05-205Council File # �� � aD�
Ordinance #
��n sn�t # ���5505
ORDINANCE
CITY OF SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA
Presented By
Referred To
3n
Committee Date :
2
3 An interim ordinance pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 462355,
4 Subd. 4, preserving the status quo in that azea of the City
5 generally within the boundaries of Stillwater Avenue on the
6 North, Howard Avenue on the East, Bush Avenue on the
7 South and Waukon Avenue on the West pending the
8 completion and report of a study and possible action on that
9 study by the City Council, including amending the City's
10 comprehensive plans and zoning ordinances.
11
12
13
14
15
16
THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAINT PAUL DOES ORDAIN:
Section 1
Gi.:'r�.a.Sf�ILS�
i� !. 1 �
17 Statement of Legislative Intent: The Council of the City of Saint Paul finds that the RTl
18 zoning classificaUOn which permits the construction of two-family dwellings and presenfly
19 assigned to certain lots within the boundaries of Stillwater Avenue on the North, Howard Avenue
20 on the East, Bush Avenue on the South and Waukon Avenue on the West and more fully
21 described as shown on the zoning map attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as
22 Exhibit 1, is entirely surrounded by lots which are zoned R3 or R4 which limit development to
23 one-family dwellings. The Council fur[her finds that the R3 and R41ots are virtually fully
24 developed with one-family dwellings consistent with their R3 or R4 designation, while the vast
25 majority of the subject lots zoned RTl are undeveloped and that any new development of these
26 RTl zoned lots may result in uses which may not be consistent or comparible with either the
27 already established development pattern in this neighborhood of one-family dwellings or the
28 development goals of this area of the City.
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
The recent examination by the Board of Zoning Appeals of two zoning applications for variances
requested for the purpose of converting the only two existing one-family dwelling units on the
subject RTl zoned lots into two-family dwellings lead this Council to find that the potential for
incompauble or inconsistent development of the subject RT-1 zoned lots raises substantial
questions relating to the ability of the present official controls and comprehensive plan to assure
that any development of these parcels will be undertaken in a manner which reflects and is
compatible with the present patterns of development in this area as well as a future vision for
development of this area; and
os- a�
2 The Council therefore finds that a zoning study is necessary to deternune whether the City's
3 present official controls and plans regularing the subject area require amendment in order to
4 eliminate the potential for incompatible or inconsistent development in the subject area. The
5 Council further finds that development of the subject lots, undertaken before a zoning study of
6 the City's official controls and comprehensive plans regulating the said area has been completed,
7 reported, and acted upon by the Councii could result in land uses which would not be consistent
8 with either the City's current comprehensive plan or ongoing planning and development goals.
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
Accordingly, regarding the lots generally described in Exhibit No. 1, it is the desire of the
Council to establish a moratorium under this interim ordinance to protect the general health,
welfaze and safety of the public and preserve the status quo with respect to the present land use
within the said area pending the conclusion and report of a zoning study of the lands described in
Exhibit No1 by immediately prohibiting, subject to provided exceptions, any development on
any lot or part thereof within the boundaries in Exhibit 1, until such time as the aforementioned
study has been completed and reported and the City Council has taken action on any
recommendations arising therefrom.
Section 2
Moratorium Imposed: on any parcel of land, lot, or part thereof within the boundaries of
Exhibit 1, pending the undertaking and completion of a zoning study of the said area, and action
by the City Council on the said study, the issuance or approval of zoning permits, site plan and
lot split or plat approvals, and building permits or occupancy certificates aze prohibited until the
expiration of tweive months, unless otherwise provided under Minn. Stat. § 462.355, Subd. 4, or
unti] such earlier time as the City Council has taken action on the recommendations contained in
the study.
Section 3
Moratorium. Written Requests for Zoning Auurovals. Compliance with Minn. Stat. §
15_99: Until such time as the said study has been completed and acted upon by the City Council,
City departments receiving written requests for approvals regulated under this interim ordinance
shail accept complete requests and immediately process such requests in accordance with the
provisions of Minn. Stat. § 15.99, Subd. 2, consistent with the legislative intent expressed under
this interim ordinance.
oS- a.a5
Section 4
Moratorium. Effecfive Date: The effective date of the moratorium enacted under this interim
ordinance is deemed to be as of the effective date of the Resolution in Council File No. OS-191 .
Secrion 5
This interim ordinance shall take effect and be in force 30 days from and after its passage,
approval and publication. Pending the effective date of this ordinance, applications regarding
land uses intended for regulation by this interim ordinance, shall be processed in conformance
with the terms and conditions set forth in Council File No. OS-191 . As of the effective date of
this interim ordinance, the terms of the Resolution under Council File No OS-191 aze dischazged.
�
l ,. .
�. :�
q ,1 fi i :
Requested by Department of:
By:
Form Appr by City Attorney
By: '�J� �WcWr�_ �� z— O S
Approved by Mayor for Submission to Council
� �/I��
� - f.��
_, ��/ ' '-��
I ��sl�
Adopted by Council: Date �,� b�
Adoption Certi�d by Council Secretary
os- a�s
�, .
,
;-, .� _. ��� � �---
�'��' -
� Q.A �\ f
Q
�:I:i:li!:I:I� ���
Y1 XOL�I
�I• ; 1 (
:I: i;�lli���� I
:�: I +.' i 'I: I �
a��
' � I 1 :I:�
'� i
�.
I. 'I1. �;� j�
L� CRSSE
I .��..� i � l �' �.'"
,' i .
T _ : : . I �
!'. . . ' I
� � �
�
•r..r. a.a
/ /
�m�2
� � �,
�..., . „•;
y �'� - \ � � :'.';� '��:�: , � .. ; �, i _...
7 � � � BUSM . V` .
� i�'� I'.�..: IN.�:.�i:���� ��':1:�:1!:I:I:
r
� �� ����T
\ FI1MVT • . � 2� — I•; I•I�i:�II
� ` . . _ — 1V : �
.�� �"' ' :I: � i:'�'i:��i :a �I:.�;��ill
, r � , ';` ` �� ' �� � .�' ":s ::i ��l�l
MIIIIMX
_ • � �` i� '�� €— j!, i-� ;���j� �, � I .t
.. , ';�: ! i i i ; i � � : I : R��
' B_E[x � y�,
' � i � ' ' '_ � ii _ ' I i . .; I ;;:,: � , i
.. � � � `m:.... ' T' .� i: � �
I, ��`�� �I 'i ijj;j�� � � j
Y�nWN[T SL
� ' — �; -- rl - - - -. ; - : - s ,- : � i I _ . � � : � ; � � � � �
..;li i '' '�i'i I' 4I• �I.:� - ui I I ..;
i I '
�i :R rl � I: I;�'
_�.—_�— . � i: i' �i i.�; ;i •�
'i I:� . ilii '�. . , I � "•" 1 � ,
� ''' ''I i ':II
� I �'� B �I �i ,) �;'";;�' _ _� li�� � II!
- ' �il:���s � .I�I,i ._ ':;::II!
i1fTM ST
�' � • �' � ' �� �� � . . � � � � > :I: I � , � �� 1 I I
i Q :
=��;��:;;1 �i'� 1 � � �ii�� :iil'.'
� , .
. . . . . . . .... ,
�OVNiM SL _ _ �
os- a°�
� Green Sheet Green.Sheet. Green,Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet �
CA �ity Attomry
Confact Person & Phone:
Peter WarnEx
Must Be on Council /�qert
ContraM rype:
OR-0RDINANCE
03MAR-05
� '
Assign
Number
For
Roufing
ONer
Topl # of Signalure Pages _(Clip All Locations for Signature)
Green Sheet NO: 3025505
Deparhnent SentTOPerson
o 'tvAtmrnev - I
1 'LVAltoroev IDeo rlmentDirector �
2 ounal
3 ' Qerk
4
5
An interim ordinance preserving the status quo in that area of the Ciry generally bounded by Stillwater Avenue on the North, Howazd
Avenue on the East, Bush Avenue on the South and Waukon Avenue on tke West pending the complerion of a zoning study.
idffiions: Appro�e (A) or R
Plannirg Commission
CIB Committee
Citil Service Commission
Mswerthe Following Questions:
1. Has this persoNfirtn e�er worked under a corrtract for this department?
Yes No
2. Has this persoNfirtn eeer been a city employee?
Yes No
3. Does this persoNfirtn possess a skill rwt normally possessed by any
curtent city employee?
Yes No
Explain all yes answers on separate sheet and attach to green sheet
Initiating Problem, Issues, Opportunity (Who, What, When, Where, Why):
AdVanWgeSlfApp�oVed:
Disadvantages If Approved:
Disadvantayes If Not Approved:
Trensaction:
FundinA Source:
Financial Information:
(Explain)
CostlRevenue Budgeted:
Activiry Number.
March 3, 2005 11:42 AM Page 1
D� -ao5
3-25-05
RE CE��ED
Attention Ciry Counal Member MqR 2� 1��5
Kathy Lantry CO����
RY
Regarding zone petitions from ait our neighbors on Howard Street North. I have been
asked to write you to protect our property and value of our nice Beaver Lake area from
rezoning our neighborhood from R3 to Rt 1. Please keep it a non-commercial area.
Most of my neighbors own their own homes. I have lived here on 789 Howard Street
North since 1954 and have raised 3 sons here. My husband and I cherish the quiet
and pleasant area near and al{ around Beaver Lake.
Thank you for your
service to our corrrmunity
���i. i�C�zri �� �- ,�,�z,e�etic �
j �'riu � d-cu �_ � �
i ��
05 do5.
�#�/
Petition in Support
Of Proposed Zoning Changes
To the honorable Mayor and City Council: �Ve the owners of land proposed to be
.tezoned in the City of Saint Paul's study of the neighborhood south of Beaver Lake,
hereby petition you to rezone the affected properties from a RT i(to�vn house/duplet)
zomn� district to an R 3(single family) zoning district, for the purpose of maintainins the
single family nature of the neighborhood. �
Name Address Sisnature
7� St
L ��i�`(f�:, ��..: � �
� �-' ; L 1- � 2181 E �� St �\� i
� dj'(-z! LcSf/
\.
Catherine Hildebrandt 2175 7` St \�� ( c�� LcsE-�
or Suzanne LundQren 2167 7`
Ke 2172
Cardinal
�[f
U��—`�jC
Janet Meulemans 2151 Ross Ave
Paul Kutscher 2158 Ross Ave
:� /
Richard Iverson 2150 Ross Ave _`�•'�,tij1 i�,� �_�
Romayne Smaller 2146 Ross Ave `' ,\ '� �' �
Kathleen Kopp 2140 Ross Ave
Pang Van� or Zai Cha 2160 7` St `� i-�— �/L--
�
o5-aos
Petition in Support
Of Proposed Zoning Changes
To the honorable Mayor and City Council: We the owners of land neaz the stud�• area
proposed to be rezoned in the City of Saint Paul's study of the nei�hborhood south of
Beaver Lake, hereby petition you to rezone the affected properties from a RT 1(town
house/duplex) zoning district to an R 3(single family) zoning district, for the purpose of
maintaining the single family nature of the neighborhood.
Name Address
, i � I��1 �� ���� �-I � 8 �6 hucv��� > i �r/
�"/Z��. ,JZ�
� '"7
�.�<.�/i ;' ' � l��
s I�f. ( � �
,. ,
� (�:� t �
. � ���.� :
,.
� ��
� � Y'r,ti
_� ��L(�
C �
�����1�1 )
; -�
,;�,, �. i,
�tt-
/,• J
�'.
�. �
>- /
,�; ���
J� I "
Sf �'1
,
Z- �� � .,�. .-✓ S'�
`,�
�n -, -��� '���� 5�� �lc:,�,�� � �1 � `�� -
� 5 �-
,. � S6` 7� ��, �/ i; ��� I � C�.;;,-�; c:
� j/.' � ✓ ;/
'{ ' �' , � i��l � `�r. � ,
� z�
- I . , . ! i% 1.
Sf ; J -
. �,
� �L� �r� i� ��r;.v,� -s
y �C� /��i
- � –� �
S ' /.
��
`` �\ . , '
� � I � ,
�.�
� � �:
c�, : c� S�- fv
��tmi � - � G'Cr,� ma�P �S�'-I Hcu�a �- �1 5 � . � t
o�=a vs
Petition in Supporf
Of Proposed Zoning Changes
To the honorable Mayor and City Council: We the owners of land near the study area
proposed to be rezoned in the City of Saint Paul's study of the neighborhood south of
Beaver Lake, hereby petition you to rezone the affected properties from a RT 1(town
house/duplex) zoning district to an R 3(single family) zoning district, for the purpose of
maintaining the single family nature of the neighborhood.
Name Address
c
crv`- �� ,
�� �
�
U %
��
�f
--' - -----�-`-' — ,�'1 �� -!_ ; ,
_ � .✓,.,,_ r,tti �, , �✓ ��_ r_
7---- - _._ _ ----�— l>--_ �f�QV 1
�
.. � �. ��' . �� ;• n�- i� , _�_ 1 `I � /� �>, ._t ; � T J
� �,� .�"'--�'.� � w(
�..�,1� ����� _. _�_ ---_.,���_. /G�l�,[t?!�__ �7 � �.� 5 ��;
-.�_ .: -`s-
� �.5� � � � � _ n r . ,
�._�.�� �-._.��..'�..��_� C�.�.J_'�T"__'�.� �—.._�.-- � L`• `-i'�tv-' . �7
__�� �' l; /'� .Sf S�r� / .� !.Ss;
_��� � w
b'�� l�C �. �C �,�.� �� ;9
--____�sS �.a�.E � o� f�.� f.�vc
_ �7��°��� �
_ `
/ / IL I
�� / / VV �
� 4 � ---�-`�-�. �S� .
_ _ �5 `.__��-�_�..� ---- -----.� .
—
� fluc,:.�r�-W� s �I . sTP,�u��_ �t_�(s S�
' / � ' �_ r '.� �
0
os aos
Petition in Support
Of Proposed Zoning Changes
To the honorable Mayor and City Council: We the owners of land near the study area
proposed to be rezoned in the City of Saint Paul's study of the neighborhood south of
Beaver Lake, hereby petition you to rezone the affected properties from a RT 1(to«n
house/dupiex) zoning district to an R 3(single family) zoning district, for the purpose of
maintaining the single family nature of the neighborhood.
Name
�� , �I `'',
� � (t,{� � 1't L��1 ;�l�1�t�
� �� c (
��,�����.
_` �✓v>�.�2:> yi '�� �
9 �, �
�
� ) �/
Y . . J/, . �� �' � . �.
Address
� � �. � �,�.,�
`� : u �r � .�.�-t-��%
'lf�i/r ^ °3 7 l��'����
�� % � �
��_, �,,,
� � S � � I �S%)�
,�- ���� s i �
,
� �� �� ���� s�
�f✓ 5�,/�??u��:
:� S//�
. _% � , � �
„<< J .��/ �
' _1, �' { ;�' �
i. -�, > / <C 91�- � t.l. —/n J� J � ; 1 i,� L � _.L � � �
� ) � }, ' ' `
��`LLf� � L_,_ -, , _ ��� C/� � � � �� ����C..r��.�.�
��>
r
L,�. , �' /�: �� � � �. �—
�--/��� -_� �
i .,, I/.- S 1
- , n'>-
d 5��d5
;
c ,`��-�..,
,� ] � 'j
/ �'N��� l � � ? J
� hl
Petition in Support
Of Proposed Zoning Changes
To the honorable Mayor and City Council: We the owners of land near the study azea
proposed to be rezoned in the City of Saint Paul's study of the neighborhood south of
Beaver Lake, hereby petition you to rezone the affected properties from a RT 1(town
house/duplex) zoning district to an R 3(single family) zoning district, for the purpose of
maintaining the single family nature of the neighborhood.
Name Address
0
�
�. !�
�-_ ; /,
�%/.�--.�.!.��
. �
�
� �' �'<'-�.
�-; _•— � ' .
1S �'I �G'�
� � � ,;i - .
%/c-� C��� � � %l � �lc�«J�- �`
`: _` _ � , � 7� %i j �� ,.--«,— �....�_ •S_�C .j 1J v�'.e� cc � � ,�
- `�-t
L ' ,,. �_�^�._�._._...._.,�.___.._.....N.��� f �"�' ��•-c. S i� �`` -
r ' dil �' � ^ °' } �� � � =! � � i r �J � '� �
�� r _ _ � �� � . : � .._._.. �.. _..�_� ` �..=�:f /Y.
:�.z,,>., . �'La��-r. %�` 3 / �2 . --a ; ' � ,
65-�5
Petition in Support
Of Proposed Zoning Changes
To the honorable Mayor and City Council: We the owners of land near the study area
proposed to be rezoned in the City of Saint Paul's study of the neighborhood south of
Beaver Lake, hereby petition you to rezone the affected properties from a RT 1(town
house/duplex) zoning disri to an R 3(single family) zoning district, for the purpose of
maintaining the single family nature of the neighborhood.
Name
/�
Address
� t `( (Q t,�.�C2��
05-�a5
Petition in Support
Of Proposed Zoning Changes
To the honorable Mayor and City Council: We the owners of land near the study azea
proposed to be rezoned in the City of Saint Paul's study of the neighborhood south of
Beaver Lake, hereby petition you to rezone the affected properties from a RT 1(town
house/duplex) zoning district to an R 3(single family) zoning district, for the purpose of
maintaining the single family nature of the neighborhood.
��,
Address
n.
/"7c1
os-��
Petition in Support
Of Proposed Zoning Changes
To the honorable Mayor and City Council: We the owners of land near the study area
proposed to be rezoned in the City of Saint Paul's study of the neighborhood south of
Beaver Lake, hereby petition you to rezone the affected properties from a RT 1(tow
house/duplex) zoning distsict to an R 3(single family) zoning district, for the purpose of
maintaining the single family nature of the neighborhood.
Name
��7 L" r il l� � A
�. �
f'� /,� J
Address
.
� [�hl % I:� � , ��ki � /11 /�;
rt cr � r
05-ao5
Petition in Support
Of Proposed Zoning Changes
To the honorable Mayor and City Council: We the owners of land neaz the study area
proposed to be rezoned in the City of Saint Paul's study of the neighborhood south of
Beaver Lake, hereby petition you to rezone the afFected properties from a RT 1(town
house/duplex) zoning district to an R 3(single family) zoning district, for the purpose of
maintaining the single family nature of the neighborhood.
�c� � '��.Cl�'�' �lG�! c `!�` %3l-�3�8
� ` ;—`-- !\. e � i3 `i ; r''�
' - -�• >, ,�_� �
:� , �1 ' -- � 1 .r_
;
t - — �` , � - t �
, r�, �. ._ I � l j � �G-J�
.: L /:� � ` � -` � � 'i/(.^� ' J ) C I ( i t
. - / i" /�
�� , / �/
�,''2. `/� f/: /l��� /�i.��, I / v G ' / � y d j C ; % �
/ ~
r'"%iC�Z��,...,� � �1�N;��,-.:,;,.. � 5 735-3�� �
,- I y C1 � J Y � i� . ,,,,.,..� �.
f ' , , � �- ,—
.,!�.� l -..�,.
�____;=�-, �.
.,
;,
• , _ `, - (_ _ r �• /
,
, --���
- trn .,, , ,
, _ f–�r - ' . ��� , .
,
- ;1 l � ����,/
_ ;-
�c:�-� �L ,�
i��l f �.
, ,-- ,
��� ��-f �:�'z �
t , ,
� z
�/' i�t C�n �\ O �` f
�r
��
�1t0 �<
T l/�� .�
57��C>�'�' .�
�
� C� fh �
� ���� �-
� �c� c�
�i �, � �'��: ��
, � -;
-=:�y-; , ,� �--, , � ��
� 17 S �,,,�.�cl.. ��-: �
,
" 'f !- �, � ��: �%�- � , �� � � -
05 -ao5
�q
Petition in Support
Of Proposed Zoning Changes
To the honorable Mayor and City Council: We the owners of land near the study area
proposed to be rezoned in the City of Saint Paul's study of the neighborhood south of
Beaver Lake, hereby petition you to rewne the affected properties from a RT 1(town
house/duplex) zoning district to an R 3(single family) zoning district, for the purpose of
maintaining the single family nature of the neighborhood.
Name
- "' �./
� 1 ���.7 � /
—;
� i � : =—
j - � n � ,
,�
��l �
� � k. �.,,.
� ,�.�.,w:�
�: 2_--.. !� �`' _�—. � /.) T � �L._.�it (J �.
-�+.-���� �......� .�.n..�V._� �
� u
i , ,
� ( � � " �
� �_ '� �- 1-- J L.. �-� .-,—......,...�..�.v.....-r-...� I�� : ,�;l.i , 'L4 l'�` ,J i .��
� =� �____:_` ���.._W_�.�__.__ � �l � i`�� .,,.., � S�- �
�� __.P _..�.��.__ _-____.._ _ _��� _ � � _w_._ : __4� s� �
- =;_:���.,:...—:,.%J-<�!�.�.._____..�., -1 � � _._....�. l .,sc: ,(, _,�� .
� ' / / 1 , /_� J
\
�l. .( ��, , � .��—u.C_�-(/._ i:�'_�1 Iv `–�fc� >_\ i � i� -�
!` o �
� -%J
ir . ' ._
. ��
E� �z
" ;,�.�,�
Address
� _.,�
-=�� v ; , T ,
�
���� � �
��
�
/,^/
« r
�� ���i
6
,�
- ,�
���-
�z
' " ,�
� � -- � ' ,-i ; y' C '� " _ l; �� : t . ' '� �, ' � �.
,�- v ,� N� l�lC ✓j�l.-� l��'= � , ' —__...__ _�
n ,.. __-„�._ _ r� ,t _ _ `lc �' F� � �,� ��-�� �� .
, �.,.v.. _.___�_..._.-----�___�.�._
F�OM :&[L� i9EY'EFS F4�; N0. : E.1�395052 6 Flpr. Et4 �t]rj5 92:�5Ft1 F1
�5 "d a 5
ApriL4,2005
Atm: Chuck Rcpke
Distrid 2 Community Ccancil
Re: �Ve suppo:t the process which �.uu13 zesuit in dou�n aenin� to singie family the
properN, thai tivas once in the Beaver Lake crzek bed hetw•e�n �Io«•ard S�et and Waut:or
A� \Ve feel stron�ly that this aze2 shou(d remain single far.:ily aud not be
convcr[za into eiuplexes or mitl homes. �V� P�ave lived in this area for �3 years.
Sincuely,
a , x SLA� �S`�' .., _ i
\�
1�'illiam and Cheryl Meyers
2185 Waul:on Avenuc
St_ Paul, TviN 5?119
651-?39-9062
o5-ao5
-- ��? ��t � L(�� 5 � - �C y o �v�-�r�li�i.��c
! � � - �i�'1,rxw cJ,� �as,-- -2oSrz C.J��,-.�,�_
- N -��- _ 3 (,tI GC �^
� V�,Q,�--`— - - -a. � o --- � _v__ � /���—
-- `.'`'c�"�- -
-��.�. �...�.� -- ---- �� f�on-��
- - - � - �— -- - - ao °( t W cv V_�� -
�o�-� -- alo � u1_�r�___�t�
�
��� _ 1��. -- - -- ��� s� -f�� � �=�_�4_��.
� J i�
✓'iv� �✓'��'� -- - - - �.1 a S l,JaUK��-���-- -
;, �
- � ��'���=�%;-r - -- --- � -� S L�%� - r - <�` - � 11 �� ---
��(�-'� �rc�-- a�3s� �K�'N. �Y
�'
-- - -- - - --- �— -----
��� � �'��- -- - ais9 CL��..�� a�.- -
Q�-�o 5
�� � �,,- `,...'- ��`e-� f —
2 t_ �_ �_ c,.,�� ��u„_ �4.�� ,
�a��-- -�2 – - - - �1 � � �u.��� _�- _—
�,
`�'"�, >���. - - - j - --`�.�.� Q.c�
�/ —
— --
�1�4/"��,-���'/a o1 / 7�i—.-_G_t/ou_�a-2- l-1 �'�
�{, _„� , .�. ` _ -- --
•�t,,_��. _ �. d ZZC�(� _LJCr��' n A'�E�_
�� � . _ �rv�.u,n, � I � � G'✓�{-ti ��_ � - - - ---
��'�'�.C6� �'� _ L �% 6 `i"O`u//�c.✓ �'/` �= '
; — -
.
-
------
--
� � n dl ��(�,,� n ` ��-- -- — -
- - - --- - - --
�J-'- -- �-� �s� ���-
�G � . cJ`� ��t �2 v_3 i.t/ � �l_Lf�✓l �y"v�— - -_
/ � �
�f�ji�✓1 ��-t,� �C7` ! �.� r/i/ a k �� o >, iq il � - - -
1 �.�..��,�,� an4 ���, � - - -- -
�; �� a►�5 ������� ��� --- --
',�� 21 aS l�1JIU�l1 _��, -- ---
-- �.-�°j� ��n�C� ��53 �.vc.��'C (�ve�
����,. - h-<-�, � � � �t� w�,�-,�
'�.,._ �S�T.a. �.��� ���u��� t��.
��t � �.�-..-
� � � � cd�� ��� ---
za�yC�J�.m �
� � Y u.;L.,��� �� —
� ; � � �; �
� ,� � `�' � �
� I L '
`\� (((\ Iry �� �� �
I � I I I i i I 1 i •i
i ( � ' i
I � I I 1 � �i
� � � ; i , ; r� ,
I �i i j ,; �°1
I �" i i I � �� �; �.
i J' � � ;�! � i� S �:
1�' � I � �
i � J ,� , �; 3',
, 1 ' v; � ; C �.
� � `�; 3 � �' � � �: �
j��'�, � � ��� �3
, � �; � ' � ��: J : v : s
� �;c�,°����n �vm•��
� ��i � � �'6 �I �6 ; ��� N'. � � � � � �
i ���! � ; � � �
i ��,� ,
,
;`�i. � I i� ; I '
I
�
i
�
05-�,05
I
I '
�
N '
� � � ;
� v� �;, � �! �� � ; �
I �
�
��;
.,��
�i `�
� �
�
� �.
� J S
� �
i
I , ' , I � �� �; ! � �
�5-aos
Presented to St.Paul City Council
Public Hearing 04/06/OS
Kellie Krick and Joel Aussong properry owners
2176 and 2182 Stillwater Ave.
In 2002 the StPaul City Council made a pivotal decision that has subsequently
repositioned the City in the regional housing mazket. I commend you for supporting
Mayor Kelly and the Housing 5000 Plan. Tlus ambitious plan has played a significant
role in the revitalization and growth we see in St.Paul today. This plan and each year's
subsequent Housing Acrion Plan has served to demonstrate the commitment you have to
serving the diverse housing needs of families at all income levels and stages of life. As a
long time resident and St.Paul Public School teacher I am fully awaze of the housing
needs of our residents and I thank you.
Housing 5000 called for you to "engage the broader community in the implementation of
this plan" and further acknowledged, "housing production is more than large numbers of
units or impressive amounts of money". I intend to show you how my our very small
proposal supports the current goals you have set, how it meets all codes and requirements
and why existing zoning is very much appropriate and in fact consistent with nationally
recognized "best planning practice" as well as our City's very own Planning and
Economic Development 2005 Housing Action Plan.
Our intention have been outlined and communicated to the Department of Planning and
Economic Development (PED), to the Office of License, Inspections and Environmentai
Protection (LIEP), Zoning and our Community District Two Council beginning as faz
back as last September. (A timeline has been provided for your future reference).
PLEASE SEE FIRST EXHIBIT
Tonight I would like to shaze our intentions with you. Our proposed plan is to convert
property #3 (2182 Stillwater), the corner home, to two condo units. As the proposal
stands, this lot meets square feet requirements, side-set back requirements and zoning
requirements. An enirance on the east side will be the only exterior modification made to
the home. The second part of our proposal is to build a two-condo building on proposed
lot #4. This lot meets all zoning and building requirements as well. The condo units will
be sold has individual homes. THEY WILL NOT BE USED AS RENTALS. This lot
split application has been signed by a11 appropriate City Departments but has been held in
response to the resolurion. Property #2 (2176 Stillwater) is where I have lived for 8
yeazs; it will remain a single-family home. Property # 1 is an undeveloped lot owned by
Mr. and Mrs. Gear who purchased the property (and subsequent zoning rights) with the
intention of building a rivo-family home.
o5-ao5
PLEASE SEE SECOND EXHIBIT
Our properties aze located at the northem boundary of a RTl zoning district. Properties
1,2 and 3 aze contiguous properties that face Beaver Lake. The visuals provided illustrate
how these properties are separated from the neighborhood to the north by Stillwater Ave,
a collector street and Beauer Lake, to the south by au ally and a large undevelopable
green space and from the eastern and westem neighborhoods due to the fact that these
homes face the lake rather than neighbors. There aze no neighbors across the street with
wluch to visit as we collect our mail. There aze no connecting backyazds in which to
interact. In other words, we have a lazge open space in front, a lazge green space in the
back and streets and alleys surrouuding the properties on all sides. You can see that there
is an obvious "island effecY' and that these properties very much function as a
neighborhood in and of them selves.
To give you a historical perspective, one maj or planning dilemma over the past 50 yeazs
has been to determine the appropriate uses for busy collector street, which is the case for
Stillwater Ave. The more our neighborhoods have become dependent on automobiles the
less desirable it has been to own a home that faces a busy street. Our homes aze less
desirable for families with children due to the dangezs associated with a busy street. As a
matter of fact, the Borth Family, whom we purchased 2182 from, stated this as their
primary reason for selling their home. It was the perfect place to live as a young couple
until their first child became of walking age and then the risks were simply too great.
This struggle is apparent all over St.Paul and the nation. Thaukfully, planners and cities
have supported flexible land use and have begun to integrate Life Stage housing in
neighborhoods that have historically catered to only traditional families and single-family
home ownership. Life Stage housing provides opportunities for singles, childless
families, empty nesters and retirees to downsize while maintaining homeownership. As I
will be showing you shortly, your own Housing Action Plan 2005 draft speaks
specifically to supporting this very concept through promoting diversity of building types
and housing choice in the City's neighborhoods. The predominately single-family
housing along Stillwater Avenue is a perfect example of this phenomenon. The single-
family homes aze in constant change over and aze desrined for neglect as were those of
Grand, Smzunit and Mazshall before many were converted to condos.
As this information relates to the proposal before you, you can see from exhibit A, that
the properties in question ate located on lots that are much lazger, on average of 6,000
square feet larger, than those in the neighborhood to the east and west. Even with the
proposed lot split and subsequent lot #4, the lot sizes would still be lazger than those of
the surrounding homes. As these properties relate to the open spaces provided by Beaver
Lake and the undeveloped City green space, it is an ideal location in which to utilize the
existing RTl zoning.
05 -ao 5
In terms of density, our proposal would be the same as that of the existing
neighborhoods. For example, the average lot on Waukon and Howazd is 40ft by 125ft in
azea equaling 5,000 square feet per unit. Our proposal in conjunction with the future
development of lot #1, would tota136,120 square feet equaling 5,160 square feet per unit.
In other words, our proposed density is actually slighfly less than that of the existing
neighborhood. In addition, our proposal offers a much smaller building-to-land ratio.
The proposed condo units would be sold at market value prices that would be
compazable, if not slightly less than the neighborhood averages. Judging from our
conceptual building plans, it is safe to say that these condos would do nothing more than
SUPPORT increased property values.
Another key point to consider, your 2005 Housing Action Plan draft "calls for a
significant increase in New Housing Production..." This is a unique opportunity to add
new affordable home ownership opportunities to an existing neighborhood without
increasing density. This is a great design solurion capitalizing on existing infrastructures
such as sewer, water and streets. It would contribute to a mix of housing in the
neighborhood, yet another factor lrnown to directly correlate with increases long-term
neighborhood sustainability.
In 1975 the City of St.Paul initiated a City wide zoning study leading to a comprehensive
re-zoning of the city from edge to edge. Included in that extensive study was the zoning
area currently in question. Despite sweeping changes in zoning all over other parts of the
city, as well as in nearby neighborhoods, RTI zoning was maintained in this area. These
neighborhoods rexnain virtually unchanged since that time. All of the homes,
neighborhoods, streets, alleys, lakes and green spaces remain the same today as they were
when the last study took place. There have been no changes to the surrounding
neighborhoods that would lead another study to conclude anything different than that was
already determined. The existing zoning is appropriate.
In terms of the history of these specific lots, as confirmed by title research, the properties
in question have exchanged hands no less than 8 times in the past 13 years. At the time of
the original subdivision plat for these newer homes to be developed, the surrounding
neighborhoods were very much established. If there were concern over appropriate
zoning, one would think it would have been changed at that time. The PED and Zoning
regulazly review city zoning and at no other time have they, community members, the
Community Council, LIEP or any other entity expressed concern over inappropriate
zoning in this azea. If there had been previous concerns that the zoning was no longer
appropriate, a shxdy could have been initiated and a zoning change would have more than
likely been supported by previous owners. However, now that we are proposing to utilize
the current zoning, an interim moratorium has been initiated.
In other words, my proposal is an ideal opportunity for you to move towazd current
housing goals you have set for the City:
05 -a og
SEE RELEVENT PORTIONS OF TF� CITY HOUSING ACTION PLAN 2005
(DRAFT)
2.1 Housing Plan Policies
Strategy 1: Take Caze of What We Have
• Priority will be given to projects that commit to the long-term
affordabiiity of housing units.
Strategy 2: Meet New Mazket Demand
• Encourage the production of housing
• Promote good design solutions
• Encourage a diversity of building and unit types
Strategy 3: Ensure Availability of Affordable Housing
• Challenge the region to provide a full range of housing choices to meet
the housing needs of all income levels.
• Support initiates that assist lower income households to achieve
ownership
2.2 Economic Integration
The City's policy is to support a m'vc of low, moderate and higher income households
and support this mix of incomes in single family and multi-family housing
developments in the city's neighborhoods.
23 Locational Choice
The City of Saint Paul pursues policies and practices, which maximize housing and
tocationat choices for residents of all income levels. The City aggressively fghts
discrimination in the housing market and pursues policies and programs at all
government levels, which aggressively encourages the development of affordable
housing in a11 Saint Paul neighborhood and in the region.
�
05 ao5
As a long time St.Paul resident and St.Paul employee I am very concerned. I am
concerned that a proposal that obviously meets so many of the City's goals, is within all
existing codes, guidelines and ordinances, is zoned appropriately and is very much
consistent with the neighborhood lot size, building size and density is being blocked! As
a matter of fact in other neighborhoods, the city of St.Paul is actually embracing such
planning "best practice" by proposing fle�ble zoning changes in support of miaced
housing opportunities. In our case, the properties aze already appropriately zoned for this
type of good design solution.
We aze continuing to make every effort to communicate honesUy with the surrounding
neighborhoods and all appropriate City Offices and you, the City Council. As you will
read in the attached timeline, we have been in ongoing communications with the PED
and LIEP and Zoning since September of 2004. Over the past 7 months, Joel Hussong
and I have had many, many conversations with your professional staff in each office
regarding our intentions for our properties. At no point were concerns regazding zoning
ever expressed. In our timeline you will find detailed correspondences with PED, LIEP
and Zoning over the past months, which evidences that all were fully aware of our
intentions. Having full knowledge of the proposed plan, not a single professional staff in
any office expressed zoning concerns.
The final signature on our lot split application was WITHHELD in response to the
resolution, which came days AFTER our application had received all other necessary
departrnent approvals. I am lead to only one conclusion; this proposal for a"zoning
study" is a direct attempt to block one individual property owner from developing her lots
in a manner that is consistent with all codes, guidelines and zoning. Following tYus
meeting, please take time to carefully read the timeline provided and decide for yourself
the motivation behind this proposal.
District Two Community Council D'uector, Mr. Chuck Repke and President Lantry
would lead you to believe that urilizing the current zoning would be inconsistent with the
existing neighborhood and thus substantiate their efforts to "maintain the status quo".
However, these claims aze false and quite honestly a blatant effort to misinform you and
the neighborhood residents. It took less than two hours of reseazch using the Office of
License and Inspection's publicly available computer to find tUat there aze 200+ multi-
family units within one-mile squaze of our homes. This includes many legally existing
two-family homes similaz to those in my proposal. Zoning specialist Mr.Hardwick was
present while I conducted my reseazch at the LIEP office. I am certain given his much
more qualified status, experience and skill that he could verify these findings within
minutes and without initiating an expensive and timely "zoning study". Quality public
policy has never been the product of misinformed public officials.
There will be people here tonight who would lead you to believe that our plan would
result in depreciating property values in the surrounding azea. The average home value in
the area is approacimately $170,000. Our properties haue been appraised at $230,000 with
the new construction estimated to appraise at azound $350,000.
0 5 -aes
It takes little more than common sense to conclude that three properties, being 50 plus
years newer, and valuing 30% more on average than the surrounding homes would do
nothing more than increase ail other property vatues not to menrion increase the City's
tax base. Quality public policy has never been the product of misinformed public
officials.
Mr.Repke has taken it upon himself to rally the surrounding neighbors in opposition to
our proposal. The e�tent of his communications has been weil outside of the City
Notificarion Radius. I have had the opportunity to talk with 7 of the 12 homeowners who
actually fall within 300ft radius of our properties. Yesterday, many of these property
owners signed a letter stating their support for our project once they heazd the true
version of our intentions, What is most concerning is tl�t there has been no attempt to
clear up the miscommunication that has surrounded this project. Mr. Repke has
continued to support the notion that we are introducing low-income rentals in the
neighborhood, which has fueled a fearful response from many neighbors. I haue said it
many times and I will say it again, these homes will NOT BE RENTALS. They will be
sold as individual condo homes that will be similaz in value to the surrounding
neighborhood homes!
Proposed Housing Action Plan 2005, section 3.8 speaks to the obstacles to implementing
housing initiatives that the City might expect to meet. Neighborhood and other
opposition aze listed as item `E'. It is interesting to me that the predominate opposition to
the proposal is coming from residents who are not in close proximity or even within view
of our properties while six of my closest neighbors have signed in support. This interim
moratorium is cleazly an effort to block a very small yet sensible development plan based
on the misinformed and possibly biased fears of neighbors who stand to be impacted in
no way other than increased property values that will inevitably come from new
construction and long-term neighborhood sustainability.
Tn ttus week before you vote on initiating a moratorium, I encourage you to closely read
over the timeline we have provided. Talk to your professional staff. Take a drive to see
our properties and the unmediate neighborhoods fust hand. Take note of our lots sizes in
comparison to that of the neighbors'. Observe the island effect and extraordinary sense
of space as you stroll down the sidewalks and alleys that sepazate our properties from the
southern neighborhoods. Notice the obvious style and age difference between our homes
and those of the homes to the south. Esrimated the difference in values.
All appropriate departments including PED, LIEP, Zoning, Public Works, Regional
Water, Sewer Utility and others have already reviewed and signed off on our lot split
application. The surrounding community has had many yeazs in which to express concern
or pursue rezoning. The current zoning is clearly appropriate by all recognized pianning
standazds and is very much in line with the City's own Housing Action Plan 2005
agenda, policies and goals.
Increasing housing, Economic Integration, Mixed used Housing; our proposal supports
all of these citywide efforts while maintaining consistency with existing neighborhood lot
size, building size and density. This is a win — win situation. In matters of public policy,
win-win situarions aze rare and you aught to embrace this one.
I urge you to view our properties for yourself and to use your own best judgment to
determine tfie hidden objectives of this interim moratorium. Three years ago, Mayor
Kelly called on you to "engage the entire community in the production of new housing...
and to reduce the red tape and needless conflicts" that are barriers to its success. Today I
call on you. DO NOT surrender your best judgment to the misinformation that has
surroemded this inYerim moratorium. Emotional response has never resulted in good
public policy.
I thank you for your time and attention and for your commitment to serving ALL the
residents of St.Paul.
Summarizing points in support of maintaining current zoning status
• Proposal meets City housing initia6ves
• Proposal utilizes existing City infrastructures
• A good design solurion due to the location of properties, proximity to
collector street, open-space and the "island effecY' that has been created.
• Proposat maintains less density than existing neighborhood
• Proposal is consistent with neighborhood lot and building size
• There is support from the majority of neighbors within close proximity
7
05 -�D�
Krick / Hpssong Citg Commnnication Timeline
09/13/04 — 03/14/05
Department of Planning and Economic Developmettt (PED)
Office of License, Inspection & Environmental Protection (LIEP)
Date Contact Discussion
09l13/04 Jcel Hussong Ca[Ied PED and left a message witfi Paut
Paul Dubnriel (PED) Dubnuel, City Planning Aide for Zoning.
Asked for verifica6on on 2176 RTl zoning.
Requested info for condo conversion on this
ro
09/17/04 Jcel Hussong Talked via phone with Karen Zacho, Zoning
Kazen Zacho Specialist of the Office of License and
(Zoning) Inspection. She co�rmed the zoning of
2176. She menfloned that she grew up in the
area and recalted ptaying on that empty tot as
a child. It was her recognition that the city or
county had sold that land for development
about 10 ears a o.
09/23/04 JceI Hussong Paul's assistant returned caII verifying RTI
PED zonin .
09l28/04 Joel Hussong Talked with Paul in person and discussed side
Paul Dubruiel (PED) set backs and options for condoing this
property. Discussed moving tbe garage wall
to meet set back. Again, he conFirmed condo
conversion was a viable option for this
ro
11l03104 Keitie Krick Stopped at the Office of license and
Kazen Zacho InspecBon and talked with John Hazdwick,
(Zoning) Zoning Specialist and Karen Zacho about
John Hardwick conversion guidelines and parking
(I.tEP) requirements. We discussed side set backs
and the rocess for variance a lication.
11l16/04 Joel Hussong Called Ron Haider, mechanical inspector and
Ron Haider (PED) left a message requesting info for mechanica]
needs for condo conversation. Left address
and age of home. Phone cail was never
retumed.
12/Ol/04 Kellie Krick Side setback variances filed.
12/03/04 Kellie Krick Ci notification cards received.
12/08/04 Chuck Repke Received call from Chuck Repke, District 2
Community Council, asking us to attend a
neighborhood meeting. Ae shazed that
neighbors wanted to meet with us to discuss
the s ifics of our variance a tications.
05 ao5
Krick � xnssong cicy commnnication Timeline
09/I3/04 — 03/14/OS
12l10/04 Chuck Repke Received community meeting notice from the
District 2 Community CounciL The extent of
tiris maiting area is unimown but was
abviously in excess of that of the city
notifica8on radius.
12l12/04 Annonymous Received a flyer encouraging neighbors to
neighbor attend community meeting to "fight this from
ha nin ta our nei hborhood"
12l15/04 Community meeting held. We used large
visuals to describe ow inten6ons for the
properties. It was apparent by the comments
and questions fielded that there was
considerable confusion azound terminology
and zoning codes. People spoke in favor and
a ainst the ro sai.
22/16/04 Kellie Krick Stopped in the Office of license and
Karen Zacho Inspec8on. Talked with Karen about the
(Zoning) possibility of doing a Iot split should our
variances not pass. Karen said that if we
meet set back that it would not be a public
process and that the neighbors wou]d have no
sa ixi the matter.
12l16/04 Jcei Hussong Stopped at City Planning and reviewed the
Paut Dubruiel(PED) variance application with Paul and Lawrence
Lawrence Soderholm Soderhom, Planning Administrator. They
(PED) both looked over the plan sets. I exptained
that we were facittg objections from the
neighbors. In response to the notion of a lot
split, Lawrence said, "this would be an
administrative process if you meet the set
back the neighborhood has no say in your
properly." I said, "So there is no way they
can stop me?" to which I.awrence replied, "it
looks like you meet the set back and I have
the last say in this matter. I wiil pass it based
on meeting the city zoning. Don't worry
about it, ou are in ood sha :'
12/17/OS Kettie Krick A Letter summarizing the neighborhood
John Hazdwick meeting was sent to John Hardwick. It was
(LIEP) requested that this letter be added as an
addendum to our variance a tications.
12/t7/04 Kellie Krick Stopped my Office of License and Inspection.
Karen Zacho Karen looked up the variance information and
('Loning) informed us that the variances had staff
a roval.
2
05-�05
Krick / Hussong City Commnnication Tymeliue
09J13/04 — 03/14/05
12/17104 Purchase 2182 Pro
12/20/04 Board of Zoning Went before the Board of Zoning Appeals for
Appeals variance applications. Both variances had feili
staff approval as presented by John Hazdwick.
Chuck Repke spoke on behalf of the District
Community Council. He misrepresented
facts suggesting that there were no multiple
family dweIlings in the surrounding area
When the Board asked John to confirm these
statements, he apologized saying that he had
ttot dotte that reseazch and that he did not
immediately have that information before
trim. The variances were voted down.
12/21l04 Kellie Krick Spo[ce witfi John at the Office of License,
John Hazdwick Inspection about the Board of Zoning appeals.
(LIEP} He again apoiogized for not having the
information regarding the surrounding area
availabie. I inquired where I couid find
information about the type of properties in the
surrounding area. He indicated that it was
pubIic information that could be accessed
usin the com uter on the counter.
12/22/04 Kellie Krick Used the camputer in the Office of License
John Hardwick and Inspection to research the surrounding
(LIEP) area. Signed in on Public Computer Resistry.
Karen 7acho Was acknowledged by both John and Karen
{Zonin )
12/23/04 Kellie Krick Used the computer in the Office of License
John Hardwick and Inspection to research the surrounding
(LIEP) area. I signed in on the regisiry and was
Karen Zacho acknowledged by both Karen and John. In
(Zoning) my research, I found 40 duplex units and a
minimum of 590 apartment units within one-
mita s uare of our ro
Ol/13/05 Received reports from the Board of Zoning
A Is den in our variance a Iications.
02/0&/OS Ke]!ie Krick Filed lot split application at PED. The
Female employee women at the couttter reviewed ati contents
(PED) and assured me that everything she needed
was there.
02l18/OS Jcel Hussong A neighbor shared that all the neighbors had
Neighbor received a letter infomzzng them of the failed
variance application; our Iot spiit proposai
and a co of the lat ro osal.
05 ao5
Krick / Hnssong City Communication Timeiine
09/I3/04 — 03/14/05
07J22/OS Keilie Krick Stopped by Office of License, Inspection to
John Hardwick once again verify that our proposed lot split
(LIEP) was not a pubiic process aud that we met all
zoning codes. John took a close iook at the
plat and reiterated that it certainiy appeared as
though we were within ati codes. Another
women from the office waiked by and
recognized the plat that we were reviewing.
She stopped and indicated that ske had seen
that application yesterday and apptoved it
I ask John about the possibility of a zoniug
change to our properry. He briefly explained
that a moratorium would have to be initiated
by the City Council at which point a study
would by conducted. He gave me the City
Rezonin information sheet
02/22lOS Kellie Krick Called Council President Kathy Lantry's
Ellen Biales {C) o�ce to discern where the leuer to my
neighbors originated. Ellen Biales, ]egisla6ve
aide informed me t6at nothing had been sent
from her off3ce. She indicated that it must
have come from the District Community
Council.
02/22/OS Chuck Repke Called Cfiuck Repke and he confirmed that he
Kellie Krick had sent the letfer and that it was sent to ati
who had signed in at tbe 12/15/OS
neighborhood meeting. I expressed my
dispieasure over having not been copied on
the letter as my name was also listed as in
attendance at the communiry meeting. I
uested to be co ied on the letter.
02l2310S Jcel Hassong Stopped by City Planning and Paul said he
Paul Dubruiei (PBD) had started on the paper work and was still
receiving items back for internai agencies.
Paul opened the f le and said, "I have to be
carefui how I review this because there is
someone in your neighbothood who has
interest in your project works in this office".
The file showed that sewer aud water
department had given its appmval. Paul
asked me to sign a paper indicating my intent
for the properry. I questioned this request
berause it had not been part of the application
process. Paul said he usually asks for it when
licants dro off a [ications,
�
65 -aas
Krick / Hussong City Communication Timeline
09/13/04 — 03/14/05
02/23/OS Kellie Krick Called Lantry's office and left a message with
Ellea Biales (C� Ellen requesting to schedule a meeting with
Kathy. F.ilen retumed my call the same day
and said she had spoke with Kathy and Kathy
had asked tfiat 1 caIl her secr to scfiedu[e.
02/24/OS Kellie Krick CalIed and spoke with Lanty's secretary,
Vicki Sfieffer (C� Vicki Sfieffer. She indicated d►at Kathy had
told her I wouid be calling to schedute an
appointment� Vicki stated that the earliest I
couid see Lantry was March 14`�. I expressed
concerned aboat wairing that long and
indicated that it was a time sensitive matter.
Vicki insisted that March 14`" was Lanhy's
first avaiIable a intment.
OZ/24/OS Keliie Krick Faxed, calied and mailed letter to Kathy
Jcel Hussong Lantry's office reqaesting that I be noti6ed of
any pending or future city acdvity involving
our ro . (See Attachment).
03/QllOS Paut Dubruiel Our Survey Co, Randy Morton (J.Oliver &
(PED) Assoc) received a faY from PED requesting
trvo minor revisions be made on the plat
survey. The f� also requested that he call
Mike Murphy (City Surveyor) to review the
certificate of surve
03/Q2105 Randy Morton Faxed revised survey to Paul Dubmiel's
(J.Oliver o�ce at PED.
Surveyor)
Mike Murphy Randq called Mike Murphy and reviewed
(City Surveyor) certificate of survey. No remaining concems
were ex ressed
03/OS/OS Ken Eggers Spoke to Ken Eggers of Office of License and
(PED) Inspection about pulIing a permit for a condo
Joel Hussong conversion. He said he would need a copy of
the signed iot spiit from PED to issue a pernut
for a second hea8� uniG
03/08/OS Pavt Dubruiel Stopped at PED to check status of lot split
(PEDj application and deliver building plans to puli
Jcel Hussong a building pernut Discussion: Paul indicaYed
that all the paper work was in and was waiting
to be signed by Lawrence. He told me to
come back in a few days, as it should be
com leted.
F7
a 5-�05
Krick / Anssong City Communication Tinteline
09/13/04 — 03/14105
03109/OS Kellie Krick Even �ter a written request to be norified of
any proceedings invoIving our pmperties was
sent Yo Lanhy's office, an interim moratorium
was introduced by Kathy Lantry and passed aY
the City Council MeeBng. Ms.I.auuy
disregarded our written request and did not
no ' us of this action.
03/11lOS Paul Dubruiel (PED) Stopped by Ptanning to check status of lot
Lawrence Soderholm split apptication and detiver completed �
(PED} building plans to pu[1 a buiiding pemrit
Jcei Hussong Discussion: Paui indicated that ail the paper
work was in order and had not been signed by
Lawrence as he had received notice of a
Moratoriwn. I was given a copy of the
interim which was passed on 9Jednesday
3/04/O5. Paul went on to explain the process
for a zoning study that he estimated would
take about 6 months to complete. Paul
printed a copy of an aerial photo to look at the
subject project. I presented my case, as this
was the appropriate zoning due ta its tocation
on a busy sireet and the separation from other
single-family homes, Lawrence looked at the
moratorium and noted that most of the land
was non-developable green space owned by
the county and he said, "th9s is cleardy and
obviously block io your project" He also
stated he though T had a reasonable argument
for the current zoning to remain. Lawrence
went on to say Yhat once the study was
complete he would give his recommendation
to the pta2ning council and the city council.
Th wouid have the &nal sa .
�
a5 - aes
Krick / Hnssong City Comruunication Timeline
09/13/04 — 03/14/OS
03/11/OS Kellie Krick In hindsight, how very interesting that Lantry
had no available time to meet with us uutil
severai days after the bridge had been passed.
Also iuteresting timing how our fu11y
approved lot split application sat waiting for
the final signature until atter the bridge was
ssed.
03/14/OS Kathy Lantry Met in Lantry's office to share our proposal
(Council president) and provide her with information from which
Ellen Biaies (aide) she might make an informed decision
Jcei Hussong regarding our properties.
Kellie Krick
Clearly, the knowledge from which she
passed the bridge was limited at best. Much
time was spent sharing visuais and infomung
her of the Iristory of our conversations with
the City and our intentions
When she was asked to share her primary
concems and reason for inidating the
moratorium she suggested that the proposad
multiple-fanuly dwellings would not be
consistent with the housing Irends in the
neighborhood. When information gathered
from the LIEP computer documented
information to the contrary was presented, she
suggested that those properties must not be
legaily confornung. When it was again
explained that this research came from her
LIBP information systems she confinued to
mainiain her point of view.
When asked about the iettez that we sent to
her office requesting to be kept informed as to
proceedings ragarding our properties, she
acknowiedged having received the letter.
When quesrioned as to why she neglected to
notify us prior to or following her action, she
sim 1 said, "I'm so about that".
7
o5-ao5
� 2176 Stiilwater Ave
� SLPauI MN
� SSII9
� kellie.krick@spps.org
7anuary 22, I970
City Councit President Kathy Lantry
320 C. City Hall
St.Paul MN 55119
Dear Council President Iantry,
We are the homeowners of 2176 and 2182 Stillwater Avenue. Thes memo is in response to a letter that was
sent to ow neighbots by the District 2 Community CounciL The letter indicated that concerns regarding our
properties should be directed to you aod yow office.
Although we have made every effort to communicate our intentioivs for ow home, concerns and
misunderstandings remain. Unfortunazely, it is cleaz from the letter sent to oar neighbors, that Distaict 2
Community Couacil is also misinfrrrmed.
We have scheduled an appointrnent to meet with you personal]y to ensure that you haue a clear picture of
our intentions and we wish to thank you in advance for that opportuniry. Since there was a forma7letter
sent to our neighbors and because ow meeting with you is several weeks out, we felt it necessary to
formally request that we be contacted should thue be any acfivity that could impact ow home.
We have been residents of Disirict 2 for seven yeazs and have great(y enjoyed our cammunity and the
beautifully preserved Beaver Lake Area. Thank you for your commitment W St.Paut and the residenu of
dxe East Side.
Sincerel �
� q
Joel Hussong and Kellie Krick
05-ao5
FAX COVER SHEET
TO: Vicki Scheffer or Mary Erickson
Office of the City Council
15 W. Ke!logg Boulevard
FROM: Keltie Krick and 7oei Hussong
Property owners 2176 and 218Z Stillwater Ave
Phone: (b51)485-9010
Fax: (651)696-9678
Date: 04/06/05
Time Sent:2: i0pm
No. of pages sent including this cover sheet: 8
Comments: We are slated to speak to the first Public
Hearing item this evening (OS-205). P(ease be sure that
these signed letters from our neighbors get to the
appropriate people incfuding the council members. Thank
you.
05 ao5
O�ce of the City Council
City Hail and Court House
15 West Kellogg Boulevard
ATTENTION:
Mary Erickson
Vicki Sheffer
St.Paul City Council Members,
I am a resident of District Two. My home lies within a 300
feet radius of the properties currently in question (04/06
Council Agenda Item # 05-205). As I am one of the cfosest
neighbors who stand to be affected by the Krick/Hussong
proposed project, I wouid iike my opinion to be heard and
considered. It is my understanding that the properties are
currently zoned appropriately and meet at{ necessary City
ordinances. Ms.Krick and Mr.Hussong have been open and
honest as to their intentions for their properties and have
answered my questions.
I am not opposed to maintaining the current zoning that
wou/d aliow them to proceed with their p/ans.
Thank you for your consideration of my letter.
Sincerely,
yf�./ps
q oe, �-ib•�vcz<a/
U5 ��05
Office of the City Councii
City Hall and Court House
15 West Kellogg Boulevard
ATTENTION:
Mary Erickson
Vicki Sheffer
St.Paui City Council Members,
I am a resident of District Two. My home iies within a 300
feet radius of the properties currently in question (04/06
Council Agenda Item # 05-205). As I am one of the closest
neighbors who stand to be affected by the Krick/Nussong
proposed project, I would like my opinion to be heard and
considered. It is my understanding that the properties are
currentiy zoned appropriately and meet all necessary City
ordinances. Ms.Krick and Mr.Hussong have been open and
honest as fio their intentions for their properties and have
answered my questions.
I am not opposed to maintaining the current zoning that
would allow them to proceed with their plans.
Thank you for your consideration of my letter.
Sincerely, ,
��� �E�� �--,-�
����P,��-
�/��� s
�n�-fi
D5-�o5
Office of the City Council
City Hall and Court House
15 West Keifogg Boulevard
ATTENTION:
Mary Erickson
Vicki Sheffer
St.Paui City Council Members,
I am a resident of District Two. My home lies within a 300
feet radius of the properties currently in question {04J06
Councii Agenda Item # 05-205). As I am one of the closest
neighbors wha stand to be affected by the Krick/Hussong
proposed project, I would like my opinion to be heard and
considered. It is my understanding that the properties are
currently zoned appropriately and meet ati necessary City
ordinances. Ms.Krick and Mr.Hussong have been open and
honest as to their intentions for their properties and have
answered my questions,
I am not opposed to maintaining the current zoning that
would allow them to proceed with their p/ans.
Thank you for your consideration of my fetter.
Sincerely,�
w�� ���
�S'1��i� si �
si �'�1 tv��✓ s
�
(of �- 73�-y1�7
o5-aa5
Office of the City Councii
City Hail and Court House
15 West Keilogg 8oulevard
ATTENTION:
Mary Erickson
Vicki ShefFer
St.Paui City Council Members,
I am a resident of District 7wo. My home lies within a 300
feet radius of the properties currently in question (04/06
Councii Agenda Item # 05-205). As I am one of the closest
neighbors who stand to be affected by the Krick/tiussong
proposed project, I would like my opinion to be heard and
considered. It is my understanding that the properties are
currentty zoned appropriately and meet all necessary City
ordinances. Ms.Krick and Mr.Hussang have been open and
honest as to their intentians for their properties and have
answered my questions.
I am not opposed to maintaining the current zoning that
would allow them to proceed with their plans.
Thank you for your consideration of my ietter.
Sincerely,
r�r� ���2,�'1 D� �����
��y� /�
��5 �bVt�O��� S� �
� P�,�, �
�
05--�b5
Office of the City Counci!
City Hall and Court House
15 West Kellogg Boutevard
ATrENTION:
Mary Erickson
Vicki Sheffer
St.Paul City Council Members,
I am a resident of District Two. My property lies within a
300 feet radius of the properties currently in question
(04l06 Council Agenda Item # 05-205). As I am one of the
ctosest neighbors who stand to be affected by the
Krick/Hussong proposed project, I would like my opinion to
be heard and considered. It is my understanding that the
properties are currently zoned appropriately and meet all
necessary City ardinances. Ms.Krick and Mr.Hussong have
been open and honest as to their intentions for their
properties and have answered my questions.
I am not opposed to maintaining the current zoning that
would allow them to proceed with their pJans.
Thank you for your consideration of my letter.
Sincerety,
���r�.�� - �%�%U�
���hil�r .
�La..pl,c��, `�`�II�S
05 ao5
OfFice of the City Council
City Hail and Court House
15 West Keliogg Boulevard
ATTENTION:
Mary Erickson
Vicki Sheffer
St.Paui City Counci! Members,
I am a resident of District Two. My home lies within a 300
feet radius of the properties currently in question (04/06
Council Agenda Item # 05-205). As I am one of the closest
neighbors who stand to be affected by the Krick/Hussong
proposed project, I would iike my opinion to be heard and
considered. It is my understanding that the properties are
currently zoned appropriatety and meet aIi necessary City
ordinances. Ms.Krick and Mr.Hussong have been open and
honest as to their intentions for their properties and have
answered my questions.
I am not opposed to maintaining the current zoning that
would allow them to proceed with their pians.
Thank you for your consideration of my letter.
5incereiy,
c� `' �'�^�' . ��`'.,i
��� � ��st
�/� o�
/
�5 -��5
Office of the City Council
City Hali and Court House
15 West Ketlogg Bou(evard
ATTENTION:
Mary Erickson
Vicki Sheffer
St.Paul City Council Members,
I am a.resident of District Two. My home lies within a 300
feet radius of the properties currently in question (04/06
Council Agenda Item # 05-205). As I am one af the closest
neighbors who star►d to be affected by the Krick/Hussong
proposed project, I wouid {ike my opinion to be heard and
considered. It is my understanding that the properties are
currentiy zoned appropriately and meet aN necessary City
ordinances. Ms.Krick and Mr.Hussong have been open and
honest as to their intentions for their properties and have
answered my questions.
I am not opposed to maintaining the current zoning that
would allow them to proceed with their p/ans.
Thank you for your consideration of my letter.
Sincerely,
� � / -.
� 4 .
`�'���
��
�
��
�� �l- �8d 3352
05 ao5
Exhibit A for ci of st.Pau�
Owner Kell'�e Krick + Jcel Hussong
2182 /2176 stilhvater ave.
sY.paul. mn. 55i19
The Housing Action Ptan 2005 (draR)
�.,
■ �� ],
�� ��.
!� �
��
.� .
�
,��,�:.
,., ,.�,���
�� � �-- -- �
� �� �.
►� ,� �.�� ; , .
i. < ,' �
��.�.
� � � ��
�:�+ �. � ��,���,'
'� � • ��: '" . �a 3
� �� ��
� - �•.� - 3t�
$ ' !� i31 �
� e," � �l [�Z7 �
` � � .' i.�t °_ : �
Strate�4: Take Cate of What We Have
• Priority wili 6e given to projecfs that commit to tl�e iong-term afFor�bifrty of hocaing units.
Shategy 2: M�t New Market Demand
• Encowrage the production of housing
• Promote good design soiutions
• Encourage a diversity of building and unit types
Strateav 3: fnsure Availabilitv of Aftordable Housina
els.
NORTH
�
i
}
�
,
;
�
� �.
` I ,
,;.�'�<'✓`1= ? - 'Cf�-==�-�f-4 I± .. I 3CV . � !
Summarizing poirtts irt support maintaininQ current zoning status
_ Proposat meets Ci#y housina initiatives
_ Pronosal utilizes existinp Citv infastructuroe
�t aood d�ian solution due j,ocat�"on of orooerties to coflector sMeet. open-space and tt� "+sland
effect" that has been created.
_ Prop,osai mair►tains less densi�,y than extstir�g neiahborhood
Challenge the region to provide a fuli range of housiog choices m meet the housing needs of ali income lev-
L:= - • • � � = � � • - � 1a /
a5-
vv� �v�i a� �.�i nwi� a, w� �.n v� �.raw
Owner Keliie Krick + Jce! Hussona
2982/2176 stilhvater ave. N R
stoaul. mn. 55119
From:UUREQUIP 763 259 6309 04J13I2005 13:39 #056 P.DD1
os-a�-
Patrick L Riggs �a
� 2Z 87 Sevanth Street East . St Paul, MN 55119 •(651) 731-b947 • Fax (651} 730-&286 �
April 13, 200�
To the St. Paul City Council: Please Distribute to ALL Citv Cauncil Members
Ciry Hall & Court House
15 West Kellogg Blvd. Sent Via Fax 651-266-8574
St Pau1, MN �5101
RE: Information consideration regarding Aaenda Item # 05-205
To Whom It Msy Concem:
I am a home owner, and have just recently Uecome awaze of matters that affect my property, and
wish to convey to you what T lnzow and understand and to have this City Conncil talce ihe time io
cazefully examine it decision today far zoning as it relates to my property.
$rief History:
A couple weeks ago a man came to our door and spoke to my wife a�1d stated "if sha was opposed
Co `low inconae housing' requesting her to sign a petition, "to stop someone from buildiiag `Iow
income housin,a, that would wr�sck the iieighboxhood" My wife signed tliis petitioil, and Chen
infoaxzzed me of it. Then about a week later Ms. Kellie Krick, a property owner stopped by and
� provide ine information on the specifios as to a"inoratorium otx my property witl� the funher
intention of changing the unique RT-1 Zoning that certain homes (like miiie) have Yhat are neu�er
(Tn last 15 years) buitt, as opposed to the surrounding homes which were built over 40-50 ye2rs
ago. I ani izot siue exactly sure the name of this person, however, it may be have been a Mr. Retke,
based on the informal informaiion I received from some neighUors wlio also signed his petitio�i.
My ReqLiest:
I 2m con£�ised to understand why the City Council and speci�caliy Ms. ICathy T.atitry woutd even
wish to withdraw our current Zonin;, and simply ask "what purpose, othar dia�� to resYrlct a xight
that was granted to my properry properly (Asstmie it was, as I Uought my horne nearly 13 ye�rs
ago) would a"Study and Tssuanr,e of a moratoriuzn" on development of RT-1 Zoned pro�erties
do? 1s tl�ere some other considerarioi�, I am not awaze of?
In closin,a,....1 feel as a tax payir� property owner that full aud oomplefe infor�ltion should be
better made available specifically to the people lilca me who would be xxiost affected by any
gotentiai decision and as such, the City Council should be extremely c�eful in talcing away any
existiug property rights, especially Yhose wl�o paid more than fl�eir typioal neighbor for the newer
homes (azid 2oning).
Tuank you for your consideratiozi, please do not hesitate to contact me with questions at my
home number above, or my Office 763-785-2805 ox Mobxle 612-850-5029.
� Sineerely, . `
Patrick L Rie�s'�'� l �� �