HomeMy WebLinkAboutWA-08-09,ldd
City of
~WheatRi~ ge
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-08-09/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 adjacent property
owners 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 three (3) foot fence height variance; increased
from the fence height maximum of six (6) feet (Case No. WA-08-09/Jackson) is granted for the
property described located at 3225 Miller Street to construct a nine (9) foot fence, as described,
based on the following findings of fact:
1. The fence height variance would not alter the character of the
neighborhood.
2. The mjority of homes along W. 32nd Ave have 6 foot fences to screen out
W. 32nd Ave.
3. The construction of the W. 32nd 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. A 6 foot fence would do little to provide privacy and would not screen W. 32"d Ave
from the yard.
8. A 9 foot fence constructed along the southern property line would appear to be a 6
foot fence from W. 32"d Ave.
With the following condition.
The fence cannot be constructed beyond the property line as shown on the
"Improvement Survey Plat", prepared by Colorado Engineering & Surveying Inc., in
order for the City of Wheat Ridge to maintain and make improvements to the W.
32"d Ave right-of-way.
t ~_a a~
Date
Director
'R~, ~ A4~
® City of
Wh6at"ige
CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE
PLANNING DIVISION STAFF REPORT
TO: Case File DATE: October 17, 2008
CASE MANAGER: Adam Tietz
CASE NO. & NAME: WA-08-09/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:
Residential-One (R-1)
PRESENT LAND USE:
Single Family Residence
COMP PLAN LAND USE:
Single Family Residential not to exceed 4 units per acre
(SF4)
ENTER INTO RECORD:
(X) CASE FILE & PACKET MATERIALS
(X) ZONING ORDINANCE
Site
Admin
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.
I. 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 along the southern 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. (Exhibit 1,Letter of Request) 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 property line along West 32"d Avenue. (Exhibit 2, 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. Since the
lot has two street frontages it has minimum setbacks of 30 feet along both frontages.
Typically fences are not allowed to exceed 4 feet high in front of the 30 foot minimum
setback. In the instance where lots have two frontages, the 4 foot fence height limitation
typically applies to the side where the property gains access to the right-of-way. This
property gains access to public right-of-way on Miller St. As a result, a 6 foot fence may
be constructed along the southern lot line which abuts W. 32nd Ave.
The lot has a large slope on the southern portion as 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 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 line. Since the home and yard sit several feet below
the sidewalk pedestrians, people waiting at the bus stop and vehicles driving along W.
32"d Ave can view down into the property. A 6 foot fence constructed to City Code
behind the retaining wall would give the appearance of a 3 foot high fence from W. 32"d
Ave. and would provide little in terms of privacy as pedestrians and motorists would still
be able to see onto property and the home. (Exhibits 3-10,'S:te Photosf
Administrative Variance
Case No. WA-08-09/Jackson
The fence will not extend into the front yard setback as it is only intended to screen the
side yard from W. 32"d Ave. The fence will be located 55 feet back from the front
(Miller St.) property line and will not encroach into the site distance triangle. There are
no additional fence height reductions that will be required as a result of the location of the
fence.
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 11) 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 attached garage on
it and it may remain and be used in this manner regardless of outcome of the
variance request. If denied, the applicant could still construct a fence on the lot
but it would only be allowed to be 6 feet in height.
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 which is a collector street. Most 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 but also includes walls, and
berms. The fence, although it would be 9 feet, would appear as if it were a 6 foot
fence from W. 32"d 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."
Administrative Variance
Case No. WA-08-09/Jackson
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. 32"d
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 would also provide very little privacy
for the homeowners as pedestrians and motorists traveling along W. 32nd Ave.
would be able to see into the yard.
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 in respect to its
proximity to W. 32"d Ave and the property line. A six foot fence is allowed to be
constructed up to the property line. Since the property line sits three feet lower
than the land on the other side of the retaining wall, as a result of the construction
of W. 32"d Ave the fence would essentially be only 3 feet in height, as viewed
from W. 32nd Ave.
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
Administrative Variance 4
Case No. WA-08-09/Jackson
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. 32 d Ave the fence will not
appear to be 9 feet in height and therefore 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 55 feet
from the front (Miller St) 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. 32nd 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. 32nd Ave and
Miller St.
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
fenced 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.
Administrative Variance
Case No. WA-08-09/Jackson
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. 32nd Ave have 6 foot fences to screen out
W. 32n Ave.
3. The construction of the W. 32nd 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. A 6 foot fence would do little to provide privacy and would not screen W.
32nd Ave from the yard.
8. A 9 foot fence constructed along the southern property line would appear
to be a 6 foot fence from W. 32nd Ave.
With the following condition.
The fence cannot be constructed beyond the property line as shown on the
"Improvement Survey Plat", prepared by Colorado Engineering &
Surveying Inc., in order for the City of Wheat Ridge to maintain and make
improvements to the W. 32"d Ave right-of-way.
Administrative Variance
Case No. WA-08-09/Jackson
soy-.~~s7 86~
~mtrlL /,~twF'a[rrm erL~t[~irrGfb,ciYS9tz
8-29-08
To Whom It May Concern:
We are asking for a variance for a nine-toot fence along 32nd Avenue. An open ditch was
parallel to 32nd when we bought the property in 1970, since then the road has been raised (Z7
and the ditch covered. This change in the ditch and road made our property much lower
than the road. A wooden covered retaining wall is now just outside of our property line Q
along 32"d. This wall is approximately 3 feet high. If we constructed a six4oot fence it
would only be three feet high at road level.
The reasons we need a variance are:
I . A three-foot fence with a six-foot drop behind it would be unsafe feor pedestrians.
2. Thirty-second has become quite noisy because of the traffic and a fence would
help muffle the sounds.
3- It would provide privacy for that side of the yard and would be more user-
friendly. (A six-foot fence would come to most peoples chests or lower and would
not provide any privacy)
a. The street light just across from our bedroom window on the south cast coaster of
32"d and Morning Side would be somewhat defused.
We have included pictures to show you the retaining wall and the level of 32id in regards
to our home.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
John and Janet Jackson
P.S. If at all possible, when you are through with the pictures and do not need them any
more would you please place them in the self-addressed envelope and mail them back to
us.
Administrative Variance
Case No. WA-08-09/Jackson
7
T
p b'a (•V,A
uv~!r~~k I'-
r
0 r \ a r
0 r r .
F
~ P
VQ
M
~1 x 5
e r -
4~ 1 ;ce
f~ Q
2~ ' r9'sr ?g 30.0
x
r f " flj'S-AC
~IIf
l J
N
`5c pu-e . t 3o
O
N
0
rrf<:..1 144 •~S'
It7401 W. S2'-`° QVE,. ((oO.O ~.O•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 tines. I further certify that the improvements on the
above described parcel on this date, except utility cpnnections, are entirely within the boundaries
of the parcel, except as shown, that there are no encroachments upon the described premises by
improvements on any adjoining premises, except as indicated, and that there is no apparent
evidence or sign of any easement crossing or urdenin a
g ` t n►d parcel, except as noted.
"NOTICE: According to Colorado law you muse to ence any upon any defect in this
survey wi ihi99.. three years after you first di sc4ve CC
1W4 3 5t, 7.3 such de~ be Ae~. any 'on based upon
s~rc•:~~iill £~d mor an ten years
It to my interpretation that the brave desrribad fanyrom d s ccJc aeiti& rvey
located within a 100 ~he certifies rccaFfQn own here
property n."
♦CS.va~- = 127^66
Year flood hazard botindary based on Federal =Q; !y
Emergency ManagamentAganey Floo"--yrance .•S~'1
Rate Maps Dated! X48 4•G 5
Robert E Po 'Robert M. Hayden, L.S. 27268
Administrative Variance
Case No. WA-08-09/Jackson
8
k
Ni
Q
M
t\
h
s
k
x
c
c
C
z
C
s
r
G
v:
U U
J cC
CC C
J O
z
0
3
z
U
V.
U
s
x
s
x
U
C
O
O
3
z
a
s
x
U
1
O
O
O
z
U
It
rc
s
k
r
U U
U cC
C`
C
7 ~
U
-z
-U ~
~n
1
c
v,
X
U U
c~ 4^
C
~ x
U ~
~ C
ro
c
,Z
b
c
~o
W
0
z
CU
From: John & Janet Jackson
3225 Miller Street
Wheat Ridge. Colorado 80033
Phone: 301-217-8554
I:mnl ther_avc1Ip 2je igr rns,n,conl
To: The City o1' Wheat Ridge
Regarding: Variance Criteria for Review for 3225 Miller Street.
We are asking for a variance to erect a nine foot fence alone 32"d Avenue on the south
side of our property.
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.
When 32"d was widened and the irrigation ditch enclosed, a number of years ago, a three
fort wall was built just to the south of our property which makes our property three feet
lower than 32"d. A six-foot privacy fence built on our property along 32ad would mean
that at street level the fence would only be three feet high- This would not provide
privacy from cars going north on Morning Glory Drive. cars passing on 32"d or
pedestrians walking on 32nd. It would not provide much needed shade frorn the street rrj
light on 32"1 which is just outside our bedroom window. A six-foot fence. which is three
feet high on 32nd, could be dangerous for children walking along 32nd. Q
B. The variance would not alter the essential character of the locality,
From the view of'Moming Glory Drive and 32"d Avenue the fence would look to be six-
feet high. It would only show from our property that it is nine feet high.
C. The applicant is proposing a substantial investment in the property with this
application, which would not be possible without the variance-
Without this variance it would nullity the intent of a privacy fence.
D. The particular physical surrounding, shape and topographical condition of the
specific property results in a particular and unique hardship (upon the owner) as
distinguished from a mere inconvenience.
We must keep our bedroom window covered at all times or people waiting for the bus, or
cars stopping at the stop sign on Morning Side Drive can look in. At night the bright
light of the streetlight penetrates the bedroom window with any tiny slit in the drapes.
The streetlight switches on and ofTperiodically in the night which wakes us at times. We
Administrative Variance 17
Case No. WA-08-09/Jackson
have not been able to utilize the south side of our property for rest and recreation because
of so much access to public view. We will soon be building a sunroom just outside our
bedroom, which will help with the streetlight, but this area of our property needs privacy
so that we will be able to enjoy the sunroom without everyone looking in or having to
cover the windows with drapes for privacy. That would also nullify the idea of a
sunroom.
E. if there is a particular or unique hardship, the alleged difficulty or hardship has
not been created by any person presently having an interest in the property.
The hardship has been upgrades to 32nd and the irrigation ditch only.
P. 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 increase in the
congestion in public streets or increasing the danger of lire or endangering the
public safety, or substantially diminishing or impairing property values within the
neighborhood.
The fence will be placed on our property 55 feet from Miller Street and more than 15 feet
from the neighbor's driveway to the West which will give an ample view for vehicles
turning. The head of the irrigation ditch, which is on our property, will be left outside o1'
the fence so that people can work on the ditch as needed.
G. The unusual circumstance or conditions necessitating the variance request are
present in the neighborhood and are not unique to the property.
There are other nine-foot fences on 32n" Avenue to the west of us and they do not have a
drop as we do.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
John & Janet Jackson
k
it
H.
ar
ti
ti
O
Z
Administrative Variance 18
Case No. WA-08-09/Jackson
~6 AA
City of
Wheat ,ge
POSTING CERTIFICATION
CASE NO. WA-08-09/Jackson
DEADLINE FOR WRITTEN COMMENTS: October 6, 2008
114&/ / T /I C (JS~I
(name)
residing at s~ 7 5 ZG- L 57 Ae&1%.k EZ ed-71-3:3
(address)
as the applicant for Case No. WA-08-09 , hereby certify that I have posted the sign for
Public Notice at 3225 Miller Street
(location)
on this T day of 20-a-Zand 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
and will be placed in the applicant, s case file.
om MIS
,oam mvo
MIS mr0
?i
P
W75
mno
o n - roam
MIS
....'NOS _
32ND
mmr omas +nuo
MAYVILLE JANE M 39-284-02-009 7008 0150 0003 4502 6791
46 MORNINGSIDE DR
WHEAT RIDGE CO 80215
GIBBONS JEFFREYD 39-284-03-001 7008 0150 0003 4502 6807
GIBBONS ANNE C
47 MORNINGSIDE DR
WHEAT RIDGE CO 80215
JACKSON JOHN D 39-281-99-008
JACKSONJANETJ 7008 0150 0003 4502 6814
3225 MILLER ST
WHEAT RIDGE CO 80033
MC LANE SHIRLEYM 39-281-00-032 7008 0150 0003 4502 6821
10405 W 32ND AVE
WHEAT RIDGE CO 80033
HONAMAN GLENN E
HONAMAN LYNN W
3275 MILLER ST
WHEAT RIDGE CO 80033
MELONAKIS JUNE C
WAMBEKE WENDELL P
WAMBEKE LESLIE F
6497 QUAKER CT
ARVADA CO 80007 7568
MARSH TIMOTHY F
ROWE JOANNE M
10370 33RD AVE
WHEAT RIDGE CO 80033 5613
39-281-15-002 7008 0150 0003 4502 6838
39-281-20-001
39-281-20-002
7008 0150 0003 4502 6845
7008 0150 0003 4502 6852
QOGE 00 0
U5Q5 .
1 la
City of
Wheatjdge
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
City of Wheat Ridge Municipal Building
7500 W. 29" Ave. Wheat Ridge, CO 80033-8001
CERTIFIED LETTER NOTICE
P: 303.235.2846 F: 303.235.2857
September 26, 2008
Dear Property Owner:
This is to inform you of Case No. WA-08-09, a request for approval of a 3 foot
variance to the 6 foot maximum fence height requirement on property zoned
Residential-One (R-1) and located at 3225 Miller Street.
The applicant 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 adjacent 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 October 6, 2008.
Thank you.
WA0809.doc
www.ci.wheatridgexo.us
J
3
z
OE 21
0
N
L"
3
z
8
A
f
OFFICIAL
ZONING MAP
WHEAT RIDGE
COLORADO
SE 28
PARCEULOT BOUNDARY
(DESIGNATES OWNERSHIP)
WATER FEATURE
* DENOTES MULTIPLE ADDRESSES
123 100-YEAR FLOOD PLAIN
(APPROXIMATE LOCATION)
NE 28
0 100 = 'AO co Feet
Emmnm~
m DEPARTMENTOF MAP ADOPTED: June 15, 1994
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT Last Revision: September 10, 2001
~i0li
Atb
r
um
x x r ~
O »x
00
CO iz 'S~x,
s 4
M x ; z ro
CO ~ ^ O
O O 00.
-77 LL
W
0 O
LO
CO OO \ ~ C
\1 \J\ N
O M \
LO O
x
N
I'M
N MM O n
W n V `
St. co
er m o ti`l
z
Q o ''gym r 0
W U
J ti i
O
'co
, U09
O R x
UPr a t,"c r rr
y4 v+
O p"~ s N N
Case No.:
App: Last Name:
App: First Name:
Owner: Last Name:
Owner: First Name:
App Address:
City, State Zip:
App: Phone:
Owner Address:
City/State/Zip:
Owner Phone:
Project Address:
Street Name:
City/State, Zip:
Case Disposition:
Project Planner:
File Location:
Notes:
Follow-Up:
_
A0809
F
Quarter Section Map No.:
i
NE28 _
ackson
Related Cases:
ohn & Janet
Case History:
3 ft. variance to the 6 ft
ence height requirement..
ame
322
Mill
S
5
er
t_
Review Body:
dm.
_ heat Ridge, CO 80033
303.237-8554
APN'
39-281-99-008,
ame
2nd Review Body:
2nd Review Date:
ame
Decision-making Body:
3225
Approval/Denial Date:
:
Miller Street
~
_heat Ridge, ED 800 33 _
Reso/Ordinance No.:
CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE
09/16/08 3:13 PM cdba
JANET JACKSON
RECEIPT NO:CDA000755 AMOUNT
FMSD ZONING APPLICATION F 200.00
ZONE
PAYMENT RECEIVED AMOUNT
CK 9043 200.00
TOTAL 200.00
LAND USE CASE PROCESSING APPLICATION
Community Development Department
7500 West 29th Avenue, Wheat Ridge, CO 80033
Phone (303) 235-2846
(Please print or type all information)
JX
Zip 8J033 Fax SFiiu/i=
Owner sj OFl/V tf y'QF ASait/ Address 5'41L/F Phone
City State Zip Fax
Contact S!/Y1G Address Phone
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 (address):
Y
o'
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
K Variance/Waiver (from Section )
❑ Other:
Detailed description of request:
Required information:
Assessors Parcel Number: S✓7 3%-ael - ?17- ear Size of Lot (acres or square footage): e 3 r733
Current Zoning: Proposed Zoning: -I
Current Use: Proposed Use:.. ~~p, o 0
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
JENNIFER AUCOIN
NOTARY PUBLIC
STATE OF COLORADO
0~ -
and sworn to me this l'r day of SC~~ r%Pv20 O
u GZ~R-fit
otary Publi
My commission expires
To be filled out by staff:
'71,14,107 ~
Date received Fee $ ~ 06 Receippt No.~~~7JZT- Case No.4t*- 0
3
Comp Plan Desig. Zoning f~-/ Quarter Section Map
Related Case No. Pre-App Mtg. Date Case Manager
i
3:
t. f1
9
ri irr~.. arllodils _.a~. iYilfiri~i
N
~ NORTHEASTERL Y COf7NER ~Ir^OF LOT 13
PAR THE NORTHEAST 7
„s ~ ~
LQT 12
~ , , TOWNSH/P 3 SOUT o P~~ ~ ~ OF THE :SS 33R .F RoW.~ /'P`~-~ / \!-FOUND 3~4 PIPE\
0' S' 10' 15' 20' ~
~
~ SCALE: 1" = 14'
{ ST vNE~°.~-~~r~~ w w i-iw ii+ n i n
z m
~ ~ ~ ~ o
o nor »
~ ~ 1. t ~ ~
NORTHWESTERL Y CORNER
OF LOT 13 a~ye~ FOUND ~ SET PIN & CAP (4.5' NO ~ ,
THIS PART OF LOT t3 ~ 1~ ' ~ OF SUBJ (4.5' NORTHNIEST OF TRUE CORNER ~1a~a :
NOT A PART OF THIS SURVEY FOUND #5 PW ~ ~ ~ MARKED L.S. 26958 OF TRUE
~ QF SUBJECT PROPERTY) *t \ti
~ ~ NOTE: CtMiCRETE GRAIN CHANNEL ~ IS INTO ADJOINER'S PARCEL t ~a °\1 ~
Q AS SHOWN NOTE: ~iETAI SHED (NO FOUNOATIflN) 1. <1 O 1~ 0 1l ~
IS INTO ADJOfNER'S PARCEL
AS SHOwN ~ co NOTE: CONCRETE DRAIN PAN
° IS INTO ADJOINER'S PARCEL 24, ~ a• 4 ~ \ 13•
AS SHOWN gj CK ~ I W
~ k 1
cP ~ i ' ~ /a
SET PIN CApP ' " E ; ~ ~ ~ ' ' ~ I 16'3.35 a.~` J~~ MARKED l.Sr 4 ~~G& V I ~ ~ a a `q~;~` G i : . ' , a.
~O ~ A 1.5' MADE C~JCRETE~ iy Go ~`:~:"r~
O F 0 j~ STORM GRAIN PAN ~ , 4 ~ 6 , e / ~~o a. ~a /
~ / o
4
~ C7 ~ Q d ~ ~ a
`~Y
Z°,W I ~~jF STO /j p. ° a. O2~4 .a ♦ 4
O t ~F~ e' ° n . ~
4 r~rvv i n~ .7VR YG 1 ~ ~~r~~vr .
~ ~ ~ a ~ ~ & ~p~.1CRETE RETAINING WALL / ~ ~ A ~ , • Q 1 X1'1' ~ 4d. ✓ Q g, ~ i ~ d ~ ~ ~ s ~ e ~ ~ 1 ~ 4 d d s* ~ ~ ;4 d . ~ t TOTAL AREA OF PARCEI. B IS 1,019.7 na
. ,
t--~-~' ~ ~ CONCR~.~ gtOCK RETAINING WALL ~a;~~..~ES~s~,
0.6' ~ 0 6 AMP • ~ ~ 1 ,~a ~v: ~ ~ ~ ~+~A / ALSO KNOWN AS: 3255 MILLER STREET
NOTE: RETAINING WALL ~ . ~ s 6. ' .~r 26958 ~ (~,7G/`IL ~ COUNTY OF JEFFERSON PARCEL ID #39-2 • ~ TOTAL AREA QF SUBJECT PROPERTY IS 16 t ~ ~~~~y~"~~r~:~°
IS INTO ADJOINER'S PARCEL 5I' S ~ ' ~ ~ ~ ' d ~ J~ 4 d ~ ~s ~ •t
AS SHOwN ~loj ,9, 6 a } r,R/C / . 4 ~ 1 ~ ~ , ~
may/ V" ~~~N~~~~~~ r
i ¢
RONALD W. F~ANAGAN RP~S 26958 DATE SIGNED NOTES
~ ~I ~ ~ I T
W~ i O THIS PLAT REPRESENTS A BOUNDARY
~ ' ~ ~ ~ ~ X7.0 ~ ~~E// ~ t, ~ ~ I sox y SHOWN. IT IS PART OF A SUBOIVISIO FILED WITH THE CLERK AND RECORDE LEGEND oN APRIL 22ND, 1958 IN PLAT 800K 1
4 ~ ~ a O ELECTRIC..,. ~
COUNTY OF JEFFERSON ~ ~ Q ~ METIER _ - . PARCEL I.D. #39-281-00-032 ~ col I ~ a.3),~/^ `~1 INOICAIES SU&IECT PROPERTY UNE. ~2 THE WORD "CERTIFY" AS SHOWN AND
r EXPRESSION OF PROFES510NAL OPINIO IND~ATES RIGHT OF WAY UNITS AND/OR OF THE SURVEY ANO DOES NOT CON LOT BWNDARY LINE GUARANTEE, EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED.
~ ; ~ ~ ZI PARCEL A I a 99.8 a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 99.9. _ ___I~, x ~~I Z ~ +
w t
M ~ I - - - - INDICATES A LAND UNE ~3 OATE OF FIELD WORK: 8 - 25 - 2 INDICATES AN EAS~IT LINE O
I ~ Z ~ 4
- - 4 THIS SURVEY DOES NOT CONSTITUTE o~~ o~~ INOICAIES OVERHEAD U11LI1Y LINES. COLORADO ENGINEERING & SURVEYIN pWNERSHiP AND EASEMENTS OF REC P P P P IN~CAIES OVERHEAD PpWER ONES.
I z + a
I ~ I ..E[£~=_.
3 ~ I ~ 99.1' = a
0 I ~ I ~ a ;
• I ~ I
O F
Z i ( a t
' I I /
~ ~Vs
1.6~ BRICK IRRIGATION 99.~ I a E•LEI~~ ~ j
HOUSING ~ ~ jQ~O'~ I a ~ I ~
I~ ~ q ~
y ~ f, _ s
11 ~9
I a I
I I~ i ' ~ ELE I ~ fo1. 4~5~1 ~-101.6' ~a 10%6'
a , .em,___
~ ~ o L CA TED PORTION I ~ ~ £[£K= ~ E ~ BRICK DRAIN INLET JQ./~~' ~ ~ ~ ~-~-ro i'____ S 89'41'0" W -
I ~rj---- 13 WIDE
r -Ot1L OUL GULL OUL _._--~p[~~- a,..=--T-
a ~ ni pq~E R~ GUY /ANCHOR WIRE a 4. 0 4. a.
C^CT DIA1 9~ A D a ~ . , Q' 4~ ~~..r s' • ~O 4 . ° w G' " ~uinc Di SRI If` C`(1NC:RFTF WALK + 'CURB! • ' . E
VL I F111 W %4rl%l rJ w 41, 4 + d Q ~..r r..a...~ .+r.•w+.. ~ ...e m+Y ....ye .r ' w .rw r ~ ~ ~ wd..... «.rd wa +e++ ..A« w rr r $ ....rr ~..r M...y...wAer ~e.r v - - t . .d ~ 4 ~ ~ ~ r _SET PIN & CAP
SARK LS. 26958 r ~ ....r+ Q a.. w '~'T' «.r o..aA..+ «,.d...• a...,, rC~.... w+.....w.'..s a..... r.. A .WIDE CONCRETE PAN 2 41,4 MARKED L.S. 26958 RIGHTS-OF-WAY SURVEYS AT PAGE RE JEFFERSON COUNTY SURVEYOR RECEPTION NUMBER
4 -4
FLOWLINE WEST
PUBLIC 0
COLORADO ENGITNTE CES 2008-1999