Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZoning Board Of Appeals - Minutes - 09/10/198710 y ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Annual Meeting - September 10, 1987 Minutes The annual meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals was held Thursday, Sep- tember 10, 1987 at 8:30 a.m. in the Council Chambers of The City of Fort Collins City Hall. Roll call was answered by Boardmembers Thede, Lancas- ter, Walker, Lawton, Barnett and Coleman (alternate). Boardmembers Absent (Excused): Nelson. Staff Present: Barnes, Eckman, Goode and Zeigler. Minutes of the Regular Meeting of August 13, 1987 - Approved as Published. The minutes of the August 13, 1987 regular meeting were unanimously approved. Appeal #1834 Section 118-43 (E), by Dennis Sumner, owner, 602 West Moun- tain - Approved. --The variance would reduce the required 15 foot setback to 1 foot for a 2 car garage addition to a single family home in the RM zone. --Petitioner's statement of hardship: The existing garage is already closer to the rear and side lot line than allowed. The access to the garage is not good because the driveway crosses the entire lot. The garage and driveway then take up a good portion of the lot. The peti- tioner wants to demolish this garage and build a new one attached to the home, thereby creating more open space and less driveway. The rear half of the property was sold off approximately 40 years ago, so this lot is more shallow than all the other lots which front on Mountain." Zoning Administrator Barnes made it known that a call from Lawrence Law - rink, 111 N. Whitcomb, a neighbor of the petitioner phoned to state that he is opposed to a 1 foot setback, but would be agreeable to a 3 foot setback. Petitioner Dennis Sumner spoke in favor of the variance stating that he proposed to remove the existing garage and build a 2 car garage that would match the design of the house to benefit both the visual affect of his lot and provide yard space for his children. The petitioner feels that the neighbor is concerned that there be a visual difference between the 2 houses. He has a similar interest regarding that concern. Zoning adminis- trator Barnes also stated that the existing garage was built prior to 1965 and setbacks at that time were not required and that the garage could have been built right on the lot line. Boardmember Coleman suggested changing the location of the garage to another area of the lot. Dennis Sumner stated that because of the median i 7_BA Minutes - September 10, 1987 Page 2 in the center of Mountain avenue, access to his driveway is restricted to one way. Susan Sumner appeared for the variance stating that none of the other residents in the area use the Mountain avenue access, but utilize the alley access. Boardmember Walker stated that in the past, a 2'-3' setback was the minimum setback considered for a variance. There was considerable discussion regarding the possibility of a one -car addition instead of a two -car, and also how big a two -car garage had to be. Boardmember Barnett made a motion to grant the appeal for a 2' setback from the property line with the condition that the existing garage be demol- ished. Boardmember Thede seconded the motion. Yeas: Thede, Lancaster, Walker, Lawton and Barnett. Nays: None. Appeal #1835 Section 118-41(C) by Larry Michaud, for Neighbor to Neigh- bor, 605 Tenth Street - Approved. ---The variance would reduce the required lot width from 60 feet to 50 feet for a new single family dwelling in the RL zone. --Petitioner's statement of hardship: The lot is an existing, platted lot with only 50 feet of width. A brand new house will be built on the lot and will upgrade the area. Nothing can be built without a variance." Larry Michaud appeared for the variance stating that Neighbor to Neighbor proposes to construct a 1.5 story structure with an attached garage. Pend- ing the approval of this variance, construction of this project is immedi- ate. This variance was applied for and granted 1 year ago, but because of the owners reluctance to sell the property, the plans of that time were delayed. Boardmember Lancaster made a motion to approve the variance for the hard- ship stated. Boardmember Barnett seconded the motion. Yeas: Thede, Lan- caster, Walker, Lawton and Barnett. Nays: None. Appeal #1836 Void Appeal #1837 Section 118-81 (D)(2)(a) by Dale Powers, tenant, 1295 N. Col lege Avenue - Tabled. --The variance would reduce the required 5 foot landscape strip along the north side lot line to 0 feet for a change of use from auto repair to video store in the HB zone. Petitioner's statement of hardship: There is a 30 foot access easement along the North lot line to provide access to a trucking company located behind this property, therefore putting landscaping in this area would violate the terms of the easement. All other requirements of the parking code will be met, so the property will be upgraded." f ZBA Minutes - September 10, 1987 Page 3 Petitioner Dale Powers, tenant appeared. Boardmember Lancaster asked if the video business was open at this time. Mr. Powers answered affirmatively. Boardmember Thede asked staff if the easement was recorded, did the Zoning Board of Appeals have the authority to override that easement. Zoning Administrator Barnes said that utility and drainage easements are routinely landscaped, but not access easements. City Attorney Eckman stated that the owner of the property at 1295 N. College would have to comply with the easement, if it were indeed a recorded easement, or be in violation of that easement. If however, the Zoning Board of Appeals were to ask that the easement have a five foot landscape strip in it, the owner might be in violation of that easement and have a lawsuit on his hands for violation of that easement. Boardmember Walker asked about the frequency of traffic, for example more in the morning or evening. Mr. Powers said that heavy equipment is stored on the lot at the back of the lot. The easement is for ingress and egress of the heavy equipment. Most of the equipment leaves early in the morning and comes back in the evening. The equipment consists of large dump trucks and tractors which require a large turning radius. After discussion many of the Boardmembers felt uncomfortable approving the variance. They felt they would like to see landscaping there but were reluctant to put the applicant in violation of the easement if this could be avoided. They asked the applicant if he had talked this over with the owner of the property or the person who uses the easement to see what could be worked out. Mr. Powers said that they had not discussed it. Boardmember Lancaster felt that the hardship may be imagined and that he would rather table the issue until the property owners had been informed of the situation. City Attorney Eckman said that he would like to see a copy of the easement to verify that it actually exists. Boardmember Lancaster made a motion to table the appeal until the October 8th meeting. The motion was seconded by Boardmember Barnett. Mr. Powers was asked to bring with him a copy of the easement and a letter from the easement owners stating whether or not they agree to landscaping in the easement. Yeas: Thede, Lancaster, Walker, Lawton and Barnett. Nays: None. Appeal #1838 Section 118-41 (E) by William Warren, Contractor, 1828 Crestmore Place - Approved. --The variance would reduce the minimum rear yard setback from 15 feet to 8 feet 9 inches for a garage addition to a single family dwelling in the RL zone. --Petitioner's statement of hardship: This property is a corner lot; the house faces the legal side yard and the legal rear yard actually func- tions as a side yard where the owner proposes to construct a 2-car garage addition to the house." Contractor Bill Warren appeared before the Board representing Dr. Garvey, the owner of the property. Mr. Warren explained that a carport had to be demolished because of age after a recent reroofing. The Garveys are pro- posing to add a two -car garage addition to the property. t ZBA Minutes - September 10, 1987 Page 4 Boardmember Walker felt that this variance was no different than many of the variances approved because of the legal sideyard/frontage problem. Boardmember Lancaster was worried about a tree that appeared to be in the area of construction. Mr. Warren assured him that it was not in the area of proposed construction eventhough it appears so in the slide taken. City Attorney Eckman cautioned the Board about making a decision based on the location of the tree, because the owner, by right, could cut it down tomorrow. Boardmember Lancaster made a motion to approve the variance for the hard- ship stated but for the record would like to encourage the homeowner to save the tree. The motion was seconded by Boardmember Barnett. Yeas: Thede, Lancaster, Walker, Barnett. Nays: Lawton. Appeal #1839 Section 118-95 (D) by Gardner Signs, contractor, 2001 S. Shields - Approved. --The variance would allow one lot to have two freestanding signs. Spe- cifically, the variance would allow a 70 square foot single face direc- tory sign to be located in the interior of the parking lot of the Spring Creek Professional Park PUD, in addition to the entry sign on Shields. ---Petitioner's statement of hardship: See petitioner's letter." Zoning Administrator Peter Barnes explained the variance request to the Board. Dave Veldman, part owner, spoke in favor stating that it was neces- sary to have a fairly good size directory sign with a map in order to direct clients to the appropriate building. The sign is located in the interior of the parking lot in order to avoid congestion and traffic hazards at the entrance. Boardmember Thede made a motion to approve the variance for the hardship stated. The motion was seconded by Boardmember Lawton. Yeas: Thede, Lan- caster, Walker, Lawton, and Barnett. Nays: None. Appeal #1840 Section 118-41 (F) by Max and Mary Lowdermilk, owner, 1901 W. Mulberry - Approved. -The variance would reduce the minimum side yard setback from 5 feet to 1.5 feet for a patio cover addition to a single family dwelling in the RL zone. --Petitioner's statement of hardship: There was an existing patio cover that was severely damaged and was unsafe. The owners being unaware of the need for an inspection had the existing non -conforming patio cover removed. They wish to replace the cover at the same location. If they had a building inspector determine that the structure was unsafe before it was removed, they would have been able to replace it without the need for a variance." t ZBA Minutes - September 10, 1987 Page 5 Mrs. Lowdermilk explained that the patio cover they are putting up is not new to the property, but has been there for years. They were simply replacing it because it was in such bad condition and found out that it had been there illegally for years. The patio cover is used to cover an area where trash cans are kept and the area is simply for convenience. Boardmember Barnett said that since the patio was in existence for such a long time unnoticed and that apparently as homeowners they were unaware of the building permit process he would make a motion to approve the variance for the hardship stated. The motion was seconded by Boardmember Lancaster. Yeas: Lancaster, Walker, Lawton, Barnett. Nays: Thede. Appeal #1841 Section 118-44 (B), 118-44 (C) by John Dengler, potential buyer,_319 Mathews - Approved with conditions --The variance would reduce the required lot area from 12,000 square feet to 7000 square feet, and the lot width from 100 feet to 50 feet for a new professional office building in the RH zone. --Petitioner's statement of hardship: See petitioner°s letter. The vari- ance was approved on March 12, 1987, but will expire before the peti- tioner is ready to build, therefore a request is now being made for the same variances for a one year period." The majority of the Board felt that there were no problems with this vari- ance with the exception of the length of time that the variance would apply and the restriction on the use of the building. Boardmember Barnett made a motion to approve the variance for the hardship stated with the condition that the term of the variance be restricted for one year and the design must comply with the elevation drawing and site plan submitted for profes- sional office use only. The motion was seconded by Boardmember Thede. Yeas: Thede, Lancaster, Walker, Lawton, Barnett. Nays: None. Appeal #1842 Section 118-96.1 (A) by Larry Modlin, tenant, 2721 S. College - Approved --The variance would allow a 51 square foot sign to project above the top of a canopy. The sign is for the "Alpine Haus", located in Thunderbird Plaza. --Petitioner's statement of hardship: The sign is existing, however the tenant is moving in to a new lease space. The only place to put a sign is on the canopy. However, because of the unusual configuration of the roof of the building, half of the sign is a legal, flushwall sign, but the other half of the sign happens to be on top of a canopy." The petitioner Larry Modlin, tenant appeared before the Board. Boardmember Walker felt that the initial design of the entire building was lacking foresight to accommodate signing of the lease spaces. The lease space has the space for a legal sign on the east side but that location would not attract customers, nor identify the location of the business from the front. A facade will be designed for proper drainage and • • ZBA Minutes - September 10, 1987 Page 6 support for a sign on the front of the building. Boardmember Lancaster made a motion to approve the variance for the hard- ship stated. Boardmember Thede seconded. Yeas: Thede, Lancaster, Walker, Lawton and Barnett. Nays: None. Other business ---Election of officers Boardmembers unanimously nominated Dave Lawton as Chairman. Boardmember Thede made a motion to nominate John Barnett as Vice Chairman. Boardmember Walker seconded the motion. Yeas: Thede, Lancaster, Walker, Lawton and Coleman. Nays: None. Respectfully submitted, Lloyd Walker, Chairman Peter Barnes, Zoning Administrator