Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12/03/2003CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AGENDA December 3, 2003 �1'rarv%"Xnt - ilyril o I I We rKiWg b o a r d of Adjustment on December 3, 2003, at 7:30 p.m., in the City Council Chambers of the Municipal Building, 7500 W. 29 Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado. Hvnnff��� 3. PUBLIC FORUM (This is the time for anyone to speak on any subject not appearing on the agenda.) A. Case No. WA-03-21: An application submitted by Jeff Petty for approval of a 24.9 square foot variance from the 12,500 square foot minimum lot area requirement to allow a two-family dwelling unit on property zoned Residential- and located at 4695 Wadsworth Boulevard. B. Case No. WA-03-22: An application filed by Lisa Fieldman for approval of a variance to Section 26-603(A) Permitted Fence Heights AND a variance to the required 10 foot wide landscape buffer when adjacent to a public street for property zoned Residential-Two (R-2) and located at 7125 West 32" Avenue, amn��� I # DATE OF MEETING: December 3, 2003 DATE PREPARED: November 21, 2003 CASE NO. & NAME: WA-03-21/Petty CASE MANAGER: Travis Crane ACTION REQUESTED: Approval of a 24.9 square foot variance from the 12,500 square foot minimum lot area requirement in the Residential-Two zone district to allow a two- family dwelling unit. SURROUNDING ZONING: N & W: Resfdential-Two� E: Residential- Two, Restricted 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. The property in question is located at 4695 Wadsworth Boulevard, and is currently being used as a residential dwelling unit The property is zoned Residential-Two (Exhibit 1, Zoning Map). The applicant, Jeff Petty, is acting on behalf of the property owner, Morton Silverman (Exhibit 2, Letter of Consent). The parties are requesting a variance to the required minimum lot size for a two-family dwelling unit in the R-2 zone district (Exhibit 3, Letter of Request). 111. SITE PLAN The subject property is located on the southwest comer of Wadsworth Boulevard and West 47 Avenue. The property is approximately 11,475.1 square feet in size (Exhibit 4, Plat). The R-2 zone district requires a minimum lot size of 12,500 square feet for a two-family dwelling unit. If LTi3L#= I Additionally, a comer lot in the R-2 zone district must be at least 80 feet in width on each street frontage. The subject property exceeds this standard on each street frontage. The Community Development Department has not received any public comment regarding this request. If the request is denied, the property may still receive a reasonable return in use. The structure may be used as a single-family residence. 2. If the variance were granted, would it alter the essential character of the locality? If the variance were granted, the character of the locality would not be altered. Even though there are no other two-family dwellings in the immediate area, a large majority of the neighborhood is zoned R-2. Given the proximity of this property to Wadsworth Boulevard, impacts of a second dwelling unit should be minimal. 4. Has the alleged difficulty or hardship been created by any person presently having an interest in the property? T 707 — • TIMMUTY caltset or y a person W=as interest in Ine property. in 1959, CDOT acquired additional right-of-way for the purpose of widening Wadsworth Boulevard. If, prior to 1959, the property were utilized as a duplex, it would be considered a legal non-conforming duplex. Historical information has not been provided to that the property ever existed legally as a duplex. Board of Adjustment 3 WA-03-2 I /Petty The request would not be detrimental to the public welfare. The adequate supply of light and air would not be compromised as a result of the request. The request would not increase congestion in the streets, nor increase the danger of fire. The request would most likely not have an effect on property values in the neighborhood. 6. If criteria I through 5 are found, then, would the granting of the variance result in benefit or contribution to the neighborhood or the community, as distinguished fro an individual benefit on the part of the applicant, or would granting of the varianc result in a reasonable accommodation of a person with disabilities? I The request would not result in a contribution or benefit to the neighborhood. The request would not result in a reasonable accommodation of a person with disabilities. Upon review of the above request, staff concludes that the above criteria are supportive of the variance request. Staff has found that there are unique circumstances attributed to the request that would warrant approval of a variance. Therefore, staff recommends APPROVAL for the following reasons: 1. The property owner has not created the hardship. The hardship can be partially attributed to the fact that right-of-way was acquired by CLOT in 1959, reducing the size of the property by 2,100 square feet. 2. Approval of the variance will not alter the character of the locality. The vast majority of the neighborhood is zoned Residential-Two. The Residential-Two zone district allows two-family dwelling units, provided that the lot meets minimum lot size and width standards. 3. Granting of this variance would not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other properties or improvements in the area. The additional unit should not impair the adeqiiate supply of light or air to adjacent properties. nor should it increase congestion in the public streets. Board of Adjustment WA-03-2 I /Petty MI �r� E�XHIBIT I 6W 14 1 PAGE el ! k^nt BUT 2 wwn O-V ATTOR�av ! � yy ° a F p � �.�Ri x f k # N K ! ! # f w4m DXY Of * p y1p A rf R f ssl OUNTY O CAA ... s J MORTON ILVE A 3 03 -52 6-5253 ■ w °, # R ZON «(R-2) 469 WADSWORTH BLVD, WHEAT RIDGE CO 80033 CITY OF RIDGE 75 00 ? EST 2 9 ^ w� .�� '�■ � � $ <ef ± ■ e |a! mumum glag �: i� © � } } � +} . I M ILM-0 WIN U 0 M 11JONS V.1 212 1134 TO: Board of Adjustment DATE OF MEETING: December 3, 2003 CASE MANAGER: Meredith Reckert CASE NO. & NAME: Case No. WA-03-22/Fieldman SIMON 1111111111 1 !111 1111 i�I � III LOCATION OF REQUEST: 7125 West 32 "d Avenue NAME & ADDRESS OF APPLICANT (S): Lisa Field an 7125 W. 32 ° Avenue Wheat Ridge, CO 80033 NAME & ADDRESS OF OWNER(S): same APPROXIMATE AREA.- 10,500 square feet PRESENT ZONING: Residential-Two (R-2) PRESENT LAND USE: Single family SURROUNDING ZONING: N, E, W: R-2; S: •RD SURRO'UNDING LAND USE- N, E & W: single family residences S: multi-family 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. Board of Adjustment Case No. WA-03-22/Fieldman MOOKMOHM The property in question is located at 7125 West 32 nd Avenue and is currently utilized as a single-family residence. The property has Residential-Two (R-2) zoning (Exhibit 1, Zoning Map). The applicant/owner (Exhibit 2, Deed) requests approval of the of a fence height variance to allow a fence higher than four feet in the front yard. The fence in question would vary in height from 4' to 9' in height. Please see Exhibit 3 (Improvement Location Certificate), Exhibit 4 (Application) and Exhibit 5 (Letter of Request). Staff had originally published this case as needing a landscaping variance. Staff has subsequently concluded that this variance is not needed. No action should be taken on the second portion of the request noted on the agenda. 11. SITE PLAN The applicant has submitted a site plan (Exhibit 6, Site Plan) showing the location of the proposed fencelwall on the south side of the house. The proposed fence will be decorative in nature and will create an outdoor patio space in front of the home (Exhibit 7, Fence elevation). The proposed wall will have a southwestern design and will vary in height from 4' to 6' by 18" wide niches. 111. VARIANCE CRITERIA Staff has the following comments regarding the criteria used to evaluate a variance request: 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? Board of Adjustment Case No. WA-03-22/Fieldman If the request is denied, the property may still receive a reasonable return in use. The property is currently utilized as a single-family residence, and this use may continue. 2. If the variance were granted, would it alter the essential character of the locality? 3. Does the particular physical surrounding, shape or topographical condition of the specific property involved result 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? 4. Has the alleged difficulty or hardship been created by any person presently having an interest in the property? The applicant has created her own hardship by proposing a fence, which does not meet the fence height requirements. However, there are other fences in the area which exceed the maximum height allowed in the front setback. 6. If criteria I through 5 are found, then, would the granting of the variance result in a benefit or contribution to the neighborhood or the community, as distinguished from an individual benefit on the part of the applicant, or would granting of the variance result in a reasonable accommodation of a person with disabilities? The requests would not result in a reasonable accommodation of a person with disabilities. IV. STAFF CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Upon review of the request, staff concludes that the above criteria are supportive of the fence height variance. Staff has found that there are unique circumstances attributed to this request that would warrant approval of a variance. Therefore, staff recommends approval for the following reasons: 1. There are unique circumstances due to the grade change on the property. 2. The proposed decorative fence will not increase congestion in the public streets, nor increase fire danger. M L The fence be constructed in accordance with the design and materials shown on exhibits included in this packet. Board of Adjustment 4 Case No, WA-03-22/Fieldman 0 1 L z n�c r u� ur u z q z Q z ir uj #A U- uj 0� NEMI AE x ,? U Fm RECEPTION NO. FO, -9952 18.80 � cx 743 RECORDED IN JEFFERSON COUNTY, COLORADO F OC 6/277/«96 11:23. I►"zLx" TSZS L}8 tRlr dry rf 25, 1956 of tf#* County of j. c tt • r+ rd, N 6 c f,� +r :� , k^ rtae rrr: rrs r. r• : r!� v A x 1r | � � /> GFIWs , � M ;;;;&'IVA M 5 \\ . � \\ W X� . bto »�wy A _ %od. 21 �. � . . < 3« \ � � M ;;;;&'IVA M 5 \\ . � \\ W X� . LAND USE CASE PROCESSING APPLICATION Community Development Department 7500 West 29 Avenue, Wheat Ridge, CO 80033 Phone (303) 235-2846 (Please print or type all information) ME I I certify that ©- information and exhibits herewith submitted are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and that in filing this application I am acting with the knowledge and consent of those persons listed above, without whose consent the requested action cannot lawfully be accomplished. Applicants other than owners must submit power-of-attorney from the owner whi b approved of this action on his behalf 141Z K � '/ 'a C' < gm� - 0 ou by Date Me ived Comp P Dtsig. M C Qua aseNo. M14-62 rter Scctio�nZMap :ase Manager IF M -XHIRIT 4 7125 West 32 Avenue Wheat Ridge, CO 80033 720-318-5637 November 5, 2003 Wheat Ridge, CO Sincerely Lisa D. I amilton- Heldman m am 9 IMMA IV m EXTEND CURB CUT 1 cr 8 « .j T.� ' 'F5• • 'r '� �.w w F ' ^it *y J A x,� ; x ,., p$... W, S 4 µ."` Y. �^ F F r � . y t ..� S Y�I' � M} «n i `* s. �." k i « Y � t t *A« •'k ., s,Z . }� "YyY.' t �Y � ' q 4 '� 1 ^! i .y..r aK WALL F001ING CONFIGURATION "' NEW ° THICK 4" HIGH STUCCO FINISH REINFORCING, AND SIZING TO BE CONC. W ALL SPECIFIED BY ENGINEER. 8 « .j occ i Minutes of Meeting October I CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by p.m. in the Council Chambers of Municipal the Building, ♦ 29th Avenue, Wheat Ridge, 2. ROLL CALL Board of Adjustment Page ; 10/23/03 In response to a question from Board Member ABBOTT, Travis Crane explained that the street trees ♦ Marshall for the property adjacent to the applicant were installed by tile owner and not required by the city. The property owner did not realize he was planting those trees in the right-of-way. In response to a question from Board Member HOWARD, Travis confirmed that Marshall Street is a state highway with a right-of-way of approximately 50 feet. Lamar Street is a public street with right-of-way of only 20 feet. The existing front setback is approximately thirty feet. Most buildings in this area were built before the city was incorporated. In response to a question from Chair DRDA, Travis stated that the proposed site plan is short by one parking space. He further explained that staff s concern with the application is that, while UBC allows indoor parking as the application requests, it could present J�oard Member SCHULZ asked if the indoor parking would be open to the public. Travis Crane replied that the applicant stated the business does not have much customer traffic and the indoor parking would be used solely for employees and company vehicles. Board Member ABBOTT expressed concern that, the present business could be sold and bwiows if indoor parking is not used. pi�i� F ip�1111 1 Board of Adjustment Page 2 10/23/03 Travis Crane commented that the city could not require street trees to be planted in the state right of way on Marshall. • Raffill x-rccf. paw ant-f-m- a mrV 4FT, fic WOU10 Me to see improvements continue in the area. Board of Adjustment Page 3 10/23/03 1. The building is currently very deficient in parking spaces for public and private parking. The Uniform Building Code allowed "inside parking" would improve the current situation significantly. Board of Adjustment Page 4 lO/2]/O3 Upon a motion by Board Member SCHULZ and second by Board Member HOWARD the following resolution was stated: INhereas, the applicant was denied permission by an administrative officer; and Whereas, Board of Adiustment to this Board from the decision of an administrative officer; and Board of Adjustment Page 5 10/23/03 Board Member HOVLAND offered the following friendly amendment: Add a condition that the size of the addition is not to exceed the size presented at the hearing; and that landscaping occur as discussed at the hearing. The amendment was accepted by Board Members SCHULZ and HOWARD. Board Member ABBOTT commented that he would still like to accept the applicant's offer to place two street trees in the Marshall Street right-of-way which is a barren desolate stretch of highway and, even though it is state right-of-way, it would be a betterment to the neighborhood as well as the business. He offered this as a friendly amendment. Chair DRDA expressed concern that this would mandate something outside the city's jurisdiction. Travis Crane strongly advised against asking the applicant to plant street trees in the uire the trees to be removed. This would, in effect, be asking the applicant to place trees on someone else's property. It could also be a hinderance to parking in front of the building. Board Member ABBOTT withdrew his amendment. The motion passed 6-1 with Board Member DRDA voting no. (Chair DRDA declared a brief recess at 9:05 pm. The meeting was reconvened at 9:12 P.M.) B. Case No. WA-03-19: An application filed by Stan and Sharon Hergenreter for approval of a 21 -foot side yard setback variance from the 30-foot side yard setback requirement when adjacent to a public street resulting in a 9-foot side yard setback AND a 15-f•ot rear yard setback variance from the 30-foot rear yard Board of Adjustment Page 6 10/23/03 R M-M I ir-Is i i t i V-1 a ug Raw # U41 � 1111111 1 11 11 111111 11 :'�� 11 1 u MIME& ior propcTLy orn7t, Nesilential kine WiTt Court. In response to a question from Board Member DRDA regarding hardship, Travis explained that staff believes it is not a self-imposed hardship because the property presents the atypical situation of having three street frontages each of which would require a 30-foot setback. I xtt L proposed garage would be 16 feet on the west side and does not affect the sight distance triangle. In response to questions from Board Member HOWARD, Mr, Hergenreter stated that the existing shed would be removed, the asphalt would be removed and a concrete driveway installed. He also stated that the proposed garage could not be moved farther south onto the property because it would overlap the house and • very close to a window. Travis Board of Adjustment Page 7 10/23/03 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- 03-19 be, and hereby is, approved. Type of Variance: A 21-foot side yard setback variance from the 30-foot side yard esulting-ita-9-foot—Adc%4�, rd setback AND a 15-foot rear yard setback variance from the 30-foot rear yard setback requirement when adjacent to a public street resulting 15-foot rear yardsetback. For the following reasons: 6. M''MOMPA, -MINFIt M ROMMMI IN i ROMIMM01i MI W�' I ff I � fflRot gi 111mailo Mail * i I . Board of Adjustment Page 8 10/23/03 no garage. A garage has become a societal benefit to any single-family dwelling and therefore construction of a garage at this location could be considered an improvement to the general neighborhood and property values. (4) A petition in favor of this variance was submitted by eight neighbors. TiT11,77MM " I =Tiffil M111117M Willso MET& The motion passed 7-0. This case was presented by Meredith Reckert, She advised the Board there was jurisdiction to hear the case. She entered all pertinent documents into the record and reviewed the staff report and digital presentation. Staff recommended approval of this request for reasons outlined in the staff report. q : 1 ,� 1 I H WO I I &WOM) 0 (6100l I I URR I #gN&%_W_*I Aqw- I I L4 a I #t; [I gm a #rg I all 11! Board of Adjustment Page 9 10/23/03 Board Member ABBOTT asked what necessitated the 7-foot addition. Mrs. Cooper replied that it would serve as an entrance into the house and provide more lightinto the house which is presently very dark. It would also take advantage of the view to the west as well as provide additional functional space in the kitchen. Board Member DRDA questioned the hardship issue because it seems the kitchen could be enlarged without the extra 7 feet. Upon a motion by Board Member ABBOTT and second by Board Member BLAIR the following resolution was stated: 11111?1IMII III III lI 111111 11 11 11111 1 11 1 11�11:10101II ��I � t Whereas, Board of Adjustment Application Case No. WA-03-20 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 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- 03-20 be, and hereby is, approved. Type of Variance: A 7-foot side yard setback variance from the 30-foot side yard setback in R-I zoning. For the following reasons: 60 f Adj u stm e nt Page 10 10/23/03 With the following conditions: WAX 6- XMJV� - � Va Board Member HOWARD asked if this request is based on all three trailers that are presently on the property. Mike Pesicka replied that the community development director determined that, since it is a new application, it does apply to all three trailers. Board Member HOWARD believed there should be two separate applications: one for the existing trailer and one for the two additional trailers. Board Member ECHELMEYER stated that it was his understanding a temporary use permit could not be continued after a year. Mike explained that this application was not a request for continuance but was a completely new application. In response to a question from Board Member SCHULZ, Mike stated that the purpose of the application has not changed. Mike Mueller 16935 West 48' Place, Golden Mr. Mueller, with Lee Kunz Development, was sworn in by Chair DRDA. He explained the reason for the trailers is that Landcare, presently located in Arvada, and Trugreen are two divisions • the same company. Landcare plans to move onto the subject premises Board of Adjustment Page 11 10/23/03 Board of Adjustment Page 12 10/23103 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. TUP- 03-02 be, and hereby is, approved. Type of Temporary Use Permit: A one-year Temporary Structure Permit to allow three office trailers on property zoned Commercial Two and located at 8935 West 44' Avenue For the following reason: 1. Trugreen, Landeare and the building owner have been negotiating, apparently in good faith, toward bringing additional personnel and business into Wheat Ridge. It appears there is a good chance they will be leasing a sizeable building for an indefinite period of time. Because a super-majority vote of • affirmative votes was required for approval, the motion failed. Chair DRDA advised the applicant his request for a temporary use permit had been denied. Board of Adjustment Page 13 10/23/03 [a 3 im OLD BUSINESS NEW BUSINESS A. Mike Pesicka — Meredith Reckert informed the Board that this would be Mike's final Board of Adjustment meeting. He has accepted a position with El Paso County. Board members wished Mike well in his new endeavor. B. Minutes of Auggst 28, 2003 — It was moved by Board Member HOVLAND and seconded by Board Member ABBOTT to approve the minutes of August 28, 2003 as presented. The motion passed unanimously. C. Set Next Meeting Date JDecember 3 or December 101 — Because the November Board meeting falls • Thanksgiving and the December Board meeting falls on Christmas, staff requested the Board to make a decision to change the regular meeting schedule for November and December. It was moved by Board Member BLAIR and seconded by Board Member ABBOTT to set the next Board of Adjustment meeting for Wednesday, December 3, 2003. The motion passed unanimously. 0 D. Board Member Schulz — Mr. Schulz stated he plans to soon be serving on City Council and expressed to the Board members how much he enjoyed working with them. He also commented that he was impressed with the amount of knowledge represented on the Board. It was moved by Board Member HOWARD and seconded by Board Member ECHELMEYER to adjourn the meeting at 10:55 p.m. The motion passed unanimously. I; =## in F11= Ann Lazzeri, Secretary Board of Adjustment Board of Adjustment Page 14 10/23,103