Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTUP-94-3 The City of ~lheat ADMINISTRATIVE PROCESS APPLICATION Rid a Department of Planning and Development g 7500 West 29th Ave., Wheat Ridge, CO 80033 Phone (303) 237-6944 Applicant' ~~,aY~ L , 1-tn`~_Address 2(arJ5 1 Iei.tZ~~ 1,~A Phone ~,~ - 2, Owner j"~ph,t~ F- fi-~ii.~C.avi (- 1-~a~Yr~ Address'Z~,SSn~~~OV~a~T Phonec77i~ _C~7/„ Location of request Type of action requested (check one or more of the actions listed below which pertain to your request.) - Change of zone or zone conditions hVariance/Waiver Site development plan approval Nonconforming use change Special use permit Flood plain special exception Conditional use permit Interpretation of code Temporary use/building permit Zone line modification Minor subdivision Public Improvement Exception Subdivision- Street vacation 8 Preliminary Miscellaneous plat Final Solid waste landfill/ [] ** See attached procedural guide mineral extraction permit for specific requirements. ^ Other ,/ D~Let((aa~~fled Descri ti((o~~n of request -~- U~ r~ance re ~ ~c.~iorn 2i.; in (Ct M~~ V ~~~n A~ Xnr k~1e L7i.~f.P~. ' ih ~q ~u ~ s~c•+['1 1- J V List all persons and companies who hold an interest in the described real property, as owner, mortgagee, lessee, optionee, etc. NAME ADDRESS PHONE ib~aldE~rSusah L~~w. 2i~s~Yleular~d~' ~CUhea~Ridae ~~a ?7~I-~~(„7 Prir.c'~ i Re vl ~ 1 ~rt~ P~ no'i~KTi1 '(~¢~r~ jl~` n~n3 1-Fcm_ 3io_7'/tWC~ I certify that the information and exhibits herewith submitted are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and that in filing this application, I am acting with the knowledge and consent o£ those persons listed above,. without whose consent the requested action cannot lawfully be accomplished. Applicants other than owners must submit power-of-attorney from the owner which approved of this action on his behalf. Signature of Applicant , Subscribed and swo to me thisay of 'C'C`R~{'h 19 ~~ ~~'~°_`- Notary Pub is SEAL My commission expires `~-`~-,~-QS Date Received - Receipt No. (p~`~ Case No. Ct H D 3 m ~~ m '4 -E Z O .. D II1 3 µ O ~-- C 7 c~ -~ m n m H G m '~ ~.n r ~~ ~, D ~ m B L'J r1 c m m Z G7 H ~ a r; c n ~ m ~ H CJ m ?~ { H = Z 3 1. i! S .~ i dram .. .. m u! ;n ~-, ~msj o r D Z $t i('r 2R 4Pr ~ 3 ~Vr ,~ n p . t~ ~, r ,~ r 'r{ m V D d I ti i 3 U] 3 m Z ~~ S m r. T Z a m .~ ui M m D H d hl U:~ t+ LL~ LL~ .+ £ y. ~ r• m r. ~ £ C7 H LL} '3 ~-;{ G} S m O <~ E-i m £ O T D~ D 7l '~7 --~ n . H n Cii mnm r. x ~~ 4J m ,, t State of Colorado [Spue A1wve T6ir Line Por Recording Datal DEED OF TRUST FHA Goa No. 051-8488934-703 THIS DEED OF TRUST ("Security Instrument") is made on December 22, 1993 ,among the grantor, DONALD E. HOLM SUSAN L HOLM ("Borrower"), the Public Trustee of JEFFERSON County ("Trustee"), and the beneficiary, Universal Lending Corporation which is organized and existing under the laws of COLORADO ,and whose address is 6775 East Evans Avenue P.O.Box 24067 Denver, CO 80224 ("Lender"). Borrower owes Lender the principal sum of NINETY SIX THOUSAND ONE HUNDRED FIFTY AND NO/100 the Dollars (U.S. $ 96,150.00 ). This debt is evidenced by Borrower's note dated the same date as this Security Instrument ("Note"), which provides for monthly payments, with the full debt, if not paid earlier, due and payable on January 1, 2024 .This Security Insuument secures to Leader: (a) the repayment of the debt evidenced by the Note, with interest, and all renewals, extensions and modifications; (b) the payment of all other sums, with interest, advanced under paragraph 6 to protect the security of this Security Instrument; and (c) the performance of Borrower's covenants and agreements under this Security Instrument and the Note. For this purpose, Borrower, in consideration of the debt and the trust herein created, irrevocably grants and conveys to Trustee, in trust, with power of sale, the following described property located in JEFFERSON County, Colorado: THE NORTH 1/2 OF THE SOUTH 1/3 OF LOT 1, BLOCK 8, AMENDED PLAT OF HENDERSON'S SUBDIVISION, COUNTY OF JEFFERSON, STATE OF COLORADO. which has the address of 2655 NEWLAND STREET WHEAT RIDGE Colorado 80214 [Zip code]("Property Address"); Papa 1 0/! [Street, City], P'HA Colorado Deed of Trmt •2191 ®4R(CO)(Yf03).Ot VMP MORTOIVnE FORMS-t313i2C3-6100-(a00t52t•729[ Inltlala: ,. .~ OEEI GI ~L ZONING M~hP WHEf'~T RIDGE GOLORf~DO ~° y Rlla' - ~~ , H ER - <~ ~- I a ~ -ZONE DISTRICT BOUNDRY - PARCEL/LOT HOUNDRY !DESIGNATES OWNERSHIP) +y~~+GITY LIMIT LINE --~ WhTER FEATURE DENOTES MULTIPLE ADDRESSES Sl~l 25 NAP ADOPTID Lost Revision: Auqust 17, 1993 ~~ o so wo m xc ~ro SCr~L.E I'=400 D!3'1d2T1~f7Qi GF A.AMd1J6 NO ~EVH.OPf~HVf -235-7852 C 4' ATTACHMENT T4 ADIV[INISTRATIVE PRt3CESS APPI.ICATI€3N FORM From Susan I.. Hotm 2655 Newland St Denver Ct} 80214-8032 Phone number: 303-274-5762 We have been involved in the hobby of dog showing far the past i7 years,Eirst in California, continuing after we moved to Colorado in 19$6. `ale show Bearded Collies, an ancient Scottish herding breed. (See attached photos) We breed an occasional litter of puppies. (a total of 11 litters in 17 years -with a total of 68 surviving puppies resulting.} and very occasionally have an cx~tside bitch visiting (for up to one week} for the purpose ~ being bred to one of our stud dogs. As a handler 'show dogs, I occasionally have a dog sent to me for the purpose of showing himlher at local shows. Background: Susan Holm wrote the Herding Program that was adapted by the parent club, Bearded Collie Club of Americas in 1983, outlining the entire pur}x~se of instinct testing and promoting further training far the purge of maintaining the creeds natural herding abilities. Served as the Herding Chairman far the BCCA from 19$4 through 19$$> and continued an the Committee until 1990. Am a charter member of the RC3CKY ttrfOUNTAIN BEARDED C~ILI.IE CONNECTIt7N, formed in 1987, serving as Secretary, Herding Cnairman, and, currently, President and Newsletter Editor. In 1992, developed the statewfide plan of action regarding the re~uing and protection of Beart~d Collies in need, including coordinating a phone network, getting commitments from individuals who would beable tohouse a Beardie on afoster-temporary basis, persons who would donate the funds necessary to pay far any necessary health care, and spaying ar neutering costs far the rescued Beardie, persons who could groom and maintain the lags to make them mare attractive for future placement. In doing sa, the Beardee Community has fully accegted responssbility for the breed, not just the dogs they may have bred, and made every effort to keep Beardies out of shelters where they are a drain on those resources, and often, put to death rather than placed in a new, laving home. As Editor of the BEARDEE ~QRKS, the official newsletter of the RMBCC, I have written many articles an ownership responsibilities and breeders obligations. These articles are published nationally, and after gciated as sources of information regarding these and other subjects. Csn those occasions that d have bred a litters potential puppy buyers are interviewed at lengths usually well-prior to the conception of the litter, and wait until the pupa are 20+ weeks of ages which is the optimum time to puce a puppys welt-after flight imprint stage: and Glaser to an age for success?I house-training far the puppy, making the placement less traumatic far the puppy and a happier r` time for the new owner. ALL pet quality puppies are said an MAST SPAYfNEUTER contracts, with prove necessary by the pups $th month birthday, °Show" prospects are sold only on co-ownership, with my maintaining the control over the breeding of that animal for its entire Lifetime. {Bitches may not be bred prior to age 2 years, before OFA hip certification and eye checks, along wills other health checks, including thyroid] No bitch may produce mare than 3litten= in her lifetime, and all resulting PuPPies must be sold an contract, again, with °pet" prospects on spaylneuter contracts. My stud dogs are not advertised for Public stud and have only been used twice to outside bitches. The bitches owner is required tea furnish all PuPPY-buyer information, i.e., names addresses, Phone numbers, for the purpose of my maintaining contact with the new cnvners> far assistance in raising their new pup. Mg contracts, for all dogs sold, demand that in the event that the ne-a owner dies, or is na longer able to care far the Sag, at any time in the dads lifetime, the dog must be returned to me, far my responsslaility to the dogs I've bred does not end. when they are sold Currently, two of the dogs that live with me were ownedby a gentleman from New York, who past away 4 years ago. They were returned to me, by his mother, whom Pm still in contact with, and simply will live our. their lives here, safe, as was his wish, The majority of my puppies are old out of state, often to the East Coast area. But I have pups living coast to coast, and 17 that live in Colorado of Wyoming, i rved or. the first AKC herding Advisory Committee, that deueloped my original BCCA herding program to be used far all herding breeds,l am an alt breed herding {stockdag} judge, having judged at i 1 different breed 5p~ialties and all breed trials all over the wuntry. I am considered by many to be an authority on tile subject of training dogs for stack work. i produced a video on instinct testing and am currently writing a book THE WEEK-ENI? STCCKDQC3, geared for people who do not live on a farm situation, yet desire to train thou dog fot its original purge. Regarding the questions in the Wheat Ridge City section 2 bsariances and Waivers {c} l through 9: I: This is our name. We live here and share our space with the animals, They are primarily housepets, and aren't allow~l to bark incessantly, inside CR thrtside, We have lived here since Ncv. 93, and have had no complaints {*om the nrigltbars regarding the animals living here. We have a set policy: dogs are not allowed outside before $:QO am, nor after li?:O~J PM {except in a physical emer~aency,} There is nearly always someone at home to see to their needs, They are not left for more than ¢ Fouts at a time, exe;ept in an emergency. They are all crate-trained, and have large to extra-large crates for their safety and comfort. They are rotated in 3 groups of 3, far peace and quiet, their own safety and well- being {as i have 5 lags that are getting on in years, and 3 with special needs, i,e., kidney disease, brought on due to their age.} In the event we were to sell the hawse, the animals would be brparded out temporarily, to keep the house acce~ible to Realtors, etc. {However, it messt 6e explained: we have no intention of telling this property. It was Ixucha~l as our last home!} I have also discussed this with the neighbors. If they were concerned regard'€ng property values, due to the variance, I offered to go out of my way, to keep the dogs quiet, well-behaved, and the yards clean and fresh, to prove that we are an asset, not a hindrance to the community. 2. We are most certainly "unique'. C}ur commitment to showing dogs prevents us from only maintaining only3 dogs in our home. The average "show' career for a $earded Collie is 3 years, IF the dog is "speciale~l", (ie. campaigned as a Champion). however: it has always been my firm belief that one dc~ nut "get rid oF' a dog once it has fulfilled its purpa~e in the shocvring or as a breeding aniaal. Because I truly love these animals, I cannot comprehend the idea of placing them elsewhere in some kind of retirement home, after I am riot longer showing them. Too often, in situations where people take in a retired dog, they do not accept adequate responsibility for that dog, because they do not have the lifelong commitment to the care of that dog. In these oase$, for example, with my 3 dogs aver 9 years who have kidney disease: another owner would likely put the dogs down, (euthanaaa), rather than maintain them on their special (and expensive} diets, or pay their growing vet bills to keep track of the disease. h" I am to cantinue showing dogs, i must, occasionally, keep a puppy from a titter, that will be raised for the purpose of °replacing» the alder dog that is no longer being shown or bred. Chherwfse, the life span of an exhibitor would be less than 5 years. I puz the occasional income from a litter of guppies back to the dogs, in the fora of paying vet hills, shares entry fee„ (feed bills -which were Z~lg,(l~ last year alone1• 3. There would be no fundamental change in the property or surrounding properties due to this variance. It might, in the future, earse us to replace the building at the back of out property, with one suitable to attach 4 kennel runs to, but that is a future thought at this time. ~F. RE: Hardship. If this variance is not granted, it would distroy everything I have worked far in the last 27 years of my life. I would be forced to euthanize dogs wha are a ~rt of my family~before their time, as it would be nearly impassible to find quality retirement homes, particularly fox the spayed ox neuteredlolder dogs, Whose health is not If)(l9'8. It would prevent me from s:ontinuing as a show exhibitor. Tt could even be unhealthy, as I used to suffer from high blood pressure, prior to being "in dogs'. My dog activities, loving them, grooming there, xai„~ing them, and enjcsymg them have contributed to a reduction to normal levels in my blood press<rre that I have maintained for the past 15 years. Beyond that, it would break my heart. These dogs are a part ~ me. I either bred them, raising them from birth, or own their sire. The Beaxdies have added joy to my life. They have brought me many fiends, wlu~ share a common love for the same breexl. I've been through everything, together, with these dogs. Before we left California, we had four Beardies. We lined in the Riverside area, which has no 1amits on the numbers of the dogs one owns, as long as they are kept healthy and aren't annoying the neighbors. I was volunteering each Friday at the Humane Soslety soay and neuter clinic, which I believe was one way I could serve the community and show my appreciation ~ my beautiful dogs. I wasn'± aware that the house we lived in was next doge to a man who had a true hatred for animals. Can a €eiday afterxxoon, he poisoned my four dogs, using snail bait. I'd bes:ame ill at the clinic, and left 2 hours earlier than usual, when I arrived home, the yoxnxgest pup, a ~ month old, was already dead, and the other 3 were in convulsions. They were nfshed to the vet, where we maintained a constant vigil for 36 hours. They survived, thank God, and we derided to move as far away from that nigh~nare as we could. l~r{y husband tivas oBereda good job in Colorado, I knew alot of great dog people in Colorado, and we decided that this would be our home This is ois home. We love it here. But, the dogs are as much a part of this family as our now grown children. {pur kids are also always welcomed here.) 5. I do not understand this question. 6. Absolutely nat. No one can make a profit in dogs, if you ie doing it right! After showing and advertising a dog, paying its entry fees, paying for a net to keep it healthy and test for problems that could affect its suitability for breeding, feeding and training expenses, there is no profit to be made, and the money earned from a guppy sale is put right back into the dogs. ?. No. li. I dcn't believe that the variance would in any way adver,~ly affea~t anyotse in the neighborhood, We have a good relationship with our neighbors and work extremely hard at keeping the peace regarding our dogs. Tlxey are not alloaved to bark and annoy the neighbors. tfde throroughly clean the yard twice a week. The dogs are hIEVEA allowed out of the backyard without being oxx Lead. I have assisted neighbors with training or health questions regarding their own dogs, or with strays, iinding suitable homes for such. lyle have no sign that indicates that we have dogs, and do not advertise, since there is the risk of having them stoles. $. No. There would be no physical changes made that would affect any part of the property or adjundant properties. PUBLIC HEARING SPEAKERS' LIST CASE NO• TUP-94-3 D ATE• May 26, 1994 REQUEST: ~ application by Susan Holm for a Temporary Use Permit to exc eed the number of household pets allowed in a Residential-On e zone district. Said .property is located at 2655 Newland Street. ~ ; Position On Reques t; ~ ; (Please Check) ~ SPEAKER'S NAME & ADDRESS (PLEASE PRINT) i IN FAVOR ~ OPPOSED ~ ~ /~ yr. rR^~ ~. +v'~ i ~~~pA'.~ ~ ~l L~ i i .. i ,i 1 _ ~ i ~ i i ~ -~ , , i, --- - - -- -~' 0 L I ~ II^ ,. a..py,- ~. _ a-+~+ t' - cif ~~~~~! {'s r ~`Ei, i ~U . ` :~. '. M n Z fi v Nm N c d _~ v 6 UJ • 0 3 ti c i ~(~CN r (' ~a ~.S Cha„~e;orsh.p ~\~e aa~~e X,~n,S e Z-z\- 84 ® CKC _ ~ciktoT,a\ S-}ac''~8~row Growdc1S s 0 0 fi i'~ m j ~Q~ ~~ X/ 3 ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~ s ~. ~ ~ = ~ CITY OF~JUHERT KIDGE -'~~IEMOKANDUM TO: Nick Fisher RE: d'" I~leredith Reckert DATE: May 9, 1994 RE: Case No. TUP-94-3 Attached please £ind background material for Case No. TUP-94-3 - which will be reviewed at a public hearing in front of the Board of Adjustment on May 26, 1994. As you will recall, this is a request for a temporary use to exceed the number of household pets at 2655 Newland Street. I would appreciate if you would discuss this with the Animal Control Commission at their next meeting. If you would like me _.,to: attend, I will be willing to do so. Thanks. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Notice is hereby given o£ a public hearing to be held before the Wheat Ridge Board of Adjustment on, May 26, 1994, at 7:30 P.M., at 7500 West 29th Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado. All interested citizens are invited to speak at the Public Hearing or submit written comments. The following petitions shall be heard: 1. Case No. TUP-94-3: An application by Susan Holm for a Temporary Use Permit to exceed the number of household pets allowed (i.e., kennel) in a Residential-One zone district. Said property is located at 2655 Newland Street and is legally described as follows: The North 1/2 of the South 1/3 of Lot 1, Block 8,' Amended plat of Henderson's Subdivision, County of Jefferson, State of Colorado 2. ..-Case Na. WA-94-4: An application by KimberLee~~Reed for approval of a 6' fence in the front yard for property located at 5170 Tabor Street and is legally described as follows: All of the South 127 feet of the North 228.2 feet of the West 91 £eet of Lot 16 and all of the South 127 feet of the North 228.2 feet of the East 15 feet of Lot 15 of Standley Heights according to the recorded plat thereof, County of Jefferson,- State of Colorado. 3. Case No. WA-94-5: An application by Diana and Terry Olson for-approval of a 20' variance to the 30' required side yard setback adjacent to a public street in a Residential-Two zone d},strict.. Said property is located at .2990 Saulsbury Street and is legally described as follows: A parcel of land in the SE quarter of Section 26, Township 3 South, Range 69 West of the 6th Principal Meridian, City of Wheat Ridge, County of Jefferson, State of Colorado, described as fo_ilows: Beginning a point 227.5 feet west and 25.0 feet south of the NE corner of Lot 3, Block 2, Barth's Subdivision, as filed in the records of Jefferson County, Colorado; thence South 89.0 feet; thence East 101.5 feet; thence North 89.0 feet; thence West 101.5 feet to the Point of Beginning. City o£ Wheat Ridge, County of Jefferson, State of Colorado. 4.. Case No. WA-94-6: An application by Carl B. Larsen for approval of a variance to lot width and area for a duplex in a Residential-Three zone district. Said property is located at-5485 W. 32nd Avenue and is legally described as follows: The East 60' of Lots 21, 22, 23, and 24, together with that portion of the West 1/2 of the vacated alley adjoining said lots on the East, Block 1, Columbia Heights, County of Jefferson, State_of Colorado. 5. Case No. TUP-94-2:, An application by John D. Colip for approval of a Temporary Use Permit to allow a drive-thru espresso business. Property is located at 4311 Wadsworth Boulevard and is legally described as follows: Commencing at the Northeast corner of .said Southwest one-quarter; thence Westerly along the North line of said Southwest one-quarter a distance of 40.00 feet; thence Southerly and parallel to the East fine of-said Southwest one-quarter a distance of 330.60 feet to the true point of beginning; thence continuing along aforesaid course a distance of 310.22 feet to a point of 20 feet North of the South line of the Northeast one_quarter of the Northeast one-quarter of said Southwest one-quarter; thence on an angle to the right of 89°53'03" and parallel to the South line of the Northeast one-quarter of the Northeast one-quarter of the Southwest one-quarter a distance of 319.70 feet; thence on an angle to the right of 90°07'57" a distance of 310.46; thence on an angle to the right of 89054'36" , a distance of 319.70 feet to the point of beginning. Containing 2.057 acres more or less. Mary o hapla, Sec etary ATTEST: Wanda Sang, City Clerk To be published: May 10, 1994 Wheat Ridge Sentinel ~~„ P.O.BOX 678 TELEPHONE: 300/20T~6944 The Ci(y of 7500 WEST 29TH AVENUE . Wt1EAT RIDGE. COLORA00 8007] cWheat Ridge ~, POSTING CER'~IFICATION CASE NO.~I/(~-~'y-3-~Ir+~ PLANNING COMMISSI'1ON'' - CITY COUNCIL BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT (Circle One) HEARING DATEC W1py 2(~ 9~ Is \l.S r` ~ O~ , n a m e ) residing at ~/ _~ ~~ ~ ~~1 _~ ( a d d r e s s) as the applicant for Case No. hereby certify that I have posted t'~e Notice of Public Hearing at ~(~~S ~e4=~~a~a , ~k~ ( l o c a t i o n) on this ~_ day of ~ a~ , ~q~, and do hereby certify that said sign has been posted and remained in place for fifteen (15) days prior to and including the scheduled day of public hearing of this case. The sign was posted in the position shown on the map below. Signature ~~ NOTE: This form must be submitted at the public hearing on this case and will be placed in the applicant's case file at the Department of Community Development. ~~ - - -- ~ - - e ~'+ wam.nx eqo V~t R E~. F N ~~ C t 4 m~ " ~ a ~ ~ '. y ~ 5 N a ~~ N ~ ~ra~vrEix ~ 'l F O 4q I L ~ ~ „ ~ ~ ~ g ~ ~ ~, H acm nve S' ~ ~ tsvs ~~ . zes ~ su 10 z •f: -- zsae 263J 2G~0 3 f ~ ~ ,. e P.O."BOX 638 TELEPHONE: 303/237-6944 The City Of 7500~WEST 29TH AVENUE WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO 80033 cWheat Ridge May 11, 1994 This is to inform you that Case No. TUP-94-4 which is a request for approval of a Temporary Use Permit to exceed the number of household pets (i.e., a kennel) in an Residential-One zone district for .property located at 2655 Newland 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 May 26, 1994 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" ~Y~~Ytlt^~:~ ~'~._ } ~;!,~ ~ 'l;~a i ~.y~.i:.i N ;. til ,,.,: ~_ J, •m - ?@, }~~ _ t~ ~ vi i ~y £ Gr; i ~ I;,v~N~f1 ~~lt~ Q n w ~ v' ~i Q 6~ W W C a u~sl S ~ ~ O ~ ~ m 0 OG`E o Q` O ~ 0 ~ O ~ ~ O O ~ O '~ G O 1/~ ui ~' ~ L^^ L ~ M Q_ ~ ~ ~ ~~r1~./ ~ CL U ~ .1 ~ y • + m W ~ -1 // /~~ / ~ ~ h+~ a 3 r 'S53tlOOtl Ntlfll3H dO lHOIN 3Hl 013dO13AN3 d0 d01 ltl 83NOI1S 30tl1d ilNtlltlOdWl I 0 0 i~ m ~ o ~ u~ w .~ s~ a ~~ s a o rrr w w ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ 8~ ra o ' ~ ff w ' ` a9 ~ ~~ E< ~ , a.s o a s p ~ ~~ v ~ o ~ ~ 4 51 Z LL ~'- cwi. ~ W (n ¢ar~ rn a 58Q z99 E'C6 d E J Q g 0 w w U O LL F a w U w ---- _f ,. ~ P 913 667 884 L 9 ~ Ri ~ m c ~ Z m y ~ II I ' ~ ~ ,,, ~ . °o ~ 4~ ~ ~ gN ~ i ~~ ~ Na m ~ s ° ~ GL PS r az m m v ; i6 i ' l' ' a ~ , r~r M ~g ~ ~ ag a `° a v P 9Z3 667 B86 Ij _ '~il~ m D n m 'I ~7 c m ~ JI _4 -ZI m y z i ~ ~ m T m 3 ~ W i _~ ~i >. _,Vr D 1 _ i O 3 fi w '__ O~ a ~~ P 913 667 887 =__ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ m m ~~ G -~ Z m_ c IX ~ .. W L1+ IDI 1 1 d i ~ -- - m dd O ~ ~ G 7 ~ t$~$t~ jp~ ~ ~ g ~ R ° zz ~ ~ m2 y o y~ • ~ >' - t0 Q s m ~~ ~ _~ = a R ~ D9 y O 0 m \ 1 ~ Z r 9 ~y i 1 ~ n ~ 'F ° ~ o m _ i j , ~ \ 1 h- Q t. ~. ~ m ~ ~ A .. o ~ _ ~ ~ m T ~ ~ m ~ 1 ! y / ~ I l/ ~ s 77 a ~ m _ r' " . _ 1 I ` o T ' ~ m ~ ~ m m ,. IMPORTANT. PLACE STICKER AT TOP OF ENVELOPE TO E THE RIGHT OF RETURN ADDRESS. 7 - _ m a ~o ~. ~. W °a ~~ m aN N t~~. _ ~_ ~o ~ G -o~_N ~9 I n 6 n m ~~ s a ~A~ s "3=c' ~ m Nr~ ~& ~ ~lp~_. ~mm' ~ ~~ ~ D a ~ y # O~+ m o ~~ 4 a'O ~~~ +,__ _~~.~ ~ wg...o. . y y R-V . ffff 7D.O ~FD~~O~ ~ pj ~mm p Dy ~ fl~ ~ ~ a ~„ te; i 'T y ° T= ~a~ "~ ~a ~~ O ,~ y,~ B g~ ~- ~ 1 ~' ~_ ~ Jl wg.. •o ••• y ~~~~o ~ m ~'O ~ m i'Q'$ m ~~ ' _ ~ ~ D $m `<mmA ' ~3 ~mm o ea a ~ ? , ~ ,~_ ~ ~ y :R y °A3 m~~ _' ~ 7F JW m w~ 1 ~ ~y Fd~ O' ~D~ RAo 5 N ~ £~a '°p,m j ~ ~ a .~. o P a' ~d° j ~= ~ S 94 fY ~~~R ~ ~ ~w, o. er SF~ 3 ~ k'~~+ o ~aF d ~ ~a ~ ~m ~3~ ° m~$ rl o ~ ~. V p Q ~ ~ 3 d cn a m o ~ ~ 5. ~ n ~° ~ ..0 Z rv .. S ~ F \-T' ~ n K rt C N ^ ^~ N \~ ~ m LU ~ a ~ D ~ o y a < ~. `~ ffl D" 3' m y m o O .J ,~ y a ~ °i ~ Q ~ ~ ~ y N N ~ ~ ~ d ~ N ~ ~'~ y ~s N y v N N m P 913 667 880 , 1 ~ m m m m l T ~ m y ~ Z < m ~ ~ n ~ P 913 667 881 ~ ~ m y z ~ ~ ~_ f P 913 667 882 {~{ ~ m m ~ m 1 R7 Z ~ v $ P 913 667 883 j~. ~ Cn m m m { ~ fii Z < m c Q ~ a m ~ JJ O W ~ W O ~ Cy .'A' ~ ~ °~ _ y I'~' ! PQf ~ m o~ c A y'$ m m ~v ~ m v `m ~ 2 y N y n z N ~w~': ~v y ~~ , ~ ~ ss ~ O r ~`~ n ~ ~ ~ m + t .~ ~° - i \ ~ (1 A A Q 1 I m _ m ~ a ~ a ~ D_ r 9 e ~ i IMPORTANP. PLACE 5iICKER AT TOP OF ENVELOPE TO ~' THE RIGHT OF RETURN A DDRESS. ~ .~ N i -, _ ,, ~~ 1I N 7 n rt ^~ ~ c ~ a» ~ ~ 0 EL ¢+W a CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE PLANNING DIVISION STAFF REPORT TO: BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT Date Prepared• May 20, 1994 Date of Meeting: May 26, 1994 Case Manager:l~Meredith Reckert Case No. & Name: TUP-94-3/HOLM Action Requested: Temporary Use Permit to exceed the number of household pets allowed in a R-1 zone district. Location of Request: 2655 Newland Street Name & Address of Applicant(s): Susan Holm 2655 Newland Street Wheat Ridge, CO 80214 Name & Address of Owner(s): Donald and Susan Holm 2655 Newland Street Wheat Ridge, CO 80214 Approximate Area: 22,200 square feet Present Zoning: Residential-One Present Land Use: Single-family residential ' Surrounding Zoning: N, S; E, & W: Residential-One Surrounding Land Use: N, S, E & W: Low family residential ---------------------------------------------------------- Date.Published: May 10, 1994 Date to be Posted: May 12, 1994 Date Legal Notices Sent: May 12, 1994 ---------------------------------------------------------------=- ENTER INTO RECORD: ( ) Comprehensive Plan (XX) Case File & Packet Materials (XX) Zoning Ordinance (XX) Exhibits ( ) Subdivision Regulations ( ) Other ----------------------------------------------------------------- JURISDICTION: The property is within the City of Wheac.Ridge, and all notification and posting requirements have been met, therefore there is jurisdiction to hear this case. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT STAFF REPORT CASE NO. TUP-94-3 Page 2 I. REQUEST The applicant requests approval of a Temporary Use Permit to allow the keeping of nine (9) dogs on property zoned Residential- One at 2655 Newland Street. Pursuant to Section 26-10(C)(4), a permitted accessory use in the Residential-One zone district is "household pets, limited to no more than three dogs and/or four cats,- plus their un-weaned offspring." The owner of the property is a professional handler, trainer and breeder of Bearded Collies. She currently has nine dogs on the premises, however, by the time of the public hearing this number will be reduced to seven as two of the dogs have been placed. Aside from a fenced in yard where the dogs are exercised, the dogs are "crate-trained" and kept in the house as indicated in the.-applicant's supportive material. To staff's knowledge, no noise complaints have been received regarding the dogs. Staff is hesitant to classify this situation as a kennel, although the zoning ordinance defines kennel as: "Any building, structure or open space devoted in its entirety, or in part, to the raising, boarding or harboring or four (4) or more adult dogs and for five (5) or more cats." Kennels are allowed only in the A-1 zone with benefit of a Special Use Permit or in the A-2 zone district as a use-by-right. A zone change to A-1 or A-2 at this location would not be supported by staff. This situation was brought to the City's attention as a complaint to our-Animal Control Division. II. CRITERIA (1) Will this request have a detrimental effect upon the general health, welfare, safety and convenience of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the proposed use? This is an existing situation which apparently has had. minimal negative affect upon the general health, safety and welfare of the neighborhood. This is based on the fact that no complaints have been received by the Planning Department in regard to noise (barking) or smell (feces in yard). if the Temporary Use Permit is approved, a condition should be made that the dogs be kept in the house the majority of the time. (2) Will this request adversely affect the adequate light and air, or cause significant air, water or noise pollution, or cause drainage problems for the general area? BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT STAFF REPORT CASE NO. TUP-94-3 This request will and air, or cause drainage problems the dogs outside, level of noise in Page 3 not adversely affect the adequate light significant air or water pollution or for the area. If the owner starts keeping there could be a negative effect on the the area. (3) Will this request 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 the site? Approval of this request 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 the site. (4) Will this request be appropriately designed, including setbacks, heights, parking bulk, buffering, screening and landscaping, so as to be in harmony and compatible with character of the surrounding areas and neighborhood, especially with adjacent properties? The property will be continued to be used as a residence and no changes have been done or will be done to the house or yard if the Temporary Use Permit is approved. (5) Will this request overburden the capacities of the existing streets, utilities, parks, schools, and other public facilities and services? This request will not overburden the capacities of the. existing streets, utilities, parks, schools, and other --- public facilities and services. III. REFERRAL The Animal Control Commissioh reviewed the case at their meeting on May 17, 1994. Please refer to attached Exhibit 'A'. IV. CONCLUSION AND Although the criteria in general supports approval of this request, staff has concern regarding precedent for similar requests. The applicant had originally applied for a variance to the number of dogs allowed which,, if approved, could have remained indefinitely. When staff indicated that we would not support a variance, the applicant agree to change her request to a Temporary Use Permit. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT STAFF REPORT CASE NO. TUP-94-3 Page 4 For these reasons, a recommendation of APPROVAL is given for Case No. TUP-94-2 with the following conditions: 1. The Temporary Use Permit will expire in six months. 2. The owner continue to operate as she is currently with the dogs being "crated". 3. That this is clearly an interim, temporary use and shall not be considered permanent or used as a basis for future temporary use requests. 7500 WEST 29TH AVENUE P.O. BOX 638 The ri/ty Of WHEAT RIDGE. CO 80034-0638 (303) 234-5900 cWheat City Admin. Fax # 234-5924 Police Dept. Fax # 235-2949 -1\1~gPi May 18, 1994 Meredith Reckert Planning and Development 7500 West 29th Avenue Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80215 Dear Miss Reckert, CASE NO. TUP-94-4 EXHIBIT 'A' The Animal Control Commission discussed Case Number TUP-94-3 at our May 17 meeting,' regarding Susan Holmes request for a variance to keep eleven bearded collies at her residence at 2655 Newland Street, Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80214. The Animal Control Commission makes the following recommendation regarding TUP-94-3: The Animal Control Commission considers the number of animals excessive for a residential area and would not consider a variance under these circumstances. The Commission recommends the owner be given three months to rectify the situation. The recommendation was unanimously approved by the Commission. If you -have any question regarding the Commission's recommendation please contact Nick Fisher, the Commission staff liason at 235-2920. Respectfully, i r ~` ~ ~n, ~ V /v' Dr. William Tr fz, C i n City of Wh a Ridge Animal Control Commission CITY OF SEAT RIDGE D ~~ MAY1R19~~ r,-_,~r-ri`S- ~ "" n~U' ="~wNT ;. Gi Re<:wdad Paper May 25, 1994 To~ Board of Adjustment City of Wheat Ridge Wheat Ridge, Colorado From Joelle Hedden and Russell A. Hedden, Jr. 2640 Newland Street Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80214 We are unable to attend the Board of Adjustment meeting on May 26, 1994 due to an out of town commitment. We have written this letter in support of the temporary special use permit that the Holm family at 2655 Newland Street have re- quested. The dogs have caused no problems in our opinion. They have been so quiet that we were unaware of their existence until the special use request. Don and Susan Holm have assured us that they are responsible pet owners and have no plans to have their animals adversely effect the neighborhood. Since this is a temporary permit, it will give the neighbors an opportunity to verify the Holms' commitment to Newland St. The Holms' also went the extra mile to inform their neighbors about their animals via letter and pictures. This particular block in Wheat Ridge has a special diversity and a variety of animals. As long as we all commit to responsible pet ownership, this only adds to the rural flavor and uniqueness of the community. We feel that the Holm family are sincere in their efforts to continue making this part of Newland Street a place that all the residents can take pride in. Thank you for your consideration in this matter. Sincerely, j~ ~G~ 6~C.~e~G~G{ // Joelle Hedden Russell A. Hed en, Jr. May 26, 1994 TO: City of Wheat Ridge Board of &djustment FROM: Gilford and Norma Ehler 2633 Newland Street Denver, Colorado 8Q214 REF: Case No. TUP-94-3 Dear Board Members: We are opposed to the issuance of the use permit to allow more household pets than currently is permitted in-the R-1 District. This would have the effect of diminishing the established character of this area by increasing the noise level and possibly the odor level. R-1 District, as we understand it, is for residents only. This change could open the area up for a type of business if the applicants.intend to breed animals specifically for resale. We are animal lovers to be sure, but we feel this is too excessive. Please consider our opposition to this application. Gilford Ehler Norma Ehler Resident Resident WHEAT RIDGE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT. MINUTES OF MEETING: May 26, 1994 2. APPROVE THE ORDER OF THE AGENDA Page 2 Motion was made by Board Member HOWARD, seconded by Board Member CLARK, that the agenda be approved as printed with Case No. WA-94-6 being postponed until the June 1994 meeting. 3. PUBLIC FORUM (This is the time for anyone to speak on any subject not appearing on the agenda.) No one came forward to speak. 4. PUBLIC HEARING A. Case No. TUP-94-3: An .application by Susan Holm for a Temporary Use Permit to exceed the number of household pets allowed (i.e.., kennel) in a Residential-One-zone district. Said property is located at 2655 Newland Street. Board Member ECHELMEYER questioned why the application and posting shows the applicant is asking to establish and operate a kennel but nothing was mentioned in the staff report. Mr. Moberg said a kennel is a use of a piece of property and to allow more than a certain number of dogs 1 would be a variance. We had to go with a Temporary Use / Permit to allow a kennel which actually means more than 3 dogs and their un-weened pups and, therefore because she has more than three dogs, it is considered a kennel. She only has between 7 and 9 dogs and what staff is recommending is that the Temporary Use Permit be approved for more than six months so she can get rid of the dogs that she has right now to bring her to that 3 animal standard. Chairman ROS~ILLON said if we approve this for six months then after that the sky is the limit unless there is a stipulation placed on it, and Mr. Moberg answered yes and he would certainly include that no more animals be allowed than the number on_the property now or in other words she cannot bring in any other dogs. Board Member ECHELMEYER said the notice indicated there had been no complaints and yet the Animal Control hearing indicated they got involved in this because of complaints. Mr. Moberg said the applicant can explain that better but we do not have any complaints in our code enforcement files. The reason this is here is because animal control did get a complaint. Board Member ECHELMEYER asked would it be normal for code to get complaints regarding animals, and Mr. Moberg said yes J because some violations are also under our code. No further questions were asked of staff. WHEAT RIDGE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MINUTES OF MEETING: May 26, 1994 1 Page 3 The applicant, Susan Holm, 2655 Newland Street, was sworn in. Ms. Holm read to the Board her statement saying she is requesting this permit to keep no more than the 7 dogs that are on the property today. Of these 7 dogs, 4 are the geriatric set, enjoying their last few months or years of life. Of the younger 3, 2 are currently being shown towards their championships and the other is a neutered pet who belongs to their son-in-law who is in the Marines. The truth of their request is to allow these dogs to stay in their home until natural death takes them. The older dogs are in various degrees of health and cannot be placed in any sort of home. They need the stability of their home, these dogs are their pets, they do not have nor will they ever build a kennel building which to house them, that is never their intention, they live in their home. Ms. Holm said one neighbor-has verbalized .opposition and this neighbor, Mr. Robinson; has also told all members of -- her family that it is not the dogs presence that bothers him and his wife. Mr. Robinson has stated to them the dogs have never bothered his sleep, disrupted a gathering of friends or family, and there is no odor offending him. He was completely unaware that they were 3n violation of the rule of the number of dogs on the property until they requested the use permit. They requested the permit to meet-the legal requirements of the City of Wheat Ridge after a show competitor decided to make a complaint., There were no complaints made by any one in the neighborhood. Mr. Robinson is disturbed by the possibility of sometime breeding them, and his wife has st<^:ted 'this isn't a dog breeding neighborhood'. However, there is no breeding ban in the City of Wheat Ridge within the current zoning regulations and they could legally keep three breeding females and breed them at every heat cycle (-twice a year) and keep any resulting pups up to four months. In this breed this could be 50 plus puppies a year, more puppies than she has produced in 17 years. As a responsible dog owner she has never bread a litter that they didn't have a waiting list of a least five buyers. They place their puppies only in the most loving and caring homes where people that understand and have made a life-long commitment to that dog. Ms. Holms tells her buyers-that she "does not sell you this puppy, she sells you the dog that this puppy will become". That is why she is requesting this permit because she makes that same commitment to the dogs that she has now. Not just till they complete a title or produced a litter, they have several dogs that have never been bread, and never will be bred, they simply have earned the right to be with them until their natural deaths. She has dedicated her entire life to animals and they add so much to the quality of all of her family'-s lives. When our elderly ~ citizens have retired, we do not put them down as no longer productive, or past breeding age condemn them to death. If WHEAT RIDGE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MINUTES OF MEETING: May 26, 1994 only show quality humans were allowed the privileges to live within the city limits this town would be empty indeed. If this she will ask for sufficient time for them and move, for she would rather leave this city, and the state of Colorado than murd~ Page 4 rights and of Wheat Ridge, permit is refused, to sell their home neighborhood, this ar one of her dogs. Ms. Holm said "I love our home, we have invested everything we have in it, but I love my dogs much more. A-house is only made out of wood and siding, a home is where we share our lives with those who have made life worth while. We will need one year to prepare the house for sale_and find another. I believe with all my heart that everyone in this room at some time or another has been blessed with sharing their life with some beloved pet. We have no hidden agenda, no plans to change Newland Street in any way, we want the right to live and let live, plain and simple. Thanks to the Board and many neighbors who support our position." Chairman ROSSILLON asked how many dogs do you have now, and Ms. Holm replied seven adult dogs. Chairman ROSSILLON asked the applicant to describe their daily routine for the dogs. .MS. Holm said the dogs do not go out before 8:00 a.m, in the morning unless one of them become physically ill. At that time they are allowed out in groups of 3. They come back in and go to their crates to be fed breakfast, they don't go out again until 11:00 and that is their longer period of time and then they are in the house loose. At night they are put back in their crates and given dinner and they do not go out again until sometime between 10:00 and 10:30 p.m. r.... Chairman ROSSILLON asked how long-are~the dogs out in the yard for, and Ms. Holm said literally 10 minutes at a time maximum. She said four of her dogs were poisoned in California and after that time she learned never to leave her dogs out even five minutes without her standing at the back door. The dogs are not allowed out unless there is one adult home at all times. Board Member ECHELMEYER stated she had been in the dog business for 17 years and asked during that time where were you located, and Ms. Holm said they lived in Lakewood. Board Member ECHELMEYER asked the applicant when she looked for this home to buy did she check with the City in any respect as to how many dogs you could have. Ms. Holm said no she didn't, she was told this was horse property so thought it was more flexible. Ms. Holm said since they did not check, it is their fault. The lot is 300' long and they felt if they had a good relationship with their neighbors there should not be a problem. WHEAT RIDGE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MINUTES OF MEETING: May 26, 1994 Page 5 Board Member ECHELMEYER questioned the applicant's letter indicating the plan to continue to show dogs and stating a show dog is only usable for 3 years,,and Ms. Holm answered yes to both. Board Member ECHELMEYER continued asking after that 3 year time you would keep the dog and go to another show dog and Ms. Holm replied that is the normal pattern. He said she has a cycle of dogs .being shown and bred and kept and the limit could go well beyond the present. Ms. Holm answered no it wouldn't because she is tired of fighting the neighborhood. They had very good relations with all their neighbors until this request. After being complained on from one of their competitors, showing dogs simply is not as much fun as it used to be. Ms. Holm said as the older dogs pass on they will not replace them. A friend has offered to take 1 or 2 of the dogs through the summer and then when the older dogs go, the young ones will come home again. It means breaking up her family but to stay at home and not lose several thousand dollars on selling a home that was just purchased, it seems the only option. Board Member ECHELMEYER said the letter-indicated after selling a dog if for some reason the buyer can't continue to own the dog, the dog is returned to you. Presently you have 2 dogs as a result from a death that will live with you for the rest of their natural life. Ms. Holm explained that is a very specific circumstance, this person was a close friend and when he passed away he requested i take the dogs. Ms. Holm added she has had only five returnees in 17 years and each one of them was placed within 24-48 hours in a home. These dogs were young and healthy enough that there would be someone to enjoy them, but no one,::hould be asked to take a 9-10-year old dog-with kidney disease: "" "' Board Member ECHELMEYER asked the applicant if she had changed her mind as far as the kennel with four runs and Ms. Holm said originally she did think of that, however, it is not worth it. Beardies do not survive well in a kennel situation, they are more home dogs. Chairman ROSSILLON asked will the 3 stipulations in the staff report be acceptable to her, and Ms. Holm replied she obviously does not have a choice as it is what the people in the neighborhood want and if she only has 6 months she will take it gladly. She is a peace loving person and does not want 'to fight. She just wants her dogs to live and be happy and to try and place these 3 dogs in a home would be fundamentally against everything she has done for the past 17 years of her life. She is highly known and respected in her breed across the country. Ms. Holm said if I can only have 6 months, I will take it and thank you and thank my WHEAT RIDGE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MINUTES OF MEETING: May 26, 1994 Page 6 ( neighborhood and do what ever we can to find somebody who fits on Newland Street better than we do. No further questions were asked o£ Ms. Holm. Katherine Campbell, 2702 Newland Street was sworn in. Ms. Campbell is in favor o£-this request. The dogs are nice and well kept and so is the yard. She feels it is sad to live in a neighborhood as nice as this and be driven out by neighbors that don't understand what it is like to have an animal that is part of your family. No questions were asked of Ms. Campbell. James Bowen, 2702 Newland Street, was sworn in. Mr. Bowen said he was not aware the neighbors had dogs nor of any controversy over them. He said he has never heard the dogs and there is no odor coming from the house, he has no problem with this request and would be in support of the applicant keeping the dogs. If not, he would support them in having more time than six months. One of the reasons of moving in the area was because of the rules being lenient. Mr. Bowen said he owns emus. No questions were asked o£ Mr. Bowen. Bill Peterson, 6601 W. 26th Avenue, was sworn in. Mr. Peterson has lived in the neighborhood 24 years and is .opposed to this request. He has taken care of the Robinson's house for 75 years when they are away and knows no persons who love animals as much as the Robinsons do. He knows the yard and home very well. When making the 3 dog rule, he is sure the City did much research in what would be -r ~ correct~~in a residential neighborhood.""Mr. Peterson'is also concerned about setting a precedent. The Robinson's backyard is so beautiful and serene with unbelievable flowers, birds, and a waterfall. They are retired and enjoy their backyard. The lots are very close together and the sunrooms where the applicants have the dogs are right next to where the Robinson's eat. Mr. Peterson finds it hard to believe that eight dogs are kept in crates between the hours of-10:30 p.m. and 8:00 a.m. Mr. Peterson further stated his most concern was the threat by the Holms to their 'elderly neighbors that they would put lighted crosses on their front lawn to_commemorate the killing of their dogs. He said that does not set well with him at all that she would put a lighted cross in her front lawn stating the burden of their death is on Mr. and Mrs. Robinson. If a person had a choice o£ neighbors, most ( people on the block would chose the Robinsons. Check your neighbors young and old for an opinion on their character, they are beautiful elderly people trying to live out their WHEAT RIDGE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MINUTES OF MEETING: May 26, 1994 Page 7 retirement. Mr. Peterson said the Holms made many threats that are very unappropriate and it is unfortunate that they did not confirm withtheirr neighbors of their intentions and did not check the zoning laws. Putting down the Robinsons in their letters has just tended to upset all of the neighbors that have lived there for many years. No questions were asked of Mr. Peterson. Gerald Ehlers, 2750 Newland Street, was sworn in. Mr. , Ehlers related the various problems on Newland Street in the _ past 16 years since he has lived there. There has been a luggage firm, speed lab, chop shop, drive by shootings, suicides, and arson fires - this is the-first peaceful time in their experience on Newland Street for the last nine months. He said talk about a neighborhood that has been jolted and sensitized, Newland Street has. Mr. Ehlers is in objection because the applicant drifted in here from California and she should have investigated the property. It is very foolish not to investigate property that you are interested in purchasing. It is rather overbearing to ask us, especially a resident of 48 years, to ignore the law regarding 3 dogs. Mr. Ehlers is an animal lover and has in fact, been a dog breeder himself. He has a conflict as to whether this is a business or a hobby because the applicant is a breeder who breeds for profit, so Mr. Ehlers feels this is a business. No questions were asked of Mr. Ehlers. Boots Stockton, 1765 Glendale Drive, Denver, CO, was sworn in. Ms. Stockton's aunt is the previous owner of the applicant's house. Because her aunt owned animals Ms. •Stockton made sure her realtor told the Holm's realtor, without a doubt, there were only 3 dogs allowed. If that realtor did not tell the applicants, that is his fault. She asked her realtor countless times stressing the rule to prospective buyers. No questions were asked of Ms. Stockton. Dan Danner, 2670 Pierce Street, was sworn in. Mr. Danner had not heard all of the information regarding the intent of _ the Holms, but he never knew they had the dogs, so apparently the way they are keeping them is working. He does have concern. with noise and believes if Mr. Robinson says no, then he would tend to agree with him. He feels if they can stay within the zoning laws after the dogs die off, he would be in favor of that. He agrees with the applicant in some respects and disagrees in other respects. l No questions were asked of Mr. Danner. WHEAT RIDGE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MINUTES OF MEETING: May 26, 1994 Page 8 {~ Mary Lou Akers, 2661 Newland Street,.was sworn in. Ms. Akers' house is very similar to the applicant's house and feels sorry for the animals, and noted the Holms also have 4 cats. She also is opposed to and is very upset to the applicant laying all the guilt and blaming the neighbors for the animals being put to sleep or whatever. Ms. Akers appreciates the fact the applicant loves her dogs but thinks they should have done something before purchasing the property. No questions were asked of Ms. Akers. George Robinson, 2661 Newland Street, was sworn in. Mr. Robinson said it is not easy to oppose neighbors, but sometimes you are. forced to speak out. He is not against the Holms, he is against what they are trying to do. There are 6 adjoining neighbors and most of the lots are only 52 feet wide and the home structures are separated by 15 feet. The areas in our home that we enjoy and occupy the most are the solarium that faces south and abuts the Holms property, the library and fire place area and that view is to the Holm property, and the kitchen. in addition, we live in our backyard as much as we can. Mr. Robinson said they learned of the new owners through the dogs. They never observed them moving in. In December they placed a note in the mailbox welcoming them to the neighborhood along with a Christmas card, but never heard one thing back from them; no contact and no recognition. In the wintertime, the foliage they spoke of does not exist, and from their solarium they can see the property and-did see 3 or 4 dogs. At one time they witnessed two dogs mating and that did not please him, as they do have guests in their home. Mr. Robinson continued. saying Ms. Holms' daughter and her husband came to the door and asked how did they feel about allowing dogs next door and would they be in agreement with a petition to allow dogs. When they were told 9 dogs, they were startled. They do object to 9 dogs and do question the breeding. He feels this is a devaluation of property and if upon selling his property, would have to disclose this to the broker and to the buyer, and asked frankly, who on earth would want to purchase a home where next door is property with a kennel permit? Mr. Robinson said he is sorry to have to be here tonight, the Holms have been friendly and they have had no problem with the barking of the dogs, but he is bothered by a selfish point of view and that is if they sell their i property tomorrow, they would say it is posted for a kennel. Mr. Robinson feels the property is used in a commercial way with the mail showing 'Holm Beardees!_._ WHEAT RIDGE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MINUTES OF MEETING: May 26, 1994 No questions were asked of Mr. Robinson. Page 9 Lillian Harrison, 2670 Newland Street, .was sworn in. She said she does not understand why anyone would bring that many animals into a neighborhood without checking first. One day she witnessed a car pulling up and a dog got out and then the car left without the dog. , No questions were asked of Ms. Harrison. Elaine Noland, 2669 Newland Street, was sworn in. Ms. Noland said there are seven dogs and four cats in the house. She feels the applicant is and will continue to breed these dogs, .so there will always be an excess of the allowed three dogs. She is against this because it is-too many animals in a residential area. No questions were asked of Ms. Noland. Peggy Haines, 2650 Newland Street, was-sworn in. Ms. Haines is opposed to this because she feels the applicants should have looked into an area that was zoned for animals. She is sorry to say that because she has not heard the dogs, they don't bother her, and the applicants are animal lovers. However, she is in agreement with the neighbors., No questions were asked of Ms. Haines. Hunt Brown, 2704 Newland Street, was sworn in. Mr. Brown said this is a residential neighborhood, he does not know the Holms, he doe not dislike kennels but does not want them in his neighborhood. He is concerned with setting a precedent.- In the summertime the dogs would be out more, it is a very 'thin lot and a quiet neighborhood. Having 3-4 dogs out at once is a lot of dogs.. Mr. Brown is surprised the applicants did not check with the City, and has little sympathy with them for getting into this situation. He has difficulty with the guilt; it seems now they are the bad folks. They don't dislike dogs or want the applicant to put the dogs to sleep, they don't dislike the applicant, but. they have a unique little residential neighborhood and would like to keep it that way. Mr. Brown said the feeling he gets from the letter and comments tonight shows there does not seem to be .a sense of responsibility. It is the applicant's responsibility for having brought the dogs and it is her responsibility for not having checked. He does not want the dogs there, and with four cats it sounds too much like a commercial enterprise. Mr. Brown does feel the applicant needs some time to pack up, and is in agreement with animal control giving her three months to comply. i No questions were asked of Mr. Brown. 5r7AEAT RIDGE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MINUTES OF MEETING: May 26, 1994 Page 10 Steven Avers, 2637 Newland Street, the neighbor directly to the south of the applicant, was sworn in. Mr. Avers stated he does have a guard dog and he is loud; he barks at everybody, he barks at the Holms, he barks at the Hoims' dogs when they let them out. It is noisy, more than it has ever been. Mr. Avers does not want a kennel but is against putting the old dogs to sleep or having to get rid of them, and agrees the old dogs should be left alone and let them live there. No questions were asked of Mr. Avers. Lynnae Flora, 2696 Newland Street, was ,sworn in. Ms. Flora is a little distressed because she loves her neighborhood too and is sorry there such anguish over all of this. She feels some of the neighbors have been alienated, but feels Ms. Holms is being honest and truthful and just made a mistake for not checking. She feels the applicant should be allowed to have her dogs stay with her, and does not believe she will have all kinds of dogs, this request seems pretty cut and dried and not .too many loopholes. No questions were asked of Ms. Flora. Roy Darnell, 2655 Newland Street, was sworn in. He stated they do not own a kennel, they just want to let these. dogs die off of natural causes. They don't bark and don't disturb anybody. The dogs are trained and obedient. The yard is cleaned and raked once a week. They are allowed to have 3 dogs and their offspring, they only have 2 breedable dogs right now. All other dogs are neutered or spayed or for some other reason cannot be bred. Mr. Darnell asked for six months to a year to relocate the dogs and themselves. No questions were asked of Mr. Darnell. Motion was made by Board Member CLARK, that Case No. TUP-94- 3, an application by Susan Holm, be APPROVED for the following reasons: 1. The Board finds that based upon all evidence presented and based upon the Board's conclusions relative to the five specific questions to justify a Temporary Use Permit, the evidence and facts in this case do support the granting of this request. WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. The Temporary Use Permit will expire in six months. 2. The owner continue to operate. as she is currently with ~ the dogs being "crated". WHEAT RIDGE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MINUTES OF MEETING: May 26, 1994 Page 11 ~' 3. This is clearly an interim, temporary use and shall not be considered permanent or used as a basis for future temporary use requests. Chairman ROSSILLON suggested the following condition: 4. No more than seven dogs will be allowed during this six month period. Board Member ECHELMEYER wanted to know what would happen in six months and Chairman ROSSILLON answered we are giving the applicant six months to correct the problem. Mr. Moberg said at the end of six months if she has not complied with the zoning she will probably be cited by Code Enforcement and then going through the court process which takes a couple of weeks to a month, She can also re-apply for another permit after the six month period and would end up with an extra month or two. Board Member ECHELMEYER stated they have been involved in the past with situations that have gone to court and have drug on for two years in time and even at the end of the two years have had difficulty getting the police department to enforce the orders of the court. This case could go on indefinitely. Mr. Moberg replied this could happen with any case, as the person cited has every right to exhaust every legal avenue they can. This is our court. system and it is somewhat slow and allows that exhaustion to occur. In other words, there is nothing that can be done to force the property on the day after that six months is over to comply. We have got a certain legal process we have to go through and we cannot deviate from that. Chairman ROSSILLON asked if the request is denied will the same legal process-apply, and Mr. Moberg said if denied tonight, the same process would start tomorrow. Motion was seconded by Board Member HOVLAND. Motion failed 2-3, with Board Members HOWARD and ECHELMEYER voting no. Resolution attached.: . Chairman ROSSILLON called for a five minute recess. Upon reconvening, Chairman ROSSILLON stated since the first case took much longer than expected, would any applicants be willing to postpone their case until next month. No applicants volunteered, so Chairman ROSSILLON said then we will move along with the agenda. 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 26th day of Mav 1994. CASE NO: TUP-94-3 APPLICANT'S NAME: Susan Holm LOCATION: 2655 Newland Street Upon motion by Board Member CLARK seconded by Board Member HOVLAND the following Resolution was stated. WHEREAS, the applicant was denied permission by an Administrative Officer; and WHEREAS, Board of Adjustment Application, Case No. TUP- a- 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 be granted without detriment to the public welfare and without substantially impairing the intent and purpose of the regulations governing the City of Wheat Ridge. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that Board of Adjustment Application Case No. TUP-94-3 be and hereby is APPROVED. REQUEST: Temporary Use Permit PURPOSE: To exceed the number of household pets allowed in a R-1 zone district. FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: 1. The Board finds that based upon all evidence presented and based upon the Board's conclusions relative to the five specific questions to justify a Temporary Use Permit, the evidence and facts'in this case do 'support the granting of this request. WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. The Temporary Use Permit will expire in six months. 2. The owner continue to operate as she is currently with the dogs being "crated". 3. This is clearly an interim, temporary use and shall not be considered permanent or used as a basis for future temporary use requests. 4. No more than seven dogs will be allowed during this six month period. VOTE: YES: Clark, Hovland and Rossillon NO: Echelmeyer and Howard DISPOSITION: Motion failed by a vote of 3-2. Temporary Use Permit denied. DATED this 26th day of May, 1994 ~~^ e, ~~p~~ EDWIN ROSSILLON, Chairman Mar L u C apla, S cretary Board of Adjustment Boar o Adjustment 7500 WEST 29TH AVENUE P.O. BOX 638 WHEAT RfDGE. CO 80034-0638 (303} 234-5900 City Admin. Fax # 234-5924 SEPTEMBER 19, 1994 Susan Holm 2655 Newland Street Denver, CO 80214 Dear Susan, Police Dept. Fax # 235-2949 The City of Wheat Ridge In response to your request for clarification regarding the keeping of dogs on the property located at 2655 Newland Street in the city of wheat Ridge. 1. Pursuant to Section 26-10, you are limited to 3 dogs and their unweaned offspring at any time. Unweaned offsring being defined by the state of Colorado as 8 weeks of age. 2. Pursuant to Section 26-30(Q,)(1)(k): The kenneling and or grooming of any animal are not allowed as a home occupation. 3. Any deviation to the above cited sections could result in a Notice to Abate and or a Summons to Court. If you have any further questions, please feel free to contact our office at 235-2846. Department of P~l~/ann~~ing and Development Mered~th Reokert/P,].a ing •- ' F- ~ ~• ~ ~ -~ ~ _ ~ ~ ~• i/ / f~ ~ - • ,~n Eris/Code nforcement ti A.. ~. ~nl !•..p...