HomeMy WebLinkAboutA002 - Staff Report dated November 8, 2023
1
ITEM# ___2___
DATE: 11/08/23
CITY OF AMES
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND HOUSING
REPORT TO THE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
REQUEST: A Request for a Variance of two feet to allow a reduced side yard setback
from the required five-foot side setback in the “F-VR” Village Residential District for an
accessory structure at 2623 Somerset Drive.
BACKGROUND:
Beth Foreman, the applicant, owns and resides at 2623 Somerset Drive (see Location
Map—Attachment A). The property is zoned “F-VR” Village Residential District and
contains a 1,350-square-foot dwelling with a 451-square-foot, attached two-car garage.
The property is 7,000 square feet and is an interior lot. The rear yard is approximately
3,200 square feet and the house was constructed in 2002 at a side setback of
approximately 7 feet 9 inches, per the original building permit.
Ms. Foreman is requesting approval of a variance to allow an accessory structure on
the north side of the dwelling within the side yard setback. The accessory structure is
fully within the side yard and encroaches on the required five-foot side setback by two
feet. Detached accessory structures are subject to the same minimum setbacks in
the side yard as the principal structure, however, an addition to a home may
request an exception for a 2-foot encroachment. The applicant’s proposal is for
an accessory structure to avoid building code standards for an addition.
The structure is currently under construction as two separate “sheds” that span almost
the length of the side of the dwelling. The structure was constructed as a lean-to,
attached to the side wall of the dwelling. In its current configuration, it is an addition to
the home because it is connected to it for support. However, the applicant desires to
detach it, and thus the variance request for a detached accessory structure. A
site plan is included in Attachment B and Attachment C has photos of the structure.
The sheds are 5 feet in width and approximately 9 feet in height to the peak of their
roofs. One shed is approximately 15 feet and 6 inches in length (77 square feet). The
other is approximately 7 feet and 7 inches in length (38 square feet). They are
connected by a roof between their sidewalls that provides cover over a side entry to the
dwelling, the total covered area of the joined “sheds” is approximately 125 square feet.
The structure was constructed without a permit. City staff became aware of the structure
due to a complaint. All additions to principal structures require building permits,
detached accessory buildings less than 120 square feet do not require a building permit,
but are still subject to all standards.
2
The applicant indicates that based on the City’s website, they did not believe a permit
was needed. The application for a shed permit states that “structures with a floor area
less than 120 square feet do not require a Building Permit but must follow the Zoning
Ordinance regulations.” Section 5.104 of the code “Building Permits Not Required”
states that “one-story detached accessory structures used as a tool and storage sheds,
playhouses and similar uses, provided the floor area does not exceed 120 square feet”
do not require a building permit.
The applicant further indicates they also believed a three-foot setback was permitted for
accessory structures. This allowance is for accessory structures fully within the rear
yard or behind the home and is outlined in Section 29.408(7), the highlighted section
below is the controlling standard, not the rear yard standard.
Section 29.408(7)
(i) Location Within Setbacks.
(a) No detached garage or accessory building is allowed in the front yard,
or within the side yard setback adjacent to public right -of-way in the case
of corner lots.
(b) Side Yards.
(i) Interior Lot. A detached garage or accessory building wholly or
partially within the side yard shall meet all the same side setbacks as
required for the principal building.
(ii) Corner Lot. A garage or accessory building may be placed
within 3 feet of the side lot lines, provided the garage is set back a
minimum of 25 feet from the abutting streets.
(c) Rear Yards.
(i) A single-story detached garage or accessory building wholly
within the rear yard shall be a minimum of 3 feet from any property line
(other regulations notwithstanding). For purposes of this section, the rear
yard is located between the rear lot line and the primary structure,
extending from side lot line to side lot line. This section allows for 3 -foot
setbacks from both rear and side lot lines except for two-story structures,
which must meet side setbacks.
If the variance would be granted for a detached accessory structure, a building permit
would be required as the structure exceeds 120 square feet as currently configured.
The building permit would ensure that the structure is appropriately detached. The
structure would be permitted at the proposed side yard setback of 3 feet.
If the variance would not be granted, the applicant could choose to reduce the width of
the structure by two feet to meet the required side setback of five feet and detach it from
the home. Alternatively, the applicant could conform to the building code standards for
an addition and request a Zoning Board of Adjustment approval of an Exception for a
two-foot encroachment into the side yard setback.
3
APPLICANT PETITION AND STATEMENT OF SUPPORT OF PROPOSAL:
The applicant has provided the attached application including statements as to how the
request meets the standards for a variance.
APPLICABLE LAW:
The Board shall determine, pursuant to Iowa law, whether all the standards for granting
of a variance are satisfied by the Variance Request. The Criteria for Approval and
Findings of Fact prepared by staff are included in the Addendum.
Pertinent Sections of the Ames Municipal Code include the following:
Excerpt of Table 29.1201(7)-1
Village Residential (F-VR) Floating Zone Urban Regulations
Country Houses
URBAN
REGULATIONS
F-VR ZONE
Building
Placement
There shall be a mandatory build to line of 20 feet for Country
Houses in the Neighborhood Edge and 18 feet In the Neighborhood
General.
Where Country Houses have detached garages, the garage shall be
located no closer than 3 feet nor more than 20 feet from the alley line.
Where no alley exists, a detached garage may be located a minimum
of 3 feet from the rear yard lot lines.
Attached and detached garages shall be located no closer than 5 feet
to a side lot line for an interior lot
Attached and Detached garages with access from a street shall be
set back 20 feet from the property line adjacent to that street
Attached garages with access from a street shall be set back a
minimum of 5 feet from the rear lot line.
Country Houses shall be located no closer than 5 feet to an interior
side lot line and 20 feet to the side lot line in a corner condition in the
Neighborhood Edge, and 18 feet to the side lot line in a corner
condition in the Neighborhood General.
Citywide Standards
Sec. 29.402. SETBACKS.
(1) Building Setback Standard. Except as provided below, all buildings and
structures, Principal and Accessory, shall be located to comply with the minimum and
maximum Building Setbacks established for Principal and Accessory Build ings listed in
each Zone Development Standards Table, Supplemental Development Standards
Table, condition, or other regulation applicable to the lot or the use being employed at
the site.
4
Section 29.408 Accessory Buildings and Garages
(7)
(i) Location Within Setbacks.
(a) No detached garage or accessory building is allowed in the front
yard, or within the side yard setback adjacent to public right-of-way
in the case of corner lots.
(b) Side Yards.
(i) Interior Lot. A detached garage or accessory building
wholly or partially within the side yard shall meet all the same side
setbacks as required for the principal building.
(ii) Corner Lot. A garage or accessory building may be
placed within 3 feet of the side lot lines, provided the garage is set
back a minimum of 25 feet from the abutting streets.
Section 29.1504 VARIANCE
(1) Purpose. This section is intended to allow for variances from the terms of this
Ordinance pursuant to Section 414.12 of the Iowa Code as will not be contrary
to the public interest, where owing to special conditions a literal enforcement of
the provisions of the Ordinance will result in unnecessary hardship, and so that
the spirit of this Ordinance is observed, and substantial justice done.
(3) Procedure. Review of an application for variance shall be conducted by the
Zoning Board of Adjustment and shall be in accordance with the following:
(c) Review and Disposition.
(i) The Zoning Board of Adjustment shall act upon all applications for a
variance in accordance with the requirements set forth in the Iowa
Code.
(ii) In granting any variance, the Zoning Board of Adjustment may prescribe
appropriate conditions and safeguards to promote the purposes and
protect the integrity of this Ordinance. Violations of such conditions and
safeguards, when made part of the terms under which the variance is
granted, shall be deemed a violation of this Ordinance.”
(4) Standards. Pursuant to Iowa law, a variance shall be granted only if all the
following standards are satisfied:
(a) The granting of the variance shall not be contrary to the public interest.
(b) That without granting of the variance, and due to special conditions, a literal
enforcement of the ordinance will result in unnecessary hardship. Unnecessary
5
hardship exists when:
(i) The land in question cannot yield a reasonable return if used only for a
purpose allowed in the zone.
(ii) The plight of the owners is due to unique circumstances and not to the
general conditions in the neighborhood.
(iii) The use to be authorized by the variance will not alter the essential
character of the locality.
(c) The spirit of the ordinance shall be observed even when the variance is
granted.
(d) Substantial justice shall be done as a result of granting the variance.
Iowa Code Pertinent Requirements- Chapter 414 (City Zoning), Section 414.12(3)
414.12 Powers.
The board of adjustment shall have the following powers:
1. To hear and decide appeals where it is alleged there is error in any order,
requirement, decision, or determination made by an administrative official in the
enforcement of this chapter or of any ordinance adopted pursuant thereto.
2. To hear and decide special exceptions to the terms of the ordinance upon which
such board is required to pass under such ordinance.
3. To authorize upon appeal in specific cases such variance from the terms of
the ordinance as will not be contrary to the public interest, where owing to
special conditions a literal enforcement of the provisions of the ordinance will
result in unnecessary hardship, and so that the spirit of the ordinance shall
be observed, and substantial justice done.
BASIS OF PETITION:
The applicant has submitted responses to the variance criteria. See the attached
supporting information prepared by the applicant as part of the “Variance Application
Packet”. Portions of this information in addition to the staff findings are summarized
below.
PUBLIC NOTIFICATION:
Notification was made to all owners of property within 200 feet. A notice of public
hearing was placed on the property and published in the newspaper.
6
ALTERNATIVES:
1. The Zoning Board of Adjustment denies this request for a Variance of two feet to
allow a reduced side yard setback from the required five-foot side setback in the
“F-VR” Village Residential District for a detached accessory structure at 2623
Somerset Drive by adopting findings that the evidence does not support the
explicit finding of consistency with all the Variance criteria.
The applicant would need to modify the structure to either meet detached
accessory building requirements or standards for an addition to the principal
structure.
2. The Zoning Board of Adjustment, makes specific findings for consistency of the
request with all Variance criteria, approves the Variance of two feet to allow a
reduced side yard setback from the required five-foot side setback in the “F-VR”
Village Residential District for a detached accessory structure at 2623 Somerset
Drive, with the condition:
a. that the applicant meets all City of Ames Building Code and Zoning
Ordinance standards within 9 months of the Decision and Order
authorizing a detached accessory structure located no closer than 3 feet
to an exterior property line.
b. The structure shall include materials and finishes that are consistent with
the principal structure for siding, roofing, and colors.
3. The Zoning Board of Adjustment may table this Variance Request and seek
further information from the applicant or from staff.
PLANNING AND HOUSING DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDED ACTION:
It is the conclusion of staff, based upon an analysis of the project and the applicant’s
information, that the request for a variance does not meet all of the criteria. Although the
request is not contrary to the public interest based upon its size and use, staff did not
find that enough evidence was provided to support a determination that the hardship
and substantial justice criteria were met as outlined in the proposed findings of fact.
The Planning Housing Department recommends Alternative 1 to deny the
variance request. The applicant could then choose to detach the structure and
reduce the width by two feet to meet the required side setback or seek an
exception for a minor area modification for an addition to the principal structure
and meet all building code requirements.
7
ADDENDUM
Staff makes the following findings of fact and conclusions for each of the Variance
criteria:
(a) The granting of the variance shall not be contrary to the public interest.
FINDING: Setbacks preserve access to light and air, adequate separation of
buildings for fire safety and emergency access, and a uniform appearance of
buildings.
CONCLUSION: In general, it is in the public interest to ensure that the use of
property does not infringe on the rights of the neighbors, allow for emergency
access around and into properties, allow room for lawns and trees, and for light
and air into the home.
If the variance is granted, the public interest in building separation to provide light
and air, emergency access, and a uniform appearance of buildings would not be
substantially compromised. The structure is set back from the front of the home
and will have materials that match the existing home. The height of the structure
meets the requirements for detached accessory structures.
A detached structure can be located as close as three feet to a pro perty line in
the rear yard without changes to meet building code construction requirements
for fire-rated walls. If the variance is granted, a building permit would be required
for its size exceeding 120 square feet. With the combination of design elements,
size, and minimum 3-foot setback, the Board can conclude that this criterion
is met.
(b) That without granting of the variance, and due to special conditions, a
literal enforcement of the ordinance will result in unnecessary hardship.
Unnecessary hardship exists when:
(i) The land in question cannot yield a reasonable return if used only for
a purpose allowed in the zone.
FINDING: The property has a 1,350-square-foot dwelling with a 451-square-foot,
attached two-car garage. The property owner constructed the home in 2002 and
has lived at the residence with no additional accessory structures for over 20
years. The property has an assessed value of $318,300. Use of the property as
a residence may continue, regardless of whether the variance is granted for the
accessory structures.
CONCLUSION: The principle of reasonable return asks the Board to consider if,
without a variance, a property owner cannot have beneficial use or enjoyment of
the property consistent with zoning. The existing dwelling and attached garage
are not impacted by the variance and alone provide reasonable return for use of
8
the property. The applicant stated that they have invested in constructing the
accessory structures, and if the variance were denied, that investment would be
lost if the structures were removed or reduced in size. These expenses would be
a loss, but the property as a whole retains its full value and use. Additionally,
maximizing the property’s use does not relate to the base criterion of reasonable
use. The applicant has not shown that without a variance no reasonable return
on the property is possible. Therefore, the Board can conclude that this
criterion is not met.
(ii) The plight of the owners is due to unique circumstances and not to
the general conditions in the neighborhood.
FINDINGS: The property is of a typical rectangular lot configuration for the area.
The home was constructed consistent with current standards in 2002. The rear
yard is approximately 3,200 square feet and is relatively flat. There is a deck and
several planting beds. There are also several trees. However, there is sufficient
area to site accessory structures in the rear yard without impacting these
features.
Alternatively, the structure could be reduced by two feet in width to meet setback
requirements in the current location.
CONCLUSION: The principle regarding unique circumstances asks the Board to
consider if topography or other limiting factors, outside of the property owner’s
control, create the need for the variance request. The property does not contain
any steep slopes, floodplain, or unique easements that would prevent placing an
accessory structure in the rear yard. While the property owner contends
accessory structures in the rear yard would interfere with landscaping and other
features, these are preferences for use of the property and are not unique
circumstances. No unique circumstances apply to the property use or
configuration. Therefore, the Board can conclude that this criterion is not
met.
(iii) The use to be authorized by the variance will not alter the essential
character of the locality.
FINDING: This neighborhood is characterized by a variety of residential uses
with commercial and mixed-use buildings in the neighborhood center. The
property is part of the neighborhood edge, with the least-dense single-family
homes, on standard-size lots, with two-car attached garages. As the
neighborhood was recently constructed, no nonconforming lot sizes or setbacks
are likely.
The F-VR District was designed to have specific standards to ensure visually
compatible buildings and a distinct neighborhood feel including specific side
setbacks for structures. The neighboring property to the south has similar
9
accessory structures in the side yard near the dwelling, however, these appear to
meet the required side setback.
The neighboring property to the north signed the statement of support submitted
with the application materials.
CONCLUSION: With siding, roof materials, and windows proposed to be
installed on the structure providing some visual compatibility and size of the
structure, the additional encroachment is not inconsistent with the general area.
Therefore, the Board can conclude that this criterion is met.
(c) The spirit of the Ordinance shall be observed even when the variance is
granted.
FINDING: Side setback requirements uniformly apply across the city to
accessory structures in side yards. The setback is required to be the same as a
principal building, which, in this case, is the dwelling. In the F-VR District, both
the principal building and accessory structures have five-foot side yard setback
requirements. By reducing the size of the accessory structures by two feet, it
would be possible to meet the side setback requirement. Alternatively, there is
sufficient room in the rear yard for the accessory structures.
CONCLUSION: To satisfy this principle, the Board must determine if the
applicant is asking for the least relief from the zoning law that is possible and
considering other factors justifying the request the proposed relief is appropriate.
A Variance is not consistent with the intent of the Ordinance if alternatives for
development exist that do not require a variance and the variance request is not
an effort to comply with the Ordinance to the fullest extent practicable. As there
are alternative locations in the rear yard and a reduced size where the accessory
structures would meet side yard setbacks, the spirit of the Ordinance is not
observed, the variance is not needed, and the strict regulation of the zoning
ordinance can be enforced. Therefore, the Board can conclude that this
criterion is not met.
(d) Substantial justice shall be done as a result of granting the variance.
FINDING: Substantial justice speaks to the requirement that the hardship must
be peculiar to the property or that an issue of equity in the use of property exists.
The applicant indicates the situation was created due to a misunderstanding of
the code requirements and not a property-specific circumstance.
CONCLUSION: The Board must determine if there is a hardship attributable to
the property that results in lack of equal use of property compared to others
subject to the same regulations. Nonapplication for a permit is not a peculiarity
or inequity of the property itself. Granting of a variance for the accessory
structure would not provide substantial justice in the use of the property. There
are options to construct accessory structures on the property in a manner that
10
complies with the zoning ordinance. Therefore, the Board can conclude that
this criterion is not met.
11
Attachment A
Location Map
12
Attachment B
Site Plan
13
Attachment C
Photos
Figure 1 Front View--Facing West
14
Figure 2 Side View--Facing Southwest
15
Figure 3 Rear View--Facing East