Council denies request to add two bedrooms at 217 East Spring Street

Mankato City Council on April 14 voted to deny an application to add two bedrooms to a unit at 217 East Spring Street, a property licensed as four one‑bedroom units that staff said is a legal nonconforming use in the city's R2 zoning district.

City staff explained that the property holds rental license No. 889 and was originally licensed for four one‑bedroom units. Staff said city records indicate the two windows at issue did not meet egress requirements and the additional bedrooms were never licensed for that reason; records also show the lot and site do not meet current zoning standards for four units. "As it is right now, it's considered legal nonconforming and grandfathered," a city staff member said. Staff told council the existing lot is about 4,723 square feet and that lot-size requirements historically would have required 10,000 square feet for four units under the prior R3 zoning and 8,000 square feet under current standards.

The property owner, identified in the record as Mr. Daugherty, told the council the three bedrooms had been in continuous use since the owner's purchase and that the city had inspected the property "on numerous occasions." "When we bought it, it was in really bad shape," Daugherty said, adding that the owner had remodeled and addressed wiring and other safety concerns. The owner acknowledged there was no building permit on file for a window change that staff cited as relevant to egress requirements.

Blue Earth County property records shown to the council list the parcel as four units with the bedroom count recorded as unknown, staff said. City staff noted that even if the building had been used historically in a way the owner described, the city could not license six bedrooms in an R2 zoning district because of lot-size and off‑street parking requirements.

During discussion, several council members expressed concern about changing long‑standing nonconforming uses and the potential broader impact of allowing such changes. "I can't support the idea that we're going to allow adding these bedrooms into this space," Council member Hetampus said, citing neighborhood expectations and uncertainty about whether the bedrooms had ever met licensing requirements. Other members urged a broader review of rental licensing and zoning rules as a separate policy conversation.

A motion to deny the application to add two bedrooms to a unit at 217 East Spring Street was made and seconded; council members voted in favor and the motion carried. After the vote, the council directed that the property's use remain governed by existing code and licensing conditions.