Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/26/2002rag � AGEND September 26, 2002 Tu TV ap'L'l 71rarmill 1 1=11111 '11, Q P of Adjustment on September 26, 2002, at 7:30 p.m., in the City Council Chambers of the Municipal Building, 7500 W. 29 Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado. F WIQ X 3. PUBLIC FORUM (This is the time for anyone to speak on any subject not appearing on the agenda.) D. Case No. WA- 02 -1 An application filed by Kimary Marchese for approval of a variance to the fence height standard in a minimum front yard from 48 inches to 6 feet on property zoned Commercial-One (C-1) and located at 10400 West 38th Avenue. 7. NEW BUSINESS A. Approval of minutes — July 25, 2002 B. Set November meeting date R�Klq 1 il CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE PLANNING DIVISION STAFF REPORT TO: Board of Adjustment PRESENT LAND USE: Vacant laud Sf#2 ZONING: N&E: Residential One-C; S&W: Restricted Cornmercial i R ♦ � JU UNNNE M � The property in question is located at 6390 W 39 Avenue Avenue, and is currently a vacant lot. property is zoned Residential One-C (Exhibit 1, Zoning Map). The applicant (owner), The Buckeye Group (Exhibit 2, Deed), is requesting two separate variances: variance "A" is a request for approval of a 15-foot front yard setback variance. Variance "B" is a request ftr Wame k4a Ali reauiwi , 4_V__'fii1* f" 7, A i & 11. SITE PLAN — appff - c — aff has also sUbn elevab ATo_o_rpfa_noFffie proposed fi6U �h Elevations). I. 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.? If the requests are denied, the property may still receive a reasonable return mi Use. The property may still be developed with a single-family home, albeit with a smaller proposed structure and/or reduced rear yard size. 2. If the variance were granted, - would it alter the essential character of the locality? 4. Has the alleged difficulty or hardship been created by'any person presently having an interest in the property? the danger of fire. The requests 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 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 contribute to the neighborhood or community in any positive fashion, and would merely be a convenience for the property owners. The requests would not result in a reasonable accommodation of a person with disabilities. EXHIBIT I NW 24 V V 21 Nil 21 21 It w ---- It iff XI I I V S t U FIN ll I M 2�• :! �*-: � DEPAKTMENT OF PLANNINO AND DEVELOPMENT MAP ADOPTED: June 15, 1994 Last Revision: Us tember 10, 2001 I 0 LC nim ru ° U. C) ua CU.) szw a M<> tAJ N' U- c l i LJ ow W ri L. N. r 7 ■ CA. UIC 0 0 V-4 4- - CO 0 • 0 4- +.# 9 +4 • 0 lu • c n B:: Mi • qi • 0 -n- 4. fY 4- ww M OW wet • 0 5 • 0 CO) ca • • 14 • 0 to) r as • N 0 i • 4> t) Ut • CA. UIC 0 0 V-4 4- - CO 0 • 0 4- +.# 9 +4 • 0 lu • c n B:: Mi • qi i 8 0 -n- 4. fY 4- ww M OW wet • 0 5 • 0 CO) ca • 14 • 0 to) r as • N 0 i cn 4> t) Ut UIC 4.0 tea 1 0 R 45 4> 44 Ic — 67 0 9: tv • • • • • a U I m I H ou . .._.. .._ R - ' ` 0" E 2 64.72 ' ww w ------ wMw� aw . ¢g &$,,. ON 24, PANOE BOX } 11 S 13242" DAVID SWKXymM :30 .ef A " i W✓ � R ! �fy// / .a Lu LAJ Sul 3 fi dIR /.y�; ��vnMM ce 39TH AVENUE RR Tw it • � V E N ! 4 p j ( # ( R l m l 1 W' � � R zo p �R Z> zot y ...f w 1 3 tl ! ! t t 3A f �II11Yw.� � .r _ i! 6 t! 4 m '.�n""" ! 4! t � t "6 � � ,03 arEraririisR�r�iii$ � ."'=� titttFltil 11t � �' """ � � s tilttfl r ,��� �� ! , �!� � jJ 1 CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE PLANNING DIVISION STAFF REPORT TO; Board of Adjustment DATE OF MEETING: September 26, 2002 DATE PREPARED: September 13, 2002 CASE NUJ. & NA WA. -02 - 09 /Gibson CASE MANAGER: 'Travis Crane APPOMAIATE 14,953 square feet (34 Acres) F�'RESENT ZONING: R-1 (Residential One) PRESENT LAND USE: Single Family N4 ZONING: N,, S, E &W: Residential On* 4 ( )' SUB REG ATIONS - AS' A V A. A.AAU Alkrlt ,.Wx%": (X) CASE FILE & PACKET MATERIALS (X) ZONING ORDINANCE ( )' SUB REG ATIONS ( EXHIBITS OTHE JURISDICTION: The property is within the !pity of Wheat Ridge, and all notification and posting requirements have been et, therefore, there is jurisdiction to hear this case. Beard of Adjustment � WA -02 -49 /Gibson UMMKM� The property in question is located at 3850 Urban Street, and is currently a single-family residence. The property is zoned Residential One (Exhibit 1, Zoning Map). The applicant (owner), Connie Gibson (Exhibit 2, Deed), is requesting two separate variances variance "A" is a request for approval of a 7 foot 6 inch rear yard setback variance. Variance 'S" is a request for a 9 foot 2 inch side yard setback (Exhibit 3, Application). Each request will require a separate motion. H. SM PLAN Since the requests are similar, both request and "B" are addressed With th e* following criteria. However, each request will require separate discussion and a separate motion. Staff has the following comments regarding the criteria used to evaluate a variance request: I I I I I I I I ' I , The granting of these requests could potentially impact the essential character of the locality. The required rear and side yard setbacks in the R- I zone district are 15 feet. These two variance requests would reduce the rear yard setback to 2 feet 6 inches, and the side yard setback would be reduced to 10 inches. Board of Adjustment 2 WA-02-091Gibson 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.? 1% nk VCTUT'17167 almost 15,000 square feet in size, the lot far exceeds the minimum lot size requirement in the R- I zone district. The deck could be relocated or reconfigured while meeting required setbacks. The requests would not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other properties in the area. The adequate supply of light and air would not be compromised as a result of these requests. The requests would not increase congestion in the streets, nor increase the danger of fire. The requests 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 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? merely be a convenience for the property owners. The requests would not result in a reasonable accommodation of a person with disabilities. Board of Adjustment 3 WA-02-09/Gibson on "ift • • M • f* }3 AMIL IL NJ � R Y a � i • • R � t R 1 Z on "ift _ . _ VOMN 4 AMIL IL NJ a LLJ au Z W w w n � Zp Dg uj w ° o 0 U U. � . UJ w LU Li _ . _ VOMN CS Lim Z 8 m W z -j o v 0 F T rT ■ Z > Z 00 50 0 r-, Z - ,I V) 0 cr z rf Z7 jyw z ;' rr Z �F Z� c: r. el) tA EE x ,. ° r) > 0 � 0 F In �7 t-h cr c�4 OD 4L ta zp 74 Ul 2 C4 (D n C- 2c 0 4. — - r7 C, � vL z r z m 00 1• rr Uf 0 H- 0 CL 00 0 0 04 rT 11w ri c-n o' rn o r- MO 2:mo CM z:r z ;' rr Z �F Z� c: r. el) tA EE x ,. ° r) > 0 � 0 F In �7 t-h cr c�4 OD 4L ta zp 74 Ul 2 C4 (D n C- 2c 0 4. — - r7 C, � vL z r z m 00 1• rr Uf 0 H- 0 CL 00 0 0 04 rT 11w ri c-n o' rn o r- MO 2:mo CM ;' rr Z �F Z� c: r. el) tA EE x ,. ° r) > 0 � 0 F In �7 t-h cr c�4 OD 4L ta zp 74 Ul 2 C4 (D n C- 2c 0 4. — - r7 C, � vL z r z m 00 1• rr Uf 0 H- 0 CL 00 0 0 04 rT 11w ri c-n o' rn o r- MO 2:mo CM � vL z r z m 00 1• rr Uf 0 H- 0 CL 00 0 0 04 rT 11w ri c-n o' rn o r- MO 2:mo CM m 00 1• rr Uf 0 H- 0 CL 00 0 0 04 rT 11w ri c-n o' rn o r- MO 2:mo CM Em mil die flied out by staff. � � . �� 1�� � � ?7 Z ® ¥��f �/ . � . &� . . � ,� '� / . .� ~. �� � � .§ � ` � � � . .■a r � i U r r a w r. r i • � ,�w • ri DATE P REPARED: Septemb • 200 CASE N O. N CASE MANAGER: Michael Pesicka ACTION REQUESTED: Request for approval of a 10 foot side yard setback variance from the required 15 i #•! :r _ r s r ., r r r r .. .. ­V. LOCATION OF QUEST: 5831 W. 29 Avenue Wh eat Ridge, CO 80033 NAME & ADDRESS OF APPLICANT(S): John luaus 5831 W. 29 Avenue Wheat Ridge, CO 80033 NAME & A D OF O ER(S): Same as above APPROXIMATE A: 12,500 Square feet PRESENT ZONING. Residential-Three (R -3) PRESENT LAND USE: Single Family Residence SURROUNDING ZONING: 1_; R -1, : R -IC, E; R -1 & W , R -3 SURROUNDING LAND USE: N' E: Ashland. Resevoir, E: low - density residential; W: medium -to high- density residential. HATE PUBLISHED: September 12, 2002 DATE POSTED: September 12, 2002 JURISDIC:11ON: T ,IrapwT woOmMi -y--#Ik%yjhe t Rid - e - and all notification and �#_osting therefore, there is jurisdiction to hear this case. At Q resulting in a 5 foot side yard setback. The purpose of the variance request is to allow for the construction • a two-unit addition. Staff has the following comments regarding the criteria used to evaluate a variance request: 2. If the variation were granted, would it alter the essential character of the locality? 3. Would the particular physical surrounding, shape or topographical condition of the specific property involved result in a particular hardship (upon the owner) as dnguished from a mere inconvenience if the strict letter of the regulations were carried out? The lot is rectangular in shape and is relatively flat. The property does abut Ashland Reservoir on the north and east, but this does not create a unique situation for the property. The request may be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other properties in the neighborhood. The request would not impair the adequate supply of light and air to adjacent properties or increase congestion in public streets. It will not *increase the danger of fire or endanger public safety. There could be a detrimental effect on property values in the area. 6. It criteria I through 5 are found, then, would the granting of the variance result in a benefit or contribution to the neighborhood or' the comm I unity, 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 requested variance would result in a benefit solely for the applicant and would not contribute to the neighborhood • community. Granting • the variance would not result in the reasonable accommodation of a person with disabilities , IV. STAFF CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION H. 1 11111 W... The variance could alter the essential character of the locality. The surrounding land uses are single-family residences to the west and south, and all the surrounding structures were built in 1909 and still retain their original character. Granting the variance request would create a structure that is not in character th the surro ng neighbo oo . 3. Would the particular physical surrounding, shape or topographical condition of the specific property involved result in a particular hardship (upon the owner) as re mconve carried out? 4. Has the alleged difficulty or hardship been created by any person presently having an interest in the property? Yes, the hardship has been created by the applicant. The applicant is proposmig a structure which does not meet setback requirements for the district. The request may be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other properties in the neighborhood. The request would not impair the adequate supply of light and air to adjacent properties, or increase congestion in public streets. It will not increase the danger of fire or endanger public safety. There could be a detrimental effect on property values in the area. f. If criteria a through e 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 requested variance would result in a benefit solely for the applicant and would not contribute to the neighborhood or community. Granting of the variance would not result in the reasonable accommodation of a person with disabilities. 1. The requested variance could possibly alter the essential character of the neighborhood. 2. The hardship has been created solely by the applicant. 3. The requested variance will not result in the reasonable accommodation of a person with disabilities. • �3 iv qm EXHIBIT I r NE 25 ff �F� i8 lira i�rM�r t •: V«.nom.. {. t Mk. i r • �3 iv qm r t ff �F� i8 t •: V«.nom.. {. t Mk. i r • �3 iv qm Rim t �F� i8 ss Um 9 WATER FEATURE R - 3 RiCHARP MART ESTATE PARK A d { DEPARTMENT OF MAP ADOPTED: June 15, 1994 PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT Last Revision: S=t rnber 10, 2001 R be filled out by staff. • • • I• .S!5 -lt�l L n n ' � lJ wlsj 100' 29 A v 11 #5931 0 �C) z ` W M CD 0 W LLJ � O c� U W W U ry u7 Q Ly W U-) W Ln 0i .;si \A/ �sT 100' 29TH A V E I #5831 0 �o z ` W � >-- h 0 W L C/) � I Ej z 0U W W U U W L( L J �} rf LL. ��'�-�x �u � ��0/-� « uv �-A \/\/ E S T E L E V A T I Ll N | \/ \/ | // � | | � | V L_--___--- i ! i \__)83 '--�_- Y �--------� mfm � 0 5T SOUTI ELEVATHIN -wj September 4, 2002 Sincerely, Mr. And Mrs. John G. Da us ��. \ « . . � � \ rw N iii 10 t-+ 0 0 . 4;o Cd C� ecS • a r C/3 — 'o 0 to .t: v ' cd SNOW cd r4 w oo ., Q 40 Cd a E» t+� rs -3 o w r.,.w QtO9£Lt7 'OPI3t3 43d 4.0 C 7 ��. 1N3Y13SY3 553 4 . 51 �� C+3 cl3 tc � y �rwy � ,» y per: t «�" C5 � � �`r�- �«� �^» tw't� "G L U .. c) r ` Lr r y v 4 +! Zr 'o �- 0 4.) Q "^ tX .`.r W 0 ci7 C7 C F+ "ti �•,Z t ! i'OL r /M" tt cl 4w tea � CS y . cgt-•j t ,t �i V �+ ° ie Q t" {� t y e tC3 yU C>.` Ct R wow Vol w rX ^— \ tT rte+ LU to r �� fJ t _� tL? roc G71 < 0 d).""° +" ctj CS `'. t= t" '✓ ; 0 t `` ..»iv w ` 1� .a C*7 . u a vi " i i LPL 8 ""`y UU C,,5 } 67 ( co M ¢sn v3. t3 a o a w + N a +, T Ccl t _,! a s tt$ �" i_ -. G cG C) + w Cd `o ..r�'' a titi *.6E O x 224 G' O . ( I ll ` + 4, tt '.fie G" .t7 c� c' i. " "' 0 r-� x � OR �IRi. a w r to J enct. r !� tiL3 qJ V5 4) t:i }^' t C3 cCS," 4 0 ry+ cz i M d3 4 r .y 074 � � s � L7 �� y � 4) � �; ".w o c c LU r ✓� + 4 " "° . 0 Zx > Z . � C? cCi 13 Ga" C? . a a ' « cti` c C? N . 4 c a tti} to >C t> ¢3 tw" L#.r C\ O dam} o N Q tU r• U C 3 c17 C) G3 =� c c c . a MG C7� C7 ■ U chi CL� 40 o ° ai=r G7 to +• ^-s} 4i4a C,3 14 7�L ci Cs Ec$ as ur 2t Vas + 4) t 4- " Ci tn ¢ o f m 5 1 1 W Z6 I� "Z b = tQ =r, • •� �laS J w C? H 4 1 tst} to a 4 ` � O c o r19 v S~ tl� gy r. t~ T • Ei X4 Cx ci) ■ .tw mac„* .4) tU ! " 1 1 W ,], TO: Board of Adjustment DATE OF STING: September 26, 2002 DATE PREPARED: September 19, 2002 CASE NO. & NA A -02 -11 CASE MANAGER: Michael Pesieka 10400 W. 38 Avenue Wheat Ridge, CO 80033 NAME & ADDRESS OF OWNER(S): Same as above DATE POSTED: September 12, 2002 DATED LEGAL NOTICES SENT: September 1! PLATER INTO CO COMPREHENSIVE P (:) CASE FILE & PACKET MATERIALS (X) ZONING ORDINANCE { ) SLIDES ( } SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS (X) EXHIBITS ( ) OTHER JCIRISDICTION. 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 property is located at 10400 W. 38 Avenue and is currently being used for commercial and residential purposes. The property is zoned Commercial-One (C-1) and is approximately 21,780 square feet in area. (pdiib SITE PLAN 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 ► regulation for the district in is it is located? If the request is denied, the property may yield a reasonable return in service and income. The proper may still be used for commercial purposes. the variation were granted, would it alter the essential character of the locality? The request would not alter the essential character of the locality. The property is unique im 4. Has the alleged difficulty or hardship been created by any person presently having an interest in the property? The hardship has been created • the owner. The owner is proposing to build a fence that exceeds the fence height standard in the C- I zone district. However, the property has no rear yard to use for the activities that the applicant is proposing. 6. If criteria a through e 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? MOIRILOSIXORO i•• Oo #,,,1 #101 I To be rilled out by staff. ww w. lil a O O kr —4 41 V1 q � to 4.1 TA ,,j Ej m (d 0) b ut C: V 0 • 1 4 1 44 w fl) t>i �4 44 0 �4 4. 0 ,zPQ -4 4) I • LM Q m w NJ T� Ga O 0 4 9 1 W C> 0 t3 fn Cl� C> o" CO n . I 0 C �4 0 44 44 C4 41 • k 0) 0$ 0 44 li 4 0 1 to m 0 41 t 0 L) it g 41 to 1 I ta • C� 4.1 • 44 v-4 0 1 44 o 41 9 to to it E4 I �4 4. 0 ,zPQ -4 4) I • LM Q m w NJ T� Ga .� ,r � m _ °� w .�. ,� . ii�a41a9 9.1 Ce.My o�y.�� - plan Db �g(eia4n ao _. IMPROVEMENT S U PLAT DETAIL "B >, COPY OF LENA GULCH DRAINAGEWAY FLOOD CONTROL IMP. PROJECT JAN JARAY 1 1980, 0. AC. ACOUISI I SON NCB. 2.107, PROJ NO 732-282 NTS II NEtgn an 4Va of E'v2 a I k i 1 t f POINT OF BEGINNING II NEtgn an 4Va of E'v2 a I k i 1 al 1s v w J' v " - � t" t+1 t VKAt:t Nl1 v_' 15VUNUAKIL� `.SHOWN HLI<LVN WLRL LUCAiCD UNDER MY SUPERVISION, AND 1> v' 2X4 7 S ED 14 � �$� PLAT v THAT ALL LOT DIMENSIONS, EASEMENTS AND RIGHTS -OF -WAY SHOWN ARE D TAIL A i OUTHSE ��� * *a� / � � U FROM OFFICIAL PLATS THIS SURVEY DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A MILE SEARCH ®x114 - *s ®®watffid ���® ! 4P APPROX N BANK OF TO DETERMINE OWNERSHIP OR EASEMENTS OF RECORD DONE BY MARK D 4 DRY CREEK PER COPY O F A PORTIO � �� HORACE HEIGHTS SUB I � SCHEAR IN MY PROFESSIONAL OPINION MONUMENTS FOUND ARE OR °GINAL Syr t� °r �j 1"° 4 APRIL 11. 1955 aa MONUMENTS, AND WERE ACCEPTED AS SAME BOUNDARY MONUMENTS ONLY O r H O RA C E H E I G H I S m S U B DIVISION ��� R E T A I GULCH FOR �" gyp SEE DETAIL "A" � ARE TO BE USED FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF FENCE. BUILDING, OR OTHER a� 4 ,.!, FUTURE IMPROVEMENT LINES LOCATION OF ALL EASEMENTS, AND RIGHTS-OF- BOOK 14 PACE 2 3 � m j ALSO KNOWN AS , < � �� 1 � WAY IN EVIDENCE OR KNOWN TO ME ON THE PREMISES ON THIS DATE ARE �� DRY CREEK) l ;a ACCURATELY SHOWN TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF APRIL 1 1 a 1 955 EXISTING NORTH BAN ---- SOUTH LINE �,� OF LENA GULCH DRAINAGEWAY NORTH LINE FLOOD CONTROL IMP PROD ACCORDING TO COLORADO LAW YOU MUST COMMENCE ANY LEGAL ACTION N T S O F DRIE C REE K BE � c 1 f / OF LENA GULCH DRAINAGEWAY ACQUISITION NO 2 107 BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY WITHIN THREE YEARS AFTER YOU a< ✓ o Ft nnn cnNTRnt imp PRn.t .IAN 1 1 QAl) FIRST DISCOVER SUCH DEFECT IN NO FVF!NT_ MAY ANY ArTInN elAepn t tOnN JUNE 1979 CAP 132112 MATCHES 13212 MATCHES g MON REC FILED C M REC FILED 1-29-117 SITE a-I, 2 -21 -95 61 / ' I•. � SE CC28FND 11 ME 1PIN<7 t IN � RESET W\ 3/ -0` it M 41 M RE9AR W\ ALUM C7' CAP PLS 18475 a N89'59'42 "E t 4 #489`59'4 "E 39 59' E � 39 59' 1 3 � >I in :r 117 ot'I 1 ayCENTE S p q 28 fH6 3 1 7 E 1 /4 COR,SEC i f F N 1 1 2 HE5 ® M 3 ©N C LEO p t 12 -21 -92 tJi aTpy J.3 V 90427 0,�, N89 "W N89'56'2 " W 39 56 7 - — 39,55' QUARTER SECTION MAP NTc, DEPOSIT CERTIFICATE ACCEPTED FOR DEPOSIT IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER OF JEFFERSON COUNTY, AT GOLDEN COLORADO, ON THIS DAY OF , 19 AT O'CLOCK M IN BOOK AT PAGE RECEPTION NO CY JEFFERSON COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER xwz�� TIMBERLINE SURVEYING, INC. 744.4 WEST CHAMELD AVENUE, UNIT E I Pt LETON, COLORADO 80125 iANO SURIPM 0 AND COISTRUCTION 9TAKMG (308) 971 -0955 98200A REV 10 -7 -98 AM MSJR nM REV 10 -19 - AM REV 7 6 00 MD, POINT OF BEGINNING It'62'9ests° 2220 �` f � p�?� SEC FNb 1�2 50" ; (SIN NOTES Howl", I RESET W\ 3/4" REBAR W\ ALUM 1 LENA GULCH iS ALSO KNOWN AS DRY CREEK T 740 BASIS OF BEARINGS CAP PLS 18475 2 THE PURPOSE OF THIS IMPROVEMENT SURVEY FLAT IS TC CLARIFY THE SLDi,' 132_0 95' .. DONE BY TIMBERLINE SURVEYING, INC SEPT 30TH, 1996. REVISED ! I _ N 89 V45 T ` 3 LENA GULCH DRAINAGEWAY ACQUISTION NO 2 107 ANDDRAINAGE AND r,.;100 � I N 1 / 4t COR SEC 28 CONTROL EASEMENT REC NO 81086859 \OC X 1980, ARE THE SAME I o FND 3 _ 1 /4 ALUM W 8 H I._1 AV ,r1® ° LEGAL DESCRIPTION, AND THEY DO NOT CCLOSE ArfA° 'AMA:.CALLY i t Il CAP 132,12.MATCHE5 ___..,,. - -__ _ , 30 it n 4 ALL = DETAIL DRAWINGS WERE SCANNED FROM ORIGINAL DRAN.NGS AND ARE I MON REC FILER - - -_ __ ° PUBLIC RECORD -O A I 1 -29-87 r a! 5 THE WEST AND SOUTH PROPERTY LINES COULD NOT BE ESTABLISHED, AS THE L101'A.CBn LkE4 ORIGINAL GEED DOES NOT CLOSE u*L1g}171etIaIOAI O D' $69'55'45 "W S 40 t0 ( 141 o° 236` �e * *�� ^1 1 8 55' / a 1 ® PLANTERS 18 2` s����� LEGAL DESCRIPTION PER DEEDBOOK 1287 PAGE 163, REC NO 810456 s ,, ¢ �sffi� /'� 7HAT PART OF THE E1 /2 E1 /2 NW1 /4 NE 1/4 OF SECTION 28. TOWNSHIP 3 klWya. N(! V4. SEe'na1.I CAN PY 10 SOUTH, RANGE 69 WEST DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS l` "f i$ � �� G�4+h77Y u- ]==4 20 6' , BEGINNING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER'OF THE E1 / 2 E1 2 {�� rr `• 01 NWt /4 NE1 /4 OF SAID SECTION 28. THENCE WEST 236 FEET, Tr,ENCE SOUTH TO THE NORTH. BANK OF DRY CREEK, THENCE FOLLOWING LINE OF SAIO ., L 0 " COVERED C a i ; Q �� aS�e'�✓ 8 CREEK .T4 BEGINNING, COUNTY OF JEFFERSON. STATE OF COLORADO al 1s v w J' v " - � t" t+1 t VKAt:t Nl1 v_' 15VUNUAKIL� `.SHOWN HLI<LVN WLRL LUCAiCD UNDER MY SUPERVISION, AND 1> v' 2X4 7 S ED 14 � �$� PLAT v THAT ALL LOT DIMENSIONS, EASEMENTS AND RIGHTS -OF -WAY SHOWN ARE D TAIL A i OUTHSE ��� * *a� / � � U FROM OFFICIAL PLATS THIS SURVEY DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A MILE SEARCH ®x114 - *s ®®watffid ���® ! 4P APPROX N BANK OF TO DETERMINE OWNERSHIP OR EASEMENTS OF RECORD DONE BY MARK D 4 DRY CREEK PER COPY O F A PORTIO � �� HORACE HEIGHTS SUB I � SCHEAR IN MY PROFESSIONAL OPINION MONUMENTS FOUND ARE OR °GINAL Syr t� °r �j 1"° 4 APRIL 11. 1955 aa MONUMENTS, AND WERE ACCEPTED AS SAME BOUNDARY MONUMENTS ONLY O r H O RA C E H E I G H I S m S U B DIVISION ��� R E T A I GULCH FOR �" gyp SEE DETAIL "A" � ARE TO BE USED FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF FENCE. BUILDING, OR OTHER a� 4 ,.!, FUTURE IMPROVEMENT LINES LOCATION OF ALL EASEMENTS, AND RIGHTS-OF- BOOK 14 PACE 2 3 � m j ALSO KNOWN AS , < � �� 1 � WAY IN EVIDENCE OR KNOWN TO ME ON THE PREMISES ON THIS DATE ARE �� DRY CREEK) l ;a ACCURATELY SHOWN TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF APRIL 1 1 a 1 955 EXISTING NORTH BAN ---- SOUTH LINE �,� OF LENA GULCH DRAINAGEWAY NORTH LINE FLOOD CONTROL IMP PROD ACCORDING TO COLORADO LAW YOU MUST COMMENCE ANY LEGAL ACTION N T S O F DRIE C REE K BE � c 1 f / OF LENA GULCH DRAINAGEWAY ACQUISITION NO 2 107 BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY WITHIN THREE YEARS AFTER YOU a< ✓ o Ft nnn cnNTRnt imp PRn.t .IAN 1 1 QAl) FIRST DISCOVER SUCH DEFECT IN NO FVF!NT_ MAY ANY ArTInN elAepn t tOnN JUNE 1979 CAP 132112 MATCHES 13212 MATCHES g MON REC FILED C M REC FILED 1-29-117 SITE a-I, 2 -21 -95 61 / ' I•. � SE CC28FND 11 ME 1PIN<7 t IN � RESET W\ 3/ -0` it M 41 M RE9AR W\ ALUM C7' CAP PLS 18475 a N89'59'42 "E t 4 #489`59'4 "E 39 59' E � 39 59' 1 3 � >I in :r 117 ot'I 1 ayCENTE S p q 28 fH6 3 1 7 E 1 /4 COR,SEC i f F N 1 1 2 HE5 ® M 3 ©N C LEO p t 12 -21 -92 tJi aTpy J.3 V 90427 0,�, N89 "W N89'56'2 " W 39 56 7 - — 39,55' QUARTER SECTION MAP NTc, DEPOSIT CERTIFICATE ACCEPTED FOR DEPOSIT IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER OF JEFFERSON COUNTY, AT GOLDEN COLORADO, ON THIS DAY OF , 19 AT O'CLOCK M IN BOOK AT PAGE RECEPTION NO CY JEFFERSON COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER xwz�� TIMBERLINE SURVEYING, INC. 744.4 WEST CHAMELD AVENUE, UNIT E I Pt LETON, COLORADO 80125 iANO SURIPM 0 AND COISTRUCTION 9TAKMG (308) 971 -0955 98200A REV 10 -7 -98 AM MSJR nM REV 10 -19 - AM REV 7 6 00 MD, CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE BOARD O F Meetin Minutes of retaine July 25,2002 25, 2002, A set of these minutes is both in the o ffice FO Department of Planning and Development of the City of �Vheat Ridge. 3. PUBLIC signe There was no one up to spe ak. Board of Adjustment 'age 1 0'7125/02 staff report and presented photos and site layout pertaining to the application. Staff recommended denial of the application as outlined in the staff report. The applicant appeared before the Board. Board Member ABBOTT asked Mr. Olson if he had considered an alternative location to the east of his house. Mr. Olson replied that this location would necessitate the removal of a large tree and the loss of one space in his garage. It would also block light and air to his house as well as his neigh•or's house to the east. home is 34 feet long. iioard Page 2 07/25/02 Chair MONTOYA asked if there were others present who wished to address the zpplication. Hearing no response, Chair MONTOYA declared the public hearing closed. Hearing no further discussion, Chair MONTOYA stated that a motion on part A of the applicant's request was in order. Upon a motion by Board Member ABBOTT and second by Board Member BLAIR, the following resolution was stated: Whereas, the applicant was denied permission by an administrative officer; al Whereas, Board of Adjustment Application Case No. WA-02-04(A) is an appeal to this Board from the decision of an administrative officer; and For the following reasons: Board of Adjustment Page 3 07/25/02 Whereas, the relief applied for MAY NOT be granted without subslantially impairing the intent and purpose of the regulations governing the City of �Vhe Ridge. Now, therefore, be it resolved that Board of Adjustment Application Case No. WA- 02-04(B) be, and hereby is, DENIED. Board of Adjustment Page 4 07/25/02 This case was introduced by Pesicka. He entered all pertinent documents into the report record and advised the Board there was jurisdiction to hear the case. He reviewed the staff d presented photos and site layout pertaining to the application. recommended denial of the application as outlined in the staff report. The applicant appeared before the Board. Chair MONTOYA asked to hear from members of public. Board of Adjustment Page 5 07125/02 Hearing • response, he closed the public hearing. Upon a motion by Board Member. DRDA and second by Board Member ABBOTT, the following resolution was stated: �111 i i I 111lig 11111�1�1 1� 11111pil 11111111 11 1 111 !111111 !111111 I , 1 A I # Whereas, Board of Adjustment Application Case No. WA-1 t 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 aw,- an in recognition that a protest was registered against it, Whereas, the relief applied for MAY NOT be granted without detriment to the regulations governing the City of Wheat Ridge. Now, therefore, be it resolved that Board of Adjustment Application Case No. W 02-06 be, and hereby is, DENIED. Board of Adjustment Page 6 07/25/02 T. ype of 1 f oot 4 inch side i, i m the require T � f oot side yard set back i a 4 f oot : inch si set F or 1' i » reaso Board of Adjustment Page 7 07/25/02 Whereas, the applicant was denied permission by an administrative officer; and Type of Temporary Use Permit: A temporary structure permit no longer than December 15, 2002. For the following reasons: Board , of A - djustment Page 8 07/25/02 The motion passed 6-0 with Board Members ECHELMEYER and HOVLAND absent. F perim Tr a teuipltraty been approved. 5. CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING Chair MONTOYA declared the public hearing closel 6. OLD BUSINESS There was no old business to come before the Board. A. Minutes of June 27,2002 — It was moved by Board Member HOWARD a seconded by Board Member YOUNG to approve the minutes of June 27, 2002 as presented. The motion passed unanimously. I Chair MONTOYA declared the meeting adjourned at 10:10 p.m. Board of Adjustment im City of Wheat Ridge Planning and Development Department Memorandum TO: Board of Adjustment # rom. " • b" 18, 2002 RLMMI"UTOMPIT .. i. - - November and December. Attached, is a copy of the department's November and December meeting schedule. The schedule shows the Board's November meeting failing on Thanksgiving (November 28h) and the December meeting failing the day after Christmas (December 26'). Staff would like the Board to confirni its concurrence with canceling the November 28"' meeting and holding one meeting either on November 14 or December 12, 2002. This meeting would be held in lieu of the two other meetings. CADocutuents and Settings\kathyMy Documents\Kathy\BOA\Mtginemos\iiov-detmeetinSO2.wpd