Saint Paul logo
File #: ABZA 11-2    Version:
Type: Appeal-BZA Status: Archived
In control: City Council
Final action: 4/6/2011
Title: Public hearing to consider the appeal of Tuan Joseph Pham to a decision of the Board of Zoning Appeals denying a variance of the River Corridor setback standards in order to allow an existing statue structure in the rear yard on the bluff side of the property at 231 Isabel Street West to remain.
Sponsors: Dave Thune
Ward: Appeal
Code sections: Sec. 68.402. - Protection of shorelands, floodplains, wetlands and bluffs.
Attachments: 1. 231 Isabel.jpg, 2. 231 Isabel 1.jpg, 3. 231 Isabel 2.jpg, 4. 231 Isabel 3.jpg, 5. 231 Isabel 5.jpg, 6. 231 Isabel 4.jpg, 7. 231 Isabel variance application documents.pdf, 8. BZA staff report.pdf, 9. BZA minutes 1.pdf, 10. 231 Isabel deadline for action letter.pdf, 11. BZA minutes 2.pdf, 12. BZA Resolution.pdf, 13. 231 Isabel City Council appeal application docs.pdf, 14. 231 Isabel Public Hearing Notice.pdf, 15. ABZA 11-2 opposition letter.pdf, 16. ABZA 11-2 support letter.pdf
Related files: RES 11-789
Title
Public hearing to consider the appeal of Tuan Joseph Pham to a decision of the Board of Zoning Appeals denying a variance of the River Corridor setback standards in order to allow an existing statue structure in the rear yard on the bluff side of the property at 231 Isabel Street West to remain.

Body
In November of 2010, an inspector from the Department of Safety and Inspections (DSI) responded to a complaint regarding a structure built in the rear yard of this property. The inspector saw a structure, which can be best described as a statue, in the rear yard located within 40 feet of the bluffline. River Corridor setback standards require all development to take place at least 40 feet landward of the bluffline. The applicant subsequently contacted DSI and requested a meeting which was held on November 3, 2010. At the meeting the applicant was informed about the River Corridor setback standards and was given options to bring the property into compliance with the setback standards. Another inspection was done on November 8, 2010, by DSI inspectors along with the applicant. All concurred that the structure did not meet the bluffline setback requirements. On January 4, 2011, a letter was sent to the applicant ordering him to correct the violation by either moving the structure to meet the setback requirements or apply for a variance to allow the structure to remain at the current location. The applicant chose to apply for the variance. The initial public hearing was held on Monday, February 7, 2011. After hearing all testimonies, the BZA laid the matter over until March 7, 2011. On March 7, 2011, the BZA moved to deny the variance on a 7-0 vote.

Required Background Information
The applicant is appealing the decision of the BZA on the grounds that:

1- The statue structure does not bring hazard to life or property and will not adversely affect the safety, use, or stability of a public way.

2- The proposed variance is in keeping with the spirit and inten...

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