Minot planning commission upholds staff, denies detached garage at 5309 Zaharia Drive

The Minot Planning Commission voted to uphold planning staff’s interpretation of the city’s front-setback rules and denied placement of a detached garage at 5309 Zaharia Drive, affirming that setbacks must be measured from the ultimate street right-of-way rather than the curb.

Planning staff told the commission that permits R25-0000219 (manufactured home) and R25-0000294 (detached garage) were affected after staff found the home sited so there was no room for the garage to meet the 25-foot front setback measured from the platted right-of-way. Staff said it placed a stop-work order on the garage concrete forms on 4/17/2026. "Staff recommends the planning commission adopt staff findings of fact and uphold staff’s interpretation of front setback requirements regarding permit R25-0000294," planning staff said in their report.

Tom Erie, representing Licky Homes, appealed the administrative decision. Erie said the homes in the Copper Sunrise area historically followed a 25-foot measurement from the curb and described longstanding expectations among developers and buyers. "We've always followed a 25 foot setback from the curb," Erie said, asking the commission to consider neighborhood precedent and the economic harm his company faces from the stop-work order.

Neighbors who spoke said they had followed the current code when adding garages or making additions and worried that allowing this garage would create unequal treatment for future builders. "My only concern is...are they going to allow the next person to do 25 feet off?" said resident Mike Mole, who lives two houses from the site.

Commissioners acknowledged the inconsistency in past enforcement and called the situation frustrating, but they repeatedly highlighted that the planning division must apply the current land development ordinance as written. Commissioners discussed potential remedies available to property owners: (1) a text amendment to the LDO—which would change rules citywide for MH-zoned parcels; (2) a planned unit development (PUD) or overlay zoning initiated by property owners to set neighborhood-specific setbacks; or (3) converting the street to private ownership (via HOA and right-of-way vacation processes) to remove certain public setback requirements. Staff cautioned that a change to treat one MH lot differently would require an owner-initiated zoning mechanism or a citywide text amendment.

After debate and an unsuccessful effort to amend the motion to direct staff to find a lot-specific workaround, Commissioner Amik moved to affirm staff’s administrative decision; Vice Chair Bowman seconded. On roll call the motion carried with seven votes in favor and one abstention (Commissioner Goodman), affirming the staff decision and effectively denying the garage placement as proposed.

The commission’s decision affirms that the administrative remedy sought by the applicant failed; the decision can be appealed to the City Council. Staff told the commission that if property owners or the neighborhood want a different outcome for multiple lots they should pursue either a PUD or a text amendment, or coordinate a private-right-of-way process with the county and neighboring jurisdictions to change how setbacks apply.

What happens next: the applicant may appeal the planning commission’s decision to the City Council, or pursue the policy and zoning pathways described by staff to seek relief that would apply beyond this single lot.