Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZoning Board Of Appeals - Minutes - 11/13/2008FORT COLLINS ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Regular Meeting — November 13, 2008 8:30 a.m. ICouncil Liaison: Kelly Ohlson IStaff Liaison: Peter Barnes (221-6760) I IChairperson: Dwight Hall I I A regular meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals was held on Thursday, November 13, 2008 at 8:30 a.m. in the Council Chambers of the Fort Collins Municipal Building at 300 Laporte Avenue, Fort Collins, Colorado. BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Michael Bello Ronald Daggett Alison Dickson Dwight Hall . Dana McBride Jim Pisula David Shands EXCUSED ABSENCES: None STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Peter Barnes, Zoning Administrator Paul Eckman, Deputy City Attorney Lynn Suess, Staff Support to 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 August 14, 2008 meeting. Hall seconded the motion. Motion approved. Vote: Yeas: Bello, Daggett, Dickson, Hall, McBride, Shands Nays: None Abstain: Pisula 3. APPEAL NO. 2630 — Approved with conditions Address: 1309 W. Mountain Ave. Petitioner: Laura Scheman-Heath Zone: NCL Section: 3.8.3(1) ZBA November 13, 2008— Page 2 Background: The variance will allow a home occupation activity to be conducted in the existing one -car garage located in the rear of the property. Specifically, the variance will allow the garage to be used for music instruction. The home occupation ordinance requires that home occupation activities be conducted within the dwelling unit or in an attached garage instead of in detached accessory buildings. There is no attached garage, so the applicant is proposing to use the detached garage. Petitioner's Statement of Hardship: This is a common situation in the old town area, where most homes do not have attached garages which can be used for home occupations. The ZBA has granted similar requests in the past for other properties in these old town neighborhoods. All other requirements of the code will be met. Since the garage is located in the rear of the lot, adjacent to the alley, and far from neighbor's homes, the business activity will be far less noticeable than if it were located in the main house, with customers parking along the street. If the garage were attached, then a variance would not be required. Staff Comments: The Board usually approves this type of variance as long as the garage is existing and as long as all of the other home occupation regulations are met. Most often, the hardship criteria has been applied since there is no attached garage which can be converted. A condition of approval has been that the variance is tied to this owner and this business only. Staff Presentation: Barnes submitted slides relevant to the application. Barnes stated there are 11 requirements in the Land Use Code which need to be satisfied for home occupations. One of those requirements is that the home occupation activities be conducted within the dwelling unit; i.e., a bedroom, basement or attached garage. In the old town neighborhoods where most garages are detached, there are numerous requests for home occupation variances. The applicant proposes to teach music lessons. Client parking would occur along the alley rather than in front of the house on Mountain Avenue. Dickson asked the purpose of the ordinance requirement that the home occupation activity be conducted inside the dwelling unit. Barnes responded that the Home Occupation Ordinance does two things: (1) allows flexibility for people to conduct certain types of businesses in their home in a residential neighborhood in a manner that limits or mitigates the impacts created in the conduct of that business, and (2) limits individuals from building new structures for a home occupation on shallower lots. Applicant's Presentation: Laura Scheman-Heath, 1309 W. Mountain Avenue. Scheman-Heath stated that all neighbors within 150 feet of their lot line support this request. The lessons being offered are in piano, violin, and bass. The piano to be used in the instruction is electric, so the volume can be controlled. Instructions for the most part will be private —occasionally a trio consisting of two violins and a piano may receive instruction. The music will be of the chamber music variety and not hard rock. The building is insulated. There is room for three parking spaces, but it is anticipated that most frequently one car will be there at a time. Scheman-Heath stated that her husband has multiple sclerosis, is home all the time and rests often, so it is ideal to be able to conduct the business outside of the living quarters. Audience Participation: None. Board Discussion: Hall asked Barnes how the City deals with noise complaints involving a home business. Barnes responded that the owner would be contacted and asked to mitigate the noise. McBride asked which occupations were prohibited from being conducted in a home occupation setting. Barnes responded the ordinance specifically says a home occupation shall not be interpreted to include the following: animal hospital, long-term care facility, restaurant, bed and ZBA November 13, 2008— Page 3 breakfast, group home, adult oriented use, vehicle repair servicing, detailing or towing (if vehicles are dispatched from the premises or are brought to the premises or are parked or stored on the premises or an adjacent street). Other proposed businesses that cannot comply with the regulations would also not be allowed. Hall asked if the approval of the motion should be conditioned on the business of music instruction. Eckman responded that would be a good idea. Shands made a motion to approve appeal number 2630 with conditions for the following reasons: The granting of the variance would not be detrimental to the public good. The proposal as submitted will not diverge from the standards of the Land Use Code except in a nominal, inconsequential way when considered in the context of the neighborhood (Old Town area, no attached garages, mostly detached garages), and will continue to advance the purposes of the Land Use Code as contained in Section 1.2.2. Additionally, the approval is also based on hardship conditions. There are exceptional physical conditions or other extraordinary and exceptional situations unique to the property which is the subject of the appeal as follows: the lot is narrow making it difficult to have an attached garage. Because of the foregoing unique conditions, the strict application of the standard sought to be varied would result in unusual and exceptional practical difficulties or exceptional or undue hardship upon the applicantlowner and that such difficulties or hardship are not caused by the act or omission of the applicant/owner. The unique conditions coupled with the strict application of the standards sought to be varied result in the practical difficulties or hardship because there is not an attached garage which can be converted. This appeal is approved based on the following two conditions: (1) the business is limited to the instruction of piano, violin, and bass, and (2) it is granted specifically to this owner. The motion was approved. Vote: Yeas: Bello, Daggett, Dickson, Hall, McBride, Pisula, Shands Nays: 4. APPEAL NO. 2631 - Approved Address: 2613 — 2701 Stanford Road Petitioner: Jeff Valloric, Fort Collins Housing Authority Zone: MMN Section: 3.2.2(K)(1) Background: The variance will reduce the required number of parking spaces from 118 to 115 in order to allow the construction of a one-story clubhouse building for the existing apartment complex at this location. The new clubhouse will result in a net loss of 3 parking spaces. Petitioner's Statement of Hardship: See petitioner's letter. Staff Comments: The purpose of the standard is to ensure that multi -family developments have adequate on -site parking in order to limit the impact to neighbors by having large numbers of vehicles parking on the neighborhood streets. The applicant has provided documentation which explains the demographic populations of the tenants, and which illustrates that the parking demand of the tenants is easily satisfied by the 115 parking spaces provided. This documentation can be used to show that the proposal satisfies the purpose of the standard. Also, the Board may determine that reducing the number of spaces from 118 to 115 is nominal. Staff Presentation: Barnes submitted slides relevant to the application. Barnes explained that there are 29 two bedroom units and 53 one bedroom units in this three building complex. The ZBA November 13, 2008— Page 4 Housing Authority acquires apartment complexes and then makes improvements to the complex. The Housing Authority will be building a clubhouse and adding three carports. One of the curb cuts will be eliminated to accommodate the clubhouse, thus reducing the parking spaces by three. Some handicap parking spaces will also be provided. Barnes stated the applicant says the demographics indicate that the 115 parking spaces should be adequate since most of the residents do not own multiple vehicles. Applicant's Participation: Jeff Valloric, Facilities Manager for the Fort Collins Housing Authority. Valloric indicated the Housing Authority will be conducting a major rehabilitation on the complex. Five of the existing units will be converted to wheelchair accessible units —one 2-bedroom and four- 1 bedroom units. The clubhouse will also be wheelchair accessible. Poudre Fire Authority has approved the site plan. By extrapolating the figures obtained from a survey conducted at their West Elizabeth complex (which has the same demographic population), Valloric thinks that 50 to 60 parking spaces will be used on a daily basis, which indicates that the 115 planned parking spaces should be more than adequate. The clubhouse will be an accessory building to be used for resident training and community gatherings. The clubhouse will also have two offices, a handicapped accessible restroom and small galley kitchen. Dickson asked about occupancy levels at the West Elizabeth complex. Valloric stated they are generally fully leased. Bello asked about the location of the trash. Valloric responded that it is towards the street so trash trucks will not have to enter the parking lot. The trash area is 22' from the easement. Audience Participation: None Board Discussion: Bello and Dickson agreed that the request was reasonable. Based on the Q history of the Housing Authority's other complexes, it appears that the parking will be adequate at this facility. Dickson made a motion to approve appeal number 2631 for the following reasons: The granting of the variance would not be detrimental to the public good. The proposal as submitted will not diverge from the standards of the Land Use Code except in a nominal, inconsequential way when considered in the context of the neighborhood, and will continue to advance the purposes of the Land Use Code as contained in Section 1.2.2. The demographic of the individuals living in this complex is that most do not own multiple vehicles and the quantity of parking spaces should not be an issue. Bello seconded the motion. The motion was approved. Vote: Yeas: Bello, Daggett, Dickson, Hall, McBride, Pisula, Shands Nays: None 5. APPEAL NO. 2632 — Approved with condition Address: 1330 Maple Street Petitioner: Steve Whittall Zone: NCM Section: 4.8(E)(4) Background: The variance will reduce the required street side setback distance from the lot line along Wood Street from 15' to 5' for a proposed single family home and garage. The existing home and detached garage will be demolished. The property line along Wood Street is 17' from ZBA November 13, 2008— Page 5 the back of the walk and approximately 22' behind the curb, so the house will still be about 27' from the walk. Petitioner's Statement of Hardship: The property line is a considerable distance behind the walk and the curb. Newer developments have the lot line right at the inside edge of the sidewalk, so the proposed location of this house will be set back from the street about the same distance as a house in a new subdivision. Since the intent of the street side setback is to ensure that buildings aren't constructed too close to the street, the intent is satisfied in this situation even though this is not a new subdivision. Other homes in the neighborhood are located about the same distance from the sidewalk as this home would be, so it's a nominal, inconsequential deviation from the standard in the context of the neighborhood. Without a variance, the width of a new house would be limited to 15'. Staff Comments: None. Staff Presentation: Barnes presented slides relevant to the application. Barnes read a letter received from John Shaw, as follows: "In regards to the requested variance for reduced setback from the corner of the property on Maple and Wood Street, Creekwood Homes, LLC, and Wood Street Investments, owner and general contractor of the property to the north at 316 and 318 Wood Street, would like to support the variance for the applicant. However, we would also request that the rear yard setback for both new lots be a minimum of 15' from the north lot lines so that the new structures do not block the access, view or shade the home on the south side. The applicant has indicated they are in agreement with this stipulation. The applicant has also indicated that they are in the process of removing the structure at the rear of the property adjacent to the alley as it would fall into this setback and is in poor condition as well. Best regards, John Shaw." The applicant was granted a variance at last month's meeting to reduce the lot width requirement at this address to 35Y to put the lots back in their Lot 23 and Lot 24 original configuration. The house that is currently on those lots will be removed and a new house will be constructed on Lot 23. The code requires a 15' setback from the property line along the side street, which is Wood Street. The 5' on the east lot line and the 15' required on the west along Wood Street would only allow a 15.5' wide building envelope. The applicant is requesting a variance to reduce the required 15' setback along Wood Street to 5'. The applicant has stated there are other homes in the neighborhood with similar setbacks. By way of example, Barnes showed a slide of the house across that currently has a 22' setback from the street. The subject house would have a 27' setback from Wood Street. Other items stored on the property, including RVs, have been removed. Dickson asked if the normal rear yard setback with an alley would be 5'. Barnes responded that was correct. Barnes stated that this alley is only 10' wide instead of 20', so if the garage is accessed off the alley, a setback of more than 5' would probably be required so there is enough back-up space not to encroach on the property across the alley. Therefore, a 15' setback is a reasonable stipulation or condition. Barnes added that Eckman stated the board would only have jurisdiction over the 15' setback for Lot 23 since the variance is only being considered for that lot. Hall asked if the 50% lot area floor area ratio applies in the NCM zone. Barnes responded, yes. Bello asked about the sight distance triangle. Barnes stated that 15' or more back from the flow line (the curb), is outside of the sight distance triangle, so there is no problem. Applicant's Participation: Steve Whittall, 400 Whedbee Street, Fort Collins. Whittall stated that he has spent time at the property in the last month cleaning it up. In the process, he has had the opportunity to meet with the neighbors and answer many of their questions. He has received no ZBA November 13, 2008— Page 6 negative responses in regard to this request. Whittall stated that he is willing to record 15' rear setbacks on both of the lots. He also feels this setback request is nominal and inconsequential. Bello asked if Whittall was still willing to remove the garage. Whittall responded that he will do that just as soon as the historic preservation review is completed. Audience Participation: None. Board Discussion: Dickson stated that it was her opinion that the wide lot line setback is nominal and inconsequential in the context of the neighborhood. Bello added that Jeff Valloric had also emailed a message that he feels it is an asset to the Wood Street and Cherry Street area and is in favor of approving the variance. The subject letter is attached to these minutes. Dickson made a motion to approve Appeal number 2632 for the following reason: The granting of the variance would not be detrimental to the public good. The proposal as submitted will not diverge from the standards of the Land Use Code except in a nominal and inconsequential way when considered In the context of the neighborhood and will continue to advance the purposes of the Land Use Code as contained in Section 1.2.2. Specifically, there are other neighbors in the immediate area who have their houses set back the same amount or even less from the street, an example is the house across the street at only a 22' setback. At the 5' setback proposed instead of the 15' required, the house is going to be 27' away from Wood Street, which is considerable and will give the appearance of an adequate setback. A condition is added that no structures be built closer than 15' to the north lot line of Lot 23. The removal of the existing garage will occur at the same time as construction. Hall seconded the motion. The motion was approved. Q Vote: Yeas: Bello, Daggett, Dickson, Hall, McBride, Pisula, Shands Nays: None 6. APPEAL NO. 2633 - Tabled Address: 400 Jackson Avenue Petitioner: Joe Sullivan for Archer Homes, Inc. Zone: NCL Section: 4.7(Dx5), 4.7 (E)(3) Background: The variance will allow the rear 50% of the property to contain a Floor Area Ratio of .487 instead of the maximum .25 permitted. Specifically, 2,612 square feet of total building floor area would be allowed in the rear half of the lot instead of 1,342 square feet. Most of the existing home is already in the rear half of the lot (2,190 sq. ft. of the existing 2,476 sq. ft.). A 1,150 square foot, one-story garage and front entry/sunroom addition on the east and north side of the home is proposed, of which 422 square feet is located in the rear half of the lot. This additional 422 square feet requires a variance. The variance will also reduce the required rear yard setback along the south lot line from 15' to 9.25'. The front orientation of the existing home will be changed from Jackson Avenue to West Magnolia, which means that the rear half of the lot will now be the south half, and the south lot line will now be considered to be the rear lot line, which requires a 15' setback. The existing house is 9.25' from the south lot line and the new construction will comply with all setback regulations from the rear and side lot lines. ZBA November 13, 2008— Page 7 Petitioner's Statement of Hardship: An addition is proposed onto the north side of the existing house. The addition will consist of a living area, covered front porch and an attached garage. This addition will change the location of the front entry from Jackson Avenue to Magnolia. Most of the existing home is already in the rear 50% of the lot (south). One bay of the garage addition will be in the front half of the lot, but the rest of the garage will be in the rear half. The proposal satisfies the purpose of the standard equally well as does a proposal which complies. Specifically, a one - car garage with an attached carport can be constructed in the same location and building footprint as proposed without a variance since an open carport doesn't count as floor area. However, cars, bikes, mowers, etc. , stored under the carport roof will be visible to the neighbors whereas an enclosed garage will allow for indoor storage of these items. Staff Comments: The applicant requested a Floor Area Ratio and setback variance in June, but was denied by the Board. He is submitting a revised proposal for consideration. Staff Presentation: Barnes presented slides relevant to the application. A few months ago, the applicant requested a variance to reduce the side yard setback along the east lot line and floor area ratio for increasing the floor area on the rear half of the lot. The Zoning Board of Appeals denied that request and the applicant is back before the board with a somewhat different proposal. Barnes proceeded to read an email into the minutes which was received late November 12"'. Peter, I regret that I cannot attend the 400 Jackson variance meeting tomorrow. I am not in favor of granting the variance. I have attended and spoken at the previous variance meetings, and I continue to believe any variance in unwarranted. After the original lot was subdivided three ways, the position of the original house on today's lot makes any significant expansion to the east or south unworkable. This is why Archer Homes continues to push for variances, attempting to shoehorn additions into the lot. I cannot support this because the result will not be appealing. It will be packed up against the house to the east. The result will be completely out of character with the neighborhood. The only aesthetically workable solution from my point of view is to deconstruct and build a new house appropriately positioned near the center of the lot. As I discussed in the last variance meeting, we have codes and rules to protect the look and feel of our neighborhoods. Granting a variance would make the neighbors pay the price for the lack of planning on the developer's part. Regards, Jim Brokish." Barnes stated that Mr. Brokish lives in the house directly north on the comer of Jackson and Magnolia. A lot line adjustment was done on this property some time ago. This can be accomplished without a replat as long as a new lot is not being created. The property was originally platted as three lots and after the lot line adjustment, there are three lots. Houses have been constructed on two of the lots. The applicant is proposing to reorient the front of the existing house so that it faces Magnolia. A portion of the proposed garage addition is in the rear half of the lot. About 5' of the existing home is in the front half of the lot once the lot orientation is changed. The remaining portion of the existing home is in the rear 50% of the lot and 422 square feet of the new floor area proposed will be in the rear half of the lot and will increase the degree of nonconformity that we already have. The proposed addition is one story, and the garage addition would come to within 51" of the side lot line. Dickson asked if there was a requirement that the new garage be set back 10' from the house. Barnes responded that the code requires the new garage be set back 10' from the front portion of the building and the proposed garage does comply. Questions were asked about the size of the existing house and the addition. Barnes stated that the existing floor area is 2,476 square feet, and the addition including the sun room, entry area, closet, bathroom and garage is 1,150 square feet. Bello asked about city forestry's involvement in the removal of mature trees. Barnes stated forestry will only get involved if there is redevelopment with a different use. Bello asked about the major differences between the previous variance request and this request. Barnes responded that ZBA November 13, 2008— Page 8 the rear lot floor area ratio for the previous request was .66 as opposed to .487 with this request. 1^'1 The other item in the previous request was to reduce the rear setback (the east lot line at that time) 4 from 15' to 54" to accommodate new construction of a two story addition. Applicant's Participation: Joe Sullivan, 4020 Bingham Hill Road. Sullivan's company is Archer Homes. Sullivan stated that the 50% rear floor area ratio was established within months of their original lot line adjustments so he didn't foresee that being an issue at the time of the lot line adjustments. He felt the original proposal was best because it would not compromise the existing trees. Although he knows the neighbors would like to see the house torn down, it does go against sustainable practices, and he has not had a buyer want to tear that house down. Sullivan stated that economically it is not possible for him to tear it down and build a new house and expect to cover the costs. Bello suggested that the garage be a two car garage facing Magnolia instead of a 3 car as proposed, which would result in a much smaller amount of square footage then is currently proposed. This would also allow for a setback further away from the side. There was further discussion regarding Bello's suggested changes to the design. Bello stated that he would like to see support from the neighbors. Sullivan said the neighbors have stated they won't accept anything less than tearing the house down. Dickson asked about historic preservation. Sullivan stated the historic review has been completed and the house did not receive a historic preservation designation. Audience Participation: Dan Epstein, the current homeowner at the property due east of the subject property. Epstein said it is not a fair statement that they won't accept anything other than the demolition of the current house. He feels they have attempted to diligently discuss opportunities that might minimize the impact to the east boundary with Mr. Sullivan. His key points are that when they purchased their lot, they reviewed drawings showing the 400 Jackson property being centered more to the west towards Jackson and centered on the lot. Secondly, he feels that Mr. Sullivan has self -designed the problem while reaping the benefits from the other two projects. He also feels that this request does not meet any of the criteria; i.e., it does not promote the standard equally well or better, and this request is not nominal and inconsequential. Epstein stated that from an environmental perspective, his house was Colorado's first LEED house. They built within current zoning requirements and designed a project that fit in both aesthetically and with the ethic of the old town City Park neighborhood. It is he and his wife's opinion that there are workable solutions with smaller impacts or that relocate the bulk of the project to the west. They feel they would not oppose a project that meets some of the above criteria. McBride stated that he feels the current variance request is worse than the first one in terms of the impact on the neighbors. With the first variance request, the rear setback adjacent to the neighbor's house was 15'—now it is 5'. Barnes stated that at the time the applicant started working on the lot line adjustments, there weren't any floor area ratio requirements for the back half. So, the code changes made the house noncompliant and any time the degree of nonconformity is increased, a variance is required. Board Discussion: McBride stated that he felt Bello's suggestions illustrated that there are other solutions for the owner to pursue, and he would like to see the applicant come back with a redesign. Hall stated he could not support the current proposal and suggested a one car garage with additional storage. There was discussion regarding the pros and cons of tabling the current variance request versus making a decision today. Barnes stated that if the request is denied and the applicant has to re- ZBA November 13, 2008— Page 9 7. apply, the fees would have to be paid again. The applicant requested that the appeal be tabled. Dickson asked about requirements for appeal notification. Barnes stated that the code requires that neighbors be notified at least seven days in advance of the Zoning Board of Appeals meeting, and are informed they can contact the zoning office for more information. Sullivan asked if the neighbors reached agreement about the design, would the board approve the appeal. Hall responded that it would be necessary to go through the entire decision -making process with the board. Bello reiterated that having the neighbors' approval certain helps with the approval process. Shands commended Mr. Sullivan for his perseverance. Dickson reiterated the board cannot consider economics in the decision -making process. Hall made a motion a table Appeal 2633 to the December 11, 2008 meeting. Bello seconded the motion. Appeal No. 2633 was tabled until the December 2008 meeting. Vote: Yeas: Bello, Daggett, Dickson, Hall, McBride, Pisula, Shands Nays: None Other Business: None. Meeting adjourned at 10:18 a.m. -- Wight Hall, C aiTpperson Peter Barnes, Zoning Administrator