Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZoning Board Of Appeals - Minutes - 09/13/1990ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MINUTES Regular Meeting - September 13, 1990 - 8:30 a.m. Council Chambers The regular meeting of the Zoning board of Appeals was held on Thursday, September 13, 1990 at 8:30 a.m. in the Council Chambers of the City of Fort Collins City Hall. Roll call was answered by Lancaster, Garber, Huddleson. Boardmembers absent: Wilmarth, Thede and Castillo. Staff present: Barnes, Eckman and Zeigler. Minutes of the Regular Meeting of August 9, 1990. Approved as Published The minutes of the August 9, 1990 regular meeting were unanimously approved. Appeal #1960. Section 29-133 (4) by Carol Nees, potential buver - 512 Cook Dr. - Approved "--- The variance would reduce the required rear yard setback along the south lot line from 15 feet to 10.5 feet for a private school in the RL zone. The school would like to convert the existing house into a school building. --- Petitioner's statement of hardship: The petitioner would like to buy this house and convert it to a school. The zone allows schools as a permitted use. The existing building is already located at a 10.5 foot setback, and it would not be feasible to move the building. The playground will be located at the north end of the lot so the houses to the south should not be impacted by this proposed school use. Staff comments: The proposed change of use requires compliance with the Code. The lot is a corner lot, with the narrowest street frontage being along Mulberry. By definition then, the Mulberry lot line is considered the front lot line, and the lot line opposite is the rear lot line. That is why the south property line is considered the rear, even though it is actually the side of the building. If it were considered to be a side lot line, then this zone requires a 25 foot side yard setback for a school as compared to a 5 foot side yard setback for a house." There were no notices or letters received. 0 • ZBA Minutes September 13, 1990 Page 2 Zoning Administrator Peter Barnes said by changing the use of a single family dwelling to a private school, it requires the property be brought into compliance before a certificate of occupancy can be issued. Everything is in compliance with this particular piece of property except the setback from the building to the south lot line. When they proposed buying the vacant lot to the north and combining the property, it established a corner lot situation where the obvious front, rear and side of the building may be changed. Mr. Barnes stated that there will be a loop drive- way for the pick-up and delivery of students and it will be required to be paved. Petitioner Carol Nees said she works at Children's House Montessori School at 113 N. Shields and has been there since 1974. The school was established in the early 160s. Originally it was for children 2-1/2 to 6 years old. There is always a waiting list. Three years ago they added kindergarten. The plan now is to maintain the present location on Shields. The first year they will add Kindergarten and 1st grade; the 2nd year they will add 2nd grade; and the 3rd year they will add 3rd grade. The Cook Street facility will be used for the expansion. The upstairs will be used for a library and offices. The vacant lot is being discussed with the forestry department and they will work with Montessori to improve visibility on the corner of Cook and Mulberry. There will also be a playground for the children. She said the Building Inspection department has worked with her and set up an occupancy load of 60. All traffic and noise will be to the north. Children will come at 8:30 and leave at 3:30. She doesn't feel the neighbors to the south will hear any noise. They are planning to improve the facility. There was one person to speak in favor of the variance. No one was opposed. Wally Bujack said he owns the property and operated a business there for eight years with nine vehicles coming and going from early morning to late night. He never received a complaint from the neighbors. Boardmember Huddleson said the hardship came when they combined the two lots and and the improvements are already in place. He has no problem with the variance. He ,made a motion to approve the variance for the hardship stated. The motion was seconded by Boardmember Garber. Yeas: Lancaster, Huddleson, Garber. Nays: None. Motion carried 3-0. Appeal #1961. Section 29-133 (4) by Patrick McGaughran, owner - 1 21 Westward - Denied • ZBA Minutes September 13, 1990 Page 3 "--- The variance would reduce the required rear yard setback along the south lot line from 15 feet to 5 feet for a new, detached two -car garage in the RL zone. --- Petitioner's statement of hardship: The only place where a garage addition to the house could be built would require the elimination of bedroom windows for 2 bedrooms. A detached, 2- car garage can't be built anywhere on the lot without a variance. The owner would like to convert the existing garage into a bedroom and desires to build a new garage. --- Staff comments: None." There were no notices returned or letters received. Peter Barnes showed slides of the home. He pointed out that the drive -way is narrow and widens at the garage. The front drive -way will be eliminated. The rear lot line on the south should be 15 feet and building the garage will reduce it to 5 feet. As proposed, no fire rating would be needed. Pat McGaughran, petitioner, said he bought the house in 1988 and has been a resident of Fort Collins since 1984. He is trying to expand his living space by converting the existing garage into a bedroom and bathroom. With four children, he said one bathroom is not quite enough. There is only one feasible place to build the garage. He said no matter where he builds it, he will need a variance. There was no one present to speak for or against the variance. Mr. Garber asked when the house was built and if there are any other houses on the block that have detached garages. Mr. McGaughran said the house was built in 1963 and directly behind his house to the south there is a detached building, but he didn't think there were any others. Mr. Garber said he had difficulty approving this variance. He doesn't view it as a narrow lot. It is an existing legal lot and there is no hardship other than want. He said he is reluctant to change the character of the neighborhood. Boardmember Lancaster said he agreed and there is no physical hardship with the lay of the land and feels the hardship is self- imposed. Boardmember Huddleson agreed. Boardmember Garber made a motion to deny the variance because it lacks a hardship. The motion was seconded by Boardmember Huddleson. Yeas: Lancaster, Huddleson, Garber. Nays: None. Motion carried 3-0. ZBA Minutes September 13, 1990 Page 4 Appeal #1962. Section 29-133 (4) by Duane Bertsch, owner - 300 Bluebird Ct. - Approved "--- The variance would reduce the required rear yard setback from 15 feet to 38 inches for a storage shed in the RL zone. The shed is 144 square feet and 11 feet high. --- Petitioner's statement of hardship: The back yard has a considerable slope. The only level area of the yard is toward the rear lot line, and this is the best area to locate the shed because of the topography. The rear of this lot abuts detention ponds and railroad, so no development can occur behind this property, therefore the intent of the Code is met. --- Staff comments: The topographic condition of a lot may be considered to be a legitimate hardship." There were no notices returned or letters received. Mr. Barnes said the shed is under construction and violates the rear setback requirements. He pointed out that the rear of the property is adjacent to a detention pond and behind that are railroad track and the back of Steele's. He said there is a 6 foot to 8 foot change in topography in the petitioners back yard and there did appear to be only one flat spot to build the shed. Petitioner Duane Bertch was asked by Boardmember Huddleson if other neighbors had the same slope problem in their backyards. Mr. Bertch said no, his yard is the only one in the neighborhood with a slope. Mr. Barnes also pointed out that the shed is sitting on a 12 foot utility easement. The Engineering department is willing to issue a revocable encroachment permit for the shed to be placed 9 feet into the easement. There was no one present in favor or opposed to the variance. Frank Lancaster said this is a good example of physical hardship and because of the detention pond and the railroad tracks the intent of the code is being met. Boardmember Huddleson agreed and said the situation is unfair and the applicant is at a disadvantage. Boardmember Garber made a motion to approve the variance for the hardship stated. The motion was seconded by Boardmember Huddleson. Yeas: Lancaster, Huddleson, Garber. Motion carried 3-0. Appeal #1963. Section 29-303, 29-493 (1) by Mark Bolinger, potential tenant - 802 S. College Ave. - Approved ZBA Minutes September 13, 1990 Page 5 "--- The variance would reduce the required lot width from 75 feet to 60.feet and reduce the required rear yard setback to an alley from 20 feet to 14 feet for a retail store in the BL zone. The variance would also eliminate the requirement to provide a 5 foot landscape strip along the south lot line and a 10 foot landscape strip along Plum Street. The variance would also reduce the required 15 foot landscape strip along College to an average of 8 feet. These variances are for the existing building and parking lot at this location and are required because of the change of use from restaurant to retail. --- Petitioner's statement of hardship: The building and parking lot are existing and in place. If installation of the five foot landscape strip along the south lot line is required, then five parking spaces will be eliminated since they would then be in the driveway area. This would not be a safe condition. Because the parking area is so small it would be very difficult to add landscaping and still maintain an adequate number of parking spaces in a safe, efficient parking lot. A variance was approved in 1978 for the rear setback when the building changed from retail to restaurant. Changing from restaurant to retail now requires the same variance. The existing landscape areas will be cleaned up and maintained to whatever standards the City requires. Staff comments: None" There were no notices returned. One letter was received. Peter Barnes said many years ago the property was retail and changed the use to a restaurant. At that time they were required to get variances from the code requirements due to the change of use. Now that the property is going back to retail, the code has changed, so new requirements must be complied with or variances obtained. The parking spaces that abut Batson Drug will be required to have a five foot landscape strip against Batson. in 1978 a rear setback variance was granted to add coolers onto the back of the building. Also according to code a ten foot landscape should be along Plum St. but the curb cut takes up most of that area although some parking would be lost. Valerie Pedis appeared representing the applicants. She said there are no proposed changes to the foot print of the building. There would be interior work only. There is existing landscaping that is nice but needs cleaned up and pruned. There are so many curb cuts on this lot that cause traffic problems. Many of the other properties along this portion of College don't have landscaping. She said there is high pedestrian and bike traffic in front of the store and feels things should stay as they are. • ZBA Minutes September 13, 1990 Page 6 Mr. Huddleson said his initial response would be that the situation because of the size of the lot would indicate granting but thought the landscape and parking needed more thought. Although they have done about all they can do, where is the hardship? Boardmember Garber said the lot is too narrow for what's there now. Over time it has changed and safety concerns are important. He would rather see the property put to a productive use. He is in favor of granting the variance. Boardmember Lancaster agreed. He thought the Board had a responsibility to protect the character of the area. Boardmember Huddleson made a motion to approve the variance for the hardship stated. The motion was seconded by Boardmember Garber. Yeas: Lancaster, Huddleson, Garber. Motion carried 3-0. Appeal #1964. Section 29-178 (1), 29-178 (2) by Norma Tamez, owner - 425 Park Street - Approved "--- The variance would reduce the required lot area from 6000 square feet to 5750 square feet, and the required lot width from 60 feet to 50 feet for a new single family home in the RM zone. The home is an existing one-story house which will be moved onto this undeveloped lot. --- Petitioner's statement of hardship: The lot is an older lot and is platted with less width and lot area than todays code requires. Without a variance nothing can be built. This same variance was granted in May 1989, but has since expired. --- Staff comments: It would not be appropriate for the Board to deny someone reasonable use of their lot. That is what would happen if this variance were denied, since a single family house is considered to be the most reasonable use allowed in the zone in terms of impact to the neighborhood. Since the lot is undeveloped, not allowing any use on the property would be very questionable. If the owner had taken a legally complying lot and changed the original lot line configuration, then the hardship could possibly be self-imposed. But when the lot is in its original platted configuration, such as this one, then a valid hardship exists in terms of being able to develop the lot and put it to some use." There were no notices returned or letters received. ZBA Minutes September 13, 1990 Page 7 Peter Barnes said this is a case of an older lot that was platted before the new lot width requirement. He pointed out that the petitioner was planning on building .a detached garage also. Petitioner Norma Tamez said they are planning to remodel the house they place on the lot. They were aware that a variance would be needed when the lot was purchased. There was no one present to speak in favor or opposed to the variance. Boardmembers agreed this was a variance they had handled many times in the past and saw no problems with it. Boardmember Garber made a motion to approve the variance for the hardship stated. The motion was seconded by Boardmember Huddleson. Yeas: Lancaster, Huddleson, Garber. Motion carried 3-0. Other Business Peter Barnes said there is a proposal to change the laws in east side/west side neighborhoods to reduce the required lot width to what it used to be. This would eliminate variances being required. The issue will go to Planning and Zoning Board this month. Mr. Barnes also told the Board that Hector Castillo had moved back to Texas. Two new members will be appointed to the Board in October. Election of officers - Chuck Huddleson was nominated for Chairman - Carol Wilmarth was nominated as Vice Chairman. Respectfully submitted, Frank Lancaster, Chairman Peter Barnes, Staff Liaison