HomeMy WebLinkAboutZoning Board Of Appeals - Minutes - 02/11/1999Council Liaison: Ann Azari
Chairperson:
Staff Liaison: Peter Barnes (221-6760)
Phone: 4824895 (M
A regular meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals was held on Thursday, February 11, 1999, in
the Council Chambers of the Fort Collins Municipal Building at 300 LaPorte Avenue, Ft.
Collins.
BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT:
Martin Breth, Kathryn Krause, Eva Lieser, Diane Shannon, and William Stockover
BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT:
Robert Gustafson and Dan Keating
STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:
Peter Barnes, Zoning Administrator
Jenny Nuckols, Zoning Inspector
Delynn Coldiron, Staff Support to Board
AGENDA:
t. ROLL CALL:
The meeting was called to order by Chairperson Stockover and roll call taken.
2. The Minutes from the November 12, 1998 meeting were approved.
3. APPEAL 2240 — Approved:
Address: 746 N. College Avenue
Petitioner: Ad -Con Signs, Contractor
Zone: CCN
Section: 3.8.7 (G)(2)
• • ZBA
Feb. ll, 1999
Page 2
Background:
The variance would allow a sign to be placed 5' from the north property line, instead of at the
required 15' setback from this interior side lot line. The sign will advertise the new "Mister
Money" store, is 90 sq. ft. per face, and complies with all other sign requirements.
Petitioner's Statement of Hardship:
Parking lot and front landscape/sidewalk area limit possible signage location for ground or
free-standing sign. The size of such signs is/would be limited due to the narrowness of
landscaped area where the signage could be located.
Staff Comments:
The intent of requiring a 15' setback from an interior side property line is to ensure a
minimum separation between freestanding signs of 30'. Such a separation serves to reduce
the "clutter" along the street. The property to the north contains a 20' access easement
adjacent to the property line in question, meaning that property would not be able to place a
sign within 25' of the proposed sign.
Jenny Nuckols presented slides relative to this appeal.
Board Member Shannon asked if the adjacent property to the north could be subdivided.
Peter Barnes answered that the adjacent property went through a PUD process to allow the
automobile sales business that is there now. The property was platted at that time with a 20'
dedicated access easement. The purpose of the access easement is to allow access to
undeveloped property to the east. If the property were replatted, it is doubtful that the access
easement would be eliminated.
Shannon asked about additional signage should the property be subdivided. Barnes answered
that additional signage would be allowed, but no sign could be installed in the 20' access
easement. This easement is different than a utility easement, where signs are allowed. An
access easement prohibits any structure being installed in the easement itself.
Applicant Participation:
Applicant, Bill Caya, from Ad -Con Signs, addressed the Board and restated their desire to
place the sign at the proposed location.
Public Participation:
Ted Will, from Mister Money USA, addressed the Board. He mentioned that the company
entertained putting signs out in front of the property; however, this proved to be difficult due
to the current layout of the space. Putting a sign on the building was also explored. Since a
• • ZBA
Feb. 11, 1999
Page 3
roof -top sign is not allowed, this was not a good option for them, and they were forced to
look at other solutions.
Will believes that the current proposal is an appropriate solution. The sign will not interfere
with traffic in terms of visibility and it provides some interest along North College Avenue.
He also mentioned that the building is large enough to handle the presence of such a sign.
Board Discussion:
Board Member Breth asked about the landscaped area along College Avenue and whether or
not Applicant would be allowed to have a sign located there. Barnes answered that Applicant
would be allowed to have a sign in that location as long as it was installed on their property.
In this case, this would be somewhat difficult due to the narrowness of the space available. It
is unusual to find a sidewalk on someone's lot, as is the case in this situation. Sidewalks are
usually in the public right-of-way. When the redevelopment process on this property
occurred last year, the sidewalk ended up on the lot. In order to get some landscape buffering
along the street, which is also required by code, there was a small strip placed along the
College Avenue side of the walk and along the parking lot side of the walk. For a sign to be
placed along College Avenue, it would have to be narrow and would be very close to the
sidewalk which would make it an easy mark for vandalism, etc.
Breth made a motion to approve Appeal 2240 based on the hardship stated. Board Member
Lieser seconded the motion.
Vote:
Yeas: Lieser, Stockover, Breth, Krause, Shannon
Nays: None
Appeal 2240 was approved.
4. APPEAL 2241 — Approved:
Address: 2237 Cedarwood Drive
Petitioner: Dennis and Carolyn Tralmer, Owners
Zone: RL
Section: 4.3 (D)(2)(c)
Background:
The variance would reduce the required 15' setback from the rear west property line to 5' in
order to allow an I V x 20' trellis cover to be located over an existing concrete slab.
• ZBA
Feb. 11, 1999
Page 4
Petitioner's Statement of Hardship:
This is an oddly shaped lot that resembles a comer lot. The back yard is shallow. The house
is currently set at a minimum 15' rear setback, so any size porch or trellis cover would need a
variance.
Staff Comments:
Nuckols presented slides relative to this appeal. She mentioned that Applicant's lot is not a
comer lot, although it is similar to a cul-de-sac situation. Nuckols defined the front and rear
property lines in light of this. She also confirmed that the actual distance from the back of
Applicant's house to the rear property line is only 15'.
Breth asked about the neighboring house to the back of Applicant and how close this house
sits to the property line. Barnes answered that it looks to be approximately 10-12' from what
is the neighbor's side property line and the Applicant's rear property line.
Lieser asked if there were windows on that side of the neighbor's house. Applicant
mentioned that there is one skinny window, maybe 2' x 4', in the bathroom, and a window at
the very end of the house, but no windows in the vicinity of the proposed construction.
Applicant Participation:
Applicant, Carolyn Tralmer, addressed the Board. She mentioned that she wants to build the
proposed trellis cover so that there will be some place for her kids to go that has some shade.
Lieser asked Applicant to describe the trellis cover material. Applicant answered that it is a
basic 2' x 6' on top with 4' x 4' posts. There is no solid roof to it, it is just a shade structure.
Shannon asked if it was possible to do this on the side of the house. Applicant said that this
is not possible.
Shannon asked if any comments were received by neighbors. Applicant mentioned that they
had asked the neighbors ahead of time and no one had any issues with what was proposed.
Public Participation:
None.
Board Discussion:
Lieser made a motion to approve Appeal 2241 for the hardship stated. Applicant has an odd -
shaped yard with a shallow backyard. The proposed structure does not appear to be solid, so
there should be no problem.
• • ZBA
Feb. 11, 1999
Page 5
Board Member Krause seconded the motion.
Vote:
Yeas: Lieser, Stockover, Breth, Krause, Shannon
Nays: None
Appeal 2241 was approved.
5. Other Business:
A. Board & Commission Training:
On April 30, 1999, there will be an all day training seminar held for board & commission
members and staff liaisons. Fort Collins' City Council has contracted with a nationally -
known speaker who does work with City Councils to do a retreat for them, and has asked him
to provide additional training to board & commission members. There will be no fee for the
seminar and lunch will be included. Additional information will be provided once it is
received.
B. March Meeting:
The meeting date for March always falls during the week of Spring Break. Staff and Board
members are often times gone on vacation, as well as some of the people who have applied
for variances without realizing that the meeting date fell during Spring Break. Barnes asked
the Board for feedback on whether or not the meeting date should be changed.
After brief discussion on this item, Board Members decided to move the March meeting date
to Thursday, March 18, 1999.
C. Board Vacancy:
Board Member Gustafson has moved out of the Urban Growth Area and will be submitting a
letter of resignation. It is anticipated that this vacancy will be filled during the usual
recruitment and appointment process in June.
Meeting adjourned at 10:15 a.m.
William Stockover, Chairperson
13 1. v
Peter Barnes, Zoning Administrator