Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/12/2002 - ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS - AGENDA - Regular Meeting Zoning Board of Appeals Agenda Regular Meeting Thursday, September 12,2002 Roll Call Approval of the Minutes from the May 9, 2002 Meeting Appeal: 2388 328 PARK ST The variance would allow a home occupation activity to be conducted in a detached building, rather than entirely within the home. Specifically, the variance would allow the existing detached building at the rear of the lot to be used as an art studio. Paintings and drawings would be drawn in the building, but no retail sales would occur on the premises. Code Sections: 3.8.3(1) Petitioner: SIBYL STORK ZoningDistrict NCM Appeal: 2389 912 BELVEDERE CT The variance would reduce the required front setback from 20 feet to 15 feet for the recently completed single family home on this lot. Specifically, the variance would allow a portion of the covered front porch and a portion of the corner of the garage to encroach into the required 20-foot front setback. The corner of the porch is setback 15 feet from the front lot line, and the comer of the garage is setback 16 feet from the front lot line. Code Sections: 4.3(D)(2)(C) Petitioner: Matt Kaskell ZoningDistrict RL Appeal: 2390 4241 BREAKWATER CT The variance would reduce the required rear yard setback along the northwest lot line from 15 feet to 5 feet in order to allow a covered porch to be constructed over a sunken patio that is planned for the new home to be constructed on this lot. Code Sections: 4.3(D)(2(C) Petitioner: Kevin Hearne ZoningDistrict RL Appeal: 2391 3315 SNOWBRUSH CT The variance would reduce the required rear yard setback from 15 feet to 11.33 feet in order to allow a trellis cover to be constructed over a portion of the existing patio deck. Code Sections: 4.3(D)(2)(C) Petitioner. same ZoningDistrict RL Appeal: 2392 509 PLOWMAN WAY WITHDRAWN. The variance would reduce the required front setback from 15'to 13' in order to allow a covered front porch. The architecture of the covered front porch is consistent with elevations of other homes in the neighborhood. Code Sections: 3.5.2(D) Petitioner. KB Home Zoning&strict LMN Appeal: 2393 904 W VINE DR The variance would allow an outdoor storage area at the northwest comer of Vine Drive and Wood Street to be enclosed with a chain link fence instead of with a required solid wood or masonry screen fence. Specifically, the variance would allow an approximate 180'by 280'area at the corner to be used for a temporary storage yard for City of Fort Collins water&sewer pipe, electrical conduit, manholes, light poles, and similar Utility Department materials. These materials are normally stored at the Utilities Service Center storage yard at 700 Wood Street. However, they need to be temporarily relocated while the City resurfaces and reconfigures the existing storage yard. The temporary, non-screening fence enclosure will be needed for about one year, and then will be removed at the same time that the materials are removed from the site. Code Sections: 3.5.1(1)(2) Petitioner: Jack Gianola for City ZoningDistrict E/POL Appeal: 2394 924 Sycamore St WITHDRAWN BY APPLICANT. The variance would reduce the required street side setback along Park Street from 15'to 3'in order to allow the construction of a new 10'x 12'storage shed type building. The variance would also allow a home occupation activity to be conducted in this new, detached building, instead of entirely within the home. Specifically, the owner is a writer, and desires to be able to use the building as a place to write articles and books. Additionally,the owner has a consulting business and would like to be able to meet with an occassional client at this location. Code Sections: 4.7(E)(4), 3.8.3((1) Petitioner: Carl and Gretchen Nassar ZoningDistrict NCM Appeal: 2395 630 S MELDRUM ST The variance would reduce the required side yard setback along the south lot line from 25 feet to 5 feet in order to allow an addition to the existing church/religious school at this location. The proposed addition will line up with the existing south wall of the building,which is already at only a 5-foot setback. Code Sections: 4.8((D)(3)(d) Petitioner: Doug Coates ZoningDistrict NCB Appeal: 2396 726 W MOUNTAIN AVE The variance would reduce the required rear yard setback from 15 feet to 3 feet and the right(east) required setback from 5 feet to 4 feet, and would reduce the density requirement from 3:1 to 2.74:1 in order to construct a storage shed on an existing concrete slab. Code Sections: 4.6(D)(1), 4.6(E)(3),4.6(E)(4) Petitioner: Leonard Dickey ZoningDistrict NCL t Appeal: 2397 1611 Laporte Ave The variance would reduce the required side yard setback from 5 feet to 1.5 feet along the west lot line and from 5 feet to 4.8 feet along the east lot line in order to allow a one-story addition to be constructed to the existing home. The addition will line up with the existing house setback on the east and with the existing garage setback on the west. Code Sections: 4.6(E)(4) Petitioner: Steven Shoger ZoningDistrict NCL Other Business: Zoning Board of Appeals Agenda Regular Meeting Thursday, September 12, 2002 Appeal 2388 Address 328 PARK ST Petitioner SIBYL STORK 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 entirely within the home. Specifically, the variance would allow the existing detached building at the rear of the lot to be used as an art studio. Paintings and drawings would be drawn in the building, but no retail sales would occur on the premises. Hardship The home is very small, only 700 square feet, with no basement. Therefore, there is no room in the house for this activity. If the garage were attached to the home, a variance would not be required. Staff Comments It is not uncommon for the Board to hear requests to allow home occupation activities in existing, detached buildings in the older neighborhoods. This home, like many others in the neighborhood, does not have an attached garage. Homeowners in newer neighborhoods that do have attached garages can convert their garage to a home occupation area without the need for a variance. The Board has normally used the "hardship" criteria when considering this type of variance, finding that the unique situation is that the home does not have an attached garage that can be converted, and 5 0, that if the garage were attached, then a variance would not be needed. Appeal 2389 Address 912 BELVEDERE CT Petitioner Matt Kaskell Zoning District RL Section 4.3(D)(2)(C) Description The variance would reduce the required front setback from 20 feet to 15 feet for the recently completed single family home on this lot. Specifically, the variance would allow a portion of the covered front porch and a portion of the corner of the garage to encroach into the required 20-foot front setback. The corner of the porch is setback 15 feet from the front lot line, and the corner of the garage is setback 16 feet from the front lot line. Hardship There is a large ditch in the rear portion of this lot, so there is no back yard behind the home, resulting in the home being pushed as far forward as possible. The person staking out the home mistakenly used the inside edge of the public sidewalk as the property line, when the property line is actually several feet behind the walk. Staff Comments It might be difficult to apply the hardship criteria to this request since the "difficulties° created by the misplacement of the home are the result of an act by the applicant. (Even though the setback violation was not created intentionally, it is still a self-imposed hardship). However, if the Board determines that the proposal does not promote the general purpose of the setback standard equally well or better than would a proposal which complies with the standard, then the variance can only be approved by finding that there is some hardship criteria. The Board may want to consider G that (1) only a small portion of the front porch and a corner of the garage �( I encroach into the setback, rather than the entire house frontage; (2) the front lot line is irregularly shaped; and (3) that there is an open space area he abutting the west side of the lot, and that there is a ditch along the rear of the lot. Appeal 2390 Address 4241 BREAKWATER CT Petitioner Kevin Hearne Zoning District RL Section 4.3(D)(2(C) Description The variance would reduce the required rear yard setback along the northwest lot line from 15 feet to 5 feet in order to allow a covered porch to be constructed over a sunken patio that is planned for the new home to be constructed on this lot. Hardship The lot is an irregularly shaped flag lot, which requires that the home be constructed at a larger front yard setback than would normally be required. The lot actually has 2 lot lines that could be considered "rear" lot lines, and the 15-foot setback is complied with on one of them. The home itself will comply with the required setback. The variance is only for a porch cover. Reduced rear setbacks have previously been allowed in this subdivision, so this would be similar to those modifications. Staff Comments The other reduced rear setbacks were approved under the pre-Land Use Code regulations, which allowed the setbacks for this PUD to be varied administratively. Therefore, public hearing variances were not required. Nevertheless, a number of homes have already been constructed in this subdivision with smaller setbacks then would normally be required. The rear lot line of this lot abuts a landscape open space which results in the rear lot line being 35 feet from the street along the back of the lot. Therefore, the Board may determine that the "equal to or better than" standard can be used. Specifically, the purpose of the rear setback standard is to ensure an adequate distance between structures and properties in order to enhance such things as privacy, light and ventilation. Therefore, the Board may find that the proposal as submitted will promote the general purpose of the 0 standard equally well as a proposal which complies with the standard because: (1) The rear lot line abuts an open space rather than another residential lot, and (2) the part of the structure that will encroach is a covered porch that contains no wall enclosures and thereby has minimal visual impacts. n Appeal 2391 Address 3315 SNOWBRUSH CT Petitioner same Zoning District RL Section 4.3(D)(2)(C) Description The variance would reduce the required rear yard setback from 15 feet to 11.33 feet in order to allow a trellis cover to be constructed over a portion of the existing patio deck. Hardship There was a possible miscommunication between the applicant and the Building department as to whether or not a permit was required. Therefore, the owners constructed the trellis without a permit and the setback problem was discovered after-the-fact. The property backs up to an open space. Therefore, the intent of the Code is met. Staff Comments The Board may determine that the "equal to or better than" standard applies in this instance. The purpose of the rear setback standard is to ensure an adequate distance between structures and properties in order to enhance such things as privacy, light, and ventilation. Therefore, the Board may find that the proposal as submitted will promote the general purpose of the standard equally well as a proposal which complies with the standard because; (1) The rear lot line abuts an open space rather than a residential lot, and (2) the structure that will encroach is a trellis-covered deck ' containing no walls and thereby has minimal visual impacts. Appeal 2392 Address 509 PLOWMAN WAY Petitioner KB Home Zoning District LMN Section 3.5.2(D) Description WITHDRAWN. The variance would reduce the required front setback from 15' to 13' in order to allow a covered front porch. The architecture of the covered front porch is consistent with elevations of other homes in the neighborhood. Hardship The only portion of the home to encroach into the setback is at an angle, varying from an encroachment of 5.5 inches on the left (north) to 2 feet on the right (south) sides. The front face of the house still meets the setback requirement. This floor plan is the smallest plan used in this development. The house cannot be angled any other way without creating even further setback issues which would require a greater variance request. Staff Comments None. Appeal 2393 t Address 904 W VINE DR Petitioner Jack Gianola for City Zoning District E/POL Section 3.5.1(1)(2) Description The variance would allow an outdoor storage area at the northwest corner of Vine Drive and Wood Street to be enclosed with a chain link fence instead of with a required solid wood or masonry screen fence. Specifically, the variance would allow an approximate 180' by 280' area at the corner to be used for a temporary storage yard for City of Fort Collins water & sewer pipe, electrical conduit, manholes, light poles, and similar Utility Department materials. These materials are normally stored at the Utilities Service Center storage yard at 700 Wood Street. However, they need to be temporarily relocated while the City resurfaces and reconfigures the existing storage yard. The temporary, non-screening fence enclosure will be needed for about one year, and then will be removed at the same time that the materials are removed from the site. Hardship The property at the northwest corner of Vine and Wood will soon be redeveloped to include vehicle storage buildings and a materials storage yard. There is currently a detention pond in the location where the permanent storage yard will be, so that area can't be used temporarily. The proposed location is the only feasible location for a temporary yard. If a screen-type fence is required at the proposed temporary location now, it will only have to be removed in about a year when the redevelopment occurs. That would be an additional tax-payer cost. Staff Comments The proposed permanent location for the outdoor storage yard will be screened with the appropriate fence at the time the detention pond is relocated. However, until that happens, the proposed location is the only place on the property for this use. If the Utility Department could place the G materials in the detention pond area now, they would just construct the required, permanent screen fence at this time and not need a variance. The Board may determine that the detention pond constitutes a topographical hardship. If the Board determines that a hardship exists, then conditions I " should be placed on the variance, e.g. a maximum time period. Appeal 2394 Address 924 Sycamore St Petitioner Carl and Gretchen Nassar Zoning District NCM Section 4.7(E)(4), 3.8.3((1) Description WITHDRAWN BY APPLICANT. The variance would reduce the required street side setback along Park Street from 15' to 3' in order to allow the construction of a new 10' x 12' storage shed type building. The variance would also allow a home occupation activity to be conducted in this new, detached building, instead of entirely within the home. Specifically, the owner is a writer, and desires to be able to use the building as a place to write articles and books. Additionally, the owner has a consulting business and would like to be able to meet with an occassional client at this location. Hardship The lot is a corner lot. The property line along Park Street is 27' behind the street, therefore the building will be 30' from the street. This large setback satisfies the intent of the Code. Mature trees and landscaping also prevent the building from being moved further east. Due to the nature of the home occupation, writing, a remote, quiet location is preferable to a study within the home. Staff Comments WITHDRAWN BY APPLICANT Appeal 2395 Address 630 S MELDRUM ST Petitioner Doug Coates Zoning District NCB Section 4.8((D)(3)(d) Description The variance would reduce the required side yard setback along the south lot line from 25 feet to 5 feet in order to allow an addition to the existing church/religious school at this location. The proposed addition will line up with the existing south wall of the building, which is already at only a 5-foot setback. Hardship This facility is an existing facility which is designed for use by college students. Therefore, the use needs to be close to the university. The existing building is short on class space, so the addition is needed in order to meet the demand. The wall along the south lot line is only one-story in height and will line up with the existing wall. Narrowing the building by 20 feet would result in insufficient and non-functional space. A second floor addition is not feasible because the soils report indicates that the soil bearing capacity would not support a second floor. Building the addition further towards the rear of the lot would require the removal of several large trees. Staff Comments The existing building is nonconforming with regards to side setbacks. This is not uncommon in older neighborhoods where buildings were constructed under different code requirements. The Board often grants this type of variance when the addition lines up with the existing wall and is only one- story in height. J Appeal 2396 Address 726 W MOUNTAIN AVE Petitioner Leonard Dickey Zoning District NCL Section 4.6(D)(1), 4.6(E)(3), 4.6(E)(4) Description The variance would reduce the required rear yard setback from 15 feet to 3 feet and the right (east) required setback from 5 feet to 4 feet, and would reduce the density requirement from 3:1 to 2.74:1 in order to construct a storage shed on an existing concrete slab. Hardship The existing garage is not large enough to hold a vehicle and other miscellaneous items. The applicant would like to create an additional area for storage. If the building were brought up to the side of the existing garage it would eliminate most of the useful area of the back yard. The concrete slab to the rear of the existing garage is already in place. There is a 3-foot utility easement along the rear and west property lines. Staff Comments None. Appeal 2397 Address 1611 Laporte Ave Petitioner Steven Shoger Zoning District NCL Section 4.6(E)(4) Description The variance would reduce the required side yard setback from 5 feet to 1.5 feet along the west lot line and from 5 feet to 4.8 feet along the east lot line in order to allow a one-story addition to be constructed to the existing home. The addition will line up with the existing house setback on the east and with the existing garage setback on the west. Hardship See petitioner's letter. The addition will be one-story in height and will line up with the existing walls. Staff Comments None. G ,3 �- Other Business The Board will need to amend the quorum requirements in the current ,op-- bylaws in order to be consistent with City Code. ZONINGBOARD OF D, G a 1 -� i I.e — .d �ml jr4. .L - 5 i 4 o , M 1yy. w, y �yY # � ��'.. ,� . � - •, s� } r�w fir. �- '` - •.:�,� �:� .�_,_tom= '' ,.+�:t - :�'`T —�f - ` ,tiMl I,_ L�I; 'II �I'��.fr :W-►c.-per , t --- •.. .4 .. 'w' aura. " _ - ' ':r.� ,tea%:` P".q ; �' gl. ~' ia . •- - rM .".'.i -��� �"—� r •r�,. 0°sY� �.L �� .�' 1 "O11I r 3 3�3•� � �tlL _.- raw �_�� J. r � „"}1 �� riN _ t� .:k=`-sue �.�-_4.:�.. �(-,.;mow �,s �. 4 _� -:i ...•�. .�^r'r'r�.���.��'d•`� '. r--1 u, -'.�L-_� YY�`+y' •ram • ... - �.i;�"/D�ry#�yF. , DRAW,': -- - - �. ,���--r-•g � -' ,� _ 'ram s _ . - v _fir �. �F� 4 Pam,"., �•{: y w` '�r, I III K _ _ 4 ���'�� � ^_�� I •FI �t "'� t tj- �. ! ji� � •,yk�l' �;M1�Idl�llp� ',, I �t�r 4 T�i "� I t•� .r ITO 1 4 - t " s k