Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout~Master - D&O Appeal from Daniel Kolz on decision of P&HDirector regarding fenceCITY OF AMES, IOWA ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT CiL CASE NO. 22-11 LIM 1110 IN U_J PARCEL NO. 09-02-235-100 LIN V I PA A411:111 U11"1111112A C,0 DECISION AND ORDER FACTS This matter came before the Board for an appeal of the decision of the Planning Director regarding the classification of a structure within the rear yard of the property located at 802 Burnett Avenue. The property is a single-family residence with an attached garage and has non- conforming side and rear building setbacks. Fences may be constructed without regard to the required building setback, if the height of the fence meets the height limitations defined in Section 29.408(20) of the Ames Municipal Code. In his appeal, the Appellant asserts that the Planning Director has incorrectly interpreted the zoning ordinance by determining the structure to be a fence. The Appellant claims that the extended posts are not part of the fence, but are instead landscape accents, which would exempt them from height limits. Appellant agrees that in their choice of design and materials have tried to make these vertical features part of a harmonious whole. However, the Appellant asserts that the extensions are not in themselves what one would consider a fence nor do they further the purposes of a fence, regardless of what objects they touch. The current zoning designation for the property is Residential Medium Density (RM); Single Family Conservation Overlay District (O-SFC) and Historical Preservation Overlay District (0- H), Properties in the Old Town Historic District are required to receive a Certificate of Appropriateness for certain improvements, including fencing. On July 11, 2022, the Historic Preservation Commission reviewed the Certificate of Appropriateness and referred the request back to planning staff or the Appellant for additional information. The zoning ordinance defines a fence as an unroofed barrier or enclosing structure, including retaining walls. The proposed structure includes a 3-foot brick wall with three brick columns that are proposed to extend a height of 6 feet 6 inches. The brick columns surround support posts that extend to 12 feet with 8-foot arms at the top of the posts extending inwardly toward the house at an angle, resulting in a total height of over 12-feet. The extended features are to be built into the brick wall and located along the hip wall one foot from the property line. The 12-foot extensions are physically part of the fence design and were determined to be subject to the fence height limitations. City Planner Eloise Sahlstrorn presented the Staff Report to the Board and Summarized the findings of the staff. Planner Sahlstrom informed the Board the property is located at the corner of 8"' Street and Burnett Avenue in the Old Town Historic District. The Appellant appealed the Planning Director's decision that their proposed structure located along the rear of the property line is a "fence" as defined in Section 29.201(74) of the Ames Municipal Code. As a fence, the structure is limited in its height and location on the property. The Appellant's proposed fence exceeds the maximum height of six feet for fences in the rear yard setback due to the posts utilized in the design ofthe fence. The Appellant, Daniel Kolz, testified that the proposed structure doesn't look like a fence. Appellant stated that it is his understanding if the extensions were being built one foot closer or further away then it would meet the code; if the extensions weren't attached to the hip wall, then they would be fine. But with the extensions on the hip wall then it becomes part of a fence. Appellant states that although they touch walls, the extensions do not occlude lines of sight, cause a safety hazard, or Cause the types of problems you expect a fence code was put in place to address. The Board accepted and considered the Staff Report, the testimony presented at the hearing, and adopted the Faclual Findings and Conclusions in the Staff Report. FINDINGS AND DECISION The Board considered the facts as detailed above and provided in the Staff Report and all evidence provided at the hearing. The Board adopted the findings in the Staff Report and found that the proposed structure at 802 Bennett Avenue in its entirety is a fence and that the fence exceeds the maximum height allowed for a fence in the rear of the yard and that the Planning Director correctly interpreted the Ames Municipal Code. WHEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that pursuant to Section 29.1403(7)(a) of the Ames Municipal Code, the decision of the Planning Director is UPHELD. Any person desiring to appeal this decision to a court of record may do so within thirty (30) days after the filing of this decision. Done this 9"' day of November, 2022. Nat lie Rekerneyer Recording Secretary Lea i tOj mar Chair