HomeMy WebLinkAboutVII-B-03
City Council Memorandum
To: Mayor Hicks & City Councilmembers
From: John Hinzman, Community Development Director
Date: September 4, 2018
Item: Variance & OHDS Review – 414 West 5th Street – Robert Wright
Council Action Requested: Consider the request of Robert Wright for the following actions related to construction of
a new 1,000 s.f. detached garage at 414 West 5th Street:
1) Variance to the five foot minimum sideyard setback requirement per City Code Chapter 155.50. The applicant proposes to construct the garage 2 feet 8 inches from
the property line resulting in a variance request of 2 feet 4 inches. The garage
would be constructed at the same setback as the existing garage to be removed.
2) Original Hastings Design Standards (OHDS) review for construction of the garage.
The City Council serves as the Board of Adjustment and Appeals in consideration of the
variance, requiring the support of 6 of 7 councilmembers. The Planning Commission
rules for review require a majority of the quorum present to make a recommendation;
making the 3-2 vote to recommend approval valid. Approval of the OHDS review requires a simple majority of Council.
Background Information:
Mr. Wright seeks to replace an existing 369 s.f. garage with a 1,000 s.f. garage. The
existing garage is located 2 feet 8 inches from the property line. City Code requires a minimum building setback of five feet.
Advisory Commission Discussion:
The Planning Commission reviewed the application as follows:
• August 13, 2018 – No Setback from Property Line - Review of the
original request to construct the garage on the side property line with no
setback. Commissioners discussed the age and condition of the existing
building, location of the garage door in proximity to the house (would the garage door be behind the house if adhering to the minimum
setback). The Planning Commission voted 5-1 (Alpaugh dissenting) to
table the request to the August 27th Planning Commission Meeting and
requested that the applicant provide further information on the location
of the property line and to present better drawings.
• August 27, 2018 – 2’ 8” Setback from Property Line – The applicant
presented revised drawings at the meeting showing the existing garage
VII-B-03
to be 2’ 8” from the property line and amended his variance request to
place the new garage at the setback of the existing garage, resulting in a
2’ 4” variance from the five foot minimum setback. Staff recommended
denial of the variance. Commissioners discussed use of the garage and rationale for granting the variance. The Commission voted 3-2 (aye -
Johnson, Barse, and Best; nay – Deaver and Alpaugh) to recommend
approval of the variance. The Commission voted 5-0 to recommend
approval of the OHDS review. Please see the attached minutes for
further information.
Council Committee Discussion: N\A
Recommendation:
• Variance
o Approval –Planning Commission - The Commission voted 3-2
to recommend approval of the variance; adherence to the five
foot setback would place the garage door partially behind the home. o Denial – Staff - Staff recommends denial of the variance due to
due to lack of a practical difficulty; the applicant could modify
the garage size.
o Staff will draft a resolution for the variance per direction of the City Council.
• OHDS
o Approval by both Planning Commission and Staff
Attachments:
• Resolution – OHDS
• Site Plans Presented at August 27, 2018 Planning Commission Meeting
• Planning Commission Minutes – August 27, 2018
• Planning Commission Staff Report – August 27, 2018
VII-B-03
HASTINGS CITY COUNCIL
RESOLUTION NO. _________________ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HASTINGS APPROVING THE ORIGINAL HASTINGS DESIGN STANDARDS REVIEW TO
CONSTRUCT A DETACHED GARAGE AT 414 5TH STREET W
Council member ___________________________ introduced the following
Resolution and moved its adoption:
WHEREAS, Robert Wright has petitioned for Original Hastings Design Standards
(OHDS) approval to construct a +/- 1,000 s.f. detached garage at 414 5th Street W, legally described as Lot 6, Block 25, TOWN OF HASTINGS, Dakota County, Minnesota; and
WHEREAS, on August 27, 2018 the Planning Commission reviewed the
application and forwarded to the City Council a recommendation for approval; and
WHEREAS, The City Council has reviewed the request and concurs with the
recommendation of the Planning Commission.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF HASTINGS AS FOLLOWS: That the City Council of the City of Hastings hereby approves the OHDS review as
presented subject to the following conditions:
1) Conformance with the plans submitted with the City Council Staff Report dated
September 4, 2018.
2) The building must adhere to minimum zoning setbacks unless a variance is
approved by City Council.
3) Approval is subject to a one year Sunset Clause; the plat must be recorded with
Dakota County within one year of City Council approval or approval is null and
void.
VII-B-03
Council member _____________________ moved a second to this resolution, and upon
being put to a vote it was adopted by all Council members present.
Adopted by the Hastings City Council on September 4, 2018, by the following vote:
Ayes:
Nays:
Absent:
______________________________
Paul J. Hicks, Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________________
Julie Flaten, City Clerk
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the above is a true and correct copy of resolution presented to
and adopted by the City of Hastings, County of Dakota, Minnesota, on the 4th day of
September 2018, as disclosed by the records of the City of Hastings on file and of record
in the office.
______________________________
Julie Flaten, City Clerk (SEAL)
This instrument drafted by:
City of Hastings (JH)
101 4th St. East
Hastings, MN 55033
VII-B-03
Planning Commission Minutes – August 27, 2018
3. Robert Wright – Variance and OHDS Review #2018-41 – Construction of
a detached garage within the five foot sideyard setback – 414 5th Street
W. John Hinzman present a summary of the staff report requesting that the
variance be denied.
Robert Wright submitted new plans for the Commission to consider. Applicant had the property line surveyed and has learned that the existing garage is not located on the property line, but is setback 2 feet 8 inches
from the line. He is now seeking a variance of 2 feet 4 inches from the
required 5 foot minimum setback requirement.
Commissioner Barse wanted to verify that the applicant is now requesting an encroachment of the five foot rule by two feet, four inches. He also
wanted clarification on the grandfathering rule with allowing the new
structure to be built at the same setback as the existing structure.
Hinzman clarified that once the existing structure is demolished, the grandfather rule does not apply. It only applies to structures that are being added onto. Commissioner Barse also asked about the applicants
business and what his needs are for the garage. He also asked about the
power lines overhead and the clearance with the new garage. He wanted
to know if there are any provision around this situation. Director Hinzman stated that he is not sure if there is any provisions, but as long as the power lines don’t touch the building, it should be okay.
Commissioner Alpaugh wanted to identify the hardship that the applicant
is having. He does not see why the applicant cannot move the garage over to meet the five foot ordinance requirement. Robert Wright stated that the plan is to have an eighteen foot garage door and moving the garage
over to the five foot setback line would cause some of the garage door to
be behind the house. This would make it more difficult to get a car in and
out of the garage. Commissioner Alpaugh asked if he could move the garage door over. Mr. Wright stated that the current plan is to have the garage door centered on the structure. If he was to move the garage door
over, he would have to change the building plans. Commissioner Alpaugh
asked Director Hinzman if he would recommend denial of the revised 2
foot 4 inch variance request. Director Hinzman stated that he is still having a tough time finding hardship to allow the variance. He said that based off of the new plans, he would still recommend denial of variance.
Chair Deaver mentioned that on the original plan, the garage structure
was at the ten foot rear setback line. He noticed that it is now at fifteen feet and if it would help to move the garage back to the ten foot line. Mr. Wright stated that the lot survey showed the property line at a different
spot and he had concerns about moving it to the ten foot line because
there is a wall there that might not be able to handle the weight of the
garage.
VII-B-03
Commissioner Alpaugh motions to recommend denial of the variance as
recommend by staff. Motion seconded by Commissioner Deaver.
Ayes, 2 (Alpaugh and Deaver); Nays, 3 (Johnson, Barse, and Best).
Motion fails Commissioner Johnson motions to approve the two foot, four inch
variance as presented by the applicant has. Seconded by Commissioner
Barse
Ayes, 3 (Johnson, Barse, and Best); Nays, 2 (Alpaugh and Deaver). Motion approved.
Commissioner Alpaugh motions to recommend approval of the OHDS
review as presented. Seconded by Commissioner Barse. Motion
approved 5-0. Both actions will move forward to the City Council Meeting on September
4, 2018.
VII-B-03
V
I
I
-
B
-
0
3
V
I
I
-
B
-
0
3
V
I
I
-
B
-
0
3
To: Planning Commission
From: John Hinzman, Community Development Director
Date: August 27, 2018
Item: Continued: Variance/ OHDS Review – Sideyard Setback for Garage – 414 5th Street
West – Robert Wright
Planning Commission Action Requested
Review and make a recommendation on the following actions related to construction of a
1,000 s.f. garage located at 414 West 5th Street owned by Robert Wright:
1) Variance to the five foot minimum sideyard setback requirement per City Code
Chapter 155.50. The applicant proposes to construct the garage on the property line,
similar to the existing garage that will be removed.
2) Original Hastings Design Standards (OHDS) review for construction of the garage.
Planning Commission Meeting – August 13, 2018
The Commission reviewed the request at the August 13, 2018 meeting. Commissioners
discussed the age and condition of the existing building, location of the garage door in
proximity to the house (would the garage door be behind the house if adhering to the
minimum setback). The Planning Commission voted 5‐1 (Alpaugh dissenting) to table the
request to the August 27th Planning Commission Meeting and requested that the applicant
provide further information on the location of the property line and to present better
drawings. Please see the Planning Commission Minutes for further information.
Existing Condition
The existing 9,181 s.f. (66’ x 140’) property contains a 1,392 s.f. house constructed in 1930
and a 369 s.f. (18’ x 20.5’) 1.5 stall garage. The rear yard is generally flat with a couple of
mature trees. There is a 10 foot drop off along the eastern 10 feet of the property (behind
the existing fence).
Proposed Condition
Removal of the existing 1.5 stall garage and construction of a 1,000 s.f. (25’ x 40’) garage to
be located along the western property line.
Planning Commission Memorandum
VII-B-03
Comprehensive Plan Classification
The site is designated as “Medium Density Residential” in the 2030 Hastings Comprehensive
Plan. The use conforms to the Comprehensive Plan
Zoning Classification
The site is zoned R‐2 – Medium Density Residence and is within the OHDS District. Homes
without an attached garage may have up to two accessory structures totaling no greater
than 1,000 s.f.
Adjacent Zoning and Land Use
The following land uses abut the site
Existing Use Zoning Comprehensive Plan
North
Single Family Home
R‐2 – Medium Density Residence
Medium Density Residential
East
Single Family Home
R‐2 – Medium Density Residence
Medium Density Residential
South
5th Street
Single Family Home
R‐2 – Medium Density Residence
Medium Density Residential
West
Single Family Home
R‐2 – Medium Density Residence
Medium Density Residential
VARIANCE REVIEW
Variance Definition
Variances are deviations from strict compliance of City Code provisions. The Board of
Adjustment and Appeals may recommend issuance of a Variance upon determination of
findings of fact and conclusions supporting the variance as established in Chapter 30.02,
Subd. F of the City Code.
Board of Zoning Adjustment and Appeals
Hastings City Code Chapter 30.02 establishes the Board of Zoning Adjustment and Appeals
and appoints the Planning Commission to facilitate the Board’s roles and duties.
Applications for Variances require Board of Zoning Adjustment and Appeals review.
Requested Variance – Minimum Sideyard Setback
Hastings City Code 155.50 establishes a five foot minimum setback for accessory buildings
within the R‐2 Zoning District.
VII-B-03
Variance Review
The Planning Commission may consider variances to the Zoning Code that are not contrary
to the public interest where owing to special conditions, and where a literal enforcement of
the provision of the City Code would result in practical difficulties.
Variances may be granted providing the following has been satisfied (staff comments are in
bold italics):
(1) Because of the particular physical surroundings, shape or topographic conditions of the
land involved, a practical difficulty to the owner would result, as distinguished from a mere
inconvenience, if the strict letter of the regulations were to be carried out;
The size and dimensions of the lot are identical to most other lots within the
neighborhood. The eastern approximate ten feet of the lot does drop off, and is located
behind a fence.
(2) The conditions upon which the petition for a variance is based are unique to the tract of
land for which the variance is sought and one not applicable, generally, to other property
with the same zoning classification;
The applicant has not formally stated the reason for the variance, however in past
conversations he’s stated that adherence to the five foot minimum setback reduces the
amount of his usable backyard. The proposed garage is 7 feet wider than the existing
garage. Placing the garage at the 5 foot minimum setback would place the eastern wall
of the structure 12 feet further east than the existing garage wall.
(3) The purpose of the variance is not based exclusively upon a desire to increase the value
or income potential of the parcel of land;
The applicant has stated a desire to construct a larger garage to house equipment for his
business.
(4) The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to
other land or improvements in the vicinity in which the tract of land is located;
Granting the variance would place the structure directly on the property line; it is unclear
whether this is the true location of the line, or if a portion of the building would encroach
onto the neighboring property.
(5) The proposed variance will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to property,
or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets, or increase the danger of fire,
or endanger the public safety or substantially diminish or impair property values within the
vicinity; (Prior Code, §11.08)
The request would not impair light, air, congestion, fire danger, public safety, or property
values within the vicinity.
VII-B-03
(6) The variance is in harmony with the purposes and intent of ordinance;
The proposal would cause there to be no sideyard setback.
(7) The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan;
The variance would allow for expanded use of an existing building and could strengthen
the property value.
(8) The proposal puts the property to use in a reasonable manner;
Construction of the garage is a reasonable use.
(9) There are practical difficulties in complying with the official control.
The applicant has stated that application of the five foot minimum setback would reduce
the amount of usable rear yard.
VARIANCE RECOMMENDATION
Denial of the Variance is recommended subject to the following findings of fact:
1) Lack of a practical difficulty. There is no physical impediment in applying the
five foot setback. The applicant could adjust the size of the proposed 1,000
s.f structure to provide increased open space in the rear yard.
2) Construction on the property line. Granting the variance would place the
structure directly on the property line; it is unclear whether this is the true
location of the line, or if a portion of the building would encroach onto the
neighboring property
OHDS REVIEW
OHDS District
The Original Hastings Design Standards (OHDS) are effective properties zoned R‐2 and
generally located between Pine Street and the CP Railroad tracks, south to Highway 55\10th
Street. They are intended to preserve and enhance traditional neighborhood design by
reflecting the external characteristics of building dating from 1845 to 1940. OHDS
Standards do not seek to require a certain fidelity to specific architectural styles, but to
ensure that the general form of the building is consistent with the neighborhood.
OHDS Review
The proposed garage should be of similar size and design of the main structure and of other
garages in the immediate area. There is an existing 1,000 s.f. garage within the block, most
other garages are smaller in size. The sketch drawing of the proposed garage looks similar to
surrounding garages and the home on the site. The garage will have 4” vinyl siding. Garages
shall be prohibited from fronting on a public street when an alley exists. Since the garage
VII-B-03
replaces an existing garage with access to the street, this is acceptable. The garage appears
to fit in with the existing home and other garages in the area.
OHDS RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the OHDS Review subject to adherence of the attached
architectural plans.
ATTACHMENTS
Location Map
Site Plan
Site Pictures
Architectural Elevations
Application
VII-B-03
LOCATION MAP
VII-B-03
VII-B-03
VII-B-03
VII-B-03
VII-B-03