Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZoning Board Of Appeals - Minutes - 06/10/1993_I 2ONING BOARD OF APPEALS June 10, 1993 Regular Meeting 8:30am Minutes The regular meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals was held on Thursday, June 10, 1993 in the Council Chambers of the City of Fort Collins City Hall. Roll was answered by Perica, Gustafson, Lancaster, Cuthbertson, Huddleson. Absent: Anastasio, Wilmarth. The meeting was called to order by Chairman Gustafson. Council Liaison: Staff Liaison: Staff Support Present: Ann Azari Peter Barnes Peter Barnes Ann Reichert Paul Eckman The minutes from the May meeting were approved. Appeal 2072. 3509 South Mason Street, by Josh Griffin, sign contractor. Approved with conditions. Section 29-595(d), 29-595(c). ----- The variance would allow a 52 square foot freestanding sign to be located within 15 feet of an interior side lot line. Specifically it would allow the sign to be 1 foot from the lot line dividing this lot from 3501 S. Mason Street. The variance would also reduce the required setback from the front property line from 16 feet to 0 feet. (The existing "Elite Auto Glass" sign would be moved to the same location as the existing "Carousel Dinner Theater" sign, and the two signs would be combined. Petitioner's statement of hardship: The owner of 3509 South Mason Street also owns 3501 South Mason Street, therefore the lot line between the buildings isn't really an ownership line. The parking lot serving both lots is a joint parking lot and the best location for a sign is in the middle of the deepest part of the front island. The "Carousel" is in the back of the building, but most of the traffic enters from Mason, so it is important for traffic directional purposes to have signage on Mason. If the sign were setback the required 16 feet it would be in the driveway. ----- Staff Comments: If the sign were a ground sign, then the 0 setback would comply. The proposed sign could be made into a ground sign by making the base as wide as the sign face. Zoning Board of Appeals June 10, 1993 Page 2 Zoning Administrator Peter Barnes stated both properties were owned by the same party, the properties share an access to the entrance and presently there are two signs. The owner wishes to change to one sign. Presently there is not a freestanding sign on McClelland Street. Board member Huddleson asked if the owner was entitled to a sign on McClelland and Mr. Barnes stated they were. Josh Griffin, sign contractor, appeared before the Board. He stated the location of the sign was a logical place, the planter box is a unqiue shape and there is no place to put a sign on McClelland. Mr. Griffin stated this is a unique case because the same person owns both properties. No one was present in favor or in opposition of this appeal. Board member Lancaster asked the sign contractor if he has considered making the sign a ground sign. Mr. Griffin said that was an option but the owners preferred the sign as it is. Board member Huddleson stated if this sign was a ground sign, only one variance would be needed. Board chairman Gustafson said if it were to be a grouns sign, he would like to see it pushed back to the maximum inside the landscape. Mr. Griffin stated to make it a ground sign, they would have to work around the sprinkler system. Board member Lancaster stated he would like the owners to look at putting the sign back to where the jog is in the curb. Mr. Lancaster stated he saw this as a self-imposed hardship. Board chairman Gustafson stated he could support this variance as a ground sign. Board member Perica suggested this appeal be denied and the appellant re -submit. In order to pass this appeal there could be several conditions and restrictions. Mr. Griffin stated he would rather the Board put restrictions on this variance, then apply again in another month. Board member Lancaster moved to approve Appeal 2072 with the following restrictions: move the sign to within 18" of south end of the landscaped island next to the curb, limit the sign design to what was submitted, and the variances would expire if a freestanding sign is contructed on 3501 S. Mason. F Zoning Board of Appeals June 10, 1993 Page 3 The motion was seconded by Board member Perica. Yeas: Perica, Gustafson, Lancaster, Cuthbertson, Huddleson. The motion passed. Appeal 2073, 112 N. Grant Avenue by Theresa and Mark Jekel, approved. Section 29-119(4). The variance would reduce the required rear yard setback along the east lot line from 15 feet to 3 feet in order to allow a new one -car garage to be constructed on this lot located in the NCL zone. Petitioner's statement of hardship: This lot is in an older part of town. Many of the detached buildings in the neighborhood are closer than current codes allow. The setback would be consistent with other detached buildings. The owners desire to maintain a usable size back yard. Building the garage at the required setback would put it in the middle of the yard. ----- Staff Comments: none Zoning Administrator Peter Barnes stated the alley is on the side of the house instead of the back of the house. Theresa Jekel, owner, appeared before the Board. She stated the main sewer line runs diagonally across the yard. The reasonable place to put the garage would be in back and enter through the alley along the side. Board member Huddleson stated the only place the garage could be was in back. The hardship was the size and the narrowness of the lot, and the sewer line placement. Mr. Barnes stated lots in this part of town usually are deeper than this one. Zoning Board of Appeals June 10,1993 Page 4 Theresa Jekel stated some of her neighbors got variances. Board member Huddleson moved to approve Appeal 2073 for the hardship stated. Board member Cuthbertson seconded the motion. Yeas: Perica, Gustafson, Lancaster, Cuthbertson, Huddleson. The motion passed. ADDeal 2074. 1605 Remington Street by Craig Olsen, owner, approved. Section 29-119(4). ----- The variance would reduce the required rear yard setback from 15 feet to 10 feet, and the required side yard set back along the south lot line from 5 feet to 3 feet for a new, detached, 2-car garage in the RM zone. ----- Petitioner's statement of hardship: The petitioner desires to provide a covered, enclosed parking area. He desires to preserve a mature tree and in order to do this it is necessary to request a side yard variance. The back of the garage will abutt an existing wall which is in place because of changes in elevation of the lot, Because of the smallness of the yards and the elevation changes, it is desirable to keep the garage from encroaching east of the retaining wall. This same variance was approved in September 1991, but the owner did not build the garage and the variance expired. Staff Comments: In approving this variance in 1991, the Board believed that this was a case of a narrow lot, topographic conditions, and mature landscaping preservation needs. Zoning Administrator Peter Barnes stated that this lot was granted a variance in 1991, but variances expire in 6 months and the garage has not been built, so he is re -applying. Craig Olson, owner, appeared before the Board. He stated nothing had changed since the last variance. No one was present in favor or in opposition of this appeal. Board member Lancaster moved to approve Appeal 2074 for the hardship stated. Board member Huddleson seconded the motion. Yeas: Perica, Gustafson, Lancaster, Cuthbertson, Huddleson. The motion passed. Zoning Board of Appeals June 10, 1993 Page 5 Anneal 2075, 835 Riverside Avenue by Rod Hanson, tenant, approved. Section 29-493(1), 29-493(2)(f). The variance would reduce the required 15 foot wide landscape strip behind the sidewalk along Riverside Avenue to 0 feet, and reduce the 10 foot wide land- scape strip behind the walk along Myrtle Street to 0 feet.(The landscaping will be installed between the walk and curb instead of behind the walk). The variance would also reduce the required 6% interior parking lot landscaping to 1%. The variances are necessary in order to allow the use of the property in the CL zone to change from car wash to car wash/ automobile sales. ----- Petitioner's statement of hardship: The lot is an irregular shaped lot and the building already exists. To provide the required landscaping behind the walk and the required interior islands would restrict the efficient movement of vehicles on the lot. Trucks using the truck wash bay would have difficulty maneuvering around islands, and several of the bays would be inaccessible with a 15 foot or 10 foot landscape strip behind the walk. Landscape improvements are planned where possible to improve the site. Staff Comments: None Zoning Administrator Peter Barnes stated this was a change of use in the older part of town. He stated the sidewalk is usually attached and the landscape is behind the sidewalk. The hardship in this case is putting 15' of landscape would hinder the circulation of cars to the carwash. Rod Hanson, lessor of the property, appeared before the Board. He stated the shape is an irregular shape. He stated he has plans to landscape the property, but to meet code, there would be no place for trucks to turn around and exit the car wash. u 0 • Zoning Board of Appeals June 10, 1993 Page 6 Jerald Bensen, owner of the property appeared before the Board in favor of this appeal. He stated the lot is an odd shape, and to landscape according to code would be a hardship. Board member Lancaster stated he agreed with the hardship and the plans submitted would be an improvement to the lot. Board member Huddleson moved to approve Appeal 2075 for the hardship stated. Board member Perica seconded the motion. Yeas: Perica, Gustafson, Lancaster, Cuthbertson, Huddleson. The motion passed. Other Bus July 8, 1993 the Board will meet with the Mayor, who is the Council Liaison to the ZBA, at 8:15am. New members will also be present. The memo from City Council regarding appeals to the Council was discussed. The meeting was adjourned. -------------------------- Robert Gustafson, Chairman ---------------------- Peter Barnes, Zoning Administrator ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS June 10, 1993 1. Roll call. 2. Appeal 2072. The variance would allow a 52 square foot freestanding sign to be located within 15 feet of an interior side lot line. Specifically it would allow the sign to be 1 foot from the lot line dividing this lot from 3501 S. Mason Street. The variance would also reduce the required setback from the front property line from 16 feet to 0 feet. (The existing "Elite Auto Glass" sign would be moved to the same location as the existing "Carousel Dinner Theater" sign, and the two signs would be combined. Section 29-595(d), 29-595(c) by Josh Griffin, 3509 South Mason Street. 3. Appeal 2073. The variance would reduce the required rear yard setback along the east lot line from 15 feet to 3 feet in order to allow a new one -car garage to be constructed on this lot located in the NCL zone. Section 29-119(4) by Mark and Theresa Jekel, 112 N. Grant Avenue. 4. Appeal 2074. The variance would reduce the required rear yard setback from 15 feet to 10 feet, and the required side yard setback along the south lot line from 5 feet to 3 feet for a new, detached, 2-car garage in the RM zone. Section 29- 174(4), 29-178(5) by Craig Olsen, 1605 Remington Street. 5. Appeal 2075. The variance would reduce the required 15 foot wide landscape strip behind the sidewalk along Riverside Avenue to 0 feet, and reduce the 10 foot wide landscape strip behind the walk along Myrtle Street to 0 feet. (The landscaping will be installed between the walk and curb instead of behind the walk). The variance would also reduce the required 68 interior parking lot landscaping to 1%. The variances are necessary in order to allow the use of the property in the CL zone to change from car wash to car wash/automobile sales. Section 29-493(1), 29-493(2)(f) by Rod Hanson, 835 Riverside Avenue. 6. Other business.