Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/12/2023 - Land Use Review Commission - AGENDA - Regular Meeting City of COMMISSION F6rt Collins AGENDA David Carron Council Liaison: Shirley Peel Nathanial Coffman Staff Liaison: Noah Beals David Lawton John McCoy LOCATION: Philip San Filippo City Council Chambers Ian Shuff 300 LaPorte Avenue Katie Vogel Fort Collins, CO 80521 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 JANUARY 12, 2023 8:30 AM Meeting Participation Participation in the Land Use Review Commission meeting on Thursday,January 12, 2023,will only be available IN PERSON in accordance with Section 2-73 of the Municipal Code. The meeting will begin at 8:30 a.m. in City Council Chambers at City Hall, 300 Laporte Ave. Documents to Share: If residents wish to share a document or presentation, City Staff needs to receive those materials via email by 24 hours before the meeting. Please email any documents to nbeals@fcgov.com. Individuals uncomfortable with public participation are encouraged to participate by emailing general public comments 24 hours prior to the meeting to nbeals@fcgov.com. Staff will ensure the Commission receives your comments. If you have specific comments on any of the discussion items scheduled, please make that clear in the subject line of the email and send 24 hours prior to the meeting. If you need assistance during the meeting, please email kkatsimpalis@fcgov.com. • CALL TO ORDER and ROLL CALL • APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM PREVIOUS MEETING • CITIZEN PARTICIPATION (Items Not on the Agenda) • APPEALS FOR VARIANCE TO THE LAND USE CODE Land Use Review Commission Page 2 January 12, 2023 1. APPEAL ZBA220031 Address: 4624 S Mason St. Owner: GKT Arbor Plaza LLC Petitioner: Collins Corbett, National Account Manager, Anchor Signs/ Jim Donati, Project Manager Zoning District: C-G Code Section: 3.8.7.2(A)Table(A) Project Description: This is a request for the total sign allotted to the site to exceed by 42.55 square feet. The total sign area allotted to the site, based on building frontage, is 170 square feet. 2. APPEAL ZBA220038 Address: 307 Wayne St. Owner: Dan Walter& Carolyn Schultz-Walter Petitioner: Jeffrey J. Schneider, Contractor, Armstead Construction Zoning District: N-C-L Code Section: 4.7(D)(3) &4.7(E)(3) Project Description: This is a request for 2 variances: 1. Request for a new addition to encroach 5-feet into the required 15-foot rear setback. 2. Request to exceed the maximum floor area on the rear half of the lot by 628 square feet. The maximum allowed on the rear half of the lot is 468 square feet. 3. APPEAL ZBA220039 Address: 305 Park St. Owner: Dan MacKinnon Petitioner: Jeffrey J. Schneider, Contractor, Armstead Construction Zoning District: N-C-M Code Section: 4.8(D)(5) Project Description: This is a request to exceed the maximum square footage for an accessory building with habitable space by 67 square feet. The maximum floor area for an accessory building with habitable space is 600 square feet. 4. APPEAL ZBA220040 Address: 301 E Stuart St. Owner: Trinity Lutheran Church Petitioner: Katie Barron, Sign Committee Chairperson Zoning District: L-M-N Code Section: 3.8.7.1(J)(2)(b)(1) Project Description: This is a request to replace an existing primary detached sign with a new sign that will have an electronic messaging center display. The new sign will be 69 feet from the residential property to the north, and 81 feet from the residential property to the east. Signs containing an electronic messaging center display must be located 100 feet from the nearest residential property. Land Use Review Commission Page 3 January 12, 2023 5. APPEAL ZBA220041 Address: 135 Bockman Dr. Owner: Boniuk Interests Ltd Petitioner: Jeff Everhart, Sign Contractor, Concept Signs & Graphics Zoning District: C-G Code Section: 3.8.7.2 Table(B) Project Description: This is a request for a wall sign to exceed the maximum wall sign height by 1 foot 6 inches. The maximum wall sign height is 7 feet. 6. APPEAL ZBA220042 Address: 4114 Rolling Gate Rd. Owner/Petitioner: Susan and Terry Gibbons Zoning District: R-L Code Section: 4.4(D)(2)(d) Project Description: This is a request for three pergolas to encroach 4.5 feet into the interior 5-foot side setback. • OTHER BUSINESS -Election of officers for 2023 • ADJOURNMENT City of LAND USE REVIEW COMMISSION Fort Collins MEETING MINUTES Shelley La Mastra, Chair Council Liaison: Shirley Peel Ian Shuff, Vice Chair Staff Liaison: Noah Beals Nathanial Coffman David Lawton LOCATION: John McCoy City Council Chambers Taylor Meyer 300 LaPorte Avenue Katie Vogel Fort Collins, CO 80521 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 DECEMBER 8, 2022 8:30 AM • CALL TO ORDER and ROLL CALL Commission members Shuff, Lawton, Coffman, and McCoy were present; commission members Meyer, Vogel, and Chair La Mastra were absent. • APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM PREVIOUS MEETING (November 10, 2022 Minutes) Lawton made a motion, seconded by Coffman to approve the November 10, 2022, Regular Hearing Minutes. The motion was adopted unanimously. • CITIZEN PARTICIPATION (Items Not on the Agenda) • APPEALS FOR VARIANCE TO THE LAND USE CODE 1. APPEAL ZBA220035 Address: 3044 Reliant St. Owner/Petitioner: Doug & Janine Fritch Zoning District: L-M-N Code Section: 3.5.2(E)(2) & 3.5.2(E)(3) Project Description: This is a request for two variances to build a detached pergola: 1) Request to encroach 2 feet into the 8-foot rear setback. 2) Request to encroach 6 feet into the 15-foot corner side setback. Staff Presentation: Beals presented slides relevant to the appeal and discussed the variance request, noting that the property is located in the Mosaic neighborhood, north of Mulberry Ave. and east of Timberline Dr. The subject property is at the corner of Reliant St. and Dozier Rd. Land Use Review Commission Page 2 Minutes-December 8, 2022 The request is to build a pergola in the northeast corner of the property, extending the covered deck area towards the rear and side property lines. The house currently sits at the required 15-foot side setback from the property line; currently the house is approximately 21 feet from the rear property line. Because the side of the property is along a street, the required setback is considered a "street-side" setback, which requires 15 feet as apposed to an interior side setback which would require a 5-foot setback. The proposed element is a pergola, open on all four sides with a semi-transparent roof. The proposed location would place the pergola up to the 6-foot easement that runs along the back property line, with a 2-foot encroachment into the rear setback, and nine feet from the side property line. Looking at a picture of the front of the house, Beals pointed out the side yard where the encroachment would occur. Beals noted some elements that are allowed in a setback, including a fence of six feet or smaller(with a conforming fence currently present)which does not have to be transparent; this existing fence is probably more visually intrusive than the proposed pergola, which is open on all four sides. The proposed pergola location and existing paver landscaping are visible in pictures of the rear of the property. Applicant Presentation: Applicant representative Scott Hodson, of Grounded Landscape Designs, addressed the commission and offered comment. Hodson stated that the main reason that a variance is being requested is due to the limitations of the corner lot; if the 15-foot side setback were maintained, it would not leave any room for the proposed pergola structure. Other locations in the yard are not feasible and would require a taller pergola structure. As currently presented, height can be limited to approximately 9 feet and be more in proportion with a normal pergola. Drainage to the west needs to be maintained, which means the pergola needs to be placed within the east portion of the yard. To the east of the property is a large open space, so the pergola would not be blocking others' view and would be behind the existing 6-foot fence. Neighbors to the northwest and southwest have planted trees for visual blocks already, and there are no vehicular sight lines that would be blocked. Additionally, the proposed location does not encroach on any of the existing utility easements. Commission member Lawton asked Hodson to clarify if the structure would be 9 feet tall, as the drawings have a height of 8 feet marked. Hodson stated that the 8-foot measurement in the drawing are from the paver grade to the bottom of the beam (representing clearance under the beam); the beams are 2 inches x 10 inches, so total height to the top of the beam would be 8 feet 10 inches. Lawton asked if the pergola would be open at the top; Hodson explained that roof rails are built flush with the top of the main beams and are spaced at 1 foot 3 inches. Commission Discussion: Commission member McCoy stated that he had no objection to the request as submitted and recommended that the request be approved. Commission member Coffman agreed with McCoy's recommendation to approve, noting that the most visual impact occurs to the east, where any potential future neighbors would be located across the street. On the rear side, the pergola would extend only 3 feet above the existing fence line; additionally, existing trees help to obscure the view between adjacent homes. Commission member Lawton agreed with the recommendation to approve, commenting that because it is a street-facing corner lot there is a wider setback requirement; the proposed pergola would build character in the property and the project plan is solid. Vice-Chair Shuff agreed with the previous comments and noted his appreciation for the applicant's presentation in calling out site constraints and thought process behind the proposed location. Commission Member Lawton made a motion, seconded by Coffman, to APPROVE ZBA220035 for the following reasons: under section 2.10.4(H) the variance is within the condition not detrimental to the public good; the pergola is open on four sides; the covering is semi- transparent; the pergola is behind a 6-foot tall privacy fence; the pergola does not encroach into the existing easements. Therefore, the variance requests will not diverge from the Land Use Review Commission Page 3 Minutes-December 8, 2022 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: Shuff, Lawton, Coffman, McCoy Nays: - Absent: La Mastra, Meyer, Vogel THE MOTION CARRIED, THE ITEM WAS APPROVED 2. APPEAL ZBA220036 Address: 1010 W Mountain Ave. Owner/Petitioner: Patrick& Lindsey Steele-Idem Zoning District: N-C-L Code Section: 4.7(D)(2)(a)(2) Project Description: This is a request to not include ceiling height greater than 7 feet 6 inches on the second story of an accessory building as allowable floor area. Staff Presentation: Beals presented slides relevant to the appeal and discussed the variance request, noting that the property is located on Mountain Ave, between Shields St. and Mack St. The request is to have an accessory building with habitable space, and for the upper story area not count towards the overall allowable floor area for an accessory building. Beals explained that the issue here is that accessory buildings in this zone currently have a limit on floor area—once the ceiling height of the upper story reaches 7.5 feet or more, that floor area counts towards the allowable maximum. If ceiling height is lower that 7.5 feet, it does not count towards floor area. The applicant has received a building permit to build with a ceiling height less than 7.5 feet and can technically build the building now as permitted. The request now is to allow ceiling height to be greater than 7.5 feet. This is a standard that is consistently applied to this type of structure, so granting approval would be a substantial deviation in how the standard is normally applied. Plans submitted show a request to modify the ceiling trusses to create a higher ceiling height than what was originally designed. By so doing, by definition, that floor area increase is almost double the allowable area for that structure. Floor plans show a main floor consisting of shop/garage area, with a second floor made up of habitable space. Beals presented images of the current property, noting the location of driveway off of the street as well as an existing garage structure that is planned to be demolished. Images of the rear yard show where the proposed structure would be built. Commission member Coffman asked if there were any issue with the total allowable floor area for the lot. Beals responded that there did not appear to be any issues but requested that he clarify with staff who reviewed the application as well. Vice-Chair Shuff asked Beals to confirm his understanding that if the ceiling height is maintained under 7.5 feet, floor area does not have to be counted towards the allowable maximum for an accessory building. Beals confirmed this as accurate. Beals noted that the proposed changes in ceiling height are all internal, and no change would be visible to the overall shape/exterior of the building. Commission member Lawton asked Beals to explain the intent of the 7.5-foot height limit. Beals responded that it aligns more with the building code, as far as the building code is concerned about habitable space. The limit helps to keep accessory buildings low, and not become a massive/looming structure in rear yard spaces. Also, it attempts to keep the spaces more oriented toward storage spaces rather than full carriage house-type structures. Commission member McCoy asked for confirmation that the overall height of the building has not changed, merely the internal ceiling height. Beals confirmed that as accurate. Land Use Review Commission Page 4 Minutes-December 8, 2022 Commission member Coffman asked another clarifying question regarding the counting of habitable floor area, asking if the Commission would be considering a variance in the quantity of allowable space? Can we make a variance regarding a definition? Beals commented that the request is not to "count"the space but is instead a request to"exceed"the allowable floor area of standard. Applicant Presentation: Applicant Patrick Steele-Idem, owner of 1010 W Mountain Ave, addressed the Commission and offered comment. Steele-Idem stated that the intention of the space is to be an office space, as both he and his partner are currently working from home and need the extra space to separate their two working spaces. Steele-Idem stated that they have no intention of creating a space that would be used as a rental and have signed documents with the City stating as much. The proposed increase in ceiling height is intended to make the most out of a structure that has already been approved. The increase in ceiling height would have no effect at all on the exterior dimensions, and the applicants don't believe there would be any impact to the neighborhood. Three neighbors have submitted signed letters expressing their support and/or lack of objections; two of those individuals are present at the hearing. Commission member Lawton asked the applicant if they were involved in the original design of the building; Steele-Idem responded yes. Lawton then asked the applicant if they were ok with the building as originally designed; Steele-Idem stated that it was "contentious", and they wanted a higher ceiling height to begin with. He described trying to convince himself that the 7.5-foot height would be ok, but after experiencing that height in person, it did not seem like a good long-term solution given the scope and cost of the project. Audience Participation: Audience member Darrell Austin, resident at 1016 W Mountain Ave., addressed the Commission and offered comment. Austin asked Beals to present the aerial view of the property with the block. Austin noted the large structure in the back of his property, which he built. He had to address the issue of the ceiling height as well. Austin noted that no exterior changes are being made; in fact, the applicant is not asking for any changes in the total floor area but is simply being asked to account for it due to the ceiling height being raised. Austin voiced his support for the project, and it's benefit to the subject property as well as the neighborhood as a whole. This would optimize the investment and value of the subject property. Audience member Ann Stewart, neighbor of the applicant to the east side, stated that she had absolutely no objections to the project and feels that it would add to the character of the neighborhood. Commission Discussion: Commission member Lawton asked Beals to return to the aerial view of the block, asking if the large structure on the South-west corner could be identified for reference. Commission member Coffman identified the building as the Little on Mountain restaurant and adjacent townhomes. Beals also noted that there is a zone district change right at that property, as the zone changes from L-M-N to N-C-L. Beals responded to an earlier question regarding total square footage for the lot after consulting with zoning staff, noting that the proposed structure would put the allowable floor area for the lot over the allowable maximum. Commission member Coffman commented that the proposed change would add quite a bit of calculated floor area; but looking at the change in design it is hard to argue that it is not nominal and inconsequential when the building at its effect on the surrounding neighborhood does not appear to change at all. Commission member Lawton stated that this type of structure appears to be in line with where the city is headed, in allowing more habitable space, multi-family dwellings, carriage houses, etc. This is an area that already has this type of structure. Beyond the code, in actual terms, this isn't any change in the exterior or visibility to the neighbors. Lawton asked if we have all of the conditions that this variance would be for? Beals stated that allowable square footage for the lot is 3,150 sq ft; this would represent a total area on the lot of 3,502 sq ft. Lawton stated that he feels the request is reasonable, and representative of where the city is headed anyway. Land Use Review Commission Page 5 Minutes-December 8, 2022 Coffman asked if approving this request would turn the structure into a carriage house by code definition?That is more of a distinction of a full dwelling unit with a kitchen. Beals confirmed this as accurate, noting that if a kitchen were to be added in the future it would require a full development review process to turn the structure into a dwelling unit. Vice-Chair Shuff commented that this request was a bit challenging; this is the way the code has been written for a while, and many previous applicants have asked for this variance and been denied. There may be an issue of equity if this request is approved while other similar applications have been denied. Shuff stated that he has a similar building in his own back yard, which has a ceiling height of 7 feet 5 inches, which conforms to code and feels ok. The issue here is more about the strict and equal application of the code, rather than the potential impact to the mass of the structure, which the applicant has shown here would not be changed. As written currently, the code creates a deal wherein a property owner can maintain additional floor space if and when the ceiling height is maintained at the lower height required by code. Commission member McCoy stated his opinion that the change would be insignificant; the exterior of the building has been permitted and is ok. McCoy acknowledged the points made by Shuff, while at the same time felt that it was insignificant given the nature of the neighborhood, which has a number of similar accessory buildings already. Lawton acknowledged the points made by Shuff, stating that this is the reason the Commission exists, to interpret and provide discretion to requests like this. If the code were only to be strictly enforced, there would be no need for the Commission. This request does not appear to have any negative impact on other individuals but is simply at odds with code. Lawton does not have a problem with the request given that there would be no changes to the exterior of the structure; Lawton also noted that the commission needed to be sure to state the variance accurately when putting forth a motion. Shuff posed the question of if the variance was in fact asking for a higher ceiling or was asking for a larger area to be allowed on the lot. Lawton asked if it would in fact be two separate variances. McCoy offered that because the original drawing had a ceiling height below 7 feet 6 inches, the floor space was not originally considered habitable area. Shuff explained that currently, the land use code says that when a ceiling is under 7 feet 6 inches, the corresponding floor area does not have to be counted against the total lot calculation. If the ceiling is higher than allowed, the floor area then technically needs to be accounted for in the total square footage allowed on the lot. Coffman commented that it was hard to see how making the change suddenly does not follow the purpose of the Land Use Code, when it is not changing the use of the building or the lot. It feels a bit like nitpicking—the numbers appear to show a big increase, but the actual effect on the neighborhood and land use appears to be nominal. Shuff alluded to the current status of flux regarding the Land Use Code, and asked Beals how these standards might change in the new codes. Is the intent for the new code to maintain these same provisions and definitions? Beals provided some background, noting that the new code was adopted November 1, 2022; in that time a protest has been filed, and is gathering signatures on order to have Council act by either repealing the code or putting the item to a vote for referendum. In the new code (Land Development Code), it does allow for a carriage house. The standard for what is allowed on the overall lot goes away, and instead we have building forms that dictate how much floor area is allowed in primary structures and accessory dwelling units. What hasn't gone away is how much floor area is allowed on the rear portion of the lot; this is a means to ensure that ADU are still compatible within the neighborhood. The ADU allowance is 45% of the floor area of the primary building, or 1,000 square feet, whichever is more restrictive. Beals noted that the proposed structure would exceed 1,000 square feet and may not conform under the new code either. Commission Member Coffman made a motion, seconded by Lawton, to APPROVE ZBA220036 for the following reasons: the granting of the modification of standard would not be detrimental to the public good, and the proposal as submitted will not diverge from the standards of 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 purposes of the Land Use Code as contained in Section 1.2.2. This is supported by the lack of change in the exterior shape of the building, and the effect on neighboring properties. Land Use Review Commission Page 6 Minutes-December 8, 2022 Yeas: Lawton, Coffman, McCoy Nays: Shuff Absent: La Mastra, Meyer,Vogel THE MOTION CARRIED, THE ITEM WAS APPROVED • ADJOURNMENT— meeting adjourned at 9:26am Ian Shuff, Vice-Chair Noah Beals, Senior City Planner-Zoning Agenda Item 1 REPORTSTAFF i STAFF Noah Beals, Senior City Planner/Zoning PROJECT ZBA220031 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Address: 4624 S Mason St. Owner: GKT Arbor Plaza LLC Petitioner: Collins Corbett, National Account Manager, Anchor Signs/ Jim Donati, Project Manage Zoning District: C-G Code Section: 3.8.7.2(A)Table(A) Variance Request: This is a request for the total sign allotted to the site to exceed by 42.55 square feet. The total sign area allotted to the site, based on building frontage, is 170 square feet. COMMENTS: 1. Background: The property is a part of the 1981 Arbor Commercial Annexation. It received development approval in 1995 through the Fazoli's at Arbor Plaza PUD. The original building was designed with a drive-thru and the new owner will continue the use of the drive-thru. The site design includes signs on both the building and a ground sign that is visible from S College Ave. The request is to exceed the overall allotment for sign area by 25%. This proposed design includes a monument sign along college, four wall signs distributed on the north, south and east walls. A drive-thru sign is proposed and is not included per the code in the total sign allowable area for the property. The property has frontage only along S College Ave. Although Mason Street is public right of way and the driveway access is from Mason this driveway exists through an easement on another property. The proposed signs do not exceed overall height or location limitations. 2. Applicant's statement of justification: See petitioner's letter. 3. Staff Conclusion and Findings: Under Section 2.10.4(H), staff recommends approval and finds that: • The variance is not detrimental to the public good • The increase of sign area is limited to three sides of the building and the ground sign • The ground sign is existing. • The proposed signs do not exceed overall heigh or location limitations. Therefore, the variance requests 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 4. Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of APPEAL ZBA220031. Item # 1 - Page 1 City of Application A Request Fort Collins pp ' q for Variance from the Land Use Code The Zoning Board of Appeals has been granted the authority to approve variances from the requirements of Articles 3 and 4 of the Land Use Code. The Zoning Board of Appeals shall not authorize any use in a zoning district other than those uses which are specifically permitted in the zoning district. The Board may grant variances where it finds that the modification of the standard would not be detrimental to the public good. Additionally, the variance request must meet at least one of the following justification reasons: (1) by reason of exceptional physical conditions or other extraordinary and exceptional situations unique to the property, including, but not limited to physical conditions such as exceptional narrowness, shallowness, or topography, the strict application of the code requirements would result in unusual and exceptional practical difficulties or undue hardship upon the occupant/applicant of the property, provided that such difficulties or hardship are not caused by an act or omission of the occupant/applicant(i.e. not self-imposed); (2)the proposal will promote the general purpose of the standard for which the variance is requested equally well or better than would a proposal which complies with the standard for which the variance is requested; (3)the proposal will not diverge from the Land Use Code standards except in a nominal, inconsequential way when considered in the context of the neighborhood. This application is only for a variance to the Land Use Code. Building Code requirements will be determined and reviewed by the Building Department separately. When a building or sign permit is required for any work for which a variance has been granted, the permit must be obtained within 6 months of the date that the variance was granted. However, for good cause shown by the applicant, the Zoning Board of Appeals may consider a one-time 6 month extension if reasonable and necessary under the facts and circumstances of the case. An extension request must be submitted before 6 months from the date that the variance was granted has lapsed. Petitioner or Petitioner's Representative must be present at the meeting Location: 300 LaPorte Ave, Council Chambers, Fort Collins, CO 80524 Date: Second Thursday of the month Time: 8:30 a.m. Variance Address Krispy Kreme 4624 South Maso Petitioner's Name, Collins Corbett— National Acco if not the Owner City Fort Collins, CO Petitioner's Relationship Signage Vendor to the Owner is Zip Code 180525 Petitioner's Address 12200 Discher Avenue Charlesto Owner's Name GKT Arbor Plaza, LLC Petitioner's Phone# (843)576-3238 Code Section(s) 8.872-Perms lSlgw(A)Sign Area Allow Table(A)Sign Area Allow Petitioner's Email ccorbett@anchorsign.com Zoning District Commercial/Industrial Additional Jim Donati -- Project Manager Representative's Name Justification(s) 1. Hardship Representative's Address 5856 Corporate Ave Suite 200 Justification(s) 12. Equal to or better than Representative's Phone# (532)353-5906 Justification(s) JAdditional Justification Representative's Email jim.donati@wksusa.com Reasoning Please see the attached Anchor Sign Exterior Signage Variance Request document. If not enough room, additional written information may be submitted 12/12/2022 Date Signature Updated 02.18.20 IMAnchorSiga,) December 13, 2022 City of Fort Collins Land Use Review Commission 300 LaPorte Avenue Fort Collins, CO 80521 Re: Exterior Signage Variance Request Krispy Kreme Doughnut Corporation 4624 S Mason Street Fort Collins, CO 80525 1 am writing to request a sign variance allowing for 74.18 square feet of signage above the allowable sign area allowance for the new Krispy Kreme Doughnut store located at 4624 S Mason Street. The Krispy Kreme store is located along a heavily trafficked roadway in a multi-tenant parcel occupied by several different brand types and tenants. The store is set back approximately TK ft. (+/-), far away from the nearest available intersection and significant traffic flow. Due to Krispy Kreme's building position along S College Avenue, W Harmony Road, and S Mason Street, I respectfully request support from the City of Fort Collins Zoning Board of Appeals for relief from the City of Fort Collins Land Use Code regulations, specific to Article 3, Division 3.8.7 - Signs: 1. 3.8.7.2, Permanent Signs, Section (A) Sign Area Allowance, Subsection (1), specific to Table (A) Sign Area Allowance limiting Krispy Kreme to only one hundred and seventy (170) total square feet of signage. www.anchorsign.com Krispy Kreme 4624 S Mason Street Exterior Signage Variance Request Page 2 Krispy Kreme Proposed Exterior Signage (4624 S Mason Street) Sign A— 54" Krispy Kreme I Front Elevation Sign J —49" x 72" Krispy Kreme Monument (North) 47.54 Sq Ft Sign Lexan Faces I Two (2), Replacement Sign B—60" Krispy Kreme Hot Light I Front Faces Existing Location Monument Sign Elevation (North) 21.23 Sq Ft (Upper Section) 19.02 Sq Ft each / 38.04 Sign C — 54" Krispy Kreme Left Elevation Sq Ft TOTAL (East) 47.54 Sq Ft Sign K -- 30" Krispy Kreme Hot Light I Two Sign D — 54" Krispy Kreme Left Elevation (2) Replacement Faces Existing Location (East) 47.54 Sq Ft Monument Sign (Lower Section) 5.33 Sq Ft Sign F— Krispy Kreme Drive Thru Menu each / 10.66 Sq Ft TOTAL Board 131.63 Sq Ft Approval of the proposed signage variance request provides the Fort Collins community and drivers traveling through the area with increased store location visibility, enabling ease of locating store entryways and access points, thus preventing driver confusion, distraction, and the potential for traffic delays, vehicle accidents, and injuries. Also, approval by the Commission of Krispy Kreme's variance request allows Krispy Kreme to display nearly identical signage size and type to the installed signage currently displayed by neighboring tenants ex., (ex., Panda Express, 4600 S Mason Street, Fort Collins, CO 80525). Finally, approval of Krispy Kreme's signage variance request will not confer any special privileges not previously provided to other tenants in the area, and if granted, is the minimum relief that utilizes the reasonable use of the building and is consistent with the general intent and purpose of the City of Fort Collins Land Use Code regulations, specific to Article 3, Division 3.8.7 - Signs. It will not be detrimental or injurious to adjacent properties or the public welfare. The proposed signage is part of the standard Krispy Kreme interior and exterior signage package and would allow this location to coincide with other stores, both existing and future. Thank you for reviewing my letter and considering Krispy Kreme's signage variance request. Sincerely, (00"r C' Collins Corbett National Account Manager Anchor Sign, Inc. (843) 576-3238 ccorbett(a_anchorsig.com www.anchorsign.com L'ddb 31b0 AA NOI-38 ON OofZ-BZz(fof)SZ508 OOVE10�00'SNf1lOJ laOJ u_ 'ONI'S31bI00 l IONbA -Nd 11M.OZZOz® r N`dld 311S o oJ,w = S1N3Wf1004 NOIlOflil1SN00 .; O UJOH/(<A� wl o a OOV210100'SNIl10012lO� y w M DND2J>1 kdSR:N �,o�P�E " U x1o� J aN€ a o o =% gaoa� = m p< �oaw�apo n gy o €a - - - aaFSWZ'a< w LL=eno W" 4 i1 € y o� w o o opoWz Iz oQ - oZ,'" €gym za a aw< aZ- - ' o=o"a_" o'pok�'owpwps�N=<o="=wm�=w'?f_�9� <W _ F " o�wo„'€ o m - Z- � > o Fy -1 � �o�"o��wopay�apoa�w�wo�a= < z Q < on ow22 ma o= "p � o <�=Z _ " o� <w9 ."3o��- , z < ff= < = <wwO a „ w ¢ ew`ow= zsz mod < *mo 3 w p <o wz w400w� — — — — — — — e —g— —s— ho—moa,soc) — . .. . A- M,` p _ _ '3AV 303T00'S o dhoNFQo==gFmopo I des ;� o iv pEo wo o w""=�z �e �QaZ> < mq�e J= i ao �o Sot 000+ go 4 w € l \ r ',o\zs,os.os Hl 0 N j �� � L I �O� \doe � O Rya o ou .1 NN. La � t s 1 Yj o i =a >1 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ���/��\��\•��..A���};/soy ��« ii.v.�.a..roo��.o o..�.ii.�.�ow. . .i .i . . - p.. un . w. ... w a.i a.ba a w:...i w.w w.�io a.�adro nD-dS�tlWZ00lflObl uold el!S\sleeysuol OOVO sullloo Vo)N1ZOOl£L961 IN!�oau:y 'tlddtl.11 AB NOISIA38 'oN MCZ-ZZ(CDC)6Z—..40l00'S-3 1NO3 wo wo 3 n 0 OR",'AVM NOOVNOlOV me °°wo NVId 3ddOS4NVl q pp77\�J�'/� 'ONI'SMVIWMV ONV MOH-A31HIN ZZOZ® m m S1N3vin000 NOIlM)alSNOO CD va v i UJOH l`<AD WI1 oaoloo'sN�lloo lao3 4;! Y� 3W32JJI.ldSRlJi ,��„ N J a9 ac A� --—-— - - - - - - a e� - - - - — w - — — — — — — — — — — ---------- °F9 g 3 Fps gym "ac=w a„wR°�E Ll 1 'ate M - r - a�22 W LU w W O a �mwW � -- - tm - wr, O — 3W �I rcolll " LU O 0 Yr r 1 �es3 Q p � LL c) \ , Opp ;$ �a= _ U �� Fm HG wwa ww N = a oO w S' < u °W 3°°8 x Bin»Qaz V H m \ ME nz�p< awi w €s's9�u pL@p'w Ho„ odd�d r5 . e . e ., a 4 m � � 4 . . � - _ fO�g �sa$�9"aZ. ��� zU ymo°w N3 ospsaw q W -wage 6W„. OzooaowNFn CHs3�o ;w`-s �Nagww�a�O h 4 £ q £ a 3 S g £ g o W 3 y'z wa3�g "��w r L 3 5 § g yy § ��8orcpa8rc`°owwwz rc°o'a€�wxo" h P o w 4 a m S e $ z LL'o�oWw o� u� �NroLLwmoa�vw � � w a x�z o 3 E o �w 53 €wLL asLLw < - o m O. a s m ° w a pog000;pao< a =off £» pQ ,a p3 30 boa }opp. 3 E 3 3 I S 3 3 zoo - o W. < aa� p�`°'§o p~" - WSJ° g = �"' " _ 'sw= W owi miw °J 4E op� o=w"rcw°ter .� wog°o°U~ Hx �� SWQ ao� t °FV oo No E _" p H,€,°oa =3= '6� ,, of of= ,, m ,, m o�n o�a d LL3 ¢oo �u rc ��Oipi° ffls; a SHUM' � N w- _ z�✓°. W - - - - = - - a _ 3w ooLL�woopwooN p -`'a'w6 8rwa"a"s€ ffiog €„: "'a H w�aoso w� ywoo3°-H 6! wotitiy�owa�> xaa (n zQ uo NJ ' - d r�p3�_ �o€sx�Z ywy o'� >iw3a �o rc3 °.gip' " 'Fw '"-'w po%rcw�wa "gip��� w;so?€=� � - H B& pospO�do°o"&° z3�yop >;oF°'� ,;J°°.�� Fopa x'w z Y lo Wig& LL�o=°. 4ww�°£uwwa��Noow w Q o m a lea ="z3=z°8oww a <wW�VWyQ6_sw3spWLLsw w=CIS€off a �g � ot o 0 0 o p o 0 0o o r _ �U•� =" . W w°o ��a <mm <_awaw__ o_<owE';= UHF v;3o S� __ sw ss.rossr om xmx-szwx oz umem zmxsn se mxs�w sromsr wr xmx-.snwi ws murzewr wr wurzwnm wuiw uwxw swnwa siw is nmmn meomn am x amn mnesm srn zi xrx me wsm wr amxn adzes 3u v,s�MF.tlI ZOOIL 196i\?OJ\sjaeysuoia�QOVJ\esullloa jioj��y001£l9 .-o`'Y 0 0 AL 0 8U� 3'�sw 458 _ p o ayz Hn It 10 10 4 r 11 ! t t ? u ' H 1 �o • _ W a F ov - LL N� O a U)U N �O U 5 5 N m�Yrn N d o a a c 3LL`m y oac�'v r oma �aalaalaalm _aaaa o`aaa� C � C N N N N N N N d W N N N N N J !O M ill M!O 000 � Q Y 3 h00 NN U 3 m P N c m • • c p c_ N d Q y c E c E c O O U) a O Y x ^ I" Y rn m u y 3 x O d J C M N 4 Y Z V Y = vMl Y Cl) of rn o m 0 E L N N j C Y n O U o v N OLL 7 V co .. ❑ O ❑ ❑ in ❑ O N �_ N J ip II J M II J II J OD II J U fn y N N N N Q CD 3 v al 3 p a 3 p 3 U m v (7 c m v C7 p al p C7 U al a C7 m al .� m _ o m _ O 0 .� m _ o m Z. m _ O a E o E o � E Q E o �_ Q E o �_ E rn m o. °i , o. pl Y 3 2 o c in of o c v� Y 3 p c w Y 3 o c cq y `m M >. LL N O J L T LL -U O CO >. LL � O y >. LL O Y m T Y _� E O p 2 J c M O p Y � c V o p Y c V O p a c u7 H O M m O � > C V H m Y � O N Q m V 0 �L C C C C C ✓a C> N , � iz M rn O r H m W O • H -FL71 „V4 91Z 03 - 1 D A9 3 a II III li o �3 --�E E&II T ii 'i'ii - ay mt ms"8a 2000m YU' C70Y i I!i M .,. ... 0 T O a O O UW-o c d o� ❑ g� v C7 0 W O a �U a o6 m � N m0 c o a. 3tL`m in I � o9 cN 3°ma (V o`._v v a s _ aaa� (V O I O O O O O J M N N h00 NN 'O UI I O C C 6 E .0 O O m ?> 0 L T LL 01_ C M O p O (0 2 C N H 0] LO II ZM I M m ) �' N c o v m O fN d E U r ' I E L N V W j C Y n O o U Q y Y p O L L. O N Y d J bo II U fn -a Q J 0 q U y N 0 E q N E U c U c .Z E L „ti9 � ¢ E .c o rn N i U) o - m°_ 1 a N n - m w . 3 Q io E 6 NE& LL BSdc�3°�s'c - gE ay mt m58t Ewa`: a�3s�3 2000m YU' (J DY __ _ _ 0 m N a° W o R Op U1 U W a i �d i g v `m I C O a U/U I � N W <h (V N d Oa a d o a c N m I is Lu NNNNN W I zo hOO NN - --------- -- -- C � • • V I I ' I ` W i•' , I i J I i i I I c o i i i I I I m 0 O � U t N N j C Y n O U .b9 b3 y Y IN, 0 N 2 W J U rn -`a N � II 'o N 3 II Q N (a _ O N Q C C C E p o O Y 3 p c u) Nw > LL W o £ Y c V O ' m p l6 � H_ 1 U c rn N n - m ' w . .Z „v5 io i£� NE& E lOi 8-dc; Esc, R ° W oy mt m5 ga 2000m M M O Y U' C701e O N - N d W O U N ca O p O N W-o d o� LLa g a O c a U U of d �O O U 5 W71, d�Ym N d o a a c O1�'pO c 3 LL`m y oa c�'v 3°ma d d d m ._aaaa o`aaa� I N N N N N I N N N N N O O O O O i ❑ N N N N N io Min m io i 000�� i h O O N N I I � � 0 WI� M i O v i w� I � � c o W N E r y c Y n o Y o Y Y a u- � O N N Y W II d i Q U d v (7 Q c c Y 3 =' a c to w o " in 85Z c o 0 0 1 (; L H I III ) z d f0 o J U) 00.0 _ --------- ------ ---- - ---------- ------ d C lC ' - ----- s V N W3� w-E �i-----I x O tm 5 p fA 2 rw¢: a3d3 L f6 V/ 7 U = 0 m YU' O<Co O N 7 N ` E o V I > y 0 a O a O YO � o•- Y U m 0 U d wa @ X h O N � w C, 75 �'ov � CO I 1�0, 3 0 o f0 � Z X L n I0 3 0 M rn F U) L M C M a c0 \O v M O C U M c ' Y U N O _E �n M C 7 (0 _. 7 C ca Y rn M w = E d J E ; E E T Q- X L N N O m 1 3 o . c o 3LL`m N NFU DLO E m m32u) CO w `p N N "6 p d d d m N t _avaa ++ CO) L y o 3 • I �� O Em vi -0 L 0 Y v ° �' o0000 M ° o c ` a) 2 E U N N N N N ate" 0 5 L a1 7 C h OO NN 0 � a a m Y m c c or- �5 c °o U E J a 5 E -° ca 2 aci a°i —� 7 O>iw C .O0 � J .N E LL N WimO l6 "O r _ L O E -E m ]N O >� O C C 3 w N o U N > a' N U .Z/1 �ZZ .Zl l 9 l L LU N rn u°i ° E `er m Q x a N J M C O X N I� N C nL9 - _ O f6 N X N rn CMO� O°0 c >�> �� N 9 NX (n nb9 W � O.>M M d H N `O m N CM a LO CO I- M m O r w O a) E r w N j C N W Y � 0 o N_ o O _ a a U LO O O N Y N - N O* Y Y 7 LL E A : N J by II V a3 M co U fn 7> ?i II '00 CO a) Co C a 0 0 O w aw U m E�Oco ME @ W ow a°VU m12 EYd Q3 c N O Z p N Z WZ> c 0c ? n = a o n E a> ac a°)o w a°im 05 E W� 9 Ypr O L N:�yw ° Y` _ E , o J i Q c w. a) m @ m a Iu N 0 o= 3a c m roo a>y '° cLi ° cai i am 7-co a o auoc °Cmrn_ o.�N70_� NE - d OcmOV E n Q IL E UELL, a3 NU O_W 0) C. WZlnW °W -N m rfn _`o7QNOc LM c .O N i — cn-- LL 1 CO) O 8�dc3°Js.y � u�aaoomw a o N a��m�m5a ovaa=» El 6, a 3d3 x00am W YUC70Y � 3 Q � c W () r n U � © o Z � N 3 � o 2E o W a) N U � T N LD a ~ (D C a U M O N 4 5 NU) Z coo O W 'k _ 00 L Wa °- m ~ w 3 L) 3 a 0 U — X C O a N ____ J N L Oc ,N n E N U r Z a o U Y C c m d Y U) E E J N d O a.. W N T a J -0 wr 0 c x o �m ,C,7n0 E �o 3LL= ` VCl) z 16 C') N QOf a N m`vai Q m M C U 7 N 0 2`N N O '0 —00 '6 aScc a N c a v a a o �o Z O m m 3 > p aaan _ o`aaa� O � � � � � r m m w M (V ~ U C Y Q C 7 N N N N N _ 2 _ co Min M co 3 d J a 0) ° 0 O c CL c m o a) U U L J a j o 4) c Z w a) coo o H a) a) Ew `ct `m U W U � N 'O a N U) LL E O N p y a) a) L .109 or_)cQ 8 w J a)° Z_ U a N ca W �) co U O N C E 7 N Z •< 0 0 a) L N N @ O Cl) * W q > Y H d 20 o m N c+7 7 u7 O r 06 OU E L N N j C N W Y L9 0) o U N = = In U 7 N N r 7 li W p O W 3 p Z N U � N N y J N II ` U Z O N (O 7 N U fn 3 D. II "12 F a1 a) CO C DE"' O O O N a a m `� -� •o w m E cO m E rn m o N 0) ow W'p_mUV ITS m ( C a c o Z E N Lu Z W> c C _ m E .Q p rn as m m O O �-o Z m Z a) a o O fl.C a) N N U U r > LL ) a E� �_ _� �_ a: con o o 2 J C M O p d 7 7 Y r a L a) o U w a7 V N ` a) L Q C _ N. 0) O 0 0 o o � `o X V ��X V c o a o°J N� c m = — N m o EX> W Ex> a)� 'o cLi cp �'�0 l y o W w y o C o C C o C I o W a3EE N ° En y U orno° $ E 5 WFa E pFQ E C.�@ cco N N o o m )C. �000 vo� y :NW rn-° c6 C O~N _00~N N a) N (.�W ZCOZ) LL C L .L �X 2o'x H W ;:,N cn (; L H I III ) z d f0 J U) 00.0 _ --------- ------ ---- — ---------- ------ d C lC ' - ----- s V N W3� w-E �i-----I x O tm y c`. 4) 5 p fA 2 rw¢: a3d3 L f6 V/ 7 U = tj m YU' O0m O N 7 N O V I > y 0 ° O a O YO � o•- Y U m 0 U d wa @ X h O N � w C, 75 �'ov � CO I 1�0, 3 0 o f0 � Z X L n I0 3 0 M rn F U) L M C M a c0 \O v M O C U M c "') U M U N O _ E Y �n M C 7 . _. 7 C ca Y rn M rn _ E a) E a I N E E N T Q- X L N N O m 1 3 o . c o 3LL`m t U N Of 2 y a w `p N CO N "6 p d d d m N t _avaa ++ ° L y o 3 • I �� O Em vi w L 0 Y U ° �' o 0 0 0 0 M ° o c ` a) 2 E N N N N N 5 - 0 L a1 7 C hOO NN 0 � a a m Y m c c or- �5 c °o £ J d o -° O1 ca 2 aci a°i —� 7 O>iw C .O0 � J .N U U C Y O N i J N E LL N WimO l6 "O r _ L O E -E m ]N O >� O C C 3 w N o U N > a' N U .Z/1 �ZZ .Zl l 9 i L L U N rn f m Q x a N J M C O X N I� N C nL9 - _ O f6 N X N rn CMO� O°0 C >�> �� N 9 NX (n nb9 W � O.>M M d H N `O m N CM a LO CO 1- M m O r w O a) E t N N j C N W Y � 0 o N o O _ a v U LO O O N Y N - N * Y Y a LL UCC w 9 ° n 3.2 z� C) ( m W N i0 0 Cl)(O N U to -0 a�i 3 u co (D m e aoo m w a) -2 U m E'O m E:, m Ow W a°UU ma) 0 N Q c c rn NO Z pNZZ> C Cp _ ? G °- 6 C COO N U'O (6 O. Y 3 = o c U) E a>cc$ ° ac � a°� a� Na°i IV • ��N a °°- 3a c ° c NU O J N m a H m roo > m� '° cLi c5 � yo acai cc ydc X oa>-O muiacOL ID O N E Q y E U O m O V E 7 Cn¢ E c' �p C C O N n U 7 Q d a � - E N U wy ns Lm oyUc ° c C gU�N N 'U X W 01J mp y0 C W t 2 y UW ZCO Z) m� c fnHAW �N chv (; L H I III ) z d f0 o J U) 00.0 _ --------- ------ ---- - ---------- ------ d C lC ' - ----- s V N W3� w-E �i-----I x O tm 5 p fA 2 rw¢: a3d3 L f6 V/ 7 U = 0 m YU' O<Co O N 7 N O V I > y 0 ° O a O o � o•- Y U m 0 U y U wa @ X h O y � w C, 75 �'ov � CO I 1�0, 3 0 o f0 � Z 'o, L n 0 M N ~ U) L M C M a CO \O v M O C U M c Y U N O _� �n M C 7 (0 _. 7 C ca Y rn M rn _ E a) E a I N E E y T Q- X L N N O m 1 3 o . c o 3LL`m N y � U Of w `p N CO N "6 p d d d m N t _avaa ++ y L y o 3 • I �� O Em vi w L 0 Y U ° �' o0000 M y o c ` a) T o E U N N N N N c a�5 - 0 L y 7 C h O O N N 0 � a a m Y m c c or- �5 c °o y £ J d o -° O1 ca 2 aci a°i —� 7 O>iw C .O0 � J .N E LL N WimO l6 "O r _ L O E -E m ]N O >� O C C 3 w N o U N > a' N y .Z/1 �ZZ .Zl l 9 l L L U N rn ayi y E m Q x a N J M C �o X N I� N C nL9 - _ O f6 N X N rn CMO� O°0 c >�> �� N 9 NX m nb9 W � O.>M M d H N `O m N CM a LO CO I- M m O r w O a) E t N N j C N W Y � 0 o y_ o O _ a a U LO O O N Y N - v N a)* Y Y 7 LL CO ..�_, C W Q w+, � y O O 3 Z N y E N Y m w N II o O � M(O 7 - U (n N 3 II 'yo CO y CO C a 0 0 m N U d -0t7 '�w U m E10w EZ m ow W ayUU ma Q c E 0 c U) N Z pNZZ> c o E o Cn O. 6 CO U-p (a O. Y 3 = o c in E a> m aC m o y T w 0 @ y� @ U Y C o n.}' 0) 0C6m � 0 _ 3a y Loo a>y '° cLi °cam °.N `o � yo acai cc yyc X a� o 6-0 C, muia c o_oa�_ O N E Q y d U O m O V E 7 Cn¢ E c' �p C C O N N U 7 Q d N E N C W coN ° m i O m U C-O c _ C U N rn U X W 01J m 0 O W Loy a. zCOD n� c N C9� .� HAW -N chv ■ \ #®!;l;alt ■� f|/g�| 6 MN,-2i - MOO<M 76 - - f/ - i7 t f )m - : ƒ \\ { t 72 10 ;;)!7 )f;Z� F §7\{ ! >) >) >Z !Z !|757 OF t \ \ \ FMN } . & . . . cs § \ 2 k� @ &E� § ) ) ( | � & - LO /\ � \ 2 w - \ fa � t « � § }� wk n � E ] fk \ :z 2 j k\\C {{ \ Zk0k)`CC (/ | 2 - ` = 0- ) _% «- / ¥(� co f]m\\ w r \ u) �° % 7g<C66) \ 8 §/ ( 3C]\ƒ \ -/ m\m _U ; /k ® 2 ; 2 $&a 2 \b :% | ]zm=aw§ ' / )J£ aw z« M N � U! OQ .x O LULU d > t• L�3� - oE Q� a��,mtm5aa _ tdt xooQm YU' (D0Y O m d H 0 ca o-- ip O N 1 W-o om g� a c O a U U of d �O �U � (6 N m�Yrn N m o a a c 3 LL`m y ov c�'v Of — c�2ma d d d m ._avaa a o v n OQQQ� LEN N N N N <V o0000 co Min M co h O O N N G m o � • • N U W E N p_ n _ Cl) N ~ O a = o0 W ++ ° �' c� � ; o ' X co U //yy G1 a c. oc. L c Li L N N C Y p( o Q (w6 T U 3 U M M N y V �, • 't M co Y Y 7 LL 0) _ (h N ` Cl) M K = d L W N _ d 'n Z L U U a Q N M Q 3 d N c 75 d a a F 0 a cY T J n LL � 3 X No „6b Y Z I 1 M N � U! OQ .x O LULU d > t• Lo - $E Q� a by me m5$a ♦ - tdc rw¢: a3d3 2000m YU' (DDY C p d E O U O 3 'o O - O C N y o H N a a og CL 3 �� ++M ° g C ai U) y d a U) Q L N� � CO C x c 0 a ~ a aNa U)8 a C o E O 0 C L) o U C a _ N LL � 9 \ ) > E J N d o a a H ma0 xa � � �m E 'O O. C CO _ N -a._m LL m • O O lC0 F-TtiH dcmcvai C ro d e (ri m oyd O d YO N a) a) c a v a a -Fa 0 N a a a n >� 0 E O Q Q Q 0 N/ LO m !3 > 0 Q p -----f 4 N -0 O T > w N N N N N O C m C O U o0000 I > � 'o z - w NNNNN_ CV rn a 0 2 '� o •� ,- L -p h OO NN O C Q a 7 p o U 0) H a C O CY m 3 = � Q U a7 p U , • QE E C E U U U C !" 3 a, 2 C N V Y co U 7 J C N .O-. 3 y y C i y C w a) ¢ U .L.+ w L a) E a) w LL W E o OZZ = z W J O in M O 'O N C E N (o a) L N N ' N - O O N W M � Y H d 20 o 0 o N M 7 )6 O r-� aD E t N N j C N W Y !o 0 N _ U O O T v N O Y N O _ * Y Y a LL C W D-72 .. Sk .. m o 3 0 z Zo a L4M� 0z o 0 a o U N O O C ° Q a) d u u ow mC E 0E y a0 � c oCa) E E WEW> cG zoE UNZz O N rU U a J C '-' d 7 U 7 Y r a L a) p 0- a7 V C a\\ c ypV c a O V o J �'C l.0po in O E C U° > w � aLi �5 o W c ac - ao ,o � OCA 0 a)'a n I c o Jai � a3En y ° En y �U a) rno° Q) E � Y o Wes¢ E �F¢ E �. @ cco w w 0 E N m m 3 J 3 as W 3 ' rn a p �_C.(OHN J(OHN y 2 U Oi x W OJ O)�O 0 01 L O L O y U` W ztn7"y� c M �x 0_x H�W �N chv . M � . - | � § Co 2Q -o \ , k I . ,� id 1 l 0(D Z9 - §% co �0 / $! 2 � ■� E E ) § o. = z § r C4 2 -- t \CL co ;®!®] )f;Z� M \\\\\ o«<= . ) J ) ) ) ( | � & � § \ \ PD \ ] \ J ; f7 | J4 / \ \ \ & � . Agenda Item 2 STAFF REPORT January 12, 2023 Noah Beals, Senior City Planner/Zoning PROJECT ZBA220038 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Address: 307 Wayne St. Owner: Dan Walter&Carolyn Schultz-Walter Petitioner: Jeffrey J. Schneider, Contractor, Armstead Construction Zoning District: N-C-L Code Section: 4.7(D)(3) &4.7(E)(3) Project Description: This is a request for 2 variances: 1. Request for a new addition to encroach 5-feet into the required 15-foot rear setback and the open staircase to encroach and additional 5ft. 2. Request to exceed the maximum floor area on the rear half of the lot by 628 square feet. The maximum allowed on the rear half of the lot is 468 square feet. COMMENTS: 1. Background: The property is a part of the Prospect Place annexation and subdivision. The original lot extended from Akin Ave to the Alley. It was split into two parcels. It is unclear when the two parcels were created. However, the existing houses on both parcels were built in 1925 and were addressed from Wayne Street. The shape of the parcel is more square in comparison with the rest of the block. This unique shape creates a shallow depth and results in a large portion of the house being in the rear half of the lot. The lot size is also significantly smaller than the minimum lot size in the current zone district. The subject parcel is 3,571 sf. in size and current standard is a minimum of 6,000 sf. in size. Additionally, the existing house encroaches 6.3' into the 15' required rear-yard setback and the open deck encroaches 10.3'. 2. Applicant's statement of justification: See petitioner's letter. 3. Staff Conclusion and Findings: Under Section 2.10.4(H), staff recommends approval and finds that: • The variance is not detrimental to the public good. • The lot size is significantly smaller in size within the context of neighborhood and the required minimum for the N-C-L zone district. • The unique shape of the lot results in the more of the primary house to be in the rear-half of the property. • The existing house and attached deck encroach into the setback. Therefore, the variance requests may be granted due to a hardship of the lot not caused by the applicant and a strict application of the code results in a practical difficulty upon the applicant. 4. Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of APPEAL ZBA220038. Item#2 -Page 1 City of Application A Request Fort Collins pp ' q for Variance from the Land Use Code The Zoning Board of Appeals has been granted the authority to approve variances from the requirements of Articles 3 and 4 of the Land Use Code. The Zoning Board of Appeals shall not authorize any use in a zoning district other than those uses which are specifically permitted in the zoning district. The Board may grant variances where it finds that the modification of the standard would not be detrimental to the public good. Additionally, the variance request must meet at least one of the following justification reasons: (1) by reason of exceptional physical conditions or other extraordinary and exceptional situations unique to the property, including, but not limited to physical conditions such as exceptional narrowness, shallowness, or topography, the strict application of the code requirements would result in unusual and exceptional practical difficulties or undue hardship upon the occupant/applicant of the property, provided that such difficulties or hardship are not caused by an act or omission of the occupant/applicant(i.e. not self-imposed); (2)the proposal will promote the general purpose of the standard for which the variance is requested equally well or better than would a proposal which complies with the standard for which the variance is requested; (3)the proposal will not diverge from the Land Use Code standards except in a nominal, inconsequential way when considered in the context of the neighborhood. This application is only for a variance to the Land Use Code. Building Code requirements will be determined and reviewed by the Building Department separately. When a building or sign permit is required for any work for which a variance has been granted, the permit must be obtained within 6 months of the date that the variance was granted. However, for good cause shown by the applicant, the Zoning Board of Appeals may consider a one-time 6 month extension if reasonable and necessary under the facts and circumstances of the case. An extension request must be submitted before 6 months from the date that the variance was granted has lapsed. Petitioner or Petitioner's Representative must be present at the meeting Location: 300 LaPorte Ave, Council Chambers, Fort Collins, CO 80524 Date: Second Thursday of the month Time: 8:30 a.m. Variance Address 307 Wayne Street Petitioner's Name, Jeffrey J. Schneider if not the Owner City Fort Collins, CO Petitioner's Relationship Contractor to the Owner is Zip Code 180521 Petitioner's Address PO Box 330 LaPorte, CO 80535 Owner's Name Dan Walter&Carolyn Schultz- Petitioner's Phone# 970-472-1113 Code Section(s) 4.7 D(3) & 4.7 E (3) Petitioner's Email Jeff@armsteadconstruction.com Zoning District NCL Additional Representative's Name Justification(s) 1. Hardship Representative's Address Justification(s) 2. Equal to or better than Representative's Phone# Justification(s) Additional Justification Representative's Email Reasoning See Attcahement If not enough room, additional written information may be submitted Date 12-10-22 Signature Jeffrey J. Schneider Updated 02.18.20 PRVM57TEAD CONSTRUCTION Inc. "Building Dreams" 12-10-2022 City of Fort Collins Land Use Review Commission 281 North Colleqe Avenue Fort Collins. CO 80524 RE: Variance Request for 307 Wayne Street To Whom it May Concern, On behalf of my clients Dan Walter and Carolyn Schultz-Walter, I am requesting a variance to the Land Use Code to section 4.7(D)(3) and section 4.7(E)(3) regarding the allowable rear half allowable floor area and the rear setback. 11fv cliantg 1AIM11H like to remove the existing attached garage and arm a larger narane alonn with a horse office above the new garage. We believe that the claim for Hardship is justified for 4.7(D)(3) since the existing lot is more of a square shape instead of a normal rectangle and we will not exceed the overall allowable square footage with the new addition. We also believe the claim for Hardship is justified for 4.7(E)(3) since the existing home is already in nonconformance with the rear set back and our project is not reducing the rear setback than what exists currently. We believe that the claim for Nominal and Inconsequential is justified for 4.7(E)(3) exists because. the existing structure and rear setback have been in non-ronformances for decades. We respectfully ask that the commission grant us the variance to section 4.7(D)(3) and 4.7(E)(3) as we try to obtain a permit for a new home office space and larger garage. Thank you for the consideration and we appreciate your time on this variance request. Sincerely, li�� Jeffrey J. Schneider President, Armstead Construction, Inc. P.O. Box 330 • La Porte. CO 80535 Office (970) 472-1113 • Fax (970) 472-8313 www.armsteadconstruction.com IMPROVEMENT LOCATION CERTIFICATE ' FOR TRAVIS McKENZIE LEGAL DESCRIPTION: SOUTH 70.W AND EAST 52.00'OF LOT 1,BLOCK 3, PROSPECT PLACE,CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COUNTY OF LARIMER,STATE OF COLORADO, ADDRESS: 3D7 WAYNE STREET I 7 t 6,,reO komfii �IIIIIII' #A RESiaR,lV0 CAP I� POSSIBLE 20'WC i EAST 52.W 1(cr I/7 °rxSt Orl '►' 0.es CONC. i CAN. WALL Y g Tom' r' ai x Y b � d z 4 n,7 BX ` 4 Y• 94 REBAf2 •� No CAP WEST52.0(r TWISTED METAL J 20'ALLEY 1RON ROD c EOC II I LEGEND 20 10 0 20 FOUND CORKER AS DESCRIBED 1'=2Jy SAY= WINDOW WELL L l HBtEBYCERTIFY7HAT TK8 j Pflf7 eAM LorATM 0GMFlG1E Wt9 PREf"=C R Tf<4Vt3 MdW&X 7 AT FT M N0rA LA NO SNRVEYPIAr OR OrPRQVF�,tFjyT OURWY PLAT.AND THAT1T13 tW' TOWRF_Llm IA�ON faR Ti1E FSTA8IJ$lpLfNT OG r�l[:EailRtl7NQ0ROTHEIiFTntR'tElIdPRD�E4EliflStif.S. 1R}RS74731�YTHAT1l�RDVB�M$ON7HEAROYE Q,Q•00 LiO TK��Po�r aHMK TT EREAFm -mnrmmwwirkw s. aaumvr QF �-O •'TT•�teiS i BICRQACMlENTB t7PO1dn+E D�OT:O PRBME �Mr ORat A++y�O� P��TASNH07MMOAlwARE:lrrEvoFNcEORSIGNOPANY LAsEmm NOTICE: 'F 16 0's ACCro• o THM RDeURVVVOTHlH �i MAFTM ro�VMnUc, M:ECr 04 P tNrDt�crw AcnoN SAsm uPar!AWY OEFECF lH THM evRVeY BE COMOD i THm�Ye"ARs TAne •......•�'�'W DF THE 1'ERnFiU7T@!SHOWN ti>�l. Mq/L LAN NOTICE ALL OFARNoa,d19TANcm AND eA6BIEHT9 ARE PER'THE UMDMS*N PLAT W-M0THE]WGE NOTEO. MATT E.LOCKYri70p u �a COLORADO PP.i6 Na ams TRAM IIS CKENZIE PROSPECT PLACE H0' Fmvm1m By DATE ENGINEERING - R'2DJECT'�f31A•006 DRAWN W.K4% DATE 0619L1117 is unotlicial copy was downloaded on Jul-21-2022 fiom the Cit)of Fort Collins Public Records Website:bttp:/xitydocs.fcgov.com or additional information or an official copy,please contact Buildin;and Zoning Office 281 North College Fort Collins,CO 80521 USA EAST 5ZW ,*4, 57—W -fie - _ +I .0 3'AUXY Ek is 1N�� - iti^Zv-o' ARMSTEAD CONSTRUCTION INC FtkAa 375 E. HORSETOOTH RD. BLDG 4 SUITE 102 FORT COLLINS,COLO 50525 TEL: (970)472-1113 IS'b" A 5'-PK' 6'bK" 3'-IOK" PROPERTY LINE-------------------------- I EXISTING NOOSE 3 3'-0" 4'-5K" ---- - I... l li W 10-3 0 md.« ill Op z3 lil%.mil I El .,.w•mx Ill I Q 4 m I:.. ......: ._._ w c _ NEW OFFIG� E p�{AR I� al �§ 4' GARAGE QFg 2i ` ------------------------------ _ uLreo i r P rzoo. � W EXISTING 4 W Y2 LL 3 1 ONE$TORY °�' FRAME NOUbE 9 rveu mnnw o-s.m+Aennrae �d'v 9� 6 mr<oriou Q —— —_ sera vxc mim x:eaw s $ T-1 _--- .e. ..... V c a<x Zo 2 �.:...•,., mom, Z F ail OFFICE ADDITION o 5'-4": 1Y-3'R.O. IXI6TING U UPPER LEVEL FLOOR FLAN 5'-6" „ 21'-3" CREMA�N646R6 NEW HOU6E N a 6 $ GARAGE IXI6TING o c a 255 S.F. GARAGE ADDITION 44_2. MAIN LEVEL FLOOR PLAN GENERAL NOTES: LL 34'z" 2roro S,F. SCALE: 1/4"•I'-0" DIMEN610N6 ARE FROM ROUGH 6T1D FACE TO ROUGH 6T1D FACE. O� wU� = NOTE: SEE ENGINEERED FOUNDATION PLANS FouNDATION,Au sTRuc*uRAL BEARING AND ROOF TRu66 6Y6TEM LOCAL CODE.E-ENGINEERED FOR FOR CONCRETE FROST WALLS,SLAB,AND TO BE PR � - ALL STRUCTURAL BEARING ANGLE6 ARE 45 DEGREES UNLE6b NO ED OTHERWI6E PLAN CONSTRUCTION TO COMPLY WITH ALL LOCAL BUILDING CODE6 IN EFFECT AT TIME OF PERMIT 8U15MITTAL. Z OONE-0AR - GARAGE + f 5 au�mcwnanorv.ce, cnua IT xu�oELOT '---------------' ONESTORY FRAME NOOSE _--- _--- -- m s. Lu F — �� —L IT.PaoPosm.o.�e�rvR ® ca QC __________ +a/ *� �•' mew.. LL LL W Hz .. .. -0. ��.PGRCN BIRD'S EYE ROOF PLAN .�E zf_]" IR'O" FOR REFERENCE ONLY: EXISTINCx SEE ENGINEERED DRAWINGS FOR TRUSS SPEGS MAIN LEVEL FLOOR PLAN AND COMPLETE LAYOUT WITH CONNECTIONS SHEET: SCALE: 3/16". -0" 3 12 ro n.rw«isnrvc vwsE I Q4 narc:,«wrmc xa.:aE Q4 voos vrtu, aow Peru, narw ________ _ - _ _- aovr Peru, narcv w0 , Nro EH - .e...� EXISTING -- 3 G wxe.•,,. -- -� -ONEbTpRY EXISTING T,.orr r.o.once It 9 - a N(7USE -- 5 a'- __ n�w°vP:`w' 1 1 � Y Z E - w > IN L. rvGrrvc � —_eau .°.� -- -- - .LLv nvc r.o.veu rvory r.o.rva rvvrv.� re e ro ee n « c G m _ — _ mvaox.came I I I I am:.eacve�r o.tout.vane eFaaox oacoe 8 waa::vrvreL�aP I ' ' «r«ea arvw. wore cooavn.re veu eawwe mrm e =__________________ '_____________--______- o - REAR ELEVATION FRONT ELEVATION ~ w� Z WEST I' 0 0 �ST SCAL /4"E: I •I'-0" EAST SCALE: I/4"• -O' U U)cc 25:j 8 0 Q NE2 ro nnrcv«Isnuc rouse 11 p ' Q4 Roor alrw Q4 Roov alrn' jxE _—_—_____—_—_- m,me ww.°a..w u�. 4 12 ... U 4 w S O T T 1 sue: 12 xe..ww•.. p U W .•n w• m O r o.vLare z ONE-STORY ro.viare o"m w.ram.m xr c:o. FRAME HOU,$E ------ Luz : e 0 ma a° 4 w'4 T.O.EXISTING 1 _ _. _-_-_ - Q I 911BFLOOR .__-_.. ' -- ro ew-- (6 W i U avwox.cance Bane v«Bea «itruc eac u ffi nareu«srrw wnu=TaTIo — w wrooar wry norm aennu a e nvowe aou O W O _ - ---------------------- vi H �z w Q 3° LEFT SIDE ELEVATION RIGHT SIDE ELEVATION SOUTH SCALE: I/4"•I'-0° NORTH I SCALE: 1/4"•I'-O" I`l 1� 1••1 SHEET: 2 3 O TYPICAL TRUSS ROOF: o CLASS C ASPHALT 6WINGLE6(MATCH EXISTING)OVER R 3 FELT UNDERLAY ENT. STEP FLASHING ALONG C ANY/ALL VERTICAL WALL INTERSECTIONS. l/I6"OSB SHEATHING E 3x BLOCKING AT PEAK g PRE-ENGINEERED TRUSSES m o.c./61MP60N WIND TIES 3 RS TRUSS BRACING WHERE NEEDED R60 INSULATION(TOMEET GRADE I) IR"GYP.CEILING$C BOARD,TAPED APED 4 SANDED 1] 13 4 Q4 Z TYPICAL FACA/SOFFIT: •oP or r+lare—----- a --- ZO MATCHIXI6TING -`o FRAING _- U "^.a Tx6 SUBFACA W/PAINT�OFF F4CI4 RAKED MASON.SOFFIT,PENT PER CODE 0 III S U TYPICAL]xb EXTERIOR WALL: cc ,O1_ --m' w .. s'U HORIZONTAL LAP SIDING or BOARD<BATT z o SIDING(MATCH IXISTING),PAINTED, v��seva .sxmr mnao __ '', w m --- --- --- INSTALL PER MANUFACNRER SPECS U l/IG"OSB SHEATHING OFFICE v�coos al 2..STUDS•I s Rc1 MIN,INSUI-ATION W i o TYYEK OR SIMILAR VAPOR BARRIER & - - - -— —- - - - - - I/l'DRYWALL TAPED s SANDED � y °53 ww euo.ora. i ', I .niaTa.yeoa sraivs xvicnl. w ¢ S uscur.vrs n and gg � ••• GARAGE ' Xdd TYPICAL BILL ASSEMBLY: 8"POURED CONCRETE O= FOUNDATION WALL: I&DIA.ANCHOR BOLT PER ENG'D.PLAN EATED SILL PLATE SEE ENGINEERED PLANS PRESSURE TR FOR ALL STRUCTURAL SPECS. I/4"SILL GASKET 0 0 Q (�o Q o Q a BUILDING SECTION A W so: 3/b".I'O" U LL $ LL 0 �8 c �h W J ag Z' LSHEET: 3 3 Agenda Item 3 STAFF REPORT January 12, 2023 Noah Beals, Senior City Planner/Zoning PROJECT ZBA220039 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Address: 305 Park St. Owner: Dan MacKinnon Petitioner: Jeffrey J. Schneider, Contractor, Armstead Construction Zoning District: N-C-M Code Section: 4.8(D)(5) Project Description: This is a request to exceed the maximum square footage for an accessory building with habitable space by 67 square feet. The maximum floor area for an accessory building with habitable space is 600 square feet. COMMENTS: 1. Background: The property is part of the Capital Hill annexation and subdivision. The original primary structure was built in 1924. It is unclear when the accessory building was constructed. The existing garage is to be removed. It currently is a one-story structure and encroaches into the required 5-foot north side-yard setback 3.3 feet. The proposed garage is roughly the same is size in footprint. The additional square footage is being added through an upper story. Per code only 267 square feet of the upper story is defined as floor area. The proposed structure meets the required setbacks and does not exceed the allowable floor area for the entire lot or the rear-half of the lot. 2. Applicant's statement of justification: See petitioner's letter. 3. Staff Conclusion and Findings: Under Section 2.10.4(H), staff recommends approval and finds that: • The variance is not detrimental to the public good. • The proposed structure increases compliance with required setbacks. • The proposed structure complies with the maximum building height. • The additional 67 square feet is an 11% increase of the allowed floor area. Therefore, the variance requests 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 4. Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of APPEAL ZBA220039. Item#3 -Page 1 City of Application A Request Fort Collins pp ' q for Variance from the Land Use Code The Zoning Board of Appeals has been granted the authority to approve variances from the requirements of Articles 3 and 4 of the Land Use Code. The Zoning Board of Appeals shall not authorize any use in a zoning district other than those uses which are specifically permitted in the zoning district. The Board may grant variances where it finds that the modification of the standard would not be detrimental to the public good. Additionally, the variance request must meet at least one of the following justification reasons: (1) by reason of exceptional physical conditions or other extraordinary and exceptional situations unique to the property, including, but not limited to physical conditions such as exceptional narrowness, shallowness, or topography, the strict application of the code requirements would result in unusual and exceptional practical difficulties or undue hardship upon the occupant/applicant of the property, provided that such difficulties or hardship are not caused by an act or omission of the occupant/applicant(i.e. not self-imposed); (2)the proposal will promote the general purpose of the standard for which the variance is requested equally well or better than would a proposal which complies with the standard for which the variance is requested; (3)the proposal will not diverge from the Land Use Code standards except in a nominal, inconsequential way when considered in the context of the neighborhood. This application is only for a variance to the Land Use Code. Building Code requirements will be determined and reviewed by the Building Department separately. When a building or sign permit is required for any work for which a variance has been granted, the permit must be obtained within 6 months of the date that the variance was granted. However, for good cause shown by the applicant, the Zoning Board of Appeals may consider a one-time 6 month extension if reasonable and necessary under the facts and circumstances of the case. An extension request must be submitted before 6 months from the date that the variance was granted has lapsed. Petitioner or Petitioner's Representative must be present at the meeting Location: 300 LaPorte Ave, Council Chambers, Fort Collins, CO 80524 Date: Second Thursday of the month Time: 8:30 a.m. Variance Address 305 Park Street Petitioner's Name, Jeffrey J. Schneider if not the Owner City Fort Collins, CO Petitioner's Relationship Contractor to the Owner is Zip Code 180521 Petitioner's Address PO Box 330 LaPorte, CO 80535 Owner's Name Dan MacKinnon Petitioner's Phone# 970-472-1113 Code Section(s) 4.8(D)(5) Petitioner's Email Jeff@armsteadconstruction.com Zoning District INCM Additional Representative's Name Justification(s) 13. Nominal and inconsequential Representative's Address Justification(s) 12. Equal to or better than Representative's Phone# Justification(s) Additional Justification Representative's Email Reasoning See attachment If not enough room, additional written information may be submitted Date 12-10-22 Signature Jeffrey J. Schneider Updated 02.18.20 PRkMSTEAD CONSTRUCTION Inc. "Building Dreams" 12-10-2022 City of Fort Collins Land Use Review Commission 281 North Colleqe Avenue Fort Collins, CO 80524 RE: Variance Request for 305 Park Street To Whom it May Concern, On behalf of my client Dan MacKinnon, I am requesting a variance to the Land Use Code to section 4.8(D)(5) regarding the allowable detached structure to be no more than 600 square feet. My client would like to construct a new detached two car garage approximately 667 square feet in 67P with 400 square feet on the main flnnr anri 267 square feet of second floor habitable space. to be in the rear half of the property. My client would like to deconstruct the existing garage of 399 square feet and construct a new 667 square foot detached garage. We believe that the claim for Equal to or better than is justified by removing the existing structure that is not on structural foundations and building a new detached garage that complies with the current building codes and standards is equal to or better than the existing structures. We believe that the claim for Nominal and Inconsequential exists because, there has been detached structure on the property for decades. Adding a new detached garage in the same location as the previous structures would not change the character of the existing neighborhood. We respectfully ask that the commission grant us the variance to section 4.8(D)(5) as we are requesting to allow a new detached garage to be 667 square feet instead of the allowable 600 square feet. Thank you for the consideration and we appreciate your time on this variance request. Sincerely, Jeffrey J. Schneider President, Armstead Construction, Inc. P.O. Box 330 • La Porte, CO 80535 Office (970) 472-1113 • Fax (970) 472-8313 www.armsteadconstruction.com ---i Jet No. 4 rebar t,io lung) L J with 1" dia. blue plastic Set No. 4 rebar (16" long) 1 cap marked LS 34174 Elvislmg 12.4' x 4. ' Fx. °'t with 1" dia. blue lastic I l rx. off 1.0': f(tp)a Silo' on Frame She 0.4': cap marked LS 34174 I t Bldg. Cor. 0 2': (Rec.: 170') 519^° td M 1�T: Caic. eas.: S89`I3`0 170.15' ;, i I Concrete °a�ovo a Stage o°o°$tOn!0°0: ° 000a 1 21 2' o ° o o GA� •�s °o°c°c°v°000: Jc�}r nn a:. oo°cr o o ° o"0'°-o t o°0°0°oo°9ni ro°<' 00�°°0°0 0 o'b'a•o °°o°.ry tsC�Oct.u6u"aoe ° :'p°Q;G,°,1L°,0pa °°°°o°o°o' r'o°o° ocCATLoO000 0 \ , I oo°o°000°1 co�,n.o a nYo9n w0,a 26 1' in n° 52.2# I : �j yContrele M FRAME M 000°e000OPo°oc°os N ° 1 ,rC/Otter o.000c 16.1 74 0 , • I I 1 GARAGE a °o°o°°°°°o WOOD o A� Concrete •I I °°°°°°°^° N DECK Y n u Surl°cs I t 21 2' —X;2._i 28.9 f : ----j''-'_—r--- .E.' -1• yra°a sltne 12.3 1 STORY N •,___� I , Calc./PR/Mess.: FRAME RESIDENCE &oa- -- -"-- ,• I 1 • S00'13'35"W 49.99' ` 60Qf� °o tttt') (305 Pork Street) �°� stone l 1 q• ( ) i 6, aA •��� ° sarroce l .. r 1 Rec,: 50' (typ) 1 t II j G/,1c J0.0' i �Q. Y°O DvS.•°° Controt• ` d ° 16 b' 'a Swfo s ExisCng t I li• O I Fx. on E■hung t c i_ Ityp D F"celint I'net fEncNne f _1 Fx, on �� '� �i•• I Calc. My' Fx alt ,.• / N89'11 20 170.17 ;• , f , X � A !� (Rec.: 170') b Found No. 4 rebar Found No. 4 rebor w,ter rl —+ Q °', (length unknown) with (length unknown). a rn Ps r c 1"t dia. red plastic cap ' No cap or markings. I of �„ W 1 (cop markings Illegible) SUBJECT PROPERTY 1 M LOT 2, BLOCK 313, r- rn> M in CAPITOL HILL ADDITION ;� a 8,498.4t SQUARE FEET (Mess.) It �1 LQ 1 I`�v - f I ! �I EHt,tiny ay,15TINi , 5 SIt rrnce!are 12.4 x 4.0 4t I SE�Br��K (rw•) Shed en Frame Shed j� _ 589 3'0 "E 170.15' , I. '� t• CtYrsrelo -�-.Sdewglk �AD rra4 SIUno ipao0�SIIk1Q 6D°CASE o o°oa I a 'q. ___ cr'°cold-1.1 uaodcgurfQce°a0000c�nce n aua�°u Q•a°�r. { ' I � . -- ,r'b° a c'^ °aga4nu a u Q o atla,� u u„Q n c o o a�, ! �0 °atla Q yavaa°oo t , I :�- � ova 52.2 I ''i canaete a n o• 0 111 n a1.A. . C-111 �� 26.1' r 7.T Qd ktS E•� j„ Curb/Gutter cp• t�.t' ExIS'C� TT 1S] PR dSEv D '� a WOOD }r, Va �oncre4e� � 41 ►;" —� p�F_Tk-K �0 DECK # 5urlaca k t I CxAp �+ n an ���Io " �X�STIl vol � w: 1 STORY � �. .. . 4 FRAME RESIDENCE 'Caw" W_ 01 5T►o's? r PAP (305 Park Street) Slona ° ¢oR a� o Sdrface I •� I i I d 7.0' °; t.typ•)in X I = » lS - i0nd°a0°a� O Concrete `r I . iF.g W Surface Ex1ittnq ! I �4 Q t► _Esns�ltt-,4— t` rettnce me +0 " " ^--. ?" I { .-.to sIvF- N$91 1'20"W 170.17' i i I i1 5-o SETP� K + r r a oil c; 6 SET K ^ ►.Ittr c o ' 't I -ten j W LOT 2, BLOCK 313, I 31. f17 CAPITOL HILL ADDITION rf1 r"b. 6,4913.4� SQUARE FEET ;y v 0 0 � Dsh�= �l�IS -2a22 ARMSTEAD CONSTRUCTION INC ��oP� ArbbSS % 375 E. HORSETOOTH RD. BLDG 4 L L 1�I.1S�Gv ` 5 21 SUITE 102 FORT COLLINS,COLO 80525 TEL: (970)472-1113 ----------------------------- 12 12 4 --—-—-—- DECK 4_A2L f GUM51 /Tr -Il 1/6"TJI FLOOR JOI6T6 0 -7 d- BATH --------------i --------------------------- ------ ------ -------- ------- SOUTH RIGHT SIDE ELEVATION cc) SCALE: 1/4' V-O" — ------------------- gm [I---------- J) Z 0 DETACHED u) UPPER LEVEL FLOOR PLAN GARAGE FLOOR FLAN a SCALE: 1/4'-1'-0` 400 SQ, FT. 8CALE: 114".'-0" 261 SF(FOR ALLOWABLE FLOOR AREA CALC. ONLY) GENERAL NOTES: E 12 DIMEN5ION5 ARE FROM ROUGH—D FACE TO ROUGH 5TUD FACE. 4 12 FOUNDATION All bTRUCTURAL BEARING AND ROOF TRU-SYSTEM 9 5 TO BE—ENGINEERED FOR LOCAL CODE. ANGLES ARE 45 CEGREEB UNLF56 NOTED OTHERWISE. Qa u) PLAN CON6TRUCTION TO COMPLY WITH ALL LOCAL Lu BUILDING CODES IN EFFECT AT TIME Of PERMIT SUBMITTAL. z. ry�_ ____ p� Lu rcc woe t t <ZO Lu mr —1- IF-T -E z -------------------- 0 z K q-3 �,.zn I=— �d �0� 5ifRr.)'6 EYE ROOF PLAN L'F 0 ------------- --------- FOR REFERENCE ONLY: 5EE ENGINEERED DRAWINGS FOR TRUBS I-- NORTH AND COMPLETE LAYOUT WITH CONNECTIONS LEFT SIDE ELEVATION SHEE 5CALE: -"-f-O" TYPICAL RAFTER ROOF: CLASS,C ASPHALT 9STEP 6 OVER A FELT v UNDERLAY ERTI STEP FLASHING ALONG ANY/ALL VERTICAL WALL INTERSECTIONS. 1/16" SHE4T RIDGE 2.ENGINEERED RIDGE BOARD 14 veo 14" RAFTERS c 24"0.c./8IMP6 WIND TIES C 2.4 COLLAR TIES/CEILING JOISTS*24"o.c 2.1 BRACING WHERE NEEDED M d a . In -------------------------- R60 INSULATION(TO MEET RESNET GRADE 1) 'Y 1/2"GYP.CEILING BOARD,TAPED.SANDED rere O n v i TYPICAL FACIA/60FFIT: n — ———--— s TYPICAL 2xb IXTERIOR WALL: u�4 ro or sure i O T rw or pure . / FBI 2u4 FRAMING 1"O.0 HORIZONTAL LAP OR SHINGLE 2.6 SUBF ACIA W/PAINTED `✓ -------- d BIDING PER ELEVATIONS,PAINTED, 2' 5/Ib-'I 8"HARDBD,FACIA o INSTALL PER MANUFACNRER SPEC6 - PAINTED MA60N. 12 s l/16"O6B SHEATHING m i VENT PER CODE - GUESTS IfY 2x6 STUDS•16"o.c. ros os s erwoR - wwW� * rop or sueaocR $ o 2 R23.aci MIN.INSULATION WO I.. oiy TYVEK OR SIMILAR VAPOR BARRIER I/2"DRYWALL TAPED 4 SANDED o 4 9" 10'6" 4•1 12" a yE w �z c uo ne e w Fr a DORMER SECTION o AT SHOWER E 4 DETACHED p«.E arK eo. 6/e".ro" cc a€ - o GARAGE w-- - 4 4 y O o TYPICAL GILL AGSEMBLY: cur p I/1"DIA.ANCHOR BOLT PER EN 11 D $ PLAN Fiwwm wg vuvrm. W o 2x PRESSURE TREATED SILL PLATE o I/4"SILL GA S KET H & op11 S g53 cae a 8"POURED CONCRETE a d avcox. ¢ m 3 POUNDATION WALL: vsa evcmnrz n o SEE ENGINEERED PLANS n FOR ALL STRUCTURAL SPECS, d d BUILDING SECTION =E Us 3/8"y V-0" r Xdq w Z. ° w= ITT- IF - ffi o< db^ ¢ _ ------ o�<- -T Z trap o fro $' ---- —°--- --- O I� ¢ BAST '------ ---- w�sT ------- R�- Mm UPPER LEVEL ELECTRICAL PLAN REAR ELEVATION FRONT ELEVATION U SCALE: 1/4"•I'I" SCALE: 1/4"-1'O" Agenda Item 4 STAFF REPORT January 12, 2023 Noah Beals, Senior City Planner/Zoning PROJECT ZBA220040 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Address: 301 E Stuart St. Owner: Trinity Lutheran Church Petitioner: Katie Barron, Sign Committee Chairperson Zoning District: L-M-N Code Section: 3.8.7.1(J)(2)(b)(1) Project Description: This is a request to replace an existing primary detached sign with a new sign that will have an electronic messaging center display. The new sign will be 69 feet from the residential property to the north, and 81 feet from the residential property to the east. Signs containing an electronic messaging center display must be located 100 feet from the nearest residential property. COMMENTS: 1. Background: The property is part of the 1957 South College Avenue Consolidated annexation. It later received development approval in 1970 part of the Trinity subdivision. A ground sign on the east side of the property was installed in 1997. It is unclear the number of changes to ground sign have occurred since initial approval. Electronic messaging Center(EMC) signs are required to 100ft from residential uses. The proposal includes removing the existing ground sign and installing a new sign that has an EMC. This location is less than 100ft from three residential properties to the north addressed 400, 404 and 408 E Stuart Street. The property to the East addressed 419 E Stuart Street is not a residential property. In general sign regulations are design to reduce sign clutter, unnecessary distraction and limit impacts of non-residential uses. 2. Applicant's statement of justification: See petitioner's letter. 3. Staff Conclusion and Findings: Under Section 2.10.4(H), staff recommends denial and finds that: • The request is at least 30% deviation from the standard. • The sign can be setback further south to comply with the setback. Insufficient evidence has been provided in establishing a unique hardship to the property. • Insufficient evidence has been provided in showing how the proposal supports the standards in a way equally well or better than a proposal that complies with the standard. 4. Recommendation: Staff recommends denial of APPEAL ZBA220040. Item#4-Page 1 Fort Collins Application Request for Variance from the Land Use Code The Land Use Review Commission has been granted the authority to approve variances from the requirements of Articles 3 and 4 of the Land Use Code. The Land Use Review Commission shall not authorize any use in a zoning district other than those uses which are specifically permitted in the zoning district. The Commission may grant variances where it finds that the modification of the standard would not be detrimental to the public good. Additionally, the variance request must meet at least one of the following justification reasons: (1)by reason of exceptional physical conditions or other extraordinary and exceptional situations unique to the property, including, but not limited to physical conditions such as exceptional narrowness, shallowness, or topography, the strict application of the code requirements would result in unusual and exceptional practical difficulties or undue hardship upon the occupant/applicant of the property, provided that such difficulties or hardship are not caused by an act or omission of the occupant/applicant (i.e. not self-imposed); (2)the proposal will promote the general purpose of the standard for which the variance is requested equally well or better than would a proposal which complies with the standard for which the variance is requested; (3)the proposal will not diverge from the Land Use Code standards except in a nominal, inconsequential way when considered in the context of the neighborhood. This application is only for a variance to the Land Use Code. Building Code requirements will be determined and reviewed by the Building Department separately. When a building or sign permit is required for any work for which a variance has been granted, the permit must be obtained within 6 months of the date that the variance was granted. However, for good cause shown by the applicant, the Land Use Review Commission may consider a one-time 6 month extension if reasonable and necessary under the facts and circumstances of the case. An extension request must be submitted before 6 months from the date that the variance was granted has lapsed. Petitioner or Petitioner's Representative must be present at the meeting Location: 300 LaPorte Ave, City Hall Council Chambers (instructions will be emailed to the applicant the Monday prior to the hearing) Date: Second Thursday of the month Time: 8:30 a.m. Variance Address Petitioner's Name, 301 Stuart Steet Katie Barron if not the Owner City Fort Collins, CO Petitioner's Relationship Sign Committee Chairman to the Owner is Zip Code 80525 Petitioner's Address 4003 Sunstone Way Owner's Name Trinity Lutheran Church Petitioner's Phone# 520-256-5524 Code Section(s) 3.8.7.1 (J)(2) Electronic Mess Ctr Petitioner's Email barronkt@hotmail.com Zoning District Residential Sign District Additional Representative's Name Justification(s) Choose One from List #3 Representative's Address Justification(s) Additional Justification Representative's Phone# Justification(s) Additional Justification Representative's Email Reasoning WRITTEN STATEMENT EXPLAINING THE REASON FOR THE VARIANCE REQUEST REQUIRED VIA SEPARATE DOCUMENT. 12/12/22 �� 55 Date Signature fi,E �z 541�� —i M 25 o The existing sign for Trinity Lutheran Church is located at the East driveway on Stuart Street. The sign has been there for more than 18 years. Currently, there are three additional organizations that use the facilities at 301 E. Stuart: Trinity Lutheran Church, Trinity Preschool, St. Paul's Episcopal Church, and Mary of Magdala Catholic Church. Collectively, the organizations would like to have a sign that lists all the occupants as well as upgrade from a changeable letter board to a digital sign that can be programmed remotely to display various events and activities for the location. The existing sign sits 69 feet from the property line of the North neighbor at 404 E. Stuart and 81 feet from the property line of the East neighbor, Mountain Kid's. City code stipulates that a digital sign—electronic message centers (EMC)—must be a distance of 100 feet. On behalf of the organizations at 301 E. Stuart, I would like to request a variance for distance that would allow a new replacement sign, that meets all code requirements, be allowed to be placed in the existing sign's location. We are aware that the existing sign—thus the new proposed sign—resides in the right-of-way, and may be required to be relocated at any time by the city. The neighbors at 404 E. Stuart and 419 E. Stuart have been presented with our request for a distance variance and have given their endorsement to both replace the sign and install an EMC. Their signatures are attached to the application. `J Adb Alf 81.61ft � r ~, =• # 7RINITY LUTHERAN CHURCH H PRESCHOOL IL i� I Customer: 301 Faith Partners Project: 80„ Exterior Mounument Sign/ double sided Date: 12/02/2022 Details: Electronic Message Center Color programmable 12mm 75 9/16"W x 28.5"T/Double Sided RGB 60x180 12mm automatic dimmable LED display Aluminum cabinet with textured 57rr • . �� /� /� C (stucco like)finish painted to l t match brick facade of building. Lower tenant panels .040 Aluminum panels LutheranTrinity Dark Bronze finish with cut vinyl Church ' ry Of ' • • ' ' lettering. Unlit or lighting TBD based on TLC Preschl St. Paul's a Episcopal • • a code • • Church 24" Side Faces drty,IaRgeMRpssigna: As owner/agent of this properly,I approre this sign as defined in this document. Print Name: Signed: Date: Address: Phone: 31 .6 sq Email: ctin 970.493.0133 12643 ••• Dr. Suite A FortCollins, • 80525 • • • • ig n f r'^h ,... •- ,.yam?-. - 0 c The existing sign for Trinity Lutheran Church is located at the East driveway on Stuart Street. The sign has been there for more than 18 years. Currently, there are three additional organizations that use the facilities at 301 E. Stuart: Trinity Lutheran Church, Trinity Preschool, St. Paul's Episcopal Church, and Mary of Magdala Catholic Church. Collectively, the organizations would like to have a sign that lists all the occupants as well as upgrade from a changeable letter board to a digital sign that can be programmed remotely to display various events and activities for the location. The existing sign sits 69 feet from the property line of the North neighbor at 404 E. Stuart and 81 feet from Mountain Kid's, the property line of the East neighbor. City code stipulates that a digital sign— electronic message centers (EMC)—must be a distance of 100 feet. On behalf of the organization at 301 E. Stuart, I would like to request a variance for distance that would allow a new replacement sign, that meets all code requirements, be allowed to be placed in the existing sign's location. The neighbors at 404 E. Stuart and 419 E. Stuart have been presented with our request for a distance variance and have given their endorsement to both replace the sign and install an EMC. 404 E. Stuart Street Owner ❑ Renter ❑ Z� Printed Name Signature Date i Et1 23�t `Y The existing sign for Trinity Lutheran Church is located at the East driveway on Stuart Street. The sign has been there for more than 18 years. Currently, there are three additional organizations that use the facilities at 301 E. Stuart: Trinity Lutheran Church, Trinity Preschool, St. Paul's Episcopal Church, and Mary of Magdala Catholic Church. Collectively, the organizations would like to have a sign that lists all the occupants as well as upgrade from a changeable letter board to a digital sign that can be programmed remotely to display various events and activities for the location. The existing sign sits 69 feet from the property line of the North neighbor at 404 E. Stuart and 81 feet from Mountain Kid's, the property line of the East neighbor. City code stipulates that a digital sign— electronic message centers (EMC)—must be a distance of 100 feet. On behalf of the organization at 301 E. Stuart, I would like to request a variance for distance that would allow a new replacement sign, that meets all code requirements, be allowed to be placed in the existing sign's location. The neighbors at 404 E. Stuart and 419 E. Stuart have been presented with our request for a distance variance and have given their endorsement to both replace the sign and install an EMC. 419 E. Stuart Street Owner ❑ Renter ❑ Man er Printed Name Sig re Date Mountain raids 419 E. Stuart St. Fort Collins, CO 80525 www:m9Mntsin-kWs:oAm From: Noah Beals To: Kory Katsimpalis Subject: FW: [EXTERNAL]Appeal ZBA220040 Date: Tuesday,January 3,2023 9:31:02 AM -----Original Message----- From:Cathy Berg<caberg49@gmail.com> Sent: Saturday,December 31,2022 5:38 PM To:Noah Beals<nbeals@fcgov.com> Subject: [EXTERNAL]Appeal ZBA220040 Dear Mr.Beals, I'm writing concerning a letter I received in the mail today about Trinity Lutheran Church wanting to put up a sign with electronic messaging.The neighborhood does have single family homes and those of us who live in them would like to keep the neighborhood as family friendly as possible.The street and parking lot lights are very bright as it is.Having another lighted message,neon type sign would completely change the church's look.When the church took in two other groups it has slowly started to change the atmosphere of the original Lutheran Church.I stepped off the distance from the sign to the opposite side of the street(north of the sign)and it was 18 paces roughly 54 feet.I don't know where they get 69 feet?I feel the variance should be denied.This neighborhood is trying so hard to stay a quiet neighborhood not a crowded street with lighted signs. Thank you for your time. Cathy Berg 338 East Stuart Street. Sent from my iPad January 2nd, 2023 From: Rebecca and David H Residents and adjacent property owners on E Stuart St Fort Collins, CO 80525 Regarding Appeal: ZBA220040 Dear Noah Beals, Senior City Planner-Zoning, We, as residents and adjacent residential property owners directly affected, respectfully request that the Land Use Review Commission deny the request for a modification of the City of Fort Collins Land Use Code.The petitioner brought forth a request to replace an existing primary detached sign with a new sign that will have an electronic messaging center (EMC) display.The new sign will be 69 feet from the residential property to the north, and 81 feet from the residential property to the east. Signs containing an EMC display must be located 100 feet from the nearest residential property (3.8.7.1(J)(2)(b)(1))• The purposes of the land use code regulating EMCs and signs generally should be maintained: 1. (3.8.7.1(13)(1)(a))—One general purpose is to limit signs creating visual distraction, potentially creating safety hazards for motorists, bicyclists, and pedestrians; a. Our family and many other resident families in the Old Prospect neighborhood cross Stuart St. nearby the proposed EMC display on the way to the local city park, Spring Park and the Spring Creek trail.There is park and trail access by bridge which requires crossing by the sign. Motorists are significantly more likely to be visually distracted by an EMC display than the current display.Thus, the EMC display significantly increases the risk of a motorist/pedestrian accident. 2. (3.8.7.1(13)(1)(c))—Another general purpose of the regulation is to prevent the degradation of the aesthetic quality of the City, making the City a less attractive place for residents, business owners,visitors. a. An EMC display within 100 ft of several residential properties is expected to make the city less attractive for the residents and visitors. b. Several houses have living room windows and bedroom windows directly across the street from the proposed EMC display. Notably, the bedroom window used by our 4 year old and 1 year old is expected to be directly effected by the lighting emitted from the proposed EMC display as well as fluctuation in lighting of the changing messages on the display. c. Rebecca and David H also own a licensed short-term rental unit which in the adjacent property to the proposed sign.The short-term rental guests (predominantly visitors to Fort Collins)would also be negatively affected by the decreased aesthetic quality created by the EMC display. d. Holding all else equal,this may decrease residential property values. 3. It's reasonable to estimate that the negative safety and aesthetic impact on residents nearby would outweigh the benefit of an EMC display for the Owner especially given that the Owner already has an illuminated sign. The Petitioner requests a land use code modification for three reasons. We address each reason in turn: (1) By reason of exceptional situations or circumstances, the strict application of the regulation would result in peculiar and practical difficulties or exceptional undue hardship upon the owner of the such property. a. As residents and adjacent property owners directly affected by the proposed EMC display,we would like to understand the nature of the claimed exceptional circumstance. i. Specifically, we'd like to better understand how the owner's claimed exceptional circumstance is materially different from previous years when the owner displayed an illuminated, non-EMC display. ii. Furthermore, we'd like to better understand how the owner's claimed exceptional circumstance is materially different from any other owner requesting the same modification to 3.8.7.1(J)(2)(b)(1). b. If the claimed exceptional circumstance is found to be arbitrary and, in fact, non- exceptional, then permitting this variance may set precedence for other such requests to be permitted, in effect creating a way for sign clutter and EMC display visual intrusiveness to a large number of adjacent residential property owners. c. Related to the increased safety hazard discussed above, the Spring Park and Spring Creek Trail access by pedestrian bridge requires pedestrians to cross Stuart (a Collector street) near the proposed EMC display.The number of pedestrians accessing the park and trail system via this route creates an exceptional situation in favor of maintaining the Land Use Code to limit motorist visual distractions from EMC displays. (2) The proposal will promote the general purpose of the standard for which the variance is requested equally well or better than would a proposal which complies with the standard for which the variance is requested. a. We believe this is an incorrect statement from the petitioner. EMC displays have additional regulation near residential properties precisely because they are not expected to promote the general purposes of the standard better than a non-EMC display. (3) The proposal will not diverge from the standards of the Land Use Code except in nominal, inconsequential way when considered in the context of the neighborhood, provided that the granting of a variance would not result in a substantial detriment to the public good. a. The proposal does diverge from the standards in a non-nominal way in both number of residents effected and distance. Specifically,the standard limits EMC displays within 100ft from the nearest residential property. However,this proposal variance would allow an EMC display well-within 100ft from multiple residential properties (one 69 ft away, one 81ft away). b. As explained in the previous section,there would be a detriment created by the negative safety and aesthetic impact of the EMC display on residents nearby. Respectfully, David H Please note: Rebecca and I will be out of state on January 121"on a previously scheduled trip and therefore cannot attend the public hearing at the City County Chambers. Agenda Item 5 STAFF REPORT January 12, 2023 Noah Beals, Senior City Planner/Zoning PROJECT ZBA220041 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Address: 135 Bockman Dr. Owner: Boniuk Interests Ltd Petitioner: Jeff Everhart, Sign Contractor, Concept Signs & Graphics Zoning District: C-G Code Section: 3.8.7.2 Table(B) Project Description: This is a request for a wall sign to exceed the maximum wall sign height by 1 foot 6 inches. The maximum wall sign height is 7 feet. COMMENTS: 1. Background: The property received development approval originally in 1993 part of the SHOPKO PUD. Prior to this it was annexed into the City in 1979. The development approval was for a retail building. Since original construction in 1994 it has been used by multiple tenants. In general the sign code is to reduce sign clutter and distraction. The wall height limitations are included in these purposes. The previous tenant wall sign was also limited to 7' in height. A freestanding sign would be allowed along the S College Ave frontage and previous tenants have enjoyed such a sign. Additionally, in November of last year the applicant received approval for wall signs on the east and south side of the building to be increase 1.5' in height. 2. Applicant's statement of justification: See petitioner's letter. 3. Staff Conclusion and Findings: Under Section 2.10.4(H), staff recommends denial and finds that: • The property is allowed a freestanding sign to increase visibility along the college frontage. • Variances were already approved for the sides that did not have a freestanding sign. • The deviation is 21% increase in height. • Insufficient evidence has been provided in showing how the proposal supports the standards in a way equally well or better than a proposal that complies with the standard. • Insufficient evidence has been provided in establishing a unique hardship to the property. 4. Recommendation: Staff recommends denial of APPEAL ZBA220041. Item#5-Page 1 City of Application Request Fort Collins 1� for Variance from the Land Use Code The Land Use Review Commission has been granted the authority to approve variances from the requirements of Articles 3 and 4 of the Land Use Code. The Land Use Review Commission shall not authorize any use in a zoning district other than those uses which are specifically permitted in the zoning district. The Commission may grant variances where it finds that the modification of the standard would not be detrimental to the public good. Additionally, the variance request must meet at least one of the following justification reasons: (1) by reason of exceptional physical conditions or other extraordinary and exceptional situations unique to the property, including, but not limited to physical conditions such as exceptional narrowness, shallowness, or topography, the strict application of the code requirements would result in unusual and exceptional practical difficulties or undue hardship upon the occupant/applicant of the property, provided that such difficulties or hardship are not caused by an act or omission of the occupant/applicant(i.e. not self-imposed); (2)the proposal will promote the general purpose of the standard for which the variance is requested equally well or better than would a proposal which complies with the standard for which the variance is requested; (3)the proposal will not diverge from the Land Use Code standards except in a nominal, inconsequential way when considered in the context of the neighborhood. This application is only for a variance to the Land Use Code. Building Code requirements will be determined and reviewed by the Building Department separately. When a building or sign permit is required for any work for which a variance has been granted, the permit must be obtained within 6 months of the date that the variance was granted. However, for good cause shown by the applicant, the Land Use Review Commission may consider a one-time 6 month extension if reasonable and necessary under the facts and circumstances of the case. An extension request must be submitted before 6 months from the date that the variance was granted has lapsed. Petitioner or Petitioner's Representative must be present at the meeting Location: VIRTUAL ONLY via Zoom (instructions will be emailed to the applicant the Friday or Monday prior to the hearing) Date: Second Thursday of the month Time: 8:30 a.m. Variance Address 135 Bockman Drive Petitioner's Name, Concept Signs & Graphics if not the Owner City Fort Collins, CO Petitioner's Relationship Sign contractor to the Owner is Zip Code 180525 Petitioner's Address 3307 S College Ave, Ste 102-A2 Owner's Name BONIUK INTERESTS LTD Petitioner's Phone# 970-221-2627 Code Section(s) 3.8.7.2- Permanent Signs-table B Petitioner's Email Jeff@conceptsignco.com Zoning District JGeneral Commercial Additional Representative's Name Justification(s) 3. Nominal and inconsequential Representative's Address Justification(s) 2. Equal to or better than Representative's Phone# Justification(s) 1. Hardship Representative's Email Reasoning WRITTEN STATEMENT EXPLAINING THE REASON FOR THE VARIANCE REQUEST REQUIRED VIA SEPARATE DOCUMENT. Date 12/12/2022 Signature � � EVERSIGN LLC 4518 W O St.Greeley,CO aba City of Fort Collins Zoning 970.221.2627 conceptsignco.com 281 N College Ave Fort Collins sales office:3307 S College Ave.Ste 102-A2 g Fort Collins, CO, 80525 12/12/2022 We are requesting a variance on behalf of Mudoch's Ranch&Home Supply.They are the tenant of the building on 135 Bockman Drive formerly occupied by JCPenney.The owner of the property is Boniuk Interests ltd.We are requesting to be allowed to exceed the 7'sign height restriction for their front sign.The board previously approved 8'6"signs on the South and East elevations to increase visibility and maintain brand cohesion.They did not allow our request for the West sign to increase to 12'height. This revised request is simply to allow the front sign to match the previously approved signs at the 8'6"height.The distance from S College Ave and the overall size of the building are considerable and we feel it is a reasonable request with no adverse effect on the surrounding community.The Murdoch's branding is consistently an oval with their name in the middle which does affect their readability.That is their national branding and deviating from that is not desirable in order to maintain recognition and consistency. This building frontage is over 350'from S College Ave and the building is over 300'long.A sign measuring under 125 square feet will not be a distraction to traffic at that distance.The previous sign was within the code but was significantly larger than our proposed request. Thank you for your consideration, Jeff Everhart 970-221-2627 jeff@conceptsignco.com ppp�-- L - MURDOCH fse�] 276474 DATE: 12.07.22 REQUISITE CHECKLIST ALL REQUIREMENTS MUST BE MET BEFORE BEING RELEASED TO PRODUCTION ❑ ❑X SURVEY ALL VECTOR AND/OR HIGH RESOLUTION ART ART CONFIRMED BY DATE CHECKED(Designer name):Joe Example 11.16.21 JAD05.04.22 ALL PAINT/VINYL/PRINT COLORS (CMYK or PMS)/ ALL STONE, BRICK, VENEER,AND FINISHES DESIGNER NOTES •NOTES(art received I remaining,etc.) NOTES NOTES NOTES NOTES NOTES RED LINE OVER TITLE BLOCK ON DRAWING PAGES INDICATES DRAWING IS NOT READY FOR PRODUCTION-ALL TBD ITEMS MUST BE RESOLVED. JONES SIGN Your Vision.Accomplished. • MURDOCH'S• Rq NCH&HOME SU PF�.`l SITEPLAN WORK S C O P E • D ; 'Appl�ence'6tore-• .•�. L �� WS.1 lr D/F INTERNALLY LIT MONUMENT SIGN (QTY 1) (7 cp fD 135 Bockmah Dr,Fort !� ' •allins,CO 80525 `-•• r Colboarii`Dr WS.1 !' � '�Co orado �itic I aS MN.1 WS.1 •I'Ort �olhn 1 a•sFap♦ �,, _ ws.1 CALTherapy �i � La a on Balance Ce to ers.. *. •' n�Coffee r}, rden•Italia «,� S r'' � � Itahen•.SS .�:'r+�• � ��LANDINGS`« "rKFC— � CODE ALLOWANCE Chicken•S E Boardwal Dr LIJz Mexle Gill •, INFORM • ,,,� Mexican•'S. Faith Property �♦ f _ _ '" Management • � t •f:+ -tom � •� _7` �� ♦ � r Ih Su`shi Korean BBQ ��m E-1— CLIENTAPPROVAL DATE Is SHEET NUMBER .f• J13NF—S SIGNr > 1 5BOCKMAN DR. jr Vision.Accomplished. 4'22 'D REMOVE SH ON W LANDLORD APPROVAL DATE 1 .0 ........ SALES REP:S.Steele I IS REVISED�SMURDDCH'S . ...o.E, ELEVATIONS 335'1 EQ EQ o 0 WEST ELEVATION SCALE 1132"=V-0" 286'-0" EQ EQ 17 w`o� SOUTH ELEVATION SCALE 1132"=V-0" 335'-8" Oil w EAST ELEVATION SCALE 1132"=1'-0" 16 REV. By EESCR1— CLIENTAPPROVAL DATE SHEET NUMBER Jos n:276474-R8 R MURDOCH'S �.IONES SIGN DATE:02.02.2022 sw NSE*n"oG°BH0R5EAN°BnBRsr°wxl.e usW ar°I�S.MOmriEDUONEw,ENT 135 BOCKMAN DR. 2.0 �.O jr Vision.Accomplished. DESIGNER: ErvumEW IcrvsnTrpnn LANDLORD APPROVAL DATE B I I FORT COLLINS,CO 80525 A E„sE„moo„,.„. SALES REP:S.Steele I 1s,w.a Jxc uPVATPBRON-REFRONTSIGNUNSIITONATCNSIZEroB X1f—(W'SS) PROD MGR:N.Wallace This is onorgnal unpublshetldrawng byJones Sign Co Inc.l['sforyourpersonal use-nconjunctonwth aprojectbeng plannetlforyou by JONES SIGN.n'sno[[o beshowntoanyoneoutsde ofyourorg-i-ion...ISito beusetl Mproduced cop ed or exh'b'tetl' any'-hi—Usfth'stles gn or[hesal'en[elementsofthstlesgn-nanysgntlonebyanyothercompany wtheutthe e,p—wi-i—perm n o ssiof JONES SIGN.sforbidden bylaw and carr es a cv forte ture of up to 25%ofthe purchase pnce of the gn.s JONES SIGN will endeavor to closely marc ors,h coluclud'ng PMS,where specfed,Wecannot guarantee axes matches due to varyng camps[b ty of surface meteran eo IS and pa nts used.All szesand d'mensonS are'Ilumated for dents concept an of project and a re not to be understood as III exactsze or exact scale. W.S.1 NEW S/F INTERNALLY LIT CABINET SIGN (Qty 3) SQUARE FOOTAGE:122.45 14'-4 718' MIURDOCH ' SD HOME S13??V FRONT VIEW SIDE VIEW SCALE:318"=Vi SCALE:318"=Vi .063 ALUMINUM RETURNS 1"X 2"ALUM TUBING FLEX FACE HELD WITH WEDGE CLAMP TX 3"ALUMINUM ANGLE .125 Aluminum Back SPECIFICATIONS 1.ALUMINUM TUBE,BUTTED&WELDED SIGN BOX 3 24 VDC 2.PANAFLEX FACE DIGITALLY PRINTED FIRST SURFACE WHITE LEDS 1 3..125"ALUMINUM BACK,CAULKED&POP-RIVETED TO FRAME 4..063'PRE-FINISHED ALUMINUM SKIN AT SIDES,POP RIVETED TO FRAME P-1 DIGITALLY PRINTED 5.6500K SIGNBOX3 SS WHITE LED'S FLEX FACE 318'X 3"TAPCON LDT SCREWS 6.LED POWER SUPPLY COLORS I FINISHES I I 7.TOGGLE SWITCH I SWITCH PLATE 8.1"X 2"ALUMINUM SUPPORTS ON 4 FT CENTERS P-1 PAINT BLACK SATIN LOW-VOLTAGE WIRING 9.LIFTING EYEBOLT,MIN.(2)NO MORE THAN 8 FT.APART ® DP-1 DIGITALLY PRINTED FLEX FACE THROUGH WEATHERPROOF CONDUIT '?.4NCH HOME 10.MOUNTING HARDWARE TO SUIT FIELD CONDITIONS WHITE TO POWER SUPPLY IN UL APPROVED TO MATCH PMS 1215 C POWER SUPPLY BOX WITH DISCONNECT SWITCH _TO MATCH PMS 174 C NOTES TO MATCH PMS 448 C -REMOVE AND SCRAP EXISTING WALL MOUNTED SIGN DETAIL VIEW NIGHT VIEW SCALE:1 112'=V-0' SCALE:3116"=1'-0" REV. By DESCRIPTION CLIENTAPPROVAL DATE SHEET NUMBER JOB n:276474-R8 x MURDOCH'S �.IONES SIGN DATE:02.02.2022 sw NDETAILoG°EH0R5EANoteneRsrowxle sw A ar°NS.MODIrIEDMONeMErvT 135 BOCKMAN DR. /�.O LIP Vision.Accomplished. DESIGNER: oNeMEM IDNSATroAN ' FORTCOLLINS,CO 80525 J 'o.122 Do REVIEE"RpRouo EaoM MTlorvzwlrHs LANDLORD APPROVAL DATE SALES REP:S.Steele 12IRS J1.22 xc UPDAlEFIRENsTOREFRONTSIDAUNStlTONnTCHSIZEToes'xif4Tre•1wsz1 PROJ MGR:N.Wallace This is an orgnal unpubl Shetl drawing by Jones Sig,Co IhiItI.for your personal USSR,conjunct onwth a Orb-beegplan,etl for you by JON ES SI GN.ItI,—I,beshownto anyoneoutstle of yourorgan'zalon nor's[to beusetl reprotlucetl cop etl or exh'b'[etl'n anyfash'on.Useof[h'stles gn orthe sal'en[elemen[sof[hstlesgn-n anysgn tlone by any Other company w[hou[[he express write,perm ssionof JONES SIGN,s forb'dden bylaw and cars es a dv forte Lure of up ro 25Po of the purchase price of the s gn.JONES SIGN will endeavor[o closely march colors,nclud'ng PMS,where spec f Sd,We cannot guarantee exaa matches due to vary ng camps[b ty of surface meter aIS and pants used.All s zes and d'mens ons are'Ilumated for cl'ents concept an of project and are not to be understood as be ng exact s ze or exact scale. IVIN 1 D/F INTERNALLY LIT MONUMENT SIGN (Qty 1) SQUARE FOOTAGE:85.4 12'-0' V-6114" II II enney n•-o° EXISTING � Il SIDE VIEW PROPOSED 1 S'-11 1/2" SCALE:3/8"=Ti FRONT 1 BACK VIEW SCALE:3/8"=V-0" t , SPECIFICATIONS 1.REUSE EXISTING BASE ' 2.1"X 2"X.125"ALUMINUM TUBE FRAME 3..063"ALUMINUM RETURN PTD P-1 4.PANAFLEX FACE DIGITALLY PRINTED FIRST SURFACE DPA COLORS I FINISHES 5.SIGNBOX 36500K DS WHITE LED'S _ P-1 PAINTBLACKSATIN 6.LED POWER SUPPLY 7.PAINT EXISTING SCH 40 6"PIPE AND HARDWARE P-1 ® DP-1 DIGITALLY PRINTED FLEX FACE 8.ATTACH SIGN TO EXISTING PIPES WHITE 9.CAPON EXISTING BASE TO BE PAINTED P-1 TO MATCH PMS 1215 C _TO MATCH PMS 174 C NOTES TO MATCH PMS 448 C -REMOVE AND SCRAP EXISTING SIGN CABINET NIGHT VIEW SCALE:3116"=V-0" REV. By SEBCRIPIION CLIENTAPPROVAL DATE SHEET NUMBER JOB n:276474-R8 x MURDOCH'S �.IONES SIGN DATE:02.02.2022 sw NDETAILoG°EH0R5EANoteneRsrowxle usw A ar°Ns.MODIFIEDM°NUMENT 135 BOCKMAN DR. 4.0 lll'VISIOII.Accomplished. DESIGNER: DNDMEM IDNSATrDAN ' FORTCOLLINS,CO 80525 'omu eO RE MOVES SHROUD FROM MTNUUMENION >hs LANDLORD APPROVAL DATE ' SALES REP:S.Steele 12IRS Jxc U-IFIREN OREFR°NTSIONUNstlTOMATCNSIZET°es'xif4Tre•1wsz1 PROJ MGR:N.Wallace This is an orgnal unpubl Shetl drawing by Jones Sig,Co IhiItI.for your personal USSR,conjunct onwth a projectbe,gplannetl for you by JON ES SI GN.ItI,—I,beshownto anyoneoutstle of yourorgan'zalon nor's[to beusetl reprotlucetl cop etl or exh'b'[etl'n anyfash'on.Useof[h'stles gn orthe sal'en[elemen[sof[hstlesgn-n anysgn tlone by any Other company w[hou[[he express write,perm ssionof JONES SIGN,s forb'dden bylaw and cars es a dv forte Lure of up ro 25Po of the purchase price of the s gn.JONES SIGN will endeavor[o closely march colors,nclud'ng PMS,where spec f Sd,We cannot guarantee exaa matches due to vary ng camps[b ty of surface meter aIS and pants used.All s zes and d'mens ons are'Ilumated for cl'ents concept an of project and are not to be understood as be ng exact s ze or exact scale. IVIN 1 D/F INTERNALLY LIT MONUMENT SIGN (Qty 1) SQUARE FOOTAGE:85.4 12'-0" ADD EYEBOLTS @ 1'-6114" PICK POINTS g" 3'-0" 3'-0" T—�o" i .063"ALUMINUM RETAINER DOME HEAD SCREW .125"ROLLED TAB GUSSETS AS REQUIRED .125"CAM CUT RIB FLEX FACE WEDGE CLIP 2'6" ILLUMINATE W/SIGNBOX3 DS 6500K 3'-0" FLEX FACE M 4,_2" EXISTING SCH40 6"PIPE 6.625"O.D. 1"X 2"X.125"ALUMINUM TUBE FRAME 3"X 3"X 3/16"FABRICATED ALUMINUM ANGLE N EXISTING SCH40 6"PIPE 6.625"O.D. 2'-8 3/4" 10'1 C.T.C. a FRONT SECTION DETAIL _ SIDE SECTION DETAIL SCALE:1/2"=Vi 16-11 1/2" SCALE:1/2"=1'-0' REV. By oEBCR1— CLIENTAPPROVAL DATE SHEET NUMBER JOB n:276474-R8 MURDOCH'S �.IONES SIGN DATE:02.02.2022 sw &pE*n"oG°EH0R5EAN°EnERsr°wxl.e uSw a°Ns.MomnE°uorvureErv, 135 BOCKMAN DR. 5. jr Vision.Accomplished. DESIGNER:J.DoWden °N HT IcrvsnTrpnn LANDLORD APPROVAL DATE I I FORT COLLINS,CO 80525 AMo",E„sE„.o„,.„. SALES REP:S.Steele �s,w.a uxc ucoAm rnonrsTORe rRorvT5Ir3dlwstlTO NnroRsrzEroe'6x1I.5Ire•Iw's.P) PROJ MGR:N.Wallace This is Sh orgnal uCp.bl Dh.d drawing by Jones Sign Co Inch'.for your personal use-n conjunct onwth aprojectbeng planned for you by JON ES SI GN.It'snott,besh=H,ahyoneoutsde of yourorgan'zalonnor's[to be Used reproduceticoped or exhIb'tetl'n any fashion.Use of this desgn orthesal'en[elemen[s of the desgn-n Shysgh DO-by any Other componywth—the express wrtten perm....G of JONES SIGN.sforbidden by law and Carres acv forte ture of Up to 25%ofthe purchase price of thesgn.JONES SIGN will endeavorto closely march colors,nclud'ng PINS,where specfed,We cannot guarantee exaamatchesdue to varyrig camps[b ty of surface meteraIS and pants used.All sue.and d'mens Cns are'Iluma[ed forclients conceptan of project and a re not to be understood as t rig exactsze or exact scale. Agenda Item 6 STAFF REPORT January 12, 2023 Noah Beals, Senior City Planner/Zoning PROJECT ZBA220042 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Address: 4114 Rolling Gate Rd. Owner/Petitioner: Susan and Terry Gibbons Zoning District: R-L Code Section: 4.4(D)(2)(d) Project Description: This is a request for three pergolas to encroach 4.5 feet into the interior 5-foot side setback. COMMENTS: 1. Background: The property was annexed into the City in 1980 part of the Horsetooth Harmony West annexation. It was later subdivided in 1996 part of the Gates at Woodridge PUD Fourth subdivision. The request is for three pergolas to be installed 6 inches along the north side of the property. The pergolas are freestanding structures that require a 5-foot setback from the property line. The north property is also delineated by a 6-foot-tall privacy fence. The pergolas would be placed along the privacy fence. The pergolas are 2 feet taller than the fence and include a lattice within this 2-foot area. 2. Applicant's statement of justification: See petitioner's letter. 3. Staff Conclusion and Findings: Under Section 2.10.4(H), staff recommends approval and finds that: • The variance is not detrimental to the public good. • The pergolas extend 2 feet beyond the 6-foot privacy fence with semi-transparent lattices. • Two pergolas are 7.5 feet in width and the other is 5.5 feet. Therefore, the variance requests 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 4. Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of APPEAL ZBA220042. Item#6 -Page 1 Fort Collins Application Request for Variance from the Land Use Code The Land Use Review Commission has been granted the authority to approve variances from the requirements of Articles 3 and 4 of the Land Use Code. The Land Use Review Commission shall not authorize any use in a zoning district other than those uses which are specifically permitted in the zoning district. The Commission may grant variances where it finds that the modification of the standard would not be detrimental to the public good. Additionally, the variance request must meet at least one of the following justification reasons: (1)by reason of exceptional physical conditions or other extraordinary and exceptional situations unique to the property, including, but not limited to physical conditions such as exceptional narrowness, shallowness, or topography, the strict application of the code requirements would result in unusual and exceptional practical difficulties or undue hardship upon the occupant/applicant of the property, provided that such difficulties or hardship are not caused by an act or omission of the occupant/applicant (i.e. not self-imposed); (2)the proposal will promote the general purpose of the standard for which the variance is requested equally well or better than would a proposal which complies with the standard for which the variance is requested; (3)the proposal will not diverge from the Land Use Code standards except in a nominal, inconsequential way when considered in the context of the neighborhood. This application is only for a variance to the Land Use Code. Building Code requirements will be determiner and reviewed by the Building Department separately. When a building or sign permit is required for any work for which a variance has been granted, the permit must be obtained within 6 months of the date that the variance was granted. However, for good cause shown by the applicant, the Land Use Review Commission may consider a one-time 6 month extension if reasonable and necessary under the facts and circumstances of the case. An extension request must be submitted before 6 months from the date that the variance was granted has lapsed. Petitioner or Petitioner's Representative must be present at the meeting Location: 300 LaPorte Ave, City Hall Council Chambers (instructions will be emailed to the applicant the Monday prior to the hearing) Date: Second Thursday of the month Time: 8:30 a.m. Variance Address Petitioner's Name, N/A 4114 Rollin Gate Rd. if not the Owner City Fort Collins, CO Petitioner's Relationship to the Owner is Zip Code 80526 Petitioner's Address Owner's Name Susan and Terry Gibbons Petitioner's Phone# 970-215-8028 Code Section(s) Land use code Petitioner's Email susanevb@gmail.com Zoning District Low density residential Additional Representative's Name Justification(s) Choose One from List(See attached) Representative's Address Justification(s) Additional Justification Representative's Phone# Justification(s) Additional Justification Representative's Email Reasoning WRITTEN STATEMENT EXPLAINING THE REASON FOR THE VARIANCE REQUEST REQUIRED VIA SEPARATE DOCUMENT. Date I December 13, 2022 _ Signature JurarL��GG°rem We submitted application B2208364 and are requesting a variance for the following reason. We have owned and lived in the house on 4114 Rolling Gate Road since 2002. A few months ago, our new neighbors built an 8 foot tall, 100 square foot shed and placed it in the corner of their property approximately 30 inches from the property line. When the shed was built, it blocked our view of the open space behind our property. While we cannot recover the view, we are now left with a prominent view of the shed from the majority of the windows in our home and our patio is only 25 feet from the shed. As we are looking to minimize the impact of this shed on our view, we have looked at a variety of options. Because of the established landscaping, there is a 18 year old maple tree in the corner of our yard that has an extensive root system that eliminates the possibility of planting something to hide the view of the shed. We have a landscape company that offered us a solution of placing a decorative pergola next to the fence that will give us a more aesthetically pleasant view than the shed. The city requirement to place the pergola 5 feet from the fence would negate the benefit of improving the view. The windows in our house are positioned such that a pergola five feet from the fence would not accomplish the desired outcome - it would no longer block the shed. Additionally, the maple tree would be in the way. We have applied and received HOA approval for the project as it was submitted. In fact, we received an email from them praising the design and loving the look that it will add to the neighborhood. Clearly, this change would not be detrimental to the public good - quite the contrary. It would only deviate from the land use code in an inconsequential way when considered in the context of the neighborhood. Thank you for considering our request for a variance and we look forward to discussing it with you. Susan and Terry Gibbons dslis�l t iHI 41 t;l IM tt�j°III Property Plan a� Project to be built adjacent OL to existing fence on property line we -mv Project Area 6' r 4114 Rolling Gate Rd an Fort Collins, CO 80526 o S z rh _ all: �o Z ss -- m � C7 110.17 R - AQ sl ;=� g � L000 ►i3ijill Plan View ra'li�e` x� Ex.Fence Ex.Shed �l i I � sa X _ Tree Not Shown Ex.Walkway Privacy Screening PHASE TWO Panels ai Planting Paver Extension i PHASE TWO =Grill � E Ex.Planting 1 I 1 1 � 4 Residence Dining Area PHASE TWO Pergola W I2'xll' Z LL) ,� LA Ex.Fence O .s II I an Ex.Patio Seating Area f! f f 1 r ! Relocated Arbor — L100 Outer Panelr . See L102 y - - A ��� •�� �_���� ,plc �p�, � +r a - ►!3lj�l! llt!!: OUTER SECTION (2 TOTAL) a ; Front View Side View ` �26 2x2 Purlin 46„ 2x2 Purlin 4x4 Rafter 4x4 Rafter 6x6 Beam Match Angles 6x6 Beam of Beam&Strut Outdeco Panel 24x70 (trim to 20x66) 4x6 Strut 4x6 Strut 4x6 Post —4x6 Post W 10 Frame U z 8 � 8 N ;o O as m m_ V 2x6 Planter —2x6 Planter 6.9, 3"+� 2, —I--►�! 12"Dia Footing I I 30"Depth I I I I ° L102 llt!!: CENTER SECTION (1 TOTAL) a ; Front View Side View ` W; Same lumber sizes as outer sections Same Dimensions as outer sections Custom Lattice 1x2 horizontal w/1.5"gap 1x1 vertical(behind)w/2"gap w 10 Frame U z � g N ;o O as m m_ V —No Planter —No Planter on center section on center section -i'6" ! ! 12"Dia Footing 30"Depth ! o � d; L103 ►i3ij�ii Framing Connections a ; 4"Structural Screws to Q connect 2x2 to f 4x4 rafter below 6"Structural Screws B a to connect 4x4 R$ s rafter to 6x6 beam below 1.5"Exterior Screws to connect screen 6"Structural Screws to panel to 2x2 behind (4 each side) connect 4x6 post to 6x6 b am above (screws on back side of po t) 8"Structural Screws w to connect 6x6 beam to U 4x6 strut below w � g 4x6 Posts to be set in 12"dia.x 30"deep� 6"Structural Screws to LO _ hole with concrete connect 4x6 strut to 6x6 be im above N s 6"Structural Screws to 0 .s connect 4x6 strut to 4x6 pot an 4"Structural crews to connect 2x to 4x6 post 6"Structu al Screws to connec 4x6 post to 6x6 beam above L104 1 ►131j�11 ii,l;�l. Planting 8T Irrigation i ,� a ; Reinstall stockpiled mulch Provide Irrigation to in project area(-120 SF) `' both Raised Bed Planters New 2"Columnar Apple Install new drip pipe in project area (50 LF) *01 TIPM W \ / W � g [A ;� 11 0 .s \ an m_ SH NO, � V I 1 1 L105 1 i e I ''i rrru�rrrrml� '��11�I= • �'1_��i.�;�--p �I��lii,