Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZoning Board Of Appeals - Minutes - 01/12/2006FORT COLLINS ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Regular Meeting — January 12, 2006 8:30 a.m. Council Liaison: Kelly Ohlson Staff Liaison: Peter Barnes (221-6760) Chairperson: Dwight Hall Phone: (H) 224-4029 A regular meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals was held on Thursday, January 12, 2006 in the Council Chambers of the Fort Collins Municipal Building at 300 Laporte Avenue, Fort Collins, Colorado. BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Alison Dickson RobertDonahue Dana McBride Dwight Hall Jim Pisula BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT: Ron Daggett Andy Miscio STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Peter Barnes, Zoning Administrator Paul Eckman, Deputy City Attorney Angelina Sanchez -Sprague, Staff Support for the Board 1. ROLL CALL The meeting was called to order and roll call was taken. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Dickson made a motion to approve the minutes from the December 8, 2005. McBride seconded the motion. The motion passed. 3. APPEAL NO 2537 - Approved with Condition Address: 4103 S. Mason Street Petitioner: Aaron Buche Zone: C Section: 3.8.22 (A) Background: The variance would allow a proposed dog day care facility to have outdoor, unenclosed exercise areas instead of conducting all aspects of the business within a completely enclosed soundproof building. ZBA January 12, 2006 — Page 2 Petitioner's Statement of Hardship: See petitioner's letter. In addition, the petitioner believes the proposal satisfies the intent l the ually well as would a proposal that code to mitigate nuisances associated with dog day care eq complies. Specifically, the presence of staff supervision of the outdoor play area to keep barking to a minimum is equal to enclosing the play area. The proposed fence, in combination with the railroad and ditch right-of-way behind the property, will help to buffer the use from nearby property owners. Staff Comments: If the Board determines that the request satisfies a criteria for the granting of a variance, a condition should be considered regarding a requirement that the fence should be 7 feet or 8 feet tall. Staff Presentation: Barnes presented slides relevant to the appeal and provided a definition of dog day care facilities as provided in the City Code: serves as a canine day care for all or part of the day, all services must be provided within an enclosed soundproof building, and business operators shall be responsible for eliminating emission of odors. Applicant Participation: Buche explained that Camp Bow Wow is one of 100 franchises (eight of which can be found along the Front Range.) Its concept is that of a premier dog care facility with very high standards. It provides cameras from which owners can view (by internist) the care and well being of their pet. The facility is kept very clean --eliminating all odors. They separate the dogs by large and small and rambunctious and calm. The outdoor area is intended as a place where the dogs can go for a change of scenery and to relieve themselves during the day. The ratio of dogs to staff will be 15:1. They will have 56 kennels and expect a maximum of 80 dogs. To start they expect a lot more boarders r services tquality of staff, dog training lasses they will provide, and their attention to the well being the animals. Buche met with affected commercial property owners and was able to allay any concerns they might have regarding the camp. They intend to use 2/3 of the back side of the building and would like to construct a 6 foot vinyl fence with an additional foot lattice on top. The fenced area would provide 3 play areas that would complement the 4 play areas inside. The HVAC units on the back of the building would be completely fenced off and inaccessible by the dogs. With the ratio of staff, Buche believe staff would be available within two seconds of a nuisance bark. Board Discussion: Board members wanted to know how many feet past the railroad right-of-way and ditch easement the closest residential home could be found. Barnes estimated 200-300 feet. Hall appreciated the business owners were not amateurs having ownership/experience with 2 other kennels in Colorado Springs. The Board conferred about what was unique about this location and business and whether a variance was appropriate. McBride wondered if the owners were open to a masonry enclosure with a soundproof gate for egress. They were amendable to that condition. McBride made a motion to approve appeal 2537 for the following reasons: not detrimental to the public good, and the proposal as submitted will promote the general purpose of the standard for which the variance is requested equally well or better than would a proposal which complies with ZBA January 12, 2006 — Page 3 the standard for which the variance is requested. The reason the proposal promotes the general purpose of the standard for which the variance is requested equally well or better than are: a solid eight foot tall concrete block (or other sound proof materials not wood or vinyl) must be erected with egress along the east wall (where it wraps on the south.) This would not allow sound to penetrate. That wall in addition to the railroad right-of-way and ditch easement would mitigate its' outside use. Hall seconded. Vote: Yeas: Dickson, Donahue, McBride, Hall, Pisula Nays: None 4. Other Business Election of officers. McBride recommended the current slate of officers remain. Hall noted the tradition was for the Vice -Chair to move into the Chair position. Dickson was satisfied with her role and recommend the Chair continue. Hall agreed. McBride made a motion to keep the current officers (Hall as Chair and Dickson as Vice -Chair.) Donahue seconded. Vote: Yeas: Dickson, Donahue, McBride, Hall, Pisula Nays: None The meeting adjourned at 10:50 AM. Wight Hall, Chairperson Peter Barnes, Zoning Administrator