Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZoning Board Of Appeals - Minutes - 09/11/1997ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS ANNUAL MEETING September 11, 1997 8:30am II Council Liaison: Ann Azari 11 Staff Liaison: Peter Barnes -1 Chairperson: Martin Breth, Jr. 229-1629(w) 226-5101(h) The regular meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals was held on Thursday, September 11, 1997 in the Council Chambers of the Fort Collins Municipal Building. The following members were present: Stockover, Keating, Lieser, Breth, Gustafson, Shannon, Felner Absent: None Staff members present: Peter Barnes, Zoning Administrator Elain Radford, Building & Zoning Admin. Support The meeting was called to order by Chairperson Breth. The minutes from the August 1997 meeting were approved. Appeal 2199, 1216 W. Olive Street, Petitioner Susan Strawn, Zone NCL, approved. Section(s) 4.6(E)(3). --- The variance would reduce the required rear yard setback from 15 feet to 6 feet in order to allow the existing one -car detached garage at the rear of the yard to be removed and replaced with a new 3-car garage. The existing garage is at a 6 feet setback, so the new garage would be at the same setback. --- Petitioner's statement of hardship: See petitioner's letter. --- Staff comments: none ZBA September 11, 1997 Page 2 Zoning Administrator Barnes read the petitioner's statement of hardship: "We request a variance in the setback of the location of the garage to be built on our home property at 1216 W. Olive Street. At present the single car garage, carport, and concrete parking space are located in exactly the same position where we would like to build a 3-car garage. or 2-car garage with a carport. We have received permission from the Historic Preservation Department to move the garage to another location on a different property. The existing garage has been in this position for over 50 years and is setback 6 feet from the back north property line. According to City code the new setback should be 15 feet. We would like to locate the new garage exactly where the old garage has been located for over 50 years. The setback required from the alley is 5 feet, the existing structure is set back 6 feet, and the new structure will be set back 6 feet. The new garage will be built to match the architectural details of the house on the same lot, exposed gables, similar pit of roof, matching windows, etc. " Barnes passed out copies of architectural elevations of the proposed structure to the Board members. Barnes presented slides illustrating the property under consideration and pointed out the issue involved. He explained that in the old part of town many of the lots have alleys behind them and the code requires that the rear setback , the setback from the rear property line to the building, be 5 feet when it is adjacent to an alley. Barnes continued that if there is not an alley along the rear property line, then the code requires a 15 feet setback. In this particular instance the alley is along the side of the property and there is no alley along the rear. Therefore, in this situation a 15 feet requirement is established in the code. BOARD QUESTIONS: None Petitioner, Susan Strawn, introduced her husband, Robert Bailey, who is co-owner of the property under consideration and who wanted to make several comments. He commented that he has talked with the adjacent property owners just behind their property who have looked at the plans and have no objection to the garage being built. He stated that the 15 feet setback from the back property line would create unusable space on the north side of the structure which would be totally shaded and not able to be used for much. He added that moving the new structure closer to the house would require removal of mature landscaping including several trees. ZBA September 11, 1997 Page 3 BOARD QUESTIONS: Board member Shannon commented that the alley seemed narrow. Barnes stated that the alley is a 20 feet alley. He explained that a 24 feet wide backup area is required to adequately access parking stalls or garages. Barnes commented that the proposed garage would be located 6 feet in from the alley so there would be the 20 feet alley plus 6 feet which gives, per the code requirement, a little bit to spare. BOARD DISCUSSION: Board member Breth stated that there seems to be a hardship due to the narrow lot and no circumstances that would be dangerous to neighbors or infringing upon their rights. Breth asked if there was a motion to approve this appeal. Board member Gustafson commented that the existing mature landscaping on the property presents a hardship and the Board has previously set a precedence to try to maintain mature landscaping. Gustafson motioned to approval appeal 2199 with the hardships stated. Keating seconded the motion. VOTE: Yeas: Stockover, Keating, Leiser, Breth, Gustafson, Felner, Shannon Nays: None Appeal 2200, 927 Laporte Avenue, Petitioner Michael Gerstner, owner, Zone NCL, approved. Section(s)4.6(E)(3) --- The variance would reduce the required rear yard setback requirement from 15 feet to 5 feet in order to allow the construction of anew 15' x 26' detached shed. The new building is proposed to replace the existing shed, which is at a zero setback from the rear lot line. Therefore, the new shed will actually be setback further than the existing. ZBA September 11, 1997 Page 4 --- Petitioner's statement of hardship: The roof on our existing shop shed is leaking. This structure consists of an original building with an addition. The southern edge of this building is on the property line. We could reduce it's roof but we would rather replace the entire building. We are requesting a variance from the 15 feet setback for the back southern property line to accommodate a new building. Our house is set back approximately 100 feet further from Laporte Avenue than the neighboring houses and we would be unable to comply with the 15 feet setback from the southern property line without severely impacting our back yard. It is for this reason we are allowing a variance allowing a 5 feet setback from the southern property line for a new building. --- Staff comments: The fact that this home is set back from the front lot line so much further than the other homes in the neighborhood is quite unusual. Barnes stated that, again, this is a situation where there is no alley behind the property, therefore, the 15 feet setback is required. Barnes referenced the 2' page of the neighborhood map that highlights this property. Barnes presented slides illustrating the property under consideration. BOARD QUESTIONS: Breth asked if the lot width is 40 feet and what is the proposed usage of this building. Barnes responded that this lot is 40 feet x 217 feet. He stated that the petitioners have indicated the shed would be for storage. Breth commented that the garage on the lot behind this property is 2 feet off the property line and there is 2 feet between the existing shed and the garage. Petitioner, Michael Gerstner, approached the Board and stated that the map and the slide presentation clearly portray their situation. He commented that the condition of the existing shed is poor and it sits on the back property line. Gerstner stated they are not able to comply with the 15 feet setback requirement and maintain much of the yard and existing trees, which is the reason for their variance request. He also stated the structure would be used primarily as a shed and as a wood shop. ZBA September 11, 1997 Page 5 BOARD QUESTIONS: Shannon asked when the house was built. Gerstner replied that the original structure was built in 1922 but was essentially demolished and rebuilt in 1984. He stated that he purchased the property in 1989. Keating asked if the architecture of this structure would match the house. Gerstner replied that it would though it would not be as tall as the house - about 12 feet tall. Georgina Jordan, neighbor at 923 Laporte Avenue, addressed the Board and stated she believes the Gerstner's have a good plan for this structure which would improve their property. She commented she has recently been through a similar project with her garage. BOARD DISCUSSION: Shannon commented that this is another situation with which the Board is presented frequently. She stated that a hardship is created by the location of the landscaping and the location of the house for which the appellants are not responsible. She motioned to approve appeal 2200 for these reasons. Gustafson seconded the motion. VOTE: Yeas: Stockover, Keating, Leiser, Breth, Gustafson, Felner, Shannon Nays: None Appeal 2201,1205 Clark Street, Petitioners Stephen and Susan Schell, owners, Zone RL, approved. Section(s) 4.3(D)(2)(C) --- The variance would reduce the required rear yard setback along the west lot line from 15 feet to 7 feet in order to allow a sun room addition. The addition will line up with the existing west wall of the garage which is already at a 7 feet setback from the rear lot line. On this corner lot, the legal rear lot line is the west lot line. ZBA September 11, 1997 Page 6 --- Petitioner's statement of hardship: The home was originally built in the county under different zoning regulations. The legal rear property line actually functions as the side lot line which would only require a 5 feet setback. Since the house faces the legal side lot line, the intent of the code is met. There are large mature trees on the other side of the house and a utility easement along the rear of the home. So, this is the only practical location. Bames stated that it has been a while since the Board has heard a comer lot variance request but in the past people have come before the Board with plans for additions, etc. Because of the way these houses were oriented on a corner lot it became an issue of what is the rear and what is the side, so Barnes referenced the site plans to define these for this property. Barnes pointed out that the street on the east side of the property is actually a temporary culdesac on the plat which was a county subdivision. He explained that many of the homes were constructed while it was still in the county, then it was annexed in the city and some homes were constructed in compliance with city regulations. The subdivision plat called for a temporary culdesac and there is a dedicated right of way on the east side of this property. He continued that it is a dedicated road so this property is a corner lot. Therefore, being a corner lot, the lot frontage on the street is 29.25 feet and the lot frontage on the north, Clark Street, is 184 lineal feet. Barnes explained that on a corner lot line the code defines the front lot line as the shortest of the two street frontages regardless of which way the house faces. So, in this case, the property line to the east is definitely shorter than the property line to the north, therefore, the east becomes the front property line - even though the house faces and is addressed off of Clark Street. Barnes commented that by definition the rear property line is the one opposite the front which means the west property line is the legal rear lot line and, under city code, a 15 feet setback is required. Barnes presented slides illustrating the property under consideration. BOARD QUESTIONS: None • ZBA September 11, 1997 Page 7 Appellant, Susan Schell, addressed the Board and stated the proposed structure does not impose upon the next door property any more than the existing building. It extends the two sides of the building and makes a square corner. She commented that they spoke to the most affected neighbor and they have no objection as they are in favor of property improvements. Schell stated the proposed addition will be a sun room/greenhouse with the same exterior as the rest of the house, except for more windows, and the roof line will follow the garage the same as the existing structure. She stated her builder is present to answer any questions the Board may have for him. Builder, Steve Tripp, with Sett Construction, addressed the Board and spoke in favor of the proposed addition. BOARD DISCUSSION: Keating motioned approval of appeal 2201 on the hardships stated. Shannon seconded the motion. VOTE: Yeas: Stockover, Keating, Leiser, Breth, Gustafson, Felner, Shannon Nays: None Appeal 2202, 204 Garfield Street, Petitioner Chris Fillinger, Zone NCB, approved. Seetion(s) 4.8(2)(C) --- The variance would reduce the required rear yard setback along the east lot line from 15 feet to 5 feet 3 inches in order to allow a 372 square feet addition to be built. The addition will line up with the existing east wall of the home which is already at a 5 feet 3 inch setback from the east lot line. --- The petitioner's statement of hardship: The lot is very small, 3250 square feet. The house is also small, about 540 square feet. The building is existing at a non -conforming setback. Because the lot is so small a variance would be required for an addition almost anywhere on the site. This is a corner lot but the house faces the legal street side lot line, so the legal rear lot line actually functions as a side lot line. Ll ZBA September 11, 1997 Page 8 Barnes reiterated that this is, again, a corner lot line situation which was discussed for the previous appeal. Barnes presented slides illustrating the property under consideration. BOARD QUESTIONS: Gustafson asked if there is a maximum percentage of lot area that can be built upon. Barnes replied that in this zone, the NCB zone, the floor area to lot area ratio is 1:1, so there could actually be 3250 square feet of floor area coverage on this lot. The NCB zone is a buffer zone which accommodates higher density and actually some commercial uses. Appellant, Chris Fillinger, owner, addressed the Board. Fillinger stated that the existing garage setback is 2.5 feet from the existing property line and the new addition would include a 5 feet setback on the property line. So, the new footprint would not cover the original garage location. BOARD QUESTIONS: Board member Lieser requested the appellant describe the proposed addition. Fillinger responded that the existing house is a single bedroom, one bathroom house. The new addition would include a second bedroom, second bathroom, and a laundry facility. He commented that presently the washing machine is located in the kitchen and the dryer was located in the garage. Breth asked when the garage will be built. Fillinger replied that the entire addition will be built now as a single project. BOARD DISCUSSION: Gustafson stated there is a hardship given the front, side, and rear yards as well as with the size of this lot. He motioned to approve appeal 2202 with the hardships stated. Lieser seconded the motion. VOTE: Yeas: Stockover, Keating, Leiser, Breth, Gustafson, Felner, Shannon Nays: None n F,I ZBA September 11, 1997 Page 9 OTHER BUSINESS: A. Barnes handed out updates for the Boards and Commissions notebooks. B. The Board discussed Barnes' draft memo regarding the City Council's Policy Agenda. Barnes stated he will make any corrections, after today's discussion, and get the memo in to the City Manager's Office by the September 15, 1997 deadline. C. Barnes informed the Board of code changes that are scheduled to go before the P&Z Board the last Thursday in October. Barnes will mail out this information as soon as it is available. D. Community Homecoming Parade: Stockover will attend the next meeting at the Senior Center regarding the boards and commissions float. E. Election of officers: officers serve for a one year term. new Chairperson: Diane Shannon new Vice Chairperson: Butch Stockover Chairperson: Lieser motioned to nominate Diane Shannon for Chairperson. Breth seconded the motion. VOTE: Yeas: Stockover, Keating, Lieser, Breth, Gustafson, Felner, Shannon Nays: None 2. Vice Chairperson: Lieser motioned to nominate Butch Stockover for Vice Chairperson. Shannon seconded the motion. VOTE: Yeas: Stockover, Keating, Lieser, Breth, Gustafson, Felner, Shannon Nays: None Meeting adjourned at 9:45am. Martin Breth, Chairperson /�� /3.-,, Peter Barnes, Zoning Administrator