Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
08/14/2025 - Land Use Review Commission - AGENDA - Regular Meeting
LAND USE REVIEW COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING City Council Chambers – 300 Laporte Ave, Fort Collins, CO 80521 8/14/25 – LURC SUMMARY AGENDA 1 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. ROLL CALL 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Approval of July 10, 2025, Minutes. 4. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION Special Guest: Mayor Jeni Arndt 5. VARIANCE REQUESTS a. APPEAL ZBA250020 Address: 608 Peterson St Owner: JRA Property Solutions LLC Petitioners: Jamie Allen, Better Blueprint Realty Tom Martinez, Valiant Construction Holdings LLC Zoning District: OT-B Code Section: 2.1.6 Project Description: There are two requests associated with this variance application: 1. A request for a new detached accessory building (1-story garage) that is replacing an existing detached accessory building (carriage house converted to a garage) to be constructed 2 feet from the north (side) property line. The minimum required interior side setback for this lot in the OT-B zone district is 5 feet. The request is for the new detached accessory building to encroach approximately 3 feet into the required side setback. Participation in the Land Use Review Commission Meeting on Thursday, August 14, will only be available IN PERSON in accordance with Section 2-73 of the Municipal Code. The meeting will begin at 8:30am in City Council Chambers, 300 Laporte Avenue Documents to Share: If residents wish to share a document or presentation, City Staff needs to receive those materials via email by 24 hours before the meeting. Please email any documents to nbeals@fcgov.com. Individuals uncomfortable with public participation are encouraged to participate by emailing general public comments 24 hours prior to the meeting to nbeals@fcgov.com the Commission receives your comments. If you have specific comments on any of the discussion items scheduled, please make that clear in the subject line of the email and send 24 hours prior to the meeting. If you need assistance during the meeting, please email kkatsimpalis@fcgov.com. LAND USE REVIEW COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING City Council Chambers – 300 Laporte Ave, Fort Collins, CO 80521 8/14/25 – LURC SUMMARY AGENDA 2 Continued from Page 1 2. A request to allow for the garage door of the proposed detached accessory building to be built 5 feet from the rear property line. The minimum setback for a garage door from a rear alley is 8 feet. The request is for the garage door to encroach 3 feet into the required 8-foot garage door setback from a rear alley. b. APPEAL ZBA250021 Address: 1805 Laporte Ave Owner: Colin Barry and Celeste Wieting Petitioner: Jeremy Cameron, General Contractor, Intelligent Designs Zoning District: OT-A Code Section: 2.1.6 Project Description: There are two requests associated with this variance application: 1. A request to construct a 175 square-foot addition (sunroom) to an existing 1,020 square-foot detached house. The proposed location of the sunroom is along the southwest corner of the house where the addition will follow the wall line of the existing attached garage, which was built up to the western property line. The minimum required interior side setback in the OT-A zone district is 5 feet. The request is to therefore allow an encroachment into the existing side setback by 5 feet. 2. An after the fact request for approval of an existing 5 feet 6-inch-tall x 25 feet long masonry wall located at the front of the property along Laporte Avenue. The maximum allowable fence/wall height located between the front building line and the front property line is four feet. The request is for approval to exceed the maximum allowable wall height by 1 foot 6 inches. 6. OTHER BUSINESS 7. ADJOURNMENT 7/10/25 – LURC MINUTES – DRAFT 1 Land Use Review Commission REGULAR MEETING Thursday, July 10, 2025 – 8:30 AM City Council Chambers, City Hall – 300 Laporte Ave, Fort Collins, CO 80521 1. CALL TO ORDER: 8:30 AM 2. ROLL CALL Board Members Present – San Filippo, Carron, Lawton, Gupta, Floyd, Coffman Board Members Absent – Vogel Staff Members Present – Noah Beals, Kory Katsimpalis, Madelene Shehan Guest(s) – NONE 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES San Filippo made a motion, seconded by Coffman, to approve the June 12, 2025, Minutes as written. The motion passed by all members present. 4. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION -NONE- 5. VARIANCE REQUESTS a. APPEAL ZBA250016 Address: 3215 Burning Bush Ct Owner/Petitioner: Joel & Anna Goldetsky Zoning District: RL Code Section: 2.1.4 Project Description: This is a request for a proposed 16-foot deck to encroach 2 feet into the required rear setback. The minimum required rear setback for this property in the RL zone district is 15 feet. Staff Presentation: Beals presented slides relevant to the appeal and discussed the variance request, noting that the property is located on Burning Bush Ct, just north of Golden Currant Blvd and east of Banyan Dr. The subject property backs up to HOA property, and that line is considered to be the rear property line, which requires a 15-foot rear setback. The request is to encroach 2 feet into the rear setback. Additionally, there is a 6-foot utility easement at the rear of the lot; the proposed deck would not encroach into that setback. Beals presented drawings of the proposed deck as well as views of the home taken from the HOA property to the rear, noting the proposed distance from the edge of the deck to the rear property line. Applicant Presentation: Applicant Anna Goldetsky, resident and owner, 3215 Burning Bush Ct addressed the Commission and offered comment. Goldetsky stated that the request comes down to function and practicality. The existing deck is original to the home and needs rebuilding. As is, the deck is a bit small and makes it difficult to place several 7/10/25 – LURC MINUTES – DRAFT 2 deck chairs on the deck at once. Goldetsky doesn’t believe the proposed deck would impact on the neighborhood or the public good in any negative way. Lawton clarified with Goldetsky that this is a replacement of a current deck; Goldetsky confirmed. Lawton asked Beals about the nature of the rear easement; Beals indicated it was most likely for communications utilities. Public Comment: -NONE- Commission Discussion: Commission member Coffman noted the proposal seems to be nominal and inconsequential and would have no negative impact on neighbors. Coffman is in support of the variance request. Commission member San Filippo agrees with Coffman’s analysis that the variance qualifies as nominal and inconsequential, with no negative impact. San Filippo is in support of the variance request. Chair Lawton agrees with the previous comments. Lawton noted that the proposed deck would be an improvement over current conditions and represents a better use of space. Commission member Coffman made a motion, seconded by member Carron to APPROVE ZBA250016 granting the requested variance to Land Use Code Section 2.1.4 to allow the proposed deck to encroach 2 feet into the required 15-foot rear setback as shown in the hearing materials. The Commission finds that the variance would not be detrimental to the public good; and will not diverge from section 2.1.4 except in a nominal and inconsequential way when considered in the context of the neighborhood and will continue to advance the purposes of Land Use Code Section 1.2.2 because: -The HOA land abutting the rear property line will remain undeveloped; and -The deck is open on three sides. This decision is based upon the agenda materials, information presented during this hearing, and Commission discussion. The Commission adopts the information, analysis, findings, and conclusions in the hearing staff report. Yeas: San Filippo, Carron, Lawton, Gupta, Floyd, Coffman Nays: Absent: Vogel b. APPEAL ZBA250017 Address: 719 S Lemay Ave Owner: The Riverside Wendy’s Inc / Aksan United Petitioner: Jason Graber, Chief Development Officer Zoning District: NC Code Section: 5.16.2(G)(1) Project Description: This is a request to allow for one additional existing freestanding permanent sign (pre-sale menu board drive-thru lane sign). The maximum number of drive-thru signs in all sign districts is one (1) per drive- thru lane. 7/10/25 – LURC MINUTES – DRAFT 3 Staff Presentation: Beals presented slides relevant to the appeal and discussed the variance request, noting that the property is located just south of Riverside Ave on Lemay Ave. The request is to replace an existing second drive-thru sign. The sign code has changed since the sign was installed. Currently, code only allows one sign to be displayed per drive-thru lane. Beals presented images showing the proposed sign format and location on the site. Of note, the signs being requested are within the sign allowance for the property, and all other existing signs are conforming. The sign in need of variance is about 6 feet tall and is significantly set back from the public right of way. Also, there are mature trees between the sign and the public right of way that limit visibility. Chair Lawton asked Beals how many signs there are on the property. Beals indicated that in total, there are seven signs on the property, including drive-thru signs and wall-mounted sign. Commission member Gupta clarified that there is already a secondary sign in place; Beals indicated that this request was necessary to replace the secondary drive-thru sign because it was being self-demolished. Gupta asked Beals to explain the intent of the sign code; Beals indicated that the general intent of the sign code is to avoid visual clutter and limit the number of signs on any given property. Commission member Coffman asked Beals how the proposed secondary sign compares to the existing sign? Beals indicated it was of similar size and would be placed in the same location as the existing secondary sign. Commission member San Filippo indicated that he visited the subject property on Monday, July 7 at 10:05am. According to San Filippo, the existing secondary sign is two-sided and visible from the drive-thru lane during approach to the ordering location. Applicant Presentation: Applicant representative Jason Graber, Chief Development Officer, Aksan United, 114 S 7th Street, LaSalle, CO, addressed the Commission and offered comment. Graber stated that the sign is already in place and the request isn’t to add anything that isn’t already on-site, but rather to bring the sign into compliance. Graber noted that the building is undergoing comprehensive remodeling and renovations to comply with current Wendy’s brand standards and identity. During the renovations, the city indicated that a variance request would be necessary to replace the secondary sign. Beals stated that a reface would be possible without a variance request. Graber noted that the sign is not permitted and now needs to come into compliance with current City requirements. Beals stated that that was not the staff understanding of the application, which seemed to indicate that this was a sign that was going to replace an existing sign. Graber noted that other Wendy’s in town have this sign, as do multitudes of other Wendy’s franchises that he operates. Chair Lawton asked for clarification of the need for an application. Beals explained that this sign was never permitted when originally installed, and now in order to come into compliance the sign needs to be permitted as well as obtain a variance in order to come into compliance with current city code. Lawton asked if the sign is illuminated; Graber confirmed, noting the sign faces southeast and is at an angle to Lemay. The sign is two-sided so that it can be turned to advertise breakfast or lunch/dinner items depending on the time of day. Beals clarified that sign regulations do not concern the messaging of a given sign. Gupta noted the sign is visible from the stop light but not conspicuous. 7/10/25 – LURC MINUTES – DRAFT 4 Public Comment: -NONE- Commission Discussion: Commission member Coffman noted that this is an existing condition that would have been permitted at the time of construction. Coffman sees no harm to the public and is in support of the variance request. Commission member Floyd agrees with Coffman and is in support of the variance request. Commission member Gupta also noted the sign is already in place, and that the property is not looking to expand its current sign program. Gupta is in support of the variance request. Commission member San Filippo sees this request as “no harm no foul”, noting a secondary sign has been in place for years. San Filippo is in support of the variance request. Commission member Carron has no problems with the variance request, noting that the secondary sign enhances wayfinding within the parking lot when trying to find the drive-thru entrance. Commission member Floyd made a motion, seconded by member Coffman to APPROVE ZBA250017, regarding the requested variance to Land Use Code Section 5.16.2, Table(G)(1), to allow one additional permanent freestanding sign as shown in the hearing materials. The Commission finds that the variance would not be detrimental to the public good; and will not diverge from Section 5.16.2(G), Table (G)(1), except in a nominal and inconsequential way when considered in the context of the neighborhood and will continue to advance the purposes of Land Use Code Section 1.2.2 because: -The proposed sign replaces an existing sign; and -The message of the proposed sign is not visible at the same time a viewer is reading the other freestanding sign. This decision is based upon the agenda materials, information presented during this hearing, and Commission discussion. The Commission adopts the information, analysis, findings and conclusions in the hearing staff report. Yeas: San Filippo, Carron, Lawton, Gupta, Floyd, Coffman Nays: Absent: Vogel c. APPEAL ZBA250018 Address: 2318 Laporte Ave Owner/Petitioner: Forrest Schrupp Zoning District: LMN Code Section: 4.3.5(C)(4) Project Description: This is a request to construct a six (6) foot fence between the front building line and the front property line of the subject property. The maximum height for a fence between the front building line and the front property line is four (4) feet. The variance request is to exceed the maximum allowable fence height in this location by two (2) feet. 7/10/25 – LURC MINUTES – DRAFT 5 Staff Presentation: Beals presented slides relevant to the appeal and discussed the variance request, noting that the property is located on Laporte Ave, across from the PSD support building and bus barn. The request is for the construction of a fence in front of the residential property. During road improvements along Laporte Ave, the previous vegetation that provided cover was removed from the front of the property. The proposed fence would help to block vehicular headlights and road noise, as well as screen light and activity from the PSD properties that are directly across Laporte Ave. Improvements along Laporte Ave included more multi-modal lanes including a protected bike lane and an expanded paved sidewalk. Chair Lawton asked about measurements included on the hand-drawn plans submitted by the applicant, which show the fence being placed 7 feet from the sidewalk. Beals and applicant Schrupp confirmed the distance shown to be 7 feet. San Filippo visited the site on Monday, July 7 at 9:40am, noting two large trees that flank the residence on either side. San Filippo’s initial concern was that a 6-foot fence may impede visibility when a vehicle attempted to enter/exit the property via the driveway. Upon his site visit, San Filippo feels that visibility would be adequate with the construction of the proposed fence. Applicant Presentation: Applicant Forrest Schrupp, resident/owner, 2318 Laporte Ave, addressed the Commission and offered comment. Schrupp stated that he has been at the property for approximately 35 years. The improvements to Laporte have raised the roadway a bit, causing lights to shine onto the property at a level that was not experienced in previous years. Schrupp noted that other residents along Laporte also have 6-foot fences installed and described the neighborhood as “eclectic”. Schrupp reiterated that the main purpose of the fence would be to mitigate light, dust, and noise that are generated from the roadway and bike/pedestrian lanes. Chair Lawton asked if the side fence would extend to the front; Schrupp stated that the side fence would not extend all the way to the front, and it would be kept largely open. Commission member Floyd asked Schrupp if he had explored the possible effects of a 4-foot fence; Schrupp stated that he had placed markers at a height of 4 feet and then observed where light was shining; a fence of 6 feet would be more effective at blocking the light from the property. Public Comment: -NONE- Commission Discussion: Commission member Coffman asked staff if the Engineering Dept. would be looking at sight lines of the driveway? Beals indicated that Engineering would need to review given the proximity to pedestrian paths and trails. Coffman sympathizes with the resident and understands the noise and light pollution that can be generated from the bus barn. Coffman believes the impact of the proposed fence will be minimal to surrounding neighbors. Commission member Carron noted that he lives in this part of town as well and understands the manner in which the road improvements have pushed up against some properties in the area. Carron feels that this is a reasonable accommodation to provide screening from street activity as well as provide privacy for the property. Chair Lawton asked Beals about the process for Engineering review. Beals stated that a review by the Engineering Dept. would be the next step, to ensure the fence is at least 2 feet from the public right of way and to measure sight distances from the driveway. Lawton understands the need for fencing in this area and doesn’t feel that there is any problem with the proposed fence. 7/10/25 – LURC MINUTES – DRAFT 6 Commission member Floyd made a motion, seconded by member Gupta to APPROVE ZBA250018 granting the requested variance to Land Use Code Section 4.3.5(C)(4), to allow the construction of a 6- foot-tall fence between the front building and front property lines which exceeds the allowable fence height by 2 feet as shown in the hearing materials. The Commission finds that the variance would not be detrimental to the public good; and will not diverge from Section 4.3.5(C)(4) except in a nominal and inconsequential way when considered in the context of the neighborhood and will continue to advance the purposes of Land Use Code Section 1.2.2 because: -The additional height will help prevent direct glare from vehicles; and -The public right of way is still visible from other properties. This decision is based upon the agenda materials, information presented during this hearing, and Commission discussion. The Commission adopts the information, analysis, findings, and conclusions in the hearing staff report. Yeas: San Filippo, Carron, Lawton, Gupta, Floyd, Coffman Nays: Absent: Vogel d. APPEAL ZBA250019 Address: 614 W Mountain Ave Owner: Jennifer & Carlos Arguelles Petitioner: Taylor Meyer, Architect, VFLA Architecture + Interiors Zoning District: OT-B Code Section: 2.1.6 Project Description: This is a request for a proposed 773 square-foot addition to a 2,045 square-foot detached house. This will follow a demolition of an existing 239 square-foot addition on the rear of the existing 2,284 square- foot house. The maximum allowable floor area for a detached house in the OT-B zone district is 2,400 square feet. The request is to exceed the maximum allowable floor area of a detached house in the OT- B zone district by 418 square feet. Staff Presentation: Beals presented slides relevant to the appeal and discussed the variance request, noting that the property is located on the north side if Mountain Ave, between Whitcomb St and Loomis St. Based on the site plan, a two- story portion of the existing residence at the rear is to be removed, and will be replaced with a one-story addition with a deck. The deck does not count as floor area. A basement is also being added to the residence; basement square footage does not count towards allowable square footage for a property. Beals presented images of the front of the house, noting that the proposed addition does not change the front view; the rear view indicates the two-story area that would be removed and the one-story addition and deck that are proposed. Side elevations show how the proposed addition would extend further into the lot from the rear of the residence. Beals noted the presence of some accessory structures in the rear of the lot, noting they do not count towards the square footage allowance for the property. Beals noted that the above-grade addition is approximately 700 square feet. The difference in square footage between what is being removed and what is being added is approximately 250 square feet. The total additional square footage that would be created would be 418 square feet. 7/10/25 – LURC MINUTES – DRAFT 7 Previous code allowed for structures to increase in size in relation to lot size; this lot is bigger than others in the area and thus the current residence is larger than the currently-required 2,400 square feet. This addition was initially planned before code changes. Commission member Coffman asked what the allowable floor area would be if this addition included a kitchen? Beals stated at minimum, 750 additional square feet would be allowed if this were an ADU. Coffman noted that the impetus of the rules was to encourage the construction of more living units. Chair Lawton asked about two different designations shown in the plans for the porch area. Lawton asked if there were a basement area included in the addition; Beals confirmed and noted that the basement portion does not count against the square footage calculations. Applicant Presentation: Applicant representative Taylor Meyer, Architect, VFLA Architecture + Interiors, addressed the Commission and offered comment. Meyer stated that this project started with the property owners’ main goal of taking this older home and turning it into a more-comfortable place to live while they age in place. Another goal is to minimize the impact to the existing structure, recognizing that this is a beautiful historic home. To make the home more comfortable, the owners would like to expand the existing kitchen area as well as expand the living room area and create a new mud room off of the alley entrance. The portion planned for demolition is a later addition to the home and is not original. The proposed addition is not wider than the existing addition and will not alter the view of the property from the front. The plan also includes the strategy of introducing a master suite into the basement level and incorporate an elevator into the proposed addition. The space under the deck is actually a sunken patio that provides egress from the lower- level master suite. A design was considered that did not exceed the maximum floor area, but it did not fit the owners’ needs; the extra square footage being requested meets their needs and is no more than necessary. Chair Lawton asked if this building was designated as historic; Meyer noted it has not been designated. Commission member Coffman asked Meyer if there is any reason this cannot be designed as an ADU, as it appears it would just need a small kitchenette to be considered as an attached ADU. Meyer responded that his impression is that an attached ADU would need to be more separated from the main residence than what is desired by the property owners. Lawton asked if there is any living space in the garage? There appears to be a chimney coming out of the structure based on photographs. Meyer notes it is currently being used as just a garage. Public Comment: -NONE- Commission Discussion: Commission member Floyd noted that it is interesting to consider that if this were an attached ADU, it would still be within the scope of the new Land Use Code. It seems there is a way to attain increased square footage while also meeting the intent of the Code. Floyd stated he is a bit on the fence with the current application. Commission member Coffman agrees with the points put forward by Floyd. Coffman noted that an obstacle seems to be the large opening between the family room and the kitchen. Beals notes that full fire separation is required between two living units, as well as the installation of separate air handling units. For building code 7/10/25 – LURC MINUTES – DRAFT 8 purposes, this potentially would be considered a duplex, which would require sprinkling as well as capital expansion fees. Commission member Carron stated that while he agrees the variance is inconsequential to the neighborhood, this is a self-imposed hardship that rests on the desire to simply increase square footage. Commission member Gupta appreciates the desire to remove the addition, as it clearly doesn’t match the rest of the home. He also appreciates the desire to age in place and increase livable floor space without impacting the nature of the neighborhood. Coffman stated that for him, it is hard to think about approval when the option to permit this as a second unit have not been fully explored and investigated. Coffman believes this is an option that should be looked at. Chair Lawton understands the idea behind this project is to use the entire structure as a primary residence. Coffman understands, noting that the impetus of the Code to create additional units may mean that future owners of the property then have the option to provide a second unit. Coffman asked the Commission if it is worth tabling this request until more information regarding attached dwelling units can be explored? Floyd noted that one question is whether 418 square feet can be considered nominal and inconsequential in the scope of the relevant code section. This represents an 11% increase over existing conditions, or 17% of the maximum allowable square footage. Coffman responds that if the only basis for approval is percentage of square footage that is over, we don’t want to set a de facto precedent. Functionally, the only thing that separates this proposal from the designation of the addition as a conforming attached dwelling, would be the addition of a small cook stove/kitchen utility. Lawton asked the applicant if tabling this proposal would be an acceptable action at this point in time. Meyer explained that to turn this into an attached ADU would require a bit more square footage. This would also require a new staircase, which also necessitates more square footage. The goal is not to add more square footage, and the end result would not be in keeping with the goals of the property owners. Lawton pointed out this design process was begun prior to Land Use Code changes, and to follow-through at this time requires a variance request. Floyd notes that this lot size is double the minimum size for this zone district. Coffman points out the goal of the new code requirements is to encourage ADU construction within the design process in this zone district when homes are constructed and renovated. Lawton likes that the proposal maintains the design of the home. Commission member Carron states he is leaning towards approval; he feels this can be considered nominal and inconsequential, while noting the hardship is largely self-imposed based on the desire of the owners to increase square footage. Commission member San Filippo agrees with comments put forth by Carron. Gupta states he is in favor of the variance request. Floyd states his opinion that the proposal is an overall improvement to the property; the purpose is to serve the owners’ desire to age in place and maintain their current home. The purpose of the code section that limits home size also serves to limit potential capital investment in the district. Floyd is leaning towards approval. 7/10/25 – LURC MINUTES – DRAFT 9 Coffman notes that he is not completely comfortable with approval. Commission member Floyd made a motion, seconded by member Gupta to APPROVE ZBA250019, granting the requested variance to Land Use Code Section 2.1.6, to allow the construction of a 773 square foot replacement addition to the existing detached home which in total will exceed the maximum allowable floor area for a detached home of 2,400 square feet by 418 square feet as shown in the hearing materials. The Commission finds that the variance would not be detrimental to the public good; and will not diverge from Section 2.1.6 except in a nominal and inconsequential way when considered in the context of the neighborhood and will continue to advance the purposes of Land Use Code Section 1.2.2 because: -The increased floor area is only an 11% increase from the existing conditions; and -The addition is one story and to the rear of the existing building reducing its visibility. This decision is based upon the agenda materials, information presented during this hearing, and Commission discussion. The Commission adopts the information, analysis, findings, and conclusions in the hearing staff report. Yeas: San Filippo, Carron, Lawton, Gupta, Floyd Nays: Coffman Absent: Vogel 6. OTHER BUSINESS -We will have at least two items for the August meeting 7. ADJOURNMENT The Meeting was adjourned at 10:00 AM. Agenda Item 1 Item # 1 - Page 1 STAFF REPORT August 14, 2025 STAFF Noah Beals, Senior City Planner/Zoning PROJECT ZBA250020 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Address: 608 Peterson St Owner: JRA Property Solutions LLC Petitioners: Jamie Allen, Better Blueprint Realty; Tom Martinez, Valiant Construction Holdings LLC Zoning District: OT-B Code Section: 2.1.6 Variance Request: This is a request for a new detached accessory building (1 story garage) that is replacing an existing detached accessory building to be constructed 2 feet from the north (side) property line. The minimum required interior side setback for this lot in the OT-B zone district is 5 feet. The request is for the new detached accessory building to encroach approximately 3 feet into the required side setback. Additionally, the request is to allow for the garage door of the proposed detached accessory building to be built 5 feet from the rear property line. The minimum setback for a garage door from an alley is 8 feet. COMMENTS: 1. Background: The property was part of the original town plat in 1873. The primary building was constructed in 1910. There is an existing accessory structure that is accessed from the alley that is nonconforming in size and location. Most of the lots on the block use the alley for vehicle access. There is a mix of accessory buildings that meet the 600 square foot maximum floor area and exceed the standard. In June of this year the Land Use Review Commission (LURC) did approve a variance to exceed the allowable floor area by 120 square feet. At the June LURC hearing the applicant also requested to encroach into the rear setback to be 3 feet away from the east property line. This encroachment was denied. The proposed encroachments the applicant is requesting now is to encroach 3 feet into the required 5-foot side setback on the north and 3 feet into the 8-foot garage-door setback from an alley on the east. Setback standards also maintain the character of the neighborhood and provide minimum safety regulations. A setback along the alley allows more time and space for vehicles to see each other in the alley. 2. Applicant’s statement of justification: See petitioner’s letter. Agenda Item 1 Item # 1 - Page 2 3. Staff Conclusion and Findings: Under Section 6.14.4(H), staff recommends denial and finds that: • The variance request creates increased safety concerns, becoming a detriment to the public good • The proposed design does not comply to the standard equally well or better than a design that meets the standard. • There is not a unique hardship that prevents the standard from being met. • An 60% encroachment into the North side setback 37% encroachment into East garage door setback is not nominal in connection to the increased safety concerns. 4. Recommendation: Staff recommends denial of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¶V5HSUHVHQWDWLYH PXVWEHSUHVHQWDWWKHPHHWLQJ /RFDWLRQ /D3RUWH$YH&LW\+DOO&RXQFLO&KDPEHUV LQVWUXFWLRQVZLOOEHHPDLOHGWR WKHDSSOLFDQWWKH)ULGD\RU0RQGD\SULRUWRWKHKHDULQJ 'DWH 6HFRQG7KXUVGD\RIWKHPRQWK7LPH DP ’s Name )RUW&ROOLQV&2 ’s Petitioner’s Address ’s Name Petitioner’s Phone # !"Petitioner’s Email ’s Name !"Representative’s Address !"Representative’s Phone # !"Representative’s Email tZ/dd E^dd D Ed yW>/E/E'd, Z ^KE&KZd, sZ/E Z Yh ^dZ Yh/Z s/ ^ WZd KhD Ed͘ %XLOGLQJ&R H HY HZH H X Q H DU PHQ Y Y 608 Peterson Street Tom Martinez Builder Representative 80524 834f S. Perry Street, STE 119, Castle Rock CO 720.234.5207 tom.martinez@bevaliant.net Jamie Allen 33 S. Boulder Cir, STE 302, Boulder CO 720.690.7131 Jamie@betterblueprintrealty.com JRA Property Solutions LLC OT District LUC Sec 2.1.6; LUC Sec 3.1.8 2. Equal to or betten than 3. Nominal or inconsequential dditional Justinfication 7/7/2025 608 Peterson Street Jamie Allen Owner 80524 33 S. Boulder Circle, #302, Bould JRA Property Solutions LLC 7206907131 LUC Sec. 2.1.6, LUC Sec. 3 jamie@betterblueprintrealty.com OT District Tom Martinez 834 F S. Perry Street, Suite 119, 7202345207 tom.martinez@bevaliant.net May 13, 2025 Tom Martinez 2. Equal to or better than 3. Nominal and inconsequential dditional Justification 608 Peterson Street Ft. Collins, CO 80524 7/30/2025 RE: Request for Variance Consideration – Statement • Variance 1 – Our request for variance approval is for a setback encroaching into the NORTH SIDE setback to reflect the 2’-3” currently shown on the survey documents. This is to match the existing footprint of the garage structure there today. Our request for variance approval is for the scrape and rebuild of a new garage to be placed in the same set-back location of 2’-3” (LUC Sec. 2.1.6). See Survey Site plan. The only change to the footprint of the new garage would be on the alley side of the property, referred to as the rear set-back (EAST SIDE) of 5’-0”. The existing structure is shown on the Survey as 1’-6” on the south corner and 2-0” on the north corner. • Variance 2 - we are adding a second request to allow for a garage door to be set at 5’ from the rear property line, where there is an 8’ minimum setback for garage doors off of an alley (a 3’ encroachment into the required 8’ rear setback for garage doors). JRA Property Solutions LLC, the property owner request this variance for a variety of reasons: • To preserve and maintain the aesthetic and function of the rear yard • To safeguard the health and wellness of a well-established, old-growth tree and the existing landscaping in the rear yard • There are current plans underway to submit for a building permit for renovation of the single-family residence on the property. Like precedents set by adjacent properties we propose bringing the garage up to current codes and present-day standards for function and safety. And to compliment the updates to the current home • The proposed demolition and re-construction would not change the functionality of the garage, nor would there be any negative impact to the current access to the garage from the alley. Telephone Number: 303-464-9515 Surveyors Name: Robert J. Rubino Address: 3312 Airport Road ofSheet Approved CDS Surveyor Th i s s u r v e y c o o r d i n a t e d , b u t n o t p e r f o r m e d , b y C o m m e r c i a l D u e D i l i g e n c e S e r v i c e s . S u r v e y o b t a i n e d f r o m a n d c e r t i f i e d t o b y a l an d s u r v e y o r l i c e n s e d i n t h e s t a t e p r o p e r t y i s l o c a t e d . To: JRA Property Solutions LLC; Land Title Guarantee Company; First American Commercial Due Diligence Services: This is to certify that this map or plat and the survey on which it is based were made in accordance with the 2021 Minimum Standard Detail Requirements for ALTA/ACSM Land Title Surveys, jointly established and adopted by ALTA and NSPS, and includes Items 1, 2, 3, 4, 6(a), 6(b), 7(a), 7(b)(1), 7(c), 8, 9, 11(a), 13, 14, 16, 19, and 20(a) of Table A thereof. The field work was completed on 4/24/2025. Date of Plat or Map: 4/30/2025 _______________________________ Robert J. Rubino, Colorado PLS 14142 surveyor@firstam.com 2 The Title Description and Schedule B items hereon are from Land Title Guarantee Company, Commitment No. FC25215675.1 dated 03/03/2025. NOTES CORRESPONDING TO SCHEDULE "B": TITLE DESCRIPTION TITLE INFORMATION FLOOD INFORMATION CEMETERY Possible Encroachments SURVEYOR CERTIFICATION BASIS OF BEARINGS SURVEYOR'S NOTES PARKING INFORMATION LAND AREA BUILDING AREA BUILDING HEIGHT VICINITY MAP 1 2 5 6 7 4 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 The Land referred to herein below is situated in the County of Larimer, State of Colorado, and is described as follows: THE NORTH 1/2 OF LOT 8, BLOCK 156 OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COUNTY OF LARIMER, STATE OF COLORADO. TITLE DESCRIPTION ZONING INFORMATION BUILDING HEIGHT TITLE INFORMATION SCHEDULE 'B' ITEMS SURVEYOR CERTIFICATION FLOOD INFORMATION CEMETERY POSSIBLE ENCROACHMENTS LEGEND BASIS OF BEARING SURVEYOR'S NOTES PARKING INFORMATION LAND AREA BUILDING AREA VICINITY MAP NORTH ARROW / SCALE CLIENT INFORMATION BOX SURVEY DRAWING 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 8. EASEMENTS, CONDITIONS, COVENANTS, RESTRICTIONS, RESERVATIONS AND NOTES ON THE PLAT OF FORT COLLINS RECORDED JANUARY 17 1873 UNDER RECEPTION NO. 1727. (NO EASEMENTS SHOWN ON THE PLAT) 1. No observable evidence of earth moving work, building construction or building additions within recent months. 2. No observable evidence of changes in street right of way lines completed, and available from the controlling jurisdiction and no observable evidence of recent street or sidewalk construction or repairs. 3. Property has access via Peterson Street and the 20' Alley which are public street ROW. 4. All statements within the certification, and other references located elsewhere hereon, related to: utilities, improvements, structures, buildings, party walls, parking, easements, servitudes, and encroachments; are based solely on above ground, visible evidence, unless another source of information is specifically referenced hereon. 5. No evidence of wetland areas marked or delineation observed. 6. No offsite easements listed in title commitment. 7. All observed above ground evidence of underground utilities are plotted and shown on the survey. Utility evidence includes: water valves, fire hydrants, water manholes, storm inlets, sanitary sewer manholes, electric and telephone risers. 8. All bearings and distances are measured and recorded unless noted otherwise. 9. Building height measured from finish / main floor to highest point of building. 10. The distance measurements shown hereon are the U.S. Survey Foot. 11. This survey does not constitute a title search by Rubino Surveying to determine ownership or easements of record, right of way or title of record. Rubino Surveying relied upon Land Title Guarantee Company, Commitment No. FC25215675.1 dated 03/03/2025. ALTA/NSPS Land Title Survey This Work Coordinated By: Project Name: CDS Project Number: Drwn By: Surveyor Ref.No: Aprvd By: Scale: Date: Revision: Client Ref. No: Prepared For: PROJECT ADDRESS Peterson Street - Fort Collins 25-04-0117 Th i s s u r v e y c o o r d i n a t e d , b u t n o t p e r f o r m e d , b y C o m m e r c i a l D u e D i l i g e n c e S e r v i c e s . S u r v e y o b t a i n e d f r o m a n d c e r t i f i e d t o b y a l an d s u r v e y o r l i c e n s e d i n t h e s t a t e p r o p e r t y i s l o c a t e d . T h i s s u r v e y c o o r d i n a t e d , b u t n o t p e r f o r m e d , b y C o m m e r c i a l D u e D i l i g e n c e Se r v i c e s . S u r v e y o b t a i n e d f r o m a n d c e r t i f i e d t o b y a l a n d s u r v e y o r l i c e n s e d i n t h e s t a t e p r o p e r t y i s l o c a t e d . This survey coordinated, but not performed, by Commercial Due Diligence Services. Survey obtained from and certified to by a land surveyor licensed in the state property is located.This survey coordinated, but not performed, by Commercial Due Diligence Services. Survey obtained from and certified to by a land surveyor licensed in the state property is located. This survey coordinated, but not performed, by Commercial Due Diligence Services. Survey obtained from and certified to by a land surveyor licensed in the state property is located.This survey coordinated, but not performed, by Commercial Due Diligence Services. Survey obtained from and certified to by a land surveyor licensed in the state property is located. Date: Revision: Date: Revision: Date: Revision: There is no visible evidence of cemeteries on the subject property at the time of survey. Key to CDS ALTA Survey 1 18 PROJECT ADDRESS20 20 email: rubinosurveying@aol.com This survey prepared in accordance with the "2021 Minimum Standard Detail Requirements for ALTA/NSPS Land Title Surveys" (Effective February 23, 2021) The land shown in this survey is the same as that described in Land Title Guarantee Company, Commitment No. FC25215675.1 dated 03/03/2025. Boulder, CO 80301 Field Date: JRA Property Solutions LLC ZONING INFORMATION8 Zoning information is not provided SCHEDULE 'B' ITEMS3 608 Peterson Street, Fort Collins, Colorado THE BEARINGS ARE BASED ON THE NORTH LINE OF LOT 7 AND LOT 6 BLOCK 156, PLAT OF FORT COLLINS ASSUMED TO BEAR N89°57'01"W BETWEEN MONUMENTS FOUND AND DESCRIBED HEREON. 9,500 SQ. FT. / 0.2181 ACRES By graphic plotting only, the subject property is not located in a flood hazard area of the Flood Insurance Rate Map, Community Panel No. 08069C097H, Effective Date: 5/2/2012. The subject is located in Zone "X" (unshaded) defined as "Areas determined to be outside the 0.2% annual chance floodplain". HOUSE 1,653 sq. ft. HOUSE 18 Feet N/A Roof overhang 0.3' over property line GARAGE 605 sq. ft. GARAGE 17 Feet Fence crosses property line Wood fence / wall crosses property line Wood fence / wall crosses property line Wood fence / wall crosses property line Field Date: Ref.No: Surveyor This survey prepared in accordance with the "2021 Minimum Standard Detail Requirements for ALTA/NSPS Land Title Surveys" (Effective February 23, 2021) This Work Coordinated By: 17 NORTH ARROW / SCALE Boulder, CO 80301 LEGEND9 This survey coordinated, but not performed, by Commercial Due Diligence Services. Survey obtained from and certified to by a land surveyor licensed in the state property is located.This survey coordinated, but not performed, by Commercial Due Diligence Services. Survey obtained from and certified to by a land surveyor licensed in the state property is located. Th i s s u r v e y c o o r d i n a t e d , b u t n o t p e r f o r m e d , b y C o m m e r c i a l D u e D i l i g e n c e S e r v i c e s . S u r v e y o b t a i n e d f r o m a n d c e r t i f i e d t o b y a l an d s u r v e y o r l i c e n s e d i n t h e s t a t e p r o p e r t y i s l o c a t e d . This survey coordinated, but not performed, by Commercial Due Diligence Services. Survey obtained from and certified to by a land surveyor licensed in the state property is located.This survey coordinated, but not performed, by Commercial Due Diligence Services. Survey obtained from and certified to by a land surveyor licensed in the state property is located. Th i s s u r v e y c o o r d i n a t e d , b u t n o t p e r f o r m e d , b y C o m m e r c i a l D u e D i l i ge n c e S e r v i c e s . S u r v e y o b t a i n e d f r o m a n d c e r t i f i e d t o b y a l an d s u r v e y o r l i c e n s e d i n t h e s t a t e p r o p e r t y i s l o c a t e d . Th i s s u r v e y c o o r d i n a t e d , b u t n o t p e r f o r m e d , b y C o m m e r c i a l D u e D i l i g e n c e S e r v i c e s . S u r v e y o b t a i n e d f r o m a n d c e r t i f i e d t o b y a l an d s u r v e y o r l i c e n s e d i n t h e s t a t e p r o p e r t y i s l o c a t e d . Date:Scale: Date: Aprvd By: Revision: Revision: Revision: Project Name: PROJECT ADDRESS 25-04-0117 CDS Project Number: Peterson Street - Fort Collins 20 Client Ref. No: Prepared For: Date: 18 ALTA/NSPS Land Title Survey Date: Revision: Drwn By: of 22Sheet © Telephone Number: 303-464-9515 Surveyors Name: Robert J. Rubino Address: 3312 Airport Road Approved CDS Surveyor email: rubinosurveying@aol.com 19 JRA Property Solutions LLC 608 Peterson Street, Fort Collins, Colorado AL L E Y SITE PLAN 60 8 P E T E R S O N S T . FT . C O L L I N S , C O BE T T E R B L U E P R I N T R E A L T Y 64''5&'5+)0#0&&4#(6+0)+0% HCZ 64''5&4#(6+0)"%1/%#560'6 RJ Agenda Item 2 Item # 2 - Page 1 STAFF REPORT August 14, 2025 STAFF Noah Beals, Senior City Planner/Zoning PROJECT ZBA250021 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Address: 1805 Laporte Ave Owner: Colin Barry and Celeste Wieting Petitioner: Jeremy Cameron, General Contractor, Intelligent Designs Zoning District: OT-A Code Section: 2.1.6 Variance Request: This is a request to construct a 175 square-foot addition (sunroom) to an existing 1,020 square-foot detached house. The proposed location of the sunroom is along the south-west corner of the house where the addition will follow the wall line of the existing attached garage, which was built up to the western property line. The minimum required interior side setback in the OT-A zone district is 5 feet. The request is therefore to allow an encroachment into the existing side setback by 5 feet. Additionally, an after the fact request for approval of an existing 5 feet 6-inch-tall x 25 feet long masonry wall located at the front of the property along Laporte Avenue. The maximum allowable fence/wall height located between the front building line and the front property line is four feet. The request is for approval to exceed the maximum allowable wall height by 1 foot 6 inches. COMMENTS: 1. Background: The property is a part of the Frey Subdivision that was originally approved in the county in 1924. It was later annexed into the City in 1967. The primary building was constructed in 1953. Setback standards and wall height requirements maintain the character of the neighborhood and provide minimum safety regulations. The proposed design of the sunroom includes windows on the west side. Additionally, the eave and gutters appear to overhang the property line. The wall in the front yard is setback from the back of the sidewalk at least 8 feet. With the increased setback from the sidewalk the wall does not create a tunneling affect. 2. Applicant’s statement of justification: See petitioner’s letter. 3. Staff Conclusion and Findings: Under Section 6.14.4(H), staff recommends approval for increased wall height in the front yard and finds that: • The variance is not detrimental to the public good • The increased height in combination with the increase setback does not create a tunneling affect along the sidewalk Agenda Item 2 Item # 2 - Page 2 • The structure has been in place for over four years. Therefore, this variance request will not diverge from the standard but in a nominal, inconsequential way, when considered in the context of the neighborhood, and will continue to advance the purpose of the Land Use Code contained in Section 1.2.2. Further under Section 2.10.4(H), staff recommends denial for an encroachment into the side setback and finds that: • The variance request would increase the wall length set on the property line • The abutting property has potential to increase its setback from the property line • The proposed design does not address increase water run-off on the abutting property. • The proposed design does not address long-term maintenance of the new or existing structure. • The proposed design does not comply to the standard equally well or better than a design that meets the standard. • There is not a unique hardship that prevents the standard from being met. • A 100% encroachment into the setback is not nominal in connection with the increased safety concerns. 4. Recommendation: Staff recommends approval only of the increased wall height for APPEAL ZBA250021. INTELLIGENT DESIGNS INC JEREMY CAMERON 1508 Briarwood Rd Fort Collins Co 80521 970-402-9842 7/6/25 To: City of Fort Collins zoning department With regard to the application for variance from land use code Statement for variance request reasoning. To whom it may concern, This request for variance is in regard to the single family home located at 1805 Laporte Ave. Two items are noted here: the first is a variance to the setbacks (west side) where the homeowners, and the applicant, would like to construct a sunporch on the west side of the property. The best (and only) placement for this is behind the garage, tucked into an existing “L” shaped space that already serves as an open patio. Placement of the proposed sunroom is not possible anywhere else on the south side of the home, due to the narrowness of the lot, placement of the existing home and the need to maintain egress and lighting to the existing south bedroom window. It would also block the only kitchen window, serving as the only natural light to that space. Blocking that would use additional electricity for lighting at times of the day when it would be otherwise unnecessary. Additionally, The existing home’s garage currently sits on its western property line, making this proposed sunroom a continuation of that placement. The adjacent property to the west (western contiguous neighbor at 1809 Laporte Ave) has their driveway running along, and parallel to this property line, so the impact to that property would be minimal. The new roof of the structure is below the existing home’s roof, and the walls of sunroom itself would not block anything for anyone around them. Given these items, we believe the proposed sunroom would not be detrimental to the public good and would not diverge from the land use code in any consequential way. The second request for variance is in regard to an existing masonry wall constructed at the front (north facing) portion of the property. It has come to our attention that this wall is higher than the current code allows it to be (code of 4’ vs existing wall height of 5’-6”). The wall exists for the purpose of blocking the headlights of the patrons of Stodgy Brewing across the street, as well as guarding against accidents ending up in their front yard. The elevation of the parking lot, the elevation of the home at 1805 Laporte Ave, the location of the front windows, and the height of the average vehicle headlights all necessitate a wall height greater than 4’ to be effective for INTELLIGENT DESIGNS INC light blockage and for safety. As such, this wall was built accordingly, a number of years ago, without the foreknowledge of the 4’ restriction. Thank you in advance for your consideration, Jeremy Cameron, GC Intelligent Designs Inc Celeste Wieting (homeowner) Coilin Barry (homeowner) N 89°32'32" W 1324.55' BEARING BASIS CENTER OF SECTION 10, TOWNSHIP 7 NORTH, RANGE 69 WEST, 6TH P.M. FOUND NUMBER 6 REBAR IN MONUMENT BOX, 3.25 INCH ALUMINUM CAP, ILLEGIBLE, POSITION ACCEPTED CENTER WEST 1/16 CORNER OF SECTION 10, TOWNSHIP 7 NORTH, RANGE 69 WEST, 6TH P.M. FOUND NUMBER 6 REBAR IN MONUMENT BOX, 3.25 INCH ALUMINUM CAP, STAMPED PLS 31169, POSITION ACCEPTED 30 ' 60 ' LAPORTE AVENUE 60' RIGHT OF WAY ASPHALT PAVEMENT WIDTH VARIES 200.00' CONCRETE WALK 8" WIDE WALL LOT 16 FREY SUBDIVISION NOT INCLUDED LOT 18 FREY SUBDIVISION NOT INCLUDED LOT 17 FREY SUBDIVISION 3.5' DIAMETER FIRE PIT 18 ' AL L E Y FR E Y S U B 12 . 1 0 ' GRAVEL ROAD GA R D E N A R E A CHICKEN COOP 34.0' 5. 0 ' 12.0' 20 . 3 ' 11.8' 15 . 0 ' 8.0' 8. 0 ' 8.0' 8. 0 ' 18.2' 30 . 3 ' #1805 ONE STORY WOOD FRAME BUILDING 0.50' 29 . 3 0 ' 3.52' 0.40' 6.55' 6.99' 9.2' 7. 2 ' 0 20 40 NORTH SCALE 1" = 20' 6' WOOD FENCE (TYPICAL) FR E Y P L A T BO O K 4 P A G E 7 3 (NO STREET NAME) SHED STONE PATIO 1.41' GATE FOUND #4 REBAR WITH 1" RED PLASTIC CAP STAMPED STEWARD LS 5028 N 89°32'32" W 50.00' N 0 0 ° 2 7 ' 2 8 " E 1 8 0 . 0 0 ' N 0 0 ° 2 7 ' 2 8 " E 1 8 0 . 0 0 ' S 89°32'32" E 50.00' ET NO CORNER FOUND OR SET (TYPICAL) A/C UNIT GAS METER ELECTRIC METER 4' HOG WIRE FENCE N 89°32'32" W RI G H T O F W A Y 1.31' CONCRETE WALK PR O J E C T N O . Date: Drawn By: Designed By: Approved By: Project Mgr.SH E E T 1 O F 1 DR A W I N G N O . ON E I N C H - I F N O T , S C A L E A C C O R D I N G L Y 3665 JFK Parkway Building 2, Suite 100 Fort Collins, CO 80525 (970) 223-5556 I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IMPROVEMENT LOCATION CERTIFICATE WAS PREPARED FOR COLIN BARRY THAT IT IS NOT A LAND SURVEY PLAT OR IMPROVEMENT SURVEY PLAT, AND THAT IT IS NOT TO BE RELIED UPON FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF FENCE, BUILDING, OR OTHER FUTURE IMPROVEMENT LINES. THIS CERTIFICATE IS VALID ONLY FOR USE BY COLIN BARRY AND DESCRIBES THE PARCEL'S APPEARANCE ON MAY 9, 2025. I FURTHER CERTIFY THAT THE IMPROVEMENTS ON THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PARCEL ON THIS DATE, MAY 28, 2025, EXCEPT UTILITY CONNECTION, ARE ENTIRELY WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF THE PARCEL, EXCEPT AS SHOWN, THAT THERE ARE NO ENCROACHMENTS UPON THE DESCRIBED PREMISES BY IMPROVEMENTS ON ANY ADJOINING PREMISES, EXCEPT AS INDICATED, AND THAT THERE IS NO APPARENT EVIDENCE OR SIGN OF ANY EASEMENT CROSSING OR BURDENING ANY PART OF SAID PARCEL, EXCEPT AS NOTED. 5/28/2025 JVH JVH JVH JVHSU R V 1 JV H 0 0 1 IMPROVEMENT LOCATION CERTIFICATE SITUATED IN SECTION 10, TOWNSHIP 7 NORTH, RANGE 69 WEST, OF THE 6TH P.M., LARIMER COUNTY, STATE OF COLORADO IMPROVEMENT LOCATION CERTIFICATE SITUATED IN SECTION 10, TOWNSHIP 7 NORTH, RANGE 69 WEST, OF THE 6TH P.M., LARIMER COUNTY, STATE OF COLORADO DESCRIPTION: LOT 17, BLOCK 1, FREY SUBDIVISION, CITY OF FORT COLLINS, COUNT OF LARIMER, STATE OF COLORADO. RECEPTION NUMBER 20190002470, FILED IN LARIMER COUNTY ON 1/15/2019. BEARING BASIS: CONSIDERING THE SOUTH LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 10, TOWNSHIP 7 NORTH, RANGE 69 WEST, OF THE 6TH P.M., LARIMER COUNTY, STATE OF COLORADO. THE SAID SOUTH LINE BEING MARKED ON THE WEST SIDE WITH A NUMBER 6 REBAR WITH A 3.25 INCH ALUMINUM CAP STAMPED PLS 31169 AND BEING MARKED ON THE EAST SIDE WITH A NUMBER SIX REBAR WITH A 3.25 INCH ALUMINUM CAP STAMPED LS 17497, SAID LINE BEARS NORTH 89°32'32" WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 1324.55 FEET WITH ALL BEARINGS RELATIVE HERETO. GENERAL NOTES: 1. DEFINITION: CERTIFY CERTIFICATION - A PROFESSIONAL'S OPINION BASED ON HIS OR HER OBSERVATION OF CONDITIONS, KNOWLEDGE, INFORMATION AND BELIEFS. IT IS EXPRESSLY UNDERSTOOD THAT THE PROFESSIONAL'S CERTIFICATION OF A CONDITION'S EXISTENCE RELIEVES NO OTHER PARTY OF ANY RESPONSIBILITY OR OBLIGATION HE OR SHE HAS ACCEPTED BY CONTACT OR CUSTOM. 2. PER C.R.S. 18-04-508, ANY PERSON WHO KNOWINGLY REMOVES, ALTERS OR DEFACES ANY PUBLIC LAND SURVEY MONUMENT OR LAND MONUMENT OR ACCESSORY, COMITS A CLASS TWO (2) MISDEMEANOR. 3. ALL REFERENCES HEREON TO BOOKS, PAGES, MAPS AND RECEPTION NUMBERS ARE PUBLIC DOCUMENTS FILED IN THE RECORDS OF LARIMER COUNTY, COLORADO. 4. EASEMENTS AND PUBLIC DOCUMENTS SHOWN OR NOTED HEREON WERE EXAMINED AS TO LOCATION AND PURPOSE AND WERE NOT EXAMINED AS TO RESERVATIONS, CONDITIONS, OBLIGATIONS, TERMS, OR AS TO THE RIGHT TO GRANT THE SAME. 5. PER C.R.S. 38-51-106 "LINEAL UNITS DEPICTED ON THIS IMPROVEMENT SURVEY PLAT ARE U.S. SURVEY FEET. ONE METER EQUALS 39.37/12 US SURVEY FEET, EXACTLY ACCORDING TO THE NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF STANDARDS AND TECHNOLOGY". 6. SITE ADDRESS: 1805 LAPORTE AVENUE, FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 80521 7. TOTAL AREA OF PARCEL = 0.21 ACRES MORE OR LESS OR 9,000 SQUARE FEET MORE OR LESS. 8. ANY DEPICTION OF THE PROPERTY BOUNDARY LINES, RIGHT OF WAY LINES, OR EASEMENT LINES WITHIN THIS DOCUMENT ARE FOR GENERAL USE ONLY AND SHOULD NOT BE RELIED UPON FOR ANY PURPOSE OTHER THAN GENERAL INFORMATION. IF ACTUAL PROPERTY BOUNDARY LINES, RIGHT OF WAY LINES, OR EASEMENT LINES ARE NECESSARY, THAT LEVEL OF SERVICE MAY REQUIRE ADDITIONAL RESEARCH, FIELD WORK, COMPUTATIONS, AND PREPARATION OF A SURVEY DRAWING TO BE FILED IN LARIMER COUNTY PUBLIC RECORDS. SURVEYOR'S STATEMENT LEGEND NORTHN EASTE SOUTHS WESTW CONCRETECONC PRINCIPAL MERIDIANPM FIELD MEASUREMENT(F) CALCULATED MEASUREMENT(C) FOUND SECTION CORNER AS NOTED FOUND BOUNDARY MARKER AS NOTED CALCULATION POINT OVER HEAD UTILITYOHU AREA OF PROPOSED SUNROOM SUNROOM MAP VIEW PICTURES 1805 LAPORTE AVE FRONT VIEW (highlighted area is the location of the proposed sunroom) 1805 LAPORTE AVE TOP VIEW (highlighted area is the location of the proposed sunroom) top of frame is north FRONT MASONRY WALL MAP VIEW PICTURES 1805 LAPORTE AVE FRONT VIEW (highlighted area is the masonry wall) 1805 LAPORTE AVE TOP VIEW (highlighted area is the location of the masonry wall) top of frame is north Above: location of masonry wall and Stodgy parkinglot egress. Blue line points to the wall, and is a partial depiction of the headlight pathway 1805 LAPORTE AVE STREET VIEW (blue line is the line of projected headlights from patrons of Stodgy Brewing) Colin Barry <colinbarry90@gmail.com> Covered patio Karen Wilken <karen.wilken@yahoo.com> Mon, Jun 9, 2025 at 8:48 AM To: nancy frederick <nancyfred2x2@gmail.com>, Celeste Wieting <celestewieting@gmail.com> Cc: Colin Barry <colinbarry90@gmail.com> Here ya go... I, Karen Wilken, the owner of the property at 143 Frey Ave, Fort Collins, give my full consent for Celeste Wieting and Colin Barry to construct a covered patio addition on their property at 1805 Laporte Avenue. I have reviewed the proposed plans and have no objections to the construction or location. Thanks for asking! Karen 6/9/25, 11:59 AM Gmail - Covered patio https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ik=c7e47a04dd&view=pt&search=all&permmsgid=msg-f:1834463288352752446&simpl=msg-f:1834463288352752446 1/1 Colin Barry <colinbarry90@gmail.com> Covered patio Ron Chambers <mbfinfc@gmail.com> Fri, Jun 6, 2025 at 9:28 AM To: Celeste Wieting <celestewieting@gmail.com> Cc: Colin Barry <colinbarry90@gmail.com> He Celeste, this looks fine to me. I think it will look nice. Ron On Thu, Jun 5, 2025 at 2:13 PM Celeste Wieting <celestewieting@gmail.com> wrote: Hi Ron and Lorie! I am emailing in regard to a covered patio that Colin and I plan to build. I have attached the plans for a preliminary concept of the space. It would be great to have documentation of your support should we need it with the City (they ask that we reach out to neighbors just in case). To minimize the amount of work on you, I have included a blurb below. If you want to use it feel free. Please let me know if you have any questions! We, Ron Chambers and Laurie Baeten, the owners of the property at 121-129 Frey Avenue, give our full consent for Celeste Wieting and Colin Barry to construct a covered patio addition on their property at 1805 Laporte Avenue. We have reviewed the proposed plans and have no objections to the construction or location. Thank you! -Celeste- 6/9/25, 12:00 PM Gmail - Covered patio https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ik=c7e47a04dd&view=pt&search=all&permmsgid=msg-f:1834194005403541447&simpl=msg-f:1834194005403541447 1/1 Colin Barry <colinbarry90@gmail.com> Fwd: Covered patio Celeste Wieting <celestewieting@gmail.com> Mon, Jun 9, 2025 at 10:58 AM To: Colin Barry <colinbarry90@gmail.com> ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Taylor Dye <tdye@thegroupinc.com> Date: Fri, Apr 25, 2025 at 9:27 PM Subject: Re: Covered patio To: Celeste Wieting <celestewieting@gmail.com> Hey Celeste, Sorry for the late response, busy day. I, Taylor Dye, the owner of 1809 Laporte Ave, give my full consent for Celeste Wieting and Colin Barry to construct a covered patio addition on their property at 1805 Laporte Avenue. I have reviewed the proposed plans and have no objections to the construction or location. Taylor Dye The Group Real Estate 970-691-5690 tdye@thegroupinc.com www.taylordyerealestate.com 2803 East Harmony Road, Fort Collins CO 80528 "The best time to plant a tree was 20 years ago. The second best time is now." - Old Chinese proverb. __tpx__ On Wed, Apr 23, 2025 at 9:38 PM Celeste Wieting <celestewieting@gmail.com> wrote: Hi Taylor, I am emailing in regard to a covered patio that Colin and I plan to build, as we recently discussed. I have attached the plans for a preliminary concept of the space. It would be great to have documentation of your support should we need it with the City. To minimize the amount of work on you, I have included a blurb below. If you want to use it feel free. Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns! Thank you! We, ______, the owners of the property at ______, give our full consent for Celeste Wieting and Colin Barry to construct a covered patio addition on their property at 1805 Laporte Avenue. We have reviewed the proposed plans and have no objections to the construction or location. Celeste Wieting 713-598-7862 6/9/25, 11:58 AM Gmail - Fwd: Covered patio https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ik=c7e47a04dd&view=pt&search=all&permmsgid=msg-f:1834471470966608352&simpl=msg-f:1834471470966608352 1/1