Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/22/1998CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AGENDA October 22, 1998 IB 3. PUBLIC FORUM (This is the time for anyone to speak on any subject not appearing on the agenda.) Approved A. Case No. WA-98-28: An application submitted by Greg and Mamie Boom for approval of a 5' variance to the 30' front yard set back requirement to construct an addition 25' from the front yard property line. Said property is located at 4225 Vivian Street and zoned R-1. Jnued 12/10/98 variance from the 1,000 square foot lot coverage requirement for detached garages for the purpose • adding a second structure of 1,440 square feet. Said property is located at 3885 Depew Street and zoned R-IA. Denied C. Case No. WA-98-30: An application by Curtis Krey for approval of a variance from the 5'side yard and 30'front yard setback requirements for a storage shed. Said property is located at 7110 West 29 Avenue and zoned R-2. Continued D. Case No. TUP-98-08: (Continue to December 10, 1998) An application by Automotive to 12/10/98 Group, Inc,, for approval of a 6 month extension of their existing temporary use permit for an employee and customer parking lot on the south side of the Cbesrown, Friendly Ford dealership. Said property is located at 3601 Wadsworth Boulevard and zoned PCD. smw�# i 8. ADJOURNMENT to December 10, 1998 at 7:30 pm. CABarbara4B0AN981022.xvpd ♦ ' e TO: Board of Adjustment DATE OF MEETING: October 22, 1998 DATE PREPARED: October 5, 1998 CASE NO. & NAME: WA- 98 -28/ Boom CASE MANAGER: Sean McCartney ACTION QUESTED: Request for approval of a 6' front yard setback variance to the 30' front yard setback requirement. LOCATION OF REQUEST: 4225 Vivian Street NAME & ADDRESS OF APPLICANT: Mamie Boom 4225 Vivian Street Wheat Ridge, CO 80033 NAME & ADDRESS OF OWNER: Same 33,105 square feet APPROXIMATE AREA: PRESENT ZONING: Residential -One PRESENT LAND USE: Single Family Residence SURROUNDING ZONING: N:, E: and : Residential -One; and : Agricultural -Two SURROUNDING LAND USE: N:, E: W:, and : Single- family October 2, 1998 DATE PUBLISHED: DATE POSTED: October 8, 1998 DATED LEGAL NOTICES SENT: October 2, 1998 JURISDICTION: The property is within the City of Wheat Ridge, and all notification and posting requirements have been met, therefore, there is jurisdiction to hear this case. I. REQUEST The applicant is requesting approval of a 6' front yard setback variance to the 30' front yard setback variance to allow for a 24'X 24 room addition. If the request is approved, the addition will be located 24' from the front property line. To date, staff has not received any objection for the request. ll�Mty*all "M The property in question is located on the northwest comer of Vivian Street and West 42"" Avenue. Because the property is located on the comer, it is required to maintain a 30' setback from both the front and side property lines which abut a public right-of-way, III VARIANCE CRITERIA II I I I I I 1 11111111111111111111111111'1111 11111!11111 11111 �I I I � � � 111 � 1 11 � I �I I I I I I A ;Ili ii IN ii 11 1 l 3= l�iilimliil�3EMM= 1. Can the property in question 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? � -a 1 1 1111mill! 111! No. Although the applicant has stated that hardship has been established due to the location of an existing septic tank and water well, the property in question is large enough to allow for other location options. 5. Would the conditions upon which the petition for a variation is based be applicable, generally, to the other property within the same zoning classification? Yes. All applications are reviewed on a case-by-case basis thereby changing the outcome for each request. 6. Is the purpose of the variation based exclusively upon a desire to make money out of the property fVo. The purpose • the variance is to allow additional living space for an existing 948 square foot single family residence. 7. Has the alleged difficulty or hardship been created by any person presently having an interest in the property? Yes. The alleged hardship has been created by the owners of the property. 8. Would the granting of the variations be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other property or improvements in the neighborhood in which the property is located? Board of Adjustment Page 3 WA-98-28/Boom No. Approval of this request will not be detrimental to the public's welfare in that the proposed addition will be located at least 25'from, the nearest public right-of-way. Also because bedroom additions are very common in residential neighborhoods, approval of this request should not • injurious to other property or improvements. Would the proposed variation impair the adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property or substantially increase the congestion in the public streets or increase the danger of fire or endanger the public safety or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. adjacent properties. No. Approval of this request is solely for individual benefit and should, not benefit the neighborhood or community. *ption A: "I move that Case No. WA-98-28, a request for approval of a 6' front yard setback variance the 30' front yard setback requirement for property zoned Residential-One and located at 4225 Vivian Street, be DENIED for the following reasons: I The applicant may redesign the proposed bedroom addition to allow compliance for both the frN nt and north-side yard setback requirements. 2. There is no evidence • physical hardship." Option 13: "1 move that Case No. WA-98-28, a request for approval of a 6' front yard setback variance to Board of Adjustment Page 4 WA-98-28/Boom A-q • d MPMTKW CF R.MNINS AND - AREA REOUIRIN6.7 51TE PLAN APPROVAL •w rrr PLAIN (AP PROXIMATE . r PARCEL/LOT : r A .- • , WATER FEATURE .L.'APROVEMEY-L-1 1 1111: 1 Ilk loom* .w,0 -� lag. Cs oc, \\"\j 60,00' VIVIAN STREET FRAME GARAGE Ae- X "-� t -, -, .5 1 LEVEL STONE & STUCIO RES. 4275 WOAN STREET A,#,I,'4,',:> -, O'S JOB NO K249205 SCALE: 1 40 SHEET 2 OF 2 �-1 600" F l ^Inc 3.71 .� . /� \ ! ! � . | r «w� � � � � ~ 2 _� . � � | } �z�, \ \ «. � � 6��®) j� � � . ° °�^ . � � ! :y /( j j . \\ � � E,y� 4 - ©f 4r fi-) 0 f 0 o A J d: LAND USE CASE PROCESSING APPLICATION Planning and Development Department 7500 West 29th Avenue, Wheat Ridge, CO 80033 Phone (303) 235-2846 Type of action requested (check one or more of the actions listed below which pertain to your request.) MC =1 g Variance / Waiver E] Nonconforming use change EJ Flood plain special exception E] interpretation of Code EJ Lot line Adjustment 0 Planned Building Group E] Street Vacation E] Other: 40" 44 A "/ / ME= Current use: Proposed use: Assessors Parcel Number: Subscribed and sworn to me this day ofa4k, - (Y - K6tary Public' My commission expires To Fe: filled out by staff: 1 Date received 2_ 2 Receipt No. Case No. -Zoning Related Case No. Quarter Section Map # I CITY OF RIDGE Board of 4 DATE OF MEETING: October 2, 1998 DATE PREPARED: October 5, 1998 CASE NO. & NAME: WA ®98.291 Goddard CASE MANAGER: Sean McCartney PRESENT ZONING: Residential -One A PRESENT LAND USE: Single Family Residence SURROUNDING ZONING: N:, E: : and : Residential-One A DATED LEGAL NOTICE SENT: October 2, 1998 a "I The proiertv is within the ekvi Av # # # # /3-1 Pursuant to Section 26-11 (F) of the Wheat Ridge Code • Laws, the maximum building coverage for a detached garage in the Residential-One A zone district is 1,000 square feet. The applicant currently has an 1,176 square foot detached garage that was approved by building permit. Therefore, any additional detached garage space requires approval of a variance. 11 SITE PLAN The property in question is located on the west side of Depew Street, north of West 38 Avenue. The Wii;qr*T,t opportunity. As previously stated, there currently is an existing 1, 176 square foot detached garage that has a concrete driveway extending from Depew Street to the garage door. The applicant parks his recreation vehicle on this surface, to the southeast of the existing detached garage. If the request is approved, the applicant will be required to provide an asphalt or concrete driveway to connect with the existing driveway, RM III 'VARIANCE CRITERIA Staff has the following comments regarding the criteria used to evaluate a variance request: Can the property in question yield a reasonable return in use, service or income if permitted to be used only d er the conditions f ` i by regulation for r R' district in which ! ! Yes. All applications are reviewed on a case-by-case basis thereby changing the outcome for each request. 6. Is the purpose of the variation based exclusively upon a desire to make money out of the property Board of Adjustment Page WA-98-29/Goddard 8. Would the granting of the variations be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other property or improvements in the neighborhood in which the property is located? . M#t injurious to other property improvements in the neighborhood. 9. Would the proposed variation impair the adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property or substantially increase the congestion in the public streets or increase the danger of fire or endanger the public safety or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. HIT= =I M Ma I#M the adequate supply of light and air nor increase the danger of fire for the adjacent properties. Also, because the applicant intends on connecting the proposed driveway to the existing driveway, there should not be an increase in the congestion in the public streets. So. neighborhood or community. ii;ti:: zl Ir Ir Option A: "I move that Case No. WA-98-29, a request for approval of a 1,440 square foot maximum building coverage variance to the 1,000 square foot maximum building coverage requirement for property zoned Residential-One A and located at 3885 Dcpew Street, be DENIED for the following reasons: Board of Adjustment Page 4 WA-98-29/Goddard M 1. There is already an existing 1,176 square foot detached garage located on the property. 2. Approval of this request could alter the essential character of the locality." Option B: I move that Case No. WA-98-29, a request for approval of a 1,440 square foot maximum building coverage variance to the 1,000 square foot maximum building coverage requirement for property zoned Residential-One A and located at 3885 Depew Street, be APPROVED for the following reasons: 1. 2. 3. Board of Adjustment Page 5 WA-98-29/Goddard ;3 s "1 F i PARCEL/LOT eOLNVRY V u. rr t :.' "' OP W -2Y- SEPTEMBER 10, 1998 is- � /� - 9 �Al �:,. e : .,� . 4 : LTI - M T 1 e o : PJ 101 ¥ » M 4 IL0 - 'C: ® klisIM&N IMIMUO \ � � \ ¥ a � . Q« : � \: . .. . a -� % %, � HERBERT T9t.tPMpN3 at A •toje « SCALE: ! i�rrGrrt �f. ixxxt 120't PitRCt STRttT 1?tNYt R. GBLORA00 8012 INCH EQUALS 20 FEET REGISTERED ENGINEER SURVEY C ERTIFICATE No. REGISTERED LAND SURVEYOR SEPTE►I6ER 21, 1979 OWNER; KEII, dx 1 ER it �P 6x„tlCrr 2 STE'WART GARDENS I E AST 57.04 FEET TO DEPEW S TREET NORTH I.IKE CF fj .o �¢# x 21 a NO. F063897'7 W C LL 0 w F RECEPTION Q d 2 g.0 CS I �yy i 0 it t cv < 1 p P ` k 4. w t t HERBERT RECEPTI • F06 3L.77 11.35 052 RECORDED IN JEFFERS • UNTY, COLORAD PS: 0001 -002 6/Z61199 1is3 5r38 nflf r CI.AIAA nrrvi '11115 DEED, Made this 22nd dayor between KENNETH J. OLLER •'tic*c .18 . 4005 OEPEW ST of the WHEATRIDGecluxalyot JEFFERSON slid Slate of C Colorado, grantor, slid JIMIE U. GOUDARU & MEDA S. GODDARD 3885 DEPEW ST WHEATkIUGE, co 8021; whose legal address is , 3885 DIPEW ST WHEATRIDGE, Co 80212` of the W H E A T R I O G county of JE and State of Colorado, grantees, W1TNUSGT11, That Cite grantor, tar and in consideration of the sum of THREE THO FI HUN ($:3500'.0O) ---------------------- DOLLARS the raeailrt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, 1104 rcrtri", released, sold, coil -rd and Qtt1'l' CLAIMED), and by these presents does reurise, release, sell, convey and QUrr CLAIM unto Cite grantees, their heirs, successors and assigns forever, trot in tenancy In cnnunrnt, but in joint tenancy, all the right, title, hctctust, c:l.rirtt wn1 rh n ltd which the grant has n and tcc ttf real ouri together witty inrltnwcurcnts, if any, situate, lying and king in fire of ' JEFFERSON Crnuny and State of Colorado, described as follows. SfEWART GARDENS BLOCK 21 STARTING AT fHE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF BLOCK 21 NORTH 148.75' WEST 80.5 SOUTH 148.75 EAST 80 «5 STATE OF COL0RAD)O, County or Jefferison s :. Tire fore going Instrument was acknowledged before me ticls 22nd day of June by Kenneth J e`.a1,1er 1998, My constnis.iuti es r: cs l Dec. 6 s 19 98' Witness nay hand A official seal 6 � "It in Denver, insert "City acrd." Pta.%Z. Rev. Sgd» at t #d N+.dh +r.# raWitaisr.. rr.r t iVarrr w , t9xwrrF. rwrr �vtn,t -- t ra tr ;"1: tSf9Ct — t sr � ON—M Phone (301235-2S46 Type of action requested (check one or more of the actions listed below which pertain to your request.) Variance / Waiver 041 0 Ie r of vour knowledge. N j g-4 Notary Public My commission expires Date received 3- Receipt No., Case No. 12 Related Case No. Zoning Quarter Section Map � ' 1 NAME & ADDRESS OF APPLICANT; Curtis Frey 7110 West 29�" Avenue Wheat Ridge, CO 80215 NAME & ADDRESS OF OWNER: Same APPROXIMATE AREA: 12,500 square feet PRESENT ZONING, Residential -Two PRESENT LAND USE. Two - Family Residence (duplex) SURROUNDING ZONING: N:, E: W: and S: Residential -Two SURROUNDING LAND USE: N:, E:, and S Single - family, and W: Two- Family DATE PUBLISHED: October 2, 1998 DATE POSTED: October 8, 1998 DATED LEGAL NOTICES ENT: October 2, 1998 ENTER INTQ RECD (X) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN (X) CASE FILE & PACKET MATERIAL () ZONING ORDINANCE () SLIDES () SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS (X) EXHIBITS (} OTHER The go= is within the City of Wheat Ri C 'l MEMEMEMM Tff e I o e owner egan Men 7 1 �,errnit. The shed contractor had told the applicant that he did not need a building permit for the construction of the shed, and placed the shed in the existing location based on the applicant's need for the structure. The shed contractor never contacted the Planning and Development Department to ask for specific setback requirements. w M - i i The property in question is a rectangular property located in a relatively flat section of Wheat Ridge. The property abuts West 29� Avenue (on the north side of the property) and is considered an interior lot (no other right-of-way abuts the side or rear lot lines). oc on ot e resi en ia s c ure, ere isn enoug room o a of the property. 11 1 1 1pi l l i p i pp i p q p 1i I !11� 1. Can the property in question 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? Yes. If the request is denied, the applicant may continue to use his property for residential Board of Adjustment Page 2 WA-98-30/Krey -11 occupation. However, due to the applicant's pre-existing medical condition and the need for the bicycle trailer, the applicant does not have any developmental alternative that would allow for the placement of the storage shed to comply with the established setback requirements AND allow a vehicle to access the shed. 2. Is the plight of the owner due to unique circumstances? Yes. The unique circumstances are attributed to the applicant's pre-existing medical condition and his need for storage of a bicycle trailer. No. The alleged difficulty was created by the shed contractor who told the applicant that he did not need a building permit for the storage shed, 8. Would the granting of the variation be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other property or improvements in the neighborhood in which the property is located.? Board of Adjustment Page 3 WA-98-30 /Krey No. Even though the shed is located within the required site-distance-triangle that is established for visibility of on-coming traffic from a private driveway, the existing driveway is large enough 9 to allow vehicles to access West 29� Avenue without having to back into on-coming traffic. Because of this, approval of this request should not be detrimental to the public's welfare. 9. Would the proposed variation impair the adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property or substantially increase the congestion in the public streets or increase the danger of fire or endanger the public safety or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. Board of Adjustment Page 4 WA-98-30/Krey O-q Board of Adjustment Page 5 WA- 98- 30/Krey C - 5 �� ■��� t����_ - &� COME .�_� ■■ ..� ., / �,■ � il o Plannin and Development Dep artment 7500 West 29th A ve Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80215 E4� w Curtis R . 7110 W. 29th Ave 4.� S ept em be r 29 Wh eat tt' C-� September 28, 1998 RE: Krey, Curtis ID: 011140221 1 For that reason, I appreciate any efforts to assist Mr. Krey in continuing his bicycling activities. If there are any further questions regarding his medical condition and-his rheumatoid arthritis, please feel free to give me a call,or contact me care • the rheumatology clinic, Kaiser Permanente, 2045 Franklin Street, Denver, CO 80205, Phone number 303-764-4480. RCH/pld D#: 1514727 D. 09/28/98 c c 66A_�1 Kaiser Foundation Health Plan of Colorado • Colorado Permanente Medical Group, P.C. Kaiser Foundation Hospitals 2045 Franklin Street • Denver, Colorado $0205-5494 • (303) 861 -3100 Recorded at o'cl M., REf ?DED IN Reception No. COG. <fY OF JEFFERSON STATE OF COLORADO rrrrcoTTAM Nf}_ 90022868 O MNI also known by street and number as 1140 -1114 W. 297'11 AVENUE, LAKEWOOD, COLORADO $0215 TOGETHER with all and singular the hereditaments and appurtenances thereunto belonging, or In anywise appertaining and the reversion and reversions, remainder and remainders, rents, issues and profits thereof, and all the estate, right, title, interest, claim and demand whatsoever of the grantor, either in law or equity, of, in and to the above bargained premises, with the hereditarnents and appurtenances. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the said premises above bargained and described, with the appurtenances, unto the grantees, their heirs and assigns forever. And the grantor, for himself, his heirs and personal representatives, does covenant, grant, bargain and agree to and with tine granters, their heirs and assigns, that at the time of the ensealing and delivery of these presents, lee is well seined of the premises above conveyed, has good, sure, perfect, absolute and indefeasible estate of inheritance, in law, in fee simple, and has good right, full power and lawful authority to grant, bargain, sell and convey the sonle in manner and rower aforesaid, and that the same are free and Clear from all former and other grants, bargains, sales, liens, taxes, assessments, encumbrances and restrictions or whatever kind or nature soever, except for taxes for the current year, a Tien but not yet due or payable, easements,, restrictions, reservations, covenants and rights»of-w;ty of record, If any, . W DO } ss. DENVER } &ill was acknowledged before me this 19TII day at Itfarch, r by RALPH 11. WAGNER 12/1419 ess my hand atid Ile Nowry IN Notary's Address: 3575 Cherry Creek D-1ve North. Denver, CO 80209 d add lit 4A ;S ; -1VAC My+ rJnlr7i5 4id expi Ne.021A. Rov. J-ss WARRANTY VFED #o J*W T *#*Wst s LAND USE CASE PROCESSING APPLICATION Planning and Development Department Phone �303) 235-2846 WrA.9100 =1 City " Owner Address City M of the actions listed below which gerta n to your reques" M MM Fill out the following information to the best of your knowledge. Current Zoning: IZ12- Size of Lot (acres or square fqotage): IWO - f r r %"WIN Proposed use: Assessors Parcel Number: Date received O AM`nf� Receipt No. 0 0 0 4ZZ6 Case No. l t)V 740 Related Case No. Zoning Quarter Section Map CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT There was no one signed up to speak. Board ot'Adjustment Pa-e 1 09!24/98 In response to questions from Board Member HOWARD. Mr. McCartney stated that the elevations shown on the plan -, ,vere not in existence at this time, but were proposed elevations; and that the applicant would need to obtain a fill permit from the Public works Department before any fill takes place. Vice Chairman ABBOTT asked if a letter of approval had been received from the horneo),wncr to the north. Mr. McCartney replied that, to his knowledge, a letter had not been received; however, a letter would be required as the approval process continued, Pete Zicinke 4271 Jellison Street NIr. Zienike stated that he is the son-in-la\v of the subject property o\vner. Mr. Helms. Mr. [leIrns also owns the adjacent property to tlie north. Mr. Ziernke stated that he does not plan to have a basement in the house, however, there would be a crawl space. Fie stated that the finished floor would be three feet above the flood plain and that there would be no furnace or other utilities in the crawl space. In response to Board Member ECHELMEYER's questions concerning the swale on the property, Mr. Ziernke replied that it the situation is being addressed by hydraulic engineers. Board Member HOWARD asked how far the property line was from the center line of Clear Creek. The applicant replied it was about 40 feet. Vice Chairman ABBOTT asked if there was anyone present who wished to address this matter. There was no response. Board of Adjustment Pa-e 2 09/24/98 Upon a motion by Board Member JUNKER and second by Board Member THIESSEN, the following resolution was stated: Whereas, the applicant was denied permission by an administrative officer; and Whereas, the Board of Adjustment Application Case ado. W - -4I is an appeal to this Board from the decision of an administrative officer; and 'Whereas, the property has been posted the fifteen days required by lawn and there were no protests registered against it; and Type of Flood Plain Exemption: To allow for demolition of an existing single- family residence and construction of a new single- family residence on a property located within the I00 -year flood plain. For the Following Reasons: 1. The request has met all the requirements of the Flood Plain Ordinance. '. Approval of the request should not have detrimental impact on the existing l00- year floodway. The proposed hydr study shows that the property can be filled to comply with the requirement that the finished floor Elevation be a least one foot above the Base I °load Elevation. 4. Bob Goebel, Flood Plain Administrator for the City of Wheat Ridge, recommends approval of the exemption permit. With the Following Conditions: Vice Chairman ABBOTT informed the applicant that his application had been approved. Board Member ECUIELMEYER asked what the backstop height requirements would be when the zoning ordinance amendment is drafted. Mr. McCartney replied that such determination would be made based on current industry standards and whether or not practice fields or competition fields are involved. .JOycc Manwaring Recreation Superintendent, City of Wheat Ridge In response to a question from Board Member ABBOTT. Ms. Manwaring stated that the industry standard for backstop fence height is between 20 and 30 feet. Board Member ECHELMEYER asked if the City would bear any liability for automobiles which may be damaged by errant foul balls. Ms. N/lanwaring replied that tile City is not responsible for such damage. tz� Board Member WALKEI� expressed concern about the distance from home plate to the bike path located near the outfield. Ms. Man-,varino replied that the measurements of the field are appropriate for the age groups which will be utilizing the park. Mr. McCartney stated that it Would be approximately 260 fleet from home plate to the bike path. Board of Adjustment 09/24/98 Page 4 Vice Chairman ABBOTT asked if there were any individuals present who wished to address this matter. There was no response. Upon a motion by Board Member THIESSEN and a second by Board Member ECHELMEYER, the following resolution was stated: Whereas, the applicant was denied permission by an administrative officer; and Whereas, Board of Adjustment Application Case No. WA-98-26 is an appeal to this Board from the decision of an administrative officer; and Whereas, the property has been p6ited 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 NVithOUt substantially impairing the intent and purpose of the regulations governing the City ol'Wheat Ridge; and I Whereas, the Board finds that, based upon all evidence presented and based upon the Board's conclusions relative to the criteria given for this variance, the evidence and facts in this case do support the granting of this request. Now, therefore, be it resolved that Board ol'Adjusti Application Case No. WA-98-26 be, and hereby is, APPROVED. Type of Variance: An eleven -foot backstop fence height variance to the tell-foot backstop fence height requirement and a one -toot tence height variance to the six-foot fence height requirement, For the Following Reasons: The Board finds that variance criteria numbers 3, 6, 8 and 9 are net as far as its concerns. This variance is basically for the safety, welfare and benefit of spectators and passersby. Vice Chairman ABBOTT offered an amendment to the motion to add two additional reasons for granting the variance as follows: I Approval of the variance creates a condition which will be in compliance with a national standard as stated by the City's Parks Superintendent. 11o,ird of Adjustment Pa-e 5 09'24/98 4. The 21 -foot high backstop would have no effect on adjacent residential property. The amendment was accepted by Board Members THIESSEN and ECHELMEYER. The motion carried by a vote of 6-0 with Board Members HOVLAND and MAURO absent. Vice Chair ABBOTT announced that the request had been approved. C. Case No. WA-98-27: An application submitted by Ken Sanchez for Beatrice Anders for approval of a 15-foot side yard setback variance to the 30-foot side yard setback requirement to allow a 22-foot by 22•foot detached garage. The property is zoned R 1 -A and located at 3512 Wright Street. This case was presented by Sean McCartney. He reviewed the staff report and presented slides and overhead projections of the subject property, He entered all pertinent documents into the record and advised that there was jurisdiction for the Board to hear the case. He stated that the City has received two letters of opposition to this request. Mr. McCartney stated staffs conclusion that, based on criteria presented in the staff report, approval of this request could be detrimental to the public's welfare, create congestion in tile public streets and could alter the essential character of the locality. Further, based on the fact that staft'did not find any evidence of hardship, aside from personal inconvenience for the property owner, he stated that staff recommended denial of the request. He advised the Board that, should the request be approved. staff recommended that the request be changed to a I 0-foot side yard setback variance to allow for a driveway depth of 20 feet. In response to a question from Vice Chairman A13B017. Mr. McCartney stated that lie had received another letter of opposition in addition to the letter included with the staff report. Board Member ECHELMEYER asked the address of the property owner who submitted the second letter of opposition. Mr. McCartney stated that it was an adjacent property owner at ' ) 541 Ward Road. Vice Chairman ABBOTT referred to staff s concern that approval of the application could increase congestion in tile public street and asked for clarification. Mr. McCartney replied that this concern was based upon industry standards of a driveway length of 20 feet for example, a driveway length of less than iO feet could cause a large vehicle to extend onto public right-of-way. Board of Adjustment - - - ------ Page 6 09/24/98 Mr. Sanchez, upon consultation with Beatrice Anders, advised the Board that it was the desire of the applicant to amend the i request from 15 feet to 10 feet. Board Member ECHELMEYER expressed concern that the application was for a shop/garage and the actual use would be as a workshop. Mr. McCartney replied that the setback requirement applies to any structure, regardless of use, and therefore the Board had Z-1 jurisdiction to consider the case at this time. Board Member ECHELMEYER asked Mr. Sanchez if he was planning to construct a driveway from the building to the street, Mr. Sanchez replied that they were not planning construct a driveway; however, they would be willing to comply with the 20-foot setback requirement. Board Member HOWARD asked if tile applicant could show the Board a drawing of the proposed structure, Mr. Sanchez replied that he did not have a drawing -vvith him but that it was planned to have a 22-foot by 22-foot structure with a gabled roof In response to Board Member I I0WARD*s comment that it would not match the house. Mr. Sanchez replied that the other structures on tile property do not match tile house since it is very dil'tICUlt to match the A-frame structure ofthe house. In response to a question from Board Member ECHELMEYER, Mr. Sanchez stated that the structure will contain four solid walls with either an 8-foot bav door or a french door on the South side to facilitate the movement of woodworking equipment and supplies. Beatrice Anders 3512 Wright Street Ms. Anders was sworn in by Vice Chairman ABBOTT. She stated that she bought the property because Of its unique design, the room in the back yard for her grandchildren to play and to construct a woodworking shop where her husband call invent and build equipment for people with learning disabilities. She said it was not practical to add the shop area onto the present house, e Beard of Adjustment Fa�g — 7 09/24/98 In response to a question from Board Member ECHELMEYER, Ms. Anders stated that she does not plan to install a concrete drive to the street. She also stated that, without the variance, her back yard Would be extremely small. Board Member ECHELMEYER asked if a fUtUre owner would have to apply for a variance in order to build a driveway should that owner wish to use the structure as a garage. Mr. McCartney explained that if this variance is granted, a future owner could build a concrete driveway without having to apply for a variance or a permit. Board Member HOWARD asked the applicant if she had considered alternatives such as an I 8x24 foot structure. The applicant replied that mature trees on the property prevent building any further to the south. Vice Chairman ABBOTT commented that perhaps the applicant could build a smaller structure, providing for a lesser variance. Ms. Anders replied that they needed the requested size to accommodate her husband's equipment. Ken Sanchez returned to the podium and stated that they had considered a smaller structure; however, they wanted to build the structure as close to the corner of the property as possible to retain more of the back yard, Vice Chairman ABBOTT commented that the applicant is giving away some square footac of the structure by leaving an eight foot setback from the fence when only five feet are required. Anthony Gibbons 12420 West 35th Avenue Mr. Gibbons was sworn in by Vice Chairman ABBOTT. I le stated that his residence was diaoonally across the street frorn the applicant. He expressed his concern about the legality orate existing fence which is six inches from the inside edge of the sidewalk along West 35th Avenue. fie Further expressed his opposition to the proposed setback variance which he telt would be out of character for the neighborhood. In response to a question from Board Member THIESSEN, Mr. Gibbons stated that he was still opposed to the variance in spite of the fact that the applicant had amended tier request by five feet. In response to a question from Mr. Gibbons about the legality of the fence, Mr. McCartney explained the relevant portion of the code and informed Mr. Gibbons that the fence was in compliance. Board Member FIOWARD asked to see the letter of protest that was not included in the packet. The following letter was introduced into the record as an exhibit and given to the Board of Adjustment 09, pa-C 8 I- Board members for their examination: Exhibit "A" - Letter from Mr. Yemen, 3541 Ward Road, expressing opposition to the variance, Board Member WALKER asked if there was an option to continue the case since the report referred to the proposed structure as a garage rather than a workshop. Mr. McCartney replied that this was not an option since the variance must be considered oil the basis of a structure and not its intended use. Ken Sanchez returned to the poditin'*l and stated that, should the variance be denied. the structure could be - constructed to be in compliance with the code; however, it would still leave the option for a future owner to install a concrete driveway and use the structure as a garage. In response to a question from Board Member THIESSEN, Mr. McCartney explained that an approval is not required to install a curb Cut for a driveway for single family residences other than to make sure the drainage meets requirements. Vice Chairman ABBOTT requested that the owner address the Board and specifically state her intentions in regard to the use of the structure. Bernice Anders returned to the podium and stated that the use of the entire structure will be as a shop. She stated her original intention was to add a shop onto the house, but it would have been cost prohibitive fir her to do so. Upon a motion by Board Member THIESSEN and second by Board Member ECI­lELME'YER, the following resolution was stated: Whereas. the applicant was denied permission by an administrative officer, and NVIiereas, Board of Adjustment Application Case No. WA-98-27 is an appeal to this Board from tile decision of an administrative officer; and NVIiereas, the property has been posted the fifteen days required by law, and there were protests registered against it; and NVhcrcas, the reliel'applied for may not be granted without Substantially impairing the intent and purpose Ot'tllC rei'Lliations governing , the City of Wheat Ridge, Now, therefore, be it resolved that Board of Adjustment Application Case No. WA-98-27 be, and hereby is, DENIED. Board of A(tiLISMIC11t Pa-C 9 09,124/98 For the followina reasons: 1. Strong protests were registered by the affected neighbors in the area against the variance. The Board does not believe that granting this request would be aesthetically pleasing to the - neighborhood. There are other developmental prospects on this property that can be achieved without the variance. Im a a 4. There are no unique circumstances that would require the granting of this request over the neighborhood protests. 5. Granting this request could significantly alter the character of the neighborhood. 6� Granting this request could diminish or impair property values. Vice Chairman ABBOTT stated that he would vote in favor of the motion for all of the reasons stated. Fle stated that, even though lie sympathized with the applicant, it was the Board's position to look for hardships and weigh those hardships against the ordinances adopted by the City's elected officials. Board Member ECHELMEYER stated that he would also vote in favor of the motion because it appears that if the present wooden shed were removed. a structure between the concrete patio and the five-foot casement on the east would accommodate the 22•foot by 22-tbot structure and still leave room for a play area. . The motion 1()r denial carried by a vote of 5•1. with Board Member WALKER voting NO and Board Members I-IOVLAN and MAURO absent. Vice Chair ABBOTT advised the applicant that the request had been denied. OLD BUSINESS Mr. McCartney asked if the Board would like to schedule a study session. There was a consensus of the Board to hold a study session before the end of the year. NEW BUSINESS Approval of Minutes of ALI'l 27, 1998. It was moved by Board Member WALKER and seconded by Board Member .II. NKE_R to Page 10 Board of AdJustnient 09!24/98 Board ot'Adjusiment Page 11 U9/?4!9S