Saint Paul logo
File #: RES 23-343    Version: 1
Type: Resolution Status: Passed
In control: City Council
Final action: 3/8/2023
Title: Memorializing the City Council’s decision to deny an appeal from a decision of the Board of Zoning Appeals to deny a 10-foot lot-width variance for the purpose of splitting property commonly known as 1841 Lincoln Avenue into two lots.
Sponsors: Amy Brendmoen
Related files: ABZA 22-4
Title
Memorializing the City Council’s decision to deny an appeal from a decision of the Board of Zoning Appeals to deny a 10-foot lot-width variance for the purpose of splitting property commonly known as 1841 Lincoln Avenue into two lots.
Body

WHEREAS, on August 15, 2022, Amy and Kurt Atkinson (hereinafter “Appellants”), filed an application with the Board of Zoning Appeals ( hereinafter, “BZA”) under BZA File No. 22-086120, for a variance from the strict application of Leg. Code § 66.231 pertaining to R3 zoning district lot-width minimum standards for property commonly known as 1841 Lincoln Avenue legally and legally described as Lots 6 and 7, Block 4, Kenna’s Subdivision of Lot 53, Block 4, Rosedale Park, [PIN: 042823310097], (hereinafter, the “Property”); and


WHEREAS, on September 6, 2022, the BZA pursuant to Leg. Code § 61.203(c), having sent written notice on August 25, 2023 to property owners within 350 feet of the Property, duly conducted a public hearing on Appellants variance application at which the BZA received a report and recommendation from BZA staff and where all persons interested were given an opportunity to submit testimony regarding the said variance but, during the course of the hearing, the BZA lost quorum and, as a result, the BZA could take no action on the variance application and therefore opted to have the public hearing open remain open and to continue the matter to the BZA’s October 3, 2022 meeting; and


WHEREAS, October 3, 2022, the BZA again considered the Appellants variance request and, after hearing additional testimony from the Appellants and receiving additional public comment, the BZA closed the hearing and, following considerable deliberation, duly moved to deny the said variance application based upon the record, the public hearing evidence and the BZA staff report, based upon the following findings of fact as set forth in BZA Resolution No. 22-086120 as follows:


“1. The variance is in harmony ·with the general purp...

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