Title
Memorializing a City Council decision to deny the appeal of Stronger Sober House from a Board of Zoning Appeals decision to deny a variance request to establish a 12-resident supportive housing facility on the property at 269 Harrison Avenue.
Body
WHEREAS, on May 9, 2025, Chad Unger, on behalf of Stronger Sober House (Applicant), under Zoning File No. 25-033888, for the purpose of establishing a 12-resident supportive housing facility on property commonly known as 269 Harrison Avenue, [PIN No. 012823420050] and legally described as WHITACRE BRISBINE & MULLENS SU EX N 46 2/10 FT LOT 96 which is located in a H2 zoning district, applied to the Board of Zoning Appeals (“Board”) for a variance of 516 feet from the 1,320 feet minimum distance requirement for specified congregate living facilities.
AND, WHEREAS, the said application was duly noticed for a public hearing before the Board on May 30, 2025; AND
WHEREAS, on June 9, 2025, the Board conducted a public hearing where all persons interested in the 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, Minnesota Statute § 462.357, subd. 6 provides that a city may grant a variance when the applicant for said variance establishes that there are practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance; AND
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statute § 462.357, subd. 6 defines "Practical difficulties" as the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the zoning ordinance; the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner; and the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties; AND
WHEREAS, Section 61.601, of the City of Saint Paul’s Legislative Code also requires variance applicants to demonstrate practical difficulties; AND
WHEREAS, on June 9, 2025, the board considered the application and the staff report dated, May 9, 2025, which is incorporated into this resolution by reference and, following deliberations regarding said application and its accompanying recommendation, the board made the following findings supporting its denial of said application, as set forth in Board of Zoning Appeals Resolution Zing File: 25-033888, which is also incorporated herein by reference as follows:
* * * *
Finding one: The variance is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the zoning code.
The existing building is a single-family dwelling approved as a 12-resident sober house. The applicant is proposing to establish a 12-resident supportive housing facility to replace the existing use. The zoning code states that supportive housing facilities shall be a minimum distance of 1,320 feet from specified congregate living facilities with more than six (6) adult residents; this facility is 804 feet from a specified congregate living facility with more that six (6) adult residents, for a variance of 516 feet. The variance request is consistent with the purpose and intent of § 60.103 of the zoning code to provide for housing choice and affordability. This finding is met.
Finding two: The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan.
The proposed facility supports Policy H-15 of the Saint Paul Comprehensive Plan, which encourages the development of a diverse range of culturally appropriate housing types across the city to serve residents at all life stages and levels of ability. This finding is met.
Finding three: The applicant has established that there are practical difficulties in complying with the provision, that the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the provision. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties.
The zoning code requires a 1,320-foot separation between specified congregate living facilities with more than six (6) adult residents to ensure their integration into the broader community and to avoid the creation of institutional clusters. The proposed facility would be located 804 feet from a specified congregate living facility.
Finding three is not met for the following reasons:
The applicant could house up to six individuals at this property by right without [a variance to] the required separation;
The fact that this property is within 1,320 feet of another specified facility is not a practical difficulty, but rather due to the owner's choice to pursue this use at this location;
It is owner's decision to pursue supportive housing rather than other available housing options;
The difficulty is the result of the owner's decision to pursue supportive housing at the proposed resident number;
The owner has not demonstrated that there are practical difficulties to open a supportive housing facility at the number allowed by-right by the ordinance;
There are other locations that the applicant could pursue within the City of Saint Paul [to open a supportive housing facility];
There are other available uses for the property that would not require a variance; and
The difficulty is of the applicant's making.
Finding four: The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner.
Finding four is not met:
The property could house up to six residents without triggering the need for a variance of the separation requirement. The requested variance arises not from unique circumstances of the land, but from the applicant’s desire to exceed the permitted number of residents within the required separation distance. Other properties within 1,320 feet of the specified congregate living facility are in compliance with this standard. Given that the separation requirement affects other properties within the 1,320 feet proximity to the specified congregate living facility, the plight is not unique to the landowner, but general to the surrounding area.
Finding Five: The variance will not permit any use that is not allowed in the zoning district ·where the affected land is located.
A supportive housing facility is a permitted use in the H2 zoning district granting the variance would not allow a use otherwise prohibited in this zoning district. This finding is met.
Finding six is as follows: The variance will not alter the essential character of the surrounding area.
Although the proposed supportive housing facility would be within a quarter mile of a specified congregate living facility, the two facilities are separated by 7th Street West and the facility would not alter the essential character. This finding is met.
* * * *
AND, WHEREAS, on June 9, 2025, pursuant to Leg. Code § 61.702(a), the Applicant, under Zoning File No. 25-043750, duly filed an appeal from the Board’s June 9, 2025, decision regarding the denial of variance from the required distance between congregate living facilities based on findings three and four; AND
WHEREAS, a public hearing on the said appeal was noticed on August 1, 2025, AND
WHEREAS, on August 13, 2025, the Council conducted a public hearing on the Applicant’s appeal where all persons interested were afforded the opportunity to be heard; AND,
WHEREAS, upon conclusion of the hearings and based upon all the records and testimony presented, the Council, at the close of the public hearing, duly considered the matter and declined to grant the appeal in the applicant’s favor; AND
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, based upon all files, reports, and testimony in the matter, the Council hereby denies applicant’s appeal and hereby adopts the findings and recommendations of the Board of Zoning as its own. AND,
BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED, that the City Clerk provide a copy of this memorialization resolution to Appellant, Chad Unger, the Board of Zoning Appeals, and to zoning administrator Diatta.