTON: Corrvnissioner Morton moved the Zoning Corrzmittee's recnmmendatidri to approve
the canditionat use permiG The motiDn carried unanimousty ori a voice vote.
Commissioner Morton announced the items on the agenda for the nea�t 7�ning Committee
mee{ing on Thursday, January 14, 2010.
Comprehensive Planning Committee -
Chair ponnBlly-Cohen had no report. .
' . ." ' g :
@
� :.� �� .
. . . 10-331 . .
' � VL Neighborhoad and Cnxcent Planning Committee : � . � �
Cba.ir WencI reported that the 7anuary 13�' meeting has been cancelled. ._ _ � �
VIL . Enerev-Innovation'Corridor - Guest presentatioa by :Tohn I. Nlarshall,. Manager, Communiiy & .
I;ocal Goveinmen# Relations at Xcel Energy. ' -
- i . • ,.
_'. Mr. John Marshal1,1V1anager of Com�unity & I.oca1 Govemment Relations at Xcel Energy, -
provided some backgrouad in�ormation about himself. He introduced a colleague who was '
attending Qaith hun, Ms. 3.aiu'aMcCazten, Regional Vice President at Escel Energy. Mr.
Marskiall gaye a power poinY presenfatioa on the Energy Innovation Corridoi initiative. He said .
that Xcel Enezgy serves eight (8) states, and they are broken up into a couple of operating entities.
One that is'very large is. called �SP IVfinnesota. The 'service tertitozies include Nfinnesota,l�3 orth .
' and South Dakota: Mr. Marshall tallced about the intention ofthe EnergrInnovation Coffidor, .
- wIuch is to �develop a fust-of-its-ldnd clean energy and.transportation model m an estaUlished _ �
urban center itt the LTpper Midwest. The intent is to create an innovative sliowcase a[ong CenixaI
Comdor- Lighf Rail Transit line. � . ' : - ' �
He said tbzf over the last two (2) yeazs an-8xciting collaliorative of partners developed vision. t- �
_ 3hey received supportive legislative and reguiatory Ieaderslup, because the stafe appreciates fha ... +
� � collaboiafive vision of the partnership aud what it's intending tb create. Mr. Marshall talked i
about wfio tfie partaets aze and ffieir role"s.- He showed a diagram of ti�e show case area, which is
- ttie area within'/< mile of the proposed Central Gorridor LRT right-of-way. Fie explained the four .- `, i
key areas of ffie Energy Innovafion Coriidor: renewable emergy, energy effioiency, smart" •
fechnologies .and iransportation." These are four very differenf but related initiatives; some are I
, Yery visible and fangible and qiuckly imdersfandable, and ofhers ara not But the ones thsE are not �
_ visible aad tangible make the mostamount of difference and impact in energy savings. �
Commissioner Schertler asked about the University of Minnesota's involvement in defining �
� metrics.' W�iaf aze fhe outcomes you are irymg to accomptish,ls rt cost e$ciency, energy
efficiency? � ' I
John Marshall saiil ttiaY one of the biggest challenges is tb define'the metrics that will be used to ':
meas�se pmgress. The goaLs.are being developed by the coIlaboraiave, and Xce1 is ons member I
, ofthis collaborafive. The first goal is to'achieve 50 % lugtier levels of energy efficieucy. In terms
ofrenewable. energy, supplied or generated within tiie corridor they are.hoping to achieve 9.5 . i
. GWh. He said they have talked aboirt goals for cazbon emissions and jobs. The iJniversity af '
_ Minnesota is oontinuing to fgure out how to take these bulk metrics of consumption and �
gerieratiori and translate them into differe� formats ttzt are wnders[andable for people. This is
very.complex ant3 te�hnical, and, if yon get too detailed you will lose whatyou're irying to _ , ,
' explain. . . � .
�' . , . _ -. .
Commissioner Ward said in terms of communitx involvemen� in kis experience people �ith low
iacomes are al�yays.concerned about mbney, eneFgy and fiow they can spend less. .�Yhat is Xcel .
' going to do along the thatll_ mile stretch on University Avenue where a lot ofthe�e .: '
� neighborhoods are Slled with people $om multiple ctiltures? How can yoit,g� the information '. .-
out there when the people 1alking to them onty speak English? .
_' •.� - Mr. MuslialI said tfiat in Saint Paul pazticulazly that stretch of the corridoz is mtensely diverse .�
' . . ` . . _ .. . .. . 4 . - . .. - -. . - , - . .
10-331
�J
•
�
and nof just from an ethnicity stand poin� but aLso from a fiousing stock stand point, and with
` small businesses; large busmesses, etc. On the upside, Saint Pau1 has a very compiehensive
°� community base, be it the CDCs, the District Coimcils, and so forth. Each specific azea is
different and it is going to take a lot of hands on work and understanding and tailoring the .
message for the differenf audierices.- :.
Commissioner Spaulding asked about the energy efficiency benefrts of densiry because laz'ger
buildings aze inherently much more energy efficien£ He asked whether there has been an attempt
to quanrify thaf along the corridor to demonstrate-some of the benefits of increased density.
There is a resistance to density in some communities and this would be another way to
demonstrate the benefits of densiry.
Mr. Mazshall said that BOMA intemational had done some studies, and Matt Anfang brought
them into a meeting a couple of months back. IBM is doing a marketing piece called Build a
Smarter Planet. Bnt specific conversations about this topic haven't come up as part of the Energy
Innovation Comdor, but could in the future. Meetings of the partners aze strongly attended and
everyone is really engaged in working to advance these concepts. Maybe some of these types of
topics will be.addressed in this forum in the future. .
Commissloner Porter asked about the creation of local jobs and any efforts to connect
communities of color witli the job opportunities that are coaung out ofthese efforts, such.as the
I�ome Energy Squad.
Mr. Mushall said 'm regatds to the job creation, measuring jobs .impact has been on8 ofthe
tougher areas the subgroup wotking on metdcs has tried to address. in terms of the Home Energy
Squad and people of color, he is not certain. '�he NEC is the actual non-profit located at Dale and'
Selby that is implementing this program: He assumes that since they aze a non-profit funded by.
pub&c grants that there aze certain sttings tied to ttiose dollazs that require equal opporLunity
policies. In concluding, he pointed out their web site: www.enerevinnovadoncomdor.com ,
which includes more details on what he, coveied in his presentation.
VIII. Communications Cvmmittee
Commissioner Smitten reported that the Communications Committee is starting to work on the
annualreport. ,
7X.. Task Force Reports .
Commissioner Faticy announced that there will be a Ford Task Force meeting on Monday,
January 1 l, 2010 from 7:00 — 8:45 p.m. at the Hillcrest Reereation Center in the community
, room,.1970 Ford Pazkway. There will be two topics, one is the report on the Green
Manufacturing Study for the site and the second is planning for open space as part of a potential
site redevelopment.
- Commissioner Thao announced the Western, Hamline, Victoria Station Area Pianning Ste�ring
Comriuttee will be meeting on Wednesday, 7anuary 27�' from 4:00 — 6:00 p.m. at the Central
Corridor Resource Center.'.
5 .. . _ . -
� . � . `. 10.332 - :
. . . ,.
.
' ' � .. . . . . � . - . = •.
� Recorded and prepared by : .
Sonja BuYler, PIanning_Comtriission Secretaiy . .
Planning and Economic Development Depar�ent, • �
City of Saiut Paul , . ' . �
. Respectfullysubmitted, . - a �1� � .
- ��� .
..
' . ��, U �,�,.�"� � G2� �"`� t��� �I?��
° Donna prummond _ , Marilyn P �rtes � ,,/
- . Planning Direbfor . . Secretary�,ofi`he Plannmg Commission. . . -
. . . . _ . . I
- : �
, . � .,� , �
, : i
Butler�planniag commissionU�uary 22, 20�10: . - ... . . � . � � � � .
. . . . ' . . . � ' -� . . ` .. . . � . . . '. .. .. . . �
, .. . . . ' , _ . . . t ' - _ . ' .. - , _ � , . . � '
� , ...� -" .. ' .\ .. . .'.� � ..' ; ..' � .,_ . ..- �
' . . . . . ' : - � . . � . ' .' $ _ .' . . - ' . - , . � . ' ' ' _
10-331
ZONING COMMITTEE STAFF REPORT .
• 1. FILE NAME: Kim Nguyen FILE # 09-511-754
2. APPLICANT: Kim Nguyen HEARING DATE: December 29, 2009
3. NPE OF APPLICATION: Nonconforming Use Permit-Reestablishment
4. LOCATION: 1784 Lafond Ave, between Wheeler & Fairview
5. PIN & LEGAL DESCRIPTION: 332923120202; FOREST LAWN ADDITION TO ST. PAUL LOT
6 BLK 6
6. PLANNING DISTRICT: 11
7. ZONING CODE REFERENCE: §62.109(d) PRESENT ZONING: R4
8. STAFF REPORT DATE: December 22, 2009 BY: Sarah Zorn
9. DATE RECEIVED: December 2, 20D9 60-DAY DEADLINE FOR ACTION: January 31, 2010
A. PURPOSE: Re-establishment of legal nonconforming use as a duplex
B. PARCEL SIZE: 40 ft. (Lafond) X 125 ft. = 5,000 sq. ft. Including one half the alley results in a total
lot area for density purposes of 5,300 sq. ft.
C. EXISTING LAND USE: R-Duplex
D. SURROUNDING LAND USE:
North: Single family residential (R4)
East: Single family residential (R4)
South: Single and multifamily residential (RM2)
West: Single family residential (R4) and industriai uses (11)
• E. ZONING CODE CITATION: §62.109(d) lists the conditions under which the Planning Commission
may grant a permit to re-establish a nonconforming use.
F. HISTORY/DISCUSSION: There is no zoning history specific to this property.
G. DISTRICT COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION: The District 11 Council has requested that the public
hearing be postponed to allaw for neighbors to meet and comment.
H. FINDINGS:
1. On June 20, 2006, the property was placed on the City's vacant building list. Because the
property has been listed as vacant for more than one year, the property can only be used for a
conforming use (a single-family home) unless the Planning Commission approves a
nonconforming use permit.
2. According to the County Assesso�s records, the property was a duplex in 1928; in 1971 there
was no mention of an extra kitchen but an extra bath was noted. The use was listed as
conforming until 1975 when the zoning changed from a"B" Residence district to R4 and a
duplex was no longer a conforming use. Ramsey County records indicate that the property is a
two family dwelling and has been taxed as such. HoweGer, there are no records in the
Department of Safety and Inspections of building permits or a certificate of occupancy for a
duplex, and no code compliance inspection has taken place.
A 2006 rubbish complaint indicated that there were cabinets, metai, pipes, sheetrock and
windows on the property. Tfiis work was being done.without permits and the property owner
was ordered to cease renovations until the proper permits were obtained.
3. Section 62.109(e) states: When a nonconforming use of a structure, or structu�e and land in
comkination, is discontinued or ceases to exisf for a confinuous period of three hundred sixty-
• five (365J days, the planning commission may permit the reestablishment of a nonconforming
use if the commission makes the following fndings:
(1J The structure, or structure and land in combination, cannot reasonably or economically be
used for a conforming purpose. This finding appears to be met. The applicant has stated
�10-331
Zoning File # 09511-754
Zoning Committes Sfaff Report
Page 2
that the properfy is a duplex and has provided plans showing two units. Deconversion to a
singie family home would require extensive remodeling.
(2J Tf�e proposed use is equally appropriafe or more appropriafe fo the district than the
previous nonconforming use. This finding is met. The proposed use as a duplex is the
same as the previous use as a duplex.
(3) The proposed use will not be detrimental to the existing characfer of development in fhe
immediate neighborhood or endanger the public health, safety, orgeneral welfare. This
finding is met According #o the applicant this property has been a duplex in the past and its
continued use as a duplex wiil not be detrimental to the existing character of the
neighborhood. �
(4) The proposed use is consistent with the comprehensive plan. This finding is met. The
Housing Po(icy Plan supports production of rentaf housing (Poiicy 5.3) and the Land Use
Plan supports a range of housing types (Objective 5.3). In addition, the District 11 plan
sUpports "the development of altematives to single-family housing throughout the
neighborhood as opportunities arise."
•
(5) A notarized petition of two-thirds of the proper(y owners wifhin ane hundred (100) feet of
tl�e property has beerr submifted stating their support for the use. This condition is met.
Tfie petifion was found sufficient on December 1Q, 2009: 19 parcels eligible; 13 parcets
required; 13 parcels signed.
4. The Planning Commission has established guidelines for applications for nonconforming use
permifs for duptexes. While not themsefves requirements, ffiese guidelines lay out additional
more objective factors the Planning Commission wishes to consider in determining if the •
required findings for granting nonconforming use_ permits listed in §62.109 of the Zoning Code
can be made. The Planning Commission's Duplex Conversion Guidelines state that for
applications for nonconforming use permits for dupiexes in residential distriets, staff will
recommend denial unless the following guidelines are met:
A. Lot size of at least 5000 square feet with a lot width or front footage of 40 feet. This
guideline is met. The property is 5,000 square feet with 40 feet of street frontage along
Lafond.
8_ Gross living area, after completion of duplex conversion, of atleast 1,50D square feet.
Neifher unit shall be smaller than 500 square feet. This guideline is met. The applicant
has provided fioor plans that show 1,504 sq. ft. of gross tiving area and the units are of "
a sufficient size.
C. Three off-street parking spaces (non-stacked) are preferred; two spaces are the
required minimum. This guideline is met. There is a garage in the rear of the property
with a single garage door. In addition, there is room to park at least one additional
vehide on the parking pad behind the home.
D. AIi remodeling work for the duplex is on the inside of the stnrcture unless the plans for
exterior changes are approved by the Board of Zoning Appeals as part of the Yariance.
This guideline is met. Tfie"appficanf has sfated that a(I remode(ing work wi(I take p(ace
within the structure.
E. . For the purpose of protecting the welfare and safety of the occupants of any stnrcture
that has been convertea' into a duplex without the necessary permits, a code
compliance inspecfion shall be conducted and the necessary perrriifs obtained to bring
the entire starcture into conformance with building and fire code standards; or the .
property owner must, as.a condition of the approval, make the necessary •
improvements fo obtain the r�ecessary permits and bring the entire structure into
building and 6re code compliance within fhe time specfied in the reso/ution. This
� guideline can be met. The applicant wiil need to work with the Department of Safety
10-331
Zoning File # 09-511-754
• Zoning Committee Staff Report
Page 3
and Inspections regarding the certificate of occupancy and code compliance issues.
I. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Based on the findings above, stafF recommends approval of re-
establishing legal nonconforming use as a duplex subject to the condition that the applicant
obtain a Certificate of Occupancy for two dwelling units.
•
•
10-331
NONCONFORMING USE PERMIT APPLICATION
Department of Planning and Economic Development
Zoning SecGon
f 400 City Hall Mnex
25 WesfFourth SUeet
SaintPaul,MN 55f02-i634
(65i) 266-6589
Name
APPLICANT
PROPERTY
LOCATION
Address
�. � _ �
Z
•
City ��+'�_ `t ��r//St:�J` 1�— Zip (t (� ' Daytime Phone 612
Name of Owner {if different) � �� '�� � ��
Contact Person ('rf differeni) IC� ����"f E� Phone ��2� 3� 2' S
Address/Location �� �'f �'� V�X f'�VG
Legal Description ��� j� �w� � Z 1 �Qk�e- ��� � F'��— G4.i.' � F't
�G �l9 (� '� �T 1�� �D�" 6 6 �k 6 CurrentZoning � �'
(attach additional sheet if n�essary)
TYPE OF PERMR: Application is hereby made for a Nonconforming Use Permii under provisions ot Chapter 62,
Section 109 of the Zoning Code:
The permit is for: ❑
�
❑
❑
Change from one nonconforming use to anofher (para. c}
Re-establishment of a nonconforming use vacant for more than one year (para. e)
Establishment of legal nonconforming use status for use in existence at least 10 years (para. a)
Enlargemerrt of a nonconforming use (para d)
SUPPORTING INFORMATION: Supply the information that is applicable to your type of permft._ Nr
Preserrt/Past Use �� �Iwl �1N u��� i�tsyn � � � � � V
Proposed Use �� "I/,FF'VI,i,A.�. �lA(F�� IY�R.I. GC5 o1c� �� bY(GXr {2t�,��v�- '��� ^ 2 '
Attach additional sheets if necessary
C (�
� �D2
Attachments as required ❑ Site Plan
AppliqnYs Signature
permit
� Consent Petition
►�� . •-
Agent
567►
•
0
(��•
/� iV
��� r
10-331
• October 28, 2009
Department of Planning and Economic Development
Zoning Section
140� City Hall Annex
25 VJ 4`� Street
St. Paul, NIN 55102-1634
To Whom Tt May Concern:
Attached you will find the Nonconfomung Use Permit Applacation and the notarized
Consent of Adjoining Property Owners for a Nonconforxning Use Permit (please note that
T have this document notarized direcfly on it), as well as the appropriate filing fee.
I did not include the site plan, as I do not propose the change the structure of the house.
This house was originally constructed as a two family dwelling (up and down.) Each unit
has rivo bedrooms, a bathroom, kitchen, and its own private entry from the front on the
6ottom unit and the rear on the top unit.
The house has been vacant far a long rime, as the zesult, it was re-zoned to a single fanuly
home. We would like to finish repairing this properry, and bring the house to code
coxnpliance, and move iu as soon as possible (I am currently renting}. Since it was
� originally built as a duplex, if we are required to change the structural design of this
home to make it to a single family home it would be a major change in the building
layout and struc#ure. This will be a significant financial hardship and would considerably
increase the tisne it would require to get it back into condition so it can be lived in.
I recognize that this is a good neighborhood, and wouid like very much to be a part of it.
We would like to proceed with this project as soon as possible. Once this project is
complete, it will be a nice addifion to the neighborhood. I hope you will grant us the
pernussion to re-estabIish this property to be a duplex as it was originally designed and
constructed.
I am awaiting your decision before I proceed with ordering the code compliance
inspection to start the project.
Very sincerely,
,}��
r � N � y �
�
, 10-331
CITY OF SAINT PAUL
CONSENT OF ADJOIlVING PROPEI2TY OWNERS FOR A
NONCONFOI2MING USE PERMIT
���E'1VEp� :
�'C - 2 200g •
RTe, the undersigned, owners of the properiy within 100 feet of the subject property acknowledge
that we have been presented with the following.
�
A copy bf the app2ication of ��v c N �fl� �/ �(�
(name of applicaat)
toestabtisfia lWv �'AM11,� UWEt-�INCTS —�S P�yt�Cll_T �2dM btz(6Ctstkti
(ProPosed use)
located at '�� QJ �' ���V W� �C�1P- �.S'( ��iLU. � h'� t� ��1 �� .
(address of properry)
requiring a nonconfoffiing vse permit, along with any relevant site pians, cliagrams, or other
documentafion_
We consent to the approval of this application as it was explained to us by the applicant or
his/her representative,
ADDBESS OR PIN
� � �s���A��
a t��'f L�,�'�,� � �
� ;�?�'/ � ,� �r
� _ I�7.> ��s �
S f '� _'"� "
i� � `� 1(.�'
6 ; , t 7�3
7 1?S� 1�'7i
g t�
� �
ri 1 `l q
7�n
rz�
RECORD OWNER
�
, u,,,¢
z
n�� i
J/3'o
'�— �-�
�- j� G�' ,
d—l3
w���
�,
�"j3 ��
�� f
,�� �
�- �3 - �9
�.r9�G�
NOTE: tYll info�ation on the upper portian of this application must be completed pri ' g et N Sl'1�L�-
signat¢ces on this p�ition. t � N�o�Public - PAinnesota
� Vi`� �yt�xO�O�-F Y�CC¢'h 1�dXu-4.I�c^ � I��SPpIC���� fM"� _ ��jj5�gxpiresJan.31.25
� q..c Li-�`J' �_I "� f1/l.2 t �� k�-i" - S<<�v,i�w�-- . `��
�`�" I,,, ` � �/�'(°r�
°'��-�` a'7w`�" �� �(A.� �6�au-rnc �O �t1 �h�' G �c�f �aa 9,
�
10-331
�
CITY OF SAINT PAUL
�'��EIVt�
�EC - 2 2009
CONSENT OF ADJOTNING PROPERTY OWNERS FOR A
NONCONFORMING USE PERNIIT
We, the undersigned, owners of the property within 100 feet of the subject property acknowledge
that we have been presented with the following:
A copy of the application of �� �`��(�-`1 �l✓1 ,
(n e applicant)
to estabIish a � wo
located
_ � OY>
roposed use)
(address of property)
requiring a nonconforming use permit, along with any relevant site plans, diagrams, or other
documentation.
We consent to the approval of t7iis application as it was explained to us by the applicant or
his/her representative.
� ADDRESS OR PIN RECORD OWNER SIGNATUBE DATE
��
.
� 9/08
NOTE: AIl information on the upper poreion of this application must be completed prior to obfaining eligible
signatures on this petition.
10=331
CITY OF SAINT PAUL
CONSENT OF ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS FOR A
NONCONFORMING USE PERMIT
F
�
DEC - 2 ;��
We, the undersigned, owners of tfie properiy within 100 feet of the subject proper[y acl�o.wledge
that we liave been presented with the following:
A copy of the application of 'C� Y�'1 � OXL3-ti1 Cli/1
(name of appli t)
to establish a
lo�atea
of pioperry)
U V �
requiang a noaconforming use permit, along with auy relevaut site plaus, diagrams, or other
documentation.
We conseaY to the appmval of this app&cation as it was eapIained to as by the applicant or
his✓her representativa _
�
'�./o�
�7
�
178�k P,a�v,.� ��c , -. Q�Q M� 5510 t-�-
—rr— r�__�-- �• �--� �yy�w�+�+++++uu.. a�c wuaYtc�at �luVl w vol'dullII}�' Cllg1D1C
Sl$�1ab1tES OII S�LS p6Li110II. _ .
10-331
�
CITY OF SAINT PAUL
CONSENT OF ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS FOR A�
�, �� vE �
�FC ,.. 2 Z4�o
NONCONFORD�IING USE PERNIIT
.
•
We, the undersigned, owners of the property within 1Q0 feet of the subject properry aclmowledge
that we have been presented with the following:
A copy of the application of !� M 1`� ���� ,
(name of applicant)
to establish a��� WIA Q�� C/� Ulv� �( Vt�� — T�`� r1 u;-� 1 l�0 hn l% (� ( O'1 �
' U
(proposed use)
locatedat ��R� ���V� �V� 1�. P/.�/-�� f�lf� ��f��,
(address of property)
requiring a nonconforming use permit, along with any relevant site plans, diagrams, or other
documentation.
We consent to the approval of this application as it was e�eplained to as by the applicant or
hisAier representative.
ADDRESS OR PIN RECORD OWNER SIGNATIJRE nA'7'k:
9/OS
_.�. _�.: .,,. uu.,uuauuu on rne upper poraon oi uus apphcahon must be completed prior to obtaining eligible
signatures on this petifion.
10-331
CI"1'Y OF SAINT PAUL
CONSENT OF AD70INING PROPERTY OWIVERS FOR A
NONCONFORIVIING USE PERMIT
i
��C�1 V �, U
DFC — 2 2��9•
We, the undersigned, owners of the property within 100 feet of the subject pzoperiy acl�owledge
that we have been presented with the following=
A copy of the application of �i ���1� ��N
(name of applicant)
to establish a
U (p}'oposed use) '
located at_ ^ ! g � �'�� �C , �- t � �� �� 1� �
(addtess of property)
reguiring a nonconforming use pe�it, along witi� any relevant site plans, diagrdms, or other
docnmentation.
We consent to the approval of this application as it was eaplained � ns bp th�applicant or-.
his/her represenhtive: - - _ _ . _ .. . __ ..- --
_ ... _
ADDRESS OR PIN RECORD O�VNER SIGNATITRE __ .._ DATE -
R
•
'
�
��s on � �.
�
10-331
�
CITY OF SAINT PAUL
AFF�AVI'I' OF PETITIONER �OR A CONDTTIONAL
USE PERMIT OR A NONCONFORMING USE
PERMIT'
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
:SS
�
� ` � N�.�.�,t�
NAME
��if V�mr�. B� 6�, I�P� µc� ��� 3
ADDRESS
�(�� �2—��7(
COUNTY OF R.AM5EY)
The peritioner, ��I `V ^ , being first duly swom, deposes and states
that the consent petitioner is i or d and believes the parties described on the consent petition
aze owners of the parcels of real estate described immediately before each name; each of the
garties descdbed or. the consen*. petition is an ewner of property within 100 feet nf the subject
property described in the petition; the consent petition contains signatures of owners of at least
two-thirds (2/3) of all eligible properties within 100 feet of the subject property desciibed in the
petition; and the consent petition was signed by each said owner and the signatures are the trne
and correct signatures of each and all of the parties so described.
Subscribed and sworn to before me this
2-''�� day of N�✓��n k-zv , 20 �'?
,�,
NOTARY PUBLIC
• DLUAB NTX00 XANG
Notary Public
Minnesota
Commission Ex Qes,lanu 3 13
TELEPHONE NUMBER
��CElVED
a�c — a zoos
� �:
10-331
CITY OF SAINT PAUL.
CONSENT OF ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS FOR A •
NONCON�ORIVIING USE PERMIT
We, the undersigned, owners of the proper[y within 100 feeY of the subject property acknowledge
that we have been presented with tfie following.
A copy of the application of �{ 1�V1 � V ��,f�1-�iV1
(name of h t)
to establish a
locate@
(address ofproperiy)
�
requiring a nonconforming use permit, aiong witfi any relevant site pIans, diagrams, or other
documentation.
We consent to the approval of this application as iY was egplained to ns by the applicaat or
hislher representative.
ADDRESS _OR PIN RECORD OWNER. SIGNATURE DATE
•
+�
�
�i��a��� on m�s pennon.
9/08
10-331
CITY OF SAIN`F PAUL
�
AFFIDAVIT OF PETITIONER FOR A CONDTTIONAL
USE PERMIT OR A NONCONFORMING USE
PERMIT
STAT'E OF NIINNF,SOTA)
:SS
•
COUNTY OF RAMSEI�
� r,�(
The petitioner, 1�� ����A�'� �1 � �r��(� .��g �t duly swom, deposes and states
that the consent petitioner is informe and lie es the pazties described on the consent petition
aze owners of the parcels of real estate described immediaYely before each name; each of the
parties described on the consent petition is an owner of property within 100 feet of the subject
property described in the petition; the consent petition contains signatuzes of owners of at least
twathirds (2/3) of all eligible properties within 100 feet of the subject property described in the
petition; and the consent petition was signed by each said owner and the signariurs aze the true
and cosect signatures of each and all of the parties so described.
4-�IM �1�6V�'� ��'�-t'��r
NAME
�1 ��1wt��� � , �te��' �� ��t�
ADDRESS
�i�- ' �� 2= �� t
TELEPHONE NUMBER
•
5u cnb ' and s �orn to before me this
day of �Q6-y�,� 2�. /
" �oFF�t41,bEN.' .
; fdef�aY.PaNson
Notary Pubr�, Shte of I�inaus
� � Commission EWira {t-09-2ittt $
�.3
9f0$
� �� � � .
' • 10-331 .
� � , �
�oNZ�i� z���zTZO�T surrzcx�ricy cx�c� s��� _
�zan*�rr� �c�rn � �n�cup �
- FIRST SiTIIMI'I'T'E� RESUB�l�iI'TTED �
DATE PETITION.SUBMITTED: �/ O` DATE PETTTION RESUBMITTED: +�-� � J .
,
DATE OFFICIALLY RECEIVED: DATE OFFICIALLY RECEIVED: ' '
PARGELS BLIGIBLE: . ` � PARCELS EL.FGIBLE:
- � •
PARCELS IZEQUIRED: - ( � PARCELS REQLiIlZED: _ ��
PARCELS SIG.NED: � . PARCELS SIGhED: . '. � �
C� �}�(.` ( • •
�p;r. -� .
_ � .
, . .
t
� � �� � ct-3—v
CAECIlED BY: ��� C ��' e DATE: - � .
. � �,,�, rt„� —�,� � r z. -r�=c� q _
. ���. � -
: ._, � . � : `�
: , � _ - . -- -. � . -� - =
10-331
•
•�
�
�
0
�
C�
N a
Nti
1-- ^
Z
7
i
O
O
�L
�1 c
� .
tr
� y
ti�
�h
j
N ,t u S at
K � @ x $
N y�j N � �
C �
F h4 �
K �
" ""'"'-..rr_"��
S �K �
om
�
ti
�
o-M
� x �+
z o�
� X �i
V �
� , x �
� m
xF�
•
��
N1IDVY?.Y
December 21, 2009
Hamline Midway Coalition
�������
oISTRICTt7COMMllNffYGOUNGL ' "
1564LAFOND,ST.PAULMN 55104 • 657.64G.1986 • www.hamlinemidwavcoalilion.orq
Sarah Zom
City of Saint Paul
Department of Planning & Economic Development
1400 City Hall Annex
25 West 4th Street
St. Paul, MN 55102
Subject: 1784 Lafond Avenne - Nanconforming Use Permit
Sazah,
The Hamline Midway Coalition (District Council 11) respectfixlly requests that the
hearing for the nonconforming use pemut at 1784 Lafond Avenue be laid over for at least
2 weeks to allow for sufficierit community review of this application.
The iiming of Yhis application is unfortunate. Local residents have only just learned
about this applicafion and the hearing scheduled for December 29. Indeed, due to
vacations, we suspect that many local residents are not yet awaze of this application.
Also, as you aze awaze, the hearing date falls in between Christmas and New Yeazs, a
time when local residents aze traveling and unable to attend a public hearing.
Given the siguficant number of citations by the City of Saint Paul at this properiy, we
believe that this case merits a thorough review by local residents, the Dishict Council,
and the City of Saint Pau1. Please consider laying this matter over.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
������. �/�
Michael Jon Olson
Executive Director
r�
�_J
i
•
10-331 Page 1 of 5
�t�t - �►l - 75�}--
Sarah Zorn - 1784 Lafond Ave. �� ��,�d,
•
From:
To:
Date:
Subject:
CC:
�
"Edgaz Rudberg"
12/21/2009 11:38 AM
1784 Lafond Ave.
"'Michael Jon - HMC"
Sarah,
I wanted to take a moment to follow up on our conversation about 1784 Lafond Ave. In regards to the historical
use of this property as a duplex, you will be or have been contacted by Duane Weiss. He has lived on this block
for 30 years and will note that the property has never been a duplex. As per our canversation, I will look
forward to your email with a digital copy of their application this afternoon. Please let me know if there are any
road blocks with this so that I may address them heads on as soon as possible. Here is a list of my concerns with
the property as a duplex:
1) The property for the last five years has been vacant and un kept going at least back to 2006 (see
complaint dates below taken from the city's website) a time in which Ms. Nguyen has owned the
property
2) The property has not been a duplex in the past and therefore the application is incorrect
3) Our neighborhood is on the precipice of decline due to economics and our neighborhood is fighting
against this. This is one of the few remaining derelict properties on our block.
4) Rental properties in our neighborhood have tended to attract problems such as narcotics, shootings,
burglaries, etc.
5) Construction on the property has been done without permit and not to code.
6) Should the property become a duplex there is little evidence that the owner will maintain the property
safely for the renters as is evidence by previous misbehavior.
Again, I request for the pub�ic hearing on this property be pushed back. This is due to the lack of time given to
our community to properly meet and prepare comment on this issue. In addition, it is occurring at an
unfortunate time between two holidays in which many of our neighbors cannot attend. I look forward to your
update on this matter. Please feel free to contact me with any questions (952) 212-6576.
Regards,
Ed Rudberg
Complaint Date: 06/20/2006
I n iti a l I n s pecti o n: 06/19/2006
VB Category 2 - Duplex
Next Inspection on or after: 12/11/2009
Inspector: 362
Inspection Results (most recent first):
11/23/2009:Garbage/Rubbish(Unaddressed)
Grass/Weeds(Unaddressed)
rass/Weeds(Unaddressed)
B Monitoring (Recheck)
10/27/2009:Garbage/Rubbish(Unaddressed)
file://C:�Documents and Settings\zorn�I.ocal Settings\Temp�XPgrpwise\4B2FSE3Dmaild... 12/21/2009- -
10-331 Page 2 of 5
Gress/Weeds (Unaddressed)
Grass/Weeds(Unaddressed)
VB Monitoring (Recheck)
10/07fZ009:Garbage/Rubbish(Unaddressed)
Carass/Weeds (Unaddressed)
Grass/Weeds(Unaddressed)
VB Monitoring (Recheck)
10/07(2009:Garbage/Rubbish(Unaddressed)
Grass/Weeds (Unaddressed)
Grass/Weeds (Unaddressed)
VB Monitoring (Recheck)
09/28/2009:Garbage/Rubbish(Unaddressed)
Grass/Weeds (Recheck)
Gress/4Veeds(Unaddressed)
V8 Monitoring (Recheck)
OS/18J2009:Garbage/Rubbish(Unaddressed)
Grass/Weeds (Unaddressed)
VB Monitoring (Recheck)_
08/10/2009: Garbage/Rubbish (Work Order)
Grass/Weeds (Work Order)
VB Monitoring (Recheck)
06/18/2009:Garbage/Rubbish(Unaddressed)
Grass/Weeds(Unaddressed)
VB Monitoring (RecfieckJ
06/11/2009: Garbage/Rubbish {Work Order)
Grass/Weeds (Work Order)
Snow/Ice (Abated)
VB Monitoring (Recheckj
OS/28/2009:Grass/V✓eeds(Unaddressed)
Snow/Ice (Unaddressed)
VB Monitoring (Recheck)
OS/20/2009: Gress/N/eeds (Summary Abatement)
Snow/Ice (Unaddressed)
VB Monitoring (Recheck)
04/13/2009: Snow/)ce (Unaddressed)
VB Monitoring (Recheck)
03/02/2009: Snow/Ice (Unaddressed)
VB Monitoring (Recheck)
.
•
•
file://C:�Documents and Setrings�zorn�Locai Settings\TemplXPgrpwise\4B2FSE3Dmaild... 12/21/2009
10-331 Page 3 of 5
02/06J2009: Snow/Ice (Work Order)
• VB Monitoring (Recheck)
01/26/2009: Snow/Ice (Recheck)
VB Monitoring (Recheck)
11/19/2008: VB Monitoring (Recheck)
08/12/2008:Grass/Weeds(Abated)
VB Monitoring (Recheck�
08/04/2008: Grass/Weeds (Work Order)
VB Monitoring (Recheck)
06/12/2008:Grass(Weeds(Recheck)
VB Monitoring (Recheck)
04/23/2008: VB Monitoring (Recheck)
Boarding/Securing(Abated)
04/17/2008: VB Monitoring (Recheck)
03/12/2008:Snow/Ice(Abated)
VB Monitoring (Recheck)
� 01/22/2008: VB Monitoring (Summary Abatement)
12/19/2007: VB Monitoring (Recheck)
11/10/2007:Garbage/Rubbish(Abated)
Grass/Weeds (Abated)
VB Monitoring (Recheck)
11/OS/2007: Garbage/Rubbish (Work Order)
Grass/Weeds(Unaddressed)
VB Monitoring (Recheck)
11/Ol/2007: Garbage/Rubbish (Unaddressed-Comply By: il/02/07)
Grass/Weeds (Work Order)
VB Monitoring (Recheck)
10/25/2007: Garbage/Rubbish (SummaryAbatement)
Grass/Weeds (Summary Abatement)
VB Monitoring (Recheck)
09j01/2007: V8 Monitoring (Recheck)
• OS/13/2007:Garbage(Rubbish(Abated)_
Gress/Weeds (Abated)
VB Monitoring (Recheck)
file://C:�Documents and Settings�zorn\Local Settings\Temp\XPgrpwise\4B2FSE3Dmaild... 1Z/Zl/2009
10-331
08/04/2007: Garbage/Rubbish (Work Order)
Grass/Weeds(WorkOrder) ,
VB Monitoring (Recheck)
07/25/2007: Garbage/Rubbish (SummaryAbatement)
Grass/Weeds (SummaryAbatement)
VB Monitoring (Recheck)
04/18%2007: VB Monitoring (Recheck)
04/10/2007: VB Monitoring (Recheck)
03/14/2007: Snow/ace (Abated)
VB Monitoring (Recheck).
Boarding/Securing (Abated)
03/04/2007: Snow/Ice (Summary Abatement)
VB Monitoring (Recheck)
Boarding/Securing (Work Order)
02/22/2007: VB Monitoring (Recheck)
Boarding/Securing (Summary AbatementJ
11/27/Z006: Garbage/Rubbish(Abatedj
Grass/Weeds (Abated) .
VB Monitoring (Recfieck)
11/16/2006: Garbage/Rubbish (Work Order)
Grass/Weeds (Work Order)
VB Monitoring (Recheck)
11/OS/2Q06: Gress/Weeds (SummaryAbatement)
VB Monitoring (Recheck)
09/20/2006: VB Manitoring (Recheck)
08/25/2006:Ga�bage/Rubbish(Abated)
Grass/Weeds (Abated)
VB Monitoring (Recheck)
08/21/2006:Garbage/Rubbish(Unaddressed)
Grass/Weeds (Work Order)
VB Monitoring (Recheck) _
OS/10/2006: Garbage/Rubbish (Summary A6atement)
GrassJWeeds (SummaryAbatement)
VB Monitoring (Recheck)
07/20/2006: VB Monitoring (Recheckj
file://C:�Doauments and SetringslzomiLocal Setkings\Temp�grpwise\4B2FSE3Dmaild...
Page 4 of 5
12/2112009
•
•
•
10-331 Page 5 of 5
• 06/23/2006: Garbage/Rubbish(Abated)
GrassjWeeds (Abated)
VB Monitoring (Recheck)
06/19/2006: Garbage/Rubbish (Summary Abatement)
Grass(Weeds (SummaryAbatement)
r �
L J
•
file://C:�Documents and SettingslzomlLocal Settings\Temp�grpwise\4B2FSE3Dmaild... 12/Z1/2009
h Z 1784 Lafond
10-331 Page 1 of 1
� fY�l' GJ 1�'� �'
1�t9��- L�.�w,d
Sara orn -
From: Siri Brown
To:
Date: 12/21/2009 12:24 PM
Subject: 1784 Lafond
Hello,
I live 2 houses away from this home and am unable to come to the hearing at this date, as aze many of
my block members. VJe would like for the hearing to be changed as it falls between Christmas and New
Years and many people aze traveling and would like to have a say in this event.
I would rather thaf this house not become a dupiex because the owners do not really take care of it and
they were doing illegal work- this shows me a lack of honesty. Also some of the signatures on the paper
seemed forced, as some could barely write...
Thank you for hearing my concern,
-- 1776 Lafond
Siri Brown *
"We can do no great things, only small things with great love" - Mother Theresa
•
�
s
file://C:1Documents and Settings�om�I.ocal Settings\Temp�grpwise\4B2F68FSmaildp... 12/21/2009
10-331 Page I of 1
�(� - 5�� �'��—
Sarah Zorn - Fite #09-511-754 - 1784 Lafond ��(�1r I�l��
•
From: "Pam & Quane Weiss"
To: "Ed Rudberg" , "Michael Jon - HMC" , "Michael )on Olson" , , , , ,
Date: 12/21/2009 4:45 PM
Subject: File #09-511-754 - 1784 Lafond
CC:
Sarah,
This email is in response to the upcoming hearing for fiie #09-511-754. We have lived on Lafond for over 30
years and do not recafl that residence ever being a visable duplex. Our neighborhood is being over-run with
rental property and not all of them have a positive impact. We ask that you accept this email as testimony that
we are opposed to the properpty at 1784 Lafond becoming a duplex of any type, conforming or nonconforming. If
you have further questions or if you need additional information feei free to contact us via email or call us at 651-
644-8594.
Sincerely,
Duane and Pam Weiss
1763 Lafond Ave, 55104
--- Original Message —
From: Ed Rudberq
• To: Michael Jon - HMC ; Michael Jon Olson ;— ,� ,
Sent: Monday, December 21, 2��9 11:36 AM
Subject: update on 1784 Lafond
Folks,
I am sorry to overwhelm your emaii today. I spoke with Michael Jon at the District requesting his
assistance on this. He is contacting Sarah Zorn to request that the hearing be delayed. I have
also requested this via phone and via email. I have attached Michael Jon's email to this list.
Please contact Sarah Zorn at 651-266-6570 and request that this appiication be denied and that
the hearing be delayed. Piease also contact her via email sarah zornC�ci stQaul mn us and copy
Michael Jon (not sure which email is current) on these correspondences so we have written
record of this. I spoke with Duane regarding the historical accuracy of this property formerly
being a dupiex and he stated that it was not. If you have any historical reference on this
property not being a duplex, please include that with your correspondence. Thanks so much for
all your help with this. Let's keep our block getting better. Please contact me if you have any
questions 952-212-6576.
Regards,
Ed
Hotmail: Trusted email with Microsoft's powerful SPAM protection. Sign u� now.
•
file://C:�Documents and Settings�zorn\L.ocai Settings\Temp�grpwise14B2FA63Amaild... 12/22/2009
'�12J2112009) Sarah Zom - 1784 Lafond Ave � � � z z� P µ Page 1
�v�-�ht-'t�--
t'�bA-1.��'
From: Kathy & George Alfen y�
To: <sarah.zorn@ci.stpaul.mn.us�
Date: , 12/21/2009 4:02 PM
Subject: 1784 Lafond Ave.
We have lived at 1773 Lafond since 1970 and since that Sme 1784
Lafond has not been a duplex. If you have any questions we can be
reached at651-270-3255.
George & Kathleen Allen
1773 Lafond Ave.
St. Paul, MN 55104
r�
LJ
•
.
�(12/22/2009) Sarah Zorn - rezoning of 178q Lafond � �� � � � � � ���' � �� ��_ � �Lp_,�;� � -�- - �� � ' page 1 :
� (��l - �tl ��-
1'f�bk Lu.�nc�
. Prom:
To:
Date:
Subject:
Joni Hahn
<sarah.zom@ci.stpaul. m n. us>
12/22/2009 8:59 AM
rezoning of 1784 Lafond
My name is Joni Hahn and I live 1762 Bair. I am on the opposite
comer of 1784 Lafond. I did not sign the petition and I know I am
within the boundaries needed for signatures I also know of others
that did not sign. I am asking you to reschedule the date of zoning
hearing. f never recaived any notice o4 hearing and I just found out
today by a neighbor.
thank you Joni Hahn
u
r 1
U
��' � ��"��-331 page I of 1
1't� 4- 1��
Sarah Zom -1784 Lafond Avenne
From: "Craig Freeman"
To:
Date: . 12/28/2009 837 AM
Subject: 1784 Lafond Avenue
HiSarah,
I own the home at 1772 Lafond. i believe that I've been duped by the owner of 1784 into signing her petition.
She stated that the house was previously a dupiex, but others on the block say that is false. I do not support the
splitting of that home into a duplex.
Craig Freeman
..
•
, �
file://C:�Documents and SetkingslzomlLocal Settings\Temp�XPgrpwise\4B386E2Finaildp.... 12l28/2009
�� -��
��a : S-� P4�1 �1��.�.��5 ����,;s�,'�. Zo��.� Ca��:��e
�e.` �/-e �- d�-S/� -- 75�, � �.�� �' %���,�
����o�-��� j �s-e �S � ��.� (���� �s����A��
��-2afA �.�2Co!'� -�6i.S Cvot- c��✓ u� a/>P°f�r�'a.1
�
v�:n, �v � -E-e.. -E- � �
�.� � �e-es�b(�sl��,,� ��f ���� �,���« -
C v u r�!'�i,.i�S vS-�.
� 4s � ����k u � /7�Y L ,�,,�e �
T G�K� f'Ge� Gc��s�s �'r�� ��1�J /� 7 J 2 � ('' � )
1 ��� L-CtS.a�/1� �( ��ti./ �O� �cl L�Q�N.1 Gt-/'
� IM�S e« �,.,J L��-tL� � � /
`�XA�S�� ,, `"� ��jqcs-�,,,.�- 1 hu.ue
���'c�� °" � +�-es4-��ol��.�.� aF
i _ ' j"L�- �'!`�, � P,.� � �
• �"P�.�_x ��+� iu.;�
��- (��ef
� �.�.��.</ y .�4�1� � �,.� S � ,
I.Q a ,��
4 Gou � ��,�� Q � , I
p L - � � `�'�'�" ��'" f G�•1- / �'Z� 1 /_ / I
§ u��1L� fl./t tl 5 �2� ` 1 v�C. (�g ' 4 S ��i � I�'�i S� f'J4 cY+� i
�' � �'� �'�Jc,-� ��
� v1d� � ��;� I
��;1��-z� Y � t�`_-� 'l-Q,� ��
��:.CS � Sinaw S�IO.A�(J,,,L� oj�✓�,'(Jn I
�P � i � !
�
`f. � � ;. �t ��tk�`.� � :�r� � c.4.1� �I
�.� � >'h:t !'2car� o-,�
"��P wca�� cl �u�� Q `.e-es�l��JSEv��-
0� cc S rc r�.J� �{� j!� ij.�� ����. � .}� � " . �',
�"C. �'.�41"'f,}Nc��� �
f __..
� i'�Q ��l/i �Jo!'�crOc� aN (c�.�c��,� J ���� ��` ��� � I
, t��a.e_l�. I
; 5 �-t ��5� �-�` c�.1 � a.v.e7 � `� Ct, c t .}t �� �
- �� �� � � uNG,-�-�f.�, i.l t I S a�3Lt�2 �6�°.� {' �f
w � � �T�e a-s "n c ,a-Lh �.�a � t�? ` b� ela�o..s �' -s<�c..,� . 77e.s�e :s P l.e,u ,
e-� ,�nd-�.res�- ?.,, o�,�e,r�,t,; , , ,� ^ Q �
P 1 P � ��.re� -1� �co-�,�� z�te�-�,a.�S
•�° ` �r�`s�' �'�"G- h� �eu - s o+.�� �c, �Or�P teK�.�� - Coor,;�lon. �..�'
��� 71n,¢�re a�`e �I re�: J� P ie,i,t.i.i, a� �e�l u�t;�� 1r 'rkr.. ,r.,e�5btbdrhov��
J J
��-� �' tL�rc.. 6..�.,,�e :,z.s ae� � � �1t� n� � �.•vJ �r� c t�s�� �,.5 �.s `' Pro bl¢�u Prv�,,TJ�s f
, 1t �
� e�'1-�14+w'��-
1 1
REQIIIREB
LOT SIZE
(� ZONTNG WORRSHEET . -
ADDRESS: G� �p� `--e•.'T�'\� •
P?t�: ?i � 7�', 1 Z e�Z�z— _ -
BUII.DING GARD INEORMATION: �
CONSTBITCTION DATTs: ��� PERMIT: TYPE OF STRIICTQRE:
PERMLTS COIJNTY 6SSESSOR`S RECORDS LICENSE RECORIIS CTTY DIRECTORY
��� � --- -
�� � 1 �sy �Z�:.�—�
��y� - �
��� c� — C �1 �xs { t
C�t'� 1- �a wu�t-�r�� �� e��6�iec, ��� ���5 � [ 6ti�N �
�.�Fe.� 6�
t�� 1�`iy-1 t�,..e,
LEGAL DESGRIPTION �2�� l� �S l� 4 �—�f5
LOT SIZ$:
CROSS STREETS:
ZONE
%
1922
1460
.IISE
(C/NC)
C
1464 � � �
l�
is7
� 1 � ',� ( xoo�s:
- \ 'N axzTS:
�-
UNTTS
PERMITTID
C
p
•
�
��
PLANNING:
ZONING FILE
NO RSCORD
' •
COtA�IERCI9L IISE:
ZONING•.STATQS FOR
' RESIDEN'tIAL IISE: •
•. LEGAL — 4NF0 NG
LEGAL — CONFORMING IISS WITH NON—CONFORMING LOT SIZE
(fo,r residential)
LEG9L — NON—CONF08MING IISE
�J ILLEGAL
�
�� a
���
LOT SIZE
(c/xc7
(2/25l2010) Mary Erickson - File # 10-011-315
From: Sara Oxton <soxton@yahoo.com>
To: <sarah.zorn@ci.stpaul.mn.us>
Date: 2/25l2010 1:43 PM
Subject: File # 10-011-315
Ms. Zorn
---z� — -- ---Page 1
I am writing in response to a card I received regarding File# 10-011-315, approval of re-establishment of
nonconforming use as a duplex at 1754 Lafond Avenue in Saint Paul. I am writing to express my strong
disagreement that this property should continue as a duplex.
I bought my home in 1996 and have lived in it since that iime - 14 years next month. During that interval, I
have been dismayed at the number of single family homes that have been sold and then converted in to
duplexes. The resulting situation of these conversions is the homes are not occupied by the owners; there
are numerous cars parked on the street and in the alley; the properties are not maintained at the basic
level - raking leaves, shoveling snow, cutting grass; and it is difficult to know who the true residents of a
given property are. Lastly, the houses were not originally intended as duplexes and the resulting
retro-fitting invariably is done on the cheap and leaves a structure that is forever sub-par. The net situation
is one of degrading the overall quality of the neighborhood.
I appreciate the opportunity to voice my concerns. Again, I am opposed to re-establishing 1784 Lafond as
a non-conforming duplex. Please feel free to contact me at this email address if you would like any
clarification of my comments.
Respectfully,
Sara Oxton
1798 Blair Avenue
Saint Paul, MN 55104
z
�
F'
§
e:
,,
,;
�
� ` �� :*+ ' � -� - --
- - � � r�� � , _ . , --
° � i rs u�;( � r \ '... �� .
.a.... . e ����� `r�`�.''� , h? ��
��
3' �
7 �'
IE '
f�;
�
�
I�
! ::� Y::.�:
�
: � �
� ��
Y .�
YA
�
!�� :
l
�.
� �F � .
i:
� `:�7 �.:'::
,a 7 ��
�
'' 'r
�' �.
� l� -.�r.r� � <,� .
M e r::
�� e.---:',.
d y
�—�. ��
���
:-= '
`--^�._,�--, . _ _ __�._'__
��
���, �����.
,,, _ LEGEND
FILE#� `�-���tl
�. DIST�
� .:• --_� s.�;°
ls.;,�s.
2-(ll�
MAP # l v
��
_� zoning district boundary
%////////. . • . . .. -
a one family .
- � two family
�-� � multipte fami{y
nL arth�•
��
• ♦ ^ commercial
� � � industrial
. V vacant
CITIZEN PARTIGIPATF-0 DIS RICTS`
•
'u
CITIZEN PARTICTPATION RLAWNI(VG RISTRICTS
� � 1.SUNRAY=61kT7LECR�EK�HIflNW00D � ��
� 2. GRERTER ERST_ 5I f1E. - '. •
3.WEST SIDE�
� 4.OAYTON'S BLUFF . "
5: PAYNE-PHkLEN, ��> . �
" 6. NORTH Et�tD . - ' .
� 7 THOMAS=DAL� �
� 8,SUMMIT-UNIVER$ITY �,� . /-7 (
.-WESt SEVENTH � • .. : �O� - ��1 f �
1�. OF10 . .
� .HAMLINE-MI6WAY • .
12. ST. ANT+IOhfY -
13.M�RRIAM PK.-LEXINGTON HAMLiNE �
� I4_GROV€LAND=FIACAL�STER � .' � '
15.NIGHLAND -"
96�SUMMIT HILL �_ �
17.��WNTbWN� - . .
;
.
.
10-331