Saint Paul logo
File #: RES 22-289    Version: 1
Type: Resolution Status: Passed
In control: City Council
Final action: 2/23/2022
Title: Memorializing the City Council’s decision to grant an appeal by Thomas Schroeder from a decision of the BZA denying a rear-yard lot coverage variance requested for the purpose of building a new garage at 1446 Summit Avenue.
Sponsors: Amy Brendmoen
Title
Memorializing the City Council’s decision to grant an appeal by Thomas Schroeder from a decision of the BZA denying a rear-yard lot coverage variance requested for the purpose of building a new garage at 1446 Summit Avenue.

Body
WHEREAS, on October 11, 2021, Thomas Schroeder (“Applicant”), in BZA File No: 21-310398, applied to the Board of Zoning Appeals (“BZA”) for a variance from the regulation of the number and maximum rear-yard area coverage of accessory structures located in residential zoning districts under Leg. Code § 63.501(f) for the purpose of constructing a new garage on Applicant’s property commonly known as 1446 Summit Ave [PIN No. 032823310084], legally described as Wann's Addition To St. Paul Subj To St Lots 12 And Lot 13 Blk 4, and located in an R2 residential zoning district; and


WHEREAS, the rear-yard area of Applicant’s property contained two detached garages which totaled 908 square feet in area and Applicant proposed to demolish one of these garages and replacing it with a new garage which, upon its completion, would create 1,438 square feet of rear-yard area coverage by accessory structures which exceeded the 1000 square foot limitation on such coverage by 438 square feet and, consequently, Applicant requested a 438 square foot variance from Leg. Code § 63.501(f)‘s lot coverage standard; and


WHEREAS, on November 1, 2021 the BZA, pursuant to Leg. Code § 61.303, conducted a public hearing on the Applicant’s variance application which was conducted remotely via electronic means, due to the Covid-19 pandemic, in compliance with the Executive and Emergency Orders in effect at the time, as it had been previously deemed neither practical nor prudent to conduct “in- person” hearings and, accordingly, attending members of the BZA and BZA staff did so remotely while the Applicant and members of the public were afforded the opportunity to submit, no later than noon of the said hearing date, written testimony for the BZA’s considerat...

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