HomeMy WebLinkAboutA001 - City Attorney response to requirement for a side yard CITY or AMMi
r
/Steve
OFFICE MEMORANDUM
•To Veitch, John Luchan DATE 2 1 1-ZIT__
FROM John R. Klaus, City Attorne
SUWECT Side yard requirements for struct es in —dis
This is in response to your telephone call of this afternoon
in which you asked what the requirement for a side yard of a
building erected in a C-2 district is. The lot requirements of a
structure in various zoning districts is as shown on a chart
contained in Section 38-1033 of the Municipal Code of the City
of Ames.
For the C-2 district, this chart shows under side yards a
capital IL ' . This letter 'L' obviously relates to the small letter
' 1' contained in the notes following the chart. The small letter
11 ' provides "requirement of the R-4 district shall be applied
as minimum. "
It is something of a coincidence that just last week I called
John Luchan and advised him that the C-5 zoning district regulations
were being changed and this would entail a modification of 38-1033 to
delete reference to the C-5 district. I then told John that if he
were having any other problems with the charts in 38-1033, that this
• should be made known at this time so that corrections deemed
necessary can be made now. John indicated to me by telephone that
he was having problems with footnote 'L' of 38-1033. John Luchan
told me that his problem stemmed from the fact that it was his
understanding and he believed it was the understanding of everyone
else that the requirement of footnote 'L' as to R-4 district
regulations being applied as a minimum only related to residential
structures in a commercial zone. John stated that he believed
that this portion of the Municipal Code should be amended to make
this clear.
I certainly agree that if that is the intent of the ordinance,
then some additional language is needed to make that clear. A
straight forward reading of the chart produces a different result
in my opinion.
If one consults the charts to determine what the side yard
requirement is for a structure in a C-2 zone, one finds under the
side yard. column the letter 'L' . The letter 'L' indicates
that the requirements of the R-4 district must be applied as a
minimum. Going to the R-4 district, we find under side yard the
small letter 'c ' . Going to footnote ' c ' we find it provides that:
"side yards shall be a minimum of 6 feet for one-story
buildings, 8 feet for two-story buildings, 10 feet for
three-story buildings, 12 feet for four-story buildings ,
and an additional 4 feet for every story over four. On
corner lots, the side yard adjoining the street shall
be a minimum of 15 feet in S-1, S-2, R-1, R-2 and R-3
districts; and a minimum of 12 and 1/2 feet in R-4, HM,
and C-1 district. "
r -2-
• Nowhere in 38-1033 do I see anything on which one can base a
conclusion that the provisions of footnote ' 1' are only to apply
to residential structures in a commercial district and not to
commercial structures as well. If that is the intent, it should
be expressed in that manner. Until it is so expressed, I don 't
believe we have any legal basis for giving any effect to the chart
contained in 38-1033 other than what the footnote 's designations
contained therein direct. That result is as follows:
a. There is no front yard requirement in a C-2 district
unless it abuts an arterial street as is provided in footnote ' j '
in which event the building must be 60 feet from the centerline of
the street.
b. As to rear yard footage 'd' applies. This states that
no rear yard is required except on the rear of a lot which abuts
an A-1, S-1, S-2, R-1, R-2, R-3, and R-4 district, in which case
the rear yard regulations of the district which it adjoins will
apply. Oddly enough, footnote 'd' provisions for side yards
is as follows: "No side yard required except on the side of a
lot which adjoining a S-1, S-2, R-2, R-3, R-4 district in which
case the yard regulations of the district which it adjoins shall
apply. It could be this language which has caused Mr. Luchan to
become confused in a C-2 district. Certainly if footnote 'd'
appeared under the side yard column of the chart relative to the
C-2 district, then no side yard would be required unless the lot
abutted on one of the districts as specified. However, footnote
' d' does not appear in the side yard column with respect to the
C-2 district, but rather foonote '1 ' appears and footnote ' 1 '
states that the requirement of the R-4 district shall be applied
as a minimum.
Therefore, I reluctantly must again opine contrary to what
appears to be established practice and state that in a C-2 district,
even commercial buildings , must have side yards meeting the
requirements as set out in footnote ' c' to the chart contained
in 38-1033 of the Municipal Code, that being the minimum require
ment of the R-4 district.
JRK:mar