HomeMy WebLinkAboutWA-93-1The City of
~1Vheat ADMINISTRATIVE PROCESS APPLICAT-ION
~Rid~re Department o£ Planning and Development
b 7500 West 29th Ave., Wheat Ridge, CO 80033
Phone (3031 237-6944
Applicant Robert R Isbell Address ~375 Garlattd St Phone 238-b726
Owner Same Address Phone
Location of °requesf _ 3100 iIolland St.
Type o£.action requested (check one or
which pertain to
ou more o£•the actions listed below
y
r request.)
^ Change of zone or zone conditions ® Variance/Waiver
Site development plan approval Nonconforming use change
Special use permit
Conditional use permit ^ Flood plain special exception
Temporary use/building permit Interpretation of code
Zone line modification
Minor subdivision -_
Subdivision Public Improvement Exception
-
Preliminary Street vacation
Final
8 Miscellaneous plat
*~
__ _-
^ See attached procedural--guide Solid waste landfill] ;
mineral extraction permit
for specific requirements. ^ Other
Detailed Description of request T w
n
ld l;k
r
~
nd yid .. -of t:~e entire nrooerty n ed ahau a to arert a /~r fanr n th £ron+
The nrn
;
t
WheatRidee_-.i h S.hao_1 the £P.nrp wrnilr3 nrPVrn+ ~
{~
:~- arr..~p +,ha c1;rF:et. fr•nm
y
.
„r
'h
R
, ~
~
~
~
raan fr hl i
„- ~ n_cu~-the-=rop
List all persons and companies who hold an interest in-the described real
property, as owner, mortgagee, lessee, optionee, etc.
NAME ADDRESS
Rosemary (F) B Isbell 3375 Garland ~t PHONE
2~g h~~
• ~ - --
I certify that the information and exhibits herewith submitted-are true-and
correct to-the-best
f
o
_my knowledge and
am acting with the knowledge and consent that in filing this application, I
of thos
- -
without whose consent the requested acti
A e persons listed atiove,
or. cannot lawfully be accomplished
pplicants other than owners must submit
which approved of thi .
power-o£-attorney from the owner
s actin on his beh a
Signature of Applicant
_,w_
Subscribed and sworn to me this S day of ~cnu 19
g.3
_
Notary Public
SEAL
My commission expires ~/=fib ~ 9S
LQLC neceivea ~_~ -5 Receipt_ No. ~ ~ 3'~~_ -Case No ,_. _.
,; ~ Q ~ass~a
',p~' '-` ~ Recorded at o'clack..__._.ffi„ .. i'a$._~F~'...~.~f...(r.~`~._~:Q .._____.
' < Recep - _....... . _.._._......._....... ._......_EauDF ~oi-JeifevsDlt.S;atc.of-C~nerordrr.
' °= ~ ~ RECORDER~4 ST!161P
v TIDE I~EEDt Made this 22nd day ~ Seytember~
N 1975, between Richard L. O`Neil 6 Karen L. O'Neil- R'
- 01 the County of Jefferson and State of
Colorado, of the fimt part, and
1" Robert R. Isbell S Rosemary F. Isbell
¢_~
of the CoanEy of Jefferson end State of Colorado, of the second part:
eiJ~ WITNESSETH, that tho said part ies of the first part, for and i¢ covsideratioa of the aura of
~~~ Pour Thousand Fight Hundred Twenty Five and 00/100 ---------------90LLAB9,
O i~ ko the said part ies of the fimt part i¢ hand paid by tho acid parties of the aecoad p¢rt, tho receipt whereof to
` hereby conteasod and acknowledged, ha ve granted, bargained, sold and conveyed, and by these presents do
- - ¢ grnnl, bazgain, sell, convey and confirm unto khe said pazties oY the second part, their heirs and aaeigns forever, not
N [n tenancy in common but to joint tenancy, all the followl¢g described lot or pared of land, situate, (ping and
' being i¢ the County of Jefferson and State of Colomdp, to wit:
Beginning at a point which is 331.4 feet West and 417.95
feet South of'the NE corner of the SE 1/4 NW 1/4 of Section
27, Township 3 South, Range 69 West; thence South 91.65 feet;
thence West 150.7 feet; thence North to the South line of
.~ right of way of the Rocky Mountain Ditch; thence in an
Easterly direction along the South line of the right of 'way t
of said ditch to a point which is the SW corner of a tract
.~_ of land described in Deed to J. E. Petticrew dated September
22, 1944, and recorded in Sook 496 at Page 112, thence East to the
. True,POint of Beginning County of Jeffessofb, State of Colorado ,__
TOGETHER with all sad singular tfte`"bereditamenW and appurtenaucea theremtp belonging, or to anywise
appermhvng, the revemion and reversion, remainder end remaindem, rentl, issues and profits thereof; and nR the
estate, right, title, interest, claim and demand whatsoever of fhe avid part ies of the firs! park, eiWer m law or
equity, of, in and to the above bargained premises, with the hereditameata and appurtenances.
' TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the said premises above bargained and described, with the appurtenances, nm the said
parties of the second part, their heirs and ensigns forgiven And the said part ies of the fimt port, far
~ sal lers, thei)seirs, executors, and admiaistratom do covenant, grant, bargain and agree to sad with the
~_ -_ acid parties oY the second part, their heim and assigns, that nt the time of rho ensealing and delivery of Dress pree-
etita they are well seized aY the premvea above conveyed, as of goad, once, perfect, absolute and indefeasible
'' Betake of ivherltnace, in ]aw, in fee simple, and hn oe good right, fuD power and Inwfal autharlty W grant, 6az-
gain, sell and convey the same In manner sad form aforoasid, and that the same are free and clear from all former
_ ° and other granW, hargain, sales, liana, laxea, assessments and eacumbmncea of whatever find or nntam aoeeer.
.~
i~ _j
0.
_ `, _' and the above bargained premises in the gale! and peaceable Possession of the said parties of the second pert, their
'- 5 h@im and assign, against all nd every person or persons lawfully claiming or to claim the whole or any pert thereof,
' v • the said part f,ea of the first part shall and vriD WARRANT AND FOREVER DEFEND.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF the said part ies of the f¢¢st part hate herounto set their~d s and
' seal s the day sad year first above written. ' .~~ ' ~ .....
//// ~//y/,/./~
~. Signed, Sealedend Delivered in the Presence of .~.~+.~1 ._.J.l_..._`.~_.. r•%.`~ SEAL}
Richard L. O'Neil .~
------~--....._._..._............_.__....._._.._......._._..........._._._. ~.~~ ~ ~f1~ L ~::
_. _.. ..k.L......:.._.........._ . _4. -..[SEAL]
CC _-..___.._.__......._.__ ._.__.._--.._..- Karen L. O'Neil ~ .• .,
cn ~ --_...--"--__._---~-----"---•'-"--[SEAL]
' ti STATE OF COLORADO,
County o! Jefferson ae.
The foregoing intrument wee acknowledged before me this 22nd dap of September
19 75 by XX~CYtSStYHI37{}dWtX Richard L. O'Neil and Karen L. O'Neil
' My commission expires , 19 Witness my bend e¢d o~ffi~ri~nl seal
....._:: _ r:: ~.'.::h.r :~, ::,.-S ; _~~lf4c:c.7i.-LL.~~Q.Lm.tw
-~ - NoWrpublic
2'772 633
~`
_ n
F ~ No. 921. WARRAN1T DEnD-TO.ielnt Tevavh.-8M(oN PvhlLhivs Co.182{-/48bne 8trtvt Dmrer, COtmado--a.7p
' AIL ny narvl'61 p¢GaOn Ol oflQaOn¢ hBro InaOrG Ilanb OS' nanlGa: 1[ by pC2oa nnnng b ttpM80ntatlVe or p[DCLLI C•parltl Or N
aLtatTey-In-IIlCt. Nen WeOrt Tp Of person 6a Cator, ypttofney-la-(fleG pr otLCi C¢p1Uty or tl¢afllpUOn: IL by o[llcer p[ CO[-
dCA,t wfe pnaent. artaa 118 B 1 Coromdo Revised 9 tutus 96a.~~ent or other o[[ICen o[ Hoch CoGyoiaGio0. namfua It-statutory
i
.~ _ ~-
°,Ca=Y;
"?~¢be
'~ ®z~
_s
,F .-
,C oof
;§
~Fo -p.
_ ~~~
,o ~'S
~~~
',•~s~i
=ego
Szu4
~.`~ `' § ~
'el S R y
... - a E
np•
R ~p.
~~-8 &
o~~
IN
S w iwwww2 2 w• Y w
mnecncesscccccw~.m n~Nmwcmcsc
.. .:Le ... ..w.~Y.w~•..-... ..
r
5 ,.
~;
zmaa
0000
msmm
iw o~
m~a
am<a
°n~nm
~mm~
VP.r
m
° ~ ~~: :\ Y
`i
mm
mODt
yxmi
mNa~
~'ym
m~mm
ayoy
o~'+<m
mmy
mr9y
Jy
U ~ (p
n \ ~~.
~-~ I
0
i
n o
a
L
': ~ r
r c ~.
N
0
x
0
a
0
H
a
T
ti
.~
-~
.v` _ ~m" .
o _ ~i.,
ao c
00 '
_ '~ :_
' ='z-
- ''~
R :~:::'F::_E~;~
_n
'"''
OD
~'1
~
= O
m~
"'~ U)
~rn
~
0
_
ni Q 0
!T~ Z Z
C7 N C7 ~-
~ ~ -
~ Z
r
lz~ . "
'~ O
~
D ~
~
s'~ m~Zm v ~
n~^' ~'I W Z CO ~ ~
:.yt ~~ T (~j ~ ~ :D ~~,
'
F
i~ z ~ ~ ~
it~. (n .~ 'P o
~D~ Cn
=='s£
'4LS ~D z
~~~ +n
0 C
~T
.eq~ _
n~m m .
J
Rx~;: s
~ N m
o
~ofo m
mxzz
az a
w
-Nam
~ - °
~
mTm o
Nm
m 8a
m
N
m °
a ~n~
n T
~
aa~ I
mom : 1 ~
o=1..Y~s;~o€Y.~~~iL L4 n
~a+..~iewg•SR
C L'LS4 fe_L654:.siF.~
N~-Wc~a s:~z~gsgpe~~~ D ~
_e1S. _ oc~°~ .ggv~Yx~ 0 =
:'zap ~.Sa~f='eY_ ~
_~~-=6 ~~e Tsa__o~~¢~
~~
~-
N
Q
v ~
o ~
z
0
i W 36TH AVE
-•--•---•--.._-•-- W32NDAVE-•--
r_ -
iii [ - -
~.
~ ~.
,.
~.~ ~
~~.~~ ~.
1~1~1 2~
L I I I I l ! l I l I I1
I ~ ~ 1 I r`
-''-- ~--- wxn~RVC--~_----
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
Notice is hereby given of a public hearing to be held before the
Wheat Ridge Board of Adjustment on February 25, 1993, at 7:30 '
P.M., at 7500 West 29th Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado. Ali
interested citizens are invited to speak at the Public Hearing or
submit written comments. The following petitions shall be heard:
1. Case No WA-93-1: An application by Robert R. Isbell for
approval of a variance to allow a six foot fence to be
located within the minimum required frohtyard setback as
.regulated by Section 26-30(I)(1) for property located at
approximately 3400 Holland Street and is legally described
as follows:
Beginning at a point which is 331.4 feet West and 417.95
feet South of the NE corner of the SE 1/4 NW 1/4 of Section
27, Township 3 South, Range 69 West; thence South 91.65
feet; thence West 150.7 feet; thence North to the South line
of right-of-way of the Rocky Mountain Ditch; thence in an
Easterly direction along the South line'of the right of way
of said ditch to a point which is the SW corner of a tract
of land described in Deed to J.E. Petticrew dated September
22, 1944, and recorded in Book 496 at Page 112, thence East
to the True Point of Beginning including:
A parcel of land located in the southeast 1/4 of the
northwest 1/4 of Section 27, Township 3 South, Range 69 West
more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the
southwest corner of a parcel of land described in Book 2872
at Page 449 in the office of the Jefferson County Clerk and
Recorder; thence N89o53'42"E along the south line of said
parcel a distance of 93.64 feet to the center-line of the
Rocky Mountain Ditch as described in Book 1571 at Page 36 to
the Point of Beginning; thence continuing along the center-
line of said ditch the following courses and distances;
1. S55o39'06"W a distance of 6.68 feet; 2. thence S71o
39'06"W a distance of 10.00 feet; 3. thence S78o39'06"W a
distance of 20.00 feet; 4. thence N89o20'54"W a distance of
20.00 feet; 5. thence N81o20'S4"W a distance of 20.00 feet;
6. thence N74o20'S4"W a distance of 20.00 feet to the east
line of Holland Street as recorded in Book 980 at Page 39
from which the southwest corner of said parcel of sand
described in Book 2872 at Page 449 bears NOOo09'OS"E along
said east line a distance of 2.05 feet; thence SOOo09'05"W
along said east line of Holland Street a distance of 18.16
£eet to the southerly right-of-way of said ditch thence
along said southerly right-of-way the following courses and
distances;
1. ~S74o20'54"E a distance of 16.22 feet; 2. thence S81o
20'54"E a distance of 22.29 feet; 3. thence S89°20'54"E a
distance of 23:06 feet; 4. thence N78°39'06"E a distance of
22.91 feet; 5, thence N71o39'06"E a distance of 13.53-feet;
6. thence N55o39'06"E a distance of 14.76 feet; 7. thence
N40o39'06"E a distance of 3.83 feet; thence N49o20'54"W and
perpendicular to said southerly right-of-way a distance of
17.50 feet to the center-line of said Rocky Mountain Ditch;
thence along said center-line S40o39'06"W a distance of 1.53'
feet; thence continuing along said center-line S55o39'06"W a
distance of 3.32 feet to the Point of Beginning; containing
1908.68 square feet more or less. County of Jefferson,
State of Colorado.
2. base No. WA-93-2: An application by U.S. Outdoor
Advertising for. approval of a nine foot variance to the
maximum height of 32 feet allowed for a billboard as
regulated by Section 26-412 for property located at 12351
West 44th Avenue and legally described as follows:
Public Storage Amendment No. 1 Subdivision,
County of Jefferson,
State of Colorado
3. tease No, WA-93-3: An application by T.J. Ammon for approval
of a 20 foot variance to the minimum 30' frontyard setback
allowed in a Residential-One A zone district as regulated by
Section 26-13(F). Property is located at 3365 Union Street
and is legally described as follows:
Lot 54, Applewood Village Subdivision, Second Filing
County of Jefferson, State of Colorado
Mar o hapla, Se retary
ATTEST:
Wanda Sang, City Clerk
To be published: February 11, 1993
Wheat Ridge Sentinel
t- P.O. BOX 638 TELEPHONE: 303/237-6944 T172 City Of
7500 WEST 29TH AVENUE .WHEAT RIDGE. COLORADO 80034 cWheat
Ridge
February 10,-1993
This is to inform you that Case No
WA-93-1
which is a
request for approval to allow a 6' fence to be located within a front
setback
for property located at approximately 3400 Holland Street (vacant land)
will be heard by the Wheat Ridge HOARD OF ADJUSTMENT in the
Council Chambers of the Municipal Complex, 7500 West 29th Avenue
at 7:30 p. m.
on February 25, 1993
All owners and/or their legal counsel of the parcel under
consideration must be present at this hearing before the BOARD OF
ADJUSTMENT.
As an area resident or interested party, you have the right to
attend this Public Hearing and/or submit written comments.
It shall be the applicant's responsibility to notify any other
persons whose presence is desired at this meeting.
I£ you have any questions or desire to review any plans, please
contact the Planning Division. Thank you.
PLANNING DIVISION
"The Carnation City"
P 923 920 19~
~ rn
~i Z
O
t~
~ ~~
O
O ~
- _ _ !+ rv r'
P 923 920 191
U)
O
(a
-._ _O
U)
w
0
0
m
n
m
v
m
O
n
m
1
m
v
D
r
1
m a a
m n m
m c
n ~ a
m ti ~
U1 m m m
ffl < m
Z c
= #
-
I m y
~
~ ~
Q
A ~
S Do (/~
P 92:3 920 192 ,~
l/ A A
m m m
~ m c
~o~
~~~
¢. ~ D
~ ~ &~
• ~
6
w
n v a
m y ~
~ ~~
m~ a
o" o ho ~
a m °~ m
o'o
m5
o rt~D
Km
i~
~i
$~
~i
i
IMPORTANT! PLACE STICKER AT TOP OF ENVELOPE TO
THE RIGHT OF RETURN ADDRESS.
. ~ ~___. w N (~ c.
..o •
.
.
y
(n (n D
3 [
~(
~
S
Nti<y-~~002
'
~ ~
_ ~~
J 0~
__ 3a 3m
N Nm?jA pm
m9
W
~ _
c
N ~ ~ a
~ _
i3cyi 'f°. a.
~ ~ ~
p '^ ~a° ~HH
g 3
~ a I R !L °
~ Ta_ hod
_
~
~ ~ m~
N H `°
p~°
3 m ~
'*~"~a £~~ ~v
m
`d
s o
°
°
.
E a
- Q c
~ ~?~` T 4
m
~ ~~'y+~
,v,~ o
~mG m i
v
g m'D,~ ~ ~' 2
_
~
Y
~ ~m° o
'7
Q2 S
'v
..
a _
cP~
id m'"° _ o
'
Gs9 °£m
3
__. _. ?A___~
m ~, w ~...o. .~,
N
(n
(n D m an m
2
~~D~
a o ~ ~ _
~ ~ ~
J 3.3a m
°^ ~
~_ __
~ w ~ m
A W ~7 ,
~Aa ,~~._a
~
p
W c a -a. ~
m
?. _.
m m
I ~ L+ap y ~~3. ~wH
(Ll ~
~
n (i{ ~
y+ d TpO~ ~ N
~~
Z
~ ~ y
U
O
S f
~'b~
~
N .a~. ~j
N ~
~ yyy'
y}
M i
6+~ n
^
~~i
~~a 0WN
6 }j
~
~ D Oa
i N N Y O a
C
! o ~ r~r g ^ "-~ ~ y
V ~ ~d
i- .
P.O. BOX 638 TELEPHONE: 303/237-6944 ThC City Of
- 7E~0 WEST 29TH AVENUE -WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO 80034 cWheat
Ridge
T'rarch 1, 1993
This is to inform you that Case No. WA-93-1 which is a
request for approval of a variance to allow a six foot fence to be located
within the minimum required front yard setback as regulated by Section 26-30(I)(1)
for property located at approximately 3400 Holland Street
will be heard by the Wheat Ridge BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT in the
Council Chambers of the Municipal Complex, 7500 West 29th Avenue
at 7:30 p.m.
on March 11, 1993
All owners and/or their legal counsel of the parcel under
consideration must be present at this hearing before the BOARD OF
ADJUSTMENT.
As an area resident or interested party, you have the right to
attend-this Public Hearing and/or submit written comments.
it shall be the applicant's responsibility to notify any other
persons whose presence is desired at this meeting.
If you have any questions or desire to review any plans, please
contact the Planning Division. Thank you.
PLANNING DIVISION
°The Carnation City"
- -- - ~
{~ 923 920 134
fA ~ 9 I
fn Rl ~ m_ ~
T -I m ~ ~
3 W l
~
~ o
~' ~ 1
O o ~ ~i o
~
~
z n ~ o~
m
n
~~~ z N H~ c
W $ o~ o
~
1!d P 4'i
y ~ ~ 9Z m m
~
zm Z o
<
R N~
ao
~
~m 1
~
M Y y
Co A °
~
Ra
Qp
~
Y3
~m Fa
t~
~
m
\
f
m A A I
1
1 1
'i'I 1
m
~ i
1
D 3
~ ,e
o
IMPORiANP. PLACE STICKER AT TOP OF ENVELOPE TO
THE RIGHT OF RETURN ADDRESS.
~ m ~ G W d ~~~o~~~m
_. G D m~~~~c ~~f1z
~ ~
. g m mm ''' ~~9
m m
u a
~
1 1 V1q
m m,$3 '
w~
Z
r~
oD 4'! e,
Ie ° °ao ~md
n~
_
O
m
w
o ~ ~
° o
~
~
$a
~ ~ x~ ff ~t
"'e
$y f~a' HwN
3 m
~ ~
3
C ~ n.. po
mo
~ ~
~ ~ m
a
~. ~~~~_
d
--o s~~ ~~9~
~ ~ ~m.n ~
$g
~i 4.!~
a~o
SS R
fJ m o
D
S- o
i
'
°F~
3
~aF ~
o
w F
=
ro m
~~m ~
'~ ~
a
D W J A6 ~ S 3
= a
- -- Q ~ ~ D
~ ~ .a
Jo `
°
< 'O o
m ~ y
I .
~
lD
N ~
~" m
O ~ ~
F .
y ~
n a ~ m n
m
W~ µ y o
37 a
7C1 y n ~~ 77
~
~ ~
o ~ a <~.
N m ru ~~~ Ns
~ a
~ o a
Z
o ~ ~ y ° n
~
m c
o L-i . D m ~^.
°
~ w ~ a
f7 r m'~ m ~a
~,_ ._.R1 ¢ m m mm
~ m
~ ~
CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE PLANNING DIVISION
STAFF REPORT
TO: BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT Date Prepared: February 17, 1993
Date of Meeting: February 25,1993 Case Manager: Greg Moberg
Case No. & Name: WA-93-1/ISBELL
Action Requested: Approval o£ a variance to allowed a six (6')
foot, fence to be located within a front yard setback.
Location of Request: approximately 3400 Holland
Name & Address of Applicant(s): Robert R. Isbell
3375 Garland Street
Wheat Ridge, CO 80033
Name & Address of Owner(s): Same
----------------------------------------------------
Approximate Area: 13,950 square feet
Present Zoning: Residential-Two
Present Land Use: Vacant
Surrounding Zoning: N:, E:, S: & W: Residential-Two
Surrounding Land Use: S & E: Single Family, W:,School ~: Vacant
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Date Published: February 11, 1993
Date to be Posted: February 11, 1993
Date Legal Notices Sent: .February 10, 1993
Agency Check List ( ) Attached (XX) Not Required
Related Correspondence ( ) Attached (XX) None
-----------------------------------------------------------------
ENTER INTO RECORD:
( ) Comprehensive Plan (XX) Case File &_Packet Materials
(XX) Zoning Ordinance (XX) Exhibits
( ) Subdivision Regulations (XX) Other
---------------------------------------------------------
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.
CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE PLANNING DIVISION
STAFF REPORT
I. REQUEST
The applicant is requesting approval of a variance to allow a six
(6) foot high fence to be located within a front yard setback.
The applicant contends that he would like to surround this vacant
ground with a six (6) foot fence to keep trash and litter out.
Section 26-30 (I)(1) states: "Permitted fence, etc., heights. No
fence, divisional wall or hedge above the height of forty-eight
(~8) inches shall be permitted within a minimum required front
yard, or above the height of six (6) feet in instances not
otherwise specified." Section 26-15 (F) requires that the
minimum front yard setback is thirty (30) feet for property zoned
Residential-Two. Therefore to allow the applicant to surround
his property with a six (6) foot fence a variance is required.
II. SITE
The subject site is currently vacant and located to .the northwest
of the applicant's residence (the applicant lives at 3375 Garland
Street, see attached site map). Because the subject site is
separately deeded from the property that has the applicant's
residence, the subject site can be developed. In addition the
subject site is not utilized as a rear yard of the residential
property as the subject property is not part of a through lot.
The property is unplatted and by the applicant's survey and the
site map the property's west property line lies ten (10) feet
further west than the adjacent property to the south.
III. FINDINGS OF FACT
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 the regulations for the district
in which it is located?
The property is of a size and width that a single family
residence could be developed on the site therefore it is
reasonable to assume that if the site is. permitted to be
used only under the conditions allowed by the regulations
for the district in which it .is located, the property can
yield a reasonable return in use; and
2. Is the plight of the owner due to unique circumstances?
As this site is under the same constraints as are all-other
residential properties within the immediate area, is of a
size that would allow it to be developed and is not an
intragle part of the applicants residential property.
Therefore plight of the owner is not due to unique
circumstances; and
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT STAFF REPORT
CASE NO. WA-93-2 Page 3
3. if the variation were granted, would it alter the essential
character of the locality?
The granting of this variance will alter the essential
character of the local neighborhood as there are no other
six (6) foot high fences located in residential front yards.
In addition the property's west property line is located ten
(10) feet further west then the properties to the south. If
a six (6) foot fence is allowed out to the west property
line it would look like the fence were located in the right-
of-way and therefore further alter the essential character
of the local neighborhood; and
4. Are there any particular physical surroundings, shape or
topographical conditions of the property involved that would
result in a particular hardship?
There are no particular physical surroundings, shape or
topographical conditions of the property that would resuit
in a hardship that would necessitate the need of a six (6)
foot fence to be located within the front yard setback; and
5. Are the conditions upon which the petition for a variation
is based be applicable, generally, to the other property
within the same zoning classification?
Because Staff has not found hardship nor any unique
circumstance, conditions upon which the petition for a
variation is based would be applicable, generally, to the
other property within the same zoning classification; and
6. Is the purpose of the variation based exclusively upon a
desire to make more money out of the property?
The purpose of this variance is not based exclusively upon
the desire to make more money out of the property; and
7. Has the alleged difficulty or hardship been created by any
person presently having an interest in the property?
No hardship has been created by any person presently having
an interest in the property; and
8. Will 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?
The granting of this variance will not be injurious to other
property or improvements in the neighborhood; and
9. Will the proposed variation would not impair the adequate
supply of light and air to adjacent property or
substantially increase the congestion in the public streets
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT STAFF REPORT
CASE NO. WA-93-2
Page 4
or increase the danger of fire or endanger the public safety
and substantially diminish or impair property values within
the neighborhood?
The granting of this variance could impair the adequate
supply of light to the front yard of the property directly
to the north of the subject site.
IV. CONCLUSIONS AND
Based on conclusions derived from "Findings of-Fact", staff has
the following comments:
1. The property is of a size and width that
residence could be developed on the site
reasonable to assume that if the site is
used only under the conditions allowed b.
for the district in which it is located,
yield a reasonable return in use; and
a single family
therefore it is
permitted to be
the regulations
the property can
2. As this site is under the same constraints as are all other
residential properties within the immediate area, is of a
size that would allow it to be ,.developed and is not an
intragle part of the applicnats residential property.
Therefore the plight of the owner is not due to unique
circumstances; and
3. The granting of this variance will alter the essential
character of the local neighborhood as there are no other
six (6) foot high fences located in residential front yards.
In addition the property's west property line is located ten
(10) feet further west then the properties to the south. If
a six (6) foot fence is allowed out to the-west property
line it would look like the fence were located in the right-
of-way and therefore further alter the essential character
of the local neighborhood; and
4. There are no particular physical surroundings, shape or
topographical conditions of the property that would result
in a hardship that would necessitate the need of a six (6)
foot fence to be located within the front yard setback; and
5. Because Staff has not found hardship or any unique
circumstances, conditions upon which the petition for a
variation is based would be applicable, generally, to the
other property within the same zoning classification; and
6. The granting of this variance could impair the adequate
supply of light to the front yard of the property directly
to the north of the subject site.
Therefore, staff would recommend that Case No. WA-93-1 be DENIED.
February 22, 1993
Planning Division
City of Wheat Eidge
P.O. Box 638
Wheat Ridge, Colorado
80034
HE: Case No. WA-93-1
SUBJECT: Vacant lot, 3400 Holland St. A request by owner
to allow a six foot fence to be erected and
located within a front yard setback.
BESPONSE F3OM: Al Bellio
3385 Garland St.
Wheat A.idge, Colorado 80033-5823
Property owner ad~ac.ent to vacant lot
and ,just east of petitioned property.
RESPONSE: Any change on this property would cause serious
damage to the aesthetic and pristine awareness
and undermine the value of surrounding proper-
ties. For example, take Ms. Sue Wilson whose
beautiful home is dust south of this vacant
lot. Any fence or change would subtract from
her property an3 virtually destroy the wonder-
ful view to the northwest valley and then the
mountains beyond. I hope and MsayWilsonaisian
has not upset her too much as
long-time resident of this community and a bene-
factor to all of Jefferson County.
In closing, my confirmation is DENIAL OF PETITION, and
hope the Planning Board weighs the merits of this argu-
ment.
Thank You.
A 1~.~0
~i`1'1~ OF~iNHEAT RIDGE
FEB 2 4 1993
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
MINUTES OF MEETING: March 11, 1993 Page 2
2. PUBLIC FORUM (This is the time for anyone to speak on any
subject not appearing on the agenda.)
No one came forward to speak.
Chairman HOWARD arrived at 7:38 p.m.
3. PUBLIC HEARING
A. tease No. WA-93-1: An application by Robert R. Isbell for
approval of a variance to allow a six foot fence to be
located within the minimum required front yard setback as
regulated by Section 26-30(I)(1) for property located at
approximately 3400 Holland Street.
Greg Moberg presented the staff report. All pertinent
documents were entered into the record, which Chairman
HOWARD accepted.
No questions were asked of staff.
Ms. Rosemary Isbell, 3375 Garland Street, was sworn in. Ms.
isbeli stated the primary reason for the petitioning of this
variance is because they live across from Wheat Ridge High
School and get all the debris and trash (sack lunches, cans,
etc)on their property.. In order to enhance the property,
the applicants first erected a berm and someone hauled all
of the dirt away. It was noted this is not their backyard,
it is a separate vacant lot. Ms. Isbell said their neighbor
does not want them to erect a six foot fence along her side
of the property, so they will honor that. Ms. Isbell said
they are constantly cleaning the lot and have done so for 27
years (even before they owned it). The applicants tho ught
erecting a fence might solve some of the problems.
Board Member ABBOTT asked if the berm was effective in.
mitigating the problem, and Ms. Isbell said they were going
tc purchase shrubs and trees to plant, but-never got a
chance to find out. Ms. Isbell said the lot has turned into
a dumping place for people.
Board Member ABBOTT asked then if two feet of fence would
help, and Ms. Isbell. said with the amount of wind they get
they are sure it will help keep trash and debris out of .the
yard. Ms. Isbell added when the school had a six foot fence
the problem was not so bad, however the fence has been
removed.
Board Member ROSSILLON asked where exactly would the six
foot fence be placed, and Ms. Isbell answered along the
front and north side of the property only, again not to
obstruct their neighbor's view.
~, ,
CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
MINUTES OF MEETING: March 11, 1993 Page 3
Board Member ROSSILLON asked staff since this is considered
a lot would the fence be in the front yard, and Mr. Moberg
answered the code is written that a six foot fence cannot be
placed within the front yard. The front yard is defined by
thirty feet, so they could run a fence up to 30' from their
west property line.
Ms. Isbell spoke again saying the property to the north of
them is the 'big hole' that most people in Wheat Ridge are
familiar with, so the fence should not be a problem on that
side.
No further questions were asked.
Motion was made by Board Member ROSSILLON, that Case No. WA-
93-1, an application by Robert R. Isbell, be DENIED for the
following reasons:
1. The Board finds that based upon all evidence presented
and based upon the Board's conclusions relative to the
nine specific questions to justify the variance, the
evidence and facts in this case DO NOT support the
granting of this request.
Motion was seconded by Board Member BERNHART. Motion
carried 7-1, with Board Member DOOLEY voting no. Resolution
attached.
B. Case No A 3-2: ~ An application by U. Outdoor
Advertising approval of a nine fo variance to the
maximum height f 32 feet allowed f a billboard as
regulated by Sec on 26-412 for pr arty located at 12351
West 44th Avenue.
Greg Moberg presented the sta report. All pertinent
documents were entered nto cord, which Chairman HOWARD
accepted.
Board Member ROSSILLON e~
62 feet to 41 feet, an Mr.
else will remain exa y the
been lowered alreaa .
will the sign be lowered from
berg answered yes, everything
~ne. However, the sign has
Board Member BER ART asked if the ign is at its requested
height, and Mr. oberg answered yes. He continued saying a
total of 19 f t has been cut off, so 'f this request is
approved, th sign will remain as it i now.
No
.were asked of staff.
Victo Boog, 1717 Washington Avenue, Goide~CO, was
sworn n. Mr. Boog is the attorney represent g U.S. Sign
Comp y.
PUBLIC HEARING SPEAKERS' LIST
CASE N0: WA-93-1 ,DATE: March 11, 1993
REQUEST: An application by Robert R. Isbell for approval of a variance to allow
a 6' fence to be located within the minimum required front yard setback as
regulated by Section 26-30(I) for property located at approximately 3400 Holland
Street.
i Position On Request;
' i (Please Check)
i SPEAKER'S NAME ~ ADDRESS (PLEASE PRINT) i IN FAVOR ~ OPPOSED ~
i
~ i
i ~ t
i ~
~ ~ i
i
i
' i i
i
i ~ i
~ ~
i ~ i
~ ~
i ~ i
i __
'
i
~
' i ~
i i
' i
i
' i i
i
~ i
' i i
i
~
~ i i
' i r
~ i
'
~ i
i i
i
~
' t i
i ~
~
i i
~ _
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
,~ , . ,
CERTIFICATE OF RESOLUTION
I, Mary Lou Chapla, Secretary to the City of Wheat Ridge Board of
Adjustment, do hereby certify that the following Resolution was
duly adopted in the City of Wheat Ridge, County of Jefferson,
State of Colorado, on the 11th day of March 1993.
CASE NO: WA-93-1
APPLICANT'S NAME: Robert R. Isbell
LOCATION: Approximately 3400 Holland Street
Upon motion by Board Member ROSSILLON seconded by Board Member
BERNHART the following Resolution was stated.
WHEREAS, the applicant was denied permission by an Administrative
Officer; and
WHEREAS, Board of Adjustment Application, Case No. WA-93-1 _I
is an appeal to this Board from the decision of an Administrative
Officer; and
WHEREAS; the property has been posted the required 15 days by law
and there WERE protests registered against it; and
WHEREAS; the relief applied for MAY NOT 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-93-1 be and hereby is DENIED.
TYPE OF VARIANCE: To allow a six foot fence-to be located within
a front yard setback.
FOR THE FOLLOWING REASON:
1. The Board finds that based upon all evidence presented
and based upon the Board's conclusions relative to the
nine specific questions to justify the variance, the
evidence and facts in this case DO NOT support the
granting of this request.
VOTE: YES: Abbott, Albertsen, Bernhart, Howard, Junker,
Reynolds and Rossillon
NO: Dooley
DISPOSITION: VARIANCE DENIED BY A VOTE OF 7-1.
D D this 11th day of March, 1993.
ROBERT HOWARD, Chairman Mar Chapla, ecretary
Board of Adjustment Board of Adjustment