HomeMy WebLinkAboutWA-02-047500 West 29th Avenue
Wheat Ride. Colorado
Telephone 303/235-284
FAX 303/235-2857
August 2, 2002
Victor Olson
2620 Upham St.
Wheat Ridge, CO 80033
Dear Mr. Olson:
80033
RE: Case No. WA-02-04
The City of
Wheat
Ridge
Please be advised that at its meeting on July 25, 2002, the Board of Adjustment DENIED your
requests for approval of (A) a 16.5' side yard setback variance from the required 30' side yard setback,
when adjacent to a public street, resulting in a 13.5' side yard setback and (B) a 10' front yard setback
variance from the required 30' front yard setback resulting in a 20' front yard setback for the purpose
of constructing a garage on property zoned Residential-Two (R-2) and located at 2620 Upham Street.
Enclosed is a copy of the Certificate of Resolution for each request, as well as a draft copy of the
minutes, stating the Board's decision. Should you decide to appeal the decision of the Board, you
will need to notify the Jefferson County district court in writing within 30 days of the Board's
decision.
Please feel free to contact me at (303) 235-2846 if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Kathy Fie d
Administrative Assistant
Enclosures: Certificate of Resolution
Draft of Minutes
cc: WA-02-04 (case file)
C.\Docummts and Settings\kathyHMy Documents\Kathy\BOA\CORRESP\2002\wa0204denial.wpd
CERTIFICATE OF RESOLUTION ORIGINAL
I, Ann Lazzeri, 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 25` day of July. 2002.
CASE NO. WA-02-04(A)
APPLICANT'S NAME: Victor Olson
LOCATION: 2620 Upham
Upon a motion by Board Member ABBOTT and second by Board Member BLAIR, the
following resolution was stated:
WHEREAS, the applicant was denied permission by an administrative officer; and
WHEREAS, Board of Adjustment Application Case No. WA-02-04(A) is an appeal to this
Board from the decision of an administrative officer, and
WHEREAS, the property has been posted the fifteen days required by law; and there were no
protests registered against the application; and
WHEREAS, the relief applied for MAY NOT be granted 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-02-04(A) be, and hereby is, DENIED.
TYPE OF VARIANCE: A 16.5 foot side yard setback variance from the required 30 foot side
yard setback when adjacent to a public street.
FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS:
1. In the context of the Wheat Ridge Codes of Law and, in recognition that a variance runs
with the property, the Board is of the opinion that, again in the content of the intent of the
code, there are no generally recognized unusual circumstances attributed to this variance
request.
2. It would seem likely that the approval of this variance would facilitate construction of a
structure, which although designed to be architecturally compatible with the primary
structure, is likely, in the opinion of the Board, to result in a negative impact to adjacent
properties related to the essential character of the neighborhood and possibly their
property values to a significant degree.
Board of Adjustment
Resolution WA-02-04(A)
Page two (2)
3. On balance, although there may be some tangible benefit to the neighborhood as a result
of enclosing the motor home, it would seem that the granting of this variance would not
result in a significant enough benefit or contribution to the neighborhood or community.
VOTE: YES: ABBOTT, BLAIR, DRDA, HOWARD, MONTOYA, YOUNG
NO: None
ABSENT: ECHELMEYER, HOVLAND
DISPOSITION: A request for a 16.5 foot side yard setback variance from the required 30 foot
side yard setback when adjacent to a public street was DENIED.
ADOPTED and made effective this 25u` day of July. 2002.
Ann Lazzeri, Secretary
Board of Adjustment
ORIGINAL
CERTIFICATE OF RESOLUTION
I, Ann Lazzeri, 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 2501 day of July, 2002.
CASE NO. WA-02-04(B)
APPLICANT'S NAME: Victor Olson
LOCATION: 2620 Upham
Upon a motion by Board Member ABBOTT and second by Board Member BLAIR, the
following resolution was stated:
WHEREAS, the applicant was denied permission by an administrative officer; and
WHEREAS, Board of Adjustment Application Case No. WA-02-04(B) is an appeal to this
Board from the decision of an administrative officer, and
WHEREAS, the property has been posted the fifteen days required by law; and there were no
protests registered against the application; and
WHEREAS, the relief applied for MAY NOT be granted 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-02-04(B) be, and hereby is, DENIED.
TYPE OF VARIANCE: A 10 foot front yard setback variance from the required 30 foot front
yard setback requirement
FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS:
1. In the context of the Wheat Ridge Codes of Law and, in recognition that a variance runs
with the property, the Board is of the opinion that, again in the context of the intent of the
code, there are no generally recognized unusual circumstances attributed to this variance
request.
2. It would seem likely that the approval of this variance would facilitate construction of a
structure, which although designed to be architecturally compatible with the primary
structure, is likely, in the opinion of the Board, to result in a negative impact to adjacent
properties related to the essential character of the neighborhood and possibly their
property values to a significant degree.
Board of Adjustment
Resolution WA-02-04(B)
Page two (2)
3. On balance, although there may be some tangible benefit to the neighborhood as a result
of enclosing the motor home, it would seem that the granting of this variance would not
result in a significant enough benefit or contribution to the neighborhood or community.
VOTE: YES: ABBOTT, BLAIR, DRDA, HOWARD, MONTOYA, YOUNG
NO: None
ABSENT: ECHELMEYER, HOVI.AND
DISPOSITION: A 20 foot front yard setback variance from the required 30 foot front yard
setback requirement was DENIED.
ADOPTED and made effective this 250 day of July. 2002.
Ann Lazzeri, Secretary
Board of Adjustment
CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
Minutes of Meeting
July 25, 2002
1. CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by Chair
MONTOYA at 7:30 p.m. on July 25, 2002 in the city council chambers of the municipal
building, 7500 West 29th Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado.
2. ROLL CALL
Members Present:
Members Absent:
Tom Abbott
Bob Blair
Paul Drda
Bob Howard
Jerry Montoya
Kent Young
Bill Echehneyer
Paul Hovland
Staff Present: Alan White, Planning Director
Travis Crane, Planner
Mike Pesicka, Planning Tech
Ann Lazzeri, Secretary
The following is the official set of Board of Adjustment minutes for the Public Hearing of July
25, 2002. A set of these minutes is retained both in the office of the City Clerk and in the
Department of Planning and Development of the City of Wheat Ridge.
3. PUBLIC FORUM $
There was no one signed up to speak.
4. PUBLIC HEARING
A. Case No. WA-02-04 (continued from June 27,2001): An application filed by
Victor Olson for approval of (A) a 16.5' side yard setback variance from the
required 30' side yard setback when adjacent to a public street, resulting in a 13.5'
side yard setback and (B) a 10' front yard setback variance from the required 30'
front yard setback resulting in a 20' front yard setback for the purpose of
constructing a garage on property zoned Residential-Two (R-2) and located at
2620 Upham Street.
This case was introduced by Mike Pesicka. He entered all pertinent documents into the
record and advised the Board there was jurisdiction to hear the case. He reviewed the
Board of Adjustment Page 1
07/25/02
staff report and presented photos and site layout pertaining to the application. Staff
recommended denial of the application as outlined in the staff report.
The applicant appeared before the Board.
Victor Olson
2620 Upham
Mr. Olson was sworn in by Chair MONTOYA. He entered a drawing depicting the
layout of the application into the record. He stated that he planned to park his RV in the
proposed garage in order to protect the RV. If the variance is not granted, he would park
the RV on the existing concrete slab. He also offered several books on the RV industry
for Board members to review. Chair MONTOYA asked staff if these exhibits would
affect staff's recommendation. Mr. White replied they would not. Mr. Olson also stated
that he would be willing to accept a ten-foot front yard setback. He also stated that he
was not trying to "sneak something in" on the city.
Board Member ABBOTT asked Mr. Olson if he had considered an alternative location to
the east of his house. Mr. Olson replied that this location would necessitate the removal
of a large tree and the loss of one space in his garage. It would also block light and air to
his house as well as his neighbor's house to the east.
Board Member YOUNG asked if there had been any opposition expressed by the
neighbor to the west. Mr. Olson stated these neighbors had submitted a letter of
opposition but withdrew it after Mr. Olson discussed the application with him. Mike
Pesicka confirmed that the letter of opposition had been withdrawn. Mr. Olson stated
that his neighbors had indicated they preferred a garage rather than having the RV parked
outside the home. He also stated that the garage would match the house.
Board Member HOWARD questioned the plan for a 50-foot garage when the motor
home is 34 feet long.
Robert Erickson ' #A,
4145 Lipan
Mr. Erickson, contractor for the garage, was sworn in by Chair MONTOYA. He
explained that a 50 X 16-foot garage would accommodate the motor home which. has
doors that open on the sides, the front and back. It would also accommodate a larger
motor home if the applicant chose to purchase one.
Victor Olson returned to the podium and stated that it would present a hardship for him
to park his RV out in the open. He disagreed with the staff report that stated he created
this hardship. He did not believe the garage would have a negative impact on his
neighbors. He stated that he was trying to do something for the community in that his
motor home can hold 100 gallons of water that could be used by several people in case of
an emergency. He stated his belief that owning an RV is a good emergency measure.
Board of Adjustment Page 2
07/25/02
Chair MONTOYA asked if there were others present who wished to address the
application. Hearing no response, Chair MONTOYA declared the public hearing closed.
Hearing no further discussion, Chair MONTOYA stated that a motion on part A of the
applicant's request was in order.
Upon a motion by Board Member ABBOTT and second by Board Member BLAIR,
the following resolution was stated:
Whereas, the applicant was denied permission by an administrative officer; and
Whereas, Board of Adjustment Application Case No. WA-02-04(A) is an appeal to
this Board from the decision of an administrative officer; and
Whereas, the property has been posted the fifteen days required by law; and in
recognition that there were no protests registered against it; and
Whereas, the relief applied for MAY NOT be granted 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-
02-04(A) be, and hereby is, DENIED.
Type of Variance: A request for approval of a 16.5 foot side yard setback variance
from the required 30 foot side yard setback when adjacent to a public street.
For the following reasons:
1. In the context of the Wheat Ridge Codes of Law and, in recognition that a
variance runs with the property, the Board is of the opinion that, again in the
context of the intent of the code, there are no generally recognized unusual
circumstances attributed to this variance request.
2. It would seem likely that the approval of this variance would facilitate
construction of a structure, which although designed to be architecturally
compatible with the primary structure, is likely, in the opinion of the Board,
to result in a negative impact to adjacent properties related to the essential
character of the neighborhood and possibly their property values to a
significant degree.
3. On balance, although there may be some tangible benefit to the
neighborhood as a result of enclosing the motor home, it would seem that the
granting of this variance would not result in a significant enough benefit or
contribution to the neighborhood or community.
Board of Adjustment Page 3
.07/25/02
Chair MONTOYA informed those present that a motion for denial requires a simple
majority vote.
The motion passed 6-0 with Board Members ECHELMEYER and HOVLAND
absent.
Chair MONTOYA advised the applicant that part A of his application had been denied.
Hearing no further discussion, Chair MONTOYA stated that. a motion was in order for
part B of the applicant's request.
Upon a motion by Board Member ABBOTT and second by Board Member BLAIR,
the following resolution was stated:
Whereas, the applicant was denied permission by an administrative officer; and
Whereas, Board of Adjustment Application Case No. WA-02-04(B) is an appeal to
this Board from the decision of an administrative officer; and
Whereas, the property has been posted the fifteen days required by law; and in
recognition that there were no protests registered against it; and
Whereas, the relief applied for MAY NOT be granted 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-
02-04(B) be, and hereby is, DENIED.
Type of Variance: A 10 foot front yard setback variance from the required 30 foot
front yard setback requirement.
For the following reasons:
1. In the context of the Wheat Ridge Codes of Law and, in recognition that a
variance runs with the property, the Board is of the opinion that, again in the
context of the intent of the code, there are no generally recognized unusual
circumstances attributed to this variance request.
2. It would seem likely that the approval of this variance would facilitate
construction of a structure, which although designed to be architecturally
compatible with the primary structure, is likely, in the opinion of the Board,
to result in a negative impact to adjacent properties related to the essential
character of the neighborhood and possibly their property values to a
Board of
07/25/02
significant degree.
3. On balance, although there may be some tangible benefit to the
neighborhood as a result of enclosing the motor home, it would seem that the
granting of this variance would not result in a significant enough benefit or
contribution to the neighborhood or community.
The motion passed 6-0 with Board Members ECHELMEYER and HOVLAND
absent.
Chair MONTOYA advised the applicant that part B of his application had also been
denied.
B. Case No. WA-02-06: An application filed by William Luce for approval of a
10'4" side yard setback variance from the required 15' side yard setback resulting
in a 4'8" side yard setback for the purpose of constructing a garage on property
zoned Residential-One (R-1) and located at 11481 West 39`h Place.
This case was introduced by Mike Pesicka. He entered all pertinent documents into the
record and advised the Board there was jurisdiction to hear the case. He reviewed the
staff report and presented photos and site layout pertaining to the application. Staff
recommended denial of the application as outlined in the staff report.
The applicant appeared before the Board. L
A
'
R FT
William Luce
11481 West 39`h Place
Mr. Luce was sworn in by. Chair MONTOYA. He stated he wanted to build an additional
garage because the current double garage is inadequate. In order to build the garage in
another location, several mature trees would have to be removed-and it would be
necessary to install a 100-foot driveway. He entered several photographs into the record
showing various views of the yard and existing driveway. He felt there was a hardship in
that the proposed location was the only feasible location for a garage. He believed the
addition would enhance his residence as well as the entire neighborhood.
Board Member ABBOTT asked if the applicant had considered moving the garage to the
rear. Mr. Luce explained this would not be possible because of living area in the back.
Putting it further in front would detract from the aesthetic value of the house. He planned
to have a 15 X 20 garage that is wider than most single car garages to accommodate
woodworking equipment, etc. He stated he had spoken with five or six neighbors
regarding the application and had received no complaints.
Chair MONTOYA asked to hear from members of the public.
Board of Adjustment Page 5
07/25/02
O
N
O
O
o
C-D o ~o
~ ~ O C
N
N
O c7A
CAD n ¢ V1
0 ~ p
CD
CIA
N ~ C¢D
0
¢ ~ n
~ n
0
x'
IrD
CD
O
N
OP
r
0
0
x
0
c~
0
N
"d
n
N
r
0
0
x
0
0
0
N
b
n
CD
r
0
0
x
0
0
0
N
b
c~
CD
r
0
0
0
0
U4
O
O
U4
O
fD
CD
n
O
CD
CD
r+
r
0
0
0
0
0
CD
c~
r
0
0
P7'
cra
0
CD
p
0
N
S
b
n
r
O
O
UQ
CD
r+
O
~G
N
b
n
CD
CD
.
¢ CD
CD CD
CD (7- CD
C-D
CT' O ~ r•t- ~ v'
(I nD
CD P~ n
C-D
p
CD
O~ r+ cj~ p W
n
rD (D
CD n
n CL P7'
O
O
CD
CD ~
P
O O
0 C-D (7'
CD ~
~ CD
~ N
0 ON
O
O
CL
a1
OM
O
O
e-t-
V1
OW
~Q
O
e-1-
lot
O-W
n
•J
.p w
O
n
O
fD
(rQ•
K
fD
O
O
O-W
A~
A~
•J
N
M~
CD
n
n
rr-
A
•J
F-+
n
O
*We
Ej
f~D
G
a
C
CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
AGENDA
JULY 25, 2002
Notice is hereby given of a public hearing to be held before the City of Wheat Ridge Board
of Adjustment on July 25, 2002, at 7:30 p.m., in the City Council Chambers of the
Municipal Building, 7500 W. 29th Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado.
1. CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER
2. ROLL CALL
3. PUBLIC FORUM (This is the time for anyone to speak on any subject not appearing on
the agenda.)
4. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Case No. WA-02-04 (continued from June 27,2002): An application filed by
Victor Olson for approval of a 16 '/2 foot side yard setback variance from the
required 30 foot side yard setback when adjacent to a public street resulting in a
13 '/2 foot side yard setback and a 10 foot front yard setback variance from the
required 30 foot front yard setback resulting in a 20 foot front yard setback for the
purpose of constructing a garage on property zoned Residential-Two (R-2) and
located at 2620 Upham Street.
B. Case No. WA-02-06: An application filed by William Luce for approval of a 10
foot 4 inch side yard setback variance from the required 15 foot side yard setback
resulting in a 4 foot 8 inch side yard setback for the purpose of constructing a
garage on property zoned Residential-One (R-1) and located at 11481 West 39`h
Place.
C. Case No. TUP-02-03: An application filed by TCCH Management, LLC for
approval of a one-year Temporary Structure Permit to allow an office trailer on
property zoned Industrial (I) and located at 12000 West 52"d Avenue.
5. CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING
6. OLD BUSINESS
7. NEW BUSINESS
8. ADJOURNMENT
CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE
PLANNING DIVISION STAFF REPORT
TO: Board of Adjustment
DATE OF MEETING: July 25, 2002 DATE PREPARED: July 18, 2002
CASE NO. & NAME: WA-02-04\01son CASE MANAGER: Michael Pesicka
ACTION REQUESTED: Request for approval of a 16.5 foot side yard setback
variance from the required 30 foot side yard setback when
adjacent to a public street, resulting in a 13.5 foot side yard
setback, and a 10 foot front yard setback variance from the
30 foot front yard requirement resulting in a 20 foot front
yard setback for the purpose of constructing a garage on
property zoned Residential-Two (R-2) and located at 2620
Upham Street.
LOCATION OF REQUEST: 2620 Upham Street
Wheat Ridge, CO 80215
NAME & ADDRESS OF APPLICANT(S):
Victor A. Olson
2620 Upham Street
Wheat Ridge, CO
NAME & ADDRESS OF OWNER(S):
APPROXIMATE AREA:
PRESENT ZONING:
PRESENT LAND USE:
SURROUNDING ZONING:
SURROUNDING LAND USE:
DATE PUBLISHED:
DATE POSTED:
DATED LEGAL NOTICES SENT:
Same as above
9,100 square feet.
Residential-Two (R-2)
Single-family residential
N, S, E, & W: R-2
N, S, E, & W: Low-density residential
June 13, 2002
June 13, 2002
June 13, 2002
ENTER INTO RECORD:
( ) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN (X) CASE FILE & PACKET MATERIALS
(X) ZONING ORDINANCE (X) SLIDES
( ) SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS (X) EXHIBITS
( ) 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.
1. REQUEST
The property is located at 2620 Upham Street and is currently being used for single family residential.
The property is zoned R-2, Residential-Two. MIRVAIRIMM.
The. applicant (owner) is requesting approval of a 16.5 foot side yard setback variance (Request A,
north property line) from the 30' side yard setback when adjacent to a public street, resulting in a 13.5
foot side yard setback, and a 10 foot front yard setback variance (Request B, west property line),
from the 30 foot front yard requirement resulting in a 20 foot front yard setback. MEMMEMINA
,11blAt~). The purpose of the variance request is to allow for a new attached. garage.
H. SITE PLAN
The applicant has submitted a site plan showing the proposed location for the attached garage
IM, M. Exhibit 4 currently shows the existing house haveing a side yard setback of 30 feet from W.
26' Place, and a 29 foot 10 inch front yard setback from Upham Street.
The requested variance would allow for the expansion of an existing attached garage for the purpose of
storing an RV. Applicant has stated that the proposed garage would gain access off of Upham Street,
and a mature tree would need to be substantially trimmed to accommodate this request
The property in question also abuts a
cul-de-sac bulb on W. 26' Place, and the setback off of the bulb would be reduced to 5 feet. It should
be noted that according to Section 26-123 Definitions, Setback line, cul-de-sac. "A line concentrically
parallel to the right-of-way line of the street on the cul-de-sac (bulb) and a line parallel to and a minimum
as required from the right-of-way line of the remainder of the cul-de-sac. On cul-de-sac lots, the board
of adjustment may not issue a variance for use of the land between the cul-de-sac front setback line and
the cul-de-sac right-of-way line depicted." In this proposed location, the Board of Adjustment cannot
approve a variance to the cul-de-sac setback variance by virtue of the Code of Laws. Lot coverage of
40% will not be exceeded if the variance is approved.
III. VARIANCE CRITERIA (Request A)
The applicant (owner) is requesting approval of a 16.5 foot side yard setback variance (
Request A) from the 30' side yard setback when adjacent to a public street, resulting in a
13.5 foot side yard setback, and a 10 foot front yard setback variance (Request B) from the
30 foot front yard requirement resulting in a 20 foot front yard setback.
The purpose of the variance request is to allow for a new attached
garage-
Staff has the following comments regarding the criteria used to evaluate a variance request:
- L 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 regulation for the district in
which it is located?
If the request is denied, the property can still yield a reasonable return in service and income.
The property may still be used as a single-family residence.
2. If the variation were granted, would it alter the essential character of the locality?
It could possibly have an affect on the character of the locality. The garage may block the
views of adjacent residents and will not be in character with the rest of the houses in the
neighborhood. The proposed garage would be noticeable due to its size and height and
location. A mature tree on the west side of the house would be substantially trimmed in order
for the garage to be built. There are other locations such as the east side of the house where
no variance would be required althougha large mature tree would have to be removed..
Access to this location would be from the existing driveway.
3. Would the particular physical surrounding, shape or topographical condition of the
specific property involved result in a particular hardship (upon the owner) as
distinguished from a mere inconvenience if the strict letter of the regulations were
carried out?
The lot in question is rectangular in shape and relatively flat. The lot meets the minimum
requirements of 9,000 square feet in lot area and 80 feet of frontage for a corner lot in the R-2
zone district.
4. Has the alleged difficulty or hardship been created by any person presently having an
interest in the property?
The hardship has been created solely by the applicant. A City building inspector noticed a
concrete slab had been poured at the property in question and notified the applicant that a
building permit would need to be obtained for the garage to be built, and for any future work
that is to be done at the site. A permit was obtained by the applicant for the concrete slab in
November of 2001. The existing slab can remains in place and not be in violation. By law, an
RV can be parked in the front yard, but must be at least 6 feet from the property line.
5. Would the granting of the variance 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, 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?
Granting the variance could possibly be detrimental to the public welfare and injurious to other
properties in the neighborhood. The requested variance could impair the adequate supply of
light and air to adjacent property, would not substantially increase the congestion in public
streets or increase the danger fire or endanger public safety. Staff is concerned regarding the
negative visual impacts to the neighborhood. Relocation to the east side of the house would
help "hide" the garage from the street views.
6. If criteria a through a are found, then, would the granting of the variance result in a
benefit or contribution to the neighborhood or the community, as distinguished from an
individual benefit on the part of the applicant, or would granting of the variance result
in a reasonable accommodation of a person with disabilities?
Construction of the new garage would allow the applicant to park his RV in the garage instead
of the street. Granting the variance would not have any beneficial effects for the surrounding
properties or the neighborhood and will not result in a reasonable accommodation of a person
with disabilities.
IV. STAFF CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION
Staff has concluded that the above criteria are not supportive of the variance request..
Therefore, staff recommends DENIAL for the following reasons.
1. The conditions involving the property have not resulted in a particular hardship upon the
owner, but a mere inconvenience.
2. The hardship was self-created by the property owner.
3. The proposed addition will alter the essential character of the neighborhood.
4. The proposed addition could potentially impact neighboring properties.
5. There are no unusual circumstances attributed to this variance request.
6. There is an alternate location.
VI. VARIANCE CRITERIA (Request B)
Staff has the following comments regarding the criteria used to evaluate a variance request.
The applicant (owner) is requesting approval of a 16.5 foot side yard setback variance (Request A)
from the 30' side yard setback when adjacent to a public street, resulting in a 13.5 foot side yard
setback, and a 10 foot front yard setback variance (Request B) from the 30 foot front yard
requirement resulting in a 20 foot front yard setback. The
purpose of the variance request is to allow for a new attached garage.
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 regulation for the district in
which it is located?
If the request is denied, the property may yield a reasonable return in service and income. The
property is currently used as a single family residence and this use may continue.
2. If the variation were granted, would it alter the essential character of the locality?
It could possibly have an affect on the character of the locality. The garage may block the
views of adjacent residents and will not be in character with the rest of the houses in the
neighborhood. The proposed garage would be noticeable due to its size, height and location.
A mature tree on the west side of the house would be substantially trimmed in order for the
garage to be built in the front yard setback. There are other locations such as the east side of
the house where no variance would be required. Access to the detached garage
would be from the existing driveway.
3. Would the particular physical surrounding, shape or topographical conditions of the
specific property involved result in a particular hardship (upon the owner) as
distinguished from a mere inconvenience if the strict letter of the regulations were
carried out?
The lot in question is rectangular in shape and relatively flat. The lot meets the minimum
requirements of 9,000 square feet in lot area, and 80 feet of frontage for a corner lot in the R-
zone district.
4. Has the alleged difficulty or hardship been created by any person presently having an
interest in the property?
The hardship has been created solely by the applicant. A City building inspector noticed a
concrete slab had been poured at the property in question and notified the applicant that a
building permit would need to be obtained for the garage to be built, and for any future work
that is to be done at the site. The existing slab can remains in place and not be in violation. By
law, an RV can be parked in the front yard, but must be at least 6 feet from the property line.
5. Would the granting of the variance 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, 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?
Granting the variance could possibly be detrimental to the public welfare and injurious to other
properties in the neighborhood. The applicant will be gaining access to the garage off of
Upham Street, which could create a minor traffic hazard on the comer of W. 26`x' Place and
Upham Street when the applicant is parking the RV in the garage. The requested variance
could impair the adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property, would not substantially
increase the congestion in public streets or increase the danger fire or endanger public safety.
Staff is concerned regarding the negative visual impacts to the neighborhood. Relocation to the
east side of the house would help "hide" the garage from the street views.
6. If criteria a through a are found, then would the granting of the variance result in a
benefit or contribution to the neighborhood or the community, as distinguished from an
individual benefit on the part of the applicant, or would granting of the variance result
in a reasonable accommodation of a person with disabilities?
The requested variance would result in a benefit solely for the applicant and would not
contribute to the neighborhood or community. Granting of the variance would not result in the
reasonable accommodation of a person with disabilities.
VII. STAFF CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION
Staff has concluded that the above criteria are not supportive of the variance request.
Therefore, staff recommends DENIAL for the following reasons.
1. The conditions involving the property have not resulted in a particular hardship upon the
owner, but a mere inconvenience.
2. The hardship was self-created by the property owner.
3. The proposed addition will alter the essential character of the neighborhood.
4. The proposed addition could potentially impact neighboring properties.
5. There are no unusual circumstances attributed to this variance request.
6. There is an alternate location.
F
F
a
WE
b
R-
N
a
b
<
V
P
~
y
h
m <
~
u
N
0
W
~
b
z
n
R.
A
m
.
.
- " W 30T
H AVE'--
ry
N
C
28TH AVE
"
W LL
a
s
E
U
N
R
A
A
h
W 287TH AVE
f i
Jam, J
2661
~ v~! m
m Q
i Z al
F
N
a
cr
a
N
W
a ~
b
O N F .b LL ' ^ }fie al
y 3Ve. 2613
O ~ U$ N N R
C Yb '
• lCj N • 0 • p /g W V ~ b ~ ~ ~ • Y3
LL AR 7 N $
h Q' N h rbp Ip b N N
SITE o~: VARtAKCE REQUEST
PARCEL/LOT BOUNDARY SE 26
(DESIGINATES OWNERSHIP)
a E WATER FEATURE EXHIBIT 1
* DENOTES MULTIPLE ADDRESSES
100-YEAR FLOOD PLAIN o 100 200 ~CO 4GO Fecc
(APPROXIMATE LOCATION)
E ' UR-2
A
of wHC.ur LAND USE CASE PROCESSING APPLICATION oe'""EarP d I a It ient
4 EWX
T 82 U o c
HOC ORA00 ~LORP~
(Please print or type all information)
Applicant V1LTDk'. % 0~ 60A) Address ~GaO u-:PP19&J ~57- Phonoa.~)k
City dkN SAT /E/~7C7e State (.70 Zip epa /
11/C-7-0 Owner 0. Z)L S o iJ Address A- ,!//301/E Phone
City State Zip Fax
FOR/ ~0~~ 7Ga-U<Ld~
ill& 012
dog C e/GKSORJ NP~U/2 - U~
Contact 73FSr ~1L11TA~A/ESAddress PhoYY_
City ~=/U6rL E LUOD7 State ('d Zip kU /l D Fa&e) ' 41 - Dies'
(The person listed as contact will be contacted to answer questions regarding this application, provide additional information when necessary, post
public hearing signs, and will receive a copy of the staff report prior to Public Hearing.)
Location of request (address): wl, Z, _4? U U In ST G~'fl~/~T re/TJGr
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)
❑ Interpretation of Code ❑ Preliminary ❑ Final
❑ Lot Line Adjustment ❑ Right of Way Vacation
❑ Planned Building Group ❑ Temporary Use, Building, Sign
❑ Site Development Plan approval Variance/Waiver (from Section )
❑ Zoning Ordinance Amendment ❑ Other:
. rL.4-" ~v / A-X AztX-e=1'
Detailed description of request:
Required information:
Assessors Parcel Number: Size of Lot (acres or square footage):
Current Zoning: Proposed Zoning:
Current Use: Proposed Use:
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 owner submit power-of-attomey from the owner which approved of
this action on his behalf.
Signature of Applicant
Subscr' ed an sworn o me t s Z day of-- O 20 )U*
TA.. PU LX
~OF COLOQP Not &y Publie
My commission expires
Exam 04mumm Connate received -5 Fee $2 ~Receipt No. Case No. W4-6.7-05Z
Quarter Section Map L5G a(o
Comp Plan Desig. Zoning -,;I,
.
Related Case No. Pre-App Mtg. Date Case Manager G'.S z t--
row;
O
c
V; N
L`
o O
r! U.' Q
a as
o u
2 '
G G
ti c.W C
H~A>'
Woof
C4 ZUe+
~i f.✓'i ~J Vi
S
6
t
Y I
°
V
O '
O
7
F U
Y, C
Q
J
}
x
x
d
3
°
C O
~t~i ❑
L tt
c~ O
:J
} O
5 N
O ~
T
a %
r
h
rya
_z o
C~ .
❑ U
r < o
i 4
U
~ ❑ w
F ce
r F' r:
C y
x `
L. /y
3 a
O v
.U3 x c
Z
U, U rv x
m ~N
O Z . ^ _
U. N ~ N
.:mac o
v max
G m ~ O
c
Za~x
A x G
~ n ^ n
it
. ~ C T
~ V
r ~ a
f O .
G L ~ L
v > ~ D
M 3 =
O r ~ V
`d L c
f?
L °
O i O CCJ
G ~ u O
O _ C C y
u v y _ v
C i
p, o Eti
'o 'u y wa
n
v O O O
~C r..
uC ~ b
yC °
L v C
G ~ D
C L
O
J
CA 0
✓fy
`rx<
m
O y~
Yc 'y C
ap,`
C
pp0~
.aJUV;
n -Ca C > ~ ~ .C+ C
3 a' _ u 4 u
ry c _ u° 3 E~
_ N
C `p O C` O
r cA j
O w e V` w = C C
Q 6 n s .,C a u~
C° O a O ~ R~ ~ ~ C
~ a3 = u7 ;Ja9 v=
'C ~ 0 0 ~ rv C C u i' N it n h`
w D r C G CO. X r`
6 ~ v y L I
s 7 R c O C r'J C n II t
nc Ra`" n
~,.>ad o:aH~ E c-
r n ~ u'G w xw. s
r~ a w-. n n C
4= D N N g n°~ n
a. $j C _ c o
a J S r ^
C n i' D 4 r_ V.
^ " y D C C
.C C Z u ~ G,O S
eJ ~D _ J F
u\. u~ O u 0 i
`1 c y° w J u H O C u
we
z
C ~ 4
V 4 u
V G1
v O
R
u ~ ° a
C 4 U n
~ 1 L
D U -
> a .u.
o a n
D C
~ u
m
o
~ y 9
.w 7
N ~ V
C c
y J
~ c
C ~ a a.
~ ~ C t
_ U
n p D' y r
N-' G xn
G ~ J a G %
u -0 w D
o ~ a ^
V
%
O
r~
O
G
'r.
Q
P
i"
le
L
_IiIZ
K
e
7
S
~
H
Z
C
c
w
s'
Ci
lUV
f~. 33:..IHGl?di1~JGJ ?i'di=
EXHIBIT 4
WEST 26TH PLACE
45' RIGHT-OF-WAY
34' GUTTER TO GUTTER
LIJ w
W
aD
LLO
0
L"
ILL"
2 F-
Q C~ H
~ C7
ov
ill M
W
H-
C~
•51.04' ~E
c of \a,
2 M ,
50.0' o
PROPOSED GARAGE
1'e o' ON EX I°ST I NG. CONCRETE ° p
II • SL•b.8 ° °
JII LOT 7
t
o
o
1
I°
7
w
Ln
5.0'
22.
J
w
Lum
J =
- d
0
Y N
U ID
- N
of
m #
32.9'
0
o'
N o
IMPROVEMENT LOCATION CERTIFICATE
LOT 7, COWDEN - AMMON SUBDIVISION
CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, JEFFERSON COUNTY, COLORADO
DESCRIPTION:
LOT 7, COWDEN - AMMON SUBDIVISION, CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, JEFFERSON
COUNTY, COLORADO.
IMPROVEMENT LOCATION CERTIFICATE:
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IMPROVEMENT LOCATION CERTIFICATE WAS
PREPARED FOR VICTOR A. OLSEN, 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 IDESCRIBED
PARCEL, ON THIS DATE, MAY 20, 2002, EXCEPT UTILITY CONNECTIONS,
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 AP ARENT EVIDENCE OR SIGN OF ANY
EASEMENT CROSSING OR BURDENIN OF SAID PART OF SAID
PARCEL, EXCEPT AS NOTED. ~QP~••R, s
LOT E.
/CJ~J -L
lLn REGISTERED LAND SURVEYOR
COLORADO NO. 16837
e
i 5' UTILITY EASEMENTS LOT 'S
CURVE DELTA ANGLE RADIUS ARC CHORD T 6 CHORD BEARING
C 1 59°59'08" 45.00' 47.11' 44.99' S 60°05'38"E
C 2 89°59'24" 15.00' 23.56' 21.21' N 44°54'30"E
o~ •oouctgs.F
m 16837
0
'0NAE •LAN~~
NOTICE: ACCORDING TO COLORADO LAW, YOU MUST COMMENCE ANY
LEGAL ACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY WITHIN THREE
YEARS AFTER YOU FIRST DISCOVER SUCH DEFECT. IN NO EVENT, MAY ANY
ACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY BE COMMENCED MORE
THAN TEN YEARS FROM THE DATE OF THE CERTIFICATION SHOWN HEREON.
NOTES:
1. 1/2 INCH SQUARE STEEL PIN iRECOVERED AT POINT SHOWN THUS:■
2. THIS SURVEY WAS PREPARED WITHOUT THE BENEFIT OF A TITLE
INSURANCE POLICY, AND RELIED ENTIRELY ON INFORMATION
SUPPLIED BY THE BUYER.
LEGEND
INDICATES CONCRETE IMPROVEMENTS
- - INDICATES FENCE LINE
o INDICATES POWER POLE
20 0 10 20 30 PREPARED BY: LANE ENGINEERING SERVICE, INC.
SCALE I"- 20' 9500 WEST 14TH AVENUE, LAKEWOOD, CO 80215
TEL: (303) 233-4042 FAX: (303) 233-0796
PROJECT 036-:I
PREPARED 5/23/2002
May 9, 2002
City of Wheat Ridge E X H' B'
Mr. Michael Pesicka
Planning Department
7500 West 29th. Avenue
Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80215
Subject: Off-Street parking or a Garage at
2620 Upham St. Variance.
Dear Mr. Pesicka,
This is to confirm our conversation this date concerning subject. I was surprised at your call in
which you discovered that the submitted sketch plan did not match the sub-division plat. The street
layout called for 50' Upham 45' 26th. Place and 90' cul-de-sack circle but by normal measurement the
streets are 34' and the cul-de-sac circle is 73' 6". I am sure there was a change order somewhere back
in 1964 or concrete placing (Jefferson Mix) would not have had the bearing points to place the curb
and gutter, but I see that it never was recorded on the plat.
As I was a planning commissioner in the 50's & 60's for the Tri-Counties of Adams, Arapahoe
and Denver (Dr Cog?) it was the practice to measure the street by the curb line and not some other
paper right of way. Some things change over the years but I do not believe this concept has changed.
The property owner, owned and paid taxes for the property to the middle of the street but the
government maintained the street through property taxes. The owner was responsible for maintenance
of all of his other property, including sidewalks. If the city truly has the right-a-way of the sidewalks
and other developed residential property they would normally be responsible to clean and mow and
remove sidewalk snow and insure pedestrians safety for faulty sidewalks. Also it would be, that since
the city has not used this and the homeowners have normally cared for it for more than 17 years it
would revert to the property owners.
The north side of our property, is 26th place, a cul-de-sac street. As we discussed, structures can
be 10' from a cul-de-sac street and I checked with Lakewood and they apparently do the same. A
cul-de-sac is defined as a "position or passage with only one outlet; a blind alley". The word is French
for "bottom of a sack". This would mean the whole blind alley (short street) would be a cul-de-sac
street, not just the circle.
The measurement from the existing set- back, cement off-street parking to the normal north 26th.
Place curb is 19' 5". From the Upham St. side, set-back is 29' to the normal curb. From the northeast
corner of the garage it is 14' to the normal CDS curb.
If the Right-of-way concept is held as true then the set back on the 26th. Place side would
become 8' 5" to the right-of-way theoretical line. On the Upham St. side it would become 13' to the
theoretical right-of-way line. The northeast corner of the garage would become 2' 6" to the CDS curve
right-of way theoretical line.
The ideal thing for us would be to declare the historical curb line as the proper set back
measuring point and 26th place a true cul-de-sac street then the variance would be less than 10%, but if
OLSON PROPERTY AT 2620 Upham St. Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80215 303-238-4114
the "right of way concept" is b as true and the short 26th Place t true "through type street" then
the variance would have to be over 50% or all we would have is our off-street-parking.
How did I get into this position? I wanted to have our motorhome here where I could work on it
to prepare for the next trip and have the things I have stored there-in for use around the home. This is
the craziness in our lives that we enjoy but they say you have to do crazy things to be normal. I enjoy
baseball too and that is crazier than RVing and cities build base ball parks with tax money for our
recreation. A warm garage would make it easier to go on week end ski trips.
The American dream. A home with privacy, a place for a garden and a place for personal
activity. Having activities is important to a nations health. History has shown that when the people
have few activities (they are idle) they start warring with one another over the smallest things.
I am a retired construction man and I drew up what I wanted and looked for a qualified General
Contractor. I told Mr. Erickson that I would like a garage but I would settle for off-street Parking. We
now have the off street parking and would like to build a garage, there-on, if we can, but he said I
would have to work out the variance problem with you. I think he and I thought that the thing would
go right through quickly, but with the plat "possible error" problem it has made a simple appearing
thing become very complicated.
I could place the motorhome on the off street parking slab but I prefer a garage because when it
is stored outside, it starts looking beat up in a short time. 1 could buy a old beater and not worry about
appearance but I prefer to drive one that has a clean or new look.
If I can build a garage I would use matching brick, roof lines, windows, doors and it would
permit our place to look like another bed room, as we have on the south end. Our present garage does
not look like a garage from the Upham side.
Most people need garages to keep expensive cars looking nice and they store many other things
in there like lawn mowers, shovels, rakes and who knows what else. If we had only off street parking
instead of garages, how much of what is stored inside would be stored outside. Garages make all
property look neater.
The same with an RV. When you have an RV you have things that go with it like ATV's,
trailers, tires and wheels, hitches rafts and much more that would have to be stored outside under
canvases, etc. We would build a tall fence if you would allow us, but a garage would look better.
I have talked to most of my neighbors and they indicate that they would not object to a nice
looking garage.
Yours truly,
Victor A. Olson
2620 Upham St.
Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80215
303-238-3114
OLSON PROPERTY AT 2620 Upham St. Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80215 303-238-4114
Sent June 27, 2002
City of Wheat Ridge, Mr. Michael Pesicka, Planning Department
7500 West 29th. Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80033
Subject: Off-Street parking or a Garage at 2620 Upham St. Variance.
Dear Mr. Pesicka,
This is now the third city delay in subject garage project and we would like to proceed if all
questions are answered to the cities concerns.
Consensus could be reached if-.-
• The City department of transportation would agree that they have no interest in expanding the
roads in our subdivision and release the obsolete right of way provision that was a concept of the
governing body of Jefferson county in 1960 when this subdivision was in planning. Our option would
be to litigate for adverse possession which we do not want to do because of the expense to ourselves
and the City. The cost of this Red Tape is of no benefit to the City and sews the seeds of discontent in
the neighborhood (three certified mailings are hard to explain. Our neighbor has to drive out to the
distant Alameda post office every time). This is exactly what Jefferson county did for a similar cul de
sac on Caley St. that our builder was going to testify to tonight.
• If the roads were expanded in our subdivision to the full 90 foot cul de sac called for instead
of the `as built' pavement of 69 1/2' the neighbors on that circle would not have room to off street park
their vehicles in front of their houses. The 5' set back is only theoretical, the set back to the pavement
line is actually 16'. Ldoubt that your transportation department would ever consider using the 11'.
This would allow a staff approval of this and stop the hardship that has been placed upon us. This
would allow the contractor to proceed.
• Be fair. To judge the set back correctly the county subdivision rules from 1960 should be
used. If all the homes in this subdivision were judged by the 2002 set back rules they would all fail.
Common sense would allow the set backs we have asked for if we were judged by 1960 standards.
Our set back from the pavement line in front would be 31 foot to the new cement.
• The one neighborhood objection from 7230 West 26th Place has been withdrawn.
The original drawing showed access from Upham St. so no objection there. Driveway will be
over decorative pavers so it will look like grass growing up through them. Minimum in & out on not
busy Upham.
The corner tree is not to be removed only trimmed. I know people do not like change but life is
constantly changing. (RV space at all residences would be a benefit to the community and will be a
part of most every young persons life in the future (Remember "Get a horse' See Emergency Kit
Basics that are now recommended - Target : Terror RV's are the best answer and have been proved in
present fire emergency). The real objective of government should be to get the citizens to work with
one another beneficially - productively by fairness, otherwise people will be fighting one another.
I would believe it would be wise to have a-meeting with your building department head and
other supervisors involved in staff decisions to have a full discussion of any doubts on this.
Fours truly,
16-2rc.
Victor A. Olson
OLSON PROPERTY AT 2620 Upham St. Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80033 303-238-4114
7/18,2002
City of Wheat Ridge i
Mr. Michael Pesicka
Planning Department
7500 West 29th. Avenue
Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80215
Subject: Off-Street parking or a Garage at
2620 Upham St. Variance.
Dear Mr. Pesicka,
To confirm as I have said verbally that I will be there July 25, meeting.
The correct address for the comparable cul de sac garage building permit granted by Jefferson
County is at 10104 West Caley St. in the South West area near Kipling.
As I have sighted by previous letter that Jefferson County waived the set back line to the curb
line to permit a garage to be built because their right of way department (transportation) had no plans to
expand roads in this cul de sac road area and Kline Street.
Since Jefferson County had the good will to accommodate the desires of a citizen property owner
it would seem that you could verify this, before the board meeting then the city could allow a waiver
similarly to the County action that would simplify the board approval of our project.
We agree to put in a front yard cement drive, as your city engineer recommended and eliminate
the decorative pavers.
If no accommodation for waiver can be found in the north west corner of the garage we will stay
back another five foot from ROW arc, installing only a six foot high fence.
We are praying for the good will of the government of Wheat Ridge to allow the building of this
garage as it will be better for us, the neighborhood and city.
Homeland security will become bigger and bigger as we go along. Attached is another article on
the building of an industry to support the homeland security of the US.. The City should be studying
this now, to build an emergency plan to fight Terrorism. Even the fires we are seeing may be an
al-Qaeda, bin Laden, Arab, Moslem Cleric plan. I want to be prepared, let me build the garage.
Your truly,
-Za-
ic Olson
E
1
m
t:
N
N
O
S
i~
M
ON THE RIGHT HAND.
OLSON PROPERTY AT 2620 Upham St. Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80215 303-238-4114
ABETTER VIEW OF THE WEST ELEVATION SHOWING THE TWO-STORY AT SOUTH END
North End Garage will match look, size and roof line exceptwith door.
OLSON PROPERTY AT 2620 Upham St. Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80215 303-238-4114
East Elevation Back Yard Showing different rooflines
OLSON PROPERTY AT 2620 Upham St. Wheat Ridge. Colorado 80215 303-238-4114
Picture looking west from our property - Neighborhood appearance
EXHIBIT: 6
City of Wheat Ridge S~ MEMORANDUM
Department of Public Works
TO: Mike Pesicka, Planner
FROM: Dave Brossman, City Surveyor
DATE: Friday, July 12, 2002
SUBJECT: 2620 Upham Street property
Dear Mike -
I am writing to you in response to a letter you received from a Mr. Victor A Olson regarding the Right-of-Way on Upham Street
and 26 h Place (the easterly cul-de-sac), and a set back issue with the proposed driveway.
I have examined the Improvement Location Certificate prepared for Mr. Olson by Steven D. Lister, P.L.S. of Lane Engineering
Service, Inc.
I concur with Mr. Lister as to the location of the property at 2620 Upham Street.
The Lot distances shown on the Improvement Location Certificate are representative ofthose found on the original Cowden-Ammon
Subdivision plat.
I understand Mr. Olson's concerns regarding the Right-of-Way of the West 26th Place cul-de-sac as originally platted.
However, the amount of Right-of-Way that lies within the cul-de-sac (a radius of 4.5.0 feet), is the standard minimum amount usedby
the City of Wheat Ridge as per Section 26-416-C of the City of Wheat Ridge Code of Laws.
The minimum 45' Right-of-Way radius is also used by Jefferson County, the City of Lakewood, and other municipal and county
agencies, and is not an arbitrary amount.
The 45' radius is the minimum amount necessary to provide an adequate width of drivable pavement along with the area required to
construct and maintain the curb, gutter and sidewalk without disturbing private property.
In his letter to you, Mr. Olson had also mentioned an "option to litigate for adverse possession."
Mr. Olson needs to consult his attorney about this issue, but in my opinion I don't believe he will be pursuing any legal action
pertaining to adverse possession.
In order to obtain title by adverse possession as described under 38-41-101 (1) of the Colorado Revised Statutes, Mr. Olson would
have to satisfy several conditions that include having a continuous and uninterrupted possession for the entire statutory period of
eighteen years, having paid the assessed taxes on the claimed area, and having the possession be "open and notorious", that is withthe
titleholder knowing but without his consent.
These conditions having been met would satisfy the adverse possession requirements, except in this case he is speaking about an
attempt to claim title to Public Right-of-Way
According to the Colorado Revised Statutes pertaining to the Limitation of Actions Affecting Real Property, (C.R.S.38-41-101.
Limitation of eighteen years), states that:
"(2) The limitation provided for in subsection (1) of this section shall not apply against the state, county, city and county,
city, irrigation district, public, municipal, or quasi-municipal corporation or any department thereof. No possession by any person,
firm, or corporation, no matter how long continued, of any land, water, waterright, easement, or otherproperty whatsoever dedicated
to or owned by the State of Colorado, or any county, city and county, city, irrigation district, public, municipal, or quasi-municipal
corporation, or any department or agency thereof shall ever ripen into title, interest, or right against the State of Colorado, or such
county, city and county, city, public, municipal, or quasi-municipal corporation, irrigation district, or any department or agencytherof'.
Please let me know if I may be of further assistance in this matter.
David F. Brossman, P.L.S.
CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
Minutes of Meeting
June 27, 2002
1. CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by Chair
MONTOYA at 7:30 p.m. on June 27, 2002 in the city council chambers of the municipal
building, 7500 West 29th Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado.
2. ROLL CALL
Members Present: Tom Abbott
Paul Drda
Bill Echelmeyer
Paul Hovland
Bob Howard
Jerry Montoya.
Kent Young
Members Absent: Bob Blair
Staff Present: Alan White, Planning Director
Travis Crane, Planner
Mike Pesicka, Planning Tech
Ann Lazzeri, Secretary
The following is the official set of Board of Adjustment minutes for the Public Hearing of June
27, 2002. A set of these minutes is retained both in the office of the City Clerk and in the
Department of Planning and Development of the City of Wheat Ridge.
3. PUBLIC FORUM
There was no one signed up to speak.
4. PUBLIC HEARING
A. Case No. WA-02-04: An application filed by Victor Olson for approval of a 16.5
foot side yard setback variance from the required 30 foot side yard setback, when
adjacent to a public street, resulting in a 13.5 foot side yard setback for the
purpose of constructing a garage on property zoned Residential-Two (R-2) and
located at 2620 Upham Street.
Mike Pesicka introduced this case and stated there was an oversight regarding a front
yard setback that staff wasn't aware of at the time of publication for the side yard setback
variance. Since the front yard setback variance was not included in the publication for
this hearing, staff requested a continuance of the hearing. The applicant was in
Board of Adjustment
06/27/02
agreement with the continuance. Alan White stated that the applicant would not be
responsible for publication charges associated with this continuance since it was caused
by a staff oversight.
It was moved by Board Member ABBOTT and seconded by Board Member
YOUNG that Case No. WA-02-04 be continued to the next Board of Adjustment
meeting at the recommendation of staff and desire of the applicant. The motion
passed 7-0 with Board Member BLAIR absent.
B. Rehearing of Case No. WA-02-02 - An application submitted by Jeff Petty for
approval of a 600-square-foot variance from the 12,500-square-foot minimum lot
area requirement to allow an additional dwelling unit on property zoned
Residential-Two (R-2) and located at 4695 Wadsworth Boulevard.
This case was presented by Mike Pesicka. He reviewed the staff report which contained
new evidence submitted by the applicant. New photos of the property were also
presented during the staff report.
In response to questions from Board Member ABBOTT, Alan White explained that even
though there are three kitchens in this structure, the property is zoned R-2 which would
not allow a triplex. The maximum use for the structure could only be a duplex. Further,
the city traffic engineer has reviewed the parking situation and determined there is
adequate parking space for a duplex and there is also sufficient room between the
driveway and Wadsworth.
Jeff Petty
Mr. Petty, the applicant, was sworn in by Chair MONTOYA. At the previous hearing,
there was much opposition from the neighbors regarding the parking, condition of the
property and a desire that a duplex not be allowed in the subject location. Since that
time, Mr. Petty has cleaned up the property, installed new landscaping, etc. He spoke
with surrounding neighbors who indicated they are pleased with the improvements and,
with the exception of one neighbor, now have no objections to his request to use the
property as a duplex. He agreed with closing the curb cut onto Wadsworth and the
request to pave the first 25 feet of his driveway. His research also revealed several
duplexes as well as apartment buildings exist in the surrounding neighborhood.
Board Member ABBOTT asked if people were living in the structure at present. Mr.
Petty replied that two people are presently living in the structure. One of the people is
living there while he is working on the property and is paying no rent.
Board Member DRDA asked if Mr. Petty would be agreeable to permanently closing the
garage door which presently faces Wadsworth. Mr. Petty indicated he would be
agreeable to this to prevent ingress/egress from Wadsworth.
Board of Adjustment Page 2
06/27/02
x
~/az1vZ
Mr. Kenneth L. Mor nson
10115 W. Palmer%r.
Sun City, AZ 85351
o P11
Aso o ~ ~ ~
DATE OF MEETING: June 27, 2002 DATE PREPARED: June 13, 200
CASE NO. & NAME: WA-02-04101son CASE MANAGER: Michael Pesi;
ACTION REQUESTED; Request for approval of a 16.5 fool ide yard setback
variance from the required 30 foot, tde yard setback when
adjacent to a public street resultin, Sin a 13.5 foot side yard
setback.
LOCATION OF REQUEST. 2620 Upham Street.;
Wheat Ridge, CO 80215
NAME & ADDRESS OF APPLICANT(S): Victor A. Olson
2620 Upham Street
_ Wheat Ridge, CO
NAME & ADDRESS OF OWNER(S): Same as above'
APPROXIMATE AM
PRESENT ZONING:
PPFCFNT T.ANn TT41
E
9,100 square feet
Residential Two
~i
Single-family residential E '
¢t Lei } 5 P x. U. .i C Eta" .T.Y MYt
. , u
1G
E, & W R-2.i
N S
,
TTSE " , «
N S E, & W:, moderate-density residential
j
I
,
The property is within the City of Wheat Ridge, and all notification andpostmg requirements have been met,
there is jurisdiction to fiear this case..,,:
therefore
s G
,
+p mxa' °w-,-
. x* x
-
r
a: r ~se^ a e M- m~
^
44
PK K. _ Y+`
~i ,
"
4, J"Ll.:l f ) - •S )vlF+
y
ry
i
z~Y hxw... rcwie S~~ t,. ~
F ,-Y _ _ 1 't,. RJR trn
e
~
is
v s
I. - REQUEST
The property is located at 2620 Upham Street and is currently being used as a single family residence.
The property is zoned R-2, Residential-Two. (Ekliibit 1, Zoiiiiig=lGfap)p
The applicant (owner) is requesting approval of a 16.5 foot side yard setback variance from the required
30 foot side yard setback when adjacent to a public street, resulting in a 13.5 foot side yard setback.
(Exhibit 2; Application and Exhibit 3, Deed). The purpose of the variance request is to allow for a new
attached garage.
SITE PLAN
The applicant has submitted a survey showing the proposed location of the attached garage that will
store the RV (Exhibit 4, Survey).
The requested variance would allow for the expansion of the attached garage for the purpose of storing
an RV. The applicant has stated that the proposed garage would gain access from Upham Street, and a
mature tree would need to be removed to accommodate this request (Exhi M 'La'pp 4 The
property in question also abuts a cul-de-sac bulb on W. 26 h Place, and the setback from the bulb would
be reduced to 5 feet. The Code of Laws dictates that setback from a cul-de-sac bulb must be a
minimum of ten feet. Pursuant to Section 26-123, "On cul-de-sac lots, the board of adjustment may not
issue a variance for use of the land between the cul-de-sac front setback line and the cul-de-sac right-
of-way line depicted." In this proposed location, the Board of Adjustment cannot approve a variance to
the cul-de-sac setback by virtue of the Code of Laws. Lot coverage of 40% will be met if the variance
is approved
-N /,g 5 g
One letter of obj ections was submitted to the City, and has been included as (Exhibrt_
III. VARIANCE CRITERIA '
Staff has the following comments regarding the criteria used to evaluate a variance request:
1. Can the property in question 1,ield 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 is denied, the prq )erty can still yield a reasonable return in service and income.
The property may still be us4 is a single-family residence.
2. If the variation were granted would it alter the essential character of the locality?
It could possibly have an affe I on the character of the locality. The garage may block the
views of adiacent residents and will not be in character with the rest of the houses in the
neighborhood. The proposed garage would be noticeable due to its size and height. A mature
tree on the :vest side of the house would need to be removed in order for the garage to be
built.
3. Woulc i the particular physical surrounding, shape or topographical condition of the
specifi property involved result in a particular hardship (upon the owner) as
distinguished from a mere inconvenience if the strict letter of the regulations were
carrie out?
The loi in question is rectangular in shape and relatively flat. At approximately 9,100 square
feet, ti. a parcel exceeds the minimum lot area requirement for a single family home in the R-2
zone d strict. The property meets the minimum lot frontage requirement of 80 feet for a comer
lot in t lie R-2 zone district.
4
4. Has ttje alleged difficulty or hardship been created by any person presently having an
intere; it in the property? (/'5-7;Ee 3
The hz -dship has been created solely by the applicant. The applicant started construction
withoL i a permit. A City building inspector noticed a concrete slab had been poured at the
prope+ in question and notified the applicant that a building permit would needed. There may
be other alternatives for locating the structure elsewhere on the property.
5. Would the granting of the variance 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, 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?
Granting the variance could possibly be detrimental to the public welfare and injurious to other
propert.es in the neighborhood. The applicant will be gaining access to the garage from Upham
Street. This potential traffic hazard could result in increased traffic congestion on public streets.
The recuested variance could impair the adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property,
it would not increase the danger fire or endanger public safety.
6. If criteria a through a are found, then, would the granting of the variance result in a
benefit or contribution to the neighborhood or the community, as distinguished from an
individ ual benefit on the part of the applicant, or would granting of the variance result
in a re isonable accommodation of a person with disabilities?
Consw .ction of the new garage would allow the applicant to park his RV in the garage instead
of on f ie street. Such vehicles may only be parked on the street for up to 72 hours, or on a
residen :ial lot at least 6 feet back from the property line. Granting the variance would not have
any bei ;eficial effects for the surrounding properties or the neighborhood and will not result in a
reasonable accommodation of a person with disabilities.
Staff has concluded that the above criteria are not supportive of the variance request.
Therefore, staff recommends DENIAL for the following reasons. -
1. The conditions involving the property have not resulted in a particular hardship upon the
owner, but a mere inconvenience.
2. The hardship was self-created by the property owner.
3. The proposed addition could alter the essential character of the neighborhood.
4. The proposed addition could potentially impact neighboring properties.
5. There are no unusual circumstances attributed to this variance request.
i
)I _
t
1. As there are other nonconforming sheds in the area, impact to neighboring
property is lessened.
2. The location minimizes the height impact as it is in a lower portion of the yard.
3. There was an apparent genuine misunderstanding as to the setback regulations
after an apparent diligence in obtaining the information by the appellant.
4. The neighbors who would be most affected have indicated their approval.
With the following condition:
The shed must be built according to the design presented.
The motion passed unanimously.
Vice Chair ABBOTT advised the applicants their application was approved.
B. Case No. WA-02-04 (to be continued to a date uncertain) - An application
filed by Victor Olson for approval of an 11-foot side yard setback variance from
IF the required 30-foot side yard setback when adjacent to a public street, resulting
in a 19-foot side yard setback for the purpose of constructing a garage on property
zoned Residential-Two and located at 2620 Upham Street.
Alan White informed the Board that all required information had been received from the
applicant and requested that the case be continued to the next Board of Adjustment
meeting to be held on June 27, 2002.
Vice Chair ABBOTT opened the public hearing. There was no one signed up to speak to
this matter.
It was moved by Board Member DRDA and seconded by Board Member
HOWARD to continue Case No. WA-02-04 to June 27, 2002. The motion passed
unanimously.
C. Case No. WA-02-02: Request for a rehearing of Case No. WA-02-02 which was
denied by Board of Adjustment on April 25, 2002.
Vice Chair ABBOTT reopened Case No. WA-02-02.
Jeff Petty
Jeff Petty, the applicant, was sworn in by Vice Chair ABBOTT. He requested a
rehearing of his case based upon new evidence he has to present. After the last Board of
Adjustment meeting, he met with neighbors in attendance who expressed concern about
the condition of the property. He also met with other neighbors in the neighborhood who
had the same concerns. As a result, he has worked during the past month to repaint,
remove dead trees, clean the yard, and plant flowers and grass. Since this work has been
Board of Adjustment
05/23/02
D
d
d
d
D
_
~
C
u
y~
v
O
N
d
~
9
N
Q
>
y
~
C
O
C
Z
d
~
dl
v
\
v
~
C
7
v
a
v
o
\
\
y
K >I
i
a
K
N
J
O
N
O
q
M
VI C ~
.
.
~
y
j
O
E
n
o
a
O
d 0
L 0 N
as c
0
0
.
~
0
0
0
0°
°0
0
0
0
0
yry~ a -
N
d
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
N
d
° 5
l1
Q
2
~
~
2
~
2
Q N
i
i
i
v
0
O
_
•
u
cc
d
a
O
N
y
O
Y O
U
O
M
W
l0
~
E(n V
N
C-O
a
(
C"N
C y
C O
N >N
C CO
E+-%0
w
N N
0~+~
N
O
T~~
N
N
0aN
O
N
d O
y m m
N
d E O
Q O
V
S
d J 0
a 3
a
o
u E
C
m m O
m
O
T O
v
o
O N
O
ffi O
N U
L U
:
a O O
0
LL U
0
L U
U
L L
U
X
~
Y N O
y
D
Jr
U
O~a
QO m
(7NU
LL~a
dOa
N7 m
~ttl m
N
d
Q
C O C
.
N O D
Y
- ?
a O. C
CNK
j~ N
N >
C N o
LO >
C O O
Q~
O'~
QNK
a
NOK
C N
t0 >
i'n N
R 6'-
N
N
NO
Q
t0 O
~
.
~
NN d
n
00
16
N
C
0 O O
i
O d'
d
~ N
3
T(O N
N
0.-
N
d....
m
O ry C
~ r
-
d t
9
N~
LL
J
O
d
O r p
~
N
J
>
0
~
~ N "O
'
~
~
j
C jn N d R
U N
Q
a) 00
`oW
~ ~U ci~
E
LL
N
❑ ❑ ❑ ®o o
Z
o
ry
c~
~
v
~
~n
b
so
~
n
W
m
A
d
~
T
n
T
r
N
n
n
n
O
i
r
- r
r
r
`
W O
1
Q
a
v
v
v
a
v
~o
a
e
,
C) 7!
Q
`o
v
v
v
v
w
v
v
m
v
rn
m
rn
m
rn
rn
rn
m
mm
mm
m
m
m
m
m
m
V
i
N°
m
M°
~o
mo
m
mo
H
Z
<
o
o
~
o
o
o
w Q W
O
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
CD
O
N
O a Z
a
Z
N =
J
C
a
N
C
a
d
P
~
~
u
d
a
~
~
N
Q
C
N
'd
u
a
rc
i
a
N
E
2
OE
K
c
7
'
D
a
N
IYO
W C ~
N
a
E u
a
y
U
0
L O ~p
a a c
-m
r
a
CD
N
N
N
N
x a a
0
Q N .ar r
v
0
m
c
a
E
E
CL
c
a
o
O
c
a
c IN
a
m.
`oa
-i o
~
f ~n
IN
a
n
'J
` N
0
o
metro
a_in
ENO
~
Ul
m
~O
wN0
UFO
~O
d-
0
N
'a
Q F rn
W~0
NF rn
6
0
w+
4:
va
a
c ~a
a K
m~~
>
~K
wmD
>~N
>
n
.
~
°
i
In
N
Lr
N
cc
ON
V
a
c
N s
0
'
d
a
W
0
t
a
U
O
n
7
6
a u
C N
<
a
?
N
Q c E N
r cL N
O
Y
i
'o
, U vw
E
a
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
z
m
rn
m
a
m
r
n
r
IN
n
N
p
W
a
°
v
0 o
o
CO
rn
m
m
m
N
n
°rn
rn
°m
°m
Q W z
n
n
W O
= H j
p
LL
N
o Q z
a
} o W z
A
-
I
U
n~ a
nI
~
j
7500 West 29th Avenue
The City of
Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80033 Wheat Ridge
Telephone 303/235-2846
FAX 303/235-2857
July 11, 2002
Dear Property Owner:
This is to inform you that Case No. WA-02-04 which is a request for approval of a 16 t/2 foot
side yard setback variance from the required 30 foot side yard setback when adjacent to a public
street resulting in a 13 t/2 foot side yard setback and a 10 foot front yard setback variance from
the required 30 foot front yard setback resulting in a 20 foot front yard setback for the purpose of
constructing a garage on property zoned Residential-Two (R-2) and located at 2620 Upham
Street will be heard by the Wheat Ridge Board of Adjustment in the Council Chambers of the
Municipal Complex at 7500 West 29th Avenue on July 25, 2002, at 7:30 p.m.
As an area resident or interested party, you have the right to attend this Public Hearing and/or
submit written comments.
If you have any questions or desire to review any plans, please contact the Planning Division at
303-235-2846. Thank you.
Planning Division.
C1Documents and Settings\kathyf\N4y Documents\Kathy\130A\pubnotice\2002\wa02O4B.wpd
NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING
Notice is hereby given that a Public Hearing is to be held before the City of Wheat Ridge
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT on July 25, 2002, at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the
Municipal Building at 7500 West 29th Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado. All interested citizens
are invited to speak at the Public Hearing or submit written comments. The following petitions
shall be heard:
Case No WA-02-04 (continued from June 27,2002): An application filed by Victor
Olson for approval of a 16 '/z foot side yard setback variance from the required 30 foot
side yard setback when adjacent to a public street resulting in a 13 %2 foot side yard
setback and a 10 foot front yard setback variance from the required 30 foot front yard
setback resulting in a 20 foot front yard setback for the purpose of constructing a garage
on property zoned Residential-Two (R-2) and located at 2620 Upham Street.
Case No. WA-02-06: An application filed by William Luce for approval of a 10 foot 4
inch side yard setback variance from the required 15 foot side yard setback resulting in a
4 foot 8 inch side yard setback for the purpose of constructing a garage on property zoned
Residential-One (R-1) and located at 11481 West 39`h Place.
Case No. TUP-02-03: An application filed by TCCH Management, LLC for approval of
a one-year Temporary Structure Permit to allow an office trailer on property zoned
Industrial (I) and located at 12000 West 52"d Avenue.
Kathy Field, Administrative Assistant
ATTEST:
Wanda Sang, City Clerk
To be Published: Wheat Ridge Transcript
Date: July 11, 2002
C:\Kazhy\BOA\PUBHRGS@002\020725.wpd
a
a
~ pf
`
c
w
~
v
c
'
m
u
m
a
o
a
a
a
d
N
c
Q
r
>
d
C
U
O
U
~
z
~
UI
d
~
~
C
a
N
w C ~
y
Eo
a
m ~
t o
~
o a c
E o.2
t0 =
y C U =
#
y
o
°0
0
0
°0
0
0
0
0°
m
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
Q m ~ $
u
O
o
W
C
N
M
E O
M V
~
N
ca O
~ N
c. 0
O(
~
C ~
O pj
i >N
N
.N. CO
U
N
ENO
N N
.
ONO
O
~.-O
~
c-
oaN
d
d
N
`m m
9 L
n
`m E O
d t m
3 3 o
U E m
° E O
t°'n O
c L m
N
O F O
N UU
U L U
a N O
a 0 OU
L OU
c
L L U
K U
Y N O
to
j
a
U
o
o
o- m a
D
a
U
-
~
LL~
o
G
o.
c~ o
~7 ¢ w
=.G
o d
¢1
V 9
U
~3 -
d
d
y
o
Q
c
~M
o
y
O N~
~
`m
TAO >
o
LO
c o 0
Q
M
o
Nm
ry0w
cM
LM >d
Y _
N
"6 a
N
a
No
O
~
cM 3
N r Y
c o
O N t6
oM c
m N N
o v a
A N Y
co 3
T N Y
Q
co
O N 10
Q1 a (0
oN ~
~ 1~ N
~ N
~
`
.a
N
~
LL N
J
~ L
U r 0
N
J
N f 6
N J
TJ LL
L
~
L
L` N K U y
0
Q
E 2 N
N
(D
O ry a
x U U w
y
E
❑ ❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑
z
~O
m
t0
m
I~
m
N
m
O)
m
O
o
0
N
0
M
0
W)
O
V
N
N
N
N
N
M
M
M
M
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
LU N ~
Q
v
a
v
v
a
v
v
v
e
co
`o
-
~ co
~
~
rn
rn
m
m
m
m
m
m
rn
LL W O
a
E
o
M
a
M
0
M
0
M
0
M
0
M
0
M
0
M
0
m'
C
1
a
Q W p
~ 4m
N
3a "
z
0
a
W z
o
z
LO g
v
~ I,
O
y
W
d
0
P.
m
Q
E
z~
F O
b
C
N
T
0
`v
z
H
c
a
v
N
P\
K
v
V
N
N
C
d
U
N
`
a
v
ai
u
c
~
Z
?
vi
K
c
'-y
a
a
N p' °
w C ~
N
a
£ o u
~
L U N
O p C
O
~
N~ a
#
d
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
w ~ m
U
Q m
u
O
C
w
c
a
1
N
C
4(J
~
°
Y~
16
N W
o
N
(n U
3
"C t
w U
'O
N W
J
d
d
`
m d U
45
W N O
E
L N U
m
f%1
a
Q F-
M
tL U
WF
rn
OFU
d
a°i
Q
L
`~o d
~d1a
> M
SQ '0 O_. _
J N N
L n N
L N N
- N N
~ N f6
`
a
W L
N 0
U
L
V 0
N a K u
N
m n
a
Y
>
m
Q _ c
O
WO 0 0
w
0
£
rs
v
in
M
co
M
n
O
_N
U
~
N
r
w
Q
N
c
N
v
N
v
v
N
O
`
m
m
°
ro
0 co
o
`
m
w
m
m
m
W
0
m
E
o
m
0
rn
0
m
`o
m
w
V
F '
Q Q w Z
n
n
n
O
wFn
N I
C) Q Z
a
O W Z
c
U n
m
U
O
W
on
A
P:
0
ro
z
w"
0
Q,
O
P.
ro
b
N
U
N
a
0
a
z„
Y ~
O
v
L
d
a
.l
U
a
0
`v
7
z
Y
F
7500 West 29th Avenue
The City of
Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80215 Wheat Ridge
Telephone 303/235-2846
FAX 303/235-2857
June 13, 2002
Dear Property Owner:
This is to inform you that Case No. WA-02-04 which is a request for approval of a 16 '/2 foot
side yard setback variance from the required 30 foot side yard setback when adjacent to a public
street, resulting in a 13 '/2 foot side yard setback for the purpose of constructing a garage on
property zoned Residential-Two (R-2) and located at 2620 Upham Street will be heard by the
Wheat Ridge Board of Adjustment in the Council Chambers of the Municipal Complex at
7500 West 29th Avenue on June 27, 2002, at 7:30 p.m.
As an area resident or interested party, you have the right to attend this Public Hearing and/or
submit written comments.
If you have any questions or desire to review any plans, please contact the Planning Division at
303-235-2846. Thank you.
Planning Division.
C:\Kathy\BOA\pubnoti ce\2002\wa0204. wpd
NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING
Notice is hereby given that a Public Hearing is to be held before the City of Wheat Ridge
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT on June 27, 2002, at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the
Municipal Building at 7500 West 29th Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado. All interested citizens
are invited to speak at the Public Hearing or submit written comments. The following petitions
shall be heard:
Case No. WA-02-04: An application filed by Victor Olson for approval of a 16 %2 foot
side yard setback variance from the required 30 foot side yard setback when adjacent to a
public street, resulting in a 13 '/2 foot side yard setback for the purpose of constructing a
garage on property zoned Residential-Two (R-2) and located at 2620 Upham Street.
Rehearing of Case No. WA-02-02: An application submitted by Jeff Petty for approval
of a 600 square foot variance from the 12,500 square foot minimum lot area requirement
to allow an additional dwelling unit on property zoned Residential-Two (R-2) and located
at 4695 Wadsworth Boulevard.
Case No. WA-02-05: An application filed by Jim Dent for approval of a 10 foot rear yard
setback variance from the required 10 foot rear yard setback resulting in a 0 foot rear yard
setback for the purpose of constructing a garage on property zoned Residential-One C (R-
1 C) and located at 3235 Ames Street.
Kathy Field, Senior Secretary
ATTEST:
Wanda Sang, City Clerk
To be Published: Wheat Ridge Transcript
Date: June 13, 2002
Ct\Kathy\BOA\PUBHRGS\2002\020627.wpd
7500 West 29th Avenue
Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80215
The City of
Wheat Ridge
Telephone 303/235-2846
FAX 303/235-2857
May 9, 2002
Dear Property Owner:
This is to inform you that Case No. WA-02-04 a request for approval of an 11 foot side yard
setback variance from the required 30 foot side yard setback when adjacent to a public street,
resulting in a 19 foot side yard setback for the purpose of constructing a garage on property
zoned Residential-Two (R-2) and located at 2620 Upham Street will be heard by the Wheat
Ridge Board of Adjustment in the Council Chambers of the Municipal Complex at 7500 West
29th Avenue on May 23, 2002, at 7:30 p.m.
As an area resident or interested parry, you have the right to attend this Public Hearing and/or
submit written comments.
If you have any questions or desire to review any plans, please contact the Planning Division at
303-235-2846. Thank you.
Planning Division.
C:\ Kathy\BOA\pubnotice\2002\wa0204.wpd
a
a II
c
m
W
m
~
a
C
d
c
y
'
y
y
u
m
K
a
y
y
C
Q
~
~
y
K
a
m
c
~
e
Z
~
.
?
mi
~
v
~
c
7
d `o
o
m E o
a
d o
L
0 m
E o
o
y
c
f0
r a -
#
y
0
0
0
0
0
°0
0
0
0
~ $
Q m
U
O
.
y
°
a
a
~n
c .n
G
W
'O
N
M
E
VI
C
O
N
c
C
t2
N >
O
U
E Jo
N N
~.r'aO
m
O
T OM
N
C_~
O
U)
N p
d
m W
O`(n
N
YQO
C
i2
`5
D
C~
mm
Tao
d
~
N
02 m
>w0
dEO
U
ysm
030
E
000
2E0
MMO
UM0
N
0 F O
J U
N U
U L
O
N
a N O
U
O. 2 U
L U
'2
6
L L
(n W
a
K
O N
Y N O
U
y
a
a
c
O
o
.
7
'O .o
~2
-
IL~
O
c
=
O
-6
~m_O
j
>
G1 y
y
N
y
Q
_
'ZMm
'srO
mN~
N
j
TO>
LOO
COO
Q
O'a-.
N
Q
v O
CMm
L M>
_
y
O'O aa-
`
moa
~l0 O
cM 3
1`ry
c~,_,
ON m
oM c
~N N
ov 3
ANY
m 3
TNY
0.-
ON m
m a m
oN c
~n m
V N U N N
yL~
'O m
.0
N O
LL m
J
O
~
U r O
m
J
N m
co
L
s
O
a a
~
a
C y N y
E y
Q
_ E v y
'
o
~
o
K co w~
E
❑ ❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑
m
a
~n
so
m
m
o_
N
d
a
V
Q
a
a
V
Q
d'
V
U
O
O
o~
w
m
aD
m
W
m
W CV
Q
0'
V
V
V
im'
O
V
V
V
O
V
O
d
V
rn
m
rn
m
m
rn
m
rn
m
a
m
rn
m
m
m
rn
°m
rn
°m
O
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
2
b
-
b
W Q W z0
Fo
n
n
n
n
n
n
r
n
x~o
LL N p
0 < Z
a
O W z
5
Uti~
~I
0
F
W
a°
ro
N
cC
r U
ro
FO
b
T
b
O
N
E
z
s
D
d
W W
C
d
~
d_
D
C
`
C
W
y
N
.U
d
a
Q
K
D
~
d
U
°
:
a
o
d
`
c
z
d
dl
C
~
K
C
7
•
U
D
D
O
Q
d
y
d
~ U
O
y ❑ d
a
d w U
L
d d
E 1 0
E d o
t6
H~~-
#
d
0
0
0
0
x~~a
m
N
oo
N
0
N
N
o0
~ v
j
j
a d
0
0
N
C
a
O
Or . N
p
_N N
Y~
0'
N
d
o
'
2=a
a in 0
~ fn 0
m
d
`
~
w
m
WNo
Eva
A?
N
-p
Q H m
W U
NF m
0
FU
6
d
Y N
N
N
Q
N'~
m (d
O Ul
J M C
' M O
M d
0 C
N N
L r d
c N N
N
~ N c=
ow
`
W
s
c o
U t
N
p
= N `1 N 0: U y
o
Q
~
y
~
d
~
Q) N Q y~
d
~ ~U U~LL
d
E
W
❑ ❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑
z
LO
d
U
V
N
V
N
V
N
O
N
r
w
Y
Q
d
N
o
`
°e
a
c
v
0 co
o
rn
rn
m
m
~
a
E
o
m
0
01
0
O
0
T
I- V
'
Q Q W z
z
n
n
n
n
wx~ 55
x~o >
U-
N
va "
z
o
a
Z
} o w
z
i3
Q
N
O
E
W
ou
G
FL
O
E
z
N
N
R
a°
W
a
0
N
E
r7. U
m
Ho
b
C
4J
T
9
N
a
N
U
a
0
9
z
y
F
/Jefferson
(CO.
•
Owner
:Deselm Marvin L E",l
rarcel
:021573
Site
:2603 Teller St Wheat Ridge 80215
Xfered
:02/04/2002
Mail
:2603-2607 Teller S Golden Co 80403
Price
Use
:1112 Res,Improved Land
Phone
Bedrm:
Bath:2.00 TotRm: YB:1964 Pool:
B1dgSF
:1,898 Ac:
MetroScan / Jefferson
(CO)
Owner
:Wilbanks Frankie D
Parcel
:021642
Site
:7313 W 26Th P1 Lakewood 80215
Xfered
:09/09/1998
Mail
:7313 W 26Th P1 Lakewood Co 80215
Price
Use
:1112 Res,Improved Land
Phone
Bedrm:
Bath:1.75 TotRm: YB:1965 Pool:
B1dgSF
:1,962 Ac:
*
• MetroScan / Jefferson
(CO)
Owner
:Cerrone Donald A
Parcel
:021684
Site
:2625 Upham St Wheat Ridge 80215
Xfered
Mail
:2625 Upham St Wheat Ridge Cc 80215 -
Price
Use
:1112 Res,Improved Land
Phone
Bedrm:
Bath:1.75 TotRm: YB:1964 Pool:
B1dgSF
:1,964 Ac:
*
• MetroScan / Jefferson
(CO)
Owner
:Peterson Carolyn G;+
Parcel
:021891
Site
:7235 W 26Th Ave Denver 80215
Xfered
:10/29/1999
Mail
:7235 W 26Th Ave Denver Co 80215
Price
:$272,500 Full
Use
:1112 Res,Improved Land
Phone
:303-237-1539
Bedrm:
Bath:2.00 TotRm: YB:1964 Pool:
B1dgSF
:1,775 Ac:
*
• MetroScan / Jefferson
(CO)
•
Owner
:Powers John F
Parcel
:021892
Site
:2605 Upham St Wheat Ridge 80215
Xfered
:09/15/1978
Mail
:2405 Willow Ln Lakewood Co 80215
Price
:$105,000
Use
:1112 Res,Improved Land
Phone
:303-238-3911
Bedrm:
5 Bath:3.00 TotRm: YB:1965 Pool:
B1dgSF
:2,713 Ac:
*
• MetroScan / Jefferson
(CO)
:
Owner
:Mccormick Sally Anne
Parcel
:022083
Site
:2600 Upham St Wheat Ridge 80215
Xfered
:02/21/1992
Mail
:2610 Upham St Lakewood Co 80215
Price
Use
:1112 Res,Improved Land
Phone
:303-280-3523
Bedrm:
Bath:3.00 TotRm: YB:1966 Pool:
B1dgSF
:2,445 Ac:
MetroScan / Jefferson
(CO)
•
Owner
:Olson Victor A/Olson Sharon
Parcel
:022100
Site
:2620 Upham St Wheat Ridge 80215
Xfered
:06/03/1991
Mail
:2620 Upham St Wheat Ridge Cc 80215
Price
:$86,000
Use
:1112 Res,Improved Land
Phone
:303-238-3114
Bedrm:
Bath:1.75 TotRm: YB:1964 Pool:
B1dgSF
:1,680 Ac:
MetroScan / Jefferson
(CO)
Owner
:Mc Kay Betty J
Parcel
:022303
Site
:7273 W 26Th P1 Wheat Ridge 80215
Xfered
:08/10/1974
Mail
:PO Box 1391 Wheat Ridge Cc 80034
Price
.
Use
:1112 Res,Improved Land
Phone
:303-237-6505
Bedrm:
Bath:1.75 TotRm: YB:1964 Pool:
B1dgSF
:1,232 Ac:
MetroScan / Jefferson
(CO)
Owner
:Kenyon John M
Parcel
:022381
Site
:7233 W 26Th P1 Denver 80215
Xfered
:02/22/2000
Mail
:7233 W 26Th P1 Denver Co 80215
Price
Use
:1112 Res,Improved Land
Phone
:303-234-0713
Bedrm:
2 Bath:1.75 TotRm: YB:1964 Pool:
B1dgSF
:1,083 Ac:
*
• MetroScan / Jefferson
(CO)
Owner
:Butzen Eugene A
Parcel
:022461
Site
:2653 Teller St Wheat Ridge 80215
Xfered
:01/14/1976
Mail
:2653 Teller St Wheat Ridge Co 80215
Price
:$40,500
Use
:1112 Res,Improved Land
Phone
Bedrm:
Bath:1.75 TotRm: YB:1964 Pool:
B1dgSF
:1,242 Ac:
• MetroScan / Jefferson
(CO)
•
Owner
:Morgenson Kenneth L/E E
Parcel
:022641
Site
:7230 W 26Th P1 Denver 80215
Xfered
:02/24/2000
Mail
:7230 W 26Th PI Denver Co 80215
Price
:$170,000 Full
Use
:1112 Res,Improved Land
Phone
Bedrm:
Bath:1.75 TotRm: YB:1965 Pool:
B1dgSF
:1,227 Ac:
Information compiled from various sources. Real Estate Solutions makes no representations
MetroScan / Jefferson
(CO..
Parcel :022942
Xfered :09/29/1976
Price :$54,900
Phone :303-238-0660
B1dgSF:1,816 Ac:
(CO)
Parcel :022955
Xfered :02/17/2000
Price
Phone :303-233-1551
B1dgSF:1,558 Ac:
Owner :Schmidt Chris J J~
Site :2633 Teller St Wheat Ridge 80215
Mail :2633 Teller St Wheat Ridge Co 80215
Use :1112 Res,Improved Land
Bedrm:3 Bath:1.75 TotRm: YB:1964 Pool:
MetroScan / Jefferson
Owner :Wiscamb Wendell D/Violet L
Site :2613 Teller St Denver 80215
Mail :2613 Teller St Denver Co 80215
Use :1112 Res,Improved Land
Bedrm: Bath:1.75 TotRm: YB:1964 Pool:
Information compiled from various sources. Real Estate Solutions makes no representations
009
4T.
12
e 3
°3
2
f
•
03i
•
O
6
0
~
p
d ~
~
014 51.5
`
160.92'
51 58'
136'
'
lc O
008
?
\
ti 85
11
w 05
0 10
in 96.5
" 9
113.5
6'
159
s
1
.
2
's
COWD
E
- A M
O N -N
n
025
169'
18
~
008
s4 • 015
65'
~
16
017
N
_
N
" 009
a
p
19
PI
R 45'
51
5'
m
2 V
024
r 169.13'
~
00
JJ.
.
.
h
h
124 48'
64 2~
25'
67. SB'
8
v 113 5
° 010
3
O
94.48
20
s
B 7
In
v t
3
to
0
-
22
ti 006
019 A
018 -
V
m
023 0
169.30'
4"C
100'
96.5'
~
113.5'
3-A
004
0 2I
0
i
6
v"
5
4
011
N •n 005 'n
~
O
020 •0
021 0
02 o
v N
N N
15
~
N N
-
N
-
N
15
-
16 v3
75'
94.49
100' 2S
2$
105,
1
os,
v
25'
25
Ave.
Adjoining
39-351
og/~.
oa 0-
005-:L- -
60 (fe:2 -
G/-1
,
U/6
D a5-
17'
To center
of street
Upham 34' St
NOTE: NEED CEMENT
FOOTINGS,
FOUNDATION WALLS
AND PIERS
0 8' 0" 13' 4" 26' 8"
SCALE 3132" = 1 FOOT
0" to pavement
Garden
Wall
18'0"OA
odd
A ~ ~ m
~ U
E
N
>
N
4
0
m
m
m
m
3
c
b
EE
v
m
a
Locate Lawn Sprinkler
lines and protect Garden
V Wall
E
0
io
F- CAGE ON OFF STREET
16' 0"
Gas line locate, protect & hand dig
e~
6 c
FOR R.V.
Garden
Wall
Cul-de-sac 73'6" Circle
cement driveway
0
N
Garden
Wall
9'0"OA
8'R
PIER
Existing Home
2620 Upham St.
C
Front
Porch
Porch Extension TO "X24'3'
8"R
PIER
00
rn
7' 0"
Wheatridge,
Colorado
80215
stair
down
33' 0"
BR_
PIER
Porch
BVW612.5"
PIER
Porch Extension
Garden
Wall
15'3"OA
Garden
Wall
9'0'OA
LAN[CAPEING CHANGES PAGE 1 OF 2
Pit- Locate and protect lawn sprinkler
Ownor' V. S. Olson
B~ ildpr
(~03~238-3J 14
k ay 5, 20 2
211 Place Cul-de-sack
34' Street
. ' ~i>+, ~e u..'tii;ra~~~ ~?S~m'e', ' . '~'":`~~„r .k ~.e~ ~`3t'k^`,?liE:_ <~.t~9h.,,~ , w, ,,::bf~~`c~~",~41k~~ _ i+atri"
...t. w »ac.~.t,. ...n.: u, s.._u.-.dir..;., Q ~•d~r
PROTEG' C I~~NA N TS
Tf~t.~~` These cover~onfs ~r~ >o r~r~r ,ifh fh~' hand ano` ~r~ fo ~'~i~~irT~
_ o/i ~o~'rsors or~~',r~r>`i~s c/r~imir~~ ~'%'~irouq,h ~`f~~ u~derasr, jr~~d~r~fi~/
Ja~t~o' y /9~'4~ Of 1~fii'ch fiir~e >`fi~y shvl/ ~~~orno°~`ie°r~//y ~`~'rmi~crJ`~
vr~/ess ~xl`~rrd'~d .by o~ ~or`~ of >`h~ ff~~r~ o~vrr~rs r,>fa ~Q1ari y ~fr`r5~
lnfs iri fhi:~ s~,ba'ii~rsla~.
/Yo /afs shc~// be used ~xc~,~f f y r~.~id~r~fr~r/,ou~,oos~s. /IUD o'yve//i~y`~
sf~.~// 6~ ~r~~l`~d, ra/f~r~d, ,o/acted or,raer,~rliffea' ~`o r~rr~a~i7 orr ~rr~y ✓al` o~rrer i
>r~~Fr~ or~~ s~~.q/~ - f~rrr~i/y die//ii~q or or e f,Gr~~a - f~rr~ily die//ir~~. T ~ror~r~~
1r~DflY c~>-ea of sa~io' svr~sr/~ - fr~rr~i/y d~v~/I>~q, ~zcl~s~ve r~>` or e story oaen parches
a,7d ,q~rrages, shu°// b~ ~ro~' /mss 1ti~rr~ /l>f1D sp-Unre 1ee,~` ~ r or» s~`ory o'Wef/ram g ar~d 7.~"O s9uzr~-~ f r rr~u/Tip/~ sfory c~`n~~//ii~,g. Tf>e gr~ur~d f/oar o~r~~r of
~`acfi sii~g/~ - fa~r~ri/y rir»r` iry .s~rio' y`.vi~D ~`arni~ e1'v~~ l/ii~y, ~x ~/~..sivf~ or`"
sfdry D,o~rr~ ,norch~s or~d.gorQ~g~s, sfi~r// .6e r~o~` ./c~~ss ~h~r~ 800 sc,~urtr~ f~'~'~` eP ~ t d
} ~r or~~ sfory a~'r~vv~//iir~gs o~r~d 7114 s9u~re r`~~s~` for gnu/fr c% s~`ory dtye//ri~,s. 1
3. L~fs ~r sing/~ -fa'crri/y d~~l//%~9 sfia~/f have a m~i~~rr~um iv~o'fh of T✓'^>`~e~
of ft~e bar/oiiry s~,~'b~r~.~ /r:7e ern a ~n~,i-rr~rrvrr~ rrr~a of .~;~~'DC~.~°~~~~rr~ ;*~°~~,y`, ~ of~' ~r
1 `„r~vo - r`aCni/y d~v~//i;~ys s'f al/ h~r~~' d rrrii~iinurr, ~ ; r o'fh o ~ ` /4~ y`~~r` o~`,~`h~ ,6tir/dirrq e
.5'ef 6acrF /ins trrro'~r m~i~iinarrr arm of /G',S"OG~ sgv~rr8 ~`,o~~'.` {
'e
4. /Yo b~ila'iny~ sh~r// ,6e /oca~>`~'d on ~r.~y /of ,-~e~r~~r fo ary s1`y~~f fi~~
~`ha~ 3D>`~~f Tfi~ rr~ii~rin~~n vtridfh of sio~yerrds f r bu~1dri~gs sh~r/t b~ ,S
f~~~ syifh ~t ~`ofa•,~sia'~ yrrrd n~id'ffi~ Q~`' ~ra~` /mss >`ficr,7 /.3 r`~'sr`. ~`r'e~rr y~rr'ds
sha// hGrve a rnii~iinurn d~,vffr of .5 fe'el`. For The ~nv,~pose of ~`~is Coy'~.7on'r,`
errv~s, sf~,os ~rrra'open,c~rches sfia//roof ,b~ carrsisa'ered~rs ~r pv~rf o~`'fh~ ,b~i1o'ir~.q.
.5" /t/o hui/o'i.~9 shQ// be ~r~c~ed, a/,~`er~ra; ,r~/c~c`~d or ~~rrnl~`f~'~'' ~n ory /af
rr.-»`i%l the co.~sfr~~l`ior~ p/cTrrs a~-r~' srecif~c~rfi~arrs o,~:-~' o ,~,!~r~ .s~i,~~r ri-rq y`he
/oc~~io.~ of The sfrcrcf~re h~xv~~ teem rro,~rov~d ,6y ffre Ar~,~i~`~'cf~r~f Car~fro;' .
G'ora~rr~i~`~`~e ors 1`o r~~rrr/i ~ of ~or~rr~~rrjs~aict aria' rrror`~rir~',~s, .h~rr't~c~rry nd"
exJ`~rr~tr/ d~sigty ,~r:rh exisfi~q sfr~rcl`r.~res, ~i~r~' Qs ~o ,'.~~:~<.~.r`iar ~rfh r~sc~cf
fo ~`dp~~raphy a,-~d fii-ris~ rgr~r c~~ ~/c~a~rr`ian . ,/lf~ ,~encP r.~r l~~'// sha/l .6E'
~r~cf~d, ,o%~c~o` or o1~`ereo' ors ary /of cr~~r~r fo crr~y s,~`ye~~ ~hrrfr .fh~
~ri~irr~urn 6ui%d'i~~ s~~`,ba~c,~ /~rre c.,-~lc~ss siir~if~ry ofo~vvr~'~v8d.
} 6. Tfi~ Archi>`ecfrlul Corrfro/ Cor.~rr~ifr`~~, /~'/D .l~'~e.7 ~y,r ,C7r., Lo'h'ea~vor~d,
` Co%r~t'da, sho/! be ~ornoc~s~c~' o f Ca/viii G: 5'~/fA~S, l2! ~~j`f'/mar;
B. 11/u,-~~n fi'cr/r~p. A ~~r~~ri~ o~`'~`f~~ cornrnif~`~~ ~d ay ~~sig,~rr.~'.~,.
er r~~vr~.s~~,~`~iv~ fo acf ;rr`or i~r` Ire r`,~r~' ev~~,~ of d~~~`~ ~r r'~siyr~rrl`ir~n
of ni7y rr~~rrrb~r of fh~' corr~rr~~~`1`~e, ,~`he~ rernra'ii~ii7r~ rr>er..,.,: ~r°,~~ sf~a// ' ~
,~,~rve r`u//~rr~r,~horr y fo d~s~gr~af~ a successor. /Ye~f~i~~r fh~ s7~~'.~,b~rs'
of fh~ ~orr~rrri,?`f~~, rlor 11s a'esiy~-rc~~err r~pr~s~rrrr,~'r~y'~ s~crir ~rrJiir~:<-~ ' ! 6` f ~ d 9 gyp' ~ d°. Ae ad er f ~ + pF~r° A rq { r W.n+6 tm. ~ ,...v ,1
s >`o ~rny carnoei7s~a°fion for s~rvi~es performed purU~rlanr` ,fo~`fri.~ c~av~r~~'rar.` / t~-
t' ! P
7. ~Yo r~ox i ~ ors or ~ff~r~ s~ v~ racri ~rfy shrr// .6e c~orri ~d dry ~,r err ~,~y /o f ~ ~ ~ a ~ ~
/gar .sfia/I rjrry~`19ii~9 6e dory >`tr~r~or~ ,t~v`h~~',~i mrry.6~ e>r rr~ay be:^ ~m~ c~'r~ ~,.:irx..:~rv..:na=.u.,F,+a. :~cs<~.,. ssa~aw .,.a--T~v.~cczc~c. ,s-.ercazx~~ ~a -~zr r-..,.~.,.
Grr~~o~Grr~ce or r,~urs~rnc~ r`o ff~~ rreiyhbr~nc~~~d. /
x c~~ /1/o s~r~rcr`~r~ ~r`'~r ~~rrrr~,vD~y char~rc~er, Pr~xile~r, t.~.. ~`~:~a~~:-:'; f~r~,~` =srr~r~a~. ; ~~r~~~, .~~rr~
or offer ov,~`.~~ri/di~y~ sho//be used n,-~ ony Oof Qr~ r~ ~ r~~ "-.rice ~~:~t~~~r
~`e~rnpor~rr~/y or perrrf~rr~er~f/y.
9. /Uo sr9~ of ~rry !rind .shot/ ,b~ diso/ay~d x`o fh~ pu,6/ic ~r~v~ ~r,~ ~~rly /o~`~xcepf
or~c~ ,ord>`~ssiar~a/ sigma of r~o.~ rraar~ ,~hor~ ~,~e sgrrGrr~ r`daf, ~r~~ sigrr' a y` ~~1`~'ar~
fha~ .5 sq. ~`ee; odverfisirrg ~`he ,arooeryy f r s~*I~ or rer~~; Qr si~r~~s ~rs~v' ,dy fhe
bur/der oy ~t y'e~r/for fo or,~'v~r1`ise ~he,rarvc~ery duri~r~ .ftfs ~'orr~~~vc~'iar~; Q`~rc~`
sa/es p~rfvd.
~.s
_ /fJ. /Uo orjiina/s, /rv~s~`ac.~f; or pauf~r/~ afo~y .~'ii~d shv// ,b~ r~r~.s~d, br'~'c~'~r ,~r'ear`nr,~
ar~y /o,; ~xce~f dys, c~r,~s or'o~`h~r hor~s~hd/o`~oe~`s rna'y .be ,~~,c7~`~ar~~~a<~d fhaf >'fi~
errs nor` jr~pf ,brad ar ma'infaii~~d ~r o~Jy ~'ornrrrerci:~/ purc~c~.se_
~1. X1/0 /of sho/! be used or rr~a~irfa~i~ed Grs ~r ~.r~rnovny~ ground for a =~.`%s~. T~R~f
µ .garbaq~ or ofh~ r ~~rsfB sho/J ~o f be lrepr` ~xeeo~ ire sa~r~i ¢ary cor~fa~~y cr, ~ . A/1
irrcinero~`ors or o~`her equrorr~er>>` for ,r`f~'~' ~`vrayf~ or d~s,~s~r/ of s~rc, ~ ,Pr~a'f~~-ol .:r
sfiv,// ,be dr'epf iii v c%an and s~rry~frrry ~arrdif~~rT.
12. /Yv hedge or s hru,6 ,a/a~fi7y vr~hich a6sfr~crs siyhf lees o,'` e%~~~`~~r~s G~f~~'~'r~
~'ar~d ~"f~eJ` a6oy~ ~i`~~~ ro~dvyays shrr//,~epl~ced or ,c~~rrr~: ~;~`~d fry r~rr~c%r~ o~ vr~y
~orr~er /off` ~r1h~i~ ~`he friar~gr~/ar areo~ r`orrr~ed ,6y fhe sfreEl` prop~r~ ~irTes 4,~d
~r /ine cor~r~ ecfir~y ffiem of ,nvin~s Z..sfee~` f rc~rn r`he irrfersec,~`i orr o~` ~h~ sfreef /r;:
or in fh~ case of rou.~d~d proper, corr~~r from ~`h~ ir~~~''~,sc'cf~ori r~.r`,~` s~`ree,~`
,r~ro oU~:d;~y /rrr~s ezfer~v'ed 7h~' same sighf /irr~ /irlo'fo~`ior~s shy//~rp,~/y /~f
~r~h~:~ /~~e~.~ from fhe in~~rse~fiofa o~`'Gr sfr~~f,orooer,~ ll:~~ r~rffa ,7: ~d~~ df
~r driy~~voy or a//may ~vvern~rrf ~o frees sha0/ be ,nermi~`>ec✓ fd rerr~:~~ ~ v~~fherrsrrch
dsy`ar~c~s ofsrrch >r~r`ers~cfior~s urn/ess .~`~i~ ~`o/icrg~ /ire is rn~rrir~`a.~;~:~d afs~f~`=
icierrf h~ighf to,ar~v~r~f obs~`rucfion of such s~ghf /~r~~,~ . ;r
/3. T.he corr~rni~`fee s crooravo/ or dsrrpr~yayo,~ as r~~~~r~°a'ir;~ ~`h~..~~ -crav~r,7on1s shy//.6~
in ~ri,finy . In fh~ ~v~nf fh~ comrnrffee, pr ifs desrcgnof~d r~pr~.s°enrafi ~ f~ri%$'
rror~.roa-~ or disc~pPrvye t-r~i>hin 30doys rrff~rp/ans arrd sac~cificr~~ior~s be~r~ s~b-
~r~'`feo~.~`o ~f .ter itr ~rny ~ver~~; i;~`'no suif fo ~..:✓vi;~ ~`h~ consfrucr`ior~ hvs .be~r~ S
` cam..-nnr~e.7c~d ,prior fo fhe compl~fi~r~ fh~r~~f, ~ppravd/.~i,~~r;::; `,6e r-^s; i~red ~,~d, ie
r~,~r~~o'' cov~~ar~l`.s sfv//,~~ deerredr`oha~r~ be~rr~fu//y ca~,~t~~'~~~~;~i.
/4. Enfr~rcer~~rff sr5cr/Jbe by ~roceedii~~s a~/a`v ar ire e~~i~`y -Yas~d>_ ~ ~rr~y ~o~rsr~rr
gar p~rsor~s yrasr.~~`ii~rg or o'ff~.~rpfii~~ /o tiro%r~~ o,7y cov~i74r,~f i>i' ~ ~r fo r-~s1`rafrr
/.5.' Invrr/~ ~'nfior~ of ~r~y nne Of .f ~1~' GOY~/7Gll7.fS ,by fvdg,~~rrf or G~our'f nra'~r
k sha,!r ire rro ~rs~ ~rffecr` any of fhe o~`h~r proyrsior~s .r~hich sh~/I re.~~~aii~
fore ar~d er~fecf _
JEF~CO I~J'~'ES~"'I~'.~~TS, I~fC. i
ZONING OEPARTMEPJT t
PLANNING AND ZONING 26TH .._....I 1. AVE. 4917 2/ - h,71W
t` TTEST PRESIDENT SEGRETARY 3. ' b!~le~re e7/7 evs~',~; 171
IF JEFFERSON COUNTY ENGINEER ~'our>s caf /i7e, .~17 c6P' oy'& 5 yro~. r y a
11 XVr17,::XS
'0*'T 4 T OF COLORADO
4 ~ ~ e a 0(-F JEFFERSON a~ r"s F` z I I ' _ I` r ~f r 1' I~ ~ i ~ (V i 1
P
4C- c F ~ r sf q
, f.
+.ua. v~ rvmp yr ~.s ads van m•s rv yro wv ovs ..m ,va i...x..~.e s.. °•H Mi,g
NOTARY y i 4 n s w WON -M
t,ASE LOG
Case No. SDb1
Date
Action Taken
Initials
?
~
to Q
EcCI r2 tr CY 1G S l'6i "
S O
`
l ~A U . L a
S
ca A Ae +6 wse =u
t St G.v\ 1 J- ✓41~~ 5
'L t Os
593 o
ark ov v ed l.e cs se
b 3
Ica, w~te sivK" 'or\
`
S 3
6-~ ev r~,-wAe 4 cow 'nucvv 4z
g
CO 1-7 D
6\6v\ C~\S '✓A G✓TrRnEC bn A4-),,,
lf
v< ' n W. 26 ~
6A cr. 72
~17 01
cfsc ~ "A Z O
LgAk)o -6 yo/
o s4zg C(-Cnr-
Alp
-7 via 6
e i tiff D v\ ri
is r
-7 111 lop-
e c N-S. D rw" Cla~2
(Plame- e
V- W ~S S W@l S S
18 6?,
!~o
r 01,50v\ sw u c v! J~vl
Y25' /0 Z-
Cam i i t d (c,-o,
EE1
Case No.:
PP A0204
! Quarter Section Map No.
App: Last Name:
Ison
Related Cases:
App: First Name:
_ictor
Case History:
Owner: Last Name:
_Jolson
Owner: First Name:
ictor & Sharon
App Address:
P620 Upham St.
Review Body:
City, State Zip:
heat Ridge, CO 80215
App: Phone:
03-238-3114
APN:
Owner Address:
ame
2nd Review Body:
City/State/Zip:
ame
2nd Review Date:
Owner Phone:
same _
I Decision-making Body:
Project Address:
620
Approval/Denial Date:
Street Name:
Upham Street
/State, Zip:
heat Ridge, C080215
Reso/Ordinance No.:
Case Disposition:
Project Planner: Pesicka
File Location: ctive
Notes: r
Follow-Up: _
SE26
11 ft side yard setback
ariance from the required
30 ft side yard setback
hen adjacent to a public
BOA - 5/23/02
9-264-15-019
BOA - 5123102
Conditions of Approval
District: 11
Date Received: 5/6/2002
Pre-App Date:
The City of
7500 WEST 29TH AVENUE
WHEAT RIDGE, CC 80215-6713 (303) 234-5900 GWheat
City Admin. Fax # 234-5924 Police. Dept. Fax # 235-2949 9Ridge
April 17, 2003
Mr. Victor Olson
2620 Upham Street
Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80033
Dear Mr. Olson:
Thank you for your letter dated March 19, 2003. I would like to take this opportunity to respond.
The City of Wheat Ridge Board of Adjustments denied your variance request in July 2002. I do not
have the authority to override any decision made by the Board of Adjustments and a formal appeal
process is set out in the Colorado Revised Statues. As outlined in the Colorado Revised Statutes,
Volume 9, Titles 29-31, "31-23-307 Board of Adjustments", a decision by the Board of Adjustments
may be appealed, in district court, within 30 days of the Board of Adjustments final decision. No
appeal was made in district court regarding your variance application.
According to the Wheat Ridge Municipal Code, Section 2.61 Board of Adjustment, a new hearing
cannot be granted on a previous application unless new evidence is submitted which could not have
been presented at the previous hearing or at least one year has passed since the date of the decision
on the previous application or appeal. Therefore, you would need to wait until August 2003 to
reapply for the variance.
If you would like to reapply for a variance, when eligible, you will need to contact the Community
Development Department at 303-235-2846 to discuss the process.
Sincerely,
G. RAy Young
City Manager
cc: Alan White, Community Development Director
GRY/dkm
co RECYCLED PAPER
March 19,2003 6:17AM
Mayor Cerveny
A
City of Wheat Ridge
(
7500 W. 29thAve
=
Wheat Ridge, Co. 80033
. ~°1
0
Subject Emergency Preparedness
Dear Madam Mayor,
As I write this, we have 27" of Snow at our front porch and our neighbors say that they
have 36" of snow and it is still snowing. My home is in the same general block as the city hall
and I can hear a generator? running somewhere which I would imagine is your emergency
power. Our Power just came on after being off maybe three hours. The house temperature is
about 60 degrees and I am glad that the power is back on. The very unpleasant thought of frozen
plaster and broken plumbing is over for now.
I called Public Service (Xcel) earlier, while in the dark (thank heaven the phone worked)
and they said I should be prepared to have the power off for twenty four hours and I was
frightened Thank heaven that did not happen!
Could I get your help in getting a building permit from the City, for our having
emergency power and supplies as, I am sure, the City Hall has.
What will the neat emergency be? A poisoned or failed water supply? A dirty bomb?
The cities are not prepared and Wheat Ridge will not let me or anyone get prepared.
As I write this the TV is reporting on our preparation to take out, an efficient, rule by
fear, dictator in Iraq, who has been found guilty of Torture, Rape and Murder (I shall call it TRM
for brevity) of innocent people (kills his own people with weapons of mass destruction "Nerve
Gas" and cuts out the tongue of those that might disobey) in that part of the world. This same
current TV program is telling us to be prepared locally, for attacks by undercover Muslim
terrorist people, that the dictator, et al, has generally supported and has secretly placed in our
country.
We do not know who are the friendly Muslims, that have fled a totalitarian (TRM)
government or we do not know who are the terrorists, who are under orders to sabotage, to kill
secretly, all of us that disagree with Saddam Hussein and Bin Ladin. We have large numbers of
people who die every day under mysterious circumstances (unsolved fires, disappearance, crime,
murder & 9/11/01) so who knows how successful they are, or are not.
Attached are various letters about our project, starting in November, 2001.
The neighbors say they want us to build it, it will not be an eye sore, the foundations are
in, it conforms to most uniform building codes and it does not, in reality, impact any city
operation. Only hatred and ignorance stops it.
I would be glad to talk to you about this. Please acknowledge receipt.
Yours truly,
Victor A. Olson
2620 Upham ST. r G
Wheat Ridge, CO 800333
303-238-3114
R R, CF TV -FD
MAR 2 1 2003
BY:
1(2!03
Dear Sir,
Attached are the papers we talked about before Christmas:
If you can think of a way to approach the city with drawings or other action to build the garage, I would like
to try.
If you have looked at the house and slab, it does not look out of balance with the neighborhood Further we
would like to build it, so it appears as part of the original house.
All of our neighbors would like to see it built, instead of as, outside storage. This is, in spite of four certified
mailings, to our neighbors, trying to stir up public objections. That back lash, did not happen, which in this world of
anger, is surprising. Their purpose, in so many mailings, was to deny RV storage.
The planning department (Alan White) out right lied about the building permit on three different documents
although I protested at the first one and they agreed that the permit had been issued. They even reissued the "false
witness" at the denial.!! There has never been an apology and the record still stands.
The contractor testified that he had a similar garage built in Jefferson County, that had the same type design
that our original subdivision has. Our home was in that county, when it was built. Lakewood would also allow it.
I was tricked by the planning department, into spending $600, for a variance, that they knew they would deny
and that is not fair or just.
I am convinced that there is a desire of someone in the city to eliminate RV's in Wheat Ridge. Whomsoever,
do not have RV's; so why should somebody else have one (take away their Freedom). This is a selfish view because
they are becoming more popular, because they make for a better environment, are a positive step for protection, in
emergencies and fulfill the recommendations for homeland secudtty
Besides, Wheat Ridge gets a great deal of taxes from the RV businesses in the community and more people
than I, are upset about the way Wheat Ridge treats it's longtime citizens that are sports. minded
Yours truly,
Victor A. Olson
2620 Upham St.
Wheat Ridge, CO 80033
303-238-3114
:,,sue
ware i"c~otmg~}.
ibis actioa on his fxhalf
Signfture of A4)pli(.ant
i
1
SitWribed and -mom t
-
[
l
`
ivtcl
f DatL ~ cc
r
'ze
4 - ~.ecei t
y
a
comp
atng
kvlilut t ise No
Pr- App Mig, Datti
May 20, 2002
City of Wheat Ridge
Variance Board
Planning Department
7500 West 29th. Avenue
Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80215
Subject: Garage at 2620 Upham St. Variance.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
There is a old public perception that RV's are a Tobacco Road existence and should be avoided
in our residential neighborhoods but the modern RV may cost more than the average home and has a
requisite place in our society. It is a dignified & highly social, fun way to go, if you have not tried it
recently. They come in all sizes from a well equipped motorcycle to a semi truck
There is a need for this in the present day scheme of living that most people are ignorant of
unless you are a veteran RV enthusiast and that is as "a refuge in emergency situations" They
require no fuel when not in use. Mine sets in one place most of the time.
RV's are a perfect emergency vehicle (EV) and are in good supply. More garage space is
needed by most homes because in newer subdivisions they are putting in four car garages plus an RV
garage.
Consider the Emergency Supply Kit recommendations of the US department of Defense for
every household, all items packed and ready to get out of a disaster area on a moments notice i.e. .
Pure Water protected from contamination from your incoming water supply, in storage
containers, dual to one gallon Per person, per day for a two week supply First aid kit. Battery
operated radio. Utility Knife. Matches (in a water proof container). Toilet Paper. Soap.
Personal Hygiene Items. cookware, dishes, cups, tableware (basic mess kit), Blankets or sleeping
bags. Cash for two weeks. Special records & papers. Food for three days at least. Flashlights.
Manual can opener. Pliers. Tape. Extra batteries. Change of clothing. Special needs i.e..
diapers, formula, insulin, prescriptions, medications. For a family of four that would mean 450
pounds of water or 56 gallons plus the weight of other items.
One hundred percent of RV'ers are able to do this if they have their units secured nearby BUT,
Nine six percent of Wheat Ridge would fail at this; if we had poisoned water supply or dirty
bomb or a World Trade Center disaster or a Terrorist caused chemical spill (they go to work for
trucking companies) or a
Some people still consider there is no threat. I hate dealing in negative views but, so that you
might understand why I am doing this, I continue.
Vehicles to escape disasters. Vehicles are needed in a moderately unsafe society. If you might
remember walking before autos became so popular, that there was a higher incidence of street assault,
muggings and Rape by neighborhood ruffians. It is still unsafe to walk in many areas in Denver
especially at night. The car has saved us from that, but we now have a bigger problem facing us from
Terrorists and we need to be ready to move quickly, when a Pentagon type disaster might happen. All
OLSON PROPERTY AT 2620 Upham St Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80033 303-23811114
°govern ents big and small must be thinking about how their people will survive and handle Terrorism.
They should encourage Emergency Supply Kits.
Most of America and Europe is under direct attack by people who have been trained to infiltrate
our borders. Their leaders want to destroy successful nations mainly because they cannot be successful
themselves. Their people see our well organized society and ask why they can't be the same and their
leaders make the excuse that we are corrupt and we must be destroyed. They are doing a pretty good
job of it as demonstrated by Iraq, Iran, Lebanon, Bin Laden and September 11, 2002. Their wealthy
leaders keep their people in abject poverty and uneducated and train their young people to be insane.
They are to kill, destroy our vital structures, our leadership and goods and to die for their leaders
gloriously by going down with the ship or tying dynamite about their waist and setting it off to kill
themselves and the young and the old around them (even their own kind). Death to the infidel at any
price.
Everyone of us are targets of these people, having been driven to insanity beginning at four years
old, by their shrewd leaders and there are thousands of them in our country . They are trained to blend
into the local society and only be activated by their leaders on command. Yes, it has been proven that
you can drive children crazy with propaganda at a early age and produce them as dangerous, immoral,
self destructive and killers, all of their life. Hitler, Stalin, Mao Tse-tung and Rasputin did this with
children even to the killing of their own parents. They are trained to get work at our most sensitive
industries.
Most of their actions go undetected, ranging from sabotaging of planes, train derailing, forest
fires (Pine / Bailey area?), home fires, what appears to be natural deaths of our citizens, boiler
explosions, spraying of toxins, driving fuel tankers into our water supplies and more.
Some people have a second home to cover emergencies but when you consider the maintenance,
security, utilities and year round heating fuel expense it is better for the nation to use (EV's) RV's
instead
I draw your attention to a article, "The Unthinkable", in the February 2002 Readers Digest (copy
attached) that every intelligent patriot should read and take personal steps to protect the family and
neighbors.
The answer to all this is involvement and education around the world but for now we need to be
prepared.
I really want a garage for my RV, as I have said before. It will not be a eyesore and precedents
are around, for the set backs asked for. I pray for your favorable variance vote.
Yours truly,
Victor A. Olson
2620 Upham St.
Wheat Ridge, CO 80215 303-238 3114
Variance Date: May 1, 2002
Project: Home addition.
Project Location: 2620 Upham St. Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80215
Owners: Victor A &/or Sharon D. Olson
OLSON PROPERTY AT 2620 Upham St. Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80033 303-238-4114
second mailing
March 19,2003 6:17AM
Mr Alan C. White, Planning
City of Wheat Ridge
7500 W. 29thAve
Wheat Ridge, Co. 80033
Subject Emergency Preparedness
RECEWED
APP 44 2003
Dear Sir,
As I write this, we have 27" of Snow at our front porch and our neighbors say that they
have 36" of snow and it is still snowing. My home is in the same general block as the city hall
and I can hear a generator? running somewhere which I would imagine is your emergency
power. Our Power just came on after being off maybe three hours. The house temperature is
about 60 degrees and I am glad that the power is back on. The very unpleasant thought of frozen
plaster and broken plumbing is over for now.
1 called Public Service (Xcel) earlier, while in the dark (thank heaven the phone worked)
and they said I should be prepared to have the power off for twenty four hours and I was
frightened. Thank heaven that did not happen!
Could I get your help in getting a building permit from the City, for our having
emergency power and supplies as, I am sure, the City Hall has.
What will the next emergency be? A poisoned or failed water supply? A dirty bomb?
The cities are not prepared and Wheat Ridge will not let me or anyone get prepared.
As I write this the TV is reporting on our preparation to take out, an efficient, rule by
fear, dictator in Iraq, who has been found guilty of Torture, Rape and Murder (I shall call it TRM
for brevity) of innocent people (kills his own people with weapons of mass destruction "Nerve
Gas" and cuts out the tongue of those that might disobey) in that part of the world. This same
current TV program is telling us to be prepared locally, for attacks by undercover Muslim
terrorist people, that the dictator, et al, has generally supported and has secretly placed in our
country.
We do not know who are the friendly Muslims, that have fled a totalitarian (TRM)
government or we do not know who are the terrorists, who are under orders to sabotage, to kill
secretly, all of us that disagree with Saddam Hussein and Bin Ladin. We have large numbers of
people who die every day under mysterious circumstances (unsolved fires, disappearance, crime,
murder & 9/11/01) so who knows how successful they are, or are not.
Attached are various letters about our project, starting in November, 2001.
The neighbors say they want us to build it, it will not be an eye sore, the foundations are
in, it conforms to most uniform building codes and it does not, in reality, impact any city
operation. Only hatred and ignorance stops it.
I would be glad to talk to you about this.
Yours truly,
Victor A. Olson °
2620 Upham ST.
Wheat Ridge, CO 800333
303-238-3114