Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/24/2002well AGENDA October 24, 2002 11 1 - (en i7rBum! of Adjustment on October 24, 2002, at 7:30 p.m., in the City Council Chambers of the Municipal Building, 7500 W. 29 Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado. 3. PUBLIC FOR (This is the time for anyone to speak on any subject not appearing on the agenda.) A. ' Case No. TUP-02-05: An application filed by Trugreen Landcare for approval of a one-year Temporary Structure Permit to allow an office trailer on property zoned Commercial-Two (C-2) and located at 8935 West 44 Avenue. V�� OLIA2 r Hn 111NNiTwk # # #. CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE PLANNING DIVISION STAFF REPORT TO: Board of Adjustment I q 1! 111111 " 1 11 1 � i III III I �� J I I PRESENT ZONING: Commercial-Two (C-2) PRESENT LAND USE: Law care company SURROUNDING ZONING: N: R-3, S: C-1 & A-1; E: R-3 & W: C-1 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. 1. REQUEST 11. SITE PLAN Ill. VARIANCE CRITERIA Staff has the following comments regarding the criteria use to evaluate a Temporary Use request. The proposed temporary use: 1. Will not have a detrimental effect upon the general health, welfare, safety and convenience of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the proposed use; and The potential temporary office trailer will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other properties, The adequate supply of light and air will not be decreased; the temporary trailer will not increase congestion in public streets or the parking lot. There will still be adequate parking for customers, and none of the drive aisles will be restricted. The trailer would not increase the danger of fire. 3. Will not result in undue traffic congestion or traffic hazards, or unsafe parking, loading, service or internal traffic conflicts to the detriment of persons whether on or off site; and The proposed temporary trailer will not increase traffic congestion • traffic hazards. There would still be adequate parking for customers and drive aisles will not be blocked as a result. 4. Will be appropriately designed, including setbacks, heights, parking, bulk, buffering, screening and landscaping, so as to be in harmony and compatible with the character of the surrounding areas and neighborhood, especially with adjacent properties; and 5. Will not overburden the capacities of the existing streets, utilities, parks, schools, and other public facilities and services. The potential temporary structure would not be detrimental to existing streets, nor overburden any utilities, parks, schools • other public facilities. IV. STAFF CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Upon review • the above request, staff concludes that the above criteria are supportive of the temporary structure request. Staff has found that there are unique circumstances attributed to this request that would warrant approval of a temporary structure. Therefore, staff recommends APPROVAL for the following reasons: 1. Approval of the temporary structure would not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. 3. Approval of the temporary structure would not result in undue tra"i congestion or traffic hazards. E+E 15 • ca r� N 2`2 PEPAPTMENTOF MAP ADOPTED: June 15, 1994 PLANNING ANP DEYELOPMENT Last Revision: Sep tember 10, 2001 H To be filled out by staff: { E - 33 r # ti r 0 t ! UJ �� I I r°,. 1 4 1 # C: # D# V# \f I✓ B E M V J 1 J I I V C_ k i w w 4 Soa t{ ® © , P ARCEL 5 _ � _ T PLACE PARCEL 4 �° � � � TEL s . 45"9 PLACE N� ° ® #,� "� � FOE 415rA e�� _ � � � t� P(K48) �oaltron#a� 0 1 = Z GiD., Ilo.00 _ < _ PI81 B 1 l2ta: rr - iV 1� �4' ' e 3G5 CJ 7'$.20' > PARCEL 2 1 ; \ PARCEL { — i #99O PAGE 2 950 IM PAGE 2 t®x.a9a PG.#e#) i a I (BH1 6 PG.550) ;N \ , r LLJI (: g RETAIL OFFICE, ; �� t4 tPt / � r tvlllj 1 q e 6lfIL DIMG HM \I WAREHOUSE QUA, cr. 0. �kl � 1 CEL � p 1 0 N BOO 90 PAGE 2 IM ft 0 / /� /v`� r lu Z s� 14m1 i Q ", �A U z 9 w w z 0 MONUMENT 4,445 asap -�— �, ac (zr1a�,##�c�} ,. &, 3'•ti r AO 425.E PC,, N f9` IE AV JF V` NW 1/4, PIE 1/4 T3S, R69W OF 6TH P.M. AM - ..,._.,_.�.. -- Attn: Mike City of Wheat Ridge 7500 W. 29 Ave. Wheat Ridge, Co 80033 TruGreen LandCare 10575 Ralston Road Arvada, CO 80004 Tel: 303-422-9747 Fax: 303-425-1165 Re: Land use Case Processing Application, purpose of temporary use, building, and sign ror the property at 8935 W. 44' Ave. Wheat Ridge, Co 80033 BE= Robyn Leach Business Administrator CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT Minutes of Meeting September 26, 2002 WON 3. PUBLIC FORUM There was no one signed up to speak. Board of Adjustment Page 1 09/26/02 criteria for both requests (A and 13) were reviewed. Staff recommended denial of the application as outlined in the staff report. In response to questions about whether or not Lamar would be extended or vacated, Travis Crane replied it would probably remain a dead-end street but the present right-of- way for Lamar remains. Sidewalk will be required along 39 th Avenue and Mr. Crane indicated it was not clear at this time whether or not it would be required to go around the comer down Lamar Street. 1 110 • Kay Wells 3895 Lamar Street Ms. Wells was sworn in by Chair MONTOYA. She spoke in opposition to the application for the same reasons stated by Mr. Wells. U�M Board of Adjustment Page 2 09/26/02 Mary Shell 3885 Lamar Street Ms. Shell was sworn in by Chair MO NTOYA. She spoke in opposition to the application and expressed concern about parking and traffic congestion. following Upon a motion by Board Member ABBOTT and second by Board Member BLAIR, the Whereas, the applicant was denied permission Beard of Adjustment Page 3 09/26/02 Whereas, Board of Adjustment Application Case No. WA-02-08(A) is an appeal to this Board from the decision of an administrative offlcer; and Whereas, the property has b o een sted the fifteen days required by law; and in p recognition that there were 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 Boar o a ustment Application Case No. W 02-08(A) be, and hereby is, APPROVED. I Type of Variance: A request for approval of a 6-foot front yard setback variance resulting in a 24-foot front yard setback. ", I FN I I I F I � Iffil 11 M 11 1 1 * # Chair MONTOYA advised the applicant that part A of his variance request had been approved. Upon a motion by Board Member HOVLAND and second by Board MembM DRDA the following resolution was stated: I a « a iiipqiii 11111piIIIIII 1111111111 Beard ofAdjustment Page 4 09/26/02 Whereas, Board of Adjustment Application Case No. WA-02-08(B) is an appeal this Board from the decision of an administrative officer; and i VIV i. Case No. WA-02-09: An application filed • Connie Gibson for approval of (A) Board of Adjustment Page 5 09/26/02 Waltrout Klaus 3830 Urban Ms. Klaus was swom in by Chair MONTOYA. She stated she had no problem with the deck but expressed concern about storm water drainage problems between her property and the applicant's property. She testified that the problem existed before the applicant's deck was installed although the concrete posts may • adding to the problem. In response to questions from the Board, Mr. Crane explained that the city is not responsible to resolve drainage issues between private properties. This would have to be resolved with all property owners involved. Connie Gibson returned to the podium. She testified that grading between the properties was not altered when the deck was installed. She also stated they cut a hole in thefence to allow unobstructed drainage. Board of Adjustment Page 6 09/26/02 return Mike Black to the podium. He also testified that the grading had not b een change but be willing to install a French drain or r- 4 a r Boar Member YOUNG r if the hot could be relocated Mr Black stated that - deck was designed to hold the weight of the hot tub in its pre w were to be moved w ould deck to see if it would hold the weight. t i i e i r t i !. i t i • * r i r r s t: r r N '� the f ollowing t i state �11111 III i t r* i i i i r i r the f ollowing reas 1. occurs The structure, as it i stantially impairs the intent and purp o f regulati the « the city. 2. If the denie the prop erty may still receive a reas I re quest pr operty use. The ! as a single- res r its use may c ontin ue. 3. The deck could be relocated or reconfigured while meeting required set 4. re The w ould i r i or benefit t the neigh borhood a nd would solely be an enhancement for ►! o wners. 5. The persons « interest in the p rope r t y crea ted th har possibly r rough the errors and omissions of ii r B oard In response to a question from the Board, Mr. Crane stated that it was acceptable to deny both portions of the variance request under one motion. The motion passed 8-0. Chair MONTOYA advised the applicant that the request for a variance had been denied. The applicant inquired about an appeal process. Chair MONTOYA advised the applicant that an appeal may be made through district court within 30 days. Travis Crane advised the applicant that he would send a letter to the applicant explaining the appeal process. units could add to traffic congestion on 29 h . Board of Adjustment Page 8 09/26/02 enough A copy of the letter of opposition which was earlier entered into the record was given to Mr. Daus for his review. Mr. Daus disagreed with the statement in the letter that there was not i proposed additions. Board Member HOVLAND expressed concern about ingress /egress from the garages proposed to face 29` .Avenue. Board Member YO LNG asked if Mr. Daus had considered changing the plan to build the garages to face the east. Mr. Maus explained that he wanted to keep the side yard for landscaping. Whereas, the property has been posted the fifteen days required by law; and in recognition that a protest was registered against it; Whereas, the relief applied for MAY be granted without substantially impairing the intent and purpose of the regulations governing the City of Wheat Ridge. Now, therefore, be t lved that Board of Adjustment Application 1 1 (A) be, and hereby is, DENIED. Type of Variance: Request for approval of a 10 -foot side yard setback variance from the required -foot side yard setback resulting in a 5-foot side yard setback. For the following reasons. Board of Adjustment Page 9 09/26/02 11 1111liqll IIIIIIIIIII �illillili III III I I I IN!! iiiii��l 1 11111111111 ir� I:[ I 11 Whereas, the relief applied for MAY be granted without detriment to the publi welfare. II Mr, - - - - - - - M71►1"ITIM 11 . 02-10(B) M hereby is, APPROVED. Type of Variance: Request for approval of a 1-foot front yard setback variance from the required 30-foot front yard setback resulting in a 29-foot front yard setback. For the following reasons: 1. This request may not be detrimental to the public welfare. Board of Adjustment Pa 10 09/26/02 The motion passed by a vote of 7 -1 with Beard Member ECHELMEYER voting no. Chair MONTOYA advised the applicant that part B of his variance request was approved. D. Case No. WA-02-11: An application filed by Kimery Marchese for approval of a variance to the fence height standard ♦ ': inches to • feet on property • and located at 10400 West 3 8th Avenue. In • to • • : • as• -• • •• • Whereas, the property r posted the fifteen days required by recognition that there were no protests registered against Beard ofAdjustment Page 11 09/26102 Now, therefore, be it resolved that Board of Adjustment Application Case No. WA- 02-11 be, and hereby is, APPROVED. With the following conditions: The motion passed 8-0. 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 July 25,2002 — It was moved by Board Member HOWARD and seconded by Board Member YOUNG to approve the minutes of July 25, 2002. The motion passed unanimously. Board of Adjustment Page 12 09/26/02 B. ChanM in Meeting Date — Due to conflict with the Thanksgiving and Christra holidays, the November and December meetings must be rescheduled. It was moved by Board Member HOWARD and seconded by Board Member YOUNG to combine the November and December meetings to be held on Wednesday, December 4,2002. The motion passed 8-0. 1 C. Televised board meetings — Chair MONTOYA stated he had been directed to solicit opinion from Board members as to whether they wish to have the Board meetings televised. There was a mixed reaction from the Board. Four members were opposed and four members stated it made no difference to them whether or not the meetings are televised. It was moved by Board Member DRDA and seconded by Board Member HOWARD to adjourn the meeting at 12:05 a.m., September 27,2002. The motion passed 8-0. 4 71 Board of AdjustmMent 0 01 ♦ "WrIZIMN-1 Yum