Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutWA-09-08e~Aa City of ~WheatR d e 7500 West 29th Avenue Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80033 303.235.2846 Fax: 303.235.2857 Approval of Variance WHEREAS, an application for a variance was submitted for the property located at 3225 Miller Street referenced as Case No. WA-09-08/Jackson; and WHEREAS, City staff found basis for approval of the variance, relying on criteria listed in Section 26-115 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws and on information submitted in the case file; and WHEREAS, the Community Development Department has properly notified pursuant to Section 26-109 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws; and WHEREAS, there were no registered objections regarding the application; NOW THEREFORE, be it hereby resolved that a 3 foot fence height variance to the 6 foot fence height in order to construct a 9 foot fence along the western property line on property in the R-1 zone district. (Case No. WA-09-08/Jackson) is granted for the property located at 3225 Miller Street, based on the following findings of fact: 1. The fence height variance would not alter the character of the neighborhood. 2. The majority of homes along W. 32nd Ave have 6 foot fences to screen out W. 32" Ave. 3. The construction of the W. 32"d Ave and its other improvements were constructed by the City of Wheat Ridge and a hardship has been imposed on the property owner as a result. 4. There will be no negative impact to the public welfare or other properties in the area. 5. The request would not substantially increase the congestion in public streets, encroach into the sight distance triangle, increase the danger of fire or endanger the public safety. 6. There have been no protests submitted during the ten-day public notification period. 7. The existing 6 foot fence does little to provide privacy and does not screen W. 32nd Ave from the rear yard. 8. Because of the slope of the property, a 9 foot fence constructed along a portion of the western property line would appear to be a 6 foot fence from W. 32nd Ave. 9. The 9 fogt fapce will not be constructed along the entire length of the rear property 1 y/Dl ate Director ®A41 City of Wh6atPsLc gc CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE PLANNING DIVISION STAFF REPORT TO: Case File DATE: September 30, 2009 CASE MANAGER: Adam Tietz CASE NO. & NAME: WA-09-08/Jackson ACTION REQUESTED: Approval of a 3 foot fence height variance to the 6 foot fence height maximum resulting in a 9 foot fence on property zoned Residential-One (R-1). LOCATION OF REQUEST: 3225 Miller St. APPLICANT (S): OWNER (S): APPROXIMATE AREA: John and Janet Jackson John and Janet Jackson 16,261 square feet (.37 acres) PRESENT ZONING: PRESENT LAND USE: COMP PLAN LAND USE: ENTER INTO RECORD: Residential-One (R-1) Single Family Residence Single Family Residential not to exceed 4 units per acre (X) CASE FILE & PACKET MATERIALS (X) ZONING ORDINANCE Site Admini Case N 1 JURISDICTION: All notification and posting requirements have been met; therefore, the Community Development Director may make an administrative decision on this case. 1. REQUEST The applicant is requesting approval of a 3 foot (50 percent) fence height variance to the 6 foot fence height in order to construct a 9 foot fence for a length of 30 feet 14 inches along the western (rear) property line at the property indicated above. Section 26-115.13 (Variances and Waivers) of the Wheat Ridge City Code empowers the Director of Community Development to decide upon applications for administrative variances from the strict application of the zoning district development standards that are not in excess of fifty (50) percent of the standard. II. CASE ANLYSIS The applicants, John and Janet Jackson are requesting a variance as the property owners of 3225 Miller Street. The application for a 3 foot fence height variance is being requested so the applicant may a construct a wood privacy fence that is 9 feet tall on the southern end of the western property line. (Exhibit 1, Site Plan) The property is zoned R- 1 which allows for a fence up to 6 feet high behind the 30 front setback line. These development standards were established to provide high quality, safe, quiet and stable low-density residential neighborhoods, and to prohibit activities of any nature which are incompatible with the low-density residential character. The property is located on the northwest corner of W. 32nd Ave. and Miller St. (Exhibit 2 Aerial Photo) W. 32"d Ave sits several feet higher than the majority of the property. In order to create a usable sidewalk that is on the same elevation as the street, a portion of the slope coming down from the street had to be re-captured when it was constructed by the City of Wheat Ridge. A 3 foot high, wooden retaining wall was constructed directly behind the sidewalk, along the southern property line, in order to build it on the same grade as the street. The retaining wall creates a 3 foot separation of grade from the behind the sidewalk to the property in question. From the southern property line heading north, there is a difference in elevation of approximately 6-8 feet to where the home and rear yard are located in addition to the 3 foot retaining wall on the south sided of the southern property line. This makes the home and rear yard sit 9-11 feet lower then W.32nd Ave. (Exhibit 3, Topographic map) The change in elevation is steep as it occurs over a short distance. The rear property line follows this slope as it goes from the southern property line at W. 32"d Ave to the north. A 6 foot fence was constructed along the rear property line but because of the slope it gives the appearance of a 3 foot high fence from W. 32"d Ave. and provides little in terms of privacy. (Exhibits 4-8, Site Photos) The existing fence still allows for people traveling along W. 32"d Ave to see over the fence and into the rear yard of the applicants. Administrative Variance Case No. WA-09-08/Jackson The proposed fence will not extend along the entire length of the rear property line. It will only extend for a distance of 30 feet 14 inches. In addition the fence will not be located on the property line as code allows but will be approximately 15 and a half feet from the west property line at its furthest point and approximately 5 feet from the property line at its closest point. This portion of the proposed fence will be sufficient to screen W. 32"d Ave. traffic and pedestrians from looking into the rear yard. The remainder of the rear property will continue to be screened by the existing 6 foot fence. The applicants were granted a variance to construct a 9 foot fence directly behind the retaining wall along the southern property line which abuts W. 32nd Ave. Because of the 3 foot retaining wall a 6 foot fence did not give the rear and side yards the privacy that a 6 foot fence is intended to give. III. VARIANCE CRITERIA In order to approve an administrative variance, the Director must determine that the majority of the "criteria for review" listed in Section 26-115.C.4 of the City Code have been met. The applicant has provided their analysis of the applications compliance with the variance criteria. (Exhibit 9) Staff provides the following review and analysis of the variance criteria. 1. The property in question would not yield a reasonable return in use, service or income if permitted to be used only under the conditions allowed by regulation for the district in which it is located. If the request were denied, the property would continue to yield a reasonable return. The property currently has a single family home with detached garage on it and it may remain and be used in this manner regardless of outcome of the variance request. If denied, the applicant would still be able to keep the 6 foot fence that is along the rear property line today. Staff finds this criterion has not been met. 2. The variance would not alter the essential character of the locality. If the request were granted, the character of the locality would not be altered. The property is located along W. 32"d Ave. As a result of the construction of W. 32nd Ave and the terrain in this area many of the homes that abut the street have large elevation changes over a short distance resulting in steep slopes as properties approach the street. Additionally, many of the homes along W. 32"d Ave from Kipling to Youngfield, on both sides of the street, have some sort of screening from the road. The most common type screening used along this stretch of road is a 6 foot privacy fence Administrative Variance Case No. WA-09-08/Jackson however; a 9 foot fence does exist along the southern property line of the property in question. The fence, although it would be 9 feet, would appear as if it were a 6 foot fence from W. 32nd Ave. Staff finds this criterion has been met. 3. The applicant is proposing a substantial investment in the property with this application, which would not be possible without the variance. The applicant is proposing an investment in the property. However, staff does not believe the construction of a fence is a substantial investment as it relates to the intended meaning of "substantial investment in the property." Staff finds this criterion has not been met. 4. The particular physical surrounding, shape or topographical condition of the specific property involved results in a particular and unique hardship (upon the owner) as distinguished from a mere inconvenience if the strict letter of the regulations were carried out. There are very unique conditions related to the topography of the property that render a fence built to the development standards virtually ineffective. The southern property line sits three feet lower than the street elevation of W. 32nd Ave. The home sits even lower on the property than the elevation along the southern property line as the southern portion of the property slopes drastically to the north as you move away from the retaining wall towards the home. Because of such a great change in elevation between W. 32nd Ave and the home, a 6 foot fence constructed on any portion of the yard would do very little to mitigate the impacts of W. 32nd Ave on the property. It also provides very little privacy for the homeowners as pedestrians and motorists traveling along W. 32nd Ave. are be able to see into the yard over the existing 6 foot fence. This does create a unique hardship on the property in question and therefore the request for relief from the strict regulation of the law is more than a mere inconvenience. Staff finds this criterion has been met. 5. The alleged difficulty or hardship has not been created by any person presently having an interest in the property. The hardship described above relates to the height of the fence. A six foot fence is allowed and has been constructed up to the rear property line. Since the property is three feet lower than the land on the other side of the retaining wall, Administrative Variance 4 Case No. WA-09-08/Jackson and the rest of the property sits 6-8 feet lower then at the southern property line, the existing 6 foot fence essentially provides little to no privacy. Since the road and its improvements were not constructed by the owners and since the lot was not platted by the owners and was platted prior to the current owner having an interest in the property; the hardships have not been created by the owner. Staff finds this criterion has been met. 6. The granting of the variance would not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other property or improvements in the neighborhood in which the property is located, by, among other things, substantially or permanently impairing the appropriate use or development of adjacent property, impairing the adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property, substantially increasing the congestion in public streets or increasing the danger of fire or endangering the public safety, or substantially diminishing or impairing property values within the neighborhood. Staff believes the request would not be detrimental to public welfare and would not be injurious to neighboring property or improvements. Because the applicant's property sits several feet lower than W. 32nd Ave and the fence will not be constructed on the property line, the fence will appear to be 9 feet in height and will have little impact on the surrounding properties. It would not hinder or impair the development of the adjacent properties. The adequate supply of air and light would not be compromised as a result of this request. The request would not increase the congestion in the streets. Nor would it extend into the sight distance triangle as the fence is proposed to be constructed along the rear property line. It would not increase the danger of fire. It also would not cause an obstruction to motorists on the adjacent streets and would not impede the sight distance triangle. Staff finds this criterion has been met 7. The unusual circumstances or conditions necessitating the variance request are present in the neighborhood and are not unique to the property. This condition does exist at other locations in the neighborhood. Several properties have large slopes running from W. 32"d Ave to the north as the street was constructed higher than several of the properties. This condition exists primarily in the specific area of the variance request around W. 32"d Ave and Miller St. Administrative Variance Case No. WA-09-08/Jackson Six foot fences along W. 32nd Ave are also very common in this neighborhood. Nearly every home that has a side or rear yard abutting the street has a six foot fence in order provide privacy and a barrier between the street and the yard. Staff finds this criterion has been met. 8. Granting of the variance would result in a reasonable accommodation of a person with disabilities. Single family homes and fences are not required to meet building codes pertaining to the accommodation of persons with disabilities. Staff finds this criterion is not applicable. 9. The application is in substantial compliance with the applicable standards set forth in the Architectural and Site Design ManuaL The Architectural and Site Design Manual does not apply to single and two family dwelling units. Staff finds this criterion is not applicable. IV. STAFF CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Having found the application in compliance with the majority of the applicable review criteria, staff recommends APPROVAL of a 3 foot height variance to the maximum 6 foot high fence, resulting in a 9 foot fence. Staff has found that there are unique circumstances attributed to this request that would warrant approval of a variance. Therefore, staff recommends approval for the following reasons: 1. The fence height variance would not alter the character of the neighborhood. 2. The majority of homes along W. 32"d Ave have 6 foot fences to screen out W. 32" Ave. 3. The construction of the W. 32"d Ave and its other improvements were constructed by the City of Wheat Ridge and a hardship has been imposed on the property owner as a result. 4. There will be no negative impact to the public welfare or other properties in the area. 5. The request would not substantially increase the congestion in public streets, encroach into the sight distance triangle, increase the danger of fire or endanger the public safety. Administrative Variance 6 Case No. WA-09-08/Jackson 6. There have been no protests submitted during the ten-day public notification period. 7. The existing 6 foot fence does little to provide privacy and does not screen W. 32"d Ave from the rear yard. 8. Because of the slope of the property, a 9 foot fence constructed along a portion of the western property line would appear to be a 6 foot fence from W. 32nd Ave. 9. The 9 foot fence will not be constructed along the entire length of the rear property line Administrative Variance Case No. WA-09-08/Jackson PROPERT LINT' / I ! / I SETBACK I I I I N_ b I I I EXIST. CNE STORY RESIDENCE I I i ?I I ~I I ~I I EXIST. TREE CI I LINE OF ROOF >I i~ I 1 III OVERHANG - - 4 1 ~ I t-A a I N o I o f I \ `t A \ \ m \m DRIVE (/L,uf PROPERTY LINE NEW CONC. DRI NEW SPLIT FACE CONC. MOCK RETAINING WALL I LUEST 32ND AVE, SITE PLAN SCALE I" =10'-0" NORTH w s 1041 I$0395 .{00046 W of 9 d, Arl 00 John D. & Janet J. Jackson 3225 Miller Street Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80033 theravenproject@msn.com Phone: 303-237-8554 8-15-09 The City of Wheat Ridge Community Development 7500 West 29 h Avenue Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80033 To Whom It May Concern: We requested and received a variance for a detached garage. It is up and beautiful, thank you. We also requested and received a variance for a nine-foot fence along 32"d. The fence is up and is very nice; however, it does not totally accomplish what we wished. Q1 The far west side of the fence is not long enough to supply complete privacy. People walking along 32nd are able to look right into our sunroom. The fence needing to be higher is only 3o feet 14 inches long, going north from the southwest corner. This portion ICI of the fence is not on the property line. The fence is fifteen-feet eight inches from the property line in one place and five-feet one inch from the property line in another (Please 00 look at the plans). The rest of the fence, which is on the property line, would stay at xj the six-foot height. We therefore are requesting one more variance. The Variance Criteria: W A. The property in question would not yield a reasonable return in use, service or income if permitted to be used only under the conditions allowed by regulation for the district in which it is located. The current fence is six foot high which normally would be sufficient but the drop from 32"d to our house is quite steep and allows people to look right into our sunroom and conRoquently into our bedroom. B. The variance would not alter the essential character of the locality. The character of the locality would stay the same; it would just give us more privacy. C. The applicant is proposing a substantial investment in the property with this application, which would not be possible without the variance. N/A D. The particular physical surrounding, shape or topographical condition of the specific property results in a particular and unique hardship (upon the owner) as distinguished from a mere inconvenience. The typography of the property has given us quite a challenge. The unique conditions make a standard fence ineffective. People walking east can look just north of the nine- foot fence and look right into our yard because of the extreme drop off to the north. We are required because of the right of way to keep the southwest side of our property open so that the owners of Lateral 34 can adjust the water. The area where people can look in is right where the top of the lateral is so those adjusting the water are also looking into the property. They tend to be up there about 10 PM many nights. We can hear and see them as they talk while we are setting in our sunroom. We must make sure the drapes are closed when we go to bed. Our home is approximately ten-feet lower than 32nd Avenue so consequently when the six-foot fence that is currently there comes of off the nine-foot fence; it leaves an area where people can look down, into our house. E. The alleged difficulty or hardship has not been created by any person presently having an interest in the property. We did not ask for or even vote for the improvements to the road many years ago, which required a three-foot wall to be constructed along our property, which connects to 32nd avenue. We did not create this hardship. F. The granting of the variance would not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other property or improvements in the neighborhood in which the property is located, by, among other things, substantially or permanently impairing the appropriate use or development of adjacent property, impairing the adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property, substantially increasing the congestion in public streets or increasing the danger of fire or endangering the public safety, or substantially diminishing or impairing property values within the neighborhood. This would not be detrimental to public welfare and would not be injurious to neighboring property or improvements. It will not obscure the view for the neighbor to the west. The fence at the southwest corner is fifteen-feet from our property line at one area and five-feet from the property line in another area (Please look at the plans). Because of the right of way, the fence is not in a straight line. We are requesting only an additional thirty feet fourteen inches of nine-foot fence. G. The unusual circumstances or conditions necessitating the variance request are present in the neighborhood and are not unique to the property. This condition does not exist on any of the other properties. We are the only ones that have a three-foot retaining wall to 32nd Avenue. Our neighbor to the west has a drop off but not like ours and it is their front yard so consequentially there are no privacy issues. 2 H. Granting of the variance would result in a reasonable accommodation of a person with disabilities. N/A 1. The application is in substantial compliance with the applicable standards set forth in the Architectural and Site Design Manual. N/A ends P ~ City of WheatRi c POSTING CERTIFICATION CASE NO. WA-09-08/Jackson DEADLINE FOR I, residing at m e) (address) as the applicant for Case No. WA-09-08 , hereby certify that I have posted the sign for Public Notice at 3225 Miller Street (location) c on this day of 20_eL~7, and do hereby certify that said sign has been posted and remained in place for ten (10) days prior to and including the deadline for written comments regarding this case. The sign was posted in the position shown on the map below. Signature: ' NOTE: This form must be submitted to the Community Dc~elopment ep ent for this case and will be placed in the applicant' s case file. MAP ,Wm 0283 ,OfW \ 10310 6i]i5 103)0 ~i r A m3i5 W250 1M„ 1W05 .23 1W, 32ND---~-- mWe ,o3ao mWi W+ 09-0g lj-e-~orl lql4m<-Vv x'odzZ 15, HOWARD ELVA M MARSH TIMOTHY F MC LANE SHIRLEY M HOWARD JACK ROWE JOANNE M 10405 W. 32ND AVE 720 CORPORATE CIR 10370 W. 33RD AVE WHEAT RIDGE CO 80033 GOLDEN CO 80401 WHEAT RIDGE CO 80033 7006 0100 0006 7651 7006 0100 0006 7651 6340 7006 0100 000b 7651 6333 HONAMAN GLENN E SCHRO JACKSON JOHN D HONAMAN LYNN W SCHROEDER REBECCA JACKSON JANET J 3275 MILLER ST GENNERMAN 3225 MILLER ST WHEAT RIDGE CO 80033 3250 MILLER ST WHEAT RIDGE CO 80033 WHEAT RIDGE CO 80033 7006 0100 0006 7651 6296 7006 0100 0006 7651 L319 7006 0100 0006 7651 6302 WHITING KENNETH W MAYVILLE JANE M GIBBONS JEFFREY D WHITING MELYNDA A GIBBONS ANNE C 10340 W. 32ND AVE WHEAT AT RIDGE 46 GC CO DR 80215 47 MORNINGSIDE DR WHEAT RIDGE CO 80033 WHEAT RIDGE CO 80215 7006 0100 0006 7651 6265 7006 0100 0006 7651 6289 Q 6326 7006 0100 0006 7651 6272 It City of `rte WheatMidge COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT City of Wheat Ridge Municipal Building 7500 W. 29' Ave. Wheat Ridge, CO 80033-8001 P: 303.235.2846 F: 303.235.2857 CERTIFIED LETTER NOTICE September 9, 2009 Dear Property Owner: This is to inform you of Case No. WA-09-08, a request for approval of a 3 foot fence height variance to the maximum 6 foot height limit for fences in the rear yard, resulting in a 9 foot high fence on property zoned Residential-One (R-1) and located at 3225 Miller Street. The applicant for this case is requesting an administrative variance review which allows no more than a fifty percent (50%) variance to be granted by the Zoning Administrator without need for a public hearing. Prior to the rendering of a decision, all adiacent property owners are required to be notified of the request by certified mail If you have any questions, please contact the Planning Division at 303-235-2846 or if you would like to submit comments concerning this request, please do so in writing by 5:00 p.m. on September 18, 2009. Thank you. WA0908.doc www.ci.wheatridgexo.us J .8 R-3 OE 21 t, C-1 zr m a PL ~ WwT HPL n 6 a ~o q S C u~ g 41 z a ~ o~ W 1L F- 9 W m W 32ND PL F PL W 35TH -1 FW4_~ W 3d TH PL ~ yg5 A p W 3yTl{AV, o ~d3'" R o ~ F g m U p % M O O ~ m J o e a m O O J n E y s W 3 3N0 PL W 'fe" S O 3115 ~ ~..a+ . rs-rr~` y - 5E 2,5 R-1 C-1 R-C ' ~ wucta (17 m WeNEW5 _ DESIGNER'S PL WMEAi WOGE SMALLANIMAL Qt R SUP-BST SUP W4 SUP-99-1 SUP-00.2 °g ~T1 ~ f OFFICIAL NE 28 ZONING MAP C -PARCEL/LOT BOUNDARY (DESIGNATES OWNERSHIP) WHEAT RIDGE -----WATER FEATURE COLORADO DENOTES MULTIPLE ADDRESSES 7 100-YEAR FLOOD PLAIN 0 100 2OO 300 900 F'R L•-ld (APPROXIMATE LOCATION) ~Wx4)gb 5 DEPAKTMENTOF MAP ADOPTED: June 15, 1994 PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT Last Revision: September 10, 2001 M M M m m M N N M M M M m M d O O O O O O N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N m m w m m w m m u 1O 00000000 N 00000000 wwwwwwww 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00000000 2' xxxxxxxx 3333333 v ww w Q Q ~N ~ Q N l /J z D Z g o o z z d Q, N W W W Z Z Z M E J J J M X x c.) N J J J O O > 3 3 3 22 M O N N N O V 0 MV N N N m O O m M m O a D Q v n 0 ` a m m M m m m N N o m m M m m m V O O O O O O N N 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m m m a0 m W W m m iJ s x° ! 000000000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 WWWWWwww 00000000 00000000 zwwwwwwww W FaFa Fa-F¢-FaFa FQFQ (li WWWWW ~ 0 C 933333333 a w ww H F H w K K H 0 0 0 w 0 0 Q O o ww w 99 h 00 OOO O OX wmx zz W w W N Z Z o y . M M M ` N O JJ J 00 0 3 222 2i 22 N Y1 O O N N O N O (p 1~ N I~ O r N N C P O ` I~ M V N N N M a ooMmMo D Q C oE . N m z Q x w w Z Z W U' Q 0 Q 3m'0 0 YW zWWz w z d Y J W 1 ,2 Q Q , 0O Q 0z y (9 wz o a w Q z x m 3 0 00 00 0 =w 2w (D W p w 2 Y >z>0r~w Q z ~ J Z Z d Q J = o W W w2w W~Y4, z oz W0 olw ¢2z o Z- 3 ~ 3mgz= c O 0i 00000 Q- x22x(n13~a LAND USE CASE PROCESSING APPLICATION Community Development Department 7500 West 29`h Avenue, Wheat Ridge, CO 80033 Phone (303) 235-2846 (Please print or type all information) Applicant j 0///y D jf~ MES01(1 Address ~-7-2~7 j- M -T-1 LG/Z S/ Phone 3~~° z3 } City- h111 " 7 X~Z/- . G State Zip 9~De Fax Owner ~j eA{ V T/-!W j ;5-/f Lk XA- ddress S',4i~E A5 14,,Fd Phone City State Zip Fax Contact 5 f/- <1/-X P~ISdiC/ Address -5 F41w - LLB /8~657- Phone 347--2-7~-, City State Zip Fax (The person listed as contact will be contacted to answer questions regarding this application, provide additional information when necessary, post public hearing signs, will receive a copy of the staff report prior to Public Hearing, and shall be responsible for forwarding all verbal and written communication to applicant and owner.) Location of request Type of action requested (check one or more of the actions listed below which pertain to your request): Application submittal requirements on reverse side ❑ Change of zone or zone conditions ❑ Special Use Permit ❑ Consolidation Plat ❑ Subdivision: Minor (5 lots or less) ❑ Flood Plain Special Exception ❑ Subdivision: Major (More than 5 lots) ❑ Lot Line Adjustment ❑ Right of Way Vacation ❑ Planned Building Group ❑ Temporary Use, Building, Sign ❑ Site Development Plan approval )~Variance/Waiver (from Section ) ❑ Other: 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 action on his behalf. Signature of Applicant X/Z KV, ~l ~N.A / Sub crt an sworn to `da)/ V 6 US T 20 D 9 Not Publ' N~ jg$tla is' xpires ~0l6 To be filled out by staff. Op CO O Date received Fee p i Rece~ip,pt No.~ Case No. a))f Comp Plan Desig. Zoning Quarter Section Map Related Case No. Pre-App Mtg. Date Case Manager 191, '1 Required information: Assessors Parcel Number: Size of Lot (acres or square footage): Current Zoning: Proposed Zoning: Current Use: Proposed Use: 3~ N A vE vvE fRE-AP/RDVEJ 7Foo7- VA/f//IV~F ,/AT-FAAL 31 WA Tf CH/4 NE / PRdPERiY / / NF FAST W o 8 TN 6 Foo,- F,W✓cE 3G Aj-e _ 1 -60 S{ ti N 0 N 0 19V --I-~ v~. 0. w') On the basis of my knowledge, information and belief, I hereby certify that this improvement location certificate was prepared for COMMERCIAL FEDERAL , that it is not a Land Survey Plat or Improvement Survey Plat, and that it is not to be relied upon for the establishment of fence, building, or other future improvement lines. I further certify that the improvements on the above described parcel on this date, except utility epnnectiona, are entirely within the boundaries of the parcel, except as shown, that there are no encroachments upon the described premiaea by improvementa on any adjoining premises, except as indicated, and that there is no apparent evidence or sign of any easement crossing or urdening a + deed parcel, except as noted. "NOTICE: According to colorade law you muss co Once nny 'A±~+sp~ wpangny defect in this survey vithi3, three Years after you first discoYe such dell .r/ $y any ac on based upon It is o F. 5o71 d+ 5t any d It in$3 t`earveY bel Fgd maro an years my laterptetetlda that Out shove described Eros s JacrE_o hoe eertifica s, So.n her n." ten Property .«..,o.- Iooated withfa a 100 = . 127M 4 dcra year flood haEard boundary betted do Federal py ; i &metgsncyMaaagonmatAgenq ranm ter' : ~ a~'a Rate Maps Dated Fi 3R ploo}5 ii; S 'Z-. e- Robert E Por~j 4 a'ORobert M. Haydan, L.S. 27268 Administrative Variance Case No. WA-08-09/Jackson City of LAND USE APPLICATION FORM Wheatldge COMMUh1uy DEVELOPMENT Case No. WA0908_ _ 1 Date Received 8/3V200J. Related Cases Case Planner -Tietz Case Description. Fence height variance ! ~1p vtic.HN l~Mraaalron Name. Jahn D. Jackson Name Phone (303) 237-8554 Address 3225Miller 5l. City Wheat Ridge. Stale CO Zip 180033. OsrrerrJn/o'waima Name John6Janet Jackson Name Phone ~ Address F-- City F- State F71 ;.Zip F-----7 -CvMN fllzA7j ehiw Name. Janet Jackssn j. Name Phone (3031237-8554 Address F- J: Gty State r 4p. PFOI& JJnfvrwaJion Address 3225 j Sheet Miller Street _ City Wheat Ridge State ! CO Zip 80533 = 5- . - Location Description. Project Name. Parcel No. 39-281-99.008 QtrSection: NE28 Distrct No.~ III,_ El I HeVJLw Pre-App Date r- Neighborhood Meeting Date r~ ApPNa. 7'-: Review Type. ^ ?w Reis ('yy6 "dy .iy - < yJ.~ ,$y~a Re~`fevf`ba` D s o .LTom~•~ryrents i ~,~u' 7 n „ Repod g lbv Review 77, O{ ! 5 Y .tt 1 q CV y~h~ .~'r ~ t '~34 4' Y L "S t by t t ~ a fi A ~ Y ~ p ~ ds1 utt ~^a~ p4 ~ ~ ' H Y Tp~ 4✓ `'i.1, 3<3 ~Yr{ f? !j JF J y " 1, f L 6JJ >jYi#}' . , x QJS~lPtlf%Of! CaseDisposition Disposition Date r~ Conditions of Approvals Notes'. 9latus l'IOPen CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE 08/31/89 3:25 PM cdbb JOHN 8 JANET JACKSON RECEIPT NO:CDB882255 AMOUNT FMSD ZONING APPLICATION F 288.80 ZONE PAYMENT RECEIVED AMOUNT CK 9299 288.88 TOTAL 288.88