HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/28/2001 - ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS - AGENDA - Regular Meeting Zoning Board of Appeals
Agenda
Regular Meeting
Thursday,June 28,2001
Roll Call
Approval of the Minutes from the April 12, 2001 Meeting
Appeal: 2342 2000 Harmony Dr
The variance would reduce the required side yard setback along the south lot line from 5' to 4' in order
to allow the construction of a 2 story addition to the rear of the existing house. The south wall of the
addition will line up with the existing south wall of the home.
Code Sections: 4.1(D)(2)(d)
Petitioner: Ed Davis
Zo►iingDistrict LIE
Appeal: 2343 LTS 18-24, 41-47 RIGDEN FARMS
The variance would reduce the required rear yard setback for detached garages/carriage units/lofts on
Lots 18-24 and 41-47 of Rigen Farm 1st from 15 feet to 5 feet, and would allow home occupations to
be conducted in these detached buildings, rather than in the house located on the front of the lots.
Code Sections: 3.5.2(D)(3) & 3.8.3(1)
Petitioner: ROBERT HAND, FOR OWNERS
ZoningDistrict LMN
Other Business
Zoning Board of Appeals
Agenda
Regular Meeting
Thursday, June 28, 2001
Appeal 2342
Address 2000 Harmony Dr
Petitioner Ed Davis
Zoning District UE
Section 4.1(D)(2)(d)
Description The variance would reduce the required side yard setback along the south
lot line from 5' to 4' in order to allow the construction of a two story addition
to the rear of the existing house. The south wall of the addition will line up
with the existing south wall of the home.
Hardship The original builder didn't build the home parallel to the side lot line.
Therefore, the front corner of the home is 6.75' from the lot line, while the
existing back corner is only 5' from the lot line. Any addition along the
existing south wail will continue to get closer to the lot line. While the lot is
not irregularly shaped, the fact that the home was constructed canted on
the lot does create a hardship.
Staff Comments This is an older subdivision that was constructed in compliance with the RL
setback standards contained in the previous zoning code. Therefore, a 5'
side yard setback is required. If the original builder had built the home
parallel to the lot line, then a variance would not be required for this
addition.
Appeal 2343
Address LTS 18-24, 41-47 RIGDEN FARMS
Petitioner ROBERT HAND, FOR OWNERS
Zoning District LMN
Section 3.5.2(D)(3) & 3.8.3(1)
Description The variance would reduce the required rear yard setback for detached
garages/carriage units/Iofts on Lots 18-24 and 41-47 of Rigden Farm 1st
G from 15 feet to 5 feet, and would allow home occupations to be conducted
in these detached buildings, rather than in the house located on the front of
v the lots.
Hardship See petitioner's letter regarding request for a variance due to the "equal to
or better than" standard.
Staff Comments See staff memo.
]1�Qji�'h4 w��It rht t!,'S,ao ya'
e
0
J
v
Community Planning and Environmental Services
Building and Zoning Department
City of Fort Collins
MEMORANDUM
DATE: May 26, 2001
TO: Zoning Board of Appeals Members
FROM: Peter Barnes, Zoning Administrator
RE: June ZBA Meeting
I either talked to all of you or left messages for you last week regarding the rescheduling
of the June 2001 ZBA meeting. The meeting will not be held on June 14, 2001 as
originally scheduled, but will instead by on June 28, 2001.
There are only 2 items on the agenda, but one of them could be considered a complex
item that should be debated when full staff services are available for support. The
applicant needs to get started on this new development, and felt that postponing it until
the regular July meeting would be detrimental, since he needs to now how to proceed
as soon as possible. Therefore, the decision was made to reschedule the June
meeting. Please make sure your calendars are marked for Thursday, June 28, 2001.
Your flexibility has been appreciated by all. Thanks.
281 'North College Avenue • PO. Box 580 • Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 • (970)221,6760 • FAX (970)224-6134
Appeal•
111 Har-mony Dr.
Rigden Farms
Citv of Fort Collins
}I k
� u
L Y y,
'r y•y +r p.F � t
-a
.4
- as —
uI
,
�' � ";,1. 1• o _. -pis,,.. — ,.,�,.
, 1
3r �.r ' �' �i � 11 f •
y
I � yF-
i -
i �VI
Low
_ 4; s
'V?rf—�r�'at—..�.
��. �
� _ -.
Id 5
I I
`.. p
�. R
_ .s�-�
� � _
��
F � � ��
i.','-
�� _ _ � _
T erg -_� '�^`���� _ � .._�®-.-r _ '- _.__"""__
G��
14Y
��1�+�'��`�9
,.
i i'i`;
-._- .- ti
- --�-s-. - - _ _
F,_
�.------_."__� -3
�,�.� q
_._ -. .�r.�, ....
�_ � o _ � ___ -�:�v__ _
n
f
ITEM NO.ZBA #2343
MEETING DATE 6/28/01
STAFF___Troy]o�
City of Fort Collins
STAFF REPORT
PROJECT: ZONING VARIANCE TO RIGDEN FARM, FILING ONE,
LOTS 18-24 & 41-47— [Zoning Board of Appeals]
OWNERIAPPLICANT:
Robert Hand
Settler's Green LLLP
1901 Avery Court
Fort Collins, CO 80525
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This is a request for a zoning variance for two specific sections of the
Land Use Code for the Rigden Farm Filing One Project Development Plan, Lots 18-24 & 41-47.
One of the requests is to reduce the minimum required rear yard setback from 15 feet to 5 feet,
and the other to allow home occupations to be conducted in accessory buildings detached from the
dwelling units themselves and located above detached rear yard garages.
, - RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the modification request to sections 3.5.2(D)(3) & 3.8.3(1) of the
Land Use Code.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: This is a request for two zoning variances to the Rigden Farm Filing One
P.D.P., Lots 18-24 & 41-47. The variances are to following two sections of the Land Use Code:
(1) 3.5.2 Residential Building Standards (D) Residential Building Setbacks(3) Side and Rear
Yard Setbacks—This section of the Land Use Code requires that the side yard setback for all
residential buildings be at least five (5) feet, and that the rear yard setback for all residential
buildings be at least fifteen (15) feet.
(2) 3.8.3 Home Occupation (1) - This section of the Land Use Code requires that such home
occupation uses shall be conducted entirely within a dwelling;
COMMENTS
1. BACKGROUND
The site is one block within the Rigden Farm Filing One, P.D.P., more specifically, lots 18-24 & 41-
47 (See exhibit E). The surrounding zoning and land uses are as follows:
NW: LMN —Approved lots in Rigden Farm First Filing (under construction), Parkside East at
Rigden Farm P.D.P.,
MMN & NC — Undeveloped phases of the Rigden Farm Development,
COMMUNITY PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 281 N.College Ave. P.O.Box 580 Fort Collins,CO80522-0580 (970)221-6750
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Zoning Variance Request to Rigden Farm Filing One, Lots 18-24 & 41-47, ZBA #2343
June 28, 2001 Zoning Board of Appeals
Page 2
T—Cargil Research Farm, historic barn, farm land,
N: LMN —Approved lots in Rigden Farm First Filing (under construction),
E: LMN, approved filing 1 of Rigden Farm (under construction), Rigden Farm 6`' Filing P.D.P.
(under review),
S: LMN —Approved lots in Rigden Farm First Filing (under construction), a neighborhood
center (under construction) including relocated Johnson Farm structures, Rigden Farm 61h
Filing P.D.P. (under review),
RL— existing Dakota Ridge and Stone Ridge Residential Developments,
W: LMN - LaGrange Multifamily Housing at Rigden Farm P.D.P. (under final review),
MMN & NC— undeveloped phases of the Rigden Farm Development.
The property (Lots 18-24 & 41-47) is east of Des Moines Drive, north of Custer Drive, south of
Topeka Lane, and west of Canby Way. It was annexed into the City as part of the Timberline
Annexation in November of 1997.
The Rigden Farm development has a large portion ( 220.4 acres) of the site in the LMN — Low
Density Mixed-use Neighborhood zone district. The density required in the LMN zone district is at
least 5 dwelling units per net acre but no more than 8 dwelling units per gross acre for the overall
portion of LMN within the Rigden Farm development. The Land Use Code allows the density to be
shifted around within the LMN zone, so long as the overall density of 5 to 8 units per acre is
achieved for the whole LMN portion of the entire Rigden Farm Development. In a nut shell, what
this means is that the western portion of Rigden Farm's LMN zone is approved on the O.D.P. at a
density between 8 and 12 units per acre, while the eastern portion of the LMN zone is approved
between 1 and 3.7 units per acre.
Parcels F, G, H, I, J, K, L, & M of the Overall Development Plan constitute the LMN portion of the
Rigden Farm Development (see exhibit A). There is flexibility within the O.D.P. approval to allow for
carriage units because the O.D.P. does not specify an exact number of units, but rather gives a
range of unit count for each parcel. This site is part of parcel H on the O.D.P., which specifies a
range of units between 150 and 200. This O.D.P. approval allows lots within parcel H to include
carriage units so long as the maximum specified number of 200 units is not exceeded within parcel
H. Currently the land within the O.D.P. parcel H is all either approved or under review. As
approved or proposed, there are 159 definite units identified in parcel H. This leaves the flexibility
for an additional 41 units to be provided in parcel H in the form of carriage units (See exhibit B).
This site is part of the approved Rigden Farm First Filing P.D.P. It is because these lots have
already obtained P.D.P. approval, that any request to deviate from the standards in the Land Use
Code fall under jurisdiction of the Zoning Board of Appeals.
2. THE ZONING VARIANCE PROCESS
(A) Section 2.10.2(H) of the LUC specifies that in order to approve a variance from the
standards, the Zoning Board of Appeals must find that:
(1) the granting of the variance is not detrimental to the public good,
(2) the granting of the variance not authorize any change in use other than to a use
that is allowed subject to Building Permit review, and that
(3) One of the following conditions is satisfied:
Zoning Variance Request to Rigden Farm Filing One, Lots 18-24 &41-47, ZBA #2343
4 June 23, 2001 Zoning Board of Appeals
Page 3
(a) the strict application of the standard sought to be varied would result in
unusual practical difficulties or hardship, or
(b) the proposal as submitted will advance or protect the public interests and
purposes of the standard for which the variance is requested equally well
or better than would a proposal which complies with the standard.
3. APPLICANT'S REQUEST
The applicant requests variances to sections 3.8.3(1) and 3.5.2(D)(3) of the Land Use Code, forl
Lots 18-24 &41-47of Rigden Farm Filing One P.D.P. The proposed variance requests meet the
requirements of LUC 2.10.2 Variance Review Procedures (H) Step 8 (Standards). Please see the
attached written justification by the applicant and Exhibit E.
4. ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE REQUEST
(A) Variance Request#1 — Section 3.5.2 (D)(3) requires that the minimum rear yard setback be at
least 15 feet.
- The applicant proposes to reduce the rear yard setbacks between the detached rear-yard garages
and the rear property line from 15 feet to 5 feet.
Staff finds that the granting of variance request #1 would not be detrimental to the public good
because the requested reduced setback does not enable any buildings to encroach into the 5 foot
wide utility easements that are located along the rear property lines.
After some internal staff discussion, planning staff has determined that the general public interest
that is addressed by the 15 foot rear yard setback is to provide residential lots with a usable
amount of rear yard area. The setback ensures that the entire lot can not be filled to the rear
property line with building mass. The houses on these lots are proposed have small front yard
setbacks which in turn increases the distance between the rear facade of the house and the rear
property line. If the 15 foot rear yard setback were used, the detached garage building would
create two separated pieces of rear yard, one between the house and the garage, and one
between the garage and the rear property line. By reducing the rear yard setback from 15 feet to
5 feet, the majority of the rear yard can be consolidated into a single usable yard space. Staff
finds that the granting of variance request#1 will advance the public interests of the standard
equally well or better than would a plan that satisfies the standard because the granting of the
variance will increase the usable rear yard space for lots containing detached rear-yard garages.
(See exhibits C & D).
The purpose of the section being varied is stated in section 3.5.2(A) of the LUC, which states, "The
following standards are intended to promote variety, visual interest and pedestrian-oriented streets
in residential development." It is only the lots that will have a rear-yard garage (with optional
carriage units or home occupation) that will be reducing the rear yard setback from 15 to 5 feet.
The general language in City Plan and the Land Use Code regarding garages indicates that
garage doors are perceived to be generally less visually interesting than the living area of a house
or a front porch. In article 5 of the LUC, within the definition of pedestrian-oriented development," it
Zoning Variance Request to Rigden Farm Filing One, Lots 18-24 & 41-47, ZBA #2343
June 28, 2001 Zoning Board of Appeals
Page 4
states, "in pedestrian-oriented developments, buildings are typically placed relatively close to the
street and the main entrance is oriented to the street sidewalk or a walkway. . . although parking
areas and garages may be provided, they are not given primary emphasis in the design of the
site."The very nature of a pedestrian-oriented street is therefore enhanced by removing the garage
doors from the street facing fagade of the primary house. Staff finds that the plan as submitted will
protect the purposes of the standard better than would a plan which complies with the standard
because the visual interest and pedestrian-oriented nature of the residential development is
enhanced on houses where garages are not part of the street facing house fagade.
(B) Variance Request#2— Section 3.8.3 (1) requires that permitted home occupation uses shall
be conducted entirely within a dwelling.
The applicant requests the allowance of home occupations to be located in rooms to be built above
the detached garages in the rear yard of the lots at Settler's Green.
Staff finds that the granting of variance request #2 would not be detrimental to the public good
because home occupation uses, whether attached or detached from the dwelling, will continue to
be required to be clearly incidental and secondary to the use of the dwelling and will not be allowed
to change the residential character.
Staff finds that the granting of variance request#2 will protect the public interests of the standard
equally well as would a plan which satisfies the standard for the same reason that the variance is
not detrimental to the public good, which is because home occupation uses, whether attached or
detached from the dwelling, will continue to be required to be clearly incidental and secondary to
the use of the dwelling and will not be allowed to change the residential character.
There is no stated purpose in the Land Use Code for this standard. After much discussion
between the Current Planning Department and the Zoning Department, staff has come up with a
statement that we feel captures the purpose of this standard, as follows: `The purpose of allowing
a home occupation as a permitted accessory use to a dwelling is to permit the inhabitants of a
dwelling to conduct self-employment(and one support employee) on the property where that
inhabitant resides in buildings with a residential character that one would normally expect to find on
a residential lot(such as homes, sheds or garages). This self-employment use is intended to only
be permitted when the impacts to the neighborhood are minimal."Staff finds that the proposed plan
reflecting variance request #2 will protect said purpose equally well as would a plan that satisfied
the standard because a garage is a type of building that would normally be expected to be located
on a residential lot, and having a second floor home office above the garage does not change the
residential character.
5. FINDINGS OF FACT/CONCLUSION:
A. The requested zoning variances are subject to review and decision by the Zoning Board of
Appeals.
B. Granting the variance request #1 would not be detrimental to the public good because the
requested reduced setback does not enable any buildings to encroach into the 5 foot wide
utility easements that are located along the rear property lines.
Zoning Variance Request to Rigden Farm Filing One, Lots 18-24 & 41-47, ZBA #2343
June 28, 2001 Zoning Board of Appeals
Page 5
C. Granting the variance request #1 would not authorize any change in use as there is no request
by the applicant to do so.
D. Granting the variance request #1 will advance the public interests of the standard equally well
or better than would a plan that satisfies the standard because the granting of the variance will
increase the usable rear yard space for lots containing detached rear-yard garages
E. Granting the variance request #1 will protect the purposes of the standard better than would a
plan which complies with the standard because the visual interest and pedestrian-oriented
nature of the residential development is enhanced on houses where garages are not part of the
street facing house fagade. Ocr
�Cf) C0+4Kt.-,� rt Var,e.rnot wvud�f r,� in 1�EA�in�t tN�f� i�t +/?`tlUH of '41t P S'Wen 0"0-" Aew-1y),,P,
F. Granting the requested variance request #2 would not be detrimental to the public good Qt
because home occupation uses, whether attached or detached from the dwelling, will continue
to be required to be clearly incidental and secondary to the use of the dwelling and will not be
allowed to change the residential character.
G. Granting the variance request #2 would not authorize any change in use as there is no request
by the applicant to do so.
H. Granting the requested variance request#2 will protect the public interests of the standard
equally well as would a plan which satisfies the standard because home occupation uses,
whether attached or detached from the dwelling, will continue to be required to be clearly
incidental and secondary to the use of the dwelling and will not be allowed to change the
residential character.
I. Granting the modification request #2 will protect said purpose equally well as would a plan
that satisfied the standard because a garage is a type of building that would normally be
expected to be located on a residential lot, and having a second floor home office above the
garage does not change the residential character.
6. RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the variance requests to sections 3.5.2(D)(3), and 3.8.3(1)
for the Rigden Farm Filing One P.D.P., Lots 18-24 & 41-47.
May 25, 2001
Peter Barnes
Zoning Administrator
Building and Zoning Department
City of Fort Collins
281 North College
Fort Collins, CO 80524
Dear Mr. Barnes:
W are requesting variances to the following standards for Lots 18-24 and Lots 41-47, Rigden
Farm Filing One (See attached plat map).
3.8.3(1)Home Occupation.A home occupation shall be allowed as a permitted
accessory use,provided that all of the following conditions are met:
(1) Such use shall be conducted entirely within a dwelling and carried on by the
inhabitants of the dwelling with not more than one (1)additional employee or co-worker.
3.5.2(D)(3)Side and Rear Yard Setbacks. The minimum side yard setback for all
residential buildings and for all detached accessory buildings that are incidental to the
residential building shall be five (5) feet from the property line. if a zero-lot line
development plan is proposed, a single six-foot minimum side yard is required. Rear
yard setbacks in residential areas shall be a minimum of fifteen (15) feet from the rear
property line, except for garages and storage sheds not exceeding eight(8) feet in
height, where the minimum setback shall be zero(0)feet, and for alley-accessed
garages and dwellings for which the minimum setback shall be eight(8) feet.
VARIANCE #1
3.8.3(1)Home Occupation
We are requesting a variance to the standards for 3.8.3(1) because under the strict
interpretation of the code, one could not conduct a home based business in one of the
"carriage houses" (i.e. The rooms to be built above the garages) due to the fact that it is a
detached building from the primary dwelling unit.
We maintain that the granting of a variance to 3.8.3(1) allowing home based businesses in a
structure that is detached from the primary dwelling unit would serve the public interest as
equally well or better than being required to comply with the current standard. This variance is
requested for the following reasons:
NOT DETRIMENTAL TO THE PUBLIC GOOD
This variance would permit what is currently allowed (i.e. home occupation) in a single dwelling
unit to be done in two structures, the house and the carriage unit, located together on one
common lot.
ADVANCES OR PROTECTS THE PUBLIC INTERESTS
1. There would be a reduction in traffic if the home owner could conduct their business at
home rather than having to drive to another location.
2. The carriage units that will be built over the detached garages work towards achieving
the goals and objectives of city's Comprehensive Plan. Specifically the following:
PRINCIPLE AN-4: Design policies for residential buildings are intended to
emphasize creativity, diversity, and individuality. The following design policies
are based on the premise that truly creative design is responsive to its
context and the expressed preferences of citizens, and contributes to a
comfortable, interesting community.
Policy AN-4.5 Home Occupations. Home occupations should be allowed in
all residential areas provided they do not generate excessive traffic and
parking, or have signage that is not consistent with the residential character
of the neighborhood.
ADVANCES OR PROTECTS THE PURPOSES OF THE STANDARD
2.8 Supplementary Regulations
3.8.3 Home Occupations
NOTE: There are no stated purposes for these standards.
We can only conjecture that the intent of the standards requiring a home occupation to be
within the dwelling unit was to prevent an owner with a large lot to build a secondary building
with the intent of operating a significant business from that building, thus impacting the
surrounding neighborhood.
Our project provides for optional carriage units (i.e. bonus room, loft, studio, "granny flat") to be
built over the detached garages. If we were building a standard front loaded attached garage
these rooms would be within the dwelling unit and a modification would not be necessary. We
feel that our design advances and protects the intent of the standard even though the home
occupation would be separated from the dwelling unit, it is contained within the same small lot.
VARIANCE #2
3.5.2(D)(3) Side and Rear Yard Setbacks
We feel that our request for reducing the required rear set-back from 15' to 5' will advance or
protect the public interests and purposes of the standard for which the variance is requested
equally well or better than would a plan which complies with the standard. This variance is
requested for the following reasons:
NOT DETRIMENTAL TO THE PUBLIC GOOD
1. Reducing the rear yard setback from 15' to 5' would not have a detrimental impact on the
privacy of the surrounding neighbors. The covenants for Rigden Farm do not allow for high
or solid fences along the property boundaries.
2. Granting this variance request increases the feasibility and viability of this project. People
seeking this type of home and neighborhood also expect to obtain a minimal amount of
yard space. By being forced to adhere to the current setback standards while also trying to
provide an alternative to "garage dominated" designs would force us to provide nominal
yard space. We are concerned that the lack of yard space would negatively impact the
feasibility of the project.
3. The change in the setback would not impact any current residences since now house are
on the lots yet. If this variance is granted potential buyers would be made aware of the new
setback and the possibility that they are a future neighbor could possibly situate their
garage/carriage unit 5' from the rear property line.
ADVANCES OR PROTECTS THE PUBLIC INTERESTS
1. The overall Rigden Farm project was intended to and designed to encourage the option of
detached garages and carriage units at the rear of the property. Because detached
garages consume more of the available land, we are requesting this variance to allow
families on these lots to have a bit more yard space between their house and the detached
garage. This advances the public's interest by protecting small children in providing them a
protected play yard area.
2. We feel that this plan advances the public's interest significantly by addressing the
following specific community needs outlined in the city's Comprehensive Plan:
PRINCIPLE AN-5: All new residential buildings should be designed to
emphasize the visually interesting features of the building, as seen
from the public street and sidewalk.The visual impact of garage
doors, driveways,and other off-street parking will be minimized and
mitigated.
Policy AN-5.1 Garages and Driveways. To foster visual interest along a
neighborhood street, the street frontage devoted to protruding garage doors and
driveway curb crossings will be limited. Generally, garages should be recessed, or if
feasible,tucked into side or rear yards, using variety and creativity to avoid a
streetscape dominated by the repetition of garage doors. Locating garages further from
the street can allow narrower driveway frontage at the curb, leaving more room for an
attractive streetscape. It is recognized that there may be ways a residential property
can be custom-designed to mitigate the view of a protruding garage opening. The
intent of these policies is not to limit such custom-designed solutions when an
individual homeowner has a need or preference for protruding garage openings.
Policy AN-5.3 Street Vistas. If possible, the view down a street should be designed to
terminate in a visually interesting feature, and not terminate directly in a garage door.
ADVANCES OR PROTECTS THE PURPOSES OF THE STANDARD
3.5.2 Residential Building Standards
(A) Purpose/Applicability. The following standards are intended to promote
variety, visual interest and pedestrian-oriented streets in residential
development
Our desire to offer to home owners the option of a detached garage located to the rear of the
property clearly promotes variety, visual interest and pedestrian-oriented streets
Thank you for your consideration of these variance requests.
Sincerely,
Robert T. Hand
Project Manager
Settler's Green, Registered LLLP