HomeMy WebLinkAbout600 E Swallow Rd - Appeal/Zoning - 05/08/1986CITY OF FORT COLLINS NO 734
ZONING DEPARTMENT
APPEAL FOR MODIFICATION OF ZONING ORDINANCE TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
Address all communications to Zoning Administrator, Building Inspection Department.
Meeting Date:
Petitions must be on file at the office of the Board of Appeals,
two weeks before meeting date.
Petitioner must be present at meeting.
All variance permits shall be valid for a period of time not to exceed six (6)
months from the time such variance is granted.
Address of Job: 6GV J�. 4WVJA " Legal Description:
Between Cross Streets: -ty_ and �,
Owner: TAV C j� ",,th ce �elLu �r� jkL&,,, j9eu, Petitioner: �-dr.Utr°
�ia� .
Petitioner is: Owner Contractor Architect Other -O
Address of Petitioner: i/' Gj-.-tq (GSSJ
No. lu Street City Zip Phone No.
Status of Job: Not Started Under Construction Finished
Spec Fic ordinance modification desired: ((f5- 41 Orr-) /IT-`1! (F�
kk le4x� M_ &--L
l - ea mil. 9 t.�Q a t �. e� �e •+ .
,►�e�= C► r. a.s . fee C' c .�. ee �irn ce AjG;Le_?,4-2V
Q •(L LBVS Vtu`CC+� if C^ C /z;
State why it is not practicable to comply with the ordinance: ,,&-k-. ku,, o- ,
'tl�t ���;r_ Wes" �^try�z.i der L'E C,yror
�.c-'t�t./� �i!'l..►'�, _ / apt pp' � �" `-V llP'G�-CI�L(.�t� Cr'ZL- {A�i"..f-L"t:.lL'L'1,�� n �T ,.
°,c v���1� f�:ec . �e-�/J urye� �e� -QcK ��} e t C...e.
"
1. f-L r.n _jo. .tip XfiPvl14?t Xa�'(, I��S`�2. Yit'.C..}K.L-.r +,.-[�' :Y�-i�v21+4P �•V'LCX �U7�1'�Z'Ctn
I- l tltY0- bl'A V4 d.A CC"
Date [ — a 3- �4 Petitioner
Signature
A 11, q
TO: Mr. Peter Barnes, Zoning Administrator
Office of Building Inspection
City of Fort Collins, Colorado
FROM: Robert & Sharon Bren
2913 Southmoor Drive
Fort Collins, Colorado 80525
REGARDING: Request for modification of Zoning Code, Appeal No. 1734.
We are the owners of the property adjacent to the church at 600 East Swallow and feel we are in
somewhat of a no -win situation. Since neither my wife nor I will be able to make it to the hearing
on May 8, we are submitting this letter stating our position and comments. One of the truly valuable
aspects of our property is the beautiful unobstructed view of Longs Peak and we feel that the storage
building would greatly unenhance this view and reduce the saleable value of our property.
However, we are not ones to stand in the way of the church's ground improvements.
The reason I feel in a no -win situation is that if the variance is allowed to 6 feet, the building will be
closer to my lot line and more imposing. However, if the variance is not allowed, the building will
directly in front of our view of Longs Peak, especially with the 25' setback from the north lot line.
So with that in mind, we will agree to the 6' setback variance provided that the setback is allowed
both directions, on the east and north. If the north setback remains at 25', then I would protest a
variance to the east from the 15' required.
Mr. Gebhardt has shown the plans of the building to us and it does seem attractive and planned well.
It was indicated on the plans that the height of the building at the peak of the roof is 12 feet and the
only other request that I have is that the height is 12' from ground (pavement) level. I do not recall
the plans well enough to know if the building foundation would be elevated any from the pavement
level.
I would ask that, since I am unable to attend this hearing , that the city will inform us of the zoning
board decision as soon as possible.
Thank you for your consideration.
FY �