HomeMy WebLinkAboutWA-94-7rna crry or
ADMINISTRATIVE PROCESS APPLICATION
Wheat
Rid a Department of Planning and Development
g 7500 West 29th Ave., Wheat Ridge, CO 80033
Ph (303) 237-6944
one
Applicant f/r/,i O r'~ ~~ Address ~l ~ r/o ~~A~i~i S r phone
A~-
Addres's /~-~B,Srwygr~ ll`/=Phone7{~-~G~7
Owner ~„7~i9 ~-
~/ ST,
Location of request ~- ~ /> / ~'y
Type of action requested (check one or more of the actions listed below
which pertain to your request.)
Change of zone or zone conditions Variance/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 ~ Othererai extraction permit.
for specific requirements.
Dpetailed /D-ascription of request G r Fri C ~- f'~h ~ A l~~~~y
List. all persons and companies who hold an interest in the described real
property, as owner, mortgagee, lessee,. optionee, etc.
NAME ADDRESS PHONE
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 of 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 actin on his be alf.
Signature of Applicant2~~ ~ - -.-
Subscribed and sworn to me this ~ day of 19
Notary Pu lic`
SEAL ''``
My commission expires(-~~t-
Date Received (~-~- Receipt No.~}(p~~-tc z~ Case No.
~`~
~, + ~Ya
7
w
a
~ ~
J
O
O ~
W
'~ l~mi'i ~. 14M tir dq a! July , If65
I
i.t^~... MAItJORSE L. K~LTEON
2~/~-f
n//D, ~ ~..
~.•~ ~0I 't b .
.~ ~
YTATE OF t~d.ORdsnQl'
RECE?TIOtf N0. 9'-'070137
07/26/83 13e12 ~•~
. ~~ _ pwall~f Jeffars~ adahla-ae
~ cniae.+a. ~ w fhap~ a.d
. MHLVZH W. XDELTZflW, 12365 W. 46th Ave.,
Wheat Ridge, Colorado 60033
at ty O~qut Jefferson, sad alaM ad
Cabead~ at lie aaroad pu;
~PTPNEAaETH, 7'Mt ti. said party d tM 9sat part, !wr sad m aaarridratfan a[ fL net o[
TEN DOLLARS AND CTHER GDDD AND VALUA6LE CCit751DERATiDN ---~-"'
b the said part ad tie ~. f~ 62 W4 paid b tM aabi pself M kke fawtM )att. tea la~l/t etbu~
ht basab) raafaawd ad adooxA~d[ad, b{ 8 ea~Ia!1d. eaHaaad, aoid. taaeaJd sad QDIT ~ tb aae~d p-+t
riser prpaata do eg raaa4ee, n1wa, ae6, ~*4 sad Q17IT a^* . tY mmf. tie said pa+t y
his tetra. sad a~Ea-•, tan*e, s6 W rLd~4 tltlR fnbrtrt, flair of Wd df~uM. bdL
part of tie drat part Ng m ud m tie !alesrlaY descried tat ac parW
br;,= ha rya Couatr of Jeffera9n wl ELti od Caiae+de. V ~''
9eginnirsg at a point 51 reds 14 feet north of the southweatcorner
of the *ivtl/dSWl/4 cf Section 22, Township 3 South, Range 64 bleat;
theses east d36 feet; thence north 229 €eet; tbenc@ northwesterly
4d0 fee tc vest line of Section 22 at a pcin~.302,feet north from
point. of beginning; thence south 302 feet to st of beginning,
exceFt the south 92 feet thereof, together with akl eater and sster
rights, ditch and ditch rights appurtenant to the above deacr?!^°
property including one (1T inch of water from the Ouillette Di*_=-
and exrept that parcel conveyed by Melvin W. Roeltzow and Mazj;•
L. Aoeltzcw_ay,Special Warranty Deed to The DeFarteent.of HighN
.scare of Qolo~, dat~cf ee0[+~ Y7, 19ig. -~af~d red:orded z.FrSl ~ 4;
Reception No. 321523, at Book 2043, Fages 631 sad 638, Jefferaor
.County records.
~,~xoeltr w,rsJeffersonPCOtustytDistrict CourtfCase No.18 DR 6~.
{also known as s~reet number: 4240 - 42d2 KiPling StreeU
Sltned, Srakd sad LYlivrrxd iP tie Prtamm of
70 aAV€ ,4I:n TO HOLD ttr tuu., ma«>,at eYi all and atraedar LM apps sad pairBeLaa tiwraaeetr
beleasb:s or to aaswGa thereanm appat4falM. aad aA tie eemtr, rkit, tiW, merest sued elaiw wia~a~, of She
xid Parts of the 11nt Part• drier m for or a9alh'. m the oct) Per ~. beaa6t sad keioef of fie raid
part S. d ffie rroad P~+ ia4a asd aaee~as fereser.
IN WITiKES6 #eHEY$Ol, 1Ta atld party of tke 't+at Dart 1aS Mr't°m sat hCr iac+l
a,d seal t1r da) aad nrr 211K a:~.,re wr°teaw•s ,
Ma 7 ie`L: Rae t~.._- (eBIU.I
_.. .., _IrnuLl
... .... ...... _[8Rih1
_.., ..._ _ IaiR43
&T1TL AF CoIAtADO. l1`
Cnemtr of Jef ferscnJ~ - ~ ~ ~~
T'be taaiaeelaY .mt .raa arlmaerlsd#ad hdon ees tits .~5~ dal « July
i#g5.br° ?drrjarite~+L. XOe1t2Cw
Yp an~pbaim acPh+a !/ ~ N ~ i#~G ~`+~O u hued asd aCkial aaa7.
~~k
i,
I
~~. ~o.',f ~' .
0. Mrln.c ur rvou. o...~°^hearin GountY ieco,as; inenc. a •--~-
nd ap~
the wdh line d that tray of u-:
d almp
Ndbe
~ ~
,
l
Bon
YYMet 'dpe rd Book 1088 at Page 290 _
58 IeM to 1M wuthwez
Jurb 23. 7904. elm
274
~
.
d
}
d lldjwtmera en
P.Y., µ~«~'dtiiens oornerdthal bad'dlerd desenbed in sa:
63 it Pt9a 299; tMnc9 '~
RYge. d~Pypc 7fe.r~M Book 16
maad b epeek 0:14'r0'E. a dldwce d 0.82 leel to t`r
The JEFFEFtSt]N SENT IiVEL_S ar. r
or aubrdt snnbn mwrMnta-Th'7°a°'"n° eoahw+t comerd that tract of ra-:
Nero slWl M bNed: deeedbed In Book 1882 et Page 528 0l t-.
'
t
b
1 ~~ 4 W a d s W n r t h B ~ V d oste~ .
a
~p~.4; A"
nd a JeOenon CcuntY r•o°t~:lMnce w
RhertY'linss d that lraC
~~dbdfor r:POr'ot'~t
Lakewooda Cin C3tT:_15-61C1~=: tM sa
- ~ - fanddncrwedbaaeBooktes2atPa~«
TemDOnry'~u!eba {used sain dlke slang 'three (31 wurws ar:
528 the foeawkt9
.-~7 ;l-y;=_,'; N] - - -- --
- - 7~~r1 sorted lnd9slrid. Bald
oe Drape Y
isbgbd M.9150W.43th Awmw dielanus:
1JS77'49'30'YJ.adbtanead 158.99 tae'
perly
1
'r
op
oet
~ el tolawe;
-.. a~rd b~lepYYy~,yN nglMnat SO'14'10'W.ad{abnoa.d20A0
A Yad d rand 9 S 90'OObO'w. a dirtana d 70.00 te<
PINY O
~
±
THE CITY CLEF;k:S -OFFICE F AG~liatio^-
tM CBE
dy+.~ ~~B°dl''~°9
Y.. JeBenaa CoudY. roar or aPProval c'
8th P
(
O
7
CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE .
ra
~. Weer d
~: peQlndng amen
bed 23: Temporary Us• Permd to allow
dwor
Coraado
d acid Sedran
rl on Property zone
T vr--,~1[7 W ~'=/TH A~/E t
~
al
aarrbr
, rt s4>ea'e
2hwreeSO'74.7PW.. onw"n'b Mr'^0' additional un
of lM norlttweet Rnidedul-Two. SaW ProPe, Y'
reetandist•Ca
li
C`.I_I tj Cl~ 1!
WHEA-C RIDGE
' ne
along IM west
on.auarterdsaidSedbn23ad4tarE dpi2ry5edNufollowa
N 90'00'00'
tMnpe
f
7
5
I
t
~ .
I
~
of 200.00 lyl:
Blo'
~ d
b ~ ri0ah me d (lie riariraaeet TM north r
lha north 12
nd Gudem. CcuntY of Jellas:
hl
l
~
l
.. _ .
E
'
~
d
r -
~
IIV4UIC:E: LEGAL N.,JTIC:E a
H
p
rr
VO
F'i.J~<t.
it ~ jh~p
i a
3t°tedCAbrado'
~i
Y: M~puaaGor
S O'74'77
Our rr urn t,er-: WR'!t>1A.rw7 Yn UI" ~~
I ii fi is BEtlIBiNB: (hence
yral alavarir
eietnroe d 790.00 feel b a Pokit d 7n. in oa l=ow .pvr
0
0
1e
M
8)) toct Nrto
'!
'^
:
! ~Y
~
ion 23: to allow Asia (
~te-
eodh fine orb d eai
M
S
d
75 Yard setbsck Sai Drop.
d 182
d i. l.pa
PUBLICATION DATES: '?4%0='/OT thrciu~hl .
.- O tN9D'00~ ~ 9bwea7 4240 KIPIln9 Slnet .n
rgre.quarlerd described m bllows:
f
ds 141eet r;
1
~d
NUML-:ER OF L-INES: 1~2 ro
Ow pr9nwe
5
~76f
Ae9ieninwu~~wTerd7n.Nw+r<=
h
d{an z7;
0
47
~
f
:
p
COPIES REGIUEoTED p .r d
eaias.
f..t
~.e
o
a
1
t2
~ot Sedlon 22. Township 3 So.
aakIanrpp+t»~F1e bth. wn7« i14
69 WaF thenco oast a36
9~•t
~'
~ Range
ol.aid Cnw~
tn
e
m
Z
~? ~ r'-.:~
F r i rl t i n 3: n<
west
wt to
the srrYr'lired Cle
north esterly µll'
Np One d Nb noilhwee d 302 feel north ~.
gepbn zz ~. Pd
apoa~i' on
h
'
O
t~O a~
~ :
oe N 0'1 E. point d mninq; thence wrot
~+rr
o
ew.w
ih
.
Copies : d
~
w
, xa; d {rmP'9,
tM east I{ne of lM northwest ~ tMred, ope0rr w9h ail water ;
lon
i
C flit' eCt 1 Un5 ~~{~~~ g
a
c
oee~arW:d tM~t~d wapr rights, dtleh and ditch r
desa~:
F•~
TOTAL DLJE: ~ ~ -6~ - to apaklt an 9b eoutlr '896d aPPUrbnant to IM above
t,eda.eamedbeook783.iwp!F..a. araP.m „,d~ar9 ~.~c7{!^d' °{N
TFtank: you for- advertisi
i n the Jefferson Sent: i rte I hLaw
The JEFFEFiSOhI SENTINELS
1224 Wadsworth L•:Ivd _
Lakewoads CO ,~t7
239-9c9O -
THE CITY CLER}:S r_rFFICE
CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE
7FC0 W 29TH AVE
WHEAT RIDGE CO 8621
INVOICE: i_EGAL NO-I"ICE Pl.!F9t. ?_-.TIC;^i
17ur nurnGer: WRin14.GO7 Ynur i ~rlr_:n^.; i f' i i:.at:. ~ar~:
PUBLICATION DATES: 9•~/Ot'a/OT througl-. 74fOeb/o7
NUMBER OF LINES: it2
COPIES F;EtIUESTED: :~
Frintirtg:
CoF' i es:
Cc'rrect i sins
TOTAL DUE:
53.rr
t~,i7_{
p.C>O
yYe d Colorado, dated ~ I
and recorded Apnl a.
Na.321523, al Boak :.
r and 838, Jefferson Cc.
W Mary Lau Chapla• Sec-
Ridge Ja:'e
'i hart k' V~?tl fur adVP~'"`i: i S i ii<
i n 'the Jefferson Sent i rte F hlr~w ,p.+.p1s•r-`, ~
~1 ,, s. ''•~Y'
~ S
S`s, r x;.
~1 ~~
.r'~I'~ „v".
V~, ~J
;~ys
190.00 feet to the southeast corner o£ that tract of
land described in Book 1668 at Page 293 of the
Jefferson County records; thence 573°49'30"W. along the
south line of that tract of land described in said Book
1668 at Page 293 a distance of 274.58 feet to the
southwest corner of that tract described in said Book
1668 at Page 293; thence NO°14'10"E. a distance of 0.62
feet to the southeast corner of that tract of land
described in Book 1662 at Page 526 of the Jefferson
County records; thence westerly along the southerly
lines of that tract of land described in said Book 1662
at Page 526 the following three (3) courses and
distances:
1) 573°49'30"W. a distance of 156.99 feet;
2) 50°14'10"W. a distance of 20.40 feet;
3) 590°00'00"W. a distance of 30.00 feet to the TRUE
POINT OF BEGINNING.
2. Vase No TUP-94-5:_ An application by James W. Stuart for
approval of a Temporary Use Permit to allow an additional
unit on property zoned Residential-Two. Said property is
located at 3255 Harlan Street and is legally described as
follows:
The north 75 feet of the south 150 feet of the east 150
feet of the north 1/2 of Block 1, Highland Gardens,
County of Jefferson,-State of Colorado.
3. ~~~e N~_ wA-94-7:= An application by Melvin Koeltzow for
approval of a variance to allow a six (6) foot fence within
the front yard setback. Said property is located at 4240
Kipling Street and is legally described as follows:
Beginning at a point 51 rods 14 feet north of the
southwest corner of the NW1/4SW1/4 of Section 22,
Township 3 South, Range 69 West; thence east 436 feet;
thence north 229 feet; thence northwesterly 440 feet to
west .line of Section 22 at a point 302 feet north from
point of beginning; thence south 302 feet to point of
beginning, except the south 92 feet thereof, together
with all water and water rights, ditch and ditch rights
appurtenant to the above described property including
one (1) inch of water from the Ouillette Ditch; and
except that parcel conveyed by Melvin W. Koeltzow and
Marjorie L. Koeltzow.by Special Warranty Deed to the
Department of Highway, State of Colorado, dated March
17, 1969, and recorded April 4, 1969, Reception No.
321523, at Book 2093, Pages 637 and 638, Jefferson
County Records.
-500 WEST 29TH AVENUE
P.O.BOX638-- ---------__-- --- - -- - TheCityof-
WHEAT RIDGE_CO 8003=-0638 -1303) 234-5900 R x TL eat
City Admin. Fax # 234-592= Police Cent. Fax ~ 2352949 ~ ~ldge
POSTING CERTIFICATION
CASE NO. G(I~Y-~y_~'
PLANNING COMMISSION - CITY COUNCIL - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT (Circle One)
HEARING DATE: ~a -cT(,l~J ~'~
I,
residing at
n a m e
a d der e s s
as the applicant for Case No. /A~~¢ - 9-/ - '7 hereby certify
that I have posted the Notice of Public Hearing at
(1 o c a t i o n)
on this ~ day of ~ L1icf F 19 ~~, 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 ~~~/,~/.~,~,-,,,,- ~C- -r~'--- _
7" ~.
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 Planning and Development.
M A P
<pc>postingcert
rev. 05-19-94
`, Ca a,, ,~nan„~~.
~.~
i P.O. BOX 638 __ TELEPHONE: 303/237-6944 The Clfy Of
75001NEST 29TH AVENUE WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO 80033 Wheat
Ridge
June 7, 1994
This is to inform you that Case No. WA-94-7 which is a request
for approval of a variance to allow a 6 foot fence located within the
front yard setback
for property located at 4240 Kipling 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 June 23, 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.
I£ you have any questions or desire to review any plans, please
contact the Planning Division. Thank you.
PLANNING DIVISION
"The Carnation City"
c~.a~
U
C
z
3
u
c
c
(p
0
0
P 918 242 977
-P 918 242 978
a~+ » ~ ~
m. R
y 9 9
m n y
c m c
n y A
m ti ~
~I
~, ~
ffi _- ~
~ N _ _.. __ -z.
c- p ~ ~
3
G
C 3
C I
-e...__~~ A
I ~
I
i n"
~
~
_ ~
3
~ ~ £, ppp
y n.
~ m
-
°" ! ~o t+
°.. ~ m
en m
m
(
_ T
O ~
~
~ ~
.z 3
` C
C m c
m
; j
`
H
I r ~ .6~9U
~ ~ I ~ ~
~ ~ n
_ ~ v + N'
:~.
~~
~. _
N
0
N
Q
7J
W
O
O
W
m
n
m
ll
0
n
m
m
O
~_
r
=P 9Z8 242 979
N G G v
OJ
O
W W
C
Y 5
6 fi
~ Gr
-pt
p
s
W
49
+ t+ 4
R
® z aC
v
~ ~ # z
~
H t-~
p! ~
'3 R a
°
~ . z
r
'
n '
~
m c
Z
m y
~ nm °o
~_ °a~
.~n m
3
w
j
- Q
m
3
Q
m
<o
m
C
77
Z
v,
m
W$~• ~ •y
am~~a~~nni
o~_c=- v
mmx~.J _c~y
-6 A' ~Rm
n~~2F'
9 9~O 3~u~
3~3
~dm
m a ~
a Tao
o ~p~ $d°
f~3 NON
~$C ?PO'
~_~ n =
€~d.
~dm ~^
_~
W~I• ~ •y
aEtiFa'~~ooi
°°_mm ~' 333°m
m°°~ °aA
m m3 °c mm
a',°H~F' ~__
N ~~o ~'~3
3 ~~~
3.0
O '~~j A m p. ~ 0
Flo mwn.
NQ,
OdC 3 6
p?2 6_
N fJ ~p
~N.A N
a ~ o
WIa..,-...yi
'P ~ y' «y
~
. °A'3 m
W_.
D ~ ~ n ago
O nn
~:~ ~~ ~ ~~~ 6Y~
~f ~ F,°~o ma'N
~ ~ o
~ fL !-~ G o a o
Y N 53° H
~ ~
!
~ ~ i3 - --'
°
f° R n
o
'u
m
= '
O i _
~ ~ ,F ~ 3'
m
m
3
m
c
N
W V
Z 4 ~
m
~ O
„m ~O
~.
a y
Q N '`
y
Q
coo
w
O:
y
IMPORTANT! PLACE STICKER AT TOP OF ENVELOPE TO
,_ THE RIGHT OF RETURN ADDRESS.
=.
n
N
~ a
m
m
~~ec+ o
~mx
o=T
~
~P~ ~
p' N L
s ~ _
°'
-
~
A ~ 3 n
D
~ 0
N ~ N
~ ^ ^ ~
~ 3 y
c
Q] Q
N ~ 71 D ~ o
~ N O. < N.
~ O
>-
~
3 ~ m
_a
IL y a m o m
m O b+ ~
n
J <'
.~ < Q
m
a m m
~ m ~ m ti ~
. m y w m
N
N
CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE PLANNING DIVISION
STAFF REPORT
TO: BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT Date Prepared: June 8, 1994
Date of Meeting: June 23, 1994 Case Manager: Greg Moberg
Case No. & Name: WA-94-7/KOELTZOW
Action Requested: Approval of a variance to allow a six (6')
foot fence to be located within a front yard
setback.
Location of Request: 4240 Kipling Street
Name & Address of Applicant(s): Melvin Koeltzow
12385 W. 48th Avenue
Wheat Ridge, CO 80033
Name & Address of Owner(s): Same
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Approximate Area: 65,977.77 square feet
Present Zoning: Residential-Two
Present Land Use: Multiple family
Surrounding Zoning: N & ~: Commercial-One, E: Residential-One A,
S: Residential-Two
Surrounding Land Use: S: City owned parking lot, N: Vacant,
E: Single-family, W: Office
Date Published:- June 7, 1994
Date to be Posted: June 9, 1994
Date Legal Notices Sent: June 9, 1994
Agency Checklist: ( ) 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 ( ).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
TO: BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
Date Prepared: June 8, 1994
Date of Meeting: June 23, 1994
Case Manager: Greg Moberg
Case No. & Name: WA-94-7/KOELTZOW
Action Requested: Approval of a variance to allow a six (6')
foot fence to be located within a front yard
setback.
Location of Request: 4240 Kipling Street
Name & Address of Applicant(s): Melvin Koeltzow
12385 W. 48th Avenue
Wheat Ridge, CO 80033
Name & Address of Owner(s): -Same
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Approximate Area: 65,977.77 square feet
Present Zoning: Residential-Two
Present Land Use: Multiple family
Surrounding Zoning: N & Jd: Commercial-One, E: Residential-One A,
~: Residential-Two
Surrounding Land Use: S: City owned parking lot, N: Vacant,
E: Single-family, ~: Office
Date Published: June 7, 1994
Date to be Posted: June 9, 1994
Date Legal Notices Sent: June 9, 1994
Agency Checklist: ( ) Attached
Related Correspondence:
-----------------------
ENTER INTO RECORD:
( ) Comprehensive Plan
( ) Attached
--------------
(XX) Not Required
(XX) None
-----------------
(XX) Case File & Packet Materials
(XX) Zoning Ordinance (XX) Exhibits
( ) Subdivision Regulations ( ). 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.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT STAFF REPORT
CASE NO. WA-94-7
I. REQUEST
Page 2
The applicant is requesting approval of a variance to allow a six
foot. high fence to be located: within a front yard setback.
Section 26-30(I)(1) states: "Permitted fence, etc., heights: No
fence, divisional wall or hedge above the height of 48 inches.
shall be permitted within a minimum required front yard, or above
the height of 6 feet in instances not otherwise specified."
Section 26-15(F) requires that the minimum front yard setback is
30 feet for property zoned Residential-Two. Therefore, to allow
the applicant to place a 6 foot fence in the location requested,
a variance is required. The fence appears t~ be roughly 6' from
the applicant's western property line.
II. SITE
The subject site currently has multiple single family residences
located on it. These residences are located on the east half of
the property while the west half is occupied by a horse corral.
The 6' fence that is currently under construction started without
approval of a fence permit. The property owner was cited by Code
Enforcement and the applicant applied. It was found that the
fence under construction was not in conformance with the current
height standards. The permit was approved with the condition
that adherence to the fence height requirement be maintained.
The applicant has subsequently decided that he would like the
fence to remain in the present location. It is for this reason a
variance has been applied for.
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 and has been used as a residential property
for many years, 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 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, thn plight
of the owner is not due to unique circumstances; and
3. if the variation were granted, would it alter the essential
character of the locality?
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT STAFF REPORT
CASE NO. WA-94-7
Page 3
The granting of this variance could alter the essential
character of the local neighborhood as there are no other 6
foot high fences located in front yards.
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 result
in a hardship that would necessitate the need of a 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 a hardship nor 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. 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?
The hardship has been created by the applicant as the fence
was constructed without first obtaining a permit; 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 impair the adequate supply of
light and air to adjacent property or substantially increase
the congestion in the public streets 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 permit could endanger public safety by
obstructing the view of traffic of the property to the north
when it is developed.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT STAFF REPORT
CASE NO. WA-94-7 Page 4
IV. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on the preceding findings of fact, staff has reached the
following conclusions:
1. The property is and has been used as a residential property
for many years, 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 is
located, the property can yield a reasonable return in use;
and
2. As this site is under the same constraints as are all other
residential properties within the immediate area, the plight
of the owner is not due to unique circumstances; and
3. The granting of this variance could alter the essential
character of the local neighborhood as there are no other 6
foot high fences located in front yards.
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 6 foot
fence to be located within the front yard setback; and
5. Because staff has not found a hardship nor 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 hardship has been created by the applicant as the fence
was constructed without first obtaining a permit; and
7. The granting of this permit could endanger public safety by
obstructing the view of traffic of the property to the north
when it is developed.
Therefore, staff would recommend that Case No. WA-94-7 be DENIED.
t tts too5 ~ ~ i j
O O ~ 00 ~ * OO~yy * ~ ~ * ~ ~ M
O O -~-~ p O> ///p~ O) rn O O~
O j
-- ~ G
*~ 49 *NN
M
~~
~ D M ~ - ~~
~~
" G f'cR GREEK * ~ ~
S V ~u~ o y~ °o
~ M ~ ~ rn
Ro ~ ~ / \ I ro i
W 43R
W 43RD ,4VE - v ~_ R ~~~
~~ I ~ ~ ~
N
4300 `r
.` L o
`~ 42so 0
U SIGN NET D. ~41N R ~ N NODE 10 ~
z `~ TES o
- -?~ J
\~~~~ ~ \~ ~ ~ IX
~ \ . _
d~ O
.` c
~~ <.~~
~ ,.
~~- ~~
GREEN '-
I
~?- ~-2
0 0 0 o rn rn rn w rn rn rn rn c
W 41ST AVE
5T ~4VE
°`D ° o I ~ rn rn w *I I rn I *rn rn c
o_ o o~ ..~ I I I I
5 ~ ~.~ L V -
I
k
EXHIBIT 'A'
~o
KOELTZOW - DAUGHE ~BAUGH AGREEMENT
S00°17~35`~E 139.83
I
,
;
~
/
/
I
RECEPTION NO. 89051058 ~~ _..
`
jl,
m~°
hro
'
7_
O ~ /
C7 O
g/
;. ~
~~ ~ N
-i I
L7 h/
`D P0.8 PAR
CEL B
.. r
lal U,I
/
I.I
0:
In
a /
°
m ~
z/
i /
~o
N
/ ~ :,
, m'
W .,..
~ h li
ni
I l
v ~~~~
~ }
~
' ~ ~ o >:...j
~
I
I `
~
10~OEDICATEO FOR
BY PLAT - :.
hl'
{
', 1~
~
- ~
.-- - ~
'
' ~ 13995
N00°17~35~W
~- +
+
u
is
i t / ' 37
m
' 15bEDICATEO TO STATE ( ~,
15 OEOICATEO TO STATE HIGHWAY
w
i HIGHWAY DEPT.
9N 2120, PG 266 ._-. ~ w ~ _ DEPT• BK 2114, PG 469 ~_ , , I
i~ - / - .m
,Z /, _ om iO ~~
N
m P
9
_
/ ~ Z
.00: "~
~' 58 f
139.95 _ _ _
_.l.
l - .- - ~-
-, _
_2,651.8
600°22'00'E~' _
-
~ - `FOUND PK NAIL
--- 197.95
WI/4 CORNER SEC. 22
T35, R69W, 6th P. M.
FOUND BRASS CAP
IN RANGE ,BOX
OF TERMINUS '
ON LINE OF
:MENT ~--137.00+ --~
14
t
co
a
p a
~ O ~'
I ~ ~ /,
I ` -' RECEPTION N0. 85070137 -~ i
i
i !,
~ `
a,
m,
r~ _- '
N
~. ;
0~
M
.g
3
O
O
O
d'
~-
Z
3
~ ~
N .
N
~~
J
m
PO B.-COMMON LINE
BY 4GREEMENT
B PARCEL A
-- ~ -38,47'
~r_._.-_ --- .._- 2,432.31____.
2IOA0' ~ - ~--
,_ WEST LINE SEC.22 500°
K/PLING STREET
( COLO. STATE H/GHGYAY N0. 39/J
.~ ..,
WHEAT RIDGE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
MINUTES OF MEETING: June 28, 1994
Page 3
Board Member ABBOTT asked about the other structure
mentioned and Mr. Lammers said it has been on the every
since he has rented there which is roughly seven years.
Board Member ABBOTT asked staff if the other trailer
requires a permit or does it need to be put on a foundation,
and Mr. Moberg said he would have to look into it. However,
if it has been there for seven years there is not much we
can do since it is .difficult to prove.
No further-questions were asked.
Motion was made by Board Member ABBOTT that-Case No. TUP-94-
4, an application by U.S. Truck Driving School, be approved
for the following reasons:
1. The property is and has been used as a truck driving
school for many years, therefore the'proposed use will
not have a detrimental affect upon the general health or
welfare, safety, inconvenience of persons residing or
working in the neighborhood.
2. The applicant's testimony states that this structure
will become obsolete for its current use in
approximately six months.
WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITION:
1. The Temporary Use Permit will be for one year.
Motion was seconded by Board Member HOWARD. Motion carried
6-0. Resolution attached.
B. Case No. WA-94-7: An application by Melvin Koeltzow for
- approval of a variance to allow a six foot Fence within the
front yard setback. Said property is located at 4240
Kipling Street.
Greg Moberg presented the staff report. All pertinent
documents were entered_nto record, which Chairman JUNKER
accepted.
Board Member ABBOTT asked how far back the fence would have
to go to be legal in the sight triangle, and Mr. Moberg
replied the sight triangle is not a problem. The property
is zoned and used residential and therefore is exempt, the
problem is the front yard setback. A six foot fence is not
allowed in the front yard setback. For the applicant to be
legal he would have to move the fence posts approximately 25
feet to the east.
WHEAT RIDGE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
MINUTES OF MEETING: June 28, 1994
Page 4
Board Member ABBOTT said the concern seemed to be a safety
hazard on the north side of the property because of the
potential development, so he thought there would be a sight
triangle problem on that north corner. Mr. Moberg said
there could be a problem if that north corner develops out.
A six foot fence is not allowed in the front yard whether it
is commercial or residential so anything in a sight triangle
would have to drop down to 48".
Board Member ABBOTT said he was thinking of having the
applicant lower the fence down to 48" but staff is saying it
doesn't factor into this. Mr. Moberg said the way the code
is written anything that high is going to inhibit any kind
of vision along there because the entire length will be six
foot high, and we don't know where the .drive will be.
Discussion £ollowed.
Board Member HOVLAND asked in regard to the sight triangle
if that would ever obstruct the sight coming out of the
trail head to the south, and Mr. Moberg said it could
obstruct pedestrian vision that would be south bound on the
sidewalk, but not vehicular traffic.
Board Member ECHELMEYER asked if_the'fence posts that
currently run south will affect that fence, and Mr. Moberg
answered no, he can continue placing that fence. The posts
on the west side have been taken down. This fence is in the
Flood Plain and but was approved as long as the applicant
keeps 50~ open face.
Board Member ECHELMEYER wanted
commercial could it ,have a six
said not in the front yard.
to .now if this property goes
foot fence, and Mr. Moberg
Board Member HOWARD asked i£ the applicant is asking for a
25 foot. variance, and Mr. Moberg answered according to the
survey he received there has been some exchange with the
property to the north, so he does not know where the
property line or the fence is. The Parks Director says it
is approximately 4 1/2 to 5 feet from :the property line.
Mr. Moberg added the applicant wants to keep the fence in
the same location.
Board Member HOVLAND asked if the existing fence on the
property is in compliance, and Mr. Moberg replied he was
told it was 30 feet back, but that should be asked of the
applicant.
Board Member ECHELMEYER asked could this go up in the same
location if it was a four foot fence, and Mr. Moberg replied
yes.
WHEAT RIDGE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
MINUTES OF MEETING: June 28, 1994
Page 5
No further questions were asked of staff. _..
^- .
The applicant, Melvin Koeltzow, 12385 W. 48th Avenue, was
sworn in. Mr. Koeltzow stated he hired the same contractor
that was working for the City and felt they had a handle on
what could and could not be done. They set the fence four
feet back from the property and said they had a verbal
agreement from the City that if he would allow the City to
use that frontage that they would allow the six foot fence.
Mr. Koeltzow assumed they had initiated the permit to do
this and was already putting in the pickets when a city
official told him he would have to get a permit. He tried
to trace and find who did this agreement for the six foot
fence in exchange for the City using to use the frontage and
all of a sudden there is nobody that knows anything about
this.
Mr. Koeltzow said he is not trying to place the blame on
anyone, he is just a property owner trying to get a fence.
He feels he was negligent in not coming into the City and
finding out all the details and wi!.1 do whatever the Board
rules. The six foot fence will be an advantage as far as
seeing the corrals from the street, sound from the street
and privacy from the park.
Mr. Koeltzow feels he was caught in a situation but did not
intentionally do anything illegal. Whatever the ruling is,
he will comply with. He feels.it will be an advantage to
the area to have the same height fence all around. This
fence is a considerable distance back from Kipl3ng Street
and there should be no sight or traffic complications.
Board Member ABBOTT asked if he felt the extra two feet
would be a noise buffer,'and'the applicant said yes, and he
felt it would provide a little more of a deterant of
vandalism since the park will initiate public use. Board
Member ABBOTT feels the fence with the spacing would not do
to good of a job at buffering noise or maintaining privacy.
Mr. Koeltzow said to keep in mind the alternate spacing will
partially block vision and maintain semi-privacy.
Board Member ECHELMEYER questioned the applicant if this
fence is the corral fence or would he continue to keep a
separate fence, and Mr. Koeltzow answered the tenant will
provide an electric fence inside this fence. Board Member
ECHELMEYER asked if there is an electric fence now and
wanted to know if the horses belong to-the applicant. Mr.
Koeltzow replied there is an electric fence now. The horses
belong to the applicant's tenant (he is the owner but does
not live on the property). _
WHEAT RIDGE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
MINUTES OF MEETING: June 28, 1994
Page 6
Board Member ECHELMEYER asked if the horses have ever broken
out onto Kipling Street, and the applicant answered no, not
to his knowledge.
Board Member ECHELMEYER asked if he was planning to go ahead
with the six foot fence on the south, and Mr. Koeltzow
replied yes, because of the park he would like to have as
much of the six foot fence as he could possibly have because
he feels he is more vulnerable to parties and vandalism.
The applicant said the fence is necessary and if it wasn't
he would not spend the money because this is not a cheap
endeavor to fence that much area.
Board Member ECHELMEYER asked if he would have any trouble
with a four foot fence on the west, and Mr. Koeltzow said
the trouble with a four foot fence will be the double cost.
To cut the fence down will cost him a considerable amount
because the material has already been purchased. He would
feel more comfortable with the six foot fence to reduce any
liability from the horses and also feels the property will
look better.
Board Member HOVLAND asked the applicant to clarify the
statement that someone from the Parks department wanted the
fence across there so they could make a planting buffer or
something. Mr. Koeltzow said the way he was approached was
he was led to believe there was an agreement with the
contractor and somebody from the City, but never got any
documentation. The applicant pulled the permit as soon as
he was aware of the situation. The contractor has agreed to
move the fence. back.
No further questions were asked of the applicant.
Motion was made by Board Member ABBOTT, that Case No. WA-94-
9, an application by Melvin Koeltzow, be approved for the
following reasons:
1. The fence would greatly enhance privacy and peaceful use
of this residential property from this busy
thoroughfare.
2. Since horses are kept on this property, a six foot fence
would help mitigate.an attractive nuisance for
neighborhood children.
WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
1. Then fence must be lowered 48" maximum for 15 feet in
each direction from the intersection of the west fence
line and the north fence line at the driveway.
2. The Flood Plain requirements must be met.
~~
WHEAT RIDGE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
' MINUTES OF MEETING: June 28, 1994 Page 7
3. Livestock must be kept a minimum of four feet from the
fencer
4. This four foot space must be kept clear of weeds and
trash.
Motion was seconded by Board Member ECHELMEYER.
Board Member ROSSILLON stated he would be voting against
this motion even though it is somewhat of a unique
circumstance but feels there is no necessity for a six foot
fence. The Board will open themselves up for other
applicants to try and justify the six foot fence.
Chairman JUNKER said she also would be voting against this
because six foot fences are not allowed.
Board Member ECHELMEYER will be voting for this because
Kipling Street is almost totally commercial, and there will
be no precedent set relative to R-2 and R-1 districts. He
is afraid of an accident on Kipling Street with the horses.
The request would be a different story i£ the property were
R-1 or R-2.
Motion denied by a vote of 2-4, with Board Members HOVLAND,
HOWARD, JUNKER, and ROSSILLON voting no. Resolution
attached.
C. tease No. WA-94-5: An application by Diana and Terry Olson
for approval of a 20' variance to i:he 30' required side yard
setback adjacent to a public street; in a Residential-Two
zone district. Said property is located at 2990 Saulsbury
Street.
Greg Moberg, presented the staff report. .,A],l.pertinent .. "
documents were entered into record, which Chairman JUNKER
accepted.
Board Member ROSSILLON asked if the plan is to be just 10
feet from the property line, and Mr. Moberg answered the
site plan shows a 10 foot setback from the north property
line and 11 feet back from edge of asphalt. There are no
curbs, gutters or walkout, nor are there any plans to be.
Board Member ABBOTT said his problem is the side yard
setback, and asked when staff says there is an alternative
location are they talking about pushing the garage further
toward the house. Mr. Moberg replied pushing the garage
back further into-the rear yard is an alternative, they
however will lose most of their backyard..
PUBLIC HEARING SPEAKERS' LIST
CASE NO: wA-94-7 DATE• June 23, 1994
REQUEST: An application by Melvin Koeltzow for approval of a variance to allow
a six foot fence within the front yard setback. Said property is located at
4240 Kipling Street.
1 ; Position On Request;
1 (Please Check) ;
i SPEAKER'S NAME~& ADDRESS (PLEASE PRINT) i IN FAVOR i OPPOSED ~
/,,~ // /lE~ 5'0256 Sn<?.tJ
Y// ~.~ /P Of_ L T 9-? !l G) 11.J R Sc -~ 1. 2 ~/ f/T~` /~~l c- 1 ~ 1 ~"~ ! 1
~ i
i 1 ~
f
I
~
1
1
1
~ 1 1
~ ~ I
1 ~
1
I ~
I ~
I ~
~ 1
~ 1
~ I
1 ~
1
I ~
I
1
1
1
t
I
1
1
I
1
I
1
I
I
1
~ I 1 I
' 1 1 1
.~
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 23rd day of June 1994.
CASE NO: WA-94-7
APPLICANT'S NAME: Melvin Koeltzow
LOCATION: 4240 Kipling Street
Upon motion by Board Member ABBOTT seconded by Board Member
HOWARD the following Resolution was stated.
WHEREAS, the applicant was denied permission by an Administrative
Officer; and
WHEREAS, Board of Adjustment Application, Case No. WA-94-7
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 NO 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. WA-44-7 be and hereby is APPROVED.
TYPE OF VARIANCE: A 25' to the 30' required setback and a 2'
height
PURPOSE: To allow a six foot fence within the Front yard setback
FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS:
1. The fence would greatly enhance privacy and peaceful use of
this residential property from this busy thoroughfare.
„ 2. Since horses are.-kept on this property; a six foot fence
would help mitigate an attractive nuisance for neighborhood
children.'
WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
1. Then fence must be lowered 48" maximum for 15 feet in each
direction from the intersection of the west fence line and
the north fence line at the driveway.
2. The Flood Plain requirements must be met.
3. Livestock must be kept a minimum of four feet From the fence.
4. This four foot space must be kept clear of weeds and trash.
VOTE: YES: Abbott and Echelmeyer
NO: Hovland, Howard, Junker, and,ROSSillon
DISPOSITION: Variance denied by a
DA ED this 2•rd day of June, 1994.
SUSAN JUNKER Chairman
Board of Adjustment
vote of 2-4.
Q
Ma L u Chapla, Sec etary
Board o Adjustment