Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutA003 - Staff Report to ZBA dated January 8, 20251 Item #: 3 Date: 01/08/25 CITY OF AMES DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND HOUSING REPORT TO THE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT DATE PREPARED: January 3, 2025 MEETING DATE: January 8, 2025 APPLICATION: APPEAL OF A DECISION OF THE ZONING ENFORCEMENT OFFICER THAT ANY FUTURE REQUEST TO ESTABLISH, OR MODIFY, A USE IN THE “O-H” HISTORIC PRESERVATION OVERLAY, THAT DOES NOT OTHERWISE REQUIRE A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENES FOR ALTERATIONS OR NEW CONSTRUCTION AS DEFINED IN CHAPTER 31 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE, DOES NOT REQUIRE REVIEW BY THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION. APPELLANT: David Carter, property owner within the Old Town Historic District Appellant information is included as a separate document with the report. Note: The Appeal is regarding the standards of Chapter 29 (Zoning) and Chapter 31 (Historic Preservation) of the Ames Municipal Code. The Appeal is regarding provisions of Chapter 29 (Zoning) and Chapter 31 (Historic Preservation) of the Ames Municipal Code regarding the role of the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) for reviewing certain types changes to historic resources within the Historic Overlay. The appellant asserts that procedurally the HPC has the authority to review certain changes of use whether a Certificate of Appropriateness for an alteration is otherwise required. The Zoning Enforcement Officer, the Planning Director, determined that a change of use or establishment of a use alone does not require HPC review if it does not otherwise require HPC review for physical changes to a site. The Appeal is not based on a specific property at this time, but how a standard of review would apply to a future application. BACKGROUND: A zoning text amendment is currently under consideration by the City Council to change the uses allowed in the O-SFC Single Family Conservation Overlay District to include “Social Service Providers, through the approval of a Special Use Permit by the Zoning Board of Adjustment. The Old Town Historic District is an additional Overlay (O-H) that applies to a subset of properties within the O-SFC. The HPC has authority over certain types of physical alterations to historic resources as specified within the O -H Overlay and more specifically Chapter 31 Historic Preservation ordinance. 2 As part of the review of the proposed ordinance, On October 22, 2024, the City Council requested a memo from the City Attorney in response to a letter from Mr. Carter, dated October 8, 2024 (see Attachment C). The first question, addressed in a separate report, is regarding the Historic Preservation Commission’s role in making a recommendation on all zoning text amendment changes that affect the Historic Overlay (O-H) zoning district. The second question, addressed in this report, is whether review of a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) for uses is required within the Historic Preservation Overlay (O-H) zoning overlay district. Based on the decision by the Planning Director on November 27th about the applicability of the COA process, David Carter filed an appeal of the decision with the City on December 5, 2024. BASIS OF DEPARTMENT DECISION: The determination by the Planning Director, in the letter dated November 27, 2024 (see Attachment A), reads as follows: Excerpt Page 2 of Planning Director Letter- Additionally, I have concluded that any future request to establish or modify a use in the O-H that does not otherwise require a COA for alterations or new construction as defined in Chapter 31, does not require an HPC review. The review authority of Chapter 31 does not provide authority for consideration of use on its own and as the more specific ordinance it is controlling over 29.1102. The Planning Director finds that the O-H Overlay sets a general requirement of review for changes within the Overlay (Subsection (3), approval of changes are categorized as Certificates of Appropriateness (COA). The O-H defines specific instances that require a COA and cross references to specific requirements of Chapter 31 (Historic Preservation). In addition to discussing building and structure alterations within Subsection 3, it also refers to use of an area of the Historic District for parking associated with a list of uses. The list of uses is associated with parking and is not a list of uses subject to HPC review. The City Attorney’s office also concurs that the list of uses is related to parking . Having the HPC review development of new parking as listed within 29.1102 would be consistent with the scope of authority of the HPC to review physical alterations and is a higher requirement of review in Chapter 29 than Chapter 31. However, the list of uses only relates to parking and in the Planning Director’s determination the creation of new parking lots which would be a physical change or alteration to a site consistent with the general scope of review by the HPC. Per the Planning Director’s original determination, a change of use on its own does not require a COA per the language of 29.1102 or requirements of Chapter 31. 3 The relevant Sections of Chapter 29 (Zoning) and Chapter 31 (Historic Preservation) are described below. Section 29.1102. “O-H” HISTORIC PRESERVATION OVERLAY. (1) Purpose. The Historic Preservation Overlay (O-H) Zone is intended to recognize the establishment of the City’s local Historic Preservation Districts (see Section 31.1 et seq. of the Municipal Code) and to promote the public interest in having the full and informed participation of the City’s Historic Preservation Commission in the hearing of zoning applications potentially affecting the City’s historic resources. To fully meet this objective, the Historic Preservation Overlay Zone may include properties that are proximate to, but not within, one of the Historic Districts established by the Municipal Code. The procedures established by this Section are intended to ensure that the City’s Historic Preservation Commission is specifically notified of all applications before the Planning and Zoning Commission or the Zoning Board of Adjustment respecting property within or proximate to the City’s local Historic Districts. (2) Notice. With regard to zoning applications and proposed zoning ordinance amendments that affect proposed or designated landmarks and historic districts, the Historic Preservation Commission shall consider such applications and/or amendments prior to consideration by the Zoning Board of Adjustment, or by the Planning and Zoning Commission. (3) Certificate of Appropriateness. As provided by Section 31.10 of the Municipal Code, and notwithstanding any uses otherwise permitted under an applicable Base Zone classification, no building or structure within an Historic District established pursuant to Chapter 31 of the Municipal Code may be erected, altered, demolished, or removed, and no area within such Chapter 31 Historic District may be used for industrial , commercial, business, home industry or occupational parking until a certificate of appropriateness has been issued for such activity by the Historic Preservation Commission. The requirement applies only to properties within the City’s Historic Districts. Section 31.6. POWERS AND DUTIES OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION. The Commission shall have the following powers and duties: (1) To adopt its own procedural regulations. (2) To accept and review proposals for designating as historic districts. (3) To keep a register of all properties and structures that have been designated as landmarks or historic districts, including all information required for each designation as prepared by the proponents of the district under consideration. (4) To provide information to the owners of landmarks and property or structures within historic districts on preservation, renovation, rehabilitation, and reuse. (5) To hold public hearings and to review applications for new construction, alteration, demolition, or relocation affecting proposed or designated landmarks or structures within historic districts and to approve or deny Certificates of Appropriateness for such actions. (6) To make recommendations to the City Council on guidelines for the alteration, new construction, demolition, or relocation of landmarks or property and structures within a historic district. 4 (7) To review proposed zoning amendments that affect proposed or designated landmarks and historic districts. (8) To testify before boards, commissions, and the City Council on any matter affecting historically and architecturally significant property, structures, and areas. (9) To periodically review the Zoning Ordinance and to recommend to the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council any amendments appropriate for the protection and continued use of landmarks or property and structures within historic districts. (10) To undertake any other action or activity necessary or appropriate to the implementation of the purpose of this ordinance as directed by the City Council. (11) Provide information regarding historic preservation to the City Council. (12) Promote and conduct educational and/or interpretive programs on historic properties within its jurisdiction. (13) To conduct studies for the identification and designation of historic districts, structures, and sites. City staff time and resources to conduct studies must be approved by City Council. (14) To make recommendations to the State Historic Preservation Officer regarding the listings of districts, structures, or sites to the National Register of Historic Places, and hold public hearings before making recommendations regarding National Register eligibility. Section 31.10. CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS. (1) Any act of alteration, demolition, new construction, or relocation, as defined herein, shall require a Certificate of Appropriateness as further described below. Every application for a building permit or a demolition permit affecting the exterior architectural appearance of a designated landmark or any contributing structure within a designated historic district shall be accompanied by a complete City of Ames application for a Certificate of Appropriateness. The Building Official shall not issue the building or demolition permit until a Certificate of Appropriateness has been approved. (2) Alteration. An alteration is any act or process that changes one or more of the exterior features of a structure, such as windows, porches, siding, and other features identified under the Design Guidelines that do not increase the amount of gross floor area. A Certificate of Appropriateness for an alteration shall be permitted in the following instances. (a) An architectural feature has deteriorated to the point that it must be replaced. (b) Architectural features were added which modified the original qualities of the architectural style and the current property owner wishes to restore the structure to the original architectural style. (c) An architectural feature may be added if the feature is appropriate to the architectural style of the structure. (3) New Construction. A Certificate of Appropriateness shall be required for construction of: (a) A new principal structure, or (b) An addition to an existing contributing structure or to a designated 5 landmark, or (c) A new accessory building or addition to an accessory building on a property with a contributing principal structure or designated landmark. (4) Consideration of an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness shall apply the Design Guidelines, which shall pertain to all historic preservation districts and historic landmarks; and the Design Criteria, which shall apply only to the particular historic district or historic landmark for which they are enacted. A new principal structure shall be representative of one of the architectural styles approved in the district. The design for the new principal structure must meet all the design criteria listed for the architectural style selected. Architectural features not specifically listed in the design criteria may be proposed by the applicant. Those features should be incorporated in a manner appropriate with the architectural style. In each instance, the Commission may grant exemptions to the requirements for an alteration if it determines that the cost of replication is prohibitive. (5) Demolition. … (6) Demolition of Contributing Garages. … (7) Relocation. … BASIS FOR APPEAL OF DECISION: The appellant’s ability to appeal a decision of the Planning Director is given in Chapter 29.1403(8)(a) as an aggrieved party. In this case, the appellant, property owner and resident of the O-H, believes the Planning Director has incorrectly interpreted Chapter 29 (Zoning) and Chapter 31 (Historic Preservation) by determining that the Historic Preservation Commission does not have COA approval requirements for certain uses listed in Section 29.1102(3). The appellant asserts that the requirements of Section 29.1102(3), as stated on Page 11 of the appeal application, require HPC review for the uses listed in Subsection 3. (See supporting information from the Appellant included as a separate document with the report.) 6 DETERMINATION BY THE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: The Zoning Board of Adjustment is authorized to consider an appeal of an administrative decision per 414.12 of the Code of Iowa to determine if there was an error. The appeal process is not an exception or variance process, it is an interpretation of zoning standards that apply uniformly across the City. The Board must determine there was an error in the interpretation by the Planning Director that any future request to establish or modify a use in the O-H (Historic Preservation Overlay) district that does not otherwise require a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) for alterations or new construction as defined in Chapter 31 does not require review by the Historic Preservation Commission , specifically related to the list of uses in Subsection 3 associated with parking for said uses. At issue is not the appropriateness or adequacy of the standards, only if staff made an incorrect interpretation. ALTERNATIVES: 1. As an appeal, the ZBA would need to approve the appeal with three affirmative votes that the Zoning Enforcement Officer erred in his interpretation of the Zoning Ordinance. 2. The Zoning Enforcement Officer decision will stand as is with ZBA denial of the appeal or with less than three votes to overturn the decision. STAFF COMMENTS: The appellant asserts that there is an error by the City of Ames administrative official for determining the meaning and interpretation of the Zoning Ordinance in the enforcement of Chapter 29 of the Ames Municipal Code. Specifically, in the enforcement of Section 29.1102(3). The Planning Director has determined that any future request to establish or modify a use in the O-H (Historic Preservation Overlay) district that does not otherwise require a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) for alterations or new construction as defined in Chapter 31 does not require review by the Historic Preservation Commission and only a COA is required by 29.1102 (3) for the list of uses related to parking as new construction. Therefore, it is the recommendation of the Planning Director that the Zoning Board of Adjustment deny the appeal. 7 Attachment A Planning Director’s Determination 8 Attachment A Planning Director’s Determination (Page 2) Attachment B 9 City Attorney’s Memo to City Council 10 Attachment B City Attorney’s Memo to City Council (Page 2) 11 Attachment B City Attorney’s Memo to City Council (Page 3) 12 Attachment B City Attorney’s Memo to City Council (Page 4) 13 Attachment C Letter from David Carter, Dated October 8, 2024 14 Attachment C Letter from David Carter, Dated October 8, 2024 (Page 2)