95-634ORIGII�AL
Presented By
Referred To
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
Council File � ��
Green Sheet # 27981
RESOLUTION
CITY OF SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA
Committee: Date
a3
Whereas, The Housing and Redevelopment Authority of tt�e City of Saint Paul,
Minnesota made applicarion to the Heritage Preservation Commission for a demolition
pernut pursuant to the provisions of the Saint Paul L.egislative Code for property located
at 669 East Third Street, legally described as Lot 4, Block 32, Lyman dayton's Addition
to the City of Saint Paul; and
Whereas, The Coxnmission conducted a public hearing on February 23, 1995, after
having provided notice to affected properry owners. The Commission, by its Resolution
2269, adopted February 23, 1995, decided to deny the application based on the following
findings and conclusions:
1. T`he Swanson House (669 E. 3rd St.) is categorized as pivotal to the
Dayton's Bluff district and is important to its integrity. Third Street
between Mounds Boulevard and maria Avenue is a major gateway
to the community, yet the historic fabric in this area is weak almost
to the point of being non-existent. There are three 187-1882
Italianate style residential buildings, including the Swanson house,
huddled together, west of which are vacant lots that once held
homes, five new houses across the street, an intrusive gas station,
and two large vacant parcels on the other side of Maria. These
three pivotal structures are the oniy historic structures on this block
and a half of Third Street. To remove one of the three would be a
significant loss to the community of their setting and would,
therefare, have an adverse impact on the character and integrity of
tl�e historic district.
2. The Housing and Redevelopment Authority has not demonstrated that the
structure is unsound or that rehabilitation is economically unfeasible. Nor
does it appear that the economic value or usefulness of any new structure
would be significantly greater than that of the existing building if it were
rehabilitated. A community organization with a track record of
accomplisl�ing difficult preservationfrehabilitation projects bas expressed
interest in rehabilitating the Swanson House but this possibility has not
been pursued by the Authority.
Whereas, Pursuant to the provisions of Section 73.06, The Housing and
Redevelopment Authority of the City of Saint Paul, Minnesota, duly filed with the City
Council an appeal from the determination made by the Heritage Preservation
Commission, requesting that a hearing be held before the City Council for the purpose
of considering the actions taken by the said Commission; and
. 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
il
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
q� � 3�
Whereas, Acting pursuant to Sections 73.06, and upon notice to affected parties a
public hearing was duly conducted by the City Council on April 19, 1995, where all
interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard; and
Whereas, The Council, having heazd the statements made, and having considered
the application, the report of staff, the record, minutes and resolurion of the
Commission, does hereby
Resolve, That the Council of the Ciry of Saint Paul does hereby reverse the
decision of the Heritage Preservation Commission in this matter, based on the following
findings of the Council:
The Housing and Redevelopment Authority has in fact demonstrated that
the structure is unsound or that rehabilitation is economically unfeasible
and that although a community organixation has e�pressed interest in
rehabilitating the Swanson House this possibility has not been pursued by
the organization.
Further Resolved, That the appeal of The Housing and Redevelopment Authority
of the City of Saint Paul, Minnesota, be and is hereby granted; and, be it
Finally Resolved, That the Council Secretary shall mail a copy of this resolution
to The Housing and Redevelopment Authority of the City of Saint Paul, Minnesota, the
Zoning Administrator and the Heritage Preservation Commission.
Requested by Department of:
By:
Approved by
By:
i� ��
� '
By:
Form Ap r v
By:
App ov by
Cou c'
By:
by City Attorney
for Submission to
Adopted by Council: Date y,`(.
Adoption Certified by Counc Secretary
9s �a �
DEPARTMENT/OFFICFJCOUNCIL DATE INITIATED N� 2 7 9 81
c� c«�;t �-�-9s GREEN SHEE
INttiAVDATE INfTIAL/DATE
COMACT PERSON & PHONE O DEPARTMENT DIFiECTOfl � CIN COUNCIL
Cp�jCj�]$�f�}���n p$$IGN OCIT'ATTORNEY OCITYClEF1K
MUST BE ON COUNCIL AGENDA 8Y (OATE) �NBER FOR ❑ BUDGEf DIREGTOR � FIN. & MGT. SEFiVICES Dlfl.
fl0Ui7NG
OPDER � MAYOR (OR ASSISTAM1IT) O
TOTAL # OF SIGNATURE PAGES (CLIP ALL LOCATIONS FOR SIGNATUR�
ACTION RE�UESTED:
APProv�nB resolution stating that the City Coimcil reverses the dec:ision ofthe Aeritage Preservation Commission and to pursue demolilion
of the propc�rty at 669 E. 3rd Street.
RECqMMENDATIONS: Approve (A) or Ae�ec[ (R) pEHSONAL SERVICE CONTRACTS MUST ANSWEF THE FOLLOWING DUESTIONS:
_ PLANNING CAMMISSION _ CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION �� Has thi5 per50n/firtn Bv2r wOrkEd under d COntr3Ct for �hi5 depertment?
_ CIB COMMITTEE YES NO
_ STAFF 2. Has this person/firm ever been a city employee?
— YES NO
_ oisrpici cOUar _ 3. Does this person/firm possess a skill not normally possessed by any current ciry employee?
SUPPOHTS WHICH COUNCIL O&IECTIVE? �'ES NO
Ezplatn all yes answers on separate sheet and attaeh to green sheet
INITIATING PROBLEM, ISSUE, OPPOATUNITV (Who, What, When, Where, Why�:
The Housing and Redevelopment Authority has in fact demonstrated that the structure is unsound or that rehabilitation is economically
unfeasible and that removal of flris structure is inevitable.
ADVANTAGESIFAPPROVED�
Removal of a blighted property in Dayton's Bluff.
DISADVANTAGES IF APPFOVED�
None
DISADVANTAGES IG NOTAPPROVED.
The blighted pmperLy will continue to exist in Dayton's Bluff.
70TAL AMOUNT OF TRANSACTION $ COST/REVENUE BUDGETED (CIRCLE ONE) YES NO
FUNDIfdG SOURCE ACTIVITY NUMBER
FINANCIAL INFORMATION: (EXPLAIN)