HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution No. 417-07 aoej a6eae6 pasodoad ay}10 scoop aq}Jl 1991 anl} se asolo se aq ueo a6aae6
aql -Aliedoid s,}ueoildde aq} jo asn elgeuoseai aq} aol nnolle o} laessaoau
aq o} aeadde }ou saop aouelaen siq} 10 6ul}uea6 aql :asn 3-18dNOSd�I2J Z
.Halle
ue }o go �peq}as wnwlulw paalnbaa aq} }aaw pue }cal ua} aaq}oue inoq
aq} spienno} q}nos aq} o} panow aq pinoo a6eae6 pasodoad aql -}oia}sip
buluoz awes eq} ul sapedoid aaq}o o} Alleaau96 Aldde }ou Aew }eq} A:Pedoad
s,}ueolidde eq} o} Aidde }eq} suol}lpuoo jo seoue}swnoaio leuoi}daoxe
Aue aq o} aeadde }ou saop aaagl :SIONViSWf ajio TdNOIld3OXE]
:}oe}}o sbulpul} 6ulnnollol aq} apew sleaddy}o pjeo8 6uluoZ aq} 'S` 33 EHM
`pue ,but}aaw 'LOOZ `8 t
Alnr sp }e sleaddy }o paeo8 6uluoZ aa}segoo�j aq} ajolaq aweo ja}}ew slq} 'sV33 13HM
pue 'siaunno Aliadoid }uaoefpe eq}
pue aaellann ollgnd aq} o} }uawla}ap leua}ew a asneo phone pue Aliadoid aq} jo asn elgeuoseaa
ao a}enbape ainsua o} kessaoau }ou sl `aoue}swnoaio leuol}deoxa ue a}n}l}suoo }ou saop
}uawaalnbaa uoi}eool slq} o} aouelaen pa}sanbaa aq} 6ul}eoipui }oe}10 s6ulpuq papuawwooai pue
L�t,'09§ '0'0'2i ul punol epa}uo aq} palldde :.e}s }uawpedaa 6uluueld aq} `SV33 13HM
`pue `pazAleudo
sl }sanbai aouelaen e golgnn Aq elaa}lao aq} sapinoid L6t,'09§ 'O'O'21 `S` 3d EIHM
`pue '(8)(�) £LZ'Z9§ 'O'O'2l ul punoj se Aelle ue jo}}o �peq}as paeA jeaa paalnbaa wnwlulw
}ooj-q� aq} woaj }aaj ua} jo }unowe aq} ul aoueuen e gaas }uelladdy `SV33 J3HM
`pue 'Aeon-jo-}g61a ollgnd e o}}uaoefpe aull }ol pae!aeaa ao euil Rpadoid q}jou aq} woaj}aaj
}g6la pa}eool aq Illnn a6eae6 pagoe}ap pasodoad aq I -e}osauui N jajsagoo�l '(uol}lppy s,AC z}n){
`t �oo18 Cl. }o-l) }aaa}S aa}ueo }saM 0t;g6 }e pa}eool Aliadoid aq} jo apls q}jou aq} uo abeae6
pagoe}ap }oo} aaenbs gZg a}ewlxoidde ue }ona}suoo o} sNaas }uelladdy `SVgg JBHM
'pue :}aa} 9( aq llegs �oeq}as aq}aseo golgM ul `6ulpllnq
/aoss900e aq} ulq}lnn salolgan Ieuol}eaaoaa Jo salolgan J0 bui�jed eq} }lwaad
Illnn golgnn sjoop sule}uoo Aelle ue 6uloej 6ulpllnq �Gossaooe aq} jo Ilene aq} aaagnv
aseo aq} ul [pue] ... paeA aeaa paalnbaa aq} ul pa}eool aq AL- w ... sa6eae6 pagoe}aa
:snnollo} se 'lied }uenalaa ul `sa}e}s (8)(L) £LZ'Z9§ 'O'O'21 `S`d3213HM
'pue ,Aeon-lo
-}q6u ollgnd e o}}uaoefpe aull lol pjeA aeaa aq} woaj abeae6 pagoe}ap pasodoad e aoj}uawaalnbaa
�oeq}as aq} o} se saoueuipaO �o apoO as}sagoo�l aql �o (8)(4) £LZ'Z9 uol}oaS jo s}uawaalnbaa
aq} woa} aouelaen e aoj palldde („}uelladdy„) sapaftd sawoH }said 'SVDD OHM
Noun-lOSai
x s
• away from the alley and will permit the parking of vehicles or recreational
vehicles within the accessory building.
3. ABSENCE OF DETRIMENT: The granting of this variance request would
be substantially detrimental to the adjacent property owners and other
public utilizing the public alley. There is a potential for blocking the
accessibility of the alley and causing some snow removal issues in the
winter. The granting of this variance would be detrimental to the intent and
purpose of the City of Rochester Zoning Ordinance.
4. MINIMUM VARIANCE: The minimum variance that would be necessary to
alleviate the alleged hardship would be a variance to the minimum required
rear yard setback off of an alley; and,
WHEREAS, based on the above findings of fact, the Zoning Board of Appeals denied the
variance request; and,
WHEREAS, this matter was appealed to the Common Council and came before the
Council at its August 20, 2007, meeting; and,
WHEREAS, at the August 20th public hearing, the Council considered the information
presented to it in its council agenda packet (attached hereto as Exhibit A) and adopted the
Appellant's suggested findings of fact which are stated as follows:
•
1. EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES: This lot (and most other lots in the
Kutzky Park neighborhood), being only fifty feet wide, is an exception to the
R-1 zoning district which requires that lots be at least sixty feet wide. This
combined with the total area of the lot available on which to site the garage
and the presence of two significant trees, makes a variance of the minimum
alley-side setback necessary.
2. REASONABLE USE: The garage will provide the two required off-street
parking spaces and its proposed location will ensure adequate open space
for the single-family house on the property.
3. ABSENCE OF DETRIMENT: The proposed garage will be sited in nearly
the same location as the former structure. It will preserve two overstory
trees that shade not only this property but all neighboring properties. And
lastly, the new garage will be consistent with the size and siting of other
alley-facing garages on the block and in the neighborhood.
4. MINIMUM VARIANCE: The ten foot variance requested maximizes open
space in the rear and side yards of the house and allows for twenty feet of
clear area in which to back out of the garage. Greater setback would
reduce the back yard, less setback would result in difficulty exiting the
• garage, front loading (from Center Street) would reduce the side yard, and
2
side loading the garage (from the alley) would result in the loss of two
overstory trees; and,
WHEREAS, the Council concluded that the Appellant satisfied the criteria of R.C.O.
§60.417 and, as a result, was entitled to the variance.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Common Council of the City of
Rochester that the City grant to First Homes Properties a variance in the amount of ten feet from
the requirements of R.C.O. §62.273 (1)(B) as to the setback requirement for a proposed
detached garage from the rear yard lot line adjacent to a public right-of-way.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the July 18, 2007, decision of the Zoning Board of
Appeals is reversed and that a variance is granted to the Appellant consistent with the findings of
fact stated herein.
PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
z2
ROCHESTER, MINNESOTA, THIS �b OF (mot , 2007.
4 U
PRESIDENT OF SAID COMMON COUNCIL
WTTEST: )'l
CIT C ER
APPROVED THIS cjJb� DAY OF , 2007.
MAYOR OF SAID CITY
(Seal of the City,of
Rochester, Minnesota)
Zone05Nariance-Res.0702
• 3
L�ti(6(T "p(t
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING
DATE: 8/20/07
AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT: ITEM NO.
PUBLIC HEARINGS PLANNING DEPARTMENT
ITEM DESCRIPTION: Type III, Phase I(#R2007-002AP) Appeal of the Type III,Phase I PREPARED BY:
(#R2007-018VAR) Variance Denial. Logan Tjossem
Planner
August 2, 2007
Zoning Board of Appeals Action:
• On July 18th, 2007, the Zoning Board of Appeals denied a variance request from the applicant; First Homes
Properties, of ten (10) feet to allow for the placement of an accessory structure eight (8) feet from the
minimum required rear yard setback off of an alley of eighteen (18) feet per Section 62. 273 (1) (B).
The applicant requested a variance to Section 62.273 (1) (B) of the Rochester Zoning Ordinance and Land
Development Manual to the location standards of accessory buildings in a Residential Zoning District. Other
location requirements for an accessory building in the R-1 (Mixed-Single Family) Zoning District could be met.
The staff report was presented in support of a denial to the request.
Council Action Requested.-
Approve or deny the variance appeal by the applicant based on the original staff report and attachments
submitted to the Zoning Board of Appeals at their July 18 , 2007, meeting.
Attachments:
1. Copy of the July 18th, 2007,Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting Minutes.
2. Copy of Staff Report submitted to the Zoning Board of Appeals, dated July 11th, 2007.
Distribution:
1. City Administrator
2. City Attorney
3. Planning Department File
4. Applicant: This item will be considered by the Council sometime after 7:00 p.m. on Monday, August 201h,
2007, in the Council/Board Chambers at the Government Center, 151 SE 4"Street.
OUNCIL ACTION: Motion by: Second by: to:
L i
City of Rochester
Zoning Board of Appeals
2122 Campus Drive SE, Suite 100
Rochester, MN 55904
Minutes of the regularly scheduled meeting of the Rochester Zoning Board of Appeals
held on Wednesday, July 18, 2007, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council/Board Chambers of the
Government Center, 151 4ch Street SE, Rochester, MN 55904.
Members Present: Mr. Rory Lenton, Chairman; Mr. Pat Ryan, Vice-Chair; Mr. Paul
Ohly; Mr. Gerald Pestka; and Mr. Dan Thornton
Members Absent: Mr. Patrick Halsey, Mr. Chuck Applequist
Staff Present: Mr. Logan Tjossem, Planner; Mr. Justin Stotts, Secretary
Other City Staff Present: Ms. Pat Alfredson, Attorney
ADMINISTRATIVE BUSINESS:
Mr. Lenton, Chair, called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
Mr. Thornton made a motion to approve the minutes of June 6, 2007, •
seconded by Mr. Ohly. The motion carried unanimously.
A motion was made by Mr. Pestka and seconded by . Ohly to proceed
with the agenda as submitted. The motion carried unanimously.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
Type III, Phase I, Variance Request R2007-014VAR by Kathy Johnson to rebuild a
front porch that does not meet required front yard setback for single family
dwellings in the R-2 (Low Density Residential) Zoning District. The property is
located at 123 12th Street NW, Rochester, MN.
Mr. Logan Tjossem presented the staff report, dated July 11, 2007, to the Board. The
staff report is on file at the Rochester-Olmsted Planning Department.
Mr. Lenton asked how the porch was allowed to be built originally without conforming to
the Ordinance.
Mr. Tjossem said it was built in 1944, before the adoption of the Ordinance. Therefore
it was grandfathered in when the Ordinance was adopted.
Mr. Lenton opened the'publiAearing. •
Page 2
City of Rochester Zoning Board of Appeals
Meeting Date: July 18, 2.007
No one came forward.
Mr. Lenton closed the public hearing.
Mr Ohly rno�ed to approve Type III, Phase I, Vanance Request R2007 014VAR by
Kathy Johnson, wifh the'following findings Mr Pestka seconded the motion
The motion carried un420
animously
FINDINGS � j
EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES There does appear #o be exceptional
circumstances or condrtrons that apply to the applicant's property that may not
apply gerDerally to other properties on the arne zoning district ; The applicant
wishes to replace an existing front porch.which was originally constructed in
1944 according to the building permit f►le'for the property i he pore has beennrn
existence on the property but �s now in need of being replaced s t
L x a $ L y a d Z
REASONABLE USES The granting of thisvariance request does appear to be
..
necessary to allow fior the reasonable use of th`e applicant s property The front
f
porch has existed on the property since 1w944 Other han the front porch, fihea
dwelling still would not ya
xmeet the front rd k setbacrequrrernent
•
k a 3
ABSENCE OF DETRIMENT The granting of this variance request does not
appear to be subs#antially detrimental to the adJacent'property owners The front
porch has existed'on the'property sr`nce 1944 , The proposed porch is a
replacement of the porch:that hasexisted on fhe dwellrrig' However fhe grantin
� !
of this variance wou d'be detrimental to the rnten# and purpose ofthe City of
Rochester Zoning Ordinance
.f S F 3p 2 A V 3V x S ){ �' j E
3
MIIVIMU141 `VARIANCE The hintmurn variance tha#uuould be nece�saey to
alleviate fhe allegetl 'hardship would be a variance fo the mirnmum required front t'
and setback
Mr. Ryan entered the meeting.
Type Ill, Phase 1, Variance Request R2007-015VAR by Jared and Sarah Olsen to
relocate a garage door to the front of a detached accessory structure that does
not meet the required setback for detached accessory buildings in a residential
district located in the rear yard The property is in the R-1 (Mixed Single Family
Zoning District. The property address is 819'6th Street SW Rochester MN
Mr. Logan Tjossem presented the staff report, dated July 11, 2007, to the Board. The
. staff report is on file at the Rochester-Olmsted Planning Department.
Page 3
City of Rochester Zoning Board of Appeals
Meeting Date: July 18, 2007
•
Mr. Pestka asked if the diagram on page 35 in the packet correctly showed the garage
over the lot line.
Mr. Tjossem said there might be a private easement that is recorded. He noted there is
an encroachment of some kind.
Mr. Ohly asked about the accuracy.of property lines on the aerial photos.
Mr. Tjossem responded they are accurate to within a foot or two. He stated that a
certificate of survey, which is a legal document, included with the packet shows the
garage with some kind of easement.
Mr. Lenton asked about the comment included with the packet from Mark Baker with
Public Works.
Mr. Tjossem explained that Mr. Baker had concerns about the garage opening directly
onto the alley.
Mr. Lenton said the comment by Mr. Baker stated that there will not be parking between
the garage and the alley right-of-way.
Mr. Tjossem responded thafthere currently is no parking because the garage is right up
to the property line.
Mr. Thornton said the main reason for having a setback is safety. In this case, they are
driving straight toward the garage, therefore visibility is not an issue
Mr. Lenton opened the public hearing.
The applicant, Mr. Jared Olsen residing at 819 6th ST SW Rochester, MN, addressed
the Board. He said the aerial pictures appeared distorted due to the shadows. He
noted that his property is a tight lot built in the 1920's. He said there was an easement
in,place with the neighboring properties. He stated that they are not changing location
or size of the garage, just the entry point. He stated that he has the support of his
neighbors.
Mr. Ohly asked about the next door neighbor with the pickup and his opinion.
Mr. Olsen said that neighbor is out of the country.
Mr. Olsen spoke about his interpretation of the logic of the Ordinance. He believed the
setback was a parking issue. He stated that they are not encroaching on the alley, and
traffic on the alley is low volume The current driveway is shared, and abused by
neighbors. He said that approval of the variance would allow them to create green
space in their backyard.
Page 4
City of Rochester Zoning Board of Appeals
Meeting Date: July 18, 2007
Mr. Lenton asked if the existing garage entrance would be blocked, or if Mr. Olsen
would create a drive-through garage.
Mr. Olsen said there would be only one garage door, facing the alley.
Mr. Pestka asked if the garage would be bulldozed and built new. He noted that the
alley was about a foot taller than the garage.
Mr. Olsen said no, but they may have to raise the garage.
Mr. Ryan asked again whether they would bulldoze and build new.
Mr. Olsen said no.
Mr. Wayne Norrie residing at 520 9t'AVE SW Rochester, MN, addressed the Board.
He said his driveway is adjacent to the applicant. He stated that he and the other
neighbors have no objections to the variance.
Mr. Lenton closed the public hearing.
• Mr ;Ryan moved=to approve Type 111, Phase I, y,arrance Request'R20d7 015VAR by
Jared and Sarah Olsen, with the folldwing findings Mr Pestka seconded the
motion The motron'carned 0, with Mr Ohly absta►ning M==
,
k
FINDINGS' � ::
d7 F
.Z 3 9- )
Y 1 ay +
EXCEPT1bNAL'CIRCUMSTANCES There does appear t ", exceptional=y
circumstances or conditions that,'apply to'the applicant s property that ma not
i
apply generally to other properties rn the same zoning district They
y
garage/accessory structure currently exists on the property and the current r
access into the garage causes accessrbilrfy issues for both the a p(rcaynt and the
hb neig or
p
r
REASONABLE USE The granting of this variance request tloes appear to be
necessary to allow for the;reasonable use of the appiicant's property The garage
currently exists on the property and the current access into the,garage causes
accessibiliy ssuesfrbththe tn ighbor aw hpP e applicant to park vehicles or recreational vehicles within'the accessory building
w
:without resfrictron Z
3 ^5
z. s 'y
ABSENCE OF DETRIMENTS The granting of this variance re uest would not be
;substantially detrimental to the ad�acent�property owners because the current
;;:access in o,the ;gar'age causes accessrbilify;rssues,for.. both�=thea'ppficant and they.,;'
Page 5
City of Rochester Zoning Board of Appeals
Meeting Date: July 18, 2007
neighbor The granting of this.vanance would be detrimental to the ;intent and "
purpose of the City of Rochester Zoning Ordinance n
Y t 3
x _ SS
MINIMUM VARIANCE The"minimum variance that would be necessary to
alleviate'the alleged hardship would be fo the minimum regwred rear
and se' tback-off oi.zh alle .;
.. n,
Type III, Phase I, Variance Request R2007-018VAR by First Homes Properties to
rebuild a garage/detached accessory structure that does not meet the required
setback for detached accessory buildings in a residential district located in the
rear yard. The property is in the R-1 (Mixed Single Family) Zoning District. The
property address is 1140 West Center Street, Rochester, MN.
Mr. Logan Tjossem presented the staff report, dated July 11, 2007, to the Board. The
staff report is on file at the Rochester-Olmsted Planning Department.
Mr. Ohly asked if there is a garage there now.
Mr. Tjossem responded no.
Mr. Ohly asked if other garages in the neighborhood face the alley.
Mr. Tjossem said yes.
'Mr. Thornton stated that some garages in the area use a side entrance.
Mr. Ryan asked if it was possible for the applicant to conform to setback requirements.
Mr. Tjossem responded that there is 28 feet between the proposed garage and the
house. If the garage was moved back 10 feet from the alley, it would still be 18 feet
from the house and would comply with setback requirements for garages with doors off
of an alley.
Mr. Ohly said that would minimize green space and increase driveway space.
Mr. Tjossem explained another option. The garage could use a side entrance, and then
the applicant could build within 5 feet of the alley.
Mr. Pestka asked if the applicant could build in the proposed location without a variance
if the garage door was on the side of the garage, or if the door was facing the street.
He noted there is an existing driveway with street access not shown in the applicant's
proposal.
Mr. Tjossem responded yes.
Page 6
City of Rochester Zoning Board of Appeals
Meeting Date: July 18, 2007
Mr. Ohly stated the need for the existing driveway would be eliminated under the
applicant's proposal, and would add potential green space.
Mr. Lenton stated it could also be used for off-street parking.
Mr. Ryan said he thought the applicant would take the driveway out and make it into
green space.
Mr. Lenton opened the public hearing.
I;
Mr. Sean Allen, Executive Director with First Homes, residing at 609 7th AVE SW
Rochester, MN, addressed the Board. He said First Homes is a non-profit subsidiary of
the Rochester Area Foundation. He explained repairs and renovations being made to
the house. He stated that his goal with this variance is to remove the driveway and
increase green space. He said he presented this proposal to a neighborhood
committee and there were no objections. The applicant stated he is trying to preserve
trees and the backyard. Mr. Allen stated that he believed the Ordinance is written for
new subdivision developments, and that this situation is unique. He presented pictures
of the proposed options.
Ms. Shirley Lee with First Homes, residing at 13608 Postier Dr NW Oronoco, MN
• addressed the Board. She showed pictures of the previous garage and explained
structural problems, which was the reasoning for its demolition.
Mr. Allen said that an existing tree in the yard would have to be removed depending on
the option they used.
Mr. Ohly asked which option he was talking about.
Mr. Allen responded the side loading option.
Mr. Ohly asked if the reasoning for their variance proposal was to preserve the trees.
Mr. Allen responded that was an important factor.
Mr. Ohly asked about moving the garage closer to the house to comply with the
Ordinance.
Mr. Allen said that would put the garage within 5-7 feet of deck, which cuts off the back
yard. He stated that the garage door facing the alley is the favored approach creating
688 feet of impervious surface, including the garage and concrete. The second option
had the garage door facing the street, as the previous garage functioned, and would.
create 1480 feet of impervious Prface. Garage access from the side would require'
• removal of a tree, and would create about 1000 feet of impervious surface.
Page 7
City of Rochester Zoning Board of Appeals
Meeting Date: July 18, 2007
•
Mr. Allen said, if the garage was facing the alley with the required setback, that would
move the garage closer to the house than desired, and would create 888 feet of
impervious surface.
Mr. Ryan stated that the garage being closer would be more convenient in the winter.
Mr. Allen said the green space was more important for this house and the
neighborhood. He showed pictures of garages in the same block that are very close to
the alley. He said the proposal is not out of the ordinary for the neighborhood. He
stated it would not enhance their profit, instead it would be a better fit for the
neighborhood.
Mr., Lenton stated the applicant's proposal with the garage set back 8 feet from alley
does not allow for off street parking.
Mr. Lenton asked, if approved, if they would remove the existing driveway.
Mr. Allen said yes.
Mr. Lenton asked if the City had concerns with a driveway approach off of the street
with no driveway.,
Mr. Tjossem stated that it would be considered front yard parking, and there would be
violation issues.
Mr. Lenton asked who would be responsible for removing the approach.
Mr. Tjossem said the applicant would be responsible, and that should be a condition if
approved.
Ms. Lee said the existing asphalt driveway is in poor condition, and would be removed.
Mr. Rex Savage, residing North of Rochester on HWY 63 says he owns property
neighboring the applicant. He stated that the property used to be zoned R-3, and was
changed to R-1, making Mr. Savage's property non-conforming. He thought that if the
City changed the Zoning, the Board should make the applicant conform with Zoning.
He believed a pattern was being set with First Homes selling houses without the buyer
owning the land, and instead having a 99 year lease.
Mr. Allen.said First Homes owns property on each side of Mr. Savage, and bought this
house directly from the owner. He stated he has been working on problems in the
Kutzky area with the Planning Department, because properties in this area do not
conform with the existing Zoning,Ordinance Mr. Allen stated that First Homes retains
ownership of the land, and the homebuyer buys the home, leasing the land on a
renewable 99 year lease.
Page 8
City of Rochester Zoning Board of Appeals
Meeting Date: July 18, 2007
•
Mr. Ryan asked about the purpose of the 99 year lease on the land.
Mr. Allen said there is a great deal of subsidy going into developing these properties.
He stated that it costs significantly more to purchase and renovate the house than it is.*
worth when it is completed. Income guidelines apply to homebuyers, and First Homes
requires the house be sold to an income qualified family. The 99 year lease ensures
the house remains an affordable home.
Mr. Lenton asked about the tax implications.
Mr. Allen said the homeowner pays the full share of taxes.
Mr. Savage readdressed the Board. He stated how his property was an investment
property. He discussed how he believed First Homes will seek a variance for every
property they purchase in the area. He thought that all land owners in the area should
be held to the Zoning Ordinance.
Mr. Lenton closed the public hearing.
Mr. Ryan stated he would abstain.
Mr. Ohly stated he would also abstain.
Mr. Lenton asked if 3.members would still qualify as a quorum.
Ms. Alfredson responded yes.
Mr. Pestka said he had mixed feelings because there are a number of options.
Mr. Thornton agreed with Mr. Pestka. He stated that this proposal sounds the best for
the property owner, but there are other options that are reasonable uses of the land.
I'estk t
armo�red to deny Type III, Phase I, Varsance Reques R2007
Mr �018VAR by
First Hornes Properties, with the following fintlin s Mr Thornton seconded the
motions The rnoiion'carned 3 0, d with Mr Ryan'anMr Ohly abstaining
E
a
E
Z
EXCEPTIONAL.CIRCUMSANCES There does not appear fo be exceptional
circumstances or conditions that applysto the applica'nt's property that may not
»: t E "f
apply generally to other properties in the same zonin ct The proposed
garage couid bevmoved to theysouth;'towards the house, another ten (10) feet antl
meettthe required mtnirnum setback off ofvo
an alley z
Page 9
City of Rochester Zoning Board of Appeals
Meeting Date: July 18, 2007 •
REASONABLE USES The granting of this variance request does not appear to be
r 4
necessary to allow forthe realonable use of the applicant's property The garage
F
can be as close as five (5) feet if the`-doors of the proposed garage face away r'
from the alley and will permit the parking of vehicles or recreational vehicles
within the Zifl
accessory bu�ldang� �' �`
y
xd
ABSENCE OF DETRIMENT The gran#�ng of this variance request woul d lb
substantially de#rimental to the adJacent property owners and other public
utilizing fhe public alley There is a potential for blocking the accessibility of the
alley and cans na some snow removal issues on fihe winter The granting of thus
variance would be detrimental.to the intent antl purpose of the,,,City of Rochester
Zoning Qrdinar�ce
M(R�ldd(UM 'dAP.EANC The rnerD;murre variance that Vv'ould be- necessary to
alleviate the alleged`hardship would be a var�arice #®the monom6.m required rear ,.
veld setback o'ff.ofan alley. ..,-,r . ....,..
OTHER BUSINESS:
1. As may be brought up by members.
No discussion items were brought forward. •
ADJOURN:
Mr. Ryan made a motion to adjourn; seconded by Mr. Ohly. With no other business,
Mr. Lenton, Chair, adjourned the meeting. The meeting adjourned at 8:00 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted:
S C�-
Philip H. Wheeler, AICP Ivir:-lacy en ',�iair
Rochester-Olmsted Planning Dept.
n i ,
jds ;
ti5---q�.�'
I � -r
ROCHESTER-OLMSTED PLANNING DEPARTMENT •o4:gOcxESTER•n1fNNF
2122 Campus Drive SE,Suite 100• Rochester, MN 55904-4744
www.co.olmsted.mn.us/departments/planning y
COUNTY oO F� (1O
F •, •• ,%�y�
V►�'i�'i 1 — O'1
�AOR9TEn•AUGUST•5'P
TO: Rochester Zoning Board of Appeals
FROM: Logan Tjossem, Planner
DATE: July 11, 2007
RE: Variance (Type III, Phase I),#R2007-18VAR
July 181h 2007,Board of Appeals Meeting
Planning Department Review:
APPLICANT: First Homes Properties
2200 2nd Street SW
Rochester, MN 55902
LOCATION OF PROPERTY: 1140 West Center Street, Lot 13, Block 1,
Kutzky's Addition (A.W), Rochester,
. Minnesota
ZONING: R-1 (Mixed Single Family) Zoning District
REFERRAL AGENCY COMMENTS: No Comments
ANALYSIS:
The applicant is proposing to construct an approximate 528 square foot detached garage
(24' x 22') on the north side of the property. The proposed detached garage will be
located eight (8) feet from the north property line or rear yard lot line adjacent to a public
right-of-way.
According to Section 62.273—Accessory Buildings in Residential Districts — General
1) Location (B) standards of the City of Rochester Zoning Ordinance and Land
Development Manual, Detached garages and accessory buildings accessory to a
residential use may be located in the required rear yard to within 18 inches, or five feet
when in the R-Sa District, of any lot line of adjoining lots, or to within five (5) feet of any
lot line separating the lot from an alley, except in the case where the wall of the accessory
building facing an alley contains doors which will permit the parking of vehicles or
recreational vehicles within the accessory building, in which case the setback shall be 18
feet;
• The applicant requests the following:
BUILDING CODE 507/328-7111 - GIS/ADDRESSING/MAPPING 507/328-7100 • HOUSING/HRA 507/328-7150
•«rd•a wv.. PLANNING/ZONING 507/328-7100 •.WELUSEPTIC 507/328-7111
FAX 507/328-7958
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY/AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER
.eryclxbN
I! .a
A variance of ten (10) feet to a setback of eight (8) feet from the minimum •
required rear yard setback off of an alley of eighteen (18) feet per Section 62.
273 (1) (B).
The Planning staff suggested findings are:
EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES: There does not appear to be exceptional
circumstances or conditions that apply to the applicant's property that may not apply
generally to other properties in the same zoning district. The proposed garage could be
moved to the south, towards the house, another ten (10) feet and meet the required
minimum setback off of an alley.
REASONABLE USE: The granting of this variance request does not appear to be
necessary to allow for the reasonable use of the applicant's property. The garage can be as
close as five (5) feet if the doors of the proposed garage face away from the alley and will
permit the parking of vehicles or recreational vehicles within the accessory building.
ABSENCE OF DETRIMENT: The granting of this variance request would be
substantially detrimental to the adjacent property owners and other public utilizing the
public alley. There is a potential for blocking the accessibility of the alley and causing
some snow removal issues in the winter. The granting of this variance would be
detrimental to the intent and purpose of the City of Rochester Zoning Ordinance. •
MINIMUM VARIANCE: The minimum variance that would be necessary to alleviate
the alleged hardship would be a variance to the minimum required rear yard setback off
of an alley.
Attachments:
1. Copy of Application and Applicant's letter
2. Copy of Applicant's Proposed Site Plan
3. Copy of Site Location Map and Aerial Photo
4. Copy of Findings for a Variance
I l
i
TYPE II., r-HASE I DEVELOPMENT APPLICA I iON
CITY OF ROCHESTER
10he undersigned hereby makes application for a Type III Development as regulated by Section 60.530 of the
City of Rochester Land Development
Manual
NAME OF APPLICANT: / 2U'
ADDRESS OF APPLICANT: o2W �'&. mil• lG f?��1,�! ��
TELEPHONE NUMBER: cS�' ���'7 %/'� (work)
FAX NUMBER (.Ql7 -2e:2-VF,-?F E-MAIL (IF APPLICABLE)
;i ADDRESS OF PROPERTY IF DIFFERENT THAN APPLICANT'S ADDRESS:
SIGNATURE OF PROPERTY OWNER:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: `/
L0-=ey/3 43 -ck_ Ce/ L e77- I3
In
( apPropn x ,�
t Type III phased Condi#icjnal Use T c o )k ate b 3
Type III Phases lVanance
r 3
YPe 1115Ptiase I P ppeat
r` Type III Phase I Fina!PCat■ GDP File Na &Name ` y x Phase '
0 Other
4 ° a
"! w:+ r,k.e r : Y..µn•L'.:.^ a..ii.: ..{u t.::•:• YV.: r` ..S S S l Fr xM y.. � k \ .
S
REASON FOR APPLICATION: (Please describe in detail if applicable)
r'
DATE:
Res e S bmitted,
(Owner or Corporation) (Address) (Phone)
Return Application to: Rochester-Olmsted Planning Department
2122 Campus Dr. SE,Suite 100
Rochester, MN 55904
ML RIBUTION:
RECEIVED ; FOR OFFICE,USE ONLY
Planning Department: (white copy) Date Received
City Clerk: (canary copy)
Applicant: (pink copy) ILIN 79
Et Received.bY._
A lication Fee
i RCS CST=R CLMSTED Pp
Form#:1920.30 Rev.2/6/04 i FI ,'•, .�p.;iy DEPARTME14T
miss
I - .
First Homes T, 44�
Rochester Area Foundation
June 27, 2007
Mr. Brent Svenby RECEIVED
Consolidated Planning Department
2122 SE Campus Drive 11107
Rochester, MN 55904
ROChESTER-00ASTED
Pl ^tiN;tir DEFARTmEN7
Mr. Svenby,
We respectfully submit an application for variance per Section 60.410 of the City of Rochester
Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual.
First Homes purchased the property at 1 140 Center Street West as a part of our Heritage
Homes program and would like to build a new garage to replace the dilapidated garage that was •
on the property. The siting of this new garage will require a variance to the zoning code.
The Heritage Homes program seeks to provide permanently affordable homes for low- and
moderate-income families while at the same time revitalizing and restoring the Kutzky Park
neighborhood.To date we have purchased and renovated (or are in the process or renovating)
fifteen other homes in the Kutzky Park neighborhood in the past three years. Most of these
homes have required extensive rehabilitation and all have been re-sold to income qualified
buyers. The land on which these homes sit is held in a community land trust Each buyer only
purchases the house, and each time the house is resold, First Homes is able to assure that the
home goes to another income qualified buyer.
In order to have maximum impact on the neighborhood, First Homes seeks out properties
identified as sub-standard by the neighborhood in their comprehensive property inventory.We
then rehabilitate these properties to retain and restore the original character of these homes. In
doing this work,we do our best to respect the land use patterns that originally guided
development of"the neighborhood. In the case of the house at 1 140 Center Street West,that
means a modest house that fills a small, narrow lot with a detached garage on an alley.
j Unfortunately, current land use regulations mapped onto the neighborhood do not allow the
sort of development that exists in Kutzky Park—nearly ever property is non-conforming.
2200 Second St.SW,Suite 300 "Rochester MN 55902-4125 Phone:507.287.71 17 Fax:507.282.4938
www.FirstHomes.org info@FirstHomes.org
•
The original garage at 1 140 Center Street West was in extremely poor condition and needed to
be replaced.The garage was located at the back of the property on an alley. Rather than being
entered from the alley (like all but one of the other houses on the same side of the street), this
garage was entered from the front of the property by way of a driveway (also in poor condition)
with an approach on Center Street West
In keeping with the typical site pattern of the neighborhood and in order to maximize open
space on the small lot,the garage design we propose will be sited in nearly the same place as the
former garage and will be nearly the same size as the former garage. However, rather than being
accessed from the front,we will eliminate the driveway and approach on Center Street West,
and the garage will be accessed directly from the alley. In order to ensure maximum green
space, save two sixteen inch caliper trees in the back yard,and allow for a deck off the back of
the house,the garage will be setback eight feet from the alley.
This is ten feet less than the eighteen foot setback required in the R-I zone but is greater than
nearly every other alley-facing garage in the neighborhood. Given the constraints of the existing,
non-conforming, small lots in Kutzky Park,we believe this variance is a reasonable solution to
the property's parking needs.
. Sincere) ,
Sean Allen
Executive-Director
First Homes
RECEIVED
1 ROCHESTER-CL PASTED
P: 'NV'yG D-=ARTME1,,1T
j •
Heritage Homes—
1 140 Center Street West
Findings for variance to accessory building location (62.273)—reduction of alley-
side setback from eighteen feet to eight feet:
a) There are extraordinary conditions or circumstances,such as irregularity, narrowness, or
shallowness of the lot or exceptional topographical or physical conditions which are peculiar to
the property and do not apply to other lands within the neighborhood or the same class of
zoning district;
This lot (and most other lots in the Kutzky Park neighborhood), being only fifty
feet wide, is an exception to the R-I zoning district which requires that lots be
at least sixty feet wide.This, combined with the total area of the lot available on
which to site the garage and the presence of two significant trees, makes a
variance of the minimum alley-side setback necessary.
b) The variance is necessary to permit the reasonable use of the property involved,
The garage will provide the two required off-street parking spaces, and its
proposed location will ensure adequate open space for the single-family house
on the property.
c) The variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or materially injurious to •
other property in the area, is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of this ordinance,
The proposed garage will be sited in nearly the same location as the former
structure. It.will preserve two overstory trees that shade not only this property
but all neighboring properties.And lastly,the new garage will be consistent with
the size and siting of other alley-facing garages on the block and in the
neighborhood.
d) The variance as granted is the minimum necessary to provide reasonable economic use of the
property.
The ten foot variance requested maximizes open space in the rear and side
yards of the house and allows for twenty feet of clear area in which to back out
of the garage. Greater setback would reduce the back yard, less setback would
result in difficulty exiting the garage, front loading(from Center Street) would
reduce the side yard, and side loading the garage (from the alley) would result in
the loss of two overstory trees.
RECEIVED
f jU 2 9 .2007
i
�D
CL��11Tc
_ ARTNAENIT
ALLEY
NEW
• DRIVE
m itso-
270, 22'-0. P
NEW
o GARAGE
1 STING
/-5— TREE
I ..
is
I 1
I NEW
• - 1 ,.•DECK 1
EXISTING
HOUSE
it
VERIFY
POT PLAN
WEST CENTER ST.
4
77
... .,.
:. .
......_. . . _...... ....
—3 STNW—
Site Location Map of
1140 West Center Street
i
t
-------_ —j— ST—N,V --- -----------------— —_
i
ZZ
w w
4
co cv
Lij
{
Z
CENTER
7
TM
I I
i �
i I �
i ' a s-TSW
Variance#R2007-018VARties by First Homes Proper
PIN: 74.34.44.011454
Neighborhood Assoc:
Kutzky Park
Ward: 2 (Marcia Marcoux)
07/02/07
s �
}
N
Olmsted County is not responsible for ommissions or errors contained herein. If discrepancies are found within this map,please notify
the GIS Division,Rochester-Olmsted County Planning Department,2122 Campus Drive SE,Rochester, MN 55904,(507)285-8232.
MT
s�:�,>a �k� •, � € .,.. � �`^�,k�k "I'�rft'y.�r o-^�z F� � �y
Aerial Map of
4 . :1 .tT t
_ { zT 1140 West Center Street ' }
Variance#R2007-018VAR
by First Homes Properties
PIN: 74.34.44.011454
H - '
Neighborhood Assoc:
Kutzky Park
Ward: 2 (Marcia Marcoux)
07/02/07
.4. Y
m
x r�.r
��tl�y�i �
Yia
?,....y�
a y
-
�
:,! �' ,,i'✓r t,., �� a_n�- < �� Imo.
I`
t '
i)�r
y�"( °ia' 1
mUo :o ._ ,d. `
y IF
,
r
r �s� �•: �_ .3 we .
zt
- �°�'��' Yee { Jc� �i �, ,��yp. r�Y4r..}.y± _ ,. E ✓ . 7
,
S£
r 15 ... 30 .60 Feet
N
Olmsted County is not responsible for ommissions or errors contained herein. If discrepancies are found within this map,please notify
the GIS Division,Rochester-Olmsted County Planning Department,2122 Campus Drive SE,Rochester,MN 55904,(507)285-8232.
Y
ROCHESTER
•
Minnesota
TO: Consolidated Planning Department DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC
. 2122 Campus Drive SE WORKS
Rochester, MN 55904 201 4" Street SE Room 108
Rochester, MN 55904-3740
507-287-7800
FAX—507-281-6216
FROM: Mark E. Baker
Date: 7/11/07
The Department of Public Works has reviewed the requested application for a
Variance #07-18 by First Homes for the 1140 West Center Street property.
1. Public Works does not support approval of this variance request since the
proposed garage location would not provide adequate space to park a •
vehicle between the garage and alley right-of-way.
C:\Documents and Settings\plasfost\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\0LK1 CWAR07-18 First Homes(1140 West
Center Street).doc
OU Page 1 of 2
• 60.417
Findings for Variances: In taking action on a variance request, the approval
authority shall make findings supporting the decision based on the following
guidelines
Subdivision 1. The approval authority may grant a variance to the
provisions of this ordinance if it finds that:
A. there are extraordinary conditions or circumstances,such as
irregularity, narrowness,or shallowness of the lot or
exceptional topographical or physical conditions which are
peculiar to the property and do not apply to other lands
within the neighborhood or the same class of zoning
district;
B. the variance is necessary to permit the reasonable use of the
property involved;
C. the variance will not be materially detrimental to the public
welfare or materially injurious to other property in the area,
is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of this
ordinance; and;
-D. the variance as granted is the minimum necessary to
provide reasonable economic use of the property.
. The extraordinary conditions or circumstances shall be found not
to be the result of an action by the applicant or property owners
who have control of the property.
In.addition, the approval authority shall find that development of
the parcel in question cannot be integrated with development of
adjacent parcels under the same ownership in such a manner so as
to provide for the reasonable economic use of the total site in a
manner consistent with the provisions of this ordinance.
Subd.2. The Board may grant a variance to the literal
provisions of this ordinance if it finds that:
A. There has been substantial and detrimental reliance in good
faith by an applicant who has received a permit or
certificate issued in error by the administrative official
charged with enforcement of this ordinance,and
B. the mistaken issuance of the certificate or permit is not the
result of an action on the part of the applicant, the property
owner,or any other person or party who has had control of
the property,to provide misleading or incorrect
information, or to knowingly withhold information
necessary for the administrative official to accurately
review the permit or certificate request.
Subd. 3. The Board shall under
no circumstances grant a
variance that will allow a use otherwise not permitted within the _
zoning district or any variance of the elevation or levels for flood
protection
Subd. 4. In granting a variance, the zoning administrator
60 Page ,` )f 2
or the Board may impose such reasonable and appropriate
conditions and safeguards as may be necessary to accomplish, to
the extent possible under the circumstances, the purposes of the
regulations or provisions which are to be varied or modified and to
reduce or minimize potentially injurious effects of the variance
upon adjoining properties, the character of the neighborhood, and
the health,safety, or general welfare of the community. A
variance and any conditions and safeguards which were made a
part of the terms under which the variance was granted are binding
upon the applicant and any subsequent purchaser,heir,or assign of
the property,and any violation of a variance or its conditions and
safeguards shall be a violation of this ordinance and punishable as
such.
I, •