The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About06/09/2016 - Zoning Board Of Appeals - Agenda - Regular MeetingHeidi Shuff, Chair Daphne Bear, Vice Chair Bob Long John McCoy Ralph Shields Butch Stockover Karen Szelei-Jackson Council Liaison: Bob Overbeck Staff Liaison: Noah Beals LOCATION: City Council Chambers 300 LaPorte Avenue Fort Collins, CO 80521 The City of Fort Collins will make reasonable accommodations for access to City services, programs, and activities and will make special communication arrangements for persons with disabilities. Please call 221-6515 (TDD 224-6001) for assistance. REGULAR MEETING JUNE 9, 2016 8:30 AM • CALL TO ORDER and ROLL CALL • CITIZEN PARTICIPATION (Items Not on the Agenda) • APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM PREVIOUS MEETING • APPEALS FOR VARIANCE TO THE LAND USE CODE 1. APPEAL ZBA160015 Address: 521 Maple Street Petitioner/Owner: James (Mike) Keys and Elsa Keys Zoning District: N-C-M Code Section: 4.8(D)(2)(a)2, 4.8(D)(3), 4.8(D)(6), 4.8(E)(4), 4.8(F)(1)(c) and 4.8(F)(2)(b)2 Project Description The applicant is requesting to add on to the existing single family detached structure, demo the existing 1 car garage, and construct a new 2 car garage. The request requires the following variances: (1) The allowable floor area for the lot is 2181.25 square feet. The request is for a total of 2364 square feet, which is an increase of 182.75 square feet. (2) The allowable floor area on the rear half of the lot is 779.6 square feet. The existing structures already exceed the total allowable floor area on the rear half by an additional 651 square feet. The request would exceed the total allowed by 929.4 square feet. (3) The allowable wall height along the side property line at a 5 foot setback is 18 feet. The proposed wall height is 23.5 feet and it is required to be setback 8 feet. The request would encroach into the required 8 foot setback by 3 feet. (4) An accessory building is not to exceed 600 square feet. The proposed 655 square feet accessory building exceeds the maximum allowed by 55 square feet. ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS AGENDA Zoning Board of Appeals Page 2 June 9, 2016 (5) An accessory building is required to have an eave height of 10 feet along a side property line. The proposed eave heights along the side property lines are at 13 feet, exceeding the maximum allowed by 3 feet. (6) Accessory buildings are required to be 10 feet behind the front wall of the primary structure. The proposed accessory structure is entirely in front of the primary structure. 2. APPEAL ZBA160016 Address: 2200 Dover Drive Petitioner/Owner: James & Kathryn Hulings Zoning District: R-L Code Section: 4.4(D)(2)(d) Project Description The variance request is for an addition to the garage to encroach 1.84 feet into the required 15 foot corner side-yard setback. 3. APPEAL ZBA160017 Address: 621 Lesser Drive Petitioner: Nicholas Kot Owner: Thomas H. Peck Zoning District: N-C-B Code Section: 4.9(D)(6)(d) and 3.8.19(A)(6) Project Description The variance request is to allow a 295 square foot addition to the rear of the primary structure to encroach 2 feet 2 inches into the required 5 foot side-yard setback; and the proposed eave to encroach 6 inches into the required 2.5 foot setback. A portion of the existing structure already encroaches into the side-yard setback at the same distance of the proposal. However, the portion of existing structure that the addition will attach to currently meets the required 5 foot side-yard setback. • OTHER BUSINESS • ADJOURNMENT Agenda Item 1 Item # 1 - Page 1 STAFF REPORT June 9, 2016 STAFF Noah Beals, Senior City Planner/Zoning PROJECT APPEAL ZBA160015 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Address: 521 Maple Street Petitioner/Owners: James (Mike) Keys and Elsa Keys Zoning District: N-C-M Code Section: 4.8(D)(2)(a)2, 4.8(D)(3), 4.8(D)(6), 4.8(E)(4), 4.8(F)(1)(c) and 4.8(F)(2)(b)2 Variance Request: The applicant is requesting to add on to the existing single family detached structure, demo the existing 1 car garage, and construct a new 2 car garage. The request requires the following variances: (1) The allowable floor area for the lot is 2181.25 square feet. The request is for a total of 2364 square feet, which is an increase of 182.75 square feet. (2) The allowable floor area on the rear half of the lot is 779.6 square feet. The existing structures already exceed the total allowable floor area on the rear half by an additional 651 square feet. The request would exceed the total allowed by 929.4 square feet. (3) The allowable wall height along the side property line at a 5 foot setback is 18 feet. The proposed wall height is 23.5 feet and it is required to be setback 8 feet. The request would encroach into the required 8 foot setback by 3 feet. (4) An accessory building is not to exceed 600 square feet. The proposed 655 square feet accessory building exceeds the maximum allowed by 55 square feet. (5) An accessory building is required to have an eave height of 10 feet along a side property line. The proposed eave heights along the side property lines are at 13 feet, exceeding the maximum allowed by 3 feet. (6) Accessory buildings are required to be 10 feet behind the front wall of the primary structure. The proposed accessory structure is entirely in front of the primary structure. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval to allow an increase to the allowable floor area rear half of the lot with the condition that such increase does not exceed the total allowable floor area of the lot. Further staff recommends approval to allow the accessory building to be built entirely in front of the primary structure and allow the eave heights of the accessory building to be 13 feet in height along the side property line. Staff recommends the denial of the following requests; to exceed the total allowable square feet of the lot by 182.75sf, to exceed the allowable floor area of an accessory building by 55sf, and to increase the maximum 18 feet wall height along the side property line at 5ft setback. STAFF COMMENTS: 1. Background: The property was platted as part of the 1873 City of Fort Collins original town plat map. This property was a part of a larger lot that was later subdivided into 4 smaller parcels. Agenda Item 1 Item # 1 - Page 2 The original house on the property was built approximately in 1918. Alterations and remodels have occurred since then, but at this time it is unclear what is original. Because of the age of the structure and these requests for alteration, the house is currently under a historic preservation review as well. The size of the property is 4,725sf. Current Land Use Code standards would prevent a parcel from being subdivided to anything less than 5,000sf. 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 requests to increase the allowable floor area on the rear half of the lot with the condition that such increase does not exceed the total allowable floor of the lot. Further staff recommends approve to allow the accessory building to be built entirely in front of the primary structure and allow the eave heights of the accessory building to be 13ft in height along the side property line. With these recommendations staff finds: • These requests are not detrimental to the public good. • The original primary structure was built entirely in the rear half of the lot. • The eave height of an accessory building can be increased to 13ft when there is water and/or sewer connected to the building. • The eave height restriction is to decrease the effects of accessory buildings on abutting neighbor’s rear yards and in this case the accessory building is in the front yard. Therefore staff finds that based on the location of the original primary structure the applicant’s request comes with undue hardship. Additionally, Staff recommends the denial of the variance requests to increase the total allowable floor area on the lot by 182.75sf, increase the wall height maximum of 18ft at a 5ft setback, and increase the size of the accessory structure greater than 600sf. With these recommendations staff finds: • The lot size does not meet the minimum lot size for the N-C-M Zone District. Therefore the request does not provided sufficient justification to grant the variance. 4. Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of 3 of 6 variance requests of APPEAL # ZBA160015. May 10, 2016 Heidi Shuff, Chair Daphne Bear, Vice Chair Bob Long John McCoy Ralph Shields Butch Stockover Karen Szelei-Jackson Council Liaison: Bob Overbeck Staff Liaison: Noah Beals Dear Zoning Board of Appeals Members, Below is reasoning for the requested zoning variances, Proposal 1. We have color and letter-coded the referenced areas on the plans. The following list is in order of most critical to least critical as well. Code 4.8(D)(3) A As to Hardship: The existing home is located at 2’ from rear property line (south) and 1’-10” from west property line. It was built in 1918 according to county records. The entire home (1214 SF) now sits in the rear half of property. This variance request is to add 495 SF to existing home bringing the total living square footage to 1709 SF, all of which will fall in the rear half of the lot. Only 33% of allowable floor space is normally allowed in the rear 50% of the lot, a recent code amendment. All other allowable side, rear, and front setbacks are maintained for the additions to the home without the need of a variance. Numbers: Size of lot: 45’x 105’ 4725 SF normally allowed in rear 50% of lot (33%) 780 Existing SF home in rear 50% of lot 1214 Existing SF garage (to be demolished) 216 Additions to home (prop. garage is in front of 50% line) 495 Codes 4.8(D)(2)(d) and 4.8(D)(6) B A proposed “L”-shaped detached garage that will house a motorhome on the west (34’ deep portion of “L”) and a single car on the east (20’ deep portion) cannot be built in rear due to lot configurations and must therefore be built in the front portion of the lot. Garages built in rear may discount 250 SF from SF calculation when figuring the maximum allowable SF for the lot. We are asking for that 250 SF discount or Mike and Elsa Keys 521 Maple St Fort Collins CO 80521 2 some amount near 150 SF from the garage square footage, even though the garage is in front. Also, asked for is a 55 SF larger garage than the normally allowed 600 SF max. As to Equal to or better than: We know we can get the RV onto the lot with a simple concrete pad but believe the variance would facilitate a much nicer street appearance if the RV were to be fully garaged and out-of-view. We believe the high/low walls and roof pitches as well as carriage house type doors to be an asset to the view from the street since some type of garage will be built here and it will become the main view of this property from street. As to Nominal and inconsequential: The extra SF requested doesn’t seem excessive and given the existing old town location and its varied layouts and structures, seems inconsequential as well. Numbers: Normal floor SF limit for a lot size of 4725 SF (25%+1000) 2181 House SF with proposed additions 1709 “L”- shaped garage SF 655 Amount proposed “L” garage puts SF over normal lot limit 183 Amount proposed “L” garage is over normal max SF size 55 Code 4.8(F)(2)(b)2 C The aforementioned “L” garage would have an eave height of 13’ max along the west setback line, which is an amount that complies with habitable buildings but exceeds the 10’ height normally allowed for non- habitable accessory buildings. As to Equal to or better than: We could set the building in the normally required 1’ per 1’ of extra height but believe that the lot would be better served not to do so, especially considering the existing curb-cut for the driveway. As to Nominal and inconsequential: The adjoining lot to the west is a large open yard that serves the duplex that sits at the rear portion of that lot, so it is believed that a 5’ setback would have no more ill effects to that property than the 3’ extra setback would have. Code 4.8(E)(4) D It was discovered after drawings that the two-story addition on the east side (bathrooms) may be tall enough to warrant a larger setback. Another solution has been developed that sets the upper bath addition in another 2’-6” by adding a ½ bath in that area (3’-6” x 10’-0” addition), adding a tub/shower or shower only inside the existing bedroom, and reducing roof pitch so that the 18’ max height at the 5’ setback can be maintained and therefore it is not imperative that a variance to this code be granted. However, it would make design options easier. Thank you for your consideration and time on this matter. Mike and Elsa Keys Agenda Item 2 Item # 2 - Page 1 STAFF REPORT June 9, 2016 STAFF Noah Beals, Senior City Planner/Zoning PROJECT APPEAL ZBA160016 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Address: 2200 Dover Drive Petitioner/Owners: James & Kathryn Hulings Zoning District: R-L Code Section: 4.4(D)(2)(d) Variance Request: The variance request is for an addition to the garage to encroach 1.84 feet into the required 15 foot corner side- yard setback. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the request to encroach 1.84 feet into the required 15 foot corner side-yard setback. STAFF COMMENTS: 1. Background: The property was platted as part of the Village West Second subdivision in 1970. This particular lot is considered a corner lot because to abuts the intersection of two streets. The required front yard setback is 20 feet. In order to continue a larger setback along all streets a side-yard along a street is required a 15 foot setback. 2. Applicant’s statement of justification: See petitioner’s letter. 3. Staff Conclusion and Findings: Under Section 2.10.2(H), Staff recommends approval the variance requests and finds. • The variance request is not detrimental to the public good. • 1.84 feet is 12% of the total 15 foot required setback. • The addition is 12.5 feet in height and does not exceed the existing building height. Therefore, the variance request will not diverge from the standard but in a nominal, inconsequential way, when considered in the context of the neighborhood, and will continue to advance the purpose of the Land Use Code contained in Section 1.2.2. 4. Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of APPEAL # ZBA160015. :ĂŵĞƐĂŶĚ<ĂƚŚƌǇŶ,ƵůŝŶŐƐ:ŝŵ͛ƐĐĞůů͗ϵϳϬͲϮϭϵͲϮϱϴϮ ϮϮϬϬŽǀĞƌƌŝǀĞũƌŚƵůŝŶŐƐΛŐŵĂŝů͘ĐŽŵ &ŽƌƚŽůůŝŶƐ͕KϴϬϱϮϲ ǆŝƐƚŝŶŐǀŝĞǁŽĨϮϮϬϬŽǀĞƌƌ͕͘ĨƌŽŵƚŚĞEŽƌƚŚ WƌŽƉŽƐĞĚǀŝĞǁǁŝƚŚƚŚĞŐĂƌĂŐĞĞǆƚĞŶƐŝŽŶ͕ƐŚŽǁŝŶŐϴĨĞĞƚǁŝĚĞŝŶƐƚĞĂĚŽĨϲĨĞĞƚǁŝĚĞ͘ James and Kathryn Hulings 2200 Dover Dr. Fort Collins, CO 80526 Home 970-484-4972 Cell 970-219-2582 jrhulings@gmail.com Garage FENCE LINE Manchester Dr. Dover Dr. SITE PLAN Scale 1" = 20' 37'-9" 13'-2" 38'-3" 8'-0" New garage space 17'-6" 8'-0" This setback is normally 15 feet Scale 1/4"=1' Existing View from back yard 8'-0" NewView with Garage Addition James and Kathryn Hulings 2200 Dover Dr. Fort Collins, CO 80526 Home 970-484-4972 Cell 970-219-2582 jrhulings@comcast.net We are asking for 8 feet here instead of 6. Thank You. Scale 1/ 3/16"=1' 20'-0" 9'-1" 26'-6" 8'-0" New Garage Space Existing structure Garage 21'-6" ← Down ← Up Existing structure 4'-6" James and Kathryn Hulings 2200 Dover Dr. Fort Collins, CO 80526 Home 970-484-4972 Cell 970-219-2582 jrhulings@comcast.net Scale 1/4"=1' View from the North West, From Manchester Dr. 4'-6" 26'-6" New Garage Addition Existing View James and Kathryn Hulings 2200 Dover Dr. Fort Collins, CO 80526 Home 970-484-4972 Cell 970-219-2582 jrhulings@comcast.net Agenda Item 3 Item # 3 - Page 1 STAFF REPORT June 9, 2016 STAFF Noah Beals, Senior City Planner/Zoning PROJECT APPEAL ZBA160017 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Address: 621 Lesser Dr Petitioner: Nicholas Kot Owner: Thomas H. Peck Zoning District: N-C-B Code Section: 4.9(D)(6)(d) and 3.8.19(A)(6) Variance Request: The variance request is to allow a 295 square foot addition to the rear of the primary structure to encroach 2 feet 2 inches into the required 5 foot side-yard setback; and the proposed eave to encroach 6 inches into the required 2.5 foot setback. A portion of the existing structure already encroaches into the side-yard setback at the same distance of the proposal. However, the portion of existing structure that the addition will attach to currently meets the required 5 foot side-yard setback. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the variance request to allow a 295 square foot addition to encroach 2 feet 2 inches into the required 5 foot side-yard setback. STAFF COMMENTS: 1. Background: The property is part of the Lesser Subdivision that was recorded in 1947. This subdivision was annexed into the City in 1955. The original structure was built approximately in 1950. The number of changes to the original structure is uncertain. As stated in the applicant’s application, the original structure was built to a 3 foot side-yard setback and later a rear addition was built to a 5 foot side-yard setback. The portion of the existing structure that the addition attaches to does meet the required 5 foot setback. 2. Applicant’s statement of justification: See petitioner’s letter. 3. Staff Conclusion and Findings: Under Section 2.10.2(H), Staff recommends denying the variance request and finds: • The nonconforming portion of the existing structure is 30 feet in length. The proposed addition is 20 feet in length. The increase of nonconformance is 2/3 the length of the existing nonconforming portion of the structure. • The existing addition that the proposed addition attaches to meets the required setback Therefore, the request has not provided sufficient information to justify an approval of a variance. 4. Recommendation: Staff recommends denial of APPEAL # ZBA160017. To: Zoning of Appeals From: Nicholas Kot Re: Zoning Variance Application Property: 621 Lesser Dr., Ft. Collins, CO. 80524 Date: May 9 ,2016 Justification Reasons: #2) The proposal will promote the general purpose of the standard for which the variance is requested equally well or better than would a proposal which complies with the standard for which the variance is requested. #3) The proposal will not diverge from the Land Use Code standards except in a nominal, inconsequential way when considered in the context of the neighborhood. "The neighborhood will not be able to see the proposed addition with proposed setback due to location of addition, and due to original house structure which already has a 3' setback. Also, the 6' privacy fence visually shields the views from adjacent neighbors. The narrow strip of land between proposed addition and North side fence cannot be utilized nor maintained for any other purpose, therefor the proposed addition is the "best use"of this land. Finally, the addition will be a visual and property value improvement to the immediate neighborhood, encouraging other owners improving their properties." Respectfully, Nicholas Kot