HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/11/2002 - ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS - AGENDA - Regular Meeting Zoning Board of Appeals
Agenda
Regular Meeting
Thursday,November 14,2002
Roll Call
Approval of the Minutes from the May 9, 2002 Meeting
Appeal: 2398 651 WHEDBEE ST
The variance would reduce the required lot area from 4295 square feet to 4045 square feet in order to
correct the lot area variance that was approved on December 13,2001. That variance authorized the lot
area reduction from 5000 square feet to 4295 square feet in order to allow the owner to split the one lot
that contained the homes at 420 E. Laurel and 651 Whedbee into 2 separate lots. A 250 square foot
surveying error was discovered at the time that the official replat was processed through the City's
platting proceedure. The proposed lot line that was approved in December, 2001 will still be in the same
location, so this variance request will not result in anything different from what was originally approved.
Code Sections: 4.7(D)(1)
Petitioner: Stephen Mack
ZoningDistrict NCM
Appeal: 2399 630 S HOWES ST
The variance would allow a home occupation activity to be conducted in a detached building rather than
within the home that is on the lot. Specifically, the variance would allow the existing detached garage to
be used as a bicycle repair shop, rather than require the shop use to be conducted in the home that is on
the front portion of the lot.
Code Sections: 3.8.30)
Petitioner: James Beck
ZoningDistrict CC
Appeal: 2400 300 E FOOTHILLS PKWY
The variance would allow this property to have 2 single-face freestanding signs on the south side of the
building. The code allows freestanding signs to be located only along dedicated public streets. The
former Foothills Parkway along the south side of this lot was vacated several years ago, therefore there is
no longer a public street along the south on which freestanding signs can be located. Specifically, the
variance would allow a single-face, 15 square foot freestanding sign to face onto the private drive into the
Foothills Mall. (south-facing)and would allow a second single-face, 8 square foot freestanding sign to
face into the parking lot(east-facing).
Code Sections: 3.8.7(G)(6)
Petitioner: FAST SIGNS
ZoningDistrict C -COMMERCIAL
Other Business:
Zoning Board of Appeals
Agenda
Regular Meeting
Thursday, November 14, 2002
Appeal 2398
Address 651 WHEDBEE ST
Petitioner Stephen Mack
Zoning District NCM
Section 4.7(D)(1)
Description The variance would reduce the required lot area from 4295 square feet to
4045 square feet in order to correct the lot area variance that was approved
on December 13, 2001. That variance authorized the lot area reduction
from 5000 square feet to 4295 square feet in order to allow the owner to
split the one lot that contained the homes at 420 E. Laurel and 651
Whedbee into 2 separate lots. A 250 square foot surveying error was
discovered at the time that the official replat was processed through the
City's platting proceedure. The proposed lot line that was approved in
December, 2001 will still be in the same location, so this variance request
will not result in anything different from what was originally approved.
Hardship The original variance authorized the new lot line to be located 17' west of
the home at 651 Whedbee and 10' east of the home at 420 E. Laurel. This
proposed variance will result in the lot line being in the same location as the
original variance, so nothing is really changing with respect to this lot. The
surveying error wasn't discovered until recently. The lot will still comply with
the 2 to 1 lot area to floor area ratio that is required in the NCM zone. The
proposed location of the lot line as originally intended was to allow adequate
distance between the existing buildings and the lot line in order to maintain
the location of the natural split in the patio area between the two houses.
This variance request will maintain that original intent.
Staff Comments The December, 2001 variance was approved pursuant to the "equal to or
better than" standard. In order to apply this standard, the Board must
determine that the proposal as submitted will 1) 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, and 2) will not be detrimental to the public good.
The purpose of the standard - a 5000 sf lot area per home- is to ensure that
the lot size of a lot on which a home is located is adequate to provide
0 important private open space and to ensure there is a relatively small
percentage of the lots in the NCM zone on which a second home can be
constructed, thereby preventing the proliferation of"alley houses". On
December 13, 2001, the ZBA made the following findings: 1) there was no
detriment to the public good since both homes already existed, and 2) the
purpose of the standard is promoted equally well since the property is
already a legal, nonconforming property, no new homes or buildings are
being proposed or allowed by the variance, and the variance would simply
draw a line on a piece of paper allowing the two existing homes to exist on
different lots.
Appeal 2399
Address 630 S HOWES ST
Petitioner James Beck
Zoning District cc
Section 3.8.3(1)
Description The variance would allow a home occupation activity to be conducted in a
detached building rather than within the home that is on the lot. Specifically,
the variance would allow the existing detached garage to be used as a
bicycle repair shop, rather than require the shop use to be conducted in the
home that is on the front portion of the lot.
Hardship The detached building is existing. The home does not have an attached
garage. If the garage was attached to the home, then a variance would not
be required. This is similar to other properties in the older neighborhoods,
wherein similar variances have been approved.
Staff Comments It is not uncommon for the Board to hear request 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. Residents in newer neighborhoods that do have attached garages
can convert the 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 that if
the garage were attached, then a variance would not be needed.
wj�
Appeal 2400
Address 300 E FOOTHILLS PKWY
x f Petitioner FAST SIGNS
Zoning District C - COMMERCIAL
Section 3.8.7(G)(6)
Description The variance would allow this property to have 2 single-face freestanding
signs on the south side of the building. The code allows freestanding signs
to be located only along dedicated public streets. The former Foothills
Parkway along the south side of this lot was vacated several years ago,
therefore there is no longer a public street along the south on which
freestanding signs can be located. Specifically, the variance would allow a
single-face, 15 square foot freestanding sign to face onto the private drive
into the Foothills Mall. (south-facing) and would allow a second single-face,
8 square foot freestanding sign to face into the parking lot (east-facing).
Hardship The fagade of the building is mainly comprised of windows and the roof will
not accommodate signage. Mathews St. is the only location a freestanding
sign can be located since that is the only street adjacent to this property, but
there is another tenant residing in the west/Mathews St end of the building.
The tenants on the east side of the building would rather their signage be
located next to their unit and believe that the only feasible alternative is to
use freestanding signs due to the design of the building. The signs are
located about 80' behind the former Foothills Pkwy, so they really aren't
located close to the former street, and really funtion more as building signs
then street signs.
Staff Comments The design of the building does create some difficulties with regards to
erecting wall signs. The signs are much closer to the building than to the
former street, so no real abuse is occuring. If the Board decides to grant a
variance, some consideration to imposing conditions should be given. For
example, a condition should be placed on the variance prohibiting the signs
from being moved closer to the former street, the variance should be limited
to these specific signs, and the 1' of air space below the signs should be
filled in with materials that match the building material or with evergreen
shrubs planted as a filler.
40`
Other Business
1. Election of officers in December
2. Boards and Commissions appreciation event
3. Set date for breakfast worksession in January or February.
4. Go over handouts in packet (2003 work plan, open meetings memo).