HomeMy WebLinkAbout4 422 6th Street W Variance and OHDS
Memo
To: Planning Commissioners
From: Justin Fortney, Associate Planner
Date: April 28, 2008
SubjectThomas Dunlap and Mary Christensen
: – Original Hastings Design
Standards Review and Variance #2008-12 – Enlarge Garage and
th
attach it to the house – 422 6 Street West
REQUEST
The applicants propose to increase the size of their garage and connect it to the house with a
breezeway. The property is subject to Original Hastings Design Standards (OHDS) requirements,
which is subject to Planning Commission Review and City Council Approval. The present location
of the garage meets setback requirements for a detached structure (5’ minimum for a side-loaded
garage from the rear property line). Since the garage will be attached to the house the setback
requirements for principal structures apply (20’ minimum from the property line)
th
St W.
A similar request was granted about 10 years ago at 419 6
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Comprehensive Plan Classification
The property conforms to the Comprehensive Plan. The Plan designates the property as U-I – Urban
Residential (1-3 units per acre)
Zoning Classification
The subject property is zoned R-2\OHDS – Residential Medium Density\Original Hastings Design
Standards. Single-family homes are a permitted use subject to Design Standards Requirements.
Adjacent Zoning and Land Use
The following land uses abut the property:
Direction Existing Use Zoning Comp Plan
North Single Family Home R-2\OHDS U-I – Res.
East Single Family Home R-2\OHDS U-I – Res.
th
South 6 Street
Single Family Home R-2\OHDS U-I – Res.
West Forest Street
Single Family Home R-2\OHDS U-I – Res.
Existing Condition
The existing garage was constructed in 1994 and is in good condition. The existing home was
constructed in 1885.
Proposed Condition
The applicant proposes to expand the existing 14’ x 20’ (280 s.f.) garage to 20’x 22’ (440 s.f.). This
will require the roof to be rebuilt to accommodate a larger span. The garage would be attached to
the house by a 13’ x 17’ (221 s.f.) breezeway.
OHDS REVIEW
OHDS Intent
Original Hastings Design Standards (OHDS) preserve and enhance traditional neighborhood design
by reflecting the general characteristics of buildings dating from 1845 to 1940, which is the
predominate era for building construction within the OHDS District. OHDS regulations ensure
traditional neighborhood design by incorporating design features such as alleys, carriage houses,
front porches, period sensitive housing design, sidewalks, and traditional street lighting. Design
standards create and enhance the character of older neighborhoods by establishing regulation to
guide property development and rehabilitation consistent with the unique historic character of the
neighborhood. The OHDS are derived from the Design Guidelines for Original Hastings, adopted
in 2003 by the City Council as part of the Heart of Hastings Master Plan. OHDS regulations are
located found in Chapter 10.14, Subd. 4 of the Hastings City Code
Garage Location and Access
OHDS prohibits new garages from directly abutting a public street if an improved alley way abuts
the property. Currently the driveway enters onto the alley from the side-loaded garage. This same
situation is proposed after the garage is expanded.
Garage Exterior Materials
4” lap vinyl siding would be used on the garage and the breezeway to mach the 4” lap vinyl siding of
the house.
Roof Materials
The applicant is proposing a shingled gable roof over the breezeway and a shingled slant roof over
the garage as depicted on the attachment. Asphalt shingles meet OHDS requirements, but the
guidelines do not address pitch for additions to the rear of a structure.
Pitch requirements:
Front Yard: Garage/ Alley
Steep pitch- (8:12 minimum) Gable roof. Same as main building
Lower pitch-Italianate hip or porch roof.
VARIANCE REVIEW & ANALYSIS
Review Criteria
The following criteria have been used as findings of fact in granting variances to zoning provisions:
A. That special conditions and circumstances exist which are peculiar to the land, structure, or
building involved and which are not applicable to other lands, structures, or buildings in the
same district.
B. The literal interpretation of the City Code would deprive the applicants of rights commonly
enjoyed by other properties in the same district under the terms of Chapter 10.
C. That the special conditions and circumstances do not result from actions of the applicant.
D. That granting the variance requested will not confer on the applicant any special privilege
that is denied by Chapter 15 to other lands, structures, or buildings in the same district. No
non-conforming use of neighboring lands, structures, or buildings in the same district, and no
permitted or nonconforming use of lands, or buildings in other districts shall be considered
grounds for the issuance of a variance.
Recommended Action
Approval of the variance is recommended based on the following findings of fact and hardships:
1.The intent of the ordinance is to not allow a continuous line of structure from the front building
line all the way to the rear property line. This would be overwhelming to the enjoyment and
privacy of adjacent property owners. In this particular situation there are four unique
circumstances which are peculiar to the situation, which are not applicable to other lands,
structures, or buildings in the same district.
A.The home on the property is uniquely placed 75’ back from the front property line, where as
homes are normally 20’ back from the front property line.
B.The adjacent home to the east is also 75’ back from the front property line.
C.The property is located on a corner lot, thereby not affecting a property owner to the west.
D.There is an alley to the north thereby providing a buffer to that property, which also has a
garage off of the alley.
The unique situation of these two homes place the emphasis on property enjoyment and privacy
in the front yards rather than the rear yards. This is also evident in the fact that both homes have
decks and substantial landscaping in the front yards rather than the rear yards. With this being
the case, it may be more prudent to add onto the back of the home rather than the front.
2.The proposal will not result in any further encroachment to the rear property line.
3.The proposed breezeway that will connect the house to the garage will be adjacent to the existing
garage wall on the property to the east, thereby not blocking any existing lateral open space.
4.The special conditions and circumstances do not result from actions of the applicant as the home
was built closer to the rear of the property rather than the front.
5.Granting the variance requested will not confer on the applicant any special privilege as
appropriate hardships have been determined.
Notification of Adjoining Property Owners
Notification was sent to adjoining property owners. No comments have been received at this time.
RECOMMENDATION
Approval of the variance and OHDS is recommended subject to the following conditions:
1)Proposed siding and roofing improvements must be completed consistent with the plans
presented to the Planning Commission.
2)Approval of a building permit.
3)Approval is subject to a one year Sunset Clause; if significant progress is not made
towards construction of the proposal within one year of City Council approval, the
approval is null and void.
ATTACHMENTS
Location Map
Site Photographs