Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZoning Board Of Appeals - Minutes - 02/14/1991ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS February 14, 1991 Regular Meeting - 8:45AM Minutes The regular meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals was held on Thursday, February 14, 1991 at 8:45A.M in the Council Chambers of the City of Fort Collins City Hall. Roll call was answered by Boardmembers Gustafson, Huddleson, Garber, Anastasio and Lancaster. Boardmembers absent: Wilmarth Staff present: Barnes, Goode, and Reichert Minutes of the Regular Meeting of January 13, 1991, Approved as published. The minutes of the January 13, 1991 regular meeting were unanimously approved. Lancaster abstained. Appeal #1976. Section 29-133 (4) by Walt Wilkens, 2918 Greentree Circle - Approved --- The variance would reduce the rear setback requirements from 15 feet to 12 feet for a detached carport in the RL zone. --- Petitioner's statement of the 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 requested a variance to reduce setback to 6 feet at the January, 1991, Zoning Board meeting, but that request was denied. The structure is built in 8 foot sections, so the petitioner is now requesting a variance which would require the removal of only one 8 foot section. One corner of the rear of the carport will be 12 feet from the lot line, the other corner will be 14 feet. --- Staff Comments: At the January meeting some Board members expressed concerns that the hardship was self-imposed and that the carport did not have to be 32 feet long in order to shelter a boat. The petitioner has now modified his request in light of these objectives and is proposing that the carport be only 24 feet long. Removal of another 8 foot section would result in only a 16 foot carport. No APO notices were returned and no letters were received. Zoning Board of Appeals February 14, 1991 Page 2 Zoning Administrator, Peter Barnes explained the lot was odd shaped and there was no access through the back of the lot. Currently, the rear of this 32 foot long structure sets only 4 feet from the rear property line. The carport is built in 8 foot lengths, so by removing one 8 foot length it would reduce the rear set -back to 12 feet. Walt Wilkens, owner of the property , spoke in favor of the variance and emphasized that removing one 8 foot section would be the easiest thing to do without making the structure too small for his boat. No others attended the meeting to speak either in favor of or against the appeal. Boardmember Lancaster made a motion to approve appeal #1976 for the hardship that the configuration of the lot makes it difficult to place this structure on the property in other places. Garber seconded. Yeas: Lancaster, Anatasio, Huddleson, Gustafson, Garber. The appeal passed. Appeal #1977. Section 29-148, 29-133(3)by Rick Armitstead of Tri- Trend Homes. --- The variance would reduce the required front yard setback for a new single-family dwelling in the RLP zone from 20 feet to 16.9 feet. --- Petitioner's statement of hardship: This lot is at the end of a cul-de-sac which abuts Taft Hill Road, a major arterial street. In order to add additional noise buffer to the living area of the home, the contractor believes that it is most desirable to build the garage on the west side of the house, the same as had been done on the other lots which abut. Taft Hill. This lot is very shallow because of the arc of the cul-de-sac, so if the house were moved back to comply with the front yard requirement then a rear yard variance would be needed. All of the houses in this development are factory built and all of the models have the same building footprint, so putting a different model on this lot would still create the same problem. The house could be built without a variance, but then the living area portion of the home would be on the west side of the lot and only 8 feet from the property line along Taft Hill Road. Zoning Board of Appeals February 14, 1991 Page 3 --- Staff comments: On the one hand, this could be viewed as a self-imposed hardship since there is a way to build the home without a variance. On the other hand, there are many unique factors involved which could a considered a legitimate hardship, such as: the shallowness of the lot due to the arc of the cul=de- sac; its close proximity to Taft Hill and the accompanying noise and visual problems; these are all factory built homes with the same building footprint, so putting another model home on the lot is not a solution; other homes along Taft Hill in this subdivision were able to be built with the garage on the side adjacent to Taft; and even with a front setback reduction, the house, being at the end of the street, will not appear to be any closer to the street than all the other houses on the block. No APO notices were returned and no letters were received. Rick Armitstead, Vice President of Tri-Trend appeared before the Board. He stated that they would like to make the best living conditions possible for their clients, and making the garage on the west side would buffer the sound in the living area. He also stated he had an interested party wanting to buy this model and they too would like the model flipped. No one else addressed the Board to speak in favor or against this appeal. Boardmember Garber made a motion to approve this appeal stating the hardship was the size of the lot and it was in the best interest of the. community and a good solution to the problem. Boardmember Gustafson seconded. Ayes: Lancaster, Huddleson, Gustafson, Garber. The meeting was adjourned. Chuck Huddleson, Chairman Vk. A.,, Peter Barnes, Zoning Administrator CH/PB/aer