HomeMy WebLinkAboutLand Use Review Commission - Minutes - 09/09/2021
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
SEPTEMBER 9, 2021
8:30 AM
• CALL TO ORDER and ROLL CALL
All commission members were present.
• APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM PREVIOUS MEETING
Stockover made a motion, seconded by Shields to approve the August 12, 2021, Minutes. The
motion was adopted unanimously with Meyer and Shuff abstaining.
• CITIZEN PARTICIPATION: Kory Katsimpalis was introduced as a new member of the administrative
team for The Land Use Review Commission. Aaron Guinn was introduced as a counsel liaison who
will be filling in at next months’ hearing.
• APPEALS FOR VARIANCE TO THE LAND USE CODE
1. APPEAL ZBA210034 –APPROVED with Condition
Address: 1905 Navajo Dr.
Owner/Petitioner: Diane Sparks and Robert Kerlee
Zoning District: R-L
Code Section: 3.8.11(C)(3)
Project Description:
This is a request to allow a fence in the side-yard setback to increase 2 feet in height above the
allowable height maximum of 6 feet.
Staff Presentation:
Beals showed slides relevant to the appeal and discussed the variance request, noting the property is
located on a corner. The backyard rear property line is shared with the adjacent properties’ side
property line. The request is to build two feet higher than what code allows from the corner of the
existing fence to almost the rear property line of the adjacent house. The property has a deck which
sits higher than the adjacent property and there is a clear view into the neighboring house.
LAND USE REVIEW COMMISSION
MEETING MINUTES
Land Use Review Commission Page 2 August 12, 2021
Applicant Presentation:
Applicants, Diane Sparks and Robert Kerlee, 1905 Navajo Dr, and Melissa Risley, 905 Cheyenne Dr
addressed the board and agreed to have the hearing held remotely. The entire fence will not be 8 feet
tall. It will go from 7 to 7.5 feet along with the slope of the lot. Some of the vegetation will need to be
taken down due to weather. The current fence is 25 years old and needs to be replaced. They want to
build a nicer fence as well as preserve the privacy.
Vice Chair LaMastra noted that the application stated that the fence would not be visible from the
public streets, however the photos appear to show that it would be visible. Mr Kerlee stated that the
highest section of the fence will not be visible from the street.
Chair Shields asked about the height of the existing fence. Mr Kerlee stated that it is about 7 feet tall.
Mrs Sparks noted that the trees are Evergreen and would help to block the visibility of the fence year-
round.
Audience Participation: (none).
Commission Discussion:
Commission member Meyer thinks that this is a reasonable request and can see the need for it given
the privacy issues.
Vice Chair LaMastra agrees but wants to be certain that nothing beyond the front of the house
exceeds 6 feet.
Commission Member Lawton is also in support. He understands the significance of the rear -yard to
side-yard issue and thinks the applicants have come up with a good solution.
Vice Chair LaMastra made a motion, seconded by Meyer, to APPROVE WITH CONDITON
ZBA210034 with the condition being that the additional height starts at the front wall of the
primary structure and extends west, and finds that the granting of the modification will not be
detrimental to the public good, and the general purpose o f the standard for which the
modification request is being met for the following reasons: In the past vegetation has
existed at similar height and location, The fence is perpendicular to the public right of way and
will be less visible, therefore the request will not diverge from the Land Use Code except in a
nominal and 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: Meyer, Lawton, Shields, McCoy, LaMastra, Stockover and Shuff. Nays: none.
THE MOTION CARRIED; THE ITEM WAS APPROVED WITH CONDITION.
2. APPEAL ZBA210035 - APPROVED
Address: 2902 Sykes Dr.
Owner: East Ridge Holding LLC
Petitioner: Patrick McMeeken.
Zoning District: L-M-N
Code Section: 3.5.2(E)(2)
Project Description:
This is a request for the single family detached home to encroach 1.83 feet into the required 15-foot
street side setback (13.17 feet setback to the property line/public street right-of-way).
Staff Presentation:
Beals showed slides relevant to the appeal and discussed the variance request, noting it is a corner
property which has not yet been built. The property has a slight flare, being a little larger in the front.
The builder wants to build in a way that will not quite meet the setback due to the shape of the parcel.
The property would not abut an adjacent property as it abuts the street.
Land Use Review Commission Page 3 August 12, 2021
Vice Chair LaMastra disclosed that the property owner is a current client of hers. She does not have
any financial interest and does not have any personal bias. Council Havelda stated that LaMastra
would not need to recuse herself.
Commission member Shuff asked about the width of the property. Beals stated he believes it is close
to 40 feet.
Applicant Presentation:
Applicant Patrick McMeekin, 4801 Goodman Rd, Timnath, addressed the board and agreed to the
remote proceedings. Because of the unique geometry of the lot, the product does not fit. He does not
believe that it will be detrimental.
Chair LaMastra asked about the front yard setback and wondered if the house could shift a bit. Mr .
McMeekin stated that he believed it could go up a few feet. She asked whether site triangles will be
affected. The applicant answered that site triangles will not be affected.
Audience Participation: (none)
Commission Discussion:
Commission member Shuff thinks this is a reasonable request, given that the side setback does not
abut any neighbors .
Commission member Lawton also agrees with this and will be in support.
Commission Member Stockover mentioned that shifting the house forward would take away green
space and thinks where it sits now would be preferable. Commission member Meyer agrees with
Stockover that green space should not be sacrificed due the small size of the encroachment.
Commission Member Stockover made a motion, seconded by Shuff to approve ZBA210035 for
the following reasons: the granting of the modification as standard would not be detrimental to
the public good and the proposal as submitted will not diverge from the standard except 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 encroachment is not the entire length of the wall, The wall gradually
encroaches into the setback, The encroachment does not abut another residential lot .
Yeas: Meyer, Lawton, Shields, McCoy, LaMastra, Stockover and Shuff. Nays: None
THE MOTION CARRIED, THE ITEM WAS APPROVED
3. APPEAL ZBA210036- APPROVED
Address: 808 W Mountain Ave.
Owner/Petitioner: James and Julie Lee
Zoning District: N-C_L
Code Section: 3.8.3(1)
Project Description:
This is a request to use a 10x12 foot storage shed to store materials related to the currently licensed
home occupation. Home occupations are required to operate entirely within the dwelling and not a
detached accessory building.
Staff Presentation:
Beals showed slides relevant to the appeal and discussed the variance request, noting what the code
requires for Home Occupations. There is not a shed built yet. It would be located in the backyard.
There is a fence that is set-in and the shed would be inside the fence. A Building permit would be
required due to the proposed height of the shed, but that is not a part of this variance.
Commission Member Meyer wanted to clarify that the shed would meet setbacks. Beals stated that it
would since the existing fence is set back considerably from the rear property line.
Land Use Review Commission Page 4 August 12, 2021
Chair Shields asked about a maximum size of the shed. Beals stated that the max allowed is 600 sf.
He noted that there are multiple instances of different sizes of the shed within the packet.
Commission Member Stockover asked about the nature of the business. Beals stated that the
applicant would be able to answer.
Commission member McCoy wanted clarification on the code for Home Business. Beals explained that
houses with attached garages can store equipment within the garage as it is part of the primary
building. In this case, there is no attached garage. Any storage space would happen outside of the
attached dwelling, hence, the need for the variance.
Commission member Lawton asked about making a stipulation about business being conducted out of
the shed. Beals stated that the business licenses do not allow for retail sales.
Applicant Presentation: Applicants James and Julie Lee, 808 W Mountain Ave, addressed the board
and agreed to have the hearing held remotely. They clarified that the shed size is 10x12. They will be
storing business supplies in the shed. There are no sales that take place on premise. The business is
a window covering business. The applicants store products on a 2–3-week rotation.
Commission member Stockover asked whether another variance would be needed if the applicants
were to build a garage in the future. Beals explained that it is tied to the business and there would not
be a need for another variance. Only if the house is sold or a different business is being conducted.
Beals clarified that any portion of business run out of the home requires a Home Occupation License.
Audience Participation: (none)
Commission Discussion:
Commission member Shuff thinks that this is fairly passive and will be in favor. Chair Shields agrees
that it will fairly low impact and will be in favor.
Commission member Meyer made a motion, seconded by Stockover to APPROVE ZBA210036
for the following reasons: the granting of the modification of standard would not be detrimental
to the public good, the storage of the materials will help conceal the home occupation. If the
primary structure included an attached garage or shed, it would be considered part of the
dwelling. Therefore, the proposal as submitted 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: Meyer, Lawton, Shields, McCoy, LaMastra, Stockover and Shuff Nays: none.
THE MOTION CARRIED; THE ITEM WAS APPROVED.
** The applicant wanted to make a note that it would take 8-10 weeks to build the shed**
4. APPEAL ZBA210038- APPROVED
Address: 4700 Lady Moon Dr
Owner: Banner Health
Petitioner: Juan Ramos
Zoning District: H-C
Code Section: 3.8.7.2(B)
Project Description:
This is a request to allow signage to be displayed on the north elevation of the building exceeding the
overall height limit by an additional 4.5 feet for the logo and 2 feet for the letters. In the residential sign
district, the max height allowed is 1.5 feet.
Staff Presentation:
Beals showed slides relevant to the appeal and discussed the variance request, noting a portion of the
property is in the residential sign district. The sign would be placed in the area in the residential sign
district. The request is to put a sign on the north side for better identification. The intent of the
residential sign district is to limit the impact of signs to neighboring residences.
Land Use Review Commission Page 5 August 12, 2021
Applicant Presentation:
Applicants Juan Ramos, 4700 Lady Moon Dr and Kyle Majchrowski, 4700 Lady Moon Dr, addressed
the board and agreed to have the appeal heard remotely. The proposed sign height is about 5 feet tall,
not 7 feet. There is a similar sign already on the premises. The reason for the request is because
recently built residential property to the east now obscures the existing sign. The growth of the hospital
requires expansion of the building, and the existing sign would get removed anyway. The proposed
change aligns with neighboring commercial properties. An 18-inch sign would not be adequately
visible.
Audience Participation: (none)
Commission Discussion:
Vice Chair LaMastra thinks this is very reasonable. Any emergency building should be clearly signed
and easily located.
Chair Shields thinks that this is a better location for the sign and would be in support .
Commission Member Shuff made a motion, seconded by Meyer to APPROVE ZBA210038 for
the following reasons: Under Section 2.10.4(H) the variance is not detrimental to the public
good; the Medical Campus, which includes emergency medicine, requires patrons to be able to
find their way on campus in a timely manner; The proposed signs do not face residential uses.
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: Stockover, Meyer, Lawton, Shields, McCoy, LaMastra and Shuff: none.
THE MOTION CARRIED; THE ITEM WAS APPROVED
• OTHER BUSINESS
Beals stated that the commission will be meeting remotely for the rest of the year. Two commission
members will be ending their terms at the end of the year. It was asked whether Hybrid meetings
would be a possibility. Beals stated that this is being considered for the future and the city
management would need to work through the needs of additional staff. Council Havelda requested
that the Commission send her their preference of whether the members prefer remote meetings or in
person meetings.
• ADJOURNMENT – meeting adjourned at 9:51 AM
Ralph Shields, Chair Noah Beals, Senior City Planner-Zoning