Title
Memorializing a City Council decision to grant the appeal of Joe Bennett from the Board of Zoning Appeals decision denying a zoning variance to convert an existing lit freestanding sign to dynamic display at 1305 7th Street West.
Body
WHEREAS, On December 21, 2025, Joe Bennett (“Applicant”), applied to the Board of Zoning Appeals (“BZA”) in BZA File No. 000232-2025 for a variance from the strict application of the provisions of Section 64.405 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code for the purpose of converting an existing lit freestanding sign to dynamic display on property in a B2 zoning district and commonly known as 1305 7th Street West, and legally described as CLARKE'S ADDITION EX VICTORIA AND 7TH STS LOTS 16 AND LOT 17 BLK 8 (PIN: 112823430014); and
WHEREAS, Section 64.405 (a) permits business signs with dynamic displays to be placed at least seventy-five (75) feet, as measured along the road, from a residential district and fifty (50) feet from a residential district measured radially; and
WHEREAS, Staff found the property is located in a commercial district that is completely surrounded by a residential district; and
WHEREAS, Applicant’s ability to update the sign in a manner consistent with other commercial properties, which are typically located in fully commercial corridors, is limited; and
WHEREAS, Section 64.207 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code authorizes the City to grant variances for signs according to the provisions in Section 61.601 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code; and
WHEREAS, A sign variance must also demonstrate that such variance is needed due to unusual conditions pertaining to the sign needs of a specific building or lot, that the sign would not create a hazard, would not be objectionable to adjacent property owners, would not adversely affect residential property through excessive glare and lighting, and would be in keeping with the general character of the surrounding area; and
WHEREAS, The variance application was duly noticed for a public hearing, having sent written notice on January 21, 2026 to property owners within 350 feet of the property before the BZA; and
WHEREAS, On February 2, 2026, the BZA, in accordance with Section 61.601 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code duly conducted a public hearing on the Applicant’s variance request where all persons interested in said application were afforded the opportunity to present testimony either in-person at the hearing or by the prior submission of written testimony for the record; and
WHEREAS, At the public hearing the BZA considered the application, a staff report dated January 29, 2026, which contained a recommendation to approve Applicant’s variance request and is incorporated into this resolution by reference, and testimony from the Applicant as set forth in the BZA’s adopted minutes which are incorporated herein by reference; and
WHEREAS, The BZA, upon closing the public hearing, and based upon all the records and testimony received, including the report and recommendation of the BZA staff dated January 29, 2026, as substantially reflected in the minutes, moved to deny the requested variance for failure to establish practical difficulties and a finding that the variance will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood (findings three and six respectively); and
WHEREAS, The motion to deny said application was seconded, but failed on a three to one (3-1) vote; and
WHEREAS, Section 61. 203 (b) of the Saint Paul Legislative Code provides in part: [f]our (4) members of the board shall constitute a quorum for the conduct of its business; provided, that no action may be taken unless at least four (4) members vote in favor of such action; and
WHEREAS, A subsequent motion to approve the variance was made, but failed to receive a second to the motion, for the reasons stated on the record; and
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statute §15.99 subdivision 2 (b) provides in part: [w]hen a vote on a resolution or properly made motion to approve a request fails for any reason, the failure shall constitute a denial of the request provided that those voting against the motion state on the record the reasons why they oppose the request; and
WHEREAS, On February 10, 2026, Applicant, pursuant to Section 61.702 (a) of the Saint Paul Legislative Code, duly filed an appeal from the BZA’s February 2, 2026, determination in this matter under Zoning Appeal Application BZA File No. 000232-2025 and requested a hearing before the City Council for the purpose of considering the actions taken by the BZA; and
WHEREAS, The City Council appeal was assigned DSIAPP-000317-2026, and the matter was set for hearing on March 4, 2026; and
WHEREAS, On February 18, 2026, City staff sent notice of the March 4, 2026, City Council public hearing to property owners within 350 feet of the property; and
WHEREAS, On March 4, 2026, and pursuant to Section 61.702 (b) of the Saint Paul Legislative Code, a public hearing was duly conducted by the City Council where all interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard; and
WHEREAS, Following public testimony, having considered the application, the reports, the statements made before the BZA, and the BZA’s minutes and staff report, the City Council found errors in the BZA’s application of findings three and six; and
WHEREAS, The City Council found that finding three, practical difficulties, had been met where the unique circumstance of a commercial lot being surrounded by residential lot prevented the sign from meeting the residential distance requirement; and
WHEREAS, The City Council found that finding six, the essential character of the neighborhood, would not be altered by the variance and would reduce the size and lighting of the sign and overall impact on the neighborhood; and
WHEREAS, A motion was made and passed seven to zero (7-0), finding that findings three and six had been met; and
BE IT RESOLVED, That the Council of the City of Saint Paul, having considered the Appellants application and all the reports, records, and minutes in this matter including the BZA staff report, hereby grants Applicant’s zoning variance application; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That the Council, in support of its decision, hereby adopts as its own and hereby incorporates by reference, the staff’s recommendation as set forth in staff report dated January 29, 2026; and
BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED, That the City Clerk provide a copy of this memorialization resolution to Appellant, Joe Bennett, the Zoning Administrator, and the BZA.