The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About05/11/2023 - Land Use Review Commission - SUPPLEMENTAL DOCUMENTS - Regular MeetingLand Use Review Commission Hearing Date: May 11, 2023 Supplemental Document Log Any written comments or documents received after the agenda packet was published are listed here. Unless otherwise stated, these documents are included in the online “Supplemental Documents” for this meeting. DISCUSSION AGENDA: 1. Item ZBA230008 • No Items Received 2. Item ZBA230009 • Citizen emails/letters: o 1 email was received in opposition to the variance request. The letter is included on pages 2-3 of the Supplemental Document Log. GENERAL CITIZEN EMAILS/LETTERS: • No Items Received EXHIBITS RECEIVED DURING HEARING: Item # Exhibit # Description: ZBA230009 1 Applicants presented additional images and information via PowerPoint. The presentation is included in pages 4 – 24 of the Supplemental Document Log. 1 From:Noah Beals To:Kory Katsimpalis Subject:FW: Appeal ZBA230009 Date:Tuesday, May 9, 2023 10:51:23 AM From: michael bashkinguitars.com <michael@bashkinguitars.com> Sent: Monday, May 8, 2023 1:54 PM To: Noah Beals <nbeals@fcgov.com> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Appeal ZBA230009 Hi Noah: I am writing to express my concerns with Appeal ZBA230009 at 318 N. Sherwood Street for 3 variances. As the immediate adjoining neighbor, my family and I will be directly impacted by the requested variances. Unfortunately, due to prior travel plans I am unable to attend the hearing on May 11 th. A major concern is the lack of information about the accessory building with habitable space. No plans are yet available online to evaluate the proposed structure. Is the entire floor space dedicated to habitable space, or is some of it a garage or workshop? What is the total height of the building and how high are the windows (they will directly look down into our backyard and house). Is the foundation of the building 600 sq ft with a full second floor, or is the foundation 1,198 sq ft with additional square footage above? Where on the property is the proposed building? What is the intended use (Airbnb, Vrbo, full-time rental)? Does the proposed variance for the second floor overhang effectively reduce the 5 foot setback from other properties? Is installing a fence part of the plan to mitigate the reduction in the amount of privacy affecting neighbors? Also of concern is the scope and size of the variances for the proposed structure. The variances call for a doubling of allowable total floor area from 600 to 1,198 sq ft, and increase in allowable eave height from 13 feet to 17.6 feet, and a second floor overhang. These are of significant excess of the current code. In effect, this could be adding a second full–size house on lot, not an accessory building zoned for single family medium density. Again, I would like to have more information on the planned structure. Finally, the Land Use Review Commission was formed to hear cases where: 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 such property. Clearly, there is no exceptional undue hardship which would allow such a large variance from the existing code. If there is exceptional undue hardship, then what is it? 2. The proposal will promote the general purpose of the standard for which 2 the variance is requested equally well or better than the would a proposal which complies with the standard for which the variance is requested. The proposal is asking for a substantially larger structure than is currently allowed and there is no apparent reason why this serves the standard equally or better. It is simply to build a structure twice the standard. 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 the variance would not result in a substantial detriment to the public good. The proposal clearly deviates from the current land use code in a consequential way given the overreach of the variance in size and height, in effect a second home, and would change the character of the neighborhood with single family homes most of which are from the early 1900’s, and by affecting the viewscape and privacy of the neighbors. I regret that I cannot attend the meeting and hope that the Land Use Review Commission and the developer can provide more information about the project before a final ruling is made. Thank you- Michael Bashkin Guitars 1400 East Olive Ct., unit G Fort Collins, CO. 80524 970-495-1011 www.bashkinguitars.com https://www.fretboardjournal.com/author/michael-bashkin/ 3 318 N SHERWOOD St. Accessory Structure w/ Habitable Space Permit #: B2300875 GC: Jason Harrington, Harrington Construction LLC Architect: Olexa Tkachenko, DNA Design+Architecture Variance Request Hearing 5/11/2023 EXHIBIT 1 4 Current Design West Facing (Faces Primary House) East Facing (Faces Alley) EXHIBIT 1 5 Current Design These images are of 318 N Sherwood St House & Accessory Building, both currently in permitting, Showing the structures on the lot within the neighborhood. The images are overlaid using the most recent Google Earth Data for this area. EXHIBIT 1 6 Initial Concept Review 318 N Sherwood went through a Conceptual Review on Feb 3, 2022, with Brandy Harras (DRC), Dave Betley (Engineer) and Pete Wray (Planner), there was no indication that there would be any issues with the structure as drawn other than making sure the naming was correct for permitting. We believe this structure fits within the neighborhood character and will not negatively impact surrounding homes. The design has taken into consideration the surrounding homes as well as the neighborhood and other new Accessory Structures being built in the same neighborhood district. Many of the new builds in this area are incorporating modern craftsman, mid-modern and industrial farmhouse stepping away from/replacing the original “shotgun” homes that made up this area and are still found within this neighborhood district. EXHIBIT 1 7 Variance Request Allowable Square Footage Article 4-Districts, Division 4.8-Neighborhood Conservation, Medium Density District Section D- Land Use Standards (2) Allowable Floor Area on Lots (d):“For the purpose of calculating allowable floor area, the floor area of the following spaces and building elements shall not be included: The first two hundred fifty (250) square feet of a detached accessory building, provided that it is located behind a street-fronting principal building and is separated from such principal building by at least ten (10) feet. (4)Accessory Buildings with Habitable Space.…Any such structure containinghabitable space that is located behind a street-fronting principal building shallcontain a maximum of six hundred (600) square feet of floor area. EXHIBIT 1 8 Variance Request Allowable Square Footage Current Design: *Does Not Exceed Maximum Required Height of 24’ (Feet) *Within FAR Calculations *Ceiling Height Does Not Affect Overall Building Height * Reducing Ceiling Height to 7’6” would not cause us to change the exterior shape * Square Footage of Structure: Upper: 600sqft if ceiling height=9’ (Feet) Upper: 0sqft if ceiling height=7’6” Garage:598sqft Total: 1198sqft 24’37’ EXHIBIT 1 9 Variance Request Allowable Eave Height Article 4-Districts, Division 4.8-Neighborhood Conservation, Medium Density District Section E-Dimensional Standards (6) Eave Height: The exterior eave height of an eave along a side lot line shall not exceed thirteen (13) feet from grade for a dwelling unit located at the rear of the lot or an accessory building with habitable space. An eave of a dormer or similar architectural feature may exceed thirteen (13) feet if set back two (2) feet from the wall below and does not exceed twenty-five (25) percent of the wall length. EXHIBIT 1 10 Variance Request Allowable Eave Height The following pages show examples where the Zoning Department has been lenient in allowing exceptions to the eave height rule and approved/allowed structures to be permitted with an eave height greater than 13’ (feet). All photos with dimensions have been measured with a Leica Disto D2 Measuring Device and have been taken within the period of 4/24/23- 5/1/23 EXHIBIT 1 11 Eave Height’s Greater Than 13’ Within the Medium Density District Upper Eave Height: 17’1.5” Lower Eave 11’3-1/4” No Step Back Dormer Area 80% EXHIBIT 1 12 412 N Sherwood Upper Eave Height:18’ Mid Level Eave Height: 16’11” Overall Length: Shed Roof Dormer 50% Eave Height’s Greater Than 13’ Within the Medium Density District EXHIBIT 1 13 128 Sherwood St Eave Height: 16’7” Eave Height’s Greater Than 13’ Within the Medium Density District EXHIBIT 1 14 926 W Mulberry St Final Inspection: 4/1/21 Inspector: Marcus Coldiron Upper Eave Height: 18’ Lower Eave Height: 14’3-3/4” Eave Height’s Greater Than 13’ Within the Medium Density District EXHIBIT 1 15 612 W Mulberry St Upper Eave Height: 14’9-3/4” Lower Eave Height: 13’3-1/2” Eave Height’s Greater Than 13’ Within the Medium Density District EXHIBIT 1 16 321 S Whitcomb Eave Height: 16’9” Full Length Dormer Eave Height’s Greater Than 13’ Within the Medium Density District EXHIBIT 1 17 209 S Sherwood Eave Height: 16’-8-3/4” Eave Height’s Greater Than 13’ Within the Medium Density District EXHIBIT 1 18 116 N Grant Structure Permitted/Finaled at 1092 Sqft w/ 492sqft @ 2 nd Floor Dormer Exceeds 50% Of Wall Length Eave Height’s Greater Than 13’ Within the Medium Density District EXHIBIT 1 19 722 W Mountain Upper Eave Height: 14’3-1/4” Dormer Exceeds 50% Of Wall Length Eave Height’s Greater Than 13’ Within the Medium Density District EXHIBIT 1 20 Variance Request Building Design Article 4-Districts, Division 4.8-Neighborhood Conservation, Medium Density District Section F- Development Standards (d): A second floor shall not overhang the lower front or side exterior walls of a new or existing building. EXHIBIT 1 21 Variance Request Building Design The access, and thus “front”, of the accessory structure has been designed to be from the alley (Alley Facing).The “back” of the structure, and where the overhang in this variance request derives from, faces the primary structure on the property (primary structure is Street Facing) creating a common backyard area between the structures. The overhang serves to limit exposure to environmental conditions while occupants are using the backyard/accessory structure. Accessory StructurePrimary Structure Common backyard EXHIBIT 1 22 Variance Request Building Design The residence at 612 W Mulberry is an example of a second-floor overhang at both ends of the house that has been passed through zoning. EXHIBIT 1 23 Variance Request Summation We are requesting leniency on the presented zoning issues that we believe are consistent features of, and found throughout, the Old Town neighborhoods. We are not attempting to callout or criticize anyone for the buildings we have used as examples to strengthen our requests. We have presented accessory structures built within the last 10 years in this neighborhood district that have similar details or design concepts also used to create an interesting design collection. To enforce a tight set of rules would lead to an Old Town that looks more like a suburban landscape or regulated HOA. The appeal of living and building within Old Town is the eclectic mix of homes that fall within the American Vernacular Architecture and our goal is to create an accessory structure that fits in, and adds to the charm of, Old Town. Thank you. EXHIBIT 1 24