Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/10/2004 - ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS - AGENDA - Regular Meeting Zoning Board of Appeals Agenda Regular Meeting Thursday, June 10, 2004 Appeal 2463 Address 2024 E HARMONY RD Petitioner JOHN MARKS Zoning District HC Section 3.8.7(C)(1)(k) Description The variance would allow a sign advertising a home occupation to be larger than 4 square feet per face along an arterial street. Specifically, the variance would allow a sign to identify the Psychic Kay home occupation to be 10 square feet per face instead of the allowed 4 square feet per face. The proposed sign would be located along Harmony Road, in front of the house. (This appeal was discussed at the May 13, 2004 ZBA meeting and was tabled to June 10, 2004 in order to allow the applicant to submit revised drawings and a sign plan, requesting a sign of about 10 square feet instead of the originally requested 24 square feet). Hardship This property is at the intersection of Harmony and Timberline, which is one of the largest intersections in the city. Cars travel along Harmony at 59 mph, so an advertising sign needs to be large enough to be seen by motorists well in advance in order to avoid sudden stops along a State highway. The property is zoned to allow commercial uses. If the building were not occupied as a residence, but rather entirely as an office, the property would have a sign allowance of 115 square feet. This would mean that a sign as large as 57.5 square feet per side would be allowed for a commercial use. Staff Conitnents The Board has granted several sign variances to allow home occupation signs to exceed 4 square feet when the property is along a high speed major arterial street. Harmony Road is a State highway and it is high speed along this section of Harmony. However, the 24 square foot sign that was proposed on May 13, 2004 is considerably larger than the size allowed for �I ( , other similar variances. Those variances have allowed the signs to be around 10 square feet. The revised submittal of 10 square feet is more in keeping with other variances. The revised sign, in addition to being 1 �0 p,,, . considerably smaller than the originally proposed sign, has far less mass i ov V° �s since there is no base underneath the sign face. This property is somewhat oAke� 5.'S different from previous ones the Board has heard in that it is surrounded by commercial uses. If the Board does grant a variance for a size larger than 4 0 square feet, then Staff recommends that the Board consider placing some conditions on the color of the proposed sign, building illumination, use of Chirstmas lights, vehicle mounted signs, and/or other types of devices that would be designed to attract attention to the home occupation. Appeal 2465 Address 1601 Remington St Petitioner Troy Jones Zoning District LMN Section 3.5.2(D)(1) & 3.8.19(B) Description The variance would reduce the required street side setback along Prospect Road from 30 feet to 10.5 feet by allowing the "contextual setback" standard of the Land Use Code to apply to the side lot line along Prospect instead of to the front lot line along Remington Street. Hardship See petitioner's letter regarding the "equal to or better than" standard. Staff Comments The petitioner has explained his "equal to or better than"justification in his letter. y-0 Appeal 2466 Address 1300 Coulter St Petitioner Scott Brink Zoning District RL Section 4.3(D)(2)(c) Description The variance would reduce the required rear-yard setback along the east lot line from 15 feet to 6 feet for the storage shed that was recently constructed. Hardship Moving the shed to comply with the required setback would put it in the middle of the back yard. The proposed shed location is in keeping with the setbacks of other existing sheds in the neighborhood. Staff Comments None. Appeal 2467 Address 719 Benthaven Ct Petitioner Raymond Sanchez Zoning District RL Section 4.3(D)(2)( c) Description The variance would reduce the required rear setback along the south lot line from 15 feet to 6 feet in order to allow the construction of a 432 square foot sunroom on the south east corner of the house. Hardship The placement of the house, the size of the lot, and the irregular lot layout does not allow for the sunroom to be attached anywhere on the backside of the house without encroaching into the setback. There is a window well and fireplace that does not allow for the sunroom to be located any closer to the front of the home. There is also a 15-foot easement along the north property line as well as a drainage ditch along the south (rear) property line, therefore there are no homes located to the south of this property and the intent of the code is met. Staff Comments The Board has previously considered open space that abuts a lot as a mitigating factor that can be used to justify an "equal to or better than" variance. G � . 4 Appeal 2468 Address 711 W Mountain Ave Petitioner Curtis Marwitz Zoning District NCL Section 4-6(F)(1)(g) Description The variance would allow the existing enclosed back porch to be removed and a living room addition constructed in its place with a roof pitch of .25712 slope instead of the minimum required slope of 2"/12. The addition will be approximately twice as large as the existing porch, but the roof slope of the addition will match the slope of the existing porch roof. Hardship See petitioner's letter. Staff Comments None- G Appeal 2469 Address 3600 Horsetooth Ct Petitioner Mike & Mary Beth Patrick Zoning District RL Section 4.3(D)(2)(e) Description The variance would allow a new single family home to be constructed with a height of 30'-7" instead of the maximum height allowed of 28 feet. The new home will be located 100 feet from the east lot line, 118 feet from the south lot line, 155 feet from the north lot line, and 43 feet from the lot line along Horsetooth Court. Hardship The lot is 1.81 acres, so it is an extremely large lot for an RL zoned property. The average size lot in the RL zone is about 7000 square feet. There are only 4 lots in the subdivision, and other houses exceed the 28 feet height limit. The home will be constructed a considerable distance from the lot lines, so the extra 2 1/2' of height should not be noticeable to any nearby neighbors. Staff Comments The intent of limiting the height of homes in this zone is to limit situations where houses may "loom" over abutting properties, affecting privacy, shading, etc. The 28' standard was not intended to apply to lots as large as the ones in this subdivision. Staff believes the intent of the ordinance is complied with and there is no detriment to the public good. 6 4 kt_p .Q,e -�"e- . F Appeal 2470 Address 125 N GRANT AVE Petitioner Justin Mauck Zoning District NCL Section 4.6(E)(3), 4.6(E)(4), 4.6(F)(1)(g) Description The variance would reduce the required rear-yard setback along the alley from 5 feet to 0 feet, reduce the required side setback along the south lot line from 5 feet to 0 feet, and reduce the minimum roof pitch from 2:12 to 314:12 in order to allow the existing carport to be rebuilt to the same size and location. The existing carport was damaged in the March 2003 snowstorm and the owner would like to restore it to a safe condition. In the event it can not be restored, the owner would like to rebuild it. Rebuilding it would require variances. Hardship If the building were rebuilt in compliance with required setbacks, access to the garage would be cut off and a vehicle could not be parked in the carport either. Staff Comments None. G