Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZoning Board Of Appeals - Minutes - 03/08/19900 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MINUTES Regular Meeting March 8, 1990 The regular meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals was held on Thursday, March 8, 1990 at 8:45 a.m. in the Council Chambers of the City of Fort Collins City Hall. Roll call was answered by Boardmembers Huddleson, Lancaster and Thede. Boardmembers absent: Spight, Lawton, Wilmarth and Nelson. Staff present: Barnes and Zeigler Minutes of the Regular meeting of January 11, 1990, Approved as Published Appeal #1943. Section 29-148, 29-133(4) by Jim Temple, owner, 3212 Camelot Drive - Approved with conditions "---The variance would reduce the required rear yard setback from 15 feet to 1.5 feet for an addition to the rear of a home in the RLP zoning district. ---Petitioner's statement of hardship: The petitioner desires to enlarge the eating area of the home. the existing eating and kitchen area are very small, and the proposed addition will increase the size of the eating area and kitchen storage area. The only way to build the addition is to the rear. the house is already at the minimum setback, so any addition will require a variance. the property adjacent to the rear lot line and south lot line is a detention pond and will always remain undeveloped, so the addition does not impact anyone and the intent of the code is met. ---Staff comments: The house was built so far back on the property that the rear yard is very shallow, in fact the existing deck is already encroaching into the required setback. This lot is very unique in that it has a detention pond on two sides which means that if a variance is granted it certainly shouldn't have any substantial detriment to the public good, nor would it impair the intent of the Code. If a variance is granted it should be conditioned on the applicant getting the 10 foot easement vacated which runs along the rear lot line." No notices were returned and no letters were received. Zoning Administrator Peter Barnes said this is a unique lot. It is surrounded by a detention pond and Boltz Junior High is across the street from it. He pointed out a deck on the back of the house ZBA Minutes March 8, 1990 Page 2 and said it was not shown on the original house plans and if it had been noticed, it would have needed a variance. He feels it was built with the house originally because there would not have been any exiting provided without it. Mr. Barnes showed slides of the back of the house and pointed out the fence goes past the property line 15 feet into the detention area. This doesn't cause any problems because it is a mesh fence. A six foot picket would not be allowed by the storm drainage office. There is no potential for development in this area as long as it is a detention pond, but the easement at the rear of the lot will need to be vacated. Petitioner Jim Temple explained how much they like their home but with three children, their eating area is not large enough. The addition would take care of this. He said he talked to Mike Herzig, of the City Planning office and he felt there would not be any problem in vacating the easement. Boardmember Thede said she saw no problems with the variance and felt the intent of the code is being met. Boardmember Huddleson made a motion to approve the variance for the hardship stated with the condition that the easement is vacated. Boardmember Thede seconded the motion. Yeas: Huddleson, Lancaster and Thede. Nays: None. Motion carried 3-0. Appeal #1944. Section 29-595(d) by Gardner Signs, contractor, 2720 S. College Avenue - Approved with conditions "---The variance would allow a freestanding sign to be 2 feet from an interior side lot line instead of the 15 feet required by Code. specifically it would allow an 18 square foot per face sign identifying "Inside -Out". The new sign would replace the existing ground sign which received a similar variance in 1979 to reduce the setback distance to the interior lot line on the south side of the lot. ---Petitioner's statement of hardship: See petitioner's letter. In addition, if this sign were placed 15 feet from either interior side lot line it would be located in one of the 4 existing parking spaces in front of the building. Parking accommodations are already very limited and the owner would like to keep the existing spaces. The intent of the Code will be met because the sign will not result in any visual sign clutter because the South College Liquor sign is approximately 95 feet away. ---Staff comments: There appears to be a legitimate hardshij, because the only place the a sign could be located without a variance from either side lot line would be somewhere in the middle of the parking area or curb cut. This would virtually render the parking unusable. The sign is smaller and lower I r1 L'A lJ ZBA Minutes March S, 1990 Page 3 than the existing sign which received a similar variance. The Board may want to condition any variance by requiring that if the property to the south replaces their existing sign with a new sign that is within 30 feet of this proposed sign, a new variance will be required." There were no notices returned or letters received. Peter Barnes explained the difficulty involved with installing a sign without a variance at this location. He told the Board the difference between a ground sign and a free standing sign. The existing sign is a ground sign and if it were moved closer to the road it would be difficult to view traffic. However, even though the proposed sign would be closer to the road, because it is a free standing sign, vehicles would be able to have a clear view under the sign. Petitioner Paul Morrissey felt this option was the most reasonable solution to get the owner a clear view of his sign. Peter Barnes said the variance should be reviewed if the property to the south ever moved their sign, which they could feasibly do. Boardmember Thede made a motion to approve the variance for the hardship stated with the condition that if a sign was installed within 30 feet on the south, the variance would need to be reviewed. The motion was seconded by Boardmember Huddleson. Yeas: Huddleson, Lancaster and Thede. Nays: None. Motion carried 3- 0. OTHER BUSINESS - Frank Lancaster said Duffy Kemming with the Commission on the Status of Women was requesting a member from all Boards and Commissions to participate in a meeting on March 29th from 7-9 in the Council Chambers. Chuck Huddleson said he would go. Peter Barnes said the breakfast will be held on April 12th before the meeting. Discussion will be held on the open meeting policy and how it effects ZBA. Respectfully submitted, Frank Lancaster, Chairman Peter Barnes, StaffLiaison