Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/24/2009♦~A( City of' Wheat 1jdge BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AGENDA September 24, 2009 Notice is hereby given of a public meeting to be held before the City of Wheat Ridge Board of Adjustment on September 24, 2009, at 7:00 p.m., in the City Council Chambers of the Municipal Building, 7500 W. 29`h Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado. Individuals with disabilities are encouraged to participate in all public meetings sponsored by the City of Wheat Ridge. Call Heather Geyer, Public Information Officer at 303-235-2826 at least one week in advance of a meeting if you are interested in participating and need inclusion assistance. 1. CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER 2. ROLL CALL 3. PUBLIC FORUM (This is the time for anyone to speak on any subject not appearing on the agenda.) 4. PUBLIC HEARING A. Case No. WA-09-09: An application filed by Swiss Valley, LLC, for approval of a variance to Section 26-412.D.2 of the Subdivision Regulations to allow a new two-family residence at 6701 West 48th Avenue to have domestic water service from a well. B. Case No. WF-09-08: An application filed by Swiss Valley, LLC, for approval of a Class II special exception permit to allow construction of a two-family residence in the 100 year flood plain on property located at 6701 West 48th Avenue. 5. CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING 6. OLD BUSINESS 7. NEW BUSINESS A. Approval of minutes - July 23, 2009 8. ADJOURNMENT City of Wh6atP4j_dgc CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE PLANNING DIVISION STAFF REPORT TO: Board of Adjustment CASE MANAGER: CASE NO. & NAME DATE: September 24, 2009 Meredith Reckert WA-09-09/Swiss Valley ACTION REQUESTED: Approval of a variance to Section 26-412.D.2. of the Subdivision Regulations to allow domestic water service by a well on property zoned Residential-Two (R-2) located at 6701 W. 48th Avenue LOCATION OF REQUEST APPLICANT/OWNER: APPROXIMATE AREA: 6701 W. 48th Avenue Kevin Larson for Swiss Valley, LLC 22,760 s.f. PRESENT ZONING: Residential-Two (R-2) PRESENT LAND USE: Vacant ENTER INTO RECORD: Site r -29 _.i W21 Feu bees 1 FF ~ i.1. Case No. WA-09 [[-N 109/Swiss valley 1 (X) CASE FILE & PACKET MATERIALS (X) ZONING ORDINANCE (X) DIGITAL PRESENTATION JURISDICTION: All notification and posting requirements have been met; therefore, there is jurisdiction to hear this case. 1. REQUEST The applicant is requesting approval of a variance to Section 26-412.D.2. of the Subdivision Regulations to allow domestic water service by a well on property zoned Residential-Two (R-2) located at 6701 W. 48th Avenue The purpose of the variance is to allow construction of a two family residence without public water service. II. CASE ANALYSIS Property description The property owners own four parcels of land located between the ridge of W. 48th Avenue and the right-of-way for I-70 and its southern frontage road. Access to the properties is from the southern I-70 frontage road via W. 48t' Avenue. These properties are addressed to W. 48th Avenue due to the frontage road access off 48th Avenue at approximately Pierce Street extended. The eastern-most parcel is zoned C-1, Commercial-One, and has on it an architectural design firm. Prior to the current owners purchasing the property, it was a social hall known as the Swiss Society. The remainder of the parcels are zoned R-2, Residential-Two, and are currently vacant except for parking for the commercial business. The use of the residential property for commercial parking is legally nonconforming and may remain regardless if a new residential structure is built. (Exhibit 1, property survey) Previously there had been a single family residence located on the R-2 property which burned down in 2008. (Exhibit 2, aerial photo) The property owners would like to build a duplex on the residentially zoned property at roughly the same location. Pursuant to the Section 26-412.D.2. of the Subdivision Regulations, "all lots shall be served by public water and sanitary sewer through the appropriate district". It is the intent of this application to allow the new residential structure to have domestic water service from an existing well on the property. The former house had domestic service from this well, as does the commercial structure. A copy of the existing well permit was submitted to the city as evidence. The closest available water line is located in the right-of-way for West 48th Avenue on the top of the bluff. In order to tap into the main line, almost 900' of line extension would be required which would be cost prohibitive. Surrounding properties to the east and south are single family dwellings zoned R-2. The adjacent land use to the north is CDOT right-of-way with the frontage road which gives Case No. WA-09-091Swiss valley 2 access to the property. I-70 is just beyond to the north of the frontage road. Land to the west is the trailhead for the Clear Creek greenbelt and trail. Sanitary sewer service using a "pump" system provides sanitation service to the commercial structure and will also be utilized for the proposed residence. Agency referral An agency referral was given to the Wheat Ridge Water District. The district manager indicated that the district has no problem with the use of wells as long as it is determined that the water is potable. He suggested that if the variance is approved, a condition be placed requiring potability testing prior to issuance of a building permit. III. VARIANCE CRITERIA Staff has the following criteria to evaluate variance requests and shall determine that the majority of the "criteria for review" listed in Section 26-115.C.4 of the City Code have been met. The applicant has provided their analysis of the applications compliance with the variance criteria (Exhibit 3, applicant responses). Staff provides the following review and analysis of the variance criteria. 1. The property in question would not yield a reasonable return in use, service or income if permitted to be used only under the conditions allowed by regulation for the district in which it is located. If the request were denied, a new residential structure could not be constructed on the property. While there are numerous residential structures serviced by wells in the city, no new construction would be allowed without public water service unless a variance is granted. Staff finds this criterion has been met. 2. The variance would not alter the essential character of the locality. If the request were granted, it would not alter the character of the area. There was a residence on the property before, and although the applicant is proposing a two- family dwelling, the conditions will essentially be the same. Adjacent land uses include a commercial structure to the east, the Clear Creek greenbelt trail and parking area to the west and the back yards of the residential structures along W. 48th Avenue. There is an approximate 50' grade change between the subject property and the adjacent homes. Staff finds this criterion has been met. Case No. WA-09-09/Swiss valley 3 3. The applicant is proposing a substantial investment in the property with this application, which would not be possible without the variance. The applicant is proposing a substantial investment in the property that would not be possible without use of the well. It would be cost prohibitive to extend a water line 900' for service to the property. Staff finds this criterion has been met 4. The particular physical surrounding, shape or topographical condition of the specific property involved results in a particular and unique hardship (upon the owner) as distinguished from a mere inconvenience if the strict letter of the regulations were carried out. The location of the property and the topography of the area have created a unique hardship for the applicant. Staff finds this criterion has been met. 5. The alleged difficulty or hardship has not been created by any person presently having an interest in the property. A person who has interest in the property has created the hardship by wanting to rebuild the residential structure. Staff finds this criterion has not been met. 6. The granting of the variance would not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other property or improvements in the neighborhood in which the property is located, by, among other things, substantially or permanently impairing the appropriate use or development of adjacent property, impairing the adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property, substantially increasing the congestion in public streets or increasing the danger of fire or endangering the public safety, or substantially diminishing or impairing property values within the neighborhood. Staff concludes that the request would not be detrimental to public welfare and would not be injurious to neighboring property or improvements as long as the well water is potable. The variance would not hinder or impair the development of the adjacent property. The adequate supply of air and light would not be compromised as a result of this request. The request would not increase the congestion in the streets. The request will most likely not have an effect on property values in the neighborhood. Staff finds this criterion has been met. Case No. WA-09-09/Swiss valley 4 7. The unusual circumstances or conditions necessitating the variance request are present in the neighborhood and are not unique to the property. There are numerous residential properties in the city that have domestic water service from wells. While it would be possible to build additions to those residences, no new structures would be allowed without public water availability unless a variance is granted. To Staff's knowledge this is the first variance requested for relief from this portion of the Subdivision Regulations. Staff finds this criterion has been met. 8. Granting of the variance would result in a reasonable accommodation of a person with disabilities. Single and two family are not required to meet building codes pertaining to the accommodation of persons with disabilities. Staff finds this criterion is not applicable. 9. The application is in substantial compliance with the applicable standards set forth in the Architectural and Site Design Manual. The Architectural and Site Design Manual does not apply to single and two family dwellings. Staff finds this criterion is not applicable. IV. STAFF CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Having found the application in compliance with the majority of the applicable review criteria, staff recommends approval of the variance to Section 26-412.D.2. of the Subdivision Regulations to allow domestic water service by a well on property zoned Residential-Two (R-2) located at 6701 W. 48"' Avenue. Staff has found there are unique circumstances attributed to this request that warrant approval of the variance. Therefore, staff recommends APPROVAL for the following reasons: 1. There are unique circumstances due to the property location and topography of the area. 2. The variance will not alter the character of the neighborhood. 3. It would result in a substantial investment in the property. 3. The request would not be detrimental to public welfare as long as testing occurs to verify potability. With the following conditions: Case No. WA-09-09/Swiss Valley 5 I. Prior to issuance of a building permit for the new residence, evidence of water potability be provided and reviewed by the City. 2. Prior to issuance of C.O. for the structure, a consolidation plat be recorded with Jefferson County Clerk and RecorOder's Office. Case No. Wig-09-09/.Swiss Valley 6 b G ~ Y n Ff ` - ro q ' zv ~ d _ P ;i s ~ - 3s S s5i - u .+rt tt< Y i J } rr ~ ~i?4i . x ~ ! < S ~ i l~V ~ i ~ . 6rI 1 4~, •fi I 9 r. C,~ fry . ~ s I _r w lam, v ` S N ti t\I Case No. WA-09-09/Swiss Valley 8 Swiss Property Well Variance Submittal The subject property is remotely located adjacent to the 1-70 Highway. The current parcel has both C-1 Zoning for the commercial business and R-2 Zoning for the residential use. The original property had a single family home located basically in the same location that the proposed new structure would be located. The entire property has been served by an existing well for over 20 years. The information available on the well from the County has been provided to the City for review. Addressing Item #4 Criteria for review we would submit the following: 4a. The nearest water line connection to the site is located over 900' way from the property- The cost for installing this line would be equal to the total proposed improvements that have been planned for the property. Basically without the use of the well for the property no new improvements Would occur on the site. 4b. By allowing this variance there is be no impact on the "essential character of the locality'. 4c. The proposed duplex structure would be a substantial investment in the property, without the variance the development will riot occur, 4d. The subject property is uniquely located in the city of Wheat Ridge. The site sits ~ over 50' below 48" Ave to the South. The grades on the South side of the property will ~ not allow connecting into the water main located in 48" Ave. without extending the water line up the service road to the East. The distance to the waterline connection is over 900' away. This is not an inconvenience; it is a financial barrier which would stop any future development on the site. 4e. The difficulty associated with domestic water to the site has always been an issue with the site, from its early development in the 1970's. The current commercial office building utilizes the local well for water. 4f, Granting this variance would have no temporary or permanent impact on adjacent properties. The well is located on the property and would not be modified. 4g. Any additional development that would occur near this property would have the same issues with domestic water in that the tie to the existing city water lines would be cost prohibitive. 4h. Granting of the variance would result in a reasonable accommodation of a person with disabilities. 4i. The application is in substantial compliance with the applicable standards set forth in the Architectural and Site Design Manual City of Wh6atPs,,ibdge CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE PLANNING DIVISION STAFF REPORT TO: Board of Adjustment DATE: September 17, 2009 CASE MANAGER: Adam Tietz CASE NO. & NAME: WF-09-08/Swiss Valley ACTION REQUESTED: Approval of a Class II Floodplain Exception Permit to allow the construction of a two family dwelling unit on property zoned R- 2. LOCATION OF REQUEST: 6995 West 48°i Avenue APPLICANT (S): Kevin Larson OWNER (S): Swiss Valley, LLC. APPROXIMATE AREA: 56,061.2 square feet (1.29 acres) PRESENT ZONING: Residential-Two (R-2) COMP PLAN LAND USE: Single Family Detached (not to exceed 4 units per acre) (SF4) ENTER INTO RECORD: (X) CASE FILE & PACKET MATERIALS (X) DIGITAL PRESENTATION (X) ZONING ORDINANCE Location Map Site Case No. WF-09-08/Swiss Valley I JURISDICTION: All notification and posting requirements have been met; therefore, there is jurisdiction to hear this case. 1. REQUEST The property in question is located at 6995 W. 481h Avenue, is zoned R-2 and encompasses several parcels. Combined the parcels make up just over an acre of land with 56,061 square feet. (Exhibit 1, Property Survey) The applicant is requesting a Class II Floodplain exception permit to allow for the construction of an attached two-family dwelling unit. (Exhibits 2, Letter of request) The property currently has an office building that is used an architecture office while the rest remains vacant. A single family home was located on the property as well until it burned down in 2008. The portion of the property where the duplex is proposed is located within the Clear Creek 100 year floodplain. (Exhibit 3, Floodplain map, Exhibit 4, Aerial photo with floodplain overlay) A separate variance is being processed in conjunction with this request to allow the duplex to be served by well water. Section 26-808(D) (Floodplain Control) of the Wheat Ridge City Code empowers the Board of Adjustment to hear and decide appeals of Class I special exemption permits which have been denied by the floodplain administrator and requests for Class II special exemption permits as provided within these regulations. II. CASE ANLVSIS The Wheat Ridge Code of Laws states that in order for any "habitable structure" to be constructed in the 100 year floodplain, a flood plain permit must be obtained. Specifically Sec. 26-808(D) states that any new construction of any residential structure for human occupancy within the floodplain must obtain a Class II Floodplain Exception Permit. As a part of the application for a Class II Floodplain Exception Permit, plans certified by an engineer must be submitted to the floodplain administrator that show the lowest floor will be elevated at least one foot above the base flood elevation. The applicant has submitted all the required information which included a floodplain study and analysis. Upon analysis of the floodplain report the floodplain administrator does support the findings. (Exhibit 5, Memo from Floodplain Administrator) The required drainage report was prepared by a registered engineer, which does indicate the lowest floor of the duplex will be at least one foot above the base flood elevation of 5,300.35 feet. (Exhibit 6, Flood study conclusions) The study also indicates that the proposed construction will not cause the flood water levels to increase in the area; that the damage to the duplex caused by flooding on the property will be minimized; and the utilities on site will be protected from flooding. Case No. WF-09-08/Swiss Valley 2 There are currently two separate parcels which encompass proposed footprint of the duplex. The applicant will have to consolidate these parcels prior to a Certificate of Occupancy being issued, if the floodplain permit is approved. Consolidation plats can be approved administratively without a public hearing. III. STAFF CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Upon review of the above request, staff concludes that the two-family dwelling unit as proposed will not have a negative impact on the 100 year floodplain. Therefore, staff recommends APPROVAL for the following reasons: 1. The proposed construction will not result in raising the flood water height in the area. 2. The damage due to floods will be minimized. 3. The utilities will be installed in a manner that will be protected from flood damage. 4. The floodplain administrator has reviewed and supports the findings of the floodplain analysis. With the following conditions: 1. The lowest floor elevation of the proposed duplex must be constructed 1 foot above the base flood level of 5,300.35 feet. 2. The elevation must be verified by an elevation survey after the foundation has been poured, prior to other construction commencing. A lot consolidation plat must be approved prior to the issuance of Certificate of Occupancy Case No. WF-09-08/Swiss Valley o a - z- - i <aw s v Y: a id ~i ~ x ~ I I r' •.....x+.- n:.F :.ar. n iq Y y > , I ' 4 r ~ i a r ~ ~ Q H ' 4 x r• ~ {3~5 ~ , n f f 5` 5 h /~JJJ _ 4 `+A 5i• 1rrgS~CSS~ '~C ~r / 5_- 'i :i. e5 ~P I F I' i i~ ro.r "S:r. ti -lz tectonic CArchitecture onn M1fdnd4ement ,1 .171* rt r! i ji 1 I GenerO COatrdOnO 4695'Nest 48th Areaue Wh[•at ROp (0 80033 303.403.1128 September 2, 00 Meredith Reckert AICP City of'W'heat Ridge 750() W. ?9r" Aye. Wheat Ridi.1c, CO 800' 3-8001 Rl•:: Swiss Valley I.LC Request for Variance 6695, W. 48°i Avc. Building in a Flood Plain Dear Meredith. We appreciate the opportunity to submit this Request for Variance for the above referenced property. Our intent is to receive a variance on the property to allow the construction of a new. duplex apartment to be built in an existin., flood planl area, I hider Section '6-11 Variances, itch we submit the following: a. A copy of the Special Warranty Deed is attached along with a lax Statement b. No Power of Attorney is provided in That the Applicant is the Owner C. A copy of the Property Survey is included. d. Fnctosed is some additional information 16r your review in the package from I I V S Engineering. c. A proposed Site Plan has been provided for rt`ViCw indicatim, the proposed new structure and the cxistim well Inc;ltion. 1. Architectural Elevations have not been provided due to the nature of the variance. g. A Posting Certificate will be submittal at the hearing to the clerk. h. Other infilnmttiow. it. The Swiss Valley Property is a unique piece of land. The original single family residence Svgs destroyed by an arsonist in late -1008. With the revisions to the flood plain maps from the city the property now has an area that occurs in the (loud plain. Please see the attached Flood Plain Analysis for reasons to allow the construction of a nev% bitilding in the flood plain. Kevin Larson k N Case No. WF-09-08/Swiss Valley 17 ,0 i I I I I I 1 ,I ~.:I, ~ tat ,I ~ liI I , , ~T• I I I I I 1 ~ I I I I I, I~ 1 I I ~ r, . 11 I I 11 -71 i I ~.~,I I I• I i X I,I 2 I ' Q l r ` J cc cc I sue,'/ 1 t,i >14 f tl ~ .`ty I. I ~ I I « II ,I ~ ~ 1 ' I I 1 I I 1 111 r I .T; r 1 I f y! ~ I I I I I, I w m- 1 F I, ' III. I \ ~ ~ Ill . •~w/~nf tl t•~~, I~. ' ~ 5 NOT ~I a I II Y" I I n ~ f $ Y c v < • e o wa a ~ ~ U v f U FQ- f~~1+1 + , 'ty v' 4 D :c ~ 5 1 7 Q. Q y ,4 > q r s C r Q 6~ M a - ' LL >_Rz i ' , - d v V' frl I ~ W p ~ p ^~I o" > y ~ U t f 'r I~r ~ I 1 Y µ cd 9 O z U Exhibit 4 F I, ~ ft@c. . ~S Z R. Case No. WF-09-08/Swiss Valley 7 ( ilk tai `1`I heat j is tic Memorandum '10: 1credi11l RcC:k rl. Scniol- P1,lnllcr FROM: hill Paranto, Director ot'PuMic \ orks DATE: September [4. 2009 SUBJECT: C,isc No. W1:-(t(}-M,:' S',%i,S Va[IC, Ail application I(lr a 1' (x)d Plaill Ue\'elopnlclll PCr1111, Ilas becil recelved Coll cernlng, C011SIt-LICtioll -11 of a Illt.11 6 4-111111 1' 1'C l(lClltlal propet-IN ' it C 601 4,Si A%cmLic. 1110 bi-1;I(II11 ' SIt< I - Itl 1110 U1i.11' Creek aoo(Iplain. I ID'S I':nglile(;rin.. has peV61-mcd h}'(Iratliic analy i, and prepared <s report tutee Septonnhet' 1( 09. pEle report indWatt- that the ;lroposc'(I 1111111 ino -wc 1:,; IoCate(= In ( lear C•rcck ;1o+?dp;It in b,lckw,,IIM IWS Iuls determined that depositI]IU till <tt t11e site for a bui[din11 Iwd ill not inlp,ld Ills Ilok)(kSumo) t1ood clc%,Iz: lIs of properties AbOW Of IWILM Ilk- S\\ is ,Ilicv site alou Clear ('rock. 1311sc(I upon the I JVS rcpt?rt. I Ctut su1)p01-1 a C l,us ]l Special Exception ['crnli[ li?r 1ir111tcd site tall and C011struCti0r1 0C,1 xuldin-,, it the S\t'iss VallcN property location idcl;[iiic(3 b\ IIVS I'.n! IIICI'i'In_ 1111 Ills= 1011(1\1 III,' Colld.I1011S: 13u1[dtn` pl; ns 011d a site pId111 ha\c not hccn pri'pared tier the pl'opu.:ed ne\\ huil(iin" at ill:5 The plan-, must re\•ie\ ed t(? ir~ure Cull)JIi,111Ce with the [ loodplain C ollilltll t)r(IiltMIX, The IILIII(i11111' 11001' Clc\dltioll I11L(11 1.1i' ill 01 a11OW 5'-01.5+1 Ic'e[. heal 1tld'-'c: I'll) PCl'llllt I;ll:sl .'1C 0[l1ala('(1 [11';(>I' to Conil11CllCCI17C111 01 1\(?1'k. 4. As li[I is proposed it; a portion (?Ct11C 1100(iphill' \+Itltin lhC C'it\ ol':\r\ada, a Fl(u)d [".airl Pcl'mll 111LI,t bC 0111;1il:Cd I'-onl the Cit\ o' Arvada, il-applicab[c. 5. W;Itcr and siulltarsc\\'C," selTices I11113t be Identifficd and not -~LtbICL:, to 11tk>(;Ul,7 1 11 6. 1lle dorw-~tlc',\',.Wr dl Slumn ,1([!;lct'llt to the propowd Ilew buddlllb! lutist be \,kaler- nroofed ill : TL llim acck:ptA)1e it, tilt: Cits A re,-istcrcd profession:)) enu.illecr slt 11 ccrtif\ that the huildiu" 101111ddtiOil ::OIISlrUctwn torrtls arc set ,It c1C\ations iu C(?nti,iluall(c ith tilt bUildim- lllan;- S. A re-istercd proIcs'simml englilcer s11:111 ccrlil"y that the Iowcst bt111d111l1 tloor cie\at ion is ,it or abo\ e 01 , 1 h'Ct its iooll as p0 sih1e Iollo lilts i mi,;tructlon (1t the Io\\'l'.ii huddirw 411001'. This CCi'llllCZ16011 a1a11 OCCL11' (3Lna1'1 Collstrt:Ctl(?t1 10 n15LIV 1I)0dit1C.,1[t0ll of thc M Idin;. p anW% aoul(I file lu\\'cst bttilclin 11001' t)C initi,dIV ~Oll-sIFUCLCd a1 an UI1aCCCptllllle As al\ea\.. I and a\ ail:,hle to clacass this nlsttet al aour cot) cniellce. In v„ ~-D w Case No. WF-09-08/Swiss Valley 8 CONCLUSIONS AND RLCOMMI?NDA7IONS The Swiss Valley property located at 6695 West 48"' Avenue is in the Cits of Wheat Ridge, except for the northwest corner of the property, which is located in the City of Arvada. The property is located in Zone X Oil the FLMA FIRM, indicating that property is outside Ilse 100- year floodplain. Howcver, most of the property is located within the 100-year floodplain in the 2007 FI IAD, which was adopted by tlac City of Wheat Ridge for regulating the 100-year flood plain. The entire property is located outside the floodway as defined in the 2007 FHAD, Plaiting fill on the portion of the Swiss Valley property that is within Wheat Ridge will have no etlcct on either the FIRM defined or 2007 defined I00-year floodplain. Thus this study finds that the proposal construction, as shoe+n on the accompanying site drawing will: 1. not increase flood heights in the area. 2. ininimizc flood damage and protect utilities, and 3, result in the lowest floor elevation of the ne~~ bttilding being over I' above the base 0 00 Year) flood level of j300.35. ^-1z Case No. WF-09-08/Swiss Valley 9 11( 1, City of W heat 1jdge BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT Minutes of Meeting July 23, 2009 1. 2 CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER The regular meeting of the Wheat Ridge Board of Adjustmf by Vice Chair HOVLAND at 7:00 F.m. in the City Council Municipal Building, 7500 West 29" Avenue, Wheat Ridge, ROLL CALL Board Members Present: Tom Abbott Janet Bell Bob Blair Ryan Fisher Paul Hovland Betty Jo Page Bob Howard, Alternate Board Members Absent: Staff Members Present: 3. PUBLIC FORUM , No one wished to 4. PUBLIC Alan Bucknam Larry Linker was called to order ambers of the Meredith Reckert, Senior Planner Ann Lazzeri, Secretary the Board at this time. A. Case No. WA-09-04 (continued from June 25, 2009: An application filed by Robert Sherman for approval of up to a 10-foot side yard setback variance from the 15-foot side yard setback requirement resulting in a 5- foot side yard setback on property zoned Residential One and located at 3305 Moore Street. The case was presented by Meredith Reckert. She entered all pertinent documents into the record and advised the Board there was jurisdiction to hear the case. She reviewed the staff report and digital presentation. The applicant Board of Adjustment Minutes July 23, 2009 received three letters of support from neighbors. Staff recommended approval for reasons outlined in the staff report. Robert Sherman, the applicant, was sworn in by Vice Chair HOVLAND. He stated the house was built in 1927 and added on to several times. If the variance is granted, he plans to build an addition to accommodate a large walk-in closet. The structure, being an old farmhouse, has very small closets. He stated the addition would match the house's building materials and roof line. In response to a question from Board Member BELL, Mr. Sherman stated that he would replace the large cedar tree demolished by the recent storm with a fast- growing type of tree. The tree had provided some screening from the adjacent property. Board Member HOVLAND commented that the addition would be secluded and there have been no objections from the neighbors who would be most affected by the addition. Board Member BELL comment closet in this particular old farm Vice Chair HO response, he cli Upon a me BELL, the Whereas, Board o-. to the Board from Whereas, in recouni asked to Member she could understand the need for a larger of the public. Hearing no and second by Board Member denied permission by an administrative officer; justment application Case No. WA-09-04 is an appeal decision of an administrative officer; and -rty has been posted the fifteen days required by law and there were no protests registered against it; and Whereas, the relief applied for may be granted without detriment to the public welfare and without substantially impairing the intent and purpose of the regulations governing the City of Wheat Ridge. Now, therefore, be it resolved that Board of Adjustment application Case No. WA-09-04 be, and hereby is APPROVED. For the following reasons: Board of Adjustment Minutes -2- July 23, 2009 1. The variance would not alter the essential character of the locality. 2. The applicant is proposing a substantial investment in the property that may not be possible without the variance. 3. The request would not be detrimental to public welfare and would not be injurious to neighboring properties or improvements. 4. The conditions necessitating the variance request are present in the neighborhood and are not unique to the subject property. 5. The addition is over fifty percent west of the mid-line of the existing structure. 6. A letter of approval has been submitted by the neighbor immediately to the south. % With the following conditions: = 1. The addition must follow existing architectural design of the affected side of the existinu house. 2. Upright landscaping material or other types of material shall be used to provide reasonable screening of this addition from the view of the street. 3. As the request is for up to ten feet, the Board requests the applicant and staff to work on reducing the variance to less than ten feet. Board Member HOWARD offered a friendly amendment to state that the addition cannot be built closer than five feet from the lot line. The amendment was BOTT and BELL. ber HOWARD voting no. Case No. WA-09-05: An application filed by Catherine Snyder for approval of (A) a 5-foot rear yard setback variance from the 10-foot rear yard setback requirement resulting in a 5-foot rear yard setback; and (B) a 25-foot side yard setback variance from the 30-foot side yard setback requirement when adjacent to a public street resulting in a 5-foot side yard setback on property zoned Residential One and located at 2995 Webster The case was presented by Meredith Reckert. She entered all pertinent documents into the record and advised the Board there was jurisdiction to hear the case. She reviewed the staff report and digital presentation. Staff recommended approval for reasons outlined in the staff report. Board Member BLAIR asked if there had been any response from the neighbors. Ms. Reckert stated that one phone call was received from an adjacent neighbor who, upon explanation of the variance request, indicated support of the application. Board of Adjustment Minutes - 3 - July 23, 2009 Catherine Snyder, the applicant, was sworn in by Vice Chair HOVLAND. She stated that she worked very hard to find a location for the shed that would be within the city guidelines, but came to the conclusion it could not be done without a variance. Her property is secluded with a six-foot fence. The proposed placement of the shed would be in the most inconspicuous portion of her property. Adjacent property to the west is not residential. She stated that many of her neighbors have sheds placed on the property line. Ms. Reckert agreed that many of the neighbors do have sheds placed on the property line. At the request of Board Member HOWARD, Ms. Snyder provided a photo of the shed she plans to have erected in her yard. There were no members of the public present to address this matter. Vice Chair HOVLAND closed the public hearing Upon a motion by Board FISHER, the following n Whereas, the applicant was d and Whereas, Ba appeal to the recognition ent GE and second by Board Member )n by an administrative officer; on Case No. WA-09-05(A) is an an administrative officer; and been posted the fifteen days required by law and -re no protests registered against it; and Whereas, the relief applied for may be granted without detriment to the public welfare and without substantially impairing the intent and purpose of the regulations governing the City of Wheat Ridge. Now, therefore, be it resolved that Board of Adjustment application Case No. WA-09-05(A) be, and hereby is APPROVED. For the following reasons: 1. There is an existing six-foot privacy fence to the north and west on the property. 2. The house setback from the front of the lot is quite unique and sets it back further than required making placement of the shed impractical elsewhere. 3. Placement elsewhere would ruin the aesthetics of the property. Board of Adjustment Minutes -4- July 23, 2009 Board Member ABBOTT offered a friendly amendment: Five of seven criteria have been met with numbers 8 and 9 not applicable. The amendment was accepted by Board Members PAGE and FISHER Board Member ABBOTT offered a second friendly amendment: The shed location allowed by this rear yard variance directly abuts property zoned Planned Commercial Development with the subsequent required setback screening and landscaping of PCD along the long side of the shed. The amendment was accepted by Commissioners PAGE and RYAN. The amended motion carried 7-0. Upon a motion by Board Member BELL and second by Board Member FISHER, the following resolution was stated: Whereas, the applicant was denied permission by an administrative officer; and Whereas, Board of Adjustment application Case No. WA-09-05(B) is an appeal to the Board from the decision of an administrative officer; and Whereas, the property has been posted the fifteen days required by law and in recognition that there were no protests registered against it; and Whereas, the relief applied for may be granted without detriment to the public welfare and without substantially impairing the intent and purpose of the regulations governing the City of Wheat Ridge. Now, therefore, be it resolved that Board of Adjustment application Case No. WA-09-05(B) be, and hereby is APPROVED. For 1. It would not alter the essential character of the locality. 2. A substantial investment would be made in the property. 3. It would not be detrimental to public welfare or injurious to other properties or improvements. 4. Five of the seven criteria for the variance have been met. Criteria eight and nine are not applicable. 5. The location of the shed would be in the least conspicuous place on the property. 6. It would be adjacent to 38th Avenue which will be built to full width when that commercial property is developed. 7. The six-foot security fence minimizes effect on the adjacent neighborhood. Board of Adjustment Minutes -5- July 23, 2009 The motion carried 7-0. 5. CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING Vice Chair HOVLAND closed the public hearing. 6. OLD BUSINESS Ms. Reckert advised the Board that more information regarding a policy for seating alternates will be available at a later meeting. Board Member PAGE reported that she submitted money for the Board of Adjustment banner at Carnation Festival. 7. NEW BUSINESS l A. Approval of minutes - June 25, 2009 It was moved by Board Member BLAIR and seconded by Board Member PAGE to approve the minutes of June 25, 2009 as presented. The motion carried unanimously. 8. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 8:40 p.m. '~'Paul Hovland, Vice Chair Arm Lazzeri, Secretary Board of Adjustment Minutes July 23, 2009 -6-