HomeMy WebLinkAboutLand Use Review Commission - Minutes - 07/08/2021
Ralph Shields, Chair
Shelley La Mastra, Vice Chair
David Lawton
John McCoy
Taylor Meyer
Ian Shuff
Butch Stockover
Council Liaison: Shirley Peel
Staff Liaison: Noah Beals
LOCATION:
Virtual Hearing
The City of Fort Collins will make reasonable accommodations for access to City services, programs, and activities and will make
special communication arrangements for persons with disabilities. Please call 221-6515 (TDD 224-6001) for assistance.
REGULAR MEETING
JULY 8, 2021
8:30 AM
CALL TO ORDER and ROLL CALL
All commission members except Shuff, LaMastra and Stockover were present.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM PREVIOUS MEETING
Meyer made a motion, seconded by Shields to approve the June 10, 2021 Minutes.
The motion was adopted unanimously, with Shields abstaining.
CITIZEN PARTICIPATION (Items Not on the Agenda)
Council Havelda introduced Aaron Guin, a new member of the City Attorney’s office, who joined the
meeting to observe the Hearing.
APPEALS FOR VARIANCE TO THE LAND USE CODE
1. APPEAL ZBA210025 –APPROVED
Address: 1550 Reeves Dr.
Owner/Petitioner: Anurag Agrawal
Zoning District: L-M-N
Code Section: 3.8.11(C)(5)
Project Description:
This is a request to extend the existing rear-yard fence along the public sidewalk. The existing fence
encroaches 2 feet into the 2-foot setback from the sidewalk and the proposed fence is requesting to
match the existing encroachment.
Staff Presentation:
Beals showed slides relevant to the appeal and discussed the variance request, noting it is a corner
property in Registry Ridge neighborhood. Land Use Code requires a 2-foot setback from the street.
There is an existing fence that encloses the backyard which is already encroaching the sidewalk.
Proposal is to extend the existing fence. Engineering was consulted and the applicant will need to get
LAND USE REVIEW COMMISSION
MEETING MINUTES
Land Use Review Commission Page 2 July 8, 2021
approval from Engineering. Engineering initially thought they may have a concern with the sight
distance triangle, however, upon further review they determined it would not be an issue from a sight
distance perspective.
Applicant Presentation:
Applicants, Anurag Agrawal and Debolina Sen, 1550 Reeves Dr, addressed the board and agreed to
have the hearing held remotely. The fence already existed when they purchased the house in 2016.
They discussed their plans with the HOA to extend the fence to allow for more space. There is a
fountain in their yard which takes up a lot of space. There is also an Excel Energy pipeline in the way
if they were to build the fence to meet code requirements.
Chair Shields asked whether the new fence would match the existing fence. Applicant responded that
it would match.
Audience Participation:
Jean Aimes, 6851 Ranger Dr, addressed the commission. She is a neighbor and does not have any
issues with the fence. She was also curious whether the fence would match the existing and is happy
to hear that it will.
Commission Discussion:
Commission Member Meyer does not have any problems with the request. It seems reasonable,
especially when considering the gas line.
Chair Shields agrees with Meyer’s comments.
Boardmember Meyer made a motion, seconded by Lawton, to approve ZBA210025 for the
following reasons: The granting of the modification will not diverge from the standard but in a
nominal, inconsequential way, when considered in the context of the neighborhood, and will
continue to advance the purpose of the Land Use Code contained in Section 1.2.2 with the
following findings: The existing fence along the property and the fence on the abutting tract
encroach the same distance, and the proposed fence does not extend the full side of the west
wall of the house, and there are exceptional physical conditions with the gas line installed
where the fence will go to meet the Land Use Code
Yeas: Meyer, Shields, Lawton and McCoy. Nays: none.
THE MOTION CARRIED, THE ITEM WAS APPROVED.
2. APPEAL ZBA210026 - APPROVED
Address: 2026 Bear Mountain Dr.
Owner: Omnia Cum Deo LLC
Petitioner: Mark Bruder.
Zoning District: I
Code Section: 3.8.7.2(B) Table (B)
Project Description:
This is a request for a variance to the required sign height in the Residential Sign District. The request is
to allow all wall signs, both currently proposed and future signs, for this building to extend an additional 1
foot beyond the required 2-foot height limit.
Staff Presentation:
Beals showed slides relevant to the appeal and discussed the variance request, noting it is a new
mixed-use industrial building and is surrounded by non-residential use buildings. It is in the residential
sign district, industrial areas which typically abut residential areas and are placed in the residential sign
district for additional restrictions on signage. This property does not abut any residential properties but
is in the vicinity of some. Overall request is to have a blanket approval for wall signs placed on the
building to be 3 feet instead of the 2 feet allowed by the code. He showed slides which had images of
the various sign proposals.
Land Use Review Commission Page 3 July 8, 2021
Applicant Presentation:
Applicant, Jay Gerdes addressed the board and agreed to the remote proceedings. Two tenants of the
building would have to drastically modify their logos to make them legible and within the code. He feels
that this would not have a negative impact whatsoever to anyone in the neighborhood. This would
level the playing field to businesses in the area.
Audience Participation: none
Commission Discussion:
Commission member Meyer asked Beals if the commercial businesses to the South fall under the
same signage code. Beals explained that the only property not part of the district is a place of worship.
The City is looking at re-calibrating the district in the future but has not happened. Meyer thinks it is a
reasonable request. He appreciates the before and after pictures of the signs provided by the
applicant.
Commission member Lawton asked Beals whether the other businesses in the district are in
compliance. Beals stated that most businesses are complying. A few received variances to increase
their signage. Lawton believes the addition to the size would help the businesses and would be in
support.
Chair Shields agreed that there are no impacts to residential areas and would be in approval.
Council Havelda wanted clarification that the variance only pertains to the one building. The applicant
stated as such.
Boardmember Meyer made a motion, seconded by Lawton to approve ZBA210026 for the
following reasons: the variance is not detrimental to the public good; The height increase will
have minimal increase in impact to existing residential development; There are taller buildings
intervening between the closest residential property to the south; There is a six-lane arterial
street with streetlights and street trees on either side between the residential property to the
east. Therefore, the variance request will not diverge from the standard but in a nominal,
inconsequential way, when considered in the context of the neighborhood, and will continue to
advance the purpose of the Land Use Code contained in Section 1.2.2
Yeas: McCoy, Meyer, Shields, Lawton Nays: none.
THE MOTION CARRIED, THE ITEM WAS APPROVED
3. APPEAL ZBA210027- APPROVED
Address: 1025 Sailors Reef
Owner/Petitioner: Elaine and Dennis Edwards
Zoning District: R-L
Code Section: 4.4(D)(2)(c)
Project Description:
This is a request to build a deck encroaching a total of 8.75 feet into the required 15-foot rear-yard
setback. The approved subdivision plans already allow a 3-foot encroachment into the required 15-foot
rear setback. The proposed deck is seeking an additional 5.75 feet. This also requires vacating part of a
10-foot utility easement along the rear property line.
Staff Presentation:
Beals showed slides relevant to the appeal and discussed the variance request, noting it is a single
family attached property. Request is for an elevated deck. Vacating the easement is a separate
process. The process has been started with the Engineering department. There have not been any
utilities discovered yet in the easement. The house sits a bit lower than the lake. The purpose is to
obtain a water view.
Land Use Review Commission Page 4 July 8, 2021
Commission member Lawton asked about the neighboring property and whether it was a duplex.
Beals clarified that there is only one unit on a lot and it is called a single family attached.
Applicant Presentation:
Applicants Dennis and Elaine Edwards, 1025 Sailors Reef addressed the board and agreed to have
the hearing held remotely. They purchased the property in November of 2019. They only have a few
feet before they encroach on the easement. They currently do not have enough room to build a deck.
The design of their deck will match the neighboring decks. Both Comcast and their HOA do not have
any problem with vacating the easement.
Council Havelda wanted to ensure that the letter the applicant submitted was clear to the commission
since there were some technical difficulties. All commission members and the applicants were
comfortable moving forward and relying on the applicant letter.
Commission member Meyer asked whether this has been approved by the HOA. Applicant stated as
such. Meyer also asked about the lack of a 2nd floor on the property. The applicant stated that there
will be no internal access to the deck. The only access would be from the outside.
Audience Participation: (none)
Commission Discussion:
Commission member Meyer was initially concerned about the design. Since it has been approved by
the HOA, he doesn’t have as many concerned. He is comfortable approving.
Commission member Lawton stated that he is familiar with the area. He believes there is precedence
and does not detract from the neighborhood.
Boardmember Meyer made a motion, seconded by Lawton to approve ZBA210027 for the
following reasons: the granting of the modification of standard would not be detrimental to the
public good; The proposed deck does not increase the impacts of the current patio area; the
abutting property to the southwest is a private lake with no residential buildings. Therefore, the
variance request will not diverge from the standard but in a nominal, inconsequential way,
when considered in the context of the neighborhood, and will continue to advance the purpose
of the Land Use Code contained in Section 1.2.2
Yeas: McCoy, Meyer, Shields Lawton, Nays: none.
THE MOTION CARRIED, THE ITEM WAS APPROVED
4. APPEAL ZBA210028- APPROVED
Address: 421 E. Laurel St
Owner: Patricia and Nick Quinn
Petitioner: Kristin Zuro
Zoning District: N-C-M
Code Section: 4.8(D)(2)(a)(2)
Project Description:
This is a variance request to exceed maximum allowable floor area of the lot by 619 square feet. The
total allowable square footage of the lot is 3,496 square feet. Previous variance, ZBA210011,
approved an additional 295 square feet. This variance request is asking for an additional 324 square
feet on top of the 295 square feet already granted.
Staff Presentation:
Beals showed slides relevant to the appeal and discussed the variance request, noting that the
previous variance was heard in April. They are requesting additional square footage for an addition.
During the time of the previous variance, they did not have elevations. Now that they do, they are
requesting the additional square footage.
Land Use Review Commission Page 5 July 8, 2021
Applicant Presentation:
Applicants Patricia Quinn, 421 E Laurel St, Kristin Zuro, and Chris Gray (Building Collective)
addressed the board and agreed to have the appeal heard remotely. The existing house is driving the
design. It has been reviewed by the Historic Preservation Board. The design protects the historic
nature of the house. The changes are not visible from the street, are minimally visible from the alley
and neighbors. It will actually make the house a bit more compact. The changes will not be made to
the original historic part of the house.
Beals mentioned that he knows that the applicants have been working with HP staff and they are in
favor of the changes.
Audience Participation: (none)
Commission Discussion:
Commission member Meyer appreciates the collaboration with HP staff and that the design is driven
by the existing design of the house. He will be in favor.
Commission member Lawton thinks it is a good addition.
Chair Shields agrees and likes the modern twist on the historical home.
Boardmember Meyer made a motion, seconded by Lawton, to approve ZBA210028 for the
following reasons: The granting of the modification of standard would not be detrimental to
the public good, The addition does not exceed the allowable floor area in the rear-half of the
lot; The addition meets the required setback; In an effort to match the existing roof line, the
proposed addition creates a vaulted ceiling; The addition is blocked from view from the street
and has limited views from the alley. Therefore, the variance request will not diverge from the
standard but in a nominal, inconsequential way, when considered in the context of the
neighborhood, and will continue to advance the purpose of the Land Use Code contained in
Section 1.2.2.
Yeas: McCoy, Meyer, Shields, Lawton Nays: none.
THE MOTION CARRIED, THE ITEM WAS APPROVED
OTHER BUSINESS
Beals stated that the intention would be to meet in person beginning in August. If anything
changes, we will have to continue remotely. Chair Shields asked whether other Boards were
meeting in person. Beals stated that the P&Z is a hybrid meeting. For this commission, the
recommendation is for a full in-person meeting. The Commission was in favor of this.
Beals has also reached out the Boards and Commissions team to re-evaluate the new name.
ADJOURNMENT – meeting adjourned at 9:59
Ralph Shields, Chair Noah Beals, Senior City Planner-Zoning