Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout~Master - Zoning Board of Adjustment Minutes 4-27-2016MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AMES, IOWA APRIL 27, 2016 The Ames Zoning Board of Adjustment met, pursuant to law, in regular session at 6:00 p.m. on April 27, 2016, in the Council Chambers of City Hall with the following members present: Shelby Ebel, Kyle Perkins, Susan Bradbury, Matthew Koehler and Amelia Schoeneman. Staff members Charlie Kuester and Mark Lambert were also present. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Moved by Perkins, seconded by Koehler, to approve the minutes of the meeting of April 13, 2016. Vote on Motion: 5-0. Motion declared carried unanimously. CASE NO. 16-03 VARIANCE – Timothy Grandon, 105 South Maple Avenue Public Hearing on application for Variances to the front and rear setback requirements to allow construction of a detached garage on the property located at 105 South Maple Avenue* City Planner Charlie Kuester displayed a location map and site plan for the project. The applicant wishes to construct a three stall garage 22 feet by 30 feet on the site. The lot is a corner lot on the south side of Lincoln Way. The lot is platted as 45 feet by 80 feet and is a non-conforming lot per the development standards of the Zoning Ordinance. The house is at the far south end of the lot. There once was a single stall detached garage north of the house but it was removed sometime between 2003 and 2008. The location of the house is the back corner of the property, the address of the property is fronting onto South Maple, and the zoning requirements for location of detached garages in a front yard hinder the ability to construct any garage that would meet requirements. Currently, there is no off-street parking, which would make the property non-conforming regarding parking requirements for single family homes because two spaces are required for a single family home. The proposed garage would be set back 20 feet from the east lot line along South Maple Avenue. This is the same setback of the existing house so the garage would not protrude forward of the house. This would require a variance of 5 feet from the required 25 foot front setback. The garage would be set back 3 feet from the west property line. This would require a variance of 17 feet from the required 20 foot rear setback. The garage would be set back 25 feet from the Lincoln Way lot line; this meets the required 15 feet setback. The site plan, project description, applicable law, and findings of fact and conclusions were reviewed in detail by Mr. Kuester. He explained that City staff has reviewed the request and recommends that the Board approve the request for a Variance. Ms. Bradbury inquired if property owners were notified. Mr. Kuester replied that property owners within 200 feet were notified; the applicant provided signatures from two property owners who indicated they had no issues with the site plan. Other than that, no other calls or contact was received from the public. Ms. Schoneman questioned what the proposed height of the garage is. Mr. Kuester said that the height of the garage is required to be no more than the height of the two story house. Ms. Ebel inquired about one of the conclusions in the staff report. She noted that the report says that the accessory structure is defined as being a subordinate structure which does not mean that the structure must be smaller than the principal structure, it means it must be used only to serve the principal use on the lot. Ms. Ebel noted that she feels use and size should both be considered and questioned if the code says anywhere that it’s just the use. Mr. Kuester said that accessory garages are not defined; however, garages are subordinate because their purpose is to serve as a principal structure. If the house were to go away, the garage could not remain because it’s no longer serving as the principal structure. Ms. Ebel asked if there are requirements, as far as covered or uncovered, for the two parking spaces necessary for single homes. Mr. Kuester said that the spaces can be covered or uncovered; they only require that there are two off street parking spaces. Tim Grandon, 2851 Monroe Drive, was sworn in and testified under oath. He informed the Board that he recently purchased this property and noted that parking was not a concern for the previous homeowner who lived at the property for 30 years because they did not drive or own any vehicles. Mr. Grandon expressed that he applied for the size of garage that he did so that he is able to park two vehicles, as well as snow blowers, mowers, etc. in the garage. Mr. Koehler inquired why uncovered parking is not allowed in certain spots. Mr. Kuester replied that the zoning code states that parking is not allowed in the front yard unless it’s on a driveway that leads to the side or the rear of the house. In this case, the front yard is only defined for parking purposes. Ms. Ebel voiced her concern with the three stall garage. She said she doesn’t feel that that small of a home needs that much off street parking. In her opinion, she feels that subordinate means in size and in use. Ms. Ebel resolved that the three stall garage would also be inconsistent with the neighborhood. Ms. Bradbury said that she drove past the house and although it is very cute, it is also relatively small. She understands the issue of being so close to Lincoln Way and the corner which makes on street parking impossible. She also understands the need for a garage but feels the three stall would be out of proportion to the house, lot and surrounding neighborhood character. Ms. Bradbury concluded that the two stall garage makes the most sense for the property and location. Mr. Grandon said that if a three stall garage is not approved, then he would likely build a shed to house mowers and snow blowers. He asked the Board if they would rather see a two car garage built with a shed for equipment or a three stall garage. Ms. Ebel inquired if he would be able to build a shed if he was not granted the three stall garage. Mr. Kuester said that the shed would have to be built on the west or south side of the house but there are only two or three feet to work with in those areas. He concluded that the applicant would have to return to the Board for a Variance for the shed, as well. Moved by Bradbury, seconded by Ebel, to approve ORDER NO. 16-03, thereby approving a two car garage variance of 5 feet from the required 25 foot front setback and 17 feet from the required 20 foot rear setback to allow construction of a 22 foot by 22 foot garage on the property located at 105 South Maple Avenue. Roll Call Vote: 5-0. Motion declared carried unanimously. COMMENTS: There were no comments by the Board. ADJOURNMENT: Moved by Perkins, seconded by Koehler, to adjourn the meeting at 6:32 p.m. _____________________________ _________________________________ Erin Cain, Recording Secretary Shelby Ebel, Chair