HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/27/2000AGENDA
APRIL 27, 2000
Notice is hereby given of a public hearing to be held before the City of Wheat Ridge Board of
Adjustment on April 27, 2000, at 6:00 p.m., Police Training Conference Room, second floor of the
Municipal Building, 7500 West 29th Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado.
1. TRAINING SESSION
1 1i
5. PUBLIC FORUM (This is the time for anyone to speak on any subject ni
appearing on the agenda.)
A. Request for reconsideration of action taken by the Board of Adjustment on March 23,
2000 (Case No. WA-00-02) regarding an application filed by Trailer Source, Inc. for an
interpretation of allowed uses as listed in their Planned Commercial Development (Tabor
Development Planned Commercial Development Outline Development Plan). Said
property is located at 4651 Tabor Street and zoned PCD.
B. Case No. WA-00-04: (Withdrawn) An application filed by the City of Arvada for approval
of a 20' setback variance from the required 50' front yard setback requirement for the
purpose of constructing an equipment for soil and groundwater remediation. Said
property is located at the northeast comer of the 1-70 westbound off-ramp and Ward Road,
at approximately 4700 Ward Road, and is zoned Agricultural-Two.
A. Approval of Minutes: March 23, 2000
8. ADJOURNMENT to May 25, 2000
CABarbarwB0A\000427,Nvpd
4. Making Motions
A. The imDortance of making findings, or starting reasons for gooroval or
A. Votinq Requirements: Code of Laws Sec. 2-53 d
B. Public Hearin q Procedures.
8. Taking Action
WHEAT RIDGE
;OARD OF ADJUSTMENT TRAINING WORKSHOP
1 . Appointment and Membership: Charter Sec. 9.3.
1=
91-9-13J
(2) The board of adjustment has the responsibility, in accordance with the
Zoning Ordinance, section 26.D., to permit in any district a temporary
building which is used for a permitted use in that district, or a
temporary use • land which is not allowed in that district; such permit
is
• be issued for no longer than one (1) year per application.
Review Criteria for Variances and Waivers: Code of Laws Sec. 26-
. §JQE21:
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?
2) Is the plight of the owner due to unique circumstances?
3) ff the variation were granted, would it alter the essential character of
the locality?
1) Would the particular physical surrounding, shape or typographical
condition • the specific property involved result in a particular
hardship (upon the owner) as distinguished from a mere inconvenience
if the strict letter of the regulations were carried ouO
2) Would the conditions upon which the petition for a variation is based
• applicable, generally, to the other property within the same zoning
classification?
3) Is the purpose of the variation based exclusively upon a desire to makv
money out of the property?
4) Has the alleged difficulty or hardship been created by any person
presently having an interest in the property?
5) Would the granting of the variations be detrimental to the public
welfare
R to other property t #! in the
neighborhood in which the property is located?
6) Would the proposed variation impair the adequate supply of light and
air to adjacent property of 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?
3. Implementing the Hardship Standard In Practic43
R. While "hardship" is in the mind of the beholder, some important
elements should be a part of the applicant's case:
GED\53027\3459M01 2
Hardship should not be self-imposed. Did the applicant buy the
property knowing that it was too small for the required lot size in the
single family zoning district, or with knowledge that the front setback
would force the building to be exceptionally narrow?
4. Burden of Proof.
GED153027\345900,01 3
health; safety and welfare not affected; etc.). Strict interpretation of
this section means that the variance or waiver must be denied if even
one requirement or element has not been proven. '
B. The courts will not substitute their judgment for that of the Board
unless the Board's discretion has been clearly abused. Monte Vista
Professional Building v. City of Monte Vista, 531 P.2d 400 (Colo.
App. 1975).
Actions of the Board on variance or waiver requests or appeals from
administrative officials are guasi-iudicial, not legislative. The Board sits as an
appellate body (a judge), not as the decision maker in the first instance. The
consequences of the fact that the BOA's function is quasi-judicial are several:
1) Defined: Contacts between the applicant or opponents and the
members of the Board of Adjustment outside of publicly scheduled
hearings and meetings on the application.
2) Why should these contacts be avoided? The consequence of
engaging in such contacts can be as severe as invalidating the action
of the Board.
3) How can ex parte contacts be avoided? Once approached or called by
the applicant or opponent and the matter is identified by them,
immediately advise them that, as a board member, it is improper for
you to talk about the case outside of the hearing room, and urge them
to bring their points • view and testimony to the hearing room.
GED1530271345900.01 4
4) The prohibition extends to written materials as well: Make sure any
materials you receive outside of the hearing room are copied and
shared with everyone at the time of hearing.
5) What to do if an ex parte contact has occurred: Disclose the contact
to the Board at the beginning of the hearing; describe its content as
completely as possible. In an extreme case, you may be required to
step down and not further participate.
Site visits: Avoid any contact with either side at the site. Even
ormational" contact is still an ex parte contact.
9§00��M
A. Voting Requirements: Code of Laws See. 2-53(d).
8
6
7
6
6
5
5
4
plip 1111111pi pq 11 ji� 11111! 11 P ��
B. Public Hearing Procedurea
The applicant or his or her agent must appear at the hearing before the
Board. C.R.S. § 31-23-307:
GED\53027\3459M01 5
S. Taking Testimony
2) If a large number signed up, divide the available time and assign it at
the beginning
2) Relaxed rules of evidence in administrative hearings.
3) There is no prohibition/limitation on kind or nature of testimony in the
Wheat Ridge Code of Laws.
4) It is appropriate for the Board to consider the weight and credibility of
testimony
Consider all the testimony and evidence (D• n't let the number •
people for or against the application determine your decision.)
C. Amendments to Motions
GED\53027N3459M01 6
9. Taking Action: The Importance of Written Findings.
Consider all the testimony and evidence. Do not let the number of
people for or against the application determine your decision.
2) Compare the evidence against the standards in the Code.
3) Draw conclusions from the evidence.
Rely upon and state your conclusions in the decision.
8) Term - __Expj ration: Section 26-6(D)(2)d. Variances and waivers expire
180 days after being granted unless:
0 a building permit issued, before that time, or
a different term is granted in the resolution.
GED\53027\345900,01 7
EN=
2) Substantially improved chances if there is a preponderance of the
evidence in the record on each of the required elements, and if that
evidence is summarized in written findings.
1 1. Case Law
i I i i
191 WIZ I I I � IND
Plaintiff bought land with notice that it was not sufficient f
single-family residence. I
0 1.25 acres; 2.5 reqEM
Rights • prior owners not relevant.
MMM•
1.41
0 1 0-year amortization of overheight billboards.
• Billboard owners challenge height restrictions.
• BOA denies variance.
M�t_�
• Permit for single-family house denied. Lot too small.
• At hearing, staff told applicant's attorney to go home; then
more testimony was taken.
GEDN53027N3459MOI 9
GED\53027,3459M01 10
ROBINSON & SCHEURER
A Professional Corporation
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
143 Union Boulevard
Suite 625
Lakewood, Colorado 80228-1827
Re: Board • Adjustment/Reconsideration Request/Trailer Source, Inc.
I
Dear Mr. White:
action taken at the last Bo:.tr tita M 4 ill
of the language of the PCD relating to ATVs and snowmobiles.
all
I ig��lllpip� �� 11�111 1�11qiq llqpi�lqp�ii�l
1 7 1 11 1 1"i � i 1 1
iii
ITY3017rdUrs, Tvnicn WE ri*pc uF uFtFUNb Ill 111111VI I Ut LFIC U111C 01 UIC HCUI 11F DRUFFIRIC600aro *1
Adjustment.
lll ll Jill 11111 11111 1
11 6 1 1 11 111 11 c3=rJMM=
Very truly yours,
Richard L5iheurer
•
cc: Jerry Dahl
J.R. Blumenthal
jeanu- I \Ietters4hitela-452000
7500 West 29th Avenue
Wheat Rid e. Colorado 80215
uz�
UMMM
FAX 303/235-2857
Mr. Richard J. Scheurer
Robinson & Scheurer
Artorneys-at-Law
N. M', MORE D I
Dear Mr. Scheurer:
I C"Ll"I III I"CIpT7777 . -74T1MR1*71runt m •
reconsideration of action from the Board • Adjustment.
Just so you are aware, the Public Comments section of the agenda is at the beginning of the
meeting and wi I I be done just moments after the meeting is called to order.
Opp I I 1 11 1 1111 111 1 p�1111 211 �
i
Alan C. White, AlCP
E.' wpd
City of Wheat Ridge
Planning and Development Department
Memorandum
TO: Board of Adjustment
FROM: Alan C. White, Director of Planning and Development
I 1
ill I 'I I II 111101LOVIDIM �
DATE: April 27, 2000
The application by the City of Arvada for approval of a 20' setback variance from the required 50'
front yard setback requirement for the purpose of constructing an equipment for soil and
groundwater remediation was withdrawn,
A-2 zoning currently requires a 30' front yard setback for this request thereby nullifying the need
for a variance..
CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
Minutes of Meeting
March 23, 2000
1. CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by Chair
HOWARD at 7:30 p.m. on March 3, 2000 in the Council Chambers of the Municipal
Building, 7500 West 29th Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado.
2. ROLL CALL
Alan White introduced Jerr-
y Montoya as the new Board . of Adjustment member representing
District 111.
Members Present: Michelle Brown
Bill Echelmeyer
Bob Howard
Paul Hovland
Linda Mauro
Jerry Montoya
Members Absent: Tom Abbott
Staff Present: Alan White, Planning Director
Mary Austin, Planner
Gerald Dahl, City Attorney
Ann Lazzeri, Secretary
23, 2000. A set of these minutes is retained both in the office of the City Clerk and in the
Department of Planning and Development of the City of Wheat Ridge.
It was moved by Board Member MAURO and seconded by Board Member
MONTOYA to approve the order of the agenda. The motion carried 6-0 with Board
Member ABBOTT absent.
(This is the time for anyone to speak on any subject not appearing on the agenda.)
There was no one signed up to speak.
A. Case No. TUP-00-01: (continuedfi-om February 24, 2000) y filed by •GT
Enterprises for approval of a temporary use permit to maintain existing storage of RV's at
10 165 West 49th Avenue (Lot 3) and to allow commercial vehicle display and storage at
10145 West 49th Avenue (Lot 1) without lot improvements. Said properties are zoned
Commercial-One.
Chair HOWARD asked if anyone wished to speak to this matter. There was no response and
no one had signed the public hearing roster. Page 2
Board ;T Adjustment Minutes
03/23-00
Now, therefore, be it resolved that Board of Adjustment Application Case No. TUP-00-
01 be and hereby is APPROVED.
Type of Variance: Temporary Use Permit to allow for rental of U-Hauls on the portion
of property known as Lot No. 4.
For the following reasons:
Y. The Board finds that based on the evidence presented and based on the Board's
conclusions relative to the five specific questions to justify the temporary use
permit, the evidence and facts in this case do support the granting of this
request.
With the following conditions:
The Temporary Use Permit is not to exceed one year or until the property is
sold.
Board of Adjustment Minutes Page 3
03/231-00
Board Member MAURO offered an amendment to add a Hau third conditio area -n whibich ch would uld
require four to six inches of gravel to be placed in the U-1 display ,N Nvo
\D,
extend to the curb. This amendment was accept ed by Board Member HoVt,A
Type of Variance: Temporary Use Permit to allow for rental of U-Hauls on the portion
of property known as Lot No. 4.
card of Adjustment Minutes Page 4
03/23-00
For the following reasons:
The Board
Board finds that based on the evidence presented and based on the
conclusions relative to the five specific questions to justif�' the temporary use
permit, the evidence and facts in this case do support the granting of this
request. I
With the following conditions:
1. The Temporary Use Permit is not to exceed one year or until the property is
sold.
3. Four to six inches of gravel will be placed in the U-Haul display area and the
gravel will extend to the curb.
The motion failed by a vote of-3-3 with Board Members MONTOYA, HOWARD and
ECHELMEYER voting opposed, and Board Member ABBOTT absent.
B. Case N% WA-I1 pplication filed by Trailer
Source, Inc. for an interpretation of allowed uses as listed in their Planned Commercial
Development (Tabor Development Planned Commercial Development Outline Development
Plan.) Said property is located at 4651 Tabor Street and zoned PCD.
denial of the application for reasons outlined in the staff report. lie entered a letter dated
March 14. 2000 from Kenneth G. Brengle. Jr,. President of the West Chamber indicating his
support for the applicant's request. The letter was made a part of the case file.
Board Member BROWN asked the staffs reason for the opinion that the sale of all-terrain
vehicles (ATVs) and snowmobiles should not be allowed. Mr. White explained staff's
interpretation is that there is nothing similar to ATV's or snowmobiles in the list of
permitted uses for this development.
Mr. White requested that staff be given the opportunity for a closing statement before a
motion is considered.
Dick Scheurer
143 Union Boulevard, Suite 625, Lakewood
Mr, Scheurer stated there is ample evidence to support the finding that sales of ATVs all
snowmobiles are in the scope of the Planned Development approved by Council in 1995
under the similar use provision.
Board Member HOVLAND expressed concern that sales could be expanded to include dirt
bikes or other vehicles that don't require licenses, Mr. Blumenthal responded that they have
turned away similar products such as motorized bicycles.
Board Member MONTOYA asked if Trailer Source sold pickup trucks.'Mr. Blumenthal
stated that, under the original PCD, they are allowed to sell pickup trucks but are limited to
fifteen at any one time.
Dick Scheurer returned to the podium. He presented a list of uses allowed in the Planned
Board of Adjustment Minutes Page 6
03123-00
In regard to Mr. White's request for rebuttal, lie stated he had no objection to Mr. Ahite
giving rebuttal. However, he did voice concern to the Board about counsel giving rebuttal
because he was not sure if Mr. Dahl represented the Board or Mr. White.
James Blumenthal returned to the podium. He stated that it was his intent to be a good
neighbor and not to do anything wrong. He stated that he felt he has been held unjustly at
bay by others and asked the Board to rule in his favor.
Gerald Dahl, city attorney, stated that he planned to address the Board on behalf of the staff
and planning director who interpreted the ordinance to say snowmobiles and ATV's are not
permitted on the PCD. He stated he was not representing the Board of Adjustment. Mr.
Scheurer indicated he had no objection Dahl speaking on behalf of the staff.
Board of Adjustment Minutes Page 7
03/23-00
Beard of Adjustment Minutes Page 8
03/23 -00
Type of Interpretation: Interpretation of the permitted use regulations in a Planned
Commercial Development.
F
The BoarT VrFFMMeM
relative to other similar uses, the applicant's request would be an approved use in the
Planned Commercial Development.
Board Member ECHELMEYER stated that he would be in favor of the application if the
semi traffic could be controlled.
Board Member HOVLAND stated that, while he shared a concern about traffic. there were
other items in the list of permitted uses that could generate at least as much traffic. He stated
that the Board's purpose was not to regulate the site but to determine if this is an intended
similar use.
In response to a question from Board Member MAURO, Mr. White explained that the
interpretation would only apply to the subject planned development and would not affect
other planned developments within the city.
Board Member HOVLAND asked if the interpretation could include traffic restrictions. Mr.
Dahl cited Section 2-6 1 -D(3) of the city code which says the Board has the authority to
affirm, reverse or modify.
Because a super majority vote is required, the motion failed by a vote of 4 to 2 with Board
Members HOWARD and MONTOYA voting no.
Dick Scheurer referred to a code provision which requires a simple majority in case of
interpretations as opposed to a super majority. Gerald Dahl informed Mr. Scheuerer that the
code had been amended within the last year to provide for a super majority vote in all cases
considered by the Board of Adjustment including cases of interpretation.
Chair HOWARD informed the applicant that the zoning administrator's interpretation will
stand.
(Chair HOWARD declared a brief recess at 10:1 U pm. The meeting reconvened at 10:20
P�m)
C. Case No. TUP-00-02: An application filed by Lisa Aiello for approval of a temporary u
permit to operate a retail garden, fresh produce market and Christmas tree lot from April
201 0 through March 31, 2001. Said property is located at 10590 West 44th Avenue and
zoned Agricultural-One. I
reviewed the five criteria involved in evaluating a temporary use permit. Staff
re commended denial of the request for reasons outlined in the staff report� If the proposed
roper zoning -with required
business is going to operate on a continuous Nlear_round basis, p
s ite improvements should be pursued.
Board of Adjustment Minutes Page 10
03/23-00
Kathy Weiss
4370 Moore Street
NIS, Weiss - was sworn in by Chair HOWARD. She presented a petition containing
signatures from the surrounding neighbors who were in favor of the application.
Whereas, the relief applied for may be granted without detriment to 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-00-
02 be, and hereby is, approved.
For the following reasons:
With the following conditions:
The motion carried by a vote of 6-0 with Board Member ABBOTT absent. Chair
HOWARD advised the applicant that her application was granted.
Daniel Grantham
I I I I I t
This variance would considerably impact the property values in the area in that
there are no other properties within this particular zoning that have exceeded
the 15-foot side yard setback.
The motion carried by a vote of 6-0 with Board Member ABBOTT absent.
5. CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING
Chair HOWARD declared the public hearing closed.
6. OLD BUSINESS
There was no old business to come before the Boar
dlnnffi=§��
A. Approval of Minutes It was moved by Board Member HOVLAND and seconded by
Board Member MAURO to approve the minutes of January 27, 2000 and Februar-y
24, 2000. Motion carried 5-0 with Board Member MONTOYA abstaining and Board
Member ABBOTT absent.
B. Board of Adjustment Training Session - Since there are no cases scheduled to come
before the Board at its April meeting, Alan White announced a training session to be held at
6:00 p.m. on April 27, 2000.
11
It was moved by Board Member HOVLAND and seconded by Board Member
ECHELMEYER to adjourn the meeting at 1127 p.m. The motion unanimously carried.
BOB HOWARD, Chairman
Board of Adjustment
Ann Lazzeri. Secretary
Board of Adjustment
Board of Adjustment Minutes Page 13
03123-00