Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLand Use Review Commission - Minutes - 01/11/2024 Ian Shuff, Chair Dave Lawton, Vice Chair David Carron Nathaniel Coffman John McCoy Philip San Filippo Katie Vogel Council Liaison: Shirley Peel Staff Liaison: Noah Beals LOCATION: City Council Chambers 300 Laporte Avenue Fort Collins, CO 80521 The City of Fort Collins will make reasonable accommodations for access to City services, programs, and activities and will make special communication arrangements for persons with disabilities. Please call 221-6515 (TDD 224-6001) for assistance. REGULAR MEETING JANUARY 11, 2024 8:30 AM • CALL TO ORDER and ROLL CALL All Commission members were present with the exception of member Vogel. • APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM PREVIOUS MEETING Commission member Coffman made a motion, seconded by Lawton to approve the December 14, 2023, Regular Hearing Minutes. The motion was approved; Vogel was absent; San Filippo abstained from voting. • CITIZEN PARTICIPATION (Items Not on the Agenda) • APPEALS FOR VARIANCE TO THE LAND USE CODE 1. APPEAL ZBA230029 Address: 1402 E Harmony Rd Owner: Prenzlow Enterprises II LLC Petitioner: Nanette Park, Partner Owner / Kevin Bowes, Action Signs Zoning District: H-C Code Section: 3.8.7.2(B) Project Description: This is a request for a variance to 3.8.7.2(B) regarding a relocation of two signs from prior business location to be installed at a new location with the Residential Neighborhood Sign District, where wall sign height is limited to 2.5 feet. The signs are approximately 4.5 feet tall, roughly 2 feet taller than what is allowed within the Residential Neighborhood Sign District. LAND USE REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES Land Use Review Commission Page 2 DRAFT Minutes – January 11, 2024 Staff Presentation: Beals presented slides relevant to the appeal and discussed the variance request, noting that the property is located on the corner of Wheaton Dr and E Harmony Rd. The property is currently vacant as it is being renovated for the applicant. The property is located in the same parking lot as a large Safeway grocery store. The request is to install signs that are over-height compared to what is allowed. The property is located in the residential neighborhood sign district, which means signs need to be smaller than what is allowed in a commercial district. The subject property is across from residential areas facing Wheaton, and faces commercial districts along E Harmony Rd. The signs in question were previously installed on the applicant’s former location and are intended for re-use at the subject property location. The signs complied while in use at the previous location. The signs would be placed on the south and east sides of the subject property; neither of those face a residential area. To note, at some point in time the City did allow Safeway to have signs bigger than what is allowed by code. Those signs are also on sides of that building that do not face residential areas. The portion of the sign that is in question is the logo. The logo image is taller than the allowed 2.5 feet. A sign would be placed on the south side of the building, facing E Harmony Rd where the main entrance to the business is located. Another sign would be placed on the east side of the building, facing the parking lot. West side facing residential area would not be signed, nor would the south side of the building which faces parking and dumpster enclosure areas. Brad Yatabe, Assistant City Attorney, noted that our sign code is based on “time, use, and manner”. As such, a sign’s content is not within the purview of the Commission. Instead, review should be based only on criteria of size and placement. Applicant Presentation: Applicants Nanette Park (and husband) introduced herself and Kevin Bowes, Action Signs. Bowes addressed the Commission and offered comment, stating that he enjoys working within and applying the sign code of the City of Fort Collins. In this instance, applying the letter of the law in terms of sign code does not work well for this business and their desire to use/move existing signs to their new location. The applicants need to have the Pancake Pete logo large enough to that the word “original” is visible. This allows them to capture the value of a nationally known brand. The signs are taller than what is allowed, but only consume approximately 50% of the allowable sign area. The former tenant had more signage by area as well as a continuous accent light bar running along the eaves. This variance is the most efficient use of the property and through the planned placement of the signs, the applicants have attempted to minimize the impact. Member San Filippo asked Bowes what influenced the decision to place signs on the south and east? Bowes responded it was purely owner preference. Signs could have been placed on the west, facing the residential development. However, the most efficient solution was to re-use existing signs on two prominent elevations. Sign placement is also limited by architectural elements present on the building. Public Comment: -NONE- Commission Discussion: Commission member Coffman noted the signs would face east and south and avoid facing residential areas, and in that way the application follows intent of residential sign district. The signs won’t disturb the adjacent commercial area. A small portion of overall sign out of compliance. Land Use Review Commission Page 3 DRAFT Minutes – January 11, 2024 Vice-Chair Lawton stated his belief that this variance would have minimal impact, and it is good to see a vacant business being filled. No issue foreseen with residential areas. Lawton stated he would support the variance request. Commission member San Filippo noted the signs would aid traffic safety, as they create an opportunity for drivers to signal a turn adequately and navigate to the business safely and efficiently. San Filippo has no issues with the request as presented. Commission member Carron stated his agreement with members’ previous statements, adding that the application appears to follow the intent of the Land Use Code. Chair Shuff agreed with previous comments made by members. He stated that he appreciates the applicant’s comparison of sign size. Shuff believes the application can be approved when compared against the nominal and inconsequential justification. Commission member Coffman made a motion, seconded by Carron, to APPROVE ZBA230029 for the following reasons: the variance is not detrimental to the public good; the sign locations do not face any residential uses; the height increase is only a portion of the sign; the height increase is short than the tallest sign in the shopping center. Therefore, the variance request will not diverge from the standard but in a nominal and inconsequential way when considered in the context of the neighborhood and will continue to advance the Land Use Code contained in Section 1.2.2. Yeas: Carron, Coffman, Shuff, McCoy, San Filippo, Lawton Nays: Absent: Vogel THE MOTION CARRIED, THE ITEM WAS APPROVED • OTHER BUSINESS -Beals: officer elections will be held in April, based on seating of new members in March 2024 following updated cadence. -Items have been submitted for next month, we will plan to meet. -Brad Yatabe – during adoption of minutes, there was a vote to abstain. A few years ago, Council adopted practice that a vote to abstain functions as a vote to support. At times when a member is not present to during meeting which Minutes were taken. Yatabe advises that members can vote yes even if not present, as an administrative function. San Filippo clarified he was not present during the December 14, 2023, meeting and appreciated the counsel. -Preference form Council is to have members vote yes/no rather than abstention. • ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 8:57am. Meeting Minutes were approved at the February 8, 2024, LURC Regular Meeting. All members present voted to approve the Minutes.