Planning staff recommends conditional approval of the variance request from Section 27-304, Table 27-300.3.A.5 & 6 requiring a 5-foot side or rear setback to allow 3-foot minimum side setback (north property line) and a 0-foot rear setback back (west property line) in a First Neighborhood (N1) zone, on the east 90 ft of Lots 2 and 3, Block 18, North Elevation Sub 3rd Filing, a 4,500 square foot parcel of land. 
 

This is a variance request from Section 27-304, Table 27-300.3.A.5 & 6, to allow a zero-foot rear setback and a three-foot side setback, where a minimum five-foot setback is required for both the side and rear yards in the N1-First Neighborhood zoning district. The subject property is located at 910 N 32nd Street and is legally described as the East 90 feet of Lots 2 and 3, Block 18, North Elevation Subdivision, 3rd Filing. The parcel is approximately 4,500 square feet in size and is currently developed with a single-family home and a detached garage located approximately one foot from the northern side property line.

The applicant is proposing to connect the existing detached garage to the home and extend it slightly forward under the existing roofline. Once attached, the garage would be considered part of the principal structure and subject to primary structure setback requirements. As currently located, the garage does not meet the five-foot side or rear setback required in the N1 zone, prompting the need for this variance.

The variance would allow the property owner to create a more functional and accessible garage space with enclosed, conditioned access from the residence. Aside from the requested setback variance, the proposed modification complies with all other zoning standards of the N1 district, including lot coverage and height.

The applicant has indicated that the existing garage is not adequately sized for vehicle use and that the current configuration does not provide protected or enclosed access to the home. The proposed changes would improve usability while maintaining the existing footprint’s proximity to the lot lines.

The Board of Adjustment has reviewed several setback variances in this neighborhood, most of those requests have involved existing structures on narrow or constrained lots. This request is similar in that it involves an existing detached accessory structure being connected to the principal building.

APPLICATION DATA
OWNER: David Schaer
AGENT: Jeff Wollschlager, A-Line Drafting
PURPOSE: A variance from 27-304, Table 27-300.3.A.5 & 6 requiring a 5-foot side or rear setback to allow 3-foot minimum side setback (north property line) and a 0-foot rear setback back (west property line) in a First Neighborhood (N1) zone
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: NORTH ELEVATION SUB 3RD FILING, S32, T01 N, R26 E, BLOCK 18, Lot 2, E90 FT LTS 2,3
ADDRESS: 910 N 32nd Street
SIZE OF PARCEL: 4,500 Sq. Ft
ZONING: First Neighborhood - N1
EXISTING LAND USE: Residential
PROPOSED LAND USE: Residential

SURROUNDING ZONING AND LAND USE
NORTH: Zoning: N1
Land Use: Residential
SOUTH: Zoning: P1
Land Use: Park
EAST: Zoning: N1
Land Use: Residential
WEST: Zoning: N1
Land Use: Residential

Planning staff notified the surrounding property owners by mail, placed a legal advertisement in the Yellowstone County News, and posted the property with the required sign. The application was also posted on our webpage for current zoning applications. No comments from any surrounding owners were received by staff at the time of writing this report.

The Board of Adjustment may:

• Conditionally approve the requested variance and adopt the proposed findings of fact for the review criteria as recommended by the Planning staff;
• Approve the requested variance with different or added conditions, or no conditions;
• Deny the requested variance and amend the findings of fact for the criteria;
• Allow the applicant to withdraw the variance request; or
• Delay action on the variance to a future BOA meeting.

Approval or denial of the requested variance will have no financial effect on the Planning Division budget.

Prior to approval, the Board of Adjustment shall ensure that the determinations for variances (Sec. 27-1627.D and E.), as outlined below, have been satisfied:

Section 27-1627.D

1) That special conditions and circumstances exist which are peculiar to the land, the lot or something inherent in the land which causes the hardship, and which are not applicable to other lands in the same district.
The property is a narrow lot that was platted and developed in the early 1900s, before current zoning rules were in place. The existing detached garage was built approximately one foot from the side property line, and the home is set further back on the lot. The current configuration of the lot, including the placement of the garage and the orientation of the home, limits the property owner's ability to renovate or improve the site without encroaching into the required primary structure side setback.

Attaching the garage to the home, which converts it into part of the principal structure, triggers compliance with setback standards that did not apply at the time of the original development. These constraints are inherent to the lot’s size and historic layout and are not easily modified. While some other properties in the district may be similarly sized, not all face the same combination of narrow width, preexisting structures near lot lines, and limited flexibility for compliant expansion, making this a unique hardship.

2) That a literal interpretation of the provisions of this Chapter would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other tracts in the same district.
The subject property is in a subdivision where most homes were built in the early 1900s. Strictly applying the current setback requirements would prevent the applicant from attaching the existing garage to the home, even though many properties in the neighborhood have attached garages or have been modified to include enclosed access. There have been numerous variance requests in the surrounding area, many of which were related to setbacks and lot coverage, reflecting the challenges of applying modern standards to historically developed lots. Denying this variance would prevent the owner from making a common improvement that enhances usability, particularly during inclement weather, and allows better use of existing structures.

3) That granting the variance requested will not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by this zoning code to other land in the same district.
Granting this variance would not give the applicant any special privilege that others in the subdivision do not have. This is an older neighborhood with narrow lots and development patterns that predate current zoning. There are several nearby properties where garages are attached or built close to the property line, similar to what the applicant is proposing.

This variance does not allow for anything beyond what has already been approved in other cases or what exists in practice throughout the area. It simply permits the owner to improve and use their property in a way that fits the established character of the neighborhood and aligns with how similar lots have been treated under the zoning code.

4) That the granting of the variance will be in harmony with the general purpose and intent of this zoning code and with the Growth Policy.
Granting this variance would allow an improvement to an existing residential property without increasing the building footprint beyond what is already present. It supports reinvestment in an established neighborhood and allows for more functional use of the property, which aligns with the Growth Policy goals of encouraging and maintaining neighborhood character and promoting housing quality and livability.

The variance maintains compatibility with surrounding land uses and does not conflict with the zoning code’s overall intent to preserve neighborhood scale and form.

Section 27-1627.E
5) In granting any variance, the Board may prescribe appropriate conditions and safeguards in conformity with this Zoning Code. Violation of such conditions and safeguards, when made a part of the terms upon which the variance is granted, shall be deemed a violation of this Zoning Code;
Staff is recommending the following conditions for the approval of this variance request.

1. The variance is to allow 3-foot minimum side setback (north property line) and a 0-foot rear setback back (west property line) to allow an addition to the garage, a connection between the garage and the home, and a small addition to the home to the north.
2. This variance is limited to Block 18, Lot 2, E90 FT LTS 2,3, North Elevation Sub 3rd Filing, known as 910 N 32nd St.
3. The applicant will submit and obtain a building permit for the new garage within 1 year and have it completed within 2 years.
4. The applicant will submit a site plan for building permit approval in substantial conformance with the site plan submitted for this variance.
5. The applicant shall meet all other city code requirements for the proposed addition with the exception of this variance.
6. Failure to begin or complete actions required by this approval within the time limits set forth shall void this variance.  
7. These conditions of variance approval shall run with the land described in this authorization and shall apply to all current and subsequent owners, operators, managers, lease holders, heirs and assigns.

6) The Board shall prescribe a time limit within which the action for which the variance is required shall be begun or completed, or both. Failure to begin or complete such action within the time limit set shall void the variance.
The applicant will submit and obtain a building permit within 1 year and have it completed within 2 years of BOA approval.
 
7) Under no circumstances shall the Board grant a variance to allow a use not permissible under the terms of this zoning code in the district involved. A variance shall not be a grant of special privilege inconsistent with limitations placed upon other properties in the district.
The requested variance does not involve a use variance and does not propose a use that is prohibited in the N1 First Neighborhood zoning district. The proposed residential addition is consistent with the existing single-family residential use of the property, which is a permitted use in this district.