Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/14/2013 - Zoning Board Of Appeals - Agenda - Regular MeetingCommunity Development & Neighborhood Services 281 North College Avenue P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522.0580 970.416.2740 970.224.6134 (fax) www.fcgov.com/development AGENDA Fort Collins Zoning Board of Appeals Regular Meeting – Thursday, February 14 , 2013 Appeal 2726 - (Withdrawn) Appeal 2727 Address 300 S Loomis Ave Petitioner Sylvia Akmakjian Zoning District NCL Section 4.7(D)(1), 4.7(E)(2), and 4.7(E)(3) Justification See petitioner's letter. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Request for Variance to Sections 4.7(D)(1), 4.7(E)(2) and 4.7(E)(3) – front and rear yard setbacks and lot area. The variance will reduce the required lot size from 6,000 square feet to 5,750 square feet and will reduce the front yard setback from 15 feet to 12 feet in order to allow the existing house to be removed and replaced with a new house. The variance will also reduce the required rear yard setback from 15 feet to 5 feet for a new detached 426 square foot garage. The existing detached garage is located on top of the Arthur Ditch. The replacement garage will be located to the rear of the lot, behind the ditch. The lot is currently nonconforming with 5,750 square feet of lot area, so the lot will remain at its current size. Similar variances were approved in December, 2011; however the Arthur Ditch Company is now requiring a greater easement along the ditch than they previously required. This change has necessitated a change in the location of the buildings and slight modifications to the plans of the house and garage to meet the new ditch easement requirements. STAFF COMMENTS: 1. Background: The property is located within the boundaries of the West Side Neighborhood. The rear 75 feet of the original lot on which the existing house is located was sold off in 1905, reducing the original lot size of the platted lot from a total of 9,500 square feet down to 5,750 square feet for the remaining front portion of the lot. At the time of the original lot split, the 5,750 lot size complied with the code. However, the required minimum lot size was increased to 6,000 square feet in 1965 and this lot has been nonconforming ever since. Without a lot size variance, a new house cannot be constructed. The proposed house does comply with all of the other lot area to floor area regulations. The Arthur Ditch runs diagonally through the lot, impacting the acceptable location of buildings. February 14, 2013: Zoning Board of Appeals Public Hearing Page 2 2. Applicant’s statement of justification: See Petitioner’s letter. 3. Staff Conclusion and Findings: Under Section 2.10.2(H), Staff recommends approval of the variance request to reduce the lot area from 6,000 square feet to 5,750 square feet, reduce the front setback from 15 feet to 12 feet, and reduce the rear setback from 15 feet to 5 feet in order to allow a new house and detached garage to be constructed on the lot, and finds that:  The granting of the Modification would not be detrimental to the public good.  The lot has contained only 5,750 square feet since 1905. The square footage of the proposed house and garage do not exceed the floor area to lot area ratios required for this zone, and there are 8 other lots in this block alone that have less lot area than the minimum 6,000 square feet required. The request is only for a 250 square foot reduction from the minimum required. Therefore, staff believes that the granting of the lot area reduction will result in a divergence from the standard in only a nominal and inconsequential way when considered in the context of the neighborhood.  The Arthur Ditch running diagonally through the property is a unique condition that results in practical difficulties with regard to the placement of structures on the lot. The building locations were determined previously, but the Arthur Ditch Company has changed their easement requirements since then, necessitating the need for the applicant to seek another variance. Therefore, staff believes that the granting of the front and rear setback variances is justified as a hardship variance. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of Appeal #2727. Appeal 2728 Address 517 E. Magnolia St Petitioner Steve Whittall Owners Timothy McFann & Denise Culbertson-McFann Zoning District NCM Section 4.8(D)(1),4.8(D)(5),4.8(E)(2), 4.8(E)(3),4.8(E)(4) Justification See petitioner's letter. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Request for Variance to Sections 4.8(D)(1), 4.8(D)(5), 4.8(E)(2), 4.8(E)(3), and 4.8(E)(4) – front, rear and side yard setbacks, lot area, and floor area ratio for rear ½ of lot The variance will: (1) reduce the required lot area from 5,000 square feet to 4,500 square feet, (2) reduce the required front yard setback from 15 feet to 13.25 feet, (3) reduce the required rear yard setback from the south lot line from 15 feet to 7.75 feet, (4) reduce the required side yard setback from the interior lot line along the alley from 8 feet to 5 feet, (5) reduce the required floor area to lot area ratio for the rear 50% of the lot from .33 to .48; from 743 square feet to 1,200 square feet. February 14, 2013: Zoning Board of Appeals Public Hearing Page 3 The variances are requested in order to allow the existing house on the lot to be demolished and a new two-story home constructed in its place on the existing 4,500 square foot lot. The new house will not be any closer to the front lot line than the existing home is. STAFF COMMENTS: 1. Background: The property is located within the boundaries of the East Side Neighborhood. The existing house was constructed in 1957 and has been determined to have no historic designation. The existing home is in poor condition and contains asbestos and mold. The lot on which the home sits was originally part of the lot that fronts on Whedbee. The original lot was a standard lot that went all the way to the alley on the east. However, like many corner lots in this neighborhood, the rear portion was sold off separately decades ago. The resulting 4,500 square foot lot created nonconformities with regard to lot size and setbacks (the existing house does not comply with required front and rear yard setbacks). Additionally, the lot split created a shallow, 50 foot deep lot. 2. Applicant’s statement of justification: See Petitioner’s letter. 3. Staff Conclusion and Findings: Under Section 2.10.2(H), Staff recommends approval of the variance request to allow the existing house and garage to be replaced with a new house and garage, and finds that:  The granting of the modification would not be detrimental to the public good.  The lot has contained only 4,500 square feet of lot area for a number of decades, and was made nonconforming when the minimum lot area requirement was changed from 4,500 square feet to 5,000 square feet in 1996. The proposed square footage of the building complies with the overall lot area to floor area ratio requirement. Therefore, staff believes that the granting of the lot area reduction satisfies the hardship standard because the lot size is an existing, legal nonconforming situation that creates practical difficulties and undue hardship, and it will result in a divergence from the standard in only a nominal and inconsequential way when considered in the context of the neighborhood since the overall lot area to floor area ratio will be complied with.  The shallowness of the lot (50 feet) results in a hardship with regard to the reduction of the 15 foot required front yard setback to 13.25 feet and the reduction of the rear yard setback from 15 feet to 7.75 feet. Compliance with the required setbacks would result in a maximum building footprint depth of only 20 feet. Additionally, since the existing front yard setback is already at 13.25 feet, and the new construction will be at the same setback, and since the 13.25 foot setback results in a greater setback distance from the street than any other building on this block, the variance will result in a divergence from the standards in only a nominal and inconsequential way when considered in the context of the neighborhood.  The request to allow the setback reduction along the interior side lot line abutting the alley satisfies the ‘equal to or better’ than standard because the building can be moved 3 feet closer to the west side lot line, eliminating the need for this variance. However, the impact to the property to the west by moving the building closer to the lot to the west will be greater than the impact to the alley. Therefore, staff believes that the proposed location satisfies the intent of the code better than would a location further to the west. February 14, 2013: Zoning Board of Appeals Public Hearing Page 4  The request to increase the allowed floor area in the rear ½ of the lot is supported by the hardship created by the shallow 50 foot lot depth and the rear ½ lot area of only 2,250 square feet. It is not possible to construct a house entirely in the front half of the lot. A one-story house could possibly be constructed in compliance with the rear ½ floor area standard, but all of the other principal buildings on this side of the street are 2-story or are taller than the proposed house, and there are 2-story houses on the other side of the street as well. The floor area standard enacted in 2006 for the rear half of the lot was not intended to apply to lots that have a depth of only 50 feet. The important standard for such shallow lots is compliance with the overall lot area to floor area ratio, and that standard is being met by the proposed construction. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of Appeal #2728. OTHER BUSINESS: The Board will review the proposed code changes for the East Side/West Side neighborhoods and be asked to make a recommendation for City Council.