Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZoning Board Of Appeals - Minutes - 08/14/1986E ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS August 14, 1986 Regular Meeting, 8:30 A.M. Minutes The regular meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals was held on Thursday, August 14, 1986 at 8:30 A.M. in the Council Chambers of the City of Fort Collins City Hall. Roll call was answered by Boardmembers Walker, Lieser, Thede, Barnett, Lawton. Boardmembers absent: Leis Staff Present: Barnes, Eckman and Zeigler Minutes of the Regular Meeting of July 10, 1986, Approved as Published. Appeal #1753 Section 118-41(D) by Joe Vansant, Contractor, 1301 Rollingwood Ln. - Approved "---The variance would reduce the required front yard setback from 20 feet to 15 feet for an addition to a two car garage in the RL zone. ---Petitioner's statement of hardship: This lot is unusual in that it is an interior lot, but one that is at the intersection of two different streets. The addition is actually 26 feet from the lot line where the driveway comes in. This would be considered a typical front setback, however because the lot is on an "eyebrow" there is only one front lot line, so the setback to the closest point is 15 feet, but this setback is more realistically a side setback which is only to be 15 feet. -required ---Staff recommendation: Approval if there are no objections from the neighbors." No notices or letters were received. Zoning Administrator Peter Barnes told the Board that 1301 Rollingwood was on the corner of Brookwood and Rollingwood. It is considered an interior lot, not a cul-de-sac. There is a vacant lot next door that is dedicated open space. Mr. Vansant explained that the garage addition will be used for personal storage, not home occupation. Boardmember Walker made a motion to approve the variance in light of the unusual lot situation for the hardship stated. He felt the addition would cause no visibility problems and neighbors hadn't voiced oppostion. Boardmember Thede seconded the motion. Yeas: Walker, Lieser, Thede, Barnett. Boardmember Lawton abstained due to late arrival. ZBA Minutes- Augu#11986 Page 2 • Appeal #1754 Section 118-44(C) by Belle Merwitzer, Potential Buyer, 420-422 W. Oak, Withdrawn. Appeal #1755 Section 118-91(E) by Randy Larson, Architect, 400 Boardwalk, Approved with conditions. "---The variance would allow the Harmony Presbyterian Church to have an identification sign which is 43.75 square feet per face instead of the 35 square feet allowed by Code. The church is located in the RLP zone. ---Petitioner's statement of hardship: Aesthetically, the sign as designed is of good proportion and letter size to allow readability. The actual sign area is only 10.5 square feet per face. The signage is to be placed on the walls to be compatible in design with certain features of the building. This is the only sign on a 4 acre site. ---Staff recommendation: Approval with the condition that no other signs can be erected on the property." No notices or letters were received. Zoning Administrator Peter Barnes explained how the area of this type of sign is calculated and said that similar signs had petitioned a variance (Harvard & McClelland) and the Board had approved them. It is a very small building on a four acre site. Petitioner Larsen said that there will be lettering on two sides. Lettering material will match the steeple. Boardmember Barnett verified that the minimum lot area for a church in the RLP zone is 6000 square feet. He felt that there is a visual scale hardship. The sign will not be competing with other signs but is competing with the landscaping. Boardmember Thede felt that there was 'a legitimate hardship and made a motion to approve the variance for the hardship stated with the condition that no other signs be erected on the property. This does not include a directory on the building. The motion was -seconded by Boardmember Barnett. Yeas: Walker, Lieser, Thede, Barnett, Lawton. Nays: None. Appeal #1756 Section 118-41(E) by Jeffrey Barnes, 3266 Gunnison Drive, Denied. "---The variance would reduce the required rear yard setback from 15 feet to 12 feet for a gazebo in the back yard of a single family dwelling in the RL zone. ---Petitioner's statement of hardship: To comply with the Code in this location, some mature landscaping would need to be removed. There is also a 30 foot drainage easement on the other side of the rear lot line so that no houses will be located close to this rear lot line. ---Staff recommendation: Approval. There is no hardship since the ZBA Minutes- Augus&86 Page 3 landscaping is not very mature somewhat unique since it backs adequate separation between the lot to the south." • and can be moved. However, the lot is up to a rather large easement, assuring gazebo and any future building on the There were no notices or letters received. Petitioner Jeffrey Barnes said that he had lived at that address for three years. He said he would like to place the gazebo (size-12' diameter and 13' high) at the requested location so that it would be useful and not just decorative. Boardmember Walker questioned how three feet would make any difference. Petitioner Barnes said that it would run into his landscaping involving removal of a Russian Olive tree (approximately 12' high) and several shrubs. Placing the gazebo at the legal location would also obstruct a clear view of Horsetooth. Boardmember Lawton asked what plans were being made for the area behind the gazebo. Petitioner said that they would be landscaping with ground cover. Boardmember Lieser stated that she could not find a hardship to this variance, moving trees was not a hardship. Boardmember Walker saw no hardship only a desire to put the gazebo elsewhere on the lot. Boardmember Thede saw no hardship and felt there were alternatives, self-imposed hardship. Boardmember Barnett felt the tree was relatively small and could be moved with little sacrifice. He said he could not find a hardship. Boardmember Thede made a motion to deny the variance for lack of a hardship. The motion was seconded by Boardmember Walker. Yeas: Walker, Lieser, Thede, Barnett, Lawton. Nays: None. Appeal #1757 Section 118-41(C) by Dick Pitner, 1420 Fleetwood Court, ADDroved "---The variance would reduce the required lot width from 60 feet to 54 feet for a new single family home in the RL zone. ---Petitioner's statement of hardship: The lot was platted this way, and to meet the setback the house would need to be moved back an additional 24 feet, resulting in a very small back -yard and a large front yard, with the house much further back than the others in the area. ---Staff recommendation: Approval" No notices or letters were received. Zoning Administrator Peter Barnes reiterated that there was a problem with the platting of this subdivision that Mr. Pitner had nothing to do with. The subdivision was platted in 1978. Mr. Pitner did not develop the land but owns twelve lots and is now building on them. Several of the lots in the area have needed variances. Part of the adjoining property can not be deeded to 1420 Fleetwood Court because there is already a house on the lot. These lots are not small. There is a canal on the back of the lot with a big easement. The canal is lower than the lot. The houses being built are spec homes. ZBA Minutes- Augus*986 Page 4 Jerry Runta, 1404 Fleetwood Ct., spoke regarding the variance. He said that he was mainly concerned with the size of the houses being built on the lots and how they would effect the value of his home. Most of his concerns were not directly related to the variance but dealt with covenants, which as pointed out by City staff, have nothing to do with the City code. If approved, Boardmember Lieser felt no problems would be caused. Boardmember Walker thought uniformity of placement on the lots would create a better sales value for the neighborhood. His main concern was with the people that platted the area and found it very frustrating. He felt it would be more of a hardship to deny the variance and would rather see it granted. Boardmember Thede chose to vote against the variance to try and send a message to developers. If their projects aren't platted right, their lots won't sell. Boardmember Barnett thought it an important message to be sent but denying the variance would cause aesthetic problems. Boardmember Walker made a motion to approve the variance for the hardship stated. The motion was seconded by Boardmember Barnett. Yeas: Walker, Lieser, Barnett, Lawton. Nays: Thede. Appeal #1758 Section 118-41(C) by Dick Pitner, 1416 Fleetwood Court, Approved. "---The variance would reduce the required lot width from 60 feet to 57 feet for a new single family home in the RL zone. ---Petitioner's statement of hardship: The lot was platted this way, and to meet the setback the house would need to be moved back 17 feet resulting in a very small back yard and a large front yard, with the house much further back than the others in the area. ---Staff recommendation: Approval" No notices or letters were returned. Discussion on appeal 1758 was included with appeal 1757. Boardmember Barnett made a motion to approve the variance for the hardship stated. The motion was seconded by Boardmember Walker. Yeas: Walker, Lieser, Barnett, Lawton. Nays: Thede. Appeal #1759 Section 118-41(F) by Charles Hatchette, 700 E. Elizabeth, Approved with conditions. "---The variance would reduce the side yard setback along the street side of a corner lot from 15 feet to 0 feet for a detached shop/carport in the RL zone. ---Petitioner's statement of hardship: There are a lot of large trees on the lot which would need to be removed if the building were located per code. One of the trees next to the driveway is a hazard, in that small children walking behind it can't be seen when backing out of the driveway, so the petitioner would like to make a circular drive coming ZBA Minutes- Augus*986 Page 5 Cl out the alley to make the situation safer. The building will be set back 20 feet from the curb so there will still be considerable open space between it and the street. ---Staff recommendation: Denial to reduce the setback to 0 feet. There are some legitimate matters brought up by the petitioner, but perhaps a setback of around 5 feet would be more acceptable because of maintenance concerns and the like." No notices or letters were returned. Slides of this property showed a stake at the lot line. The lot line is very close to Mr. Hatchette's house. The landscaping is very mature and it would be impossible to move 40 foot trees. The addition will be 20 x 40 (800 square feet). Utility easements and water and sewer lines are in the alley and won't be affected. Boardmember Walker suggested approval with a 3 foot setback. Boardmember Lawton asked why the shop couldn't go on the east side of the carport. Zoning Administrator Peter Barnes pointed out that the site plan did not include all of the existing landscaping and that there were even more trees on the east side of the carport. Boardmember Walker made a motion to approve the variance with the condition that it has a 3 foot setback and the eave can only extend one foot past the foundation. The motion was seconded by Boardmember Lieser. Yeas: Walker, Lieser, Thede, Barnett, Lawton. Nays: None. Appeal #1760 Section 118-41(C) by John Snell for Neighbor to Neighbor, 605 Tenth Street, Approved. "---The variance would reduce the required lot width from 60 feet to 50 feet for a new single family dwelling in the RL zone... ---Petitioner's statement of hardship: The lot is an existing platted lot with only 50 feet of width. A brand new house will be built on the lot and will upgrade the area. Nothing can be built without a variance. ---Staff recommendation: Approval." There were no notices or letters returned. Petitioner John Snell was not present. The Board questioned whether they should make any decision without the petitioner present. City Attorney, Paul Eckman, felt that the person had applied knowing that it would go before the Board on the 14th and a decision should be made. Feeling that this appeal was the standard one requested in this area, Boardmember Walker made a motion to approve with the condition that the house be built per submitted plans. The motion was seconded by Boardmember Thede. Yeas: Walker, Lieser, Thede, Barnett, Lawton. Nays: None. Peter Barnes reminded the Board that their annual meeting would be in September and new chairman and vice chairman would be elected. ZBA Minutes- Augus10986 Page 6 Meeting was adjourned. • Respectfully submitted, Eva Lieser, Chairman Peter Barnes, Zoning Administrator