Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZoning Board Of Appeals - Minutes - 09/08/1988V ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS September 8, 1988 Annual Meeting - 8:30 A.M. Minutes The annual meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals was held on Thursday, September 8, 1988 at 8:30 A.M. in the Council Chambers of the City of Fort Collins City Hall. Roll call was answered by Boardmembers Wilmarth, Lancaster, Thede, Nelson and Huddleson. Boardmembers absent: Lawton and Coleman. Staff present: Barnes, Eckman and Goode. Minutes of the Regular Meeting of August 11, 1988, Approved as Published The minutes of the August 11, 1988 regular meeting were unanimously approved. Appeal #1888. Section 29-133 (5) by Donald Niewald, 732 Cherokee - Approved with conditions --The variance would reduce the required side yard setback along the east lot line from 5 feet to 2 feet 9 inches for an addition to an existing one -car garage. --Petitioner's statement of hardship: The house is 28 years old and was built with only a one -car garage. The owner desires to enlarge the garage into a two -car garage by adding on to the side. There is no other way to enlarge the garage, and a new detached building in the back yard isn't feasible due to the topography of the lot which slopes dramatically. The 2'9" setback is only at the back corner, the front corner is at about 5 feet. --Staff comments: None" No letters were received. One notice was returned from H. F. Bowen, Jr. and Helen R. Bowen: "Regarding the above requested variance, we live directly across the street from 732 Cherokee at 741 Cherokee. We have no objection to it being granted." Zoning Administrator Peter Barnes stated that this lot is located in the Indian Hills subdivision. The petitioner proposes to build a 71x1818" garage addition onto the east side of the existing one -car garage. Because of the somewhat pie -shaped lot configuration, the back corner of the garage addition will set only 2 feet 9 inches from the lot line, therefore a variance to the building code is required. The front corner of the proposed garage will meet the intended 5 foot setback requirement. Mr. Barnes surveyed the area and found that many of the neighboring properties were built with attached two -car garages. ZBA Minutes September 8, 1988 Page 2 Don Niewald stated that he is the original owner of this property. At the time the house was designed, larger living space was a priority over a two -car garage. He now desires to have the space to house a second automobile. He feels that because the neighbors house sets approximately 7.6 feet from the lot line, that the intention of the code that requires 10 feet of separation between structures is nearly met at the back of the lot and in excess of the required setback in the front of the lot. Mr. Barnes stated that the building code requires 6 feet between structures before fire access or rating walls are taken into consideration. In this case, the structures will be in excess of the 6 foot separation requirement. Although the Board felt the hardship was somewhat weak, the majority felt that a two -car garage is a reasonable request. It was determined that a standard garage is 22-24 feet wide x 20 feet deep. In this case, the size of the garage has been minimized. Boardmember Wilmarth pointed out that the impact of this addition will mostly affect the neighbor, and that neighbor didn't appear to speak against the variance. Additionally, Boardmember Lancaster commented that to get a car off of the street would be aesthetically better for the entire neighborhood. A motion was made by Boardmember Lancaster to approve the variance for the hardship stated, with the condition that the garage be built according to the plans submitted. The motion was seconded by Boardmember Wilmarth. Yeas: Wilmarth, Lancaster, Thede and Huddleson. Nays: Nelson. Appeal #1889. Section: 29-133 (5), by Myron Lloyd, 2201 Loyola Avenue -Denied. The variance would reduce the side yard setback on the street side of a corner lot from 15 feet to 11 feet for an exterior stair addition to a single family dwelling in the RL zone. ---Petitioner's statement of hardship: The petitioner has a home occupation license for a real estate office in his home and desires to have an outside entrance to the basement for his occasional clients. This side of the house is the only side where an entrance can be made to the basement. --Staff convents: None" One notice was returned. No letters were received. Peter Barnes indicated that this property is located on the corner of Loyola and Rutgers. It is on the Rutgers Street side of the house where the petitioner intends to build an exterior stairway to the basement. If the proposed addition is approved, a variance would be needed to allow an 11 foot setback instead of the 15 foot setback required by the code. Mr. Lloyd stated that he desires the proposed additional access to alleviate the problem of clients entering his in -home business through the living area of his home. Construction of the proposed stairway will ' ZBA Minutes September 8, 1988 Page 3 require that the existing mature landscaping be removed. New landscaping will be installed as a buffer for the stairwell. The petitioner feels that this addition will not negatively impact the neighborhood which has many multi -family units. Boardmember Lancaster feels that it is the petitioner's choice to have a business in his home, therefore the hardship is self-imposed. Additionally, he commented that as a general guideline it has always been the direction of the Board not to grant a variance that is self-imposed. A motion was made by Boardmember Lancaster and seconded by Boardmember Huddleson to deny the variance. Yeas: Wilmarth, Lancaster, Thede and Huddleson. Nays: Nelson. Appeal #1890. Section 29-133 (5), by Michael Spearnak, 1118 W. Oak Street - Approved with conditions. ---The variance would reduce the required side yard setback along the east lot line from 5 feet to 4 feet for a carport addition to a single family dwelling in the RL zone. ---Petitioner's statement of hardship: Up until 3 months ago the petitioner had a detached one -car garage on the property which was dilapidated and had to be removed. He now wants to attach a carport to the side of the house. Originally he wanted it large enough for two cars, but that would have required even more of a variance. The carport as proposed will be only 15 feet wide and is the very minimum width necessary for two cars. Also, the carport will be built right over the existing driveway. --Staff comments: None" No letters were received. One notice was returned from Caroline and Frank Johnson with the following notation: "We are pleased to give our approval for modification of the code - a variance requested by Michael Spearnak of 1118 West Oak Street." Mr. Barnes stated that this lot is located west of Shields Street on the north side• of Oak. Currently this site has a driveway that runs along the side of the house. The original dilapidated garage was recently demolished by the owner. As a result, this site currently has no covered parking. Audrey Ereka appeared, representing the petitioner in his absence. She stated that the petitioner first came to the Department of Building Permits and Inspections with the intention of getting a building permit to construct an 18 foot carport. At that point, he was informed that the code requires a 5 foot side yard setback and that his plans would only allow for a I foot setback. In order to build a structure this close to the lot line the building code requires stricter conditions in regulating the types of materials that could be used for construction, along with a required variance for modification of the zoning code. The petitioner is proposing ZBA Minutes September 8, 1988 Page 4 a 15 foot carport addition to the side of the house. This is the minimum size required to park two cars in. The variance requested is to reduce the side yard setback from 5 feet to 4 feet. Because of the 50 foot width of the lot, the Board discussed other options that may be available for an alternate location for the structure, but Boardmember Nelson commented that he feels the carport addition is a good design choice and is viable for this particular lot because of it's narrowness. He moved to approve the variance for the hardship stated with the condition that the construction follow the site plans submitted. The motion was seconded by Boardmember Lancaster. Because of the open structure, maintaining grass or mowing weeds in the 4 foot area isn't a concern. Yeas: Wilmarth, Lancaster, Thede, Nelson and Huddleson. Nays: None. Appeal #1891. Section: 29-178 (5), by Rick Lee Fetters, 1808 W. Mountain —Approved with conditions --The variance would reduce the minimum required side yard setback from 5 feet to 2 feet 10 inches for a carport addition to a single family dwelling in the RM zone. --Petitioner's statement of hardship: The owner has begun construction of a carport addition in front of the existing garage which is only 2 feet 10 inches from the property line. He wishes to line—up the carport with the garage. ---Staff comments: None" Zoning Administrator Peter Barnes stated that this carport addition is already under construction and that the petitioner was not aware that a variance was needed. This house is located almost at the end of West Mountain Avenue. Mr. Barnes said in the older part of town it is common to find houses that don't comply with current setback requirements. This house sets 2 feet 9 inches from the lot line instead of the required 5 feet. This appeal is similar to other appeals in the past where a current owner will want to add —on to the structure and have the addition line up with the existing building. In this case the petitioner proposes to construct a carport addition in front of the existing garage which is only 2 feet 9 inches from the property line. Rick Fetters stated that originally this house was poorly designed. He was apologetic to the Board for the fact that the appeal is a bit misleading. The addition is not actually a carport, but merely an open structure ("canopy") that will be supported by wood posts. It is needed to alleviate a drainage problem that is occurring. He explained that the rain drains off of the front of the house onto a concrete slab at the entrance of the garage causing the water to flow into the garage. The 7 foot "carport" addition was designed to solve that problem along with keeping the design in line with the Victorian flavor of the existing house. It was suggested that the addition could be added at the front of the house but not extend out to the existing garage wall, therefore meeting the required setback. The petitioner feels that further modification of the I ZBA Minutes September 8, 1988 Page 5 design is aesthetically inferior to the design proposed. Boardmember Thede feels that the problem is with the structure, not the land. She asked the City Attorney, Paul Eckman, to clarify if an existing building versus property or lay -of -the -land should be considered as a circumstance for a variance. He said the code allows for a variance to be granted for exceptional or extraordinary situations or conditions. He stated that the description is broad enough to cover buildings as well as properties. It was determined through discussion that no other structures on neighboring lots were close to this one. Boardmember Lancaster felt lining the addition up with the existing wall is aesthetically beneficial. He moved to approve the variance with the condition that the proposed "canopy" be as designed with the east wall remaining as an open structure like the plans submitted, for the hardship being the configuration and age of the house. The motion was seconded by Boardmember Nelson. Yeas: Wilmarth, Lancaster, Thede, Nelson and Huddleson. Nays: None. Appeal #1892. Section: 29-133 (1), by Patrick Vaughn for American Continental Corp., 3837 Arctic Fox - Tabled. --The variance would reduce the required lot area for a single family lot in the RLP zone from 6,000 square feet to 5,690 square feet to accommodate a 5 foot pedestrian and bike access to the south. The lot is currently undeveloped. --Petitioner's statement of hardship: This lot, along with lot 17, were originally platted with a note reserving them for future access to the south. It has only recently been determined by the City that only a bike and pedestrian access is needed rather than vehicular. Therefore, only 5 feet from each lot is required to be deeded to the City. However, this leaves the lots smaller than required, and without a variance, nothing can be built. --Staff comments: If the Board grants this variance, it should be with the condition that the 3-to-1 lot area/floor area ratio be complied with for the house to be built on this lot." No letters were received and no notices were returned. Boardmember Lancaster disqualified himself from voting on the following appeals due to a potential conflict of interest. He resides in the subdivision in question. Zoning Administrator Peter Barnes indicated that the code requires a minimum of 6,000 square feet of lot area for a piece of land to be considered a standard lot. In this case, because of the dedication of 5 feet from each of the two lots for a bike path access, the lots are deemed substandard and cannot be built on unless a variance is granted. He added that the lots will exceed the 60 foot minimum width requirement and any structure designed consistent with others in the subdivision, in regard to size, would meet the required setbacks. ZBA Minutes September 8, 1988 Page 6 Ted Shepard, staff project planner for the Sunstone P.U.D., presented detailed information on the history of this project. He said that in 1979, Fox Meadows Subdivision approved Lots 17 & 18 to be reserved for future vehicular access to the south to connect the adjacent subdivision. The adjacent subdivision, Sunstone Village P.U.D., is located directly south of the Fox Meadows Subdivision. Recently, the Sunstone Village master plan was approved. It. was determined that vehicular access was not needed by the extension of Wapiti Drive, but rather it would be more favorable to access the subdivision from Caribou Drive, which is a collector street and able to handle more traffic. At this point the planning department contacted the developer, American Continental Corp., to report that the reservation of these lots was no longer needed for vehicular access. At the present time, Sunstone Village has final approval to construct a bike path along the north boundary of their property which is presently a 40 foot drainage swale. The planning department approached American Continental Corp. with the suggestion of dedicating a 10 foot strip from Lots 17 & 18 to provide a bike path to connect these two subdivisions and provide access to the drainage swale area —that is proposed as a future landscaped greenbelt area—. Mr. Shepard noted his support for the bike path. Through Conceptual Review meetings held for projects in the vicinity of this area, the planning department has mentioned to developers the unique situation available for the continuation of the bike path throughout this entire area. He noted that all of the property holders in the surrounding area have expressed a willingness to negotiate for it's continuance. Mr. Shepard feels that a hardship has been imposed upon the owner of these lots by the government. If the bike access was not requested, the owner would have two buildable lots, but because of the 5 foot dedication from each lot, the lots don't comply with the building code so those lots are rendered useless without a variance. Patrick Vaughn, the project developer for American Continental Corp., agreed that the hardship is a government imposition. He stated that it was with the spirit of cooperation that the 10 foot dedication was made. If the land was not dedicated, the two lots in question would be buildable lots. Mr. Vaughn submitted 137 signed consent cards which were sent to the residents of Fox Meadows by American Continental Corp., with the following notice: "As a home owner and voting member of the Fox Meadows subdivision, I hereby approve a variance of the minimum lot size form 6,000 to 5,690 square feet for Lots 17 & 18, block 10 to accommodate a bicycle path. Signature Two hundred and thirty—two of these cards were mailed. The petitioner feels the number of cards returned represents a fair amount of the residents to be in favor of the change. IL • • ZBA Minutes September 8, 1988 Page 7 Several residents appeared to speak against the variance. They were Lin Johnson, 3819 Caribou; Thomas Welch, 2202 Coyote; Terrence Jones, 2312 Wapiti; Pat Sulik, 3603 Jaquar; and William Grover, 2348 Kodiac Road. The residents are thrilled with the idea of the bike path and the access to the proposed greenbelt area, but argued that if the variance is granted, the smaller lot size would be inconsistent with the 7,800 square foot average lot size in the subdivision, thereby causing a cramped appearance. They feel that the petitioner's preference for the two smaller lots is totally economical. They would be in favor of an option that would place the bike path on one end of either lot. The group felt that this option would be beneficial to the residents in providing the bike path and access; would provide one larger lot that would fit in with the subdivision; and provide some equity for the developer. The residents argued that the consent cards mentioned above do not reflect an accurate survey of the area residents. It was noted that the way the cards were written requested that the response be sent back only if the resident was in support of the change, but didn't provide an area for the resident to respond if he disapproved of the change. Of those present at today's meeting, two have requested to rescind their prior approval and stated that others who are not present want to rescind their prior approval as well. Finally, the residents are concerned taken into consideration more so than community. They pleaded with the so further input can be gained. that the petitioner's needs are being the people who actually live in the Board to delay granting the appeal, Discussion by the Board was brief. Boardmember Nelson interjected that there is a real need for better communication between the City, developer and residents or representative group. He moved to table appeal #1892 and #1893 until the October 13, 1988 meeting in hopes that those concerned could meet and initiate a resolution. The motion was seconded by Boardmember Huddleson. Yeas: Wilmarth, Thede, Nelson and Huddleson. Nays: None. Appeal #1893. Section: 29-133 (1), by Patrick Vaughn for American Continental Corp. 2301 Arctic Fox — Tabled —The variance would reduce the required lot area for a single family lot in the RLP zone from 6,000 square feet to 5,690 square feet to accommodate a 5 foot pedestrian and bike access to the south. The lot is currently undeveloped. —Petitioner's statement of hardship: See appeal #1892 —Staff Comments: See appeal #1892 Discussion by the Board was brief. Boardmember Nelson interjected that he sees a realneed for better communication between the City, developer and residents or representative group. He moved to table appeal #1892 and " ZBA Minutes September 8, 1988 Page 8 #1893 until the October 13, 1988 meeting in hopes that those concerned could meet and initiate a resolution. The motion was seconded by Boardmember Huddleson. Yeas: Wilmarth, Thede, Nelson and Huddleson. Nays: None. The meeting was adjourned. Respectfully submitted, Jane Thede, Acting Chairwoman Peter Barnes, Zoning Administrator JT/PB/drg