Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZoning Board Of Appeals - Minutes - 01/10/1991ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS January 10, 1991 Regular Meeting - 8:30 A.M. Minutes The regular meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals was held on Thursday, January 10, 1991 at 8:30 A.M. in the Council Chambers of the City of Fort Collins City Hall. Roll call was answered by Boardmembers Gustafson, Wilmarth, Huddleson, Garber and Anastasio. Boardmembers absent: Lancaster. Staff present: Barnes and Goode. Minutes of the Regular Meeting of December 13, 1990. Approved as Published The minutes of the December 13, 1990 regular meeting were unanimously approved. Appeal #1974. Section 29-133 (4) by Walt Wilkens, 2918 Greentree Circle - Denied. "--- The variance would reduce the rear setback requirement from 15 feet to 6 feet for a detached carport in the RL zone. --- Petitioner's statement of hardship: The carport is intended to shelter a boat. The structure can't be moved forward because it would be closer to the house than the building code allows. The petitioner feels that this is the only location which is feasible. Staff comments: None. No APO notices were returned and no letters were received. Zoning Administrator, Peter Barnes explained that this carport structure is presently under construction, but further construction has ceased because of a stop -work order issued by the building department. As required the homeowner submitted an application for a building permit. While under investigation, the location of the carport was found to be nonconforming with the required 15 foot minimum separation between the structure and the rear property line. 1 Currently, the rear of this 32 foot long structure sets only 4 feet from the rear property line, and in addition, the corner of the structure encroaches two feet into an existing 6 foot utility easement along the north lot line of the property. In order to receive approval for the issuance of a permit, the structure is not allowed to encroach into the easement; so consequently, the structure will have to be modified to meet the 6 foot utility easement as well as receive a variance to allow the carport to set only 6 feet away from the rear property line. Mr. Barnes presented several photographs showing the carport's location on the lot in relation to the adjacent property, as well as the two existing storage sheds located on this large, but somewhat, odd - shaped (trapezoid) lot. The owner, Walt Wilkens expressed his desire to build the largest structure possible, in order to protect its contents, with the most practical location and the easiest access for parking a boat and camper. He feels the present configuration best suits his needs. He noted that the carport can't be moved forward because the building code requires special types of construction if there is less than 6 feet of separation between structures. In this case there is only 6 feet between the front of the carport and the house. No one else attended the meeting to speak either in favor or against the appeal. After presentations from staff and the petitioner, the Boardmembers and owner discussed the possibility of relocation or readjustment of the carport; the lack of an alternative access onto the lot from either the side or rear of the property because of an irrigation ditch that runs parallel to the rear of the property; as well as, the ability the owner has to build a smaller carport and comply with the code. After much interaction between the Board and Mr. Wilkens, all Boardmembers agreed that the hardships presented were self imposed. Boardmembers Anastasio, Gustafson and Wilmarth strongly believe that the structure's size is more than adequate to provide protection for a boat, and feel that another suitable location may be possible because of the large size of the lot. Boardmember Huddleson explained to the owner that the Board's responsibility is to vary the codes in instances where peculiar or unusual circumstances prevent one person from being able to do the same as others are able to do; however, putting the owner's desires aside, Boardmember Huddleson does believe the configuration of the lot to be a hardship. He feels that the structure would possibly meet the required setbacks if the lot were shaped differently. Boardmember Garber agreed and noted that the options available for the relocation of this carport on 2 this lot are more detrimental than the proposed location. Boardmember Garber made a motion to approve the variance for the hardship being the narrowness and odd shape of the lot. The motion was seconded by Boardmember Huddleson. Yeas: Huddleson and Garber. Nays: Wilmarth, Anastasio and Gustafson. The appeal was denied. Appeal #1975. Section 29-595 (c) by Gardner Signs, 710 E. Magnolia Approved with condition. "--- The variance would allow a new, 33.75 square foot per face,, freestanding "Conoco" sign to be 15 1/2 feet high when located at a setback of 10 feet, instead of the maximum height of 14 feet allowed by Code. The existing freestanding sign will be removed. --- Petitioner's statement of hardship: The entire street frontage of the property is a curb cut, so virtually the entire lot is a drive area. The lot is a small, triangular - shaped lot and the only practical location to put a sign so that it is not in the driveway is next to the pump islands. In order to make sure camper trucks don't hit the bottom of the sign, it is necessary that the sign be slightly higher than the code allows. --- Staff comments: None. One APO notice, addressed to J. B. Convenience Store was returned as undeliverable, and the following letter was received from: Econo Rate Rent-A-Car 505 Riverside Avenue Fort Collins, CO 80524 "In reply to your legal noticed dated 12/27/90, as an adjacent property owner, I have no objection to the variance of the code Section 29-595 for the property located at 710 E. Magnolia, allowing the installation of the "Conoco" sign." Sincerely, Don Spangler Owner/Manager Mr. Barnes presented photographs of the existing signs on this commercial property located at the intersection of Riverside and East Magnolia. Currently the property has a 20 square foot per face, freestanding sign that is illegally located in the public right of way and has to be removed. In addition, a wall sign on the building and a price sign on the gas pump island exist. The petitioner proposes to remove all the existing signage and 0 replace it with the one proposed sign. The small, triangular - shaped lot is virtually all driveway that can be accessed from both streets, so if the sign is placed at the required setback, it would be an obstacle to vehicles entering and exiting the property. The most favorable location is next to the pump island, but it will be necessary for the sign to be 15 1/2 feet high instead of the existing sign, which is 11 feet high, in order to allow camper trucks to clear the bottom of the sign. Herb Latrell, a representative for Conoco and Gardner Sign, addressed the Board. He said that he had been working with Dan Coldiron, City of Fort Collins Zoning Inspector, to relocate the illegal sign and they determined that there was no other location on the property except at the gas island. He feels that the proposed sign, the "Conoco" logo and price sign combination, will be an improvement and less intrusive than the existing signage. No one else addressed the Board to speak either in favor or against the proposed variance. The Boardmembers unanimously agreed that a hardship does exist because of the configuration of the lot, and feel that an opportunity exists to minimize the sight pollution. A motion to approve the variance for the hardship stated was made by Boardmember Wilmarth with the condition that the existing price sign be removed. The motion was seconded by Boardmember Anastasio. The motion was unanimously approved. Yeas: Gustafson, Wilmarth, Huddleson, Garber and Anastasio. Nays: None. The meeting was adjourned. CH/PB/drg Respectfully submitted, Chuck Huddleson, Chairman Peter Barnes, Zoning Administrator C!