HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/13/2001 - ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS - AGENDA - Regular Meeting t
Zoning Board of Appeals
Agenda
Regular Meeting
Thursday, September 13,2001
Roll Call
Approval of the Minutes from the August 9, 2001 Meeting
Appeal: 2355 626 W OAK ST
The variance would allow a home occupation activity to be conducted in a detached building, rather
than in the house that is located on the front portion of the lot. Specifically, the variance would allow
the owner to operate a consulting business in the upper floor of a proposed new detached garage with
finished upper floor. The new building would be constructed on the rear portion of the lot. The existing
detached garage would be removed.
Code Sections: 3,8.3(i)
Petitioner: Chip Steiner
ZoningDistrict NCM
Appeal: 2356 125 CIRCLE DR
The requested variance would reduce the street side yard setback along Lake Street from the minimum
15 feet to 10 feet to accommodate an added one-car garage to existing single car attached garage
(making a two-car garage)with a bedroom on the second floor. This same variance was approved on
March 15, 2001, but will expire September 15, 2001. The Applicant will not be able to obtain a building
permit prior to the expiration date. Therefore, the Applicant is requesting a 6-month extension to the
original variance.
Code Sections: 4.6 (E)(4)
Petitioner: FRED PORTER
ZoningDistrict NCL
Appeal: 2357 2034 S TAFT HILL RD
The variance would allow a new fence to be constructed at a height exceeding 4' in the front yard of the
home at 2034 S. Taft. Specifically, the proposed fence would be 6' in height, matching the height of the
other existing fences along S. Taft Hill Road. The variance would also allow the 114 linear feet of
fencing along the new sidewalk to be constructed without having to vary the setback of 1/3 of its length
by the required 5'. The new fence is being proposed as a way of mitigating the impacts associated with
the new 8'wide sidewalk that is being constructed as part of the City of Fort Collins Pedestrian Access
Program,
Code Sections: 3.8.11(A)AND 3.8.11(C)(1) &(2)
Petitioner: ERIKA KEETON, CITY ENGINEERING DEP
ZoningDistrict RL
f
Appeal: 2358 2540 E DRAKE RD
The property is located in the T-Transition zoning district. The code does not allow the construction of
a new building or an addition to any property in this zone unless the Zoning Board of Appeal grants a
variance. Cargill, Inc. proposes to construct a 2304 square foot addition on the north side of their
existing office building. The additional floor area will be for lab and office space associated with the
Cargill research use.
Code Sections: 4.9(B)(1)(b)
Petitioner: Allen Curtis
ZoningDistrict T
Other Business
Zoning Board of Appeals
Agenda
Regular Meeting
Thursday, September 13, 2001
Appeal 2355
Address 626 W OAK ST
Petitioner Chip Steiner, owner
Zoning District NCM
Section 3.8.3(1)
Description The variance would allow a home occupation activity to be conducted in a
detached building, rather than in the house that is located on the front
portion of the lot. Specifically, the variance would allow the owner to
operate a consulting business in the upper floor of a proposed new
detached garage with finished upper floor. The new building would be
constructed on the rear portion of the lot. The existing detached garage
would be removed,
Hardship There is no available space in the home in which to set up an office. The
basement of the home is nonconforming with respect to ceiling height, so it
could not be converted to an office. It is not unusual for properties in the
older neighborhoods to have older detached buildings that are converted
into living space or home occupation areas. The existing one-car detached
garage is very small and not conducive to being converted into usable,
finished space. There is not an attached garage that can be converted.
Staff Continents The Board hears several requests each year to allow home occupation
activities in detached buildings on lots in the older, downtown
neighborhoods. These requests usually involve the applicant's desire to
convert an existing detached garage or shed into usable, habitable floor
space for a business activity. The Board generally approves such requests
when the building is an older, existing structure, and when there is not an
attached garage that can be converted. This particular case is somewhat
different in that the applicant is proposing to remove the existing detached
G garage and construct a new, rather large building with a garage, storage
space, and 2nd floor office space. The Board may find that the applicant's
statement of hardship satisfies the "hardship variance" criteria, or the Board
may find that the "equal to or better than" standard applies, or the Board
may find that a variance is not warranted.
If the Board is inclined to grant a variance based on the "equal to or better
than" standard, it must be determined that their will be no detriment to the
public good by the construction of a large, 1700 sf detached building, and
that 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 proposed". A
proposal which complies with the standard would be one where the
applicant desires to conduct his business in the existing home, or where he
Appeal 2355
constructs an addition to the existing home for the purpose of adding the
necessary floor area. The Code does not contain a specific purpose
statement for the standard that does not allow the use of detached buildings
for home occupations. Staff provided the following purpose statement to the
Board at the June 28, 2001 ZBA meeting in conjunction with a similar
request involving lots in a new development outside of the older downtown
area: "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 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." If the Board applies the "equal to or better
than" standard, then the Board must determine that granting the requested
variance would: 1) not be detrimental to the public good, 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, and 3) granting the variance will protect said purpose
equally well as would a plan that satisfies the standard because a
garage/storage building 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.
Appeal 2356
Address 125 CIRCLE DR
Petitioner FRED PORTER
Zoning District NCL
Section 4.6 (E)(4)
Description The requested variance would reduce the street side yard setback along
Lake Street from the minimum 15 feet to 10 feet to accommodate an added
one-car garage to existing single car attached garage (making a two-car
garage) with a bedroom on the second floor. This same variance was
approved on March 15, 2001, but will expire September 15, 2001. The
Applicant will not be able to obtain a building permit prior to the expiration
date. Therefore, the Applicant is requesting a 6-month extension to the
original variance.
Hardship The house is currently at a 10-foot exterior side yard setback and the
Applicant wishes to continue the same footprint as a large 50 to 60 foot blue
spruce tree and the rear year would be impacted if the addition were
recessed from the existing exterior side by 5 feet. Also, see minutes from
March 15, 2001 meeting.
Staff Comments If the Board desires to extend the previously approved variance, the Board
may want to reaffirm the reasons for granting the original variance as stated
in the minutes of the March 15, 2001 ZBA meeting.
Appeal 2357
Address 2034 S TAFT HILL RD
Petitioner ERIKA KEETON, CITY ENGINEERING DEPT.
Zoning District RL
Section 3.8.11(A) AND 3.8.11(C)(1) &(2)
Description The variance would allow a new fence to be constructed at a height
exceeding 4' in the front yard of the home at 2034 S. Taft. Specifically, the
proposed fence would be 6' in height, matching the height of the other
existing fences along S. Taft Hill Road. The variance would also allow the
114 linear feet of fencing along the new sidewalk to be constructed without
having to vary the setback of 113 of its length by the required 5'. The new
fence is being proposed as a way of mitigating the impacts associated with
the new 8' wide sidewalk that is being constructed as part of the City of Fort
Collins Pedestrian Access Program.
Hardship See petitioner's letter. In addition, the large, existing trees on the owner's lot
are too close to the proposed fence line to accommodate an additional 5' of
varying setback.
Staff Comments The Board may find that the topographical situation of the trees may present
a hardship with respect to the 5' varying setback requirement. With respect
to the 6' fence in the front yard, the Board must determine that a hardship
exists, or that the proposal will promote the purpose of the standard equally
well or better than would a proposal for which complies with the standard.
The purpose of the 4' height limit in a front yard is to allow the active,
visually interesting features of the house to dominate the streetscape, rather
than tali privacy fences. The purpose of the 5' setback standard, and to
some extent, the 6' height limit, is to require that fences along arterial
streets shall be made visually interesting and shall avoid creating a "tunnel"
effect. In order for the Board to be able to apply the "equal to or better than"
standard, it must be found that the proposed fence will not be detrimental to
the public good and that the proposal is equal to a proposal that complies
with the code. The Board may find that the existence of all the other 6' high,
non-setback-varying fences may essential make the purpose of the
standard non-applicable in this situation, since adding 114' of additional
fencing will have no impact on the streetscape whether it meets the
standard or does not.
Appeal 2358
Address 2540 E DRAKE RD
Petitioner Allen Curtis
Zoning District T
Section 4.9(B)(1)(b)
Description The property is located in the T- Transition zoning district. The code does
not allow the construction of a new building or an addition to any property in
this zone unless the Zoning Board of Appeal grants a variance. Cargill, Inc.
proposes to construct a 2304 square foot addition on the north side of their
existing office building. The additional floor area will be for lab and office
space associated with the Cargill research use.
Hardship Without a variance, the needed expansion can only occur when the property
is rezoned by the City Council at a later date. Cargill is a viable business
that needs this extra space in order to continue to operate efficiently. The
expansion will not result in any new operational activities that don't already
occur on the site. A variance is preferable over rezoning due to the time
delay involved with approving a rezoning request. The addition will be
located in an area on the site where it won't be visible from Drake Road, so
it should not be detrimental to the public good. See petitioner's letter for
additional information..
Staff Comments None.
C
J
• � f � � � � k°ARP r i�_�„i .�:
t • r 1 � - 'tom ry -.- --
• • r • r
'♦ r r r •
r
i pit
5�
t ON
i1�
��t •3 .7.,. ��. _ '•_.fir. �} ,i.:, �� ,,. ., �� ,*.
I 1.5e { 'S, -•` � X 1°�T � �'' I
r I
M Looking east along the north property lint- The existing
-
p; home currently sits 10 feet in from the corner side
property floe.
-
Appeal 2?20-125 Circle Dr. The variance would reduce the required
street side-yard setback along Lake St from 15'to 10'in order to allow a
two-car garage addition with access from the alley. A second story
addition will also be added. The variance would also reduce the required
lot area to floor area ratio from 3:1 to 2.875:1.
Looking south along the alley and rear
property line. The proposed addition
will be S feet in from the rear r
P oPertY
1F line.
7.1
Facing south and looking at the north side of the house. The
proposed addition will replace the existing garage and extend
towards the east(rear)property line.
Y.00king north along the cast(rear)property line out
towards Lake Street. The proposed addition will be
setback 5 feet from the rear property line.
r�
�L�-,gree in the southwest corner of the back
laird.
AM T
'1
Facing west,Eooking along the north,corner
Looking into the back yard at the rear of the house and side-yard property line. Again,the house
the existing garage- currently sits at a 10'setback from the
$_ property Hire. The proposed addition will
line up with the existing north wall.
r
Appeal 2357-2034 S Taft Hill Rd.
The variance would allow a new fence to be constructed at a height Looking south along the east side of Taft Hill Rd,
exceeding4'in the front yard of the home. Specifically,the proposed
fence would be 6'in height,matching the height of the other existing
fences along South Taft Hill. The variance would also allow the 114
linear feet of fencing to be constructed without having to vary the
setback of 113 of its length by the required 5'.
,t
{ I
w
Looking towards the north east at the existing 6'high fences that run
" along Taft Hill Rd.
�lixisting 6'fence along the side property line
k
}t=-
Appeal 2358-2540 E Drake Rd. The property is located in the Y
Transition Zoning District.The code does not allow the construction of
a new building or an addition to any property in this zone unless the
Zoning Board of Appeals grants a variance. Cargill,Inc.proposes to
construct a 2304 sq ft addition on the north side of their existing office
r, building
The trees front the property at 2034 S Taft Hill Rd. This view is looking
north along the front property line.
Looking north towards the front of the existing buildings. Looking towards the west at the north end of the existing building where
the addition is proposed.
k _ I
fil
r-v�
EWI
The proposed new construction will be to the north of the
existing building
Looking towards the north end of the existing building where the new
fa �$ r construction is proposed.
Zoning Board of Appeals
(aL Adilion _ •.• The End
City of Fort Collins
5