Saint Paul logo
File #: RES 20-1749    Version: 1
Type: Resolution Status: Passed
In control: City Council
Final action: 12/16/2020
Title: Memorializing the Council’s decision to grant an appeal by Suebue LLC from a decision of the Board of Zoning Appeals which had denied SueBue LLC’s request for rear-yard setback and lot coverage variances in order to construct a new single-family home at 1493 Highland Parkway.
Sponsors: Amy Brendmoen
Title
Memorializing the Council’s decision to grant an appeal by Suebue LLC from a decision of the Board of Zoning Appeals which had denied SueBue LLC’s request for rear-yard setback and lot coverage variances in order to construct a new single-family home at 1493 Highland Parkway.

Body
WHEREAS, on August 31, 2020, Michael Buelow, d/b/a Suebue LLC (“Applicant”), duly applied to the Board of Zoning Appeals (“BZA” ) under BZA File No. 20-069826 for variances from the strict application of the Legislative Code in order to construct a one-story, single-family dwelling with an attached garage on the Applicant’s property commonly known as 1493 Highland Parkway and legally described as Harkness Sunnyslope Lot 34 [PIN: 102823330150]; and


WHEREAS, the Applicant’s property is zoned R4 and is located planning district 15. The Applicant’s building plan, as proposed, required two variances: (1) Rear-yard setback. 25-feet required; 1 foot proposed for a variance of 24 feet. [Leg. Code § 66.231]. (2) Lot coverage. 40% maximum; 40.2% proposed for a variance of 0.2% (17.8 square feet). [Leg. Code § 66.232]. In a report dated September 9, 2020, which was provided to members of the BZA and the Applicant, BZA staff recommended approving both variances for the reasons stated therein; and


WHEREAS, on September 21, 2020 the BZA, in accordance with Leg. Code § 61.601, duly conducted a public hearing on the Applicant’s variance applications, the said hearing being conducted remotely pursuant to the various Executive and Emergency Orders in effect at the time as it had been deemed, due to the Covid-19 pandemic, neither practical nor prudent to conduct “in-person” hearings and, accordingly, as provided by law, members of the BZA and BZA staff in attendance participated remotely as did the Applicant with members of the public being afforded the opportunity to be heard by submitting, no later than noon of the said hearing date, written testimony for the BZA’s consideration and...

Click here for full text
Date NameDistrictOpinionCommentAction
No records to display.