The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About08/12/2021 - Land Use Review Commission - AGENDA - Regular MeetingRalph Shields, Chair Shelley LaMastra, Vice Chair David Lawton John McCoy Taylor Meyer lan Shuff Butch Stockover Council Liaison: Shirley Peel Staff Liaison: Noah Beals LOCATION: Meeting will be held virtually 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 AUGUST 12, 2021 8:30 AM Participation for this remote Land Use Review Commission meeting will be available online or by phone. No one will be allowed to attend in person. Public Participation (Online): Individuals who wish to address the Land Use Review Commission via remote public participation can do so through Zoom at https://fc�ov.zoom.us/i/96817003547 Individuals participating in the Zoom session should also watch the meeting through that site. The meeting will be available to join beginning at 8:15 a.m. on August 12, 2021 Participants should try to sign in prior to 8:30 a.m. if possible. For public comments, the Chair will ask participants to click the "Raise Hand" button to indicate you would like to speak at that time. Staff will moderate the Zoom session to ensure all participants have an opportunity to address the Board or Commission. In order to participate: Use a laptop, computer, or internet-enabled smartphone. (Using earphones with a microphone will greatly improve your audio). You need to have access to the internet. Keep yourself on muted status. If you have any technical difficulties during the hearing, please email iluther@fc�ov.com. Public Participation (Phone): If you do not have access to the internet, you can call into the hearing via phone. The number to dial is +1 346 248 7799 or +1 669 900 9128, with webinar ID: 968 1700 3547. (Continued on next page) Land Use Review Commission Page 2 August 12, 2021 The meeting will be available beginning at 8:15 a.m. Please call in to the meeting prior to 8:30 a.m., if possible. For public comments, the Chair will ask participants to click the "Raise Hand" button to indicate you would like to speak at that time — phone participants will need to hit *9 to do this. Staff will be moderating the Zoom session to ensure all participants have an opportunity to address the Committee. Once you join the meeting: keep yourself on muted status. If you have any technical difficulties during the hearing, please email jluther@fc�ov.com. Documents to Share: If residents wish to share a document or presentation, the Staff Liaison needs to receive those materials via email by 24 hours before the meeting. Individuals uncomfortable or unable to access the Zoom platform or unable to participate by phone are encouraged to participate by emailing general public comments you may have to nbeals@fcgov.com. The Staff Liaison will ensure the Board or 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. As required by City Council Ordinance 061, 2020, a determination has been made that holding an in-person hearing would not be prudent and that the matters to be heard are pressing and require prompt consideration. The written determination is contained in the agenda materials. • 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 1. APPEAL ZBA210029 Address: 511 Whedbee St. Owner: Joshua and Alaina Belanger Petitioner: Allen Curtis Zoning District: N-C-M Code Section: 4.8(E)(4) Project Description: This is a request for a variance for a new carport to encroach 3.83 feet into the 5-foot side yard setback. 2. APPEAL ZBA210030 Address: 1606 Burlington Ct Owner: Nick Berger Petitioner: Tad Bjorlie Zoning District: R-L Code Section: 4.4(D)(2)(c) Project Description: This is a request for a variance to allow a deck to encroach 3 feet into the required 15-foot setback. Land Use Review Commission Page 3 August 12, 2021 3. APPEAL ZBA210031 Address: 2242 Primrose Dr. Owner/Petitioner: Stacey Hogan Zoning District: U-E Code Section: 4.2(D)(2) Project Description: This is a request to build an accessory building (shed) encroaching a total of 15 feet into the required 25-foot rear-yard setback and encroaching a total of 17 feet into the required 20-foot side-yard setback. 4. APPEAL ZBA210032 Address: 3001 Sombrero Ln. Owner/Petitioner: Tim Fangmeier Zoning District: R-L Code Section: 3.8.3(1) Project Description: This is a request to operate a home occupation that offers appointment hours between 6:OOam and 11:OOpm. The Land Use Code states that home occupations must be operated between the hours of 8:OOam and 6:OOpm. 5. APPEAL ZBA210033 Address: Owner: Petitioner: 501 Edwards St. On Track Homes, LLC Adam Jaspers Zoning District: N-C-M Code Section: 4.8(D)(2)(a)2; 4.8(E)(4) Project Description: This is a request for a variance to increase the maximum buildable floor area by 80 square feet to 2480 square feet, and to encroach 5.8 feet into the required 15-foot street side-yard setback. • OTHER BUSINESS • ADJOURNMENT Jennifer Luther From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Hi Noah, Ralph Shields <rshields@bellisimoinc.com> Wednesday, July 21, 2021 4:10 PM Noah Beals Jennifer Luther [EXTERNAL] Re: Land Use Review Commission (LURC) formerly ZBA, Remote Hearings I agree with staff's recommendation, thanks. Thanks Ralph Shields 970.231.7665 From: Noah Beals <nbeals@fcgov.com> Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 2021 2:49 PM To: Ralph Shields <rshields@bellisimoinc.com> Cc: Jennifer Luther <jluther@fcgov.com> Subject: Land Use Review Commission (LURC) formerly ZBA, Remote Hearings Hello Chair-person Shields, Since May 2020 the Land Use Review Commission (LURC) has conducted a remote hearing. These remote hearings appear to have met the needs of the board members and the applicants. The concerns that prompted these remote meetings are beginning dissipate but are not eliminated. Health risks during a world-wide pandemic • Vaccinations continuing to be administered • Difficulties in coordinating logistics for an in-person meeting or hybrid of such It is staff recommendation to continue with a remote hearing for August 2021 meetings of the LURC and revaluate for September meeting. We understand that City Council and Planning and Zoning Commission have moved to a hybrid meeting for public hearings. We are hoping to get more feed back from their experiences before proceeding. Please respond to this email with your agreement with this recommendation or other suggestions for these hearings. Kind Regards, Noah Beals Senior City Planner-Zoning � City of Fort Collins 970 416-2313 F��t��lir�� . �41aCtolm Baldri�e 1 aSi uhil i�val ii r Ar ird �'SIL' �ku�lrrl Ka�{.F}.t'n! Ralph Shields, Chair Shelley La Mastra, Vice Chair David Lawton John McCoy Taylor Meyer lan Shuff Butch Stockover Council Liaison: Shirley Peel Staff Liaison: Noah Beals LOCATION: Virtual Hearing The City of Fort Collins will make reasonable accommodations for access to City services, programs, and activities and will make special communication arrangements for persons with disabilities. Please call 221-6515 (TDD 224-6001) for assistance. REGULAR MEETING J U LY 8, 2021 8:30 AM • CALL TO ORDER and ROLL CALL All commission members except Shuff, LaMastra and Stockover were present. • APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM PREVIOUS MEETING Meyer made a motion, seconded by Shields to approve the June 10, 2021 Minutes. The motion was adopted unanimously, with Shields abstaining. • CITIZEN PARTICIPATION (Items Not on the Agenda) Council Havelda introduced Aaron Guin, a new member of the City Attorney's office, who joined the meeting to observe the Hearing. • APPEALS FOR VARIANCE TO THE LAND USE CODE 1. APPEAL ZBA210025 —APPROVED Address: 1550 Reeves Dr. Owner/Petitioner: Anurag Agrawal Zoning District: L-M-N Code Section: 3.8.11(C)(5) Project Description: This is a request to extend the existing rear-yard fence along the public sidewalk. The existing fence encroaches 2 feet into the 2-foot setback from the sidewalk and the proposed fence is requesting to match the existing encroachment. Staff Presentation: Beals showed slides relevant to the appeal and discussed the variance request, noting it is a corner property in Registry Ridge neighborhood. Land Use Code requires a 2-foot setback from the street. There is an existing fence that encloses the backyard which is already encroaching the sidewalk. Proposal is to extend the existing fence. Engineering was consulted and the applicant will need to get Zoning Board of Appeals Page 2 June 10, 2021 approval from Engineering. Engineering initially thought they may have a concern with the sight distance triangle, however, upon further review they determined it would not be an issue from a sight distance perspective. Applicant Presentation: Applicants, Anurag Agrawal and Debolina Sen, 1550 Reeves Dr, addressed the board and agreed to have the hearing held remotely. The fence already existed when they purchased the house in 2016. They discussed their plans with the HOA to extend the fence to allow for more space. There is a fountain in their yard which takes up a lot of space. There is also an Excel Energy pipeline in the way if they were to build the fence to meet code requirements. Chair Shields asked whether the new fence would match the existing fence. Applicant responded that it would match. Audience Participation: Jean Aimes, 6851 Ranger Dr, addressed the commission. She is a neighbor and does not have any issues with the fence. She was also curious whether the fence would match the existing and is happy to hear that it will. Commission Discussion: Commission Member Meyer does not have any problems with the request. It seems reasonable, especially when considering the gas line. Chair Shields agrees with Meyer's comments. Boardmember Meyer made a motion, seconded by Lawton, to approve ZBA210025 for the following reasons: The granting of the modification will not diverge from the standard but in a nominal, inconsequential way, when considered in the context of the neighborhood, and will continue to advance the purpose of the Land Use Code contained in Section 1.2.2 with the following findings: The existing fence along the property and the fence on the abutting tract encroach the same distance, and the proposed fence does not extend the full side of the west wall of the house, and there are exceptional physical conditions with the gas line installed where the fence will go to meet the Land Use Code Yeas: Meyer, Shuff, Lawton and McCoy. Nays: none. THE MOTION CARRIED, THE ITEM WAS APPROVED. 2. APPEAL ZBA210026 - APPROVED Address: 2026 Bear Mountain Dr. Owner: Omnia Cum Deo LLC Petitioner: Mark Bruder. Zoning District: I Code Section: 3.8.7.2(B) Table (B) Project Description: This is a request for a variance to the required sign height in the Residential Sign District. The request is to allow all wall signs, both currently proposed and future signs, for this building to extend an additional 1 foot beyond the required 2-foot height limit. Staff Presentation: Beals showed slides relevant to the appeal and discussed the variance request, noting it is a new mixed-use industrial building and is surrounded by non-residential use buildings. It is in the residential sign district, industrial areas which typically abut residential areas and are placed in the residential sign district for additional restrictions on signage. This property does not abut any residential properties but is in the vicinity of some. Overall request is to have a blanket approval for wall signs placed on the Zoning Board of Appeals Page 3 June 10, 2021 building to be 3 feet instead of the 2 feet allowed by the code. He showed slides which had images of the various sign proposals. Applicant Presentation: Applicant, Jay Gerdes addressed the board and agreed to the remote proceedings. Two tenants of the building would have to drastically modify their logos to make them legible and within the code. He feels that this would not have a negative impact whatsoever to anyone in the neighborhood. This would level the playing field to businesses in the area. Audience Participation: none Commission Discussion: Commission member Meyer asked Beals if the commercial businesses to the South fall under the same signage code. Beals explained that the only property not part of the district is a place of worship. The City is looking at re-calibrating the district in the future but has not happened. Meyer thinks it is a reasonable request. He appreciates the before and after pictures of the signs provided by the applicant. Commission member Lawton asked Beals whether the other businesses in the district are in compliance. Beals stated that most businesses are complying. A few received variances to increase their signage. Lawton believes the addition to the size would help the businesses and would be in support. Chair Shields agreed that there are no impacts to residential areas and would be in approval. Council Havelda wanted clarification that the variance only pertains to the one building. The applicant stated as such. Boardmember Meyer made a motion, seconded by Lawton to approve ZBA210026 for the following reasons: the variance is not detrimental to the public good; The height increase will have minimal increase in impact to existing residential development; There are taller buildings intervening between the closest residential property to the south; There is a six-lane arterial street with streetlights and street trees on either side between the residential property to the east. Therefore, the variance request will not diverge from the standard but in a nominal, inconsequential way, when considered in the context of the neighborhood, and will continue to advance the purpose of the Land Use Code contained in Section 1.2.2 Yeas: McCoy, Meyer, Shields, Lawton Nays: none. THE MOTION CARRIED, THE ITEM WAS APPROVED 3. APPEAL ZBA210027- APPROVED Address: 1025 Sailors Reef Owner/Petitioner: Elaine and Dennis Edwards Zoning District: R-L Code Section: 4.4(D)(2)(c) Project Description: This is a request to build a deck encroaching a total of 8.75 feet into the required 15-foot rear-yard setback. The approved subdivision plans already allow a 3-foot encroachment into the required 15-foot rear setback. The proposed deck is seeking an additional 5.75 feet. This also requires vacating part of a 10-foot utility easement along the rear property line. Staff Presentation: Beals showed slides relevant to the appeal and discussed the variance request, noting it is a single family attached property. Request is for an elevated deck. Vacating the easement is a separate process. The process has been started with the Engineering department. There have not been any Zoning Board of Appeals Page 4 June 10, 2021 utilities discovered yet in the easement. The house sits a bit lower than the lake. The purpose is to obtain a water view. Commission member Lawton asked about the neighboring property and whether it was a duplex. Beals clarified that there is only one unit on a lot and it is called a single family attached. Applicant Presentation: Applicants Dennis and Elaine Edwards, 1025 Sailors Reef addressed the board and agreed to have the hearing held remotely. They purchased the property in November of 2019. They only have a few feet before they encroach on the easement. They currently do not have enough room to build a deck. The design of their deck will match the neighboring decks. Both Comcast and their HOA do not have any problem with vacating the easement. Council Havelda wanted to ensure that the letter the applicant submitted was clear to the commission since there were some technical difficulties. All commission members and the applicants were comfortable moving forward and relying on the applicant letter. Commission member Meyer asked whether this has been approved by the HOA. Applicant stated as such. Meyer also asked about the lack of a 2nd floor on the property. The applicant stated that there will be no internal access to the deck. The only access would be from the outside. Audience Participation: (none) Commission Discussion: Commission member Meyer was initially concerned about the design. Since it has been approved by the HOA, he doesn't have as many concerned. He is comfortable approving. Commission member Lawton stated that he is familiar with the area. He believes there is precedence and does not detract from the neighborhood. Boardmember Meyer made a motion, seconded by Lawton to approve ZBA210027 for the following reasons: the granting of the modification of standard would not be detrimental to the public good; The proposed deck does not increase the impacts of the current patio area; the abutting property to the southwest is a private lake with no residential buildings. Therefore, the variance request will not diverge from the standard but in a nominal, inconsequential way, when considered in the context of the neighborhood, and will continue to advance the purpose of the Land Use Code contained in Section 1.2.2 Yeas: Shuff, McCoy, Meyer, Shields Lawton, Nays: none. THE MOTION CARRIED, THE ITEM WAS APPROVED 4. APPEAL ZBA210028- APPROVED Address: 421 E. Laurel St Owner: Patricia and Nick Quinn Petitioner: Kristin Zuro Zoning District: N-C-M Code Section: 4.8(D)(2)(a)(2) Project Description: This is a variance request to exceed maximum allowable floor area of the lot by 619 square feet. The total allowable square footage of the lot is 3,496 square feet. Previous variance, ZBA210011, approved an additional 295 square feet. This variance request is asking for an additional 324 square feet on top of the 295 square feet already granted. Staff Presentation: Beals showed slides relevant to the appeal and discussed the variance request, noting that the previous variance was heard in April. They are requesting additional square footage for an addition. Zoning Board of Appeals Page 5 June 10, 2021 During the time of the previous variance, they did not have elevations. Now that they do, they are requesting the additional square footage. Applicant Presentation: Applicants Patricia Quinn, 421 E Laurel St, Kristin Zuro, and Chris Gray (Building Collective), addressed the board and agreed to have the appeal heard remotely. The existing house is driving the design. It has been reviewed by the Historic Preservation Board. The design protects the historic nature of the house. The changes are not visible from the street, are minimally visible from the alley and neighbors. It will actually make the house a bit more compact. The changes will not be made to the original historic part of the house. Beals mentioned that he knows that the applicants have been working with HP staff and they are in favor of the changes. Audience Participation: (none) Commission Discussion: Commission member Meyer appreciates the collaboration with HP staff and that the design is driven by the existing design of the house. He will be in favor. Commission member Lawton thinks it is a good addition. Chair Shields agrees and likes the modern twist on the historical home. Boardmember Meyer made a motion, seconded by Meyer, to approve ZBA210028 for the following reasons: The granting of the modification of standard would not be detrimental to the public good, The addition does not exceed the allowable floor area in the rear-half of the lot; The addition meets the required setback; In an effort to match the existing roof line, the proposed addition creates a vaulted ceiling; The addition is blocked from view from the street and has limited views from the alley. Therefore, the variance request will not diverge from the standard but in a nominal, inconsequential way, when considered in the context of the neighborhood, and will continue to advance the purpose of the Land Use Code contained in Section 1.2.2. Yeas: McCoy, Meyer, Shields, Lawton Nays: none. THE MOTION CARRIED, THE ITEM WAS APPROVED • OTHER BUSINESS Beals stated that the intention would be to meet in person beginning in August. If anything changes, we will have to continue remotely. Chair Shields asked whether other Boards were meeting in person. Beals stated that the P&Z is a hybrid meeting. For this commission, the recommendation is for a full in-person meeting. The Commission was in favor of this. Beals has also reached out the Boards and Commissions team to re-evaluate the new name. • ADJOURNMENT — meeting adjourned at 9:59 � �� Ralph Shields, Chair Noah Beals, Senior City Planner-Zoning Zoning Board of Appeals Page 6 June 10, 2021 Agenda Item 1 STAFF Noah Beals, Senior City Planner/Zoning PROJECT ZBA210029 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Address: 511 Whedbee St Owner: Joshua and Alaina Belanger Petitioner: Allen Curtis Zoning District: N-C-M Code Section: 4.8(E)(4) Variance Request: This is a request for a variance for a new carport to encroach 3.83 feet into the 5-foot side yard setback. COMMENTS: 1. Backqround: The property was part of the original town plat of 1873. The primary building was constructed in 1898 with a significant remodel in 2019. It is unclear if the existing garage was built at the same time as the primary building. Both the existing garage and the primary building comply with the N-C-M setbacks. However, the N-C-M requires any new off-street parking areas to take access from the alley. The existing garage takes vehicle access from the street. The proposed carport uses the existing street access and driveway. Throughout the neighborhood there is a mix of driveways that access from the alley or the street. Similar to the existing condition of the subject property, the driveways that access from the street lead to an accessory building that is behind and not in front or along the side of the primary building. 2. ApplicanYs statement of iustification: See petitioner's letter. 3. Staff Conclusion and Findinqs: Under Section 2.10.4(H), staff recommends denial and finds that: • The addition of a structure for vehicle storage to the side of the primary does not align with the context of the neighborhood and is consequential. • Additional accessory buildings or additions could be placed on the property in other locations to comply with setbacks. • 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 standards. 4. Recommendation: Staff recommends denial of APPEAL ZBA210029. Item # 1 - Page 1 � �t Col�ins Appl�cation Request for Variance from the Land Use Code The Zaning Boartl oi Appeals has been granted the authority to approve variances from the reguirements of Art�cles 3 and 4 of the Lancf Use Cade. The Zoning Boar� of Appeals shall not author�ze ar�y use in a zoning district other than those uses which are specifically permitted in #he zoning district. The Board may grant variances where it finds that khe modification of the standard would not be detrimental to the aublic s�ood. 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 situatlons �nique to the prape�ty, including, but not limited ta physical conditions such as exceptional narrowness, shallowriess, ar topograpl�y, the strict a�plicatian of the code requirernents would resulk in unusuai and exce�tional practical difficult�as or t�ndue hardship upon the occu�anUapplicant of the praperty, pra�ided that such difficulties or hardsh are not caused by an act ar omission of the accupantlapplicani (i.e. not se€f-imposed}; (2) the proposai will promote the general purpose of the standard for which the variance is requested eauall� well or better than would a proposal which complies with the standard #or which the variance is requested; (3) the praposal will not diverge from the Land Use Code standards excepk in a nominal. Inconseauential wa� when considered in the context of the neighbarhood. This applicatian is only for a variance to the I.and Use Code. BuildEn Code re uirsments will be determined and reviewed b the Bullding Department separately. When a build�ng ar sign psrmit is required or any wark or wh c a �ar a�ce a��i� gran e, e�ermit must be o6talned with�n 6 months of the date that the varlance was granted. However, for good cause shawn by the applicant, the Zoning Board af Appeals may consider a one-time 6 manth extension if reasonable and necessary under the iacts and circumstances af the case. An extension request must be submitted before 6 months from the c�ate that the variance was granted has lapsed. Petitioner or PatltEoner's Re resentative rtrust be resen at the meetln Location: 300 LaPorte Ave, Council Chambers, Fort Collins, CO 80524 Date: Second Thursday of the mont� Time: 8:3� a.m. Variance Address Petitioner's Name, �� ' � if not the Owner � City �or# Colfns, CO Petit€oner's Relationship � to the Owner is � r��-••�- •�-��----� 2ip Code Owner's Name Code 5ectian{s) 2aning Qistrict lustification(sj lustiiication(sj lusti�cation(sj Choose One from List Additiona} Justification Justification Petitioner's Address Petitioner's Phone # Petitioner's Email Additeonal Representative's Name Representative's Address Representative's Phone �i Representati�e's Email Reasoni�g �t �.3 �inort P�Y 1�,� m ta�usT� 1��r..�rn�� t�v�s r�, a�� r S�� s �u, If r�otenough room, 7�rp 1f A�U �J1�'ll1f� ��/.,q�vp�� qIPL3Q, LJIR�C � 1+y�lL� �, 7'N6 �7riN4 �tl�,t addEtlonal written f�ri{ �t �I.i��+AAY C�1��L�4�!¢11r1C. 7N� s��K R�G2'T� �l}� �11�, .�l�lA�^ M'P�OBY.4l, 7�3 informaiionmay �tU3 A�WYl.�l�Ls4 f�l�i�'�f � fi�"CG�i4?"l�� 1+�l�IlS� �77�1�r 7?tE's �ISrllyl'.e be submitted �D� ��A� L�WKNS� 1�'�i°ir►14 T1if�`�'flA,p�T�; G�-`1�.lS�ANe� �U�,�,�� Date 1 � � Z � Slgnature Updated 02.1820 Jennifer Luther From: Noah Beals Sent: Thursday, August 05, 2021 2:29 PM To: Jennifer Luther Subject: FW: [EXTERNAL] Input regarding request for variance 511 Whedbee St. From: Bob Wirth <rwirth@wyoming.com> Sent: Thursday, August 5, 2021 2:24 PM To: Noah Beals <nbeals@fcgov.com> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Input regarding request for variance 511 Whedbee St. Dear Mr. Beals, I am writing this as the owner of 515 Whedbee St, the property directly adjacent to the proposed carport addition. I am unable to attend the remote hearing scheduled for August 12. After reviewing the plans for the addition and carport I have serious concerns concerning the carport. 1. The distance from the proposed permanent structure columns to the shared property line would be reduced to one foot two inches instead of the five foot code. We would almost be able to reach out from our side window and touch these columns. Also from the street, in my opinion, it just would not be in keeping with the City's stated goal of preserving Old Town historic neighborhood architectural integrity. When I constructed our addition at 515 Whedbee in 2010 the City was adamant that our architect, Dick Anderson, maintain among other details, the five foot setback to preserve the look from the street. 2. Drainage from the proposed hip roof would be a significant problem especially during and after our Northern Colorado events like a 24" wet snow or a 1" summer downpour or any moisture for that matter. The runoff could seriously negatively effect 515 Whedbee given the proposed small clearance between properties. If a gutter system is installed it would further reduce the setback by another minimum 5 or 6 inches effectively putting permanent structure less than a foot from the property line. And then, where would it drain? As you know, these lots are 9,500 square feet or more and many people who wish extra vehicle storage choose to construct an alley accessed garage with no drainage issues, also maintaining the historic architectural look from the street that makes Old Town what it is. Thank you for considering our concerns for this important decision. Sincerely, Bob Wirth BUILDER: TERREL CONSTRUCTION LOT= 9,500' SQUARE FOOTAGE X � _i Z � x 0 � m m ye h o� INDICA7E5 AS CONSTRUCTED � y ELEVATION PER DEVELOPER �Oy INDICATES ELEVATION PER DEVELOPMENT PLAN 20 0 20 �� SCALE 1 "=20' SlTE PLAN 511 WHEDBEE ST N� LOT 3 BLOCK 155 FORT COLLINS ORtGIONAL TOWN PLAT S 00°00'00" E 50.00' --o---.i 0 m m DETACHED GARAGE I 31.6' --,-f�. , v m D Q x 0 � D � m 7.6' u� 9.0' z ai ;. y � 16.7' C4 Q i = Z� � i�c O -�'+ O Z t STORY p = � BRICK ;�, = � N HOUSE � �7 m � � O 11.3' (� OVERE o O PORCH `r' 14.3' �� c �'� � 5.9' Z � 0 0 O � 0 � G � � O O O ::.' := ": =.1 �;,' e: �:� °-�=� WHEDBEE STREET __ ____ SCALE: 1"=20' �� Engineering TERREt PROJECTNO. 1071 DATE: 6/�8/2021 , ,i�.OP�oration CONST. ORAWINGNO. 165 2nd ST S REVISION NO. DRAWN: saw CHECKED: SdW LOVELA 9�01�667 80100 80638 SNEET 1 oF 1 IM 1'als and Symbols .. Abbrevianons �' .. c<K.�.o„) � cw.u.ts.-e.�,u � ..� �.-.... �. �.,.. sbU,�,.� � a,�F�,o� � ,, a., W �. ..,� s"�<.�;�, � wP�Wa..< � . v��. . ..� �.,,.�, � �:A. � �. a. Fnom Numbx �ia�a Q5 w.,.E�w,�,. .� W v Q w. � " ��`�.�� x —_. .-�—___*__--_—�_—___—__=:\ __i�rcr.ess4aL� --ir ' i � 1 � T i • � �� I � �n°Ru"'� — r t - i i � � � � � � � l i � �,. � na�� r ; �� 8 �s�� ,� i, I . nY 9 t�t1 � �/ - �� f�� — ' -- — — �'�� V ��_ � ��` -- ; � �: �" , I��j //� I I z I I /j I 8 I -�.. � ��a¢�t�/� �L�i-_1"� �\/ I �� __ . .18 r ,wr,u�eo �! ' I � �� , � �_ —.--- � _ --- - � .�C��i.i � e . u so ' w� w iso.aa - � �/ - .. Y � F-e wown'�' � � I � 1 ,' � � �� . �� rt �- — _ �� .. _.—� - � R{ O . . b.o �; . � L ��wrvw°n:� e.� � � .- m� Sit� eP�n 1"=10._p.,��, �R� � Leoal Descriotion � i��mv co�:n � coia.aao Permit Information zeM: � v.�m: � �.�..a sm.t. �:eia�..mei. ��xz:.s.r�...n.e w. of eaa.aoms. My�tij (zl w. oe re. (�) .. . ok...��tll . w. of F�rvlocu: rw. waro swrc<. 6�a iq publk � &i iM pmu. N 3 � �, � � � � 9 d a �~� LL w � v 8 � g � - $u e o 3 � ��•• < i � � F u ` �� Y � , ^. �n' Allen D. Lu��tis tayea n. (Pio) 4o1�r'Ix90 Fai (PIo7 4lxy 9x99 The Belaeiwer Esiate «., ey, fs.�t�a ey�. A-1 -- - _i �- � � i � � - -- i� � �__T� fi �i �. Klr ii uvu,r,/oi*+�N4_ f;y . / � � �� m � � � ,;�� i��I�� I � � � _ � .- - W,Fi1ALTJTIT r � 'I� � � _ i - ��" � �'�i.w4r1 �� G.,�O2oYmM ' G.I4Rr�VVh � . w+W YJ.�LP - . - I �I . � I i II i - ^ - 1 -� I " li-' .. I �_- I . "�_ �� I �� i !'' -� n �j _ � ��l -� I � - NL'W IklOH �' — . . ', _ -'� � I �"�. I I �I � ,. `4'A�WYa'ry� Gr.11 PAiM wwoww ��.i I _ � -I .. � i�� NeW�IdPAdI{ _ mJ41M4 ', _ � / } m �l1�_ I I!. . .. I y .. LL W Nv° C��-L� "._.��_ _� � j�—_— _ o�. n�m�uaxa.r � ,� a O�.tr�r. a w�$ - - � -1k— II� �x'P_ <a+as.naox� I�. ' -� � aav iwa�+s '< _ 3 � � a m . _ _ _- �4;.a_ _ —_ii �.o —��--�`�`—_---�— - I�I� "! �m~3 � I _ � d� R I �� s � N_'� � �r H -� 4 �� uwmoF �''I NI^ Pi lJccn R@�CG Nl21�M� � - - - '_ - -. - - - . _ _�,.��_ . a. N��'�b' � +•— — '� — — — r. ---�— + . �T � - �� r . . � T..T�� • 1--- � Aesi�ei.m.e ''�1f o A Main F p � � � . ya�.�,� .__�- `��L ��--,F ��'�v��"� � �� loor Plan 1/4"=1'-0" �� )� �S°� a'\ Allcn D. Lurtis Eagl�a rv. 1eo53� lno) <oiermor�ocobr(�o)1tv - 1z11 The Beladmer Estot< w�� A-2I , I 1 �`--— - ------ . j .. . Nsu nro� n�w� roomw .� - � I; —� -;�I_—� ; � i�k -wrvair �—� �Side Bltla. Elev. 1/4"=1'-0" APo 1 �Frortt Buildinq Elevation 1/4"=1'-0" �� a � � d � N � LL w � � _ "ss '<'3� ��= <d�s � � / _.._.. �.. _ .`� .._-- .._-. -�s '�'\ '❑ ❑ — 1 �Y � � u � _ � ` I I NmJI`kG4WifXfoRA� IPPCF�l6D I �j � GMfbRT A�4[j .A� Rear Bldo. Elev. 1/4"=1'-0" , x �� -- - � — � �� I — � _ � — _— _ —_� fN641MA$}y2�'lip�iM .A � Side Bldq. Elev. 1/4"=1'-0" A9 Agenda Item 2 STAFF Noah Beals, Senior City Planner/Zoning PROJECT ZBA210030 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Address: 1606 Burlington Ct Owner: Nick Berger Petitioner: Tad Bjorlie Zoning District: R-L Code Section: 4.4(D)(2)(c) Variance Request: This is a request for a variance to allow a deck to encroach 3 feet into the required 15-foot setback. COMMENTS: 1. Backqround: This property was annexed as part of the Harmony Annexation in 1977. In 1979, the property received development approvals as part of the Golden Meadows Third subdivision. The primary building was later constructed in 1983. The property abuts single family detached residential lots. The proposed deck is raised 2 feet above the grade. A 3-foot tall handrail runs along the sides of the deck. A 6-foot tall fence separates the rear-yard from abutting properties. 2. Applicant's statement of iustification: See petitioner's letter. 3. Staff Conclusion and Findinqs: Under Section 2.10.4(H), staff recommends approval and finds that: • The variance is not detrimental to the public good. • The proposed deck is not covered. • The area of encroachment can be used for patio at grade level • The fence and mature landscaping in the rear-yard limit the review of the proposed deck. Therefore, the variance request will not diverge from the standard but in a nominal, inconsequential way, when considered in the context of the neighborhood, and will continue to advance the purpose of the Land Use Code contained in Section 1.2.2 4. Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of APPEAL ZBA210030. Item # 2 - Page 1 Fort Collins �� Application Request 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 qood. 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 wav 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 meetinq Location: 300 LaPorte Ave, Council Chambers, Fort Collins, CO 80524 Date: Second Thursday of the month Time: 8:30 a.m. Variance Address 1606 Burlington Ct Petitioner's Name, Tad Bjorlie if not the Owner City � Fort Collins, CO Zip Code Owner's Name Code Section(s) Zoning District Justification(s) Justification(s) Petitioner's Relationship to the Owner is Petitioner's Address Nick Berger Petitioner's Phone # Nominal and inconsequential Petitioner's Email Additional Representative's Name Representative's Address Additional Justification Representative's Phone # ntractor 1448 Antero Dr Loveland 80538 970-663-2868 sales@tnthomeimprovements.c in Schwettman Justification(s) � �Additional Justification � � Representative's Email Reasoning If not enough room, additional written information may be submitted in@tnthomeimprovements. 16' long deck from the house encroaches 3' into the 15' rear setback - the homeowner will be able to maximize usable backyard space as well as add value and aesthetic to the home in a nominal, inconsequential way. 06/30/2021 Tad B j o rl i e--,�d.�,.a,�,��.a��.m.�, °-.�.�oma,mo,o.eme�,, Date Signature Updated 02.18.20 1606 Burlington Ct — Setback Variance The homeowner's current deck design is at 16' out by 20' wide. This would encroach the rear setback by 3', making it 12' away from the property line. We are requesting a variance so that the homeowner can maximize their usable backyard space. The deck will also add value and aesthetic to the home. This variance would not be detrimental to the public good, and will not diverge from the Land Use Code standard except in a nominal, inconsequential way. Zx�o ied9�r n+{nc�ed ��1�2)lPdge��ot�s@!�"a,c, w w �" _.�___ �..�._�--� 5 ________— --- (Z��.x� � �. C K be n,� :� :� N�g '� �' ( (zi2xio beQ+� (�' �' �� '' A , 1 � _.� . _ _ � -----��-- - -- _� _----C� __ ._ .-- --zs- F12`�� _�__.��_ _�—�O�i��- f__—(,��,�---�tt2, CCIv�� Ca��. '�---- -- - - ------ 2 p � ------ --------a �� ra�.� ^-Z� deck posi 3b" �a5s Dn �� "�' �er eY Nous� �..� �. . ��o� ��,u��g�a,n �.:� �_��_--__ ��.�� '��,, ; r� ��25 2xlo�o�s�1 ', C l2" p.�. 1� � 1�tC� .- '�J '� x� �osts U��. A—' 1�1"� 30'' cc��ss��s � � I �' `x �" cci�is5a�5 � ��i �ra�rniv�� reo,-}�d �� 1. � B�ow�n �c�k decl�v�� ' � � � C � �1 n � 1n f � � i'+'l_�q �! Y'1 � �"�� § ��4 � � �'c`��'� � � � ' Pc��eY �o,��no�s @ Sia►rs . S�TG �G,�it/ - � /�D� �U�� /NG TG�N � C., O�i'F�T / G�.d'T L�4GG ./NS �C7�CJ.�',.�-,�c.� � . � . . . - : �'G� � � . . , . � . �...._ .: �. :�, /..� - . � . � � . . . + . . __ ' � � � -, , • jSV . : ' ' • �1� . - . . : V . .. • . . � : �� . • ` I ' ' ndY, . • . �. � 1. Q �' �. . �3d J� - \� �`� � \ � �. M. t \�' � • , . �T� ° � .��r• . . . \ '� , ' 1'=r'�' __ :�.a ,d o f � . � � �• , lo + -� . � � . � .�-_. , . ,� - , ' ��. �, �` ��.� � . �,s. � .z. , • ` C. � � � *�� 4 � � t ,�y� - � �- � �� ,�o � 'z._. �. � � . ,+ � . --� -�. , � � - � �, �.;_ � . � , A � � - � --� � . �a� � �= . . � }]Proi��s°� ��`:;��2��' �,?c�,c � � / � . � �� . O �-- � � � - � � ' �� Z� / `� . "� �v F =t. N _ � '::.- ��f � . �a_ . L�a," c�D, ,E,�/�u,�s � 9, �o /a� � �1,�c:.;� �� s ,� ''�;, o/r-� i(/�_. ?'�- G LCL EV `"� �� %�./��s.' /y�'� G/�cr,� .f� :--�:r� ...�I�c, � . !�-�%�`l/JC"fr/ ,� � /%. c.��G�':%Ju%� -r-��"'-SJ:..� . �" �� = �- / 7I /�� . �ili-. � , � {, 6l� f; �l ..:, S,� � Agenda Item 3 STAFF Noah Beals, Senior City Planner/Zoning PROJECT ZBA210031 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Address: 2242 Primrose Dr. Owner/Petitioner: Stacey Hogan Zoning District: U-E Code Section: 4.2(D)(2) Variance Request: This is a request to build an accessory building (shed) encroaching a total of 15 feet into the required 25-foot rear-yard setback and encroaching a total of 17 feet into the required 20-foot side-yard setback. COMMENTS: 1. Backqround: This property was annexed into the City in 2003. It received development approval in 1964 as part of the Milfred Acres subdivision. The primary structure was built in 1973. When the property was annexed into the City it was zoned Urban Estate (U-E). U-E zone district requires a minimum lot size of .5 acre. This larger minimum lot size allows for a bigger setbacks. Milfred Acres subdivision allowed for a 7.5' side setback for the primary building. It does not speak to accessory buildings. Prior to annexation other accessory structures were permitted by the county, meeting a similar setback as the primary building. The lot sizes of the Milfred Acres subdivision do not meet the U-E zone district. The average lot size is.25 acre. 2. Applicant's statement of iustification: See petitioner's letter. 3. Staff Conclusion and Findinqs: Under Section 2.10.4(H), staff recommends approval and finds that: • The variance request is not detrimental public good. • The lot sizes in Milfred Acres do not align with larger setbacks of the U-E zone district • There are other accessory structures in the neighborhood at similar setbacks as proposed. Therefore, the variance request will not diverge from the standard but in a nominal, inconsequential way, when considered in the context of the neighborhood, and will continue to advance the purpose of the Land Use Code contained in Section 1.2.2 4. Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of APPEAL ZBA210031. Item # 3 - Page 1 Fort Collins � Application Request 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 qood. 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 wav 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 meetinq Location: 300 LaPorte Ave, Council Chambers, Fort Collins, CO 80524 Date: Second Thursday of the month Time: 8:30 a.m. Variance Address 2242 Primrose Drive Petitioner's Name, NA if not the Owner City Fort Collins, CO Petitioner's Relationship Same Zip Code Owner's Name Code Section(s) Zoning District Justification(s) Justification(s) 80526 to the Owner is Petitioner's Address Same 970.217.9978 staceylhogan@hotmail.com Stacey Hogan Petitioner's Phone # 4, Div. 4.2, (D Urban Estate (U-E Petitioner's Email Additional Representative's Name I3. Nominal and inconsequential I Representative's Address Additional Justification Representative's Phone # Brian Harris 2242 Primrose Drive 970.217.4751 brianiharrisla�comcast.net Justification(s) � �Additional Justification � � Representative's Email Reasoning Please see attached letter. 7/2/21 Date Signature Updated 02.18.20 July 12, 2021 From Stacey Hogan and Brian Harris 2242 Primrose Drive Fort Collins, CO 80526 970.217.9978 To City of Fort Collins Zoning Department 281 N. College Avenue Fort Collins, CO 80524 Dear Zoning Board of Appeals: We are respectfully requesting a variance related to the setbacks on our property. Our property was designated Urban Estate (U-E) when our neighborhood was annexed into the City, despite the fact that our lot dimensions are 75' x 135' (.24 acre). Our street is comprised of lots roughly the same size as ours but we are surrounded on the north and west by, and were annexed along with, much larger properties that better meet the purpose of U-E districts, as described in the city code: "The Urban Estate District is intended to be a setting for a predominance of low-density and large-lot housing." (Article 4— Districts, Division 4.2 — Urban Estate District, Section A.) Please see attached map of our property and the surrounding area. The properties adjacent to us on the west and north sides range from two to more than four and one-half acres. They are anywhere from eight to eighteen times the size of our property and yet we are zoned the same and therefore have the same setback requirements. We have submitted an application to the Building Services Department to build a 10'x16' wood shed to store landscaping and household items (no electrical/plumbing). If we adhere to the U-E setbacks as listed in city code, the placement of the shed will chop up our back yard. Instead of placing the shed 30' from the rear property line, we are requesting approval to place it 10' from the rear, which complies with the utility easement. And instead of placing the shed 7.5' from the (east) side property line, we are requesting approval to place it 3' from the side. Please see the site plan we have included with this application. The drawing shows both where we propose to build the shed (green) and where it would be located (red) if we were to adhere to the existing U-E setbacks. We are confident our proposed location for the shed would neither be detrimental to the public good nor diverge from the Land Use Code standards in anything more than a nominal, inconsequential way when considered in the context of the neighborhood and surrounding properties. We look forward to the upcoming Zoning Board of Appeals meeting and will gladly answer any questions the board may have concerning our request. Sincerely, , �--� �/,��%L'/�!/ � ��'��'/�J Stac H gan and Bri n Harris �, — � ��( � � —� _ _; � -' 1 "� �� I � ,, -- —_ _ _ ��,� t�� (� � ��, �,'..�� r fl�� ' °= � '�,'� P- �` , � � � 1 � ] !-- _►T� , _i....._.. i.__.. a � �::�� L�,�� 4��,� �� . �_ _ � � �� ;�> e i D , — -- �,�'�;�!�.�' � ;Gic�' — -- i �� rt �; - — -� — - I ! � ' , . —• -- _ - - -- � _ -I-a------ -- .--�- � �c� �. � L � v►� �- � �� e ��.�._._..�.._.._ �.�.. . __ ; � � : �1r— , � �� r�� + ,� �— �- "�- -r '�' '�' ww~ ^^s' �. ; � gY, ''�-. � � ;�- , : _-� � � ,, � ;_ _ _ ,._ � — - � . � � � ; � � � � — - --.----;-�--- _ _ -,--.— --,— :-- � � ' _I � � �4 ■ � � 1 � /'y'` ; � l � V�/A✓ � � . �' j� .__..-..'_"'__—'--'___ � T'- '_- - — � -..�_........� ............. . .. ._. I_ . wri �r -�, -�w ,� .. +�r� aiwiF "w.i. �-M�Y ( � � l � �{ i I I i I I � ��]Y ��- L�� 5'�'i 1 � 9 a� �!� �'r�� , � �� I�' � I (�� . , � � -� � � � (' �� `�_ �. �ai�u,a cot.:v�n, Enterprise GIS Larimer County Web Map � � � � " i �' . .. � � r "�. — �:' Y�' � . . .,, . ��— � � i =� � ` _ �, _ , .� w . ....�.� s : � :.. ' �+ � _- s ;�y"Ft�,'�. � �� S iI. A � ,� w �� , � � ,,�� - . - � }, , �:� . ; � :�� , a L . Ly�L 1 :..11:��1 � ; ._�. � � � � ` j� �- �,�' i��.;r { ,.r�.. � .�� . - [R' � � �� i � . . ': � i �� -1 � . . _ ' : ��►� �-�� a �;: , ;�;_ � zo �',� ��.� � ,:� � �. ig 4 ; � }e� F. '' � +.—. _ ......� .. � !# �' ". . i.1 .1 � ;: � � . . ` [ -'� , I . �.i . �S e�.'.. � ��.• # � # ; � . � � ��= � �,:�... �- �. � �:. ;_,� �� . r � :1 - � .; , : `i , . - . _. .,� . � , 3 ,, ,. .�..., .. : . .�y�- �� , } .. , .11 :. � ,._ . � . -"�'�,�r�'`1`_ , . .� i�'�� -I _:-1� �1c''� � t.� 'Z'�-1 ?I,�,.�f:�'I-1- �._ �._.. �1-E� e Ii,� i � - `.) :�a nr��. i_ i7L� � I � ��- f� . ' '� �, � ip. � k , y� _ ` � �; � �. ., ''. . ( L / 1 L I � � J' L. � �� .. , '��..n. . . � ,_—_,,.,_. --_ - __._,..._. . . n� �: .. z� � �T ! ;' �`�:: ;�� - .� �: �� vt E�f -::�I � F��.��f�: . I' ,_'�I:. �� ,.-� ��F.� . i `I� � t � � '- ��` _ � � p " . � ; :� � ��'1'y�Q � S'.. � I . . f . . ' P . �:� 1 n .. � '�_'[� :��-1�.1'�il ' � } �� -. c + yy I . �� Tf . . . [ � [ # � R � ' _. . . . . . . .i,.x�" ... � _ ,f��.. LLJC a�� .. ' _ � � . �. .. ' . . ri � �� :� � � ; �� I:� I. � �� - �1 :,� £ ! . _,: . ., ' .. r .«� ��i� � z.. ,'ii,, �t � � � a �. � . - .. . .- ...' �'T� , . . i�� i � ^ � � � ; : { � � � � ' � 4 ��i � ": �. '. � �:iei:` ' '� t r � . 5 tc � i : : 'S �.. � �, i�1f �4 f.f i � j ir � � �.,...��,�.;$„�.,.s,,:. , '` • � �.� $ # �"'.y. � ._ �*�- -r�� . � r 4 �� i��,� -�i� E i� i� � ii 1 r�. � ri 1 i n � I; i h� �y . = i � � • � l . � �. �� t ( _ _ � y _ � t ' ! - . � � :�::3iif4'a i J�'14. � ^ �;- l.�i '� �Git��e�� 1 �� . � �.. , c.-��s' ��. a�+�G� _ �./ ' i-�,i .�-i--,, I�L. ` �`.,il�A (i �-' r � �� o- � • ! � F � . ) _ i. "�� i ' i � _ �. � _. � . �. � � , i �� yR � � � . . Addresses ':.�� Subdivisions Tax Parcels Recorded Dimensions � PLSS Township and Range Road System Lakesand Ponds _ ..... Major Rivers and Streams Rivers and Streams � County Boundary State Federal Other % r' i. � � - � � ` .MF �f�l .'t �i.��`�. F �p ' =� � �:,_ . �:�,� i�, ,; .; -;: s�.� a�� :� � r� �� _e �.. - _' t.. # - 0.0 0 0.0 Miles � This map was created by Larimer County GIS using data from multiple sourc Scale informal purposes only. This map may not reflect recent updates prior to the c �: 2,4�� printing. Larimer County makes no warranty or guarantee concernii Date Prepared: 7/4/2021 11:07:33 PM completeness, accuracy, or reliability of the content repres� > � , � � � I � i� � � 1� � 0N y N Sc.v _ .y�e 1� v m 2 � h � 00 - s0 zo 40 z� a � \ .. M/LFREO ACRES ,9 �.SUOi�/Sio.V S/TU.9TE /.v TNE SOUTHEaST jy OF SECTio.V zB, ZT ��v, R.69 K; oF T�vE S/XTi1 P M. � Lf7R/MER GaUNTY , GOLORF700 _ ... _ .. . , , ...� ,.� .� r ..< </ �c ,✓Fa n� se'/. sK.2B-7-c9 � . _ S.E C F.OF N�/+OfS% OF NE� a� 3£� SEC 2B�]-C9. , ono'- vcy /oi �6/.c use , foi �o//ci � f_Ac _s1i«h os vic_ /o.d ouf o�d d s 9.+ofed . de o/ e �dy r ✓c. P�:P_�r�e/ V �n s�i % e ii+sfu // o� o S�+ _��/ �+e�ca o% :_f. . i.0 o'io � 9 / c/.fi� , o �c / cos`f o..d d s>.�uysd oi+ f� ��_ Wi/� e � he, 3d' ca/ f/i{ g dY �/-o�...n�i 90. /9�A. ..� o ��iU�"aas�.a 7�_'O,.i�./JQ..c'��A��f � ta 1� �., �. G. fi�d ic � M��Paliic� � )r Q.� .�- �.VS Q OEL C..,r.. . Y_ t ��f f ofoCo/oiodo � �r� �fy f�y'e`/9iu...e�+f �r /e;�ed Ae/oie .�+ � i33—Q'py f c��^Q34�F0 /fl66_i -^ P�o�dM./ ia .9. oc i<' / c�u�as ..fe�� /if_ ecM� ofai c n�.ie s. �.v y,ye � � �t,' E.V6i.VEERB CERT/F/C.97Efz' •�/ oT�a�9Oc'c ... No/o��, a p� 1e»ie.+ i E J o' lai+d 5uiv<Yoi ei dai /be /o.I� / Go „ ��„y��iy .ros � o- .e �� e ��s f oy tnn s.�.v��o� t c- M.i � J hs �c sf/ieY s d P/o� i ro1� de/.neofo�. / oid,s � d fnc SY _". ___ " _. �d fAo/ . c Y � - o�✓� ��oti'� _ �dyn r�4 Jo�.es N_ �Sf�waii y , Giofa� �o/ Enyineei E Go�d �S _ � .5 iibeC .+d s dc/aie m _ --°�Coy�� d __'_ - . . � y �e� .,o. �o.n,n<�e,o„ � o,��s � .��_Q , s a� ao..,,..._. a /o y o e FPOROVEO OJr�br. � e oif Coii.n� srsy.o i� Bcoid y i � d y e_ __'_ _ � �-a /'nJ o _s�« — y._ qPORO hf0 GY Lo.. Cc .�11' P/on i9 __=1�roy�e✓a✓r e '_.._�.oi �' � `,I -f�— 9 I L.O.�/o . Z M' /A/ L>/ HNO /2f � A �io✓cma�+/,> .� de /iucleo��yood d euilvbe b 1i.s/ ioe3 ./eivm n3A�// e yieuisd //uoi o �b. m.n .gY:�cfuic . .. ._ -- L one .9/o.y_ p_�a�c�.e o.�d y_oyc� shoii im�bc /c3s % m� o�sp�Q. _./ /_of_19-�.ea, u.s 3.BU/LO/A/G LOGFT% A/ . No dr✓ei/iny 3 a// De /eeefad o ony /o/ n � fe /ba �o.�/ /of /.�e, in/ iici /a1 /.� �uf .+A ide .9fia�f / i. fbe fo/ n/6a ce// �c1ed e�d �+d ce/s � /.Sc �o/a .la� .�/ /n - of.af��(� �/si //.� - _s�_._ , c.R�ai /o//.n - o�f� . ldl�io;_ }�c�1 /�+ - > /�f. 4aTfMPORA4Y STRUCTURGS . N �fiuef i�ofa y poro j charae/ei� f o�/i� 6esv+c�{'c�� 3�,9�9s� a P �f.�Ne /.c � %ie/i//o �d .�ny /o/ u/ �c.s�.%ed o� ��.�•d �fAe 1 �� d e �r o y�oy �,.Rnao SMPfSOVEMEwIT .7/i� Mi/fi�d Cona1 uefio.� Go..�ooi+r co✓e.�o.ifs o�d ooie�s lnof fncr .r. / �w/ness eu�i n—yo'.�ds o.�d .�ee/ f�+is zL— doy� oes.,dei yp, /yba, (A/al--�e� . s�� G- f ed ic Pcf � i K / i d i =HE M=�fREO GO.US>RU�T/O.V ,CPMP9.V�' �,o,� o� ��, „do s o ..,,. e, � _ .� rna foi.yooy decioi �o., e��iof �..-�_ eore s��..s>.� (�d�<d v_�/�� ,n� .�'As�rs.� oc�oae. �90/_4.=/ G.fi�s.c �f__ :.�d ��'dcO 9�lrouf.4.. � CO.:a� �1�• �_ f' n — � �'� f.. L1Y �aloiio/ Co �.�'0�� —S�veR � R, �a�1 y v)jy „ �� I ��:' -�._�_ __,:� �_ _ _ __ �- _ _ _ . . _ _ . . __ . _ _ �.-,I / id oaf oi OeO�eofed h�ieo� , , ��"�0�—�— s..�,_,,,_ Agenda Item 4 STAFF Noah Beals, Senior City Planner/Zoning PROJECT ZBA210032 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Address: 3001 Sombrero Ln. Owner/Petitioner: Tim Fangmeier Zoning District: R-L Code Section: 3.8.3(1) Variance Request: This is a request to operate a home occupation that offers appointment hours between 6:OOam and 11:OOpm. The Land Use Code states that home occupations must be operated between the hours of 8:OOam and 6:OOpm COMMENTS: 1. Backqround: The property was annexed into the City in 1977. It received development approval in 1978. The primary building was constructed in 1980. All dwelling units in the City are allowed a Home Occupation license for certain types of businesses. A professional office is an allowable use. All Home Occupations have certain restrictions to limit the impacts to other nearby residential uses. One of these restrictions includes limits to the hours of operation. The applicants are planning an addition to the house. The addition complies the zone district standards. The proposed home occupation will be operated out of the planned addition. The property is located near the entrance to the subdivision. At the most there will be 1 couple visiting every 1.5 hours. 2. Applicant's statement of iustification: See petitioner's letter. 3. Staff Conclusion and Findinqs: Under Section 2.10.4(H), staff recommends approval and finds that: • The variance is not detrimental to the public good. • The business is not product manufacturing • The number of clients is limited. • The property is located near the entrance of the neighborhood. Therefore, the variance request will not diverge from the standard but in a nominal, inconsequential way, when considered in the context of the neighborhood, and will continue to advance the purpose of the Land Use Code contained in Section 1.2.2 4. Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of APPEAL ZBA210032. Item # 4 - Page 1 Fort Collins � Application Request 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 qood. 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 wav 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 meetinq Location: 300 LaPorte Ave, Council Chambers, Fort Collins, CO 80524 Date: Second Thursday of the month Time: 8:30 a.m. Variance Address 3001 Sombrero Ln Petitioner's Name, if not the Owner City Fort Collins, CO Petitioner's Relationship Same Zip Code Owner's Name Code Section(s) Zoning District Justification(s) Justification(s) to the Owner is Petitioner's Address Tim Fangmeier Petitioner's Phone # : Equal to or better than Petitioner's Email Additional Representative's Name Representative's Address 3. Nominal and inconsequential � Representative's Phone # 3001 Sombrero Ln, Fort Collins 402.768.3593 tim@fmhcounseling.com Justification(s) � �Additional Justification � � Representative's Email Reasoning If not enough room, additional written information may be submitted Please See Included Documents 7/13/2021 Tim Fangmeier Date Signature Updated 02.18.20 4103 E. Boardwalk Drive, Fort Collins, CO 80525 �� Mailing Address: PO Box 272845, Fort Collins, CO 80527 . 970-825-4280 FMH COUNSELING, LLC. Dear Zoning Board of Appeals, My hope is to acquire a variance regarding a home occupation that would allow me to see clients outside of the 8:00 AM to 6:00 PM window prescribed in Article 3.8.3 of the Land Use Code. I believe that the proposal will promote the general purpose of the standard as well or better than what is laid out in the Land Use Code and that it will diverge from that standard in only a nominal or inconsequential way when considered in the context of the neighborhood. I am a mental health counselor and have been working and living in Fort Collins since 2016. Over the past few years it has become clear that I would be able to be more helpful to my clients and be more present with my family if I were to have a space to see clients within my home. That began a process of exploring the available options to have a home office. My wife and I moved into our neighborhood at the end of 2016. Since that time, we have come to enjoy the neighborhood and especially the relationships we have been developing with neighbors. We landed on the option of adding on to our house in order to find a solution that would allow us to stay in the neighborhood, care for my clients well, and also honor our neighbors and the community we live in. Before attempting to dive headlong into that process and commit substantial resources toward it, though, we want to make sure that I will be able to use the new space as needed in my practice. Specifically, I would like to be able to see clients outside the 8:00 AM to 6:00 PM time frame allowed for Home Occupations in the Land Use Code. The ideal time frame would be from 6:00 AM to 11:00 PM. My goal isn't to pack this time full of clients, rather to have the flexibility to schedule at times when clients have availability. This is important for my clients, as many of them work during the hours from 8:00 to 6:00 and the only time they are able to have consistent availability for counseling is before or after work. Flexibility is doubly important for the couples I work with as they try to juggle two schedules to find the time to improve their relationship. I will now discuss why I think the proposed use would not only promote the general purpose of the standard while only diverging in an inconsequential way, but would also promote the public good of the Fort Collins Community as a whole and the Meadows East Neighborhood in particular. I believe the general purpose of the time restriction in the land use code is to prevent excessive traffic and disruption in the neighborhood, especially during hours when people are more likely to be home and the increased usage would be more noticeable. I believe this purpose would be upheld due to the very limited possible impact in addition to the intentional incorporation of design elements into the project to increase both client and neighbor privacy while also improving the aesthetics of our lot. Here is some pertinent information to help gauge the impact: 1) Our house is one block away from the entrance to the neighborhood off of Timberline Road, which is a busy main thoroughfare. This means the established patterns of noise and traffic near our house are already higher than many properties in Fort Collins generally and the Meadows East neighborhood in particular. 2) The proposed change would increase the number of cars in the neighborhood by 1.33 cars per hour in the worst case scenario, seeing couples clients back to back. 3) I recently sat outside and counted the number of cars that passed our corner on a Thursday evening from 8:00 to 9:00 PM to establish some sort of baseline. I counted 15 cars during that time. 4) Clients would not pass directly in front of any houses on their way from Timberline to our house and would pass by the sides of 3 houses. Two of these houses back directly to Timberline. 5) Our intent is to landscape in such a way as to provide privacy for clients as they enter the office space, this would also mitigate any disruption to neighbors from clients entering and exiting. 6) I am aware that I will have to put policies in place for clients that encourage them to be mindful of neighbors as they enter and exit the office, especially related to noise in the evening. 7) The nature of counseling is that clients generally appreciate privacy. This is in harmony with the desires of my neighbors who would not wish to be distracted from their evening activities by clients. 8) Clients only come to my office at prearranged times, and I can only see clients at a rate of 1 per hour for individuals and 2 per 1.5 hours for couples, so that natural limitation means there is a low ceiling for possible impact on the neighborhood. 9) For context, it is generally accepted in the counseling industry that a full client load for a counselor in private practice is seeing clients for 20 hours a week. I have seen some counselors go as high as 35 for a season, but that is not sustainable for the long term. 10) Currently I see less than '/4 of my clients outside the hours of 8:00 to 6:00 and I don't think I've ever gotten to half outside of that range. The last thing I would like to address is that this variance would promote the good of the Meadows East Neighborhood in particular and Fort Collins as a whole. Communities are strengthened when they have people that stick around. When there is lower turnover, people can develop relationships with neighbors and have a vested interest in seeing the neighborhood thrive. People are more likely to be contributors rather than consumers. That is our goal if we are able to continue to live in Meadows East. We would like to continue to grow into our niche in the neighborhood. Furthermore, Fort Collins as a whole is suffering from a lack of inental healthcare opportunities. A quick survey of the results when searching the Coloradoan's website for "Mental Health" shows this theme over the past years clearly and anecdotal evidence from my own practice shows that this past year has seen an increase in the number of people seeking help dealing with the stress and anxiety related to COVID-19. Being able to operate out of my home would allow me to take on more clients as I could more efficiently transition between home and work roles. Thank you in advance for your consideration, and I look forward to working with you to find a solution that is beneficial to everyone involved. Sincerely, 1 � Tim Fangmeier Owner, FMH Counseling, LLC Jennifer Luther From: Noah Beals Sent: Tuesday, August 03, 2021 8:23 AM To: Jennifer Luther Subject: FW: [EXTERNAL] Notice of Public Hearing - approval for ZBA210032 From: Lisa Vest <vnvest@comcast.net> Sent: Tuesday, August 3, 2021 8:12 AM To: Noah Beals <nbeals@fcgov.com> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Notice of Public Hearing - approval for ZBA210032 Hello, I just wanted to say that I approve of the petition from Tim Fangmeier (Appeal: ZBA210032). I live across the street at 3006 Sombrero Lane and Tim is a very respectable and courteous neighbor. I do not foresee that there would be any issues for his business to be operated during these hours. Thank you, Lisa Vest 970-631-4971 3006 Sombrero Lane Jennifer Luther From: Noah Beals Sent: Tuesday, August 03, 2021 9:52 AM To: Jennifer Luther Subject: FW: Zone modification 3001 Sombrero Lane From: Dunphy,Peter <Peter.Dunphy@ColoState.EDU> Sent: Sunday, August 1, 2021 5:10 PM To: n.beals@fcgoc.com Subject: [EXTERNAL] Zone modification 3001 Sombrero Lane Dear N. Beals, I received a letter concerning the above property. My backyard is only two homes away. I am against whatever the reason for this attempt to modify residential zoning hours for this property. I would fight against this change for any residential property whether I lived nearby or not. Rules are rules and must apply to everyone. No exceptions. Now for some background. My wife and I are in our sixties. I am retired and my wife is not, yet. I am at home 99% of the time day and night. Our home is between two rental homes. This has not been the easiest setting for us. Before it became a rental the owner of the house to the east of us had a race car. This race car was worked on every day and night 363 days a year. Engine being revved up every five minutes for four to five hours or more day or night. Automotive repair equipment and tools left outside on the driveway for days. This doesn't include the smoking with high-grade racing fuel close by, drinking, loud music and the nonstop coming and going of this guy's race car groupies and backyard mechanics and all the noise they made. We were forced to move out of our bedroom which is 12 feet from his garage. Even this did not help the situation. After he moved then came the renter with four dogs. Nonstop barking and whimpering day and night. There is more to this situation, but I hope you get my point. Now to the west side of our house. This house is less troublesome and yet still a problem. The pets that are allowed to live there can be large doges allowed to bark and howl all day and night into the hours of 11pm and midnight. I don't know about you, but I like to sleep at night. I believe part of the problem comes from the landlords. Landlords to me are the scum of the earth. But I digress. Most of the time the renter is not communicated to by their landlord regarding the ordinances established and the responsibility the renters will take on. We have dealt with un-shoveled sidewalks for days in the winter and trash receptacles left out in view all the time. Parties till 3am, parking problems, cars left idling, etc. So, I assure you I am very much against this resident wishing to modify the hours that are set in place for residential areas. Why are they not looking at commercial property for this endeavor? Why do they want to put enmity between them and their neighbors? If this change is allowed, I will be watching and listening. And I will put the police services phone number on speed dial. I steadfastly urge this request to be denied, period. I hope the code compliance department does a drive through multiple times a day if this change is allowed. Thank you for your time. Sincerely and never backing down, Peter J Dunphy 2000 Sonora Street I i i r� , � j 1� D Y' 100' 121' � 6' .� .� IL:]I �� i''��L�7 4 � �7��- I � c ' � � ; 10 6' � � 5ketchUp �° ` � � '- -~i '�� ,� Y . . .x . � r� ' �r � . �� - �'/ t+ _ _ _ _.: � - - - �'�,.-�: v.:`; � , .t.,i�� -� _ ;;�'_ - - , - _;,-� _: - -_ .:1:..=; �� — �fi - ,� : _ �,3��: - - `�? s=� �f�� ._ _- - - - � <' >, ;: ;=. �•. � �'- ;:�� .�y r�� 1� p�.-: j :.- �� - � -Y- � � �� •r :`�: -•.~ `� ~ ;:_`~:; '` ' :-`�:.'"--'-. ��:_:..-.' 4`=.:'y'�:i�-.r.� '_,� �� / �/ �J �+y � 4 ;a.`.' r ..'y tiy L44}y'�.'i?� .4.�fiS=.='y'=.'r°_. f-_!•�-: ��f{� /y ~ ~"��r• - �%�`'��`_- � l �� flr t y� 3a ��ti � M1~ +'+' r. 3�,�.'i s;;'i:�:�:.._S4. � � � y`ti `s t� � �t �ti t 1+ �� "Ct � �^' "" 4 ' f�� . �� R± � ti� F4` 4�y.��' �k�:4'Fi;.+}^:l. _ ��f I/� l �� . ti �� ti� -�- "4--. �.T-. �bf'Y" ��y�� .4 ��M1 `` ry `+x+'�� ,.±^� - : _ ��~ ='' � y� � �; . 'i' c - }.�� 3�_�j�k��i}: _. � � Lw� 4� �� . 4 ti ' _ F_'w".' ti' ` + �. � . +�5� � w�. . =E�"��'��u - ♦� ~�� *� �ti � ~!a �� ti~ i�Y*'� .- = Y��= »�t� ' f 1_ 'r�*n� +M �.i ti 4w 4� }�~ ` � x - - - - - - - - - - - - - . �*'� .��'.� � .��+�� a�� ` _ 4r +r w s ��4 4~~~` ti T.�4 ~ �F+� ~ ` � _ ~� ti v� 1 Y� t�• r��'4 � �'y y* ++ � .t� ~� i*�` ti .`4 I � ♦ 'ti� a� �t 1 �� i' � � . �� f 1 � � '� -_� ti� I� i ��i � � ` � � �� — er: �. : . t_ '— - � � �- •+ �� F �`-'`"�� . �'•� r s� ` - �. �', '' ' •� . i. ~ �• S •- � �� . . ,� ' �'i r'i± + _. �� : Xy yr ` , - � _ ' . --r�.�:' � � ' � -� ' . .. �"4'..� . � � ' - . . . . . , J^�.��; � I i 100' 121' � 6' .� .� IL:]I � �� ; 106' � � � , f � , � � �'�� ,�, � 7 �� 5ketchUp Map with Expected Traffic Flow: N O� � � G N� O 3901 3007 2948 � � �� a 2942 7 �� 2948 Sagebrush Dr � � �� 6 � 7 (D ao�a 300� Sombrero Ln, � 3000 fl- Fort Collins, CO 80525 2943 N O � Q � O 7 Go gle 3006 Map data 02021 United States Terms Privacy Send feedback 50 ft � � N C N .n E � � 11 �' + 7 Agenda Item 5 STAFF Noah Beals, Senior City Planner/Zoning PROJECT ZBA210033 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Address: 501 Edwards St. Owner: On Track Homes, LLC Petitioner: Adam Jaspers Zoning District: N-C-M Code Section: 4.8(D)(2)(a)2; 4.8(E)(4) Variance Request: This is a request for a variance to increase the maximum buildable floor area by 80 square feet to 2480 square feet, and to encroach 5.8 feet into the required 15-foot street side-yard setback COMMENTS: 1. Backqround: The property was annexed into the City in as part of the Lake Park Addition in 1881. It received development approval at the same time but was later replatted as part of the Craft Resub Subdivision. The existing building was constructed in the early 1900's The existing structure has been owned by the place of worship immediately across the alley to the south. It has been used as the residence of the church operators. The applicant's plan is to demolition the existing structure and build and new single family detached dwelling. The existing dwelling encroaches 4.8 feet on the east 15-foot street-side setback. The east property line is 15 feet away from the back of the existing sidewalk along Whedbee Street. 2. Applicant's statement of iustification: See petitioner's letter. 3. Staff Conclusion and Findinqs: Under Section 2.10.4(H), staff recommends denial of the additional 80sf and finds that: • The proposed design does not meet the development standard prohibiting a second floor overhanging the lower front exterior wall. • 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 standards. • Insufficient evidence has been provided in establishing how the proposal would be nominal and inconsequential in the context of the neighborhood. Further, staff recommends approval of the 5.8 foot encroachment into the street-side yard setback and finds that: • The variance request is not detrimental to the public good. • The there is an additional 15 feet from the property line to the public sidewalk • Other similar sized lots interior to the block only have a 5 foot setback. Therefore, the variance request will not diverge from the standard but in a nominal, inconsequential Item # 5 - Page 1 Agenda Item 5 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 denial of one request and approval of the other request of APPEAL ZBA210033. Item # 5 - Page 2 Fort Collins � Application Request 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 qood. 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 wav 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 meetinq Location: 300 LaPorte Ave, Council Chambers, Fort Collins, CO 80524 Date: Second Thursday of the month Time: 8:30 a.m. Variance Address 501 Edwards st Petitioner's Name, dam Jaspers if not the Owner City � Fort Collins, CO Zip Code Owner's Name Code Section(s) Zoning District Petitioner's Relationship to the Owner is Petitioner's Address ON Track Homes Petitioner's Phone # Petitioner's Email isness owner 36763 Brian Ave Windsor CO 970-231-8632 adam@hwgcolorado.com Justification(s) I �1. Hardship Additional Representative's Name Representative's Address Justification(s) Additional Justification Representative's Phone # Justification(s) Additional Justification Representative's Email Reasoning If not enough room, additional written information may be submitted Please see attached Date Signature Updated 02.18.20 501 EdwardsSt We would ask that. To be granted a variance for building set backs that matches the neighboring interior lots. This would change our requirements to be a min 5 foot side yard width to the east and a min 5 foot side yard to the west. This would allow us to encroach 10 feet into the existing set back. CurrentSituation: 501 Edwards St currently has a house on the property that sits 3.5 feet off of the east lot line and 10 feet off of the west lot line. Additionally there is a 24 foot right of way between the property line and the street on the west side creating a total set back from the curb of 34 feet to the current structure. This corner lot is 40 feet wide and 140 feet deep, making it the same dimensions as the neighboring interior lots despite its corner location. There is however public right of way that separates the property from the street on the west of another 24 feet by 140 feet. Current set back requirements for this corner lot would require that any building be 5 feet from the east lot line, and 15 feet from the west lot line. This would only leave a buildable width of 20 feet. While most corner lots are wider than the adjoining interior lots that is not the case with 501 Edwards. We do however have an additional 24 foot public easement to the west. Proposed Home: We would like to build a new house on the existing lot. The new building would be the same width as the existing structure (east west). We propose that the new building footprint be shifted to the west approx.l.5 feet to meet the side yard requirements. This would leave a total distance of approx. 9 feet to the property line, with and additional 24 feet of right of way giving a total set back of approximately 33 feet from the street. 501 EdwardsSt We request that: We would ask that our total interior square footage allowance be increased from 2400 to 2480 sq feet Current: The lot at 501 Edwards is a 40 foot wide 140 foot long which would allow a single family home to be built that has a total of 2400sqft of interior floor space. Calculated as lots sqft x.25 +1000sqft. Proposed: We would like to increase the allowed square footage to 2480 as shown on the site plan. The total house sits on the front half of the lot. � V V �Y �� V V 1 �1�� d�JL �� V V ��✓+ ��q ��L1'�� ✓��1 V✓/9 �✓`i1 rae aecvu�a (P�.�os o :o posses�.00 oF rh.s r.i/ � oogo:zes �h.s orow.:,y :,�o-�m�t o� p�o�.u:o., i� o�d rnot rne�o�g�oi o ow:.,g �e a n the p�opv(y of M//o�d ond Associotes /(d By the u of the O owing, the RECE/�ER og ees (o fhe tu//es( exten( oJ (he /ow, to /ndemnily ond ho/d M///o�d ond Associotes /td ho�m/ess Jom ony c/oim, /obi%ty a� ost �n / d/ng ot[a�ney lees and def s rostsJ o//eqed/y a�ising out o! ony reuse o� madJco[on of the Orawinq, e The O owing is dvi�ed Jom /nla�mat'on gathved du�/ng fie/d s � � a! the sr7e by M//o�d ond Associotes /1d ond/o� p�io� p/ons p�ouided byuothe�s lyh%e the oc �ocy ot the O owrng wos suifob/e fo� MrI/ �d ond Associates /1d o�gino/cu e, M]/o�d ond Associotes /td � ends thot the RECE/I�cR ✓e�ity the o �acy of the into�mo(on contahedcomlhe Orow/ng fo Iheir satstocton. M%/ordcand Associoles /td he�eby gonts u a/ Ihe inla�mofon ron(orned in (he O ow/nq, as /um/shed and noled !o� use by the RECE/IER MISCELLANEOUS NOTES: 5 3 � � W H � U O � c2$ � .a -Jn-�\ W � L � � � N � � � O � �� U� O � ,� U W�,� i 3 � U� � U � - .� =o� ��w�� A I -O COVER PAGE i I os 8 �, t' . • �• � ��_ �� _ ��_ �� — �� ,o��.l I �P _...� o Po. � � � � �� .— — — J ��ooR � , ,ao o. -- — -- � --- . . , �EA� E COVERED q� � PORGFi AI2E „ . 365Q � O�a� �LCi.iET-- FT �'� �o.� .. � � .J£oKtJtJ'vl ._ ____-__--- � .. .. O �.. _-�,____�'____ a ___ �i___'.z- _ _-- --y`_-_ _ _ _ _ _ r. �� . I..I � d� O i' P � �00 �/a'$ C MAIN LEVEL AREA 1240 SQ FT � � � O O „�� r O O COVERED FRONT PORCH AREH 55 SQ FT oor rian o�o DOOR SGhEDULE S�Af �I — I � F�ooR P�ANS � � .6�_ 3 >o n � . = _o- �, `z I °`8 a� Upper Level Floor Plan � ,.,E .-,_o Fo 5 3 � � H � U O � c2$ � .a -n�1\ nW\ W L ��('� V1 � N � � � O � �� U� O � ,� U W�,� � � i �— U� � U � - .� =o� �A I -4 FLOOR FRAMING / FOUNDATION PLANS a� Upper Level Floor Framing Plan �=,E ,. o — �� Main Level Floor Framing Plan � _- � ,<�� _ o Q� Foundation/Footing Plan � .�� „ -,. � � ! � � � �� t :. � �� ' \ -�. �� '��' I — ! ,.. �� « U � , _� , � , — � East Elevation �� - �----------------------------------------------------------------------------------�--� � �P� " �. �.� ��) ', � --5 � � � �-1------------------ ----- �'� t--�---------------------------------� South Elevation �-�a x 5 � , � � � o a r.. - ,..`^� � P "' E , 4.t �> �� , � � � � ,. ... ,. ____ __ W - � U -' �I I❑' — O � � � � , , ._,. � , �? I�� ,� �, � 0 � 0 �� , . � , _� _ -�� .. �� ,; � � � � �,�� ;� � ��\�� Z „--r � � � � � � �� ,.. i i i �i� ===-�i i i � -nI�\ i i i i i i i i ��' W � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � i i i i i � �—Y------�--1�---------��—Y- ----�--� � � North Elevation N x4� ,.-,_o � � O � �� U� � � ,� U W�,� � � � i � C� � U � — .,� — O o � � I� I� � � ` - . L u� � � -- _ � � � �� ; �'�I � � � � � � Ii- � [�l � , �. — — --- — _ � � � � � � �� L � � ; ' .�� __� �� "" West Elevation � " ', ��--� � �� L---1--------------------------------------------------------------------------------1--J �A4— I EXrER�oR ELEVATIONS ,i��4 I o 8 _a — � � "' � � . --- _ i i ,��_ ,_ �,. T i . i m i , I i i � i i i � � i f i „�,S �T ...�... i .,, i --- � — � � i u� Roof Plan -E-T-- RAILING NOIE`i- �� Typ. Stair/Railing Detail �� " ' Coffered Ceiling Feild � o.,, Coffered Ceiling @ Wall 2 E�. _,ao-o � ' v e ac .3 �\ � � g � r.z�.c. m.wrre �.\ y d5$�$ �.0 suau� sa.m „43 �' � .Eo � � Tva. Basement Wall Section i yN. .�ian vc�au 2 oa.�..� .�. \ ��. ose ��aaooR � 2 ��. �aE� re'� ._� w000 e.:E \ �.a„�Eq oz.e�weaoz�� oaE ��.E � � —� owaz x �„.ca au� I �� ' ��o�� , —. �s a� . �.�n.,� �' � � ��,�.�, o� � "�:c �ah�x�U�a �o.� � -�:`esa _ ,_�n =a,.�oW �, �� .�o °�°��°�°•°, "'°` Wall Section - A :� h w h � �'ti � w � EDWARDS STREET � � _ I _ I I r F I I I I .. � I v�:l I 501 Edxvards Sheet FortCoilins, Colorado 80i26, Legal: LOTIO,BLKI4,CRAFTS RESUBDNISION OF LAKE PARK ADDITION, CI1'Y Ok FORT COLLMS, COLRVTYOFLA2/MER,STATE OF COLORADO. u,,, - �� I ' 'I � � � � �� I I I I ` Existing Site Plan � � � � , , � �,E � l ��. � � L�----�J4 ... N89°55'26"W 40A3' ALLEY r-------------•— � � tior�. I�ae�� , ,_� �.. i �E � .,�.� .,..ti -� .,.. _�� I i � W � � � ro w � EDWARDS STREET / � � f— � � I s�s�asl,.s': t 11,� � i i II .w I ��w��:�e I �� I �..; I Fz�jE� I I I>� I �C !V / � � � I �� } ' / I ��,. � I�� ' � New Site Plan � � �',� � � �� , � � �� / I � � , � �� . �. �� — �•�- `� ------ __ N89�55'26'W 40 03' — ALLEY �--------------- I � . �A.. �_ Ia� � o� �.o.A �,. ,s» _ ��- � .o.,o�„�, .�oMPA�. ,�.P� o��. I I o-� ... ... :�: q----_�, � � � I � � � � I I I I I 1 1 1 \ � \ � � ��, � v o. .0 / � � I I � � I I � i �I- -� I I � �m f I I _� I \� I �� \ � , UP'�,. r \I . � ' k - -- q� � , �� o �---� —, �� , � � � � ;� �� , �� , �� --- --� �, ��,-- � �_,� No,E Q�Basement Electrical Plan �. �� „-,� c. UF � � I .R:y— . �$ :b .�.. _ � ��; —, �R I -' / / � � � I I� � / I / `\ l \ I 1 � `_ � � J ' ' � tr �I �— .,.... � � � � � � , , „ o�, Q � . �� _ '�'_ _'��„� � '_ , _ � '�� I ... y `T�� \ I � � `� � �l __ .. ____ �.� I � ' � F_ — — ` I � ,____4__" I ' � I I ' ��- -� � � / F � . \ ' / �' �P 7 ' � _ t .._�:� 1 , l .I I ', ', I ' I � � " � � ', I : I � �-��... 1� � �,� � I �I �a ' I'' ' I `�j�l I F L` I ' 1 I � � ' � � � u� I \ -�F§ \ `� /� �� / 4s \� � I yyy i �- : . ��' g � � ��' ��-@$ �� UP�"�:.� ��______, i� � '.� �� :�" , , . � ; , ��, � � ; � � � '� � ° � � ,- ` '----' %, � , � , � � � � ' ---� � u.,i� � --- � , , , _ �- �' ,-�--, �� _ i� �\ ._a,—z�,� Fzt �i'%f �,� ,.,� : �. .�F �, , _ , � � , . . �---, ' � � Q� Main Level Electrical Plan �= E ,.,_o ELEGTRICAL DATA. iAUDlO NOTES� ELECTRICAL NOTES ow. .,o.. ... ,� AUDIO F N DATA / CABLE Q�Upper Level Electrical Plan � _ ,. .., _a � �, r�� , ; � �� , � �. ; �� , . '�,I ; � �. �--- � o ; �� -C�O; _ �°; � , il_ �� , ;, NarE�, ' ��I '�' �. ; ---�--- a�Basement HVAC Ducting Plan � _.� ,�� -� ,C � .H � � _ � �� [, �__ �� ;� � �� __ ' tiorE � � a a�Main Level HVAC Ducting Plan � ,.,E ,�-o , �� Q��