Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
BZA grants front-yard pole barn at 5227 Knowlton Road after staff recommends approval with permit conditions
Loading...
Summary
The board approved a variance to build a 1,440-square-foot, 15-foot-tall pole barn in the front yard at 5227 Knowlton Road, accepting staff’s recommendation that environmental and flood-permitting reviews occur before construction and noting commitments to minimize tree removal and disturbance.
The Metropolitan Board of Zoning Appeals granted a variance to allow a 1,440-square-foot accessory structure in the front yard of 5227 Knowlton Road, siding with staff’s recommendation that locating the building in the front yard would minimize disturbance to environmentally sensitive rear-yard areas.
Attorney David Dearing, representing the petitioner John Puffer, argued that placing the building adjacent to the existing driveway would limit disturbance and preserve roughly 30% tree canopy the comprehensive plan’s environmentally sensitive overlay encourages. Puffer said the structure was intended for residential accessory functions and storage, and described cleanup work he had done on the property: “I have a tractor... I want to turn my garage... into their playroom,” he said, explaining the need to move equipment and tools out of the current garage.
Neighbor Dorothy Fiebelman opposed the request and urged environmental review and floodplain analysis, calling for an environmental impact study and raising concerns about drainage and nearby Crooked Creek. Fiebelman asked for detail on footing depth, pole installation and potential erosion impacts.
Staff recommended approval and noted the proposed building would be approximately 115 feet east of the floodplain boundary and that flood and drainage permits would still be required before construction. Staff said locating the building in the front yard would minimize additional clearing versus siting it in the rear and suggested the board could impose commitments to preserve trees and require administrative approval for minor adjustments.
After hearing rebuttals, the board voted to grant the variance unanimously (Beth Brandon yes; Craig Van Dalen yes; Tom Barnes yes). The approval is subject to normal permitting and any commitments the board elects to impose; staff told the board that flood and drainage reviews would be required before issuance of an improvement location permit.
The decision resolves a practical-difficulty argument the applicant made, but the petitioner must still secure flood/drainage permits and comply with any tree-preservation commitments the board records.
