Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZoning Board Of Appeals - Minutes - 08/09/1990• ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MINUTES Regular Meeting - August 9, 1990 - 8:30 a.m. Council Chambers The regular meeting of the Zoning board of Appeals was held on Thursday, August 9, 1990 at 8:30 a.m. in the Council Chambers of the City of Fort Collins City Hall. Roll call was answered by Thede, Lancaster, Garber, Castillo. Boardmembers absent: Wilmarth and Huddleson. Staff present: Barnes, Eckman and Zeigler. Minutes of the Regular Meeting of July 12, 1990, Approved as Published The minutes of the July 12, 1990 regular meeting were unanimously approved. "Appeal 1957. Section 29-493(2) by Faith Evangelical Free Church, owner. 1600 W. Drake - Approved "--- The variance requested would eliminate the requirement to provide a solid wooden fence, 6 feet in height, to screen headlights associated with a parking area located in the RL zone from adjacent residentially zoned property. This parking area will not be used at night. This request was heard at the July 12, 1990, ZBA meeting at which time the Board tabled the item until the August 9th meeting. This was done in order to allow the applicant additional time to revise the plan so that screening will be provided along the west lot line. The amended variance request is to eliminate the requirement to provide headlight screening along the east lot line and all but the west 50 feet of the north lot line for a parking lot in the RL zone. The required headlight screening will be installed along the west lot line and the west 50 feet of the north lot line. --- Petitioner's statement of hardship: The requirement of a fence on this lot in the RL zone should be varied because of its existence in the floodway and because it is surrounded by the Ross Green Area and contiguous to Roland Moore Park. The landscaping will meet the requirements for the 75% opacity plus the existing foliage near Spring Creek will more than meet those requirements. The parking lot will be recessed to meet City of Fort Collins Storm Drainage requirements which also help opacity requirements. ZBA Minutes August 9, 1990 Page 2 --- Staff comments: The only reason that the parking ordinance requires a fence is to screen headlights of vehicles from adjacent residential uses. If a parking lot is not in a residential zone or directly adjacent to a residential use then the code does not require a fence. There are a number of Peculiar and unique 1. while the property is surrounded by residentially zoned land, this land is open space owned by the City. This land will remain open space. The property is really not in a residential subdivision. 2. The three or four houses to the west are 200 to 300 feet away and are located on the other side of the bike path and Spring Creek. The rear yards of these houses are heavily landscaped in their own right and should not be affected by any headlights. 3. The parking lot will rarely, if ever, be used at night. 4. Due to the slope of the lot required by Storm Drainage Dept. along the west side of the parking lot, the cars will actually be pointing in a downward direction. This means that even if the lot was used at night the headlights would not be shining directly into anyones yard or house. 5. The entire lot is in the floodway. This means that no structures can be built due to the possibility of them becoming dislodged in a flood and floating downstream, where they might damage other property or persons. A breakaway fence may be a possibility, but even then there is no assurance that fencing might not float downstream. This may be an unnecessary risk since a fence for headlight screening is probably not needed and wouldn't serve the public good. The Storm Drainage Dept. would prefer not to have a fence installed. 6. While constructing a parking lot would change the character of the open space to a degree, at least it will have landscaping compatible to the area and will only be used on Sundays. Constructing a 6 foot fence around a lot surrounded by open space and wetlands would be an abrupt intrusion into the character of the open space and would be visible every day. The Natural Resources Dept. and the Planning Dept. would prefer not to have a fence installed. ZBA Minutes August 9, 1990 Page 3 7. If the City's property surrounding this lot were not zoned residential, then a variance would not be needed because a fence would not be required. Since there will be no residential development adjacent to this lot, the intent of the ordinance is met. The Code allows a variance to be granted based on hardships imposed by "extraordinary and exceptional situations or conditions of such piece of property." The preceding statements explain the uniqueness of this property. The Code also allows that a variance can be granted when it will not result in substantial detriment to the public good and when it will not impair the intent of the code. Requiring a fence will probably be more of a detriment to the public good due to the visual appearance of the fence in the open space and its possible hazard during a flood, whereas granting the variance should not result in substantial detriment to the public good. The board has granted similar variances to delete the required fence when the directly adjacent property owner agrees to its deletion, but usually with the condition that if said property owner decides that the fence is needed, then the fence would have to be built. At the July meeting, several neighbors to the west expressed some concerns about increased noise from Drake Road if the existing vegetation is replaced with asphalt. Therefore, they felt that installing the fence at least along the west lot line would be important for them. The church has revised their plan to accommodate this request." Zoning Administrator Peter Barnes said after tabling the variance for a month the neighbors and the church had gotten together and worked out a plan that is good for everyone. The proposed landscape plan is acceptable to the city storm drainage department. A fence is being built to shield headlights. Berms are being added along Drake which will act as a buffer for traffic noise and lights. Mr. Barnes said the intent of the code is being met. Petitioner Forest Saylor, Senior Pastor, said they met with the neighbors and decided on a fence that is 6 feet in height except a section that needs to be four feet because it is within 20 feet of the front property line. The west end of the fence won't need to be break away but the 50 feet of fence along the north lot line will be a break away fence. Neighbors Tobin James of 2542 Newport and Renie Baker of 2530 Newport said they are now in favor of the variance. ZBA Minutes August 9, 1990 Page 4 Boardmember Garber made a motion to approve the variance for the hardship stated. The motion was seconded by Boardmember Thede. Yeas: Thede, Lancaster, Garber, Castillo. Nays: None. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal #1958. Section 29-591(1) by Beth Williams, owner, 2948 Sombrero Lane - Approved "--- The variance would increase the allowed square footage of an identification sign for a single family dwelling from 2 square feet to 7 square feet. The sign advertises a home occupation called "Beth Williams' Hair Design", and is located on the fence along Timberline Road. Petitioner's statement of hardship: The back yard of this lot abuts Timberline Road, which is an arterial street. The traffic goes by at about 40 to 50 MPH, so a small sign is hard to read, and clients need to see the sign far enough in advance so they can signal to turn in order to decrease the possibility of a traffic hazard. The petitioner feels that the increase in area requested is not a substantial amount and having the sign on an arterial street does not negatively impact the neighborhood. --- Staff comments: The Board has granted a number of similar requests in the past when the home occupation is along an arterial street. The largest such sign allowed by a previous variance is 10 square feet." There were no notices or letters received. Peter Barnes said the property has three street frontages: Timberline, Sagebrush and Sombrero. Timberline is considered an arterial street. He researched the files and found several requests for this type of variance for home occupations along arterial roads and the largest request was a sign increased to 10 square feet. It was granted. This variance request is 7 square feet. Mr. Barnes thought the intent of the code is being met because the sign is not actually within the subdivision, but on the fence at the rear of the lot near Timberline. Petitioner Beth Williams said she had hired Sign Dynamics to build the sign and they assured her this was to code. She said her business has been very successful and thought the neighbors had responded positively to the sign. There was no one present to speak for or against the variance. ZBA Minutes August 9, 1990 Page 5 Boardmember Garber made a motion to approve the variance for the hardship stated. The motion was seconded. Yeas: Thede, Lancaster, Garber and Castillo. Nays: None. Motion carried. Appeal #1959. Section 29-178(4), 29-178(5) by Gary Huilregtse, owner. 901 Whedbee - Approved with conditions "--- The variance would reduce the required rear yard setback along the west lot line from 15 feet to 7 feet, and reduce the required side lot line setback along Locust Street from 15 feet to 3 feet for an addition to a detached garage in the RM zone. --- Petitioner's statement of hardship: The petitioner desires to add on to the existing 2 car detached garage. This is the only location to add on to the building because there are existing mature trees to the east of the garage which would have to be removed if the addition were located there. There are also other existing improvements east of the garage. ---Staff comments: None." There were no notices returned. The attached letter was received. Mr. Huilregtse's wife, Kathryn, addressed the Board regarding the variance request. She said they have two cars and a 1965 Corvette that he is restoring. Right now they house one car and the Corvette, but you can't get around the Corvette to work on it. They are proposing to put two cars, end to end, which will leave room for the Corvette in the wider expanded part of the garage. She showed pictures of the landscaping in the back yard and said they would hate to ruin their gardens which include water fountains and fireplaces made out of stone that were built in 1940. They want to install an overhead garage door and replace shingle siding with aluminum siding. The roof line will be the same. The pitch may vary slightly to accommodate the expansion on the east side. There was no one present to speak for or against the variance. Boardmember Thede made a motion to approve the variance for the hardship that the lot is narrow and it is already a non -conforming building, with the condition that it can't exceed the present height and they will need to match the existing pitch except on the east side to accommodate the expansion. The motion was seconded by Boardmember Garber. Yeas: Thede, Lancaster, Garber, Castillo. Nays: None. Motion carried 4-0. ZBA Minutes August 9, 1990 Page 6 Other Business Introduction of new board members. The role of alternate members was discussed. The meeting was adjourned. Respectfully submitted, Frank Lancaster, Chairman Peter Barnes, Staff Liaison