Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
St. Paul council overturns zoning board, clears way for multifamily project at 1963 Grand Avenue
Summary
The St. Paul City Council voted 6–1 to grant an appeal by Benegist Properties LLC, overturning a Board of Zoning Appeals denial of two variances (height and floor-area ratio) for a multifamily project at 1963 Grand Avenue. A council member said staff relied on historical easement facts rather than evaluating practical difficulties under zoning findings.
A St. Paul City Council member moved and the council voted 6–1 to grant an appeal by Benegist Properties LLC and allow two variances for a proposed multifamily dwelling at 1963 Grand Avenue.
The mover argued the Board of Zoning Appeals and the staff report erred procedurally by focusing on historical facts — notably that a public alley easement opened in 1888 — rather than evaluating whether the applicant demonstrated the "practical difficulties" required under the zoning code. The mover cited Zoning Code section 63.101, which treats half the alley as part of the lot for density purposes, and said the staff analysis did not address whether the lot’s circumstances were unique and not created by the landowner.
"There was an error in procedure," the mover said, urging the council to grant the appeal so the project could proceed as proposed. That motion carried with six votes in favor and one opposed.
The appeal seeks variances from the city’s 40-foot height limit and from the applicable floor-area ratio to allow a five-story building; staff had recommended denial on the grounds that the applicant had not established the required findings, specifically findings 3 and 4 pertaining to practical difficulties and uniqueness of the property. The mover said the staff report offered historical context about the alley but did not evaluate whether the applicant’s plight met the legal standard.
The council did not adopt additional conditions on the approval in the discussion recorded in the meeting transcript. The transcript records staff asserting the applicant "failed to establish their practical difficulties" and noting the alley’s historical opening date and existence when the applicant purchased the property in 2022.
What happens next: The council’s action grants the requested variances so the applicant may pursue the multifamily development as proposed. The transcript does not record further implementation steps, permits issued, or any subsequent conditions tied to the approval; those remain subject to standard permitting and review processes.
Provenance: The council’s consideration and vote on this appeal are on the meeting transcript from the segment beginning with the item introduction (SEG 045) through the vote and immediate discussion (SEG 133).
