Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZoning Board Of Appeals - Minutes - 04/12/19900 • ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MINUTES Regular Meeting April 12, 1990 The regular meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals was held on Thursday, April 12, 1990, at 8:30 A.M. in the Council Chamber of the City of Fort Collins City Hall. Roll call was answered by Boardmembers Thede, Wilmarth, Lancaster, Lawton and Huddleson. Boardmembers absent: Nelson and Spight Staff present: Barnes and Goode. Minutes of the Regular Meeting of March 8, 1990, Approved as Published The minutes of the March 8, 1990, regular meeting were unanimously approved. Appeal #1945. Section: 29-371 by Rick Hattman, architect - 1450 Riverside Approved with conditions "--The variance would reduce the required landscape buffer setback along Riverside Avenue from 50 feet to 15 feet. This would be consistent with other developments along Riverside. The project is a new building to be used for door manufacturing for Collins Cashway. This property is located in the IL zone. ---Petitioner's statement of hardship: See petitioner's letter. ---Staff comments: The section of Riverside Avenue between Prospect and Lemay is a hodgepodge of zoning districts. There are six different zoning districts in this short stretch. This project is located in the IL zone, which is the only one of the six which requires such a setback. All of the other zones in this area require only the 15 foot landscape setback adjacent to the parking lot. There are three other businesses on Riverside which are located in the IL zone, but they were all in existence prior to the code being changed to require a 50 foot setback in this zone. The property line is 18 feet behind the sidewalk. This area will also be landscaped, but it isn't shown on the plan submitted. The additional 18 feet will mean that the landscape setback at its minimum width will be 33 feet, and the width at the other points along Riverside will be 50 feet." April 12, 1990 Page 2 One notice was returned; the attached letter was received. Zoning Administrator Peter Barnes explained to the Board that this parcel is located on Riverside and is currently being used for outside storage. As the owner of the property, Collins Cashway plans to construct a new building to be used as a door manufacturing facility. Mr. Barnes further explained that along this short stretch of Riverside, six different zoning districts exist, and although several adjacent parcels are zoned IG (general industrial), this is the only one which requires a 50 foot setback. It seems that the neighboring businesses, which are also in the IL zone, HOMEDCO, Benedict's Upholstery and Fort Collins Glass, were all in existence prior to the code being changed in 1979; therefore, they comply with the code eventhough they don't have a 50 foot landscape setback. Boardmember Huddleson questioned the reason for the code change in 1979. Mr. Barnes answered that because the IL zone is sometimes surrounded by lower density zones (i.e. residential), the intent of the code was for aesthetic purposes rather than safety concerns. In this case, there are no adjacent lower density zones to consider. As a representative for the owner, Jim Gefroh, an architect/planner, addressed the Board. He told the boardmembers that the owner intends to develop this parcel within the limits of the IL zone; therefore, the two site plans submitted are preliminary and still in the design stage. However, the owner does feel that the 50 foot setback requirement is unreasonable in comparison with the other development along Riverside, thus the request for this variance. Currently, in the IL zone, the code requires a 50 foot landscape buffer between the property line and the building. In this instance, the property line is 18 feet behind the curb. The petitioner proposes to provide plant groupings and landscaped berms in the 18 feet between the street and the property line and the landscaping will continue an additional 15 feet behind the property line with intermittently spaced 17 foot landscaped islands along the approximate 600 foot length of this lot. The petitioner feels that this proposed application is consistent with the adjacent properties. All of the boardmembers agreed that the 50 foot required setback does represent a hardship and that the proposed development would be a good use as well as an improvement to the area. Boardmember Lancaster, however, was concerned about the lack of solid screening for the outside storage area shown on the site plan. He feels that the intent of the code is for aesthetic purposes and recommends that the intent be met by providing adequate, solid screening from the street. Boardmember Huddleson made a motion to approve the appeal with two conditions. One, that the proposed building not be any closer than 32 feet from the front property line, and that the final site plans submitted do not deviate substantially from those submitted with this variance request. And two, the outside storage associated with the door facility be solidly screened by means of fencing or landscaping. The motion was seconded by Boardmember Thede. The Board voted unanimously to approve the variance. ZBA Minutes April 12, 1990 Page 3 Other business Boardmember Huddleson gave a brief report on a recent meeting that he had attended for the Commission on the Status of Women. The meeting was adjourned. drg Respectfully submitted, Frank Lancaster, Chairman Peter Barnes, Zoning Administrator GEFROH HATTMAN INC. ARCH ITECT.SIPLANNERS CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT 135 West Swallow Road Fort Collins, CO 80525 (303) 223-7335 March 29, 1990 Mr. Peter Barnes Chief Zoning Officer City of Fort Collins Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522 RE: COLLINS CASHWAY PROPERTY 1400 Block of Riverside Avenue Dear Peter: We are submitting to you a request for a variance to the zoning regulation for the IL Zoning and in particular the requirement for a 50-foot landscape setback on arterial streets. The property in question is within the 1400 Block of Riverside consisting of approximately 2.8 net acres. Our request for a variance is three fold. Our first reason is based on investigation of the site and its surrounding properties on Riverside with this same zoning finds that all other properties were "grandfathered" or pre-existing to the setback requirements. Properties of the IG and BL that also exist do not require setbacks of this nature. We propose to keep a landscape setback that is consistent with the adja- cent property which would be a continuous 15-foot setback on the property with an intermittent landscape area of 17 feet allowing 70 percent parking, 30 percent landscape be set aside. We also propose that no building be closer than 32 feet from the front property line in any case. We think these setbacks are standard and ample to provide an aesthetically pleasing streetscape. As mentioned, our reasoning is three fold, the second of which is the size of the property. The property is narrow in depth being restricted by the railroad track and existing drainage easements due to the tracks. If a fifty foot setback is enforced, the building depth at maximum ranges from 56 foot to 150 foot of depth dependent upon parking placement which is nar- row for this type of building. Our third reason is that a landscape buffer can be provided in other means other than a simple 50 foot no building zone. By use of grouping of plant- ing, berms, and landscape features, the same feeling of openness and soft- ening of the built environment can be achieved. Mr. Peter Barnes March 29, 1990 Page 2 In summary we believe that the requirement for a 50-foot landscape set aside is unreasonable because it has not been provided on another property on this street. It is also a hardship because of the shape of this property and the land available for construction. Open space can be achieved through other landscape treatment other than a simple setback. Your consideration of this matter would be appreciated. Sincerely yours, GEFROH TTMAN redric J Hattm n kam