Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutWA-02-097500 West 29th Avenue The City of Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80033 Wheat Telephone 303/235-2846 Ridge FAX 303/235-2857 October 3, 2002 Connie Gibson 3850 Urban St. Wheat Ridge, CO 80033 Dear Ms. Gibson: RE: Case No. WA-02-09 Please be advised that at its meeting on September 26, 2002, the Board of Adjustment DENIED your request for a 7 '/2 foot rear yard setback variance from the required 10 foot building setback for a deck or patio resulting in a 2 '/2 foot rear yard setback as well as DENIED your request for a 9 foot 2 inch side yard setback variance from the required 10 foot building setback for a deck or patio resulting in a 10 inch side yard setback to allow for an existing deck and patio on property zoned Residential-One (R-1) and located at 3850 Urban Street. Enclosed is a copy of the Certificate of Resolution, 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. Unless we are notified that an appeal has been filed with Jefferson County, the deck must be removed within 30 days of the date of this letter. Failure to do so may result in code enforcement action. Please feel free to contact me at (303) 235-2846 if you have any questions. Sincerely, Kathy Field Administrative Assistant Enclosures: Certificate of Resolution Draft of Minutes cc: WA-02-09 (case file) CADoeuments and Setfings\kadtyAMy Documents\Kathy\BOA\CORRESP\2002\wa0209denial.wpd 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 26`h day of September, 2002. CASE NO. WA-02-09 APPLICANT'S NAME: Connie Gibson LOCATION: 3850 Urban Street Upon a motion by Board Member ABBOTT and second by Board Member DRDA, the following resolution was stated: WHEREAS, the applicant was denied permission by an administrative officer; and WHEREAS, Board of Adjustment Application Case No. WA-02-09 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 no protests were 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-02-09 be, and hereby is, DENIED. TYPE OF VARIANCE: Request for approval of a 9-foot 2-inch side yard setback variance resulting in a 10-inch side yard setback. This request also includes approval of a 7-foot 6-inch rear yard setback variance resulting in a 2-foot 6-inch rear yard setback. FOR TnZ FOLLOWING REASONS: The structure, as it occurs, substantially impairs the intent and purpose of the regulations governing the city. 2. If the request is denied, the property may still receive a reasonable return in use. The property is currently utilized as a single-family residence and its use may continue. 3. The deck could be relocated or reconfigured while meeting required setbacks. 4. The request would not result in a contribution or benefit to the neighborhood and would solely be an enhancement for the property owners. The persons having interest in the property have created the hardship possibly through the errors and omissions of their contractor. Board of Adjustment Resolution WA-02-09 Page two (2) VOTE: YES: ABBOTT, BLAIR, DRDA, ECHELMEYFR, HOVLAND, HOWARD, MONTOYA, and YOUNG NO: None DISPOSITION: A request for approval of a 9-foot 2-inch side yard setback variance resulting in a 10-inch side yard setback This request also includes approval of a 7-foot 6-inch rear yard setback variance resulting in a 2-foot 6-inch rear yard setback was DENIED. ADOPTED and made effective this 26a` day of Sentember, 2002. 7 Ann Lazzeri ecretary Board of Adjustment Whereas, Board of Adjustment Application Case No. WA-02-08(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 protests registered against a portion of this application; and Whereas, the relief applied for MAY be granted without detriment to the public welfare and without substantially impairing the intent and purpose of the regulations governing the City of Wheat Ridge. Now, therefore, be it resolved that Board of Adjustment Application Case No. WA- 02-08(B) be, and hereby is, APPROVED. Type of Variance: A request for a 6-foot variance from the required 30-foot setback from the intersection of two right-of-way lines of Lamar Street. For the following reasons: Approval of this request would not alter the essential character of the locality in that at this location the home is approximately 60 feet back from 39th Avenue which is the apparent frontage. The motion passed 7-1 with Board Member HOWARD voting no. Chair MONTOYA advised the applicant that part B of his variance request had been approved. B. Case No. WA-02-09: An application filed by Connie Gibson for approval of (A) This case was introduced by Travis Crane. 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. Variance criteria for both requests were reviewed. Staff recommended denial of the application as outlined in the staff report. a 7Y2 -foot rear yard setback variance from the required 10-foot building setback for a deck or patio resulting in a 2 %z-foot rear yard setback and (B) approval or a 9-foot 2-inch side yard setback variance from the required 10-foot building setback for a deck or patio resulting in a 10-inch side yard setback to allow for an existing deck and patio on property zoned Residential-One (R-1) and located at 3850 Urban Street. Board of Adjustment Page 5 09/26/02 Connie Gibson 3850 Urban Ms. Gibson, the applicant, was sworn in by Chair MONTOYA. She testified that when she hired the contractor to build the deck she assumed he obtained a permit. In answer to a previous question from Board Member ECHELMEYER regarding the city's knowledge of the violation, she stated she assumed it was her next door neighbor who called the city. Board Member ABBOTT asked who is responsible for pulling permits. Travis Crane replied that the normal procedure is for the contractor to come in and obtain the permit. In response to a question from Board Member MONTOYA, Mr. Crane stated that no permits were ever issued for the fence or the deck. The contractor did apply for a permit on July 12, 2002, but a permit was never approved. In response to a question from Board Member HOWARD, Mr. Crane replied that a stop work order was issued on June 27, 2002. Mike Black 3850 Urban Mr. Black was sworn in by Chair MONTOYA. He testified that when the stop work order was issued, the contractor told the applicant that he was going down to the city to get a permit. He told the applicant that he did obtain a permit and he proceeded to finish the deck. He stated that he and Ms. Gibson took the contractor at his word and explained that they did not intentionally violate the permit procedure. In reply to questions from the Board, Mr. Crane explained that a denial of the variance request would require replacement of the deck to conform to proper setbacks. Waltrout Klaus 3830 Urban Ms. Klaus was sworn in by Chair MONTOYA. She stated she had no problem with the deck but expressed concern about storm water drainage problems between her property and the applicant's property. She testified that the problem existed before the applicant's deck was installed although the concrete posts may be adding to the problem. In response to questions from the Board, Mr. Crane explained that the city is not responsible to resolve drainage issues between private properties. This would have to be resolved with all property owners involved. Connie Gibson returned to the podium. She testified that grading between the properties was not altered when the deck was installed. She also stated they cut a hole in the fence to allow unobstructed drainage. Board of Adjustment Page 6 09/26/02 Mike Black returned to the podium. He also testified that the grading had not been changed but stated they would be willing to install a French drain or whatever is needed to alleviate the drainage issues. Board Member YOUNG asked if the hot tub could be relocated. Mr. Black stated that the deck was designed to hold the weight of the hot tub in its present location. If the hot tub were to be moved, they would have to test the deck to see if it would hold the weight. Upon a motion by Board Member ABBOTT and second by Board Member DRDA, the following resolution was stated: Whereas, the applicant was denied permission by an administrative officer; and Whereas, Board of Adjustment Application Case No. WA-02-09 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 no protests were registered against it; 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- 02-09 be, and hereby is, DENIED. Type of Variance: Request for approval of a 9-foot 2-inch side yard setback variance resulting in a 10-inch side yard setback. This request also includes approval of a 7-foot 6-inch rear yard setback variance resulting in a 2-foot 6-inch rear yard setback. For the following reasons: 1. The structure, as it occurs, substantially impairs the intent and purpose of the regulations governing the city. 2. If the request is denied, the property may still receive a reasonable return in use. The property is currently utilized as a single-family residence and its use may continue. 3. The deck could be relocated or reconfigured while meeting required setbacks. 4. The request would not result in a contribution or benefit to the neighborhood and would solely be an enhancement for the property owners. 5. The persons having interest in the property have created the hardship possibly through the errors and omissions of their contractor. Board of Adjustment Page 7 09/26/02 In response to a question from the Board, Mr. Crane stated that it was acceptable to deny both portions of the variance request under one motion. The motion passed 8-0. Chair MONTOYA advised the applicant that the request for a variance had been denied. The applicant inquired about an appeal process. Chair MONTOYA advised the applicant that an appeal may be made through district court within 30 days. Travis Crane advised the applicant that he would send a letter to the applicant explaining the appeal process. C. Case No. WA-02-10: An application filed by John Daus for approval of (A) a 10- foot side yard setback variance from the required 15-foot side yard setback resulting in a 5-foot side yard setback and approval of (B) a 1-foot front yard setback variance from the required 30-foot front yard setback resulting in a 29- foot front yard setback for the purpose of adding two additional dwelling units to an existing single-family residential structure on property zoned Residential- Three (R-3) and located at 5831 West 29 h Avenue. 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. Variance criteria for both requests were reviewed. Staff recommended denial of the application as outlined in the staff report. He entered a letter of opposition into the record which was received the morning of the hearing from a resident at 2885 Gray Street. Board Member DRDA expressed concern that ingress/egress for two additional dwelling units could add to traffic congestion on 29a'. John Daus 5831 West 29th Avenue Mr. Daus, the applicant, was sworn in by Chair MONTOYA. He referred to the staff report that said the rear easement was granted to him by the Denver Water Board. He explained that he granted the easement to the Denver Water Board. This ten-foot easement is actually a hill and is unusable and he asked that this be taken into consideration. He questioned the request for four (instead of two) parking spaces for the existing home. He understood that there would only be a necessity for six parking spaces and four required spaces for the house would bring the total to eight. He noted that there are other multi-family units in the neighborhood and there is only one home that was built in 1909. He stated that his plans are in keeping with the character of the neighborhood. He is requesting the additional ten feet on the side yard to build a third garage so there would be a garage for each unit. Board of Adjustment Page 8 09/26/02 approval ofa 7'A foot rear yard setback variance a 2 % foot rear yard setback. Also, an additional approval of a 9 foot 2 inch side yard setback ulting in a 10 inch side yard setback. Board of Adjustment Thursday, September 26, 2002 r u ~ a 0 e ~ ( ; jt ~ Y iU ~ 4+, 3 i rr From Urban Street looking to the east Variance Criteria of the locality? of property result in a unique been created by anyone having i the property? ag of the variance detrimental to the welfare? of the variance result in benefit to 2 PUBLIC HEARING ROSTER CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT SEPTMBER 26, 2002 Case No. WA-02-09: An application filed by Connie Gibson for approval of a 7 '/2 foot rear yard setback variance from the required 10 foot building setback for a deck or patio resulting in a 2 '/2 foot rear yard setback and approval of a 9 foot 2 inch side .yard setback variance from the required 10 foot building setback for a deck or patio resulting in a 10 inch side yard setback to allow for an existing deck and patio on property zoned Residential-One (R-1) and located at 3850 Urban Street. (Please print) Name Address In Favor/Opposed c ~+A a l o CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE PLANNING DIVISION STAFF REPORT TO: Board of Adjustment DATE OF MEETING: September 26, 2002 DATE PREPARED: CASE NO. & NAME: WA-02-09/Gibson CASE MANAGER: Travis Crane September 13, 2002 ACTION REQUESTED: Approval of a 9 foot 2 inch side yard setback variance, resulting in a 10- inch side yard setback. This request also includes an approval of a 7 foot 6 inch rear yard setback variance, resulting in a 2 foot 6 inch rear yard setback. LOCATION OF REQUEST: 3850 Urban Street NAME & ADDRESS OF APPLICANT (S): Connie Gibson 3850 Urban Street Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80033 NAME & ADDRESS OF OWNER (S): same APPOXIMATE AREA: 14,953 square feet (.34 Acres) PRESENT ZONING: R-1 (Residential One) PRESENT LAND USE: Single Family SURROUNDING ZONING: N, S, E &W: Residential One SURROUNDING LAND USE: N, S, E &W: Single-Family DATE PUBLISHED: September 9, 2002 DATE POSTED: September 12, 2002 DATE LEGAL NOTICES SENT: September 9, 2002 ENTER INTO THE RECORD: (X) CASE FILE & PACKET MATERIALS (X) ZONING ORDINANCE ( ) SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS (X) EXHIBITS (X) OTHER JURISDICTION: The property is within the City of Wheat Ridge, and all notification and posting requirements have been met, therefore, there is jurisdiction to hear this case. Board of Adjustment WA-02-09/Gibson I. REQUEST The property in question is located at 3850 Urban Street, and is currently a single-family residence. The property is zoned Residential One (Exhibit 1, Zoning Map). The applicant (owner), Connie Gibson (Exhibit 2, Deed), is requesting two separate variances: variance "A" is a request for approval of a 7 foot 6 inch rear yard setback variance. Variance "B" is a request for a 9 foot 2 inch side yard setback (Exhibit 3, Application). Each request will require a separate motion. if. SITE PLAN The applicant is requesting these two variances to bring an existing deck into conformance. The deck was recently constructed without first obtaining a building permit. The applicant has submitted a site plan that depicts the location of the existing deck (Exhibit 4, Improvement Location Certificate). Section 26-611 of the Code of Laws states that unenclosed porches, patios and decks may encroach a maximum of one-third the distance into the required setbacks. This property is zoned R-1, which requires a fifteen foot rear and side yard setback. Given Section 26- 611, a newly constructed deck would be permitted to encroach into both the rear and side yard setbacks a maximum of five feet, resulting in a ten-foot rear and side yard setback. A ten-foot rear and five-foot side yard utility easement exists in the location of the deck. The deck is currently encroaching into both of these utility easements. Xcel Energy, Consolidated Mutual Water and Qwest Communications were all notified, and all entities approved of the location of the existing deck. They did state that the easements were still valid, and that the property owner will assume all responsibility for the deck should they require access to the easement. III. VARIANCE CRITERIA Since the requests are similar, both request "A" and "B" are addressed with the following criteria. However, each request will require separate discussion and a separate motion. Staff has the following comments regarding the criteria used to evaluate a variance request: 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 requests are denied, the property may still receive a reasonable return in use. The property is currently utilized as a single-family residence, and this use may continue. 2. If the variance were granted, would it alter the essential character of the locality? The granting of these requests could potentially impact the essential character of the locality. The required rear and side yard setbacks in the R-1 zone district are 15 feet. These two variance requests would reduce the rear yard setback to 2 feet 6 inches, and the side yard setback would be reduced to 10 inches. Board of Adjustment WA-02-09/Gibson 3. Does the particular physical surrounding, shape or topographical condition of the specific property involved result in a particular and unique hardship (upon the owner) as distinguished from a mere inconvenience if the strict letter of the regulations were carried out? The lot does not have a unique shape. It is a typical cul-de-sac lot, and is relatively flat. At almost 15,000 square feet in size, the lot far exceeds the minimum lot size requirement in the R-1 zone district. The deck could be relocated or reconfigured while meeting required setbacks. 4. Has the alleged difficulty or hardship been created by any person presently having an interest in the property? The applicant, who has sole interest in the property, has created a self-imposed hardship by constructing the deck without a valid building permit. City building inspectors visited the site on June 27, 2002 and issued a `stop-work' order. At this time, the deck was partially built. The applicant continued to construct the deck after the stop-work order had been issued. 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? The requests would not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other properties in the area. The adequate supply of light and air would not be compromised as a result of these requests. The requests would not increase congestion in the streets, nor increase the danger of fire. The requests would most likely not have an effect on property values in the neighborhood. 6. If criteria 1 through 5 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 requests would not result in a contribution or benefit to the neighborhood, and would merely be a convenience for the property owners. The requests would not result in a reasonable accommodation of a person with disabilities. Board of Adjustment WA-02-09/Gibson IV. STAFF CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Upon review of the above requests, staff concludes that the above criteria are not supportive of the variance requests. Staff has found that there are not unique circumstances attributed to these requests that would warrant approval of a variance. Therefore, staff recommends DENIAL for the following reasons: 1. Approval of the requests could potentially alter the essential character of the locality. 2. A person having interest in the property has created the hardship. 3. The requests would not result in a benefit or contribution for the neighborhood. NOTE: If the requests are approved, a condition should be placed which restricts the deck from having any walls or a ceiling. Board of Adjustment WA-02-09/Gibson 9ZMN g CY) N W 8 Z ° Q z Q 0 Q Z O fSELL ktm..W p w Q 0 w a- p JO -'f' . 9LELL M VJ J O Q SPYL • OZ W wx safe ,sett MCC owzL sse CEOZL LLI w szret . • i. N w ~ F 0 OIfi14 ,1 Z Q w Q w ° a I m1 a~ 3 p EW4 fMRL E ~ ~ , it mmn pEy4 ' KL2 Z q 4 r setz4 eruL ~ ' 9M1 K F ts4zi z PKL se1zL'J ' se4zL z W aan ~ orizL s¢+ ' , .¢a ,'ti Le4¢4 BLt2t ~ '4 ' ' 522zC O[ZLL CI le Y~ A ~ • M1 fWZ4 O- ~ # ~ ~ • • ~a4 / R V ~ sEK sL ~ I$ ~ h +p' 6 ~ L O A feEZt ~ LLZ=J saEZ eAZL. ~ ` e resf aLt otre EEL£ rare oAE aAE e1EE wff oAE o¢E osxE oue r O O ~ ` , flK STIE SAE $RE SLEf SXf SISE YdE 55LE lt2f I 6ZMN a N a Z w w o °o Z w ~ E d~ w ~ o d'. o a J 1~ O ti U O 7 + .N O W ~ G W ~ J a U _oz 4 v N COL 3) G W r~ z G 'w ti 2 /J v o O W A o Z O W J o NLL Q o IL N wo LLNCU iJ ~ w ~ ¢ w G W (ll4 L Y a ^W ICI H N~ W Q N x W 7 J 3 A xF c O N '6 ro ~ ~rG 10 F. ~U 0 U G V C 16 O 1, L) .rl G N (,10 rl O FU L J ro < U U c al H ^ ~ N w C O c x C C - O r) 3 - - ro N J v u n - ro u o V S Y _ S o 2 N N ii F ,O C O O N tt'. w N w rr N L - 7 1• Q CI I X H I I O Cl . = _ U) ~ v O ~ I o = tr] I o - _ C I - _ - 5 I tP = - m 1 h S J W I y I - - 4 L H I Q' 5 = - 1n I _ - n I - I I I r = - - - _ I r 1 - J 1 - I I J i I I _ - o - 1 1 175 r I = - N U 1 w rl = I 1 _ ~ w O 1 1 = - IU U I I L - W = I I - .S w O o - C - 1 1 ~ = G N I I L O 7 Q I _ _ IQ m z l - _ _ a h _ O w J ' I - - 11 N O r G 1 - - _ 7 0 6 G O o J o - _ - o - o S (J I v, CJ .ti 0 3 o D N x ro .Q s, - ro U O Q C V~ r~ J L -cz L'1 - - . 72 ~ 7 J _ _ S ' ~ J ,J _J r- U 3 000? L z~3 333 AaIVIN O ooa 31vis z O 0) O W o W a h Ql 1 'r Z ✓ J N lJ p U G Y N s 3 e-I O z l G w .-I p o O L 1J N - C .ti r+ m U F Z rt W a ro i} 0 r Q• r1 a sa 3 N U H u 3 S F O - X m ~ - r v - G CL - - _ y Vl U r 3 i 3 G n d O i' LAND USE CASE PROCESSING APPLICATION oEw"E"T,~ Planning and Development Department _ m 29 Avenue, Wheat Ridge, CO 80033 00 (i6k 3 Phone (303) 235-2846 ~~LORA00 HIBIT (Please print or type all information) Applicant Ceo>OJ E- C;t3 cD0 Address 393x© uPg4~,xJ sT_ Phone-42b_s) 466l2 City V~7 µG~rt~eoC~E State cc> Zip Fax (-'ez) Owner COtNNtz~~>J Address 39Sa ye-gjt2'0 s1' Phone42s -4666 City ;~cE?~tjc~c State C-® Zip Fax_ Contact Dt~v tz~> C-yp GF Address 7114- W, yq v~ Phone 9E3-t -07L3- City Wu~c 2t4t~c State c b Zip Fax 9~0-54,,n3 (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): 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 XVariance/Waiver (from Section ) ❑ Zoning Ordinance Amendment Other: t 4l Detailed description of request: Vli RE~Se "Zr--`P' 97h-.6i; Slb 6 yf-~ 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 owners must s mit power-of-attomey from the owner which approved of this action on his behalf. Signature ofApplic nt ' Subscribed and orn to me this day of 200 Notary Public My commission expires/2y I v' ~ I I a0 Date received o 0 2 Fee $ CVO' Receipt No. 1371<1 Case No. 1A14:-0V,--Q2 Comp Plan Desig. Zoning Quarter Section Map a~'&o20 Related Case No. Pre-App Mtg. Date Case Manager GI2~>I/G ZA W Ofo rn0 61 J z H D~ C~cl c O W to N y 00 00 C_CN~ Fs y2D 6com Dw ~y oc w 'D o U N O o to a o U cn D L U W O, ~ I m N n o a c J E'! „ iN]N3SH3 ),iain o L - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1 ^ JI ~ i \ N ,B'sB ' I F- N N Li r~ cnI 0'll 'q 0'SZ 09 ^ _9 ,o s .o e ~I U O. Z.~ i Jr- W- i m 0t i~ L o-z ~ ~ ~p•s ,o~B _ I j b+d_ V ,oz = „l 31vos - N /PL M 0 o ~ ,e'sz I i ~ i O I M----- ------i iN3W3SH3 I ;.Li-ilin o L ssZI LO, 9 N it ' a u Q' i n° o U O c U a W ~o o O EJ g € 0 CV F s o o ..m. ~ S~Sg$ cg ~i Ow o N-.Z N iDO~o CE e R CJ d V9 SECOV c r-. W 9~ n° S. oF Eo_~ . LLJ Yq s g $ E U~ W Z I;g ~e o D ~E3 =s E WU o d Ld $ `o-E' 211'5 ~~o q aops~ o ti ~ °esa~ g° o~ i W Sp ts E°i ~ r = o 8 EB ~ V~M 3 9i~g~n `C° , Est€° o ti r H ~e~ `sg ELB s ~E E E ° o I g£ a- L 5 ui D 2 92t ' $i le 4 i o ; E = o t u m u € p ' ~ ~ K a a f i a y C ~ nl d ~ d C W y ~ V d a l ° rc ~ ~ a 'm d u d a 1' o y m z ~ al LL' C a ~ `o ` o y m ~ w c ~ ' ' y ° E 8 a y V. t o y E w c y ,0 _ r D - y y ¢ Q Q Q Q ¢ Q a+ U 6 Q 0 N IL . M M V t7 M O ~ oM] M M y M O c O m O ' y O N N O ' O O a O W W c y d y r' ON Y t: f0 yU N ar - 0 yr' W U a N o S N Cr O W yN a 0 W ~n O C~+ TA y 0 N ~ y y OHO LL U O 000 0 ,0 U j ~0 NaU ym c wc0 O yU c (7 U ~ 0 c ~ yU y a a Qj (D aj rn x pro rn ~ja ❑ JaaoU co ~rn n Yarn morn y ~~rn V W D Q ~~OD vr9 CO.~ CM9 Y c ry yO,v_ .C O.q ~a:R Zu :2 y~ _ m y y W - Y 0w M C a IL O~ M aG TC y 0~ M c ~p~ M O~ M 9 Dm~ M R -O ¢ D- ` M y a. R d y N y Y y U y y y D y y a >L L y L f0 L L a t C N N N K U y Q ~ ~m0~ vr 6 C i E W Kt m ❑ ❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ 2 m O O ~ m N m M m V m ~O ~ t0 m y u n m n m m a^D ro ~ m m ~ Cl) M ` o 0 0 0 0 0 0 M 0 W C lZk Q v ° a v ° a °v ~ o e rn rn v rn- rn rn rn OD rn m m m a rn rn °m am rn rn m °m M M M {JJ V ' M ° M ° M ° M M ° M ° M ° I- z m o m w m o n m n w w Q W p n n w SF-p j ? < K z o a c I } o W z a j V n ~I d w~ m ! a tG V ~ y c d u u 2! M E z ? di K c I I K it K N IS w ' N o vEo a U w U L O N o 'o c 0 mft~ N X A N O N Q m ~ ~ U u 0 O o is a c c n ° 0 O m O m U) d d N ` N N 9 fq a D m Q O L m a cc N w M m 'a d 'O m 2 v 3 N a ~ o C rn~U E°'uNi o N N O d S a U U LL y m E m r m m U O M W O C a m ov co `m rn W O E ~ z o aaw o w=0 Fn 0 O3~ Q Q Z a O W z U n ~ a 7500 West 29th Avenue The City of Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80033 Wheat Ridge Telephone 303/235-2846 FAX 303/235-2857 September 12, 2002 Dear Property Owner: This is to inform you of Case No. WA-02-09 which is a request for approval of a 7 t/2 foot rear yard setback variance from the required 10 foot building setback for a deck or patio resulting in a 2 '/2 foot rear yard setback and approval of a 9 foot 2 inch side yard setback variance from the required 10 foot building setback for a deck or patio resulting in a 10 inch side yard setback to allow for an existing deck and patio on property zoned Residential-One (R-1) and located at 3850 Urban Street. The case will heard by the Wheat Ridge Board of Adjustment in the Council Chambers of the Municipal Complex at 7500 West 29th Avenue on September 26, 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. CADocuments and Settings\kathyAMy Documents\Kathy\BOA\pubnotice\2002\wa0209.wpd 3~~ V,/,{--o a--p MetroScan / Jefferson (CO) " Owner :Foos Kathy A Parcel :173449 Site :3825 Urban St Wheat Ridge 80033 Xfered :03/04/1997 Mail :3825 Urban St Wheat Ridge Co 80033 Price :$300,000 Full Use :1112 Res,Improved Land Phone Bedrm: 4 Bath:3.00 TotRm: YB:1989 Pool: B1dgSF:4,366 Ac: : MetroScan / Jefferson (CO) • Owner :Orsat ti Robert P Parcel :424681 Site :3821 Union Ct Wheat Ridge 80033 Xfered :07/19/1999 Mail :3821 Union Ct Wheat Ridge Co 80033 Price :$427,900 Use :1112 Res,Improved Land Phone Bedrm: 3 Bath:2.50 TotRm: YB:1999 Pool: B1dgSF:3,350 Ac: .28 • MetroScan / Jefferson (CO) • Owner :Vohos ka Vernon D Parcel :424682 Site :3837 Union Ct Wheat Ridge 80033 Xfered :04/12/2000 Mail :PO Bo x 437 Wheat Ridge Co 80034 Price :$390,000 Use :1112 Res,Improved Land Phone :303-423-4616 Bedrm: 2 Bath:2.25 TotRm: YB:2000 Pool: B1dgSF:2,588 Ac: .28 • MetroScan / Jefferson (CO) • Owner :Solis Frank Q Parcel :424683 Site :3853 Union Ct Wheat Ridge 80033 Xfered :03/03/1999 Mail :3853 Union Ct Wheat Ridge Co 80033 Price :$454,000 Full Use :1112 Res,Improved Land Phone Bedrm: 3 Bath:3.00 TotRm: YB:1998 Pool: B1dgSF:3,527 Ac: .28 MetroScan / Jefferson (CO) • Owner :Lepri no Mike Parcel :424684 Site :3869 Union Ct Wheat Ridge 80033 Xfered :12/29/1999 Mail :1660 Wynkoop St #1150 Denver Co 80202 Price Use :1112 Res,Improved Land Phone :303-715-0002 Bedrm: 4 Bath:3.75 TotRm: YB:2000 Pool: B1dgSF:3,630 Ac: .29 • MetroScan / Jefferson (CO) • Owner :Boett ner Klaus R Parcel :427115 Site :3830 Urban St Wheat Ridge 80033 Xfered :11/29/2001 Mail :3830 Urban St Wheat Ridge Co 80033 Price :$577,680 Full Use :1112 Res,Improved Land Phone Bedrm:4 Bath:3.00 TotRm: YB:2002 Pool: B1dgSF:2,580 Ac: .34 MetroScan / Jefferson (CO) • Owner :Gibson Connie K Parcel :427116 Site :3850 Urban St Wheat Ridge 80033 Xfered :12/27/2000 Mail :3850 Urban St Wheat Ridge Co 80033 Price :$560,000 Full' Use :1112 Res,Improved Land Phone Bedrm: 4 Bath:2.50 TotRm: YB:2000 Pool: B1dgSF:3,011 Ac: .34 MetroScan / Jefferson (CO) • Owner :Rice Wallace Parcel :427117 Site :3880 Urban St Wheat Ridge 80033 Xfered :10/28/1997 Mail :3880 Urban St Wheat Ridge Cc 80033 Price . Use :1112 Res,Improved Land Phone Bedrm: 5 Bath:3.00 TotRm: YB:2000 Pool: B1dgSF:2,563 Ac: .34 MetroScan / Jefferson (CO) • owner :Mcreynolds Robert N Parcel :427118 Site :3885 Urban St Wheat Ridge 80033 Xfered :04/05/2002 Mail :3885 Urban St Wheat Ridge Co 80033 Price :$111501000 Use :1112 Res,Improved Land Phone Bedrm: 5 Bath:2.75 TotRm: YB:2001 Pool: B1dgSF:3,282 Ac: .54 * • MetroScan / Jefferson (CO) • Owner :Rice Ralph S Parcel :427119 Site :3855 Urban St Wheat Ridge 80033 Xfered :03/30/1998 Mail :3855 Urban St Wheat Ridge Co 80033 Price :$273,250 Full Use :1112 Res,Improved Land Phone Bedrm: 4 Bath:2.25 TotRm: YB:1974 Pool: B1d gSF:2,858 Ac: .47 information compiled from various sources. Real Estate Solutions makes no representations or warranties as to the accuracy or completeness of information contained in this report. I 164 45 'vs gg2 • P I 3 S O 26 03 I S b ~ S P 'e3. P^ 6 014 7 02a 003 2 0 NPROSPECT. - m MOORE MINO SUB w N ~ 298.00 m N G ~ ,4 5 022 115.28 0 N 023 -o < © 182.3 03 12400 5 C R I - 015 E w" Q ✓ Pb' (1-~ m 5 PT. OF a OIB % 8 vq 8V g m 011 m SCHOOL DISTRICT R-1 020 v 5' ,I wa ± ~ m po 016 11600 LANE APPLETREE 2 us.ee 8 10 c m a 6 -c 3 N m m _ 010 2 - O 021 - O 018 "1 m 0 O©017 c sa' O 39 291-13-001 3 IIX - Adjoining 39-291 Adjoining 39-204 6 39-204-03-021 39-204-03-018 ' 116.17 pL 8 OF II Y 1 3s ' P OF 2 2 $ ro o_ 001 2 a D07 - 004 V c~ • IRE IOR POOLE n9.22 PROSPECT l RIDGE SU " A PLETREE OQI o I 0 12 e 13 1 ' - LANE Sore m 005 002 R - I - g 002 + I AI A N ® 03 0265 8~ 7 SUB N 03 l0, sd - p 13 2 I$ 1 i t N? 14 25 115. 5 2 , » ~ I ~ * 002 87, 035 Q 87.45 21 m = _ • ~ " • 22 ®23 G 0 015 co 1I 2.3. 4 .10' 51.50 1232 83. r 014 _ - 2 9 6 353.96 013 - 83` 034 m 043 $ 0~4 m 86.s7 1 0 044 ' - - 9 121s7 so 19 20 1 ~ 45 IB 017 016 a _ 3 m 033 ~~s 3s a~ APEL 1 - 018 6 V a ! O o_ 045 NI 25' 25' 92. ® . ay Rs 45' N 4 032 109.75' _ ^ C 91.58 W. 37 PL m 11 g _ 103 m 17 Ys~ 85 8 N 046 003 a 019 69.40 15 c 5 m 10 _ 16 LE A P 021 00D = 2 031 12 Z VD C O 8 047 ' 12 50 BS' 023 13 N 14 6 12 ar I$ A o m 030 m$ 13 co C m 024 022 zs' n 112 ' 048 m ® h pb. 0 7 „ _ _ _ ^ 029 $ 1O o4s H m co m 3 sr W. 36th PI' S pz`~ m 11 I I 1 9 8 222 004 e 89• 025 8 15 026 10 _ 027 _ 028 v 8 050 N O CO g ® 1 5 ' 53 132.85 65.38 21 25 125 M/L ' 109.7 25' 25 e 34 . 12 156.5 TRACT C 153.36 12 4 5 006 37 65-50 13 009 36 1 051 ® ~ RACT A J 0 TRACT B 001 ' 42 ' 46. ❑9 ' a S • 120.34 ' M - P 4 ~'i2' 25. 38, 10 .40 .3T 2 ` 6g 0.Q 17 I8 'RACT D 3 TRACT E 02 6 I I m 007 8 aD 010 14 m ® 190 53 0 „ 0 M 03 003 MOORE MINO DISTRICT R-1 992 6 7 aO `~3' a1 014 024 m 2 m NPROSPECT.- SUB m m oa 8 M M 022 N K 115.28 023 ,2400 0 5 R I- E 03 015 W " te' a 1 a c c 5 PT. OF 4 g a 020 019 g 4 - m o E I 011 11&00 1 7 5 WR ° 016 LANE Ils.ee 10 c APPLETREE 8 q g 6 ~ 'a 3 m 3 0 m 'd o_ 010 c 03 M ° 017 ° 5 0' 00' 021 018 03 001 "A 13 291 - . 39- Adjoining 39-291 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Notice is hereby given that a Public Hearing is to be held before the City of Wheat Ridge BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT on September 26, 2002, at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Municipal Building at 7500 West 291h 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-02-08: An application filed by The Buckeye Group for approval of a 15 foot front yard setback variance from the required 30 foot front yard setback from dedicated right-of-way resulting in a 15 foot front yard setback. This would include a request for additional setback encroachment of up to 6 feet from the required 30 foot setback from the intersection of 2 right-of-way lines of Lamar Street for property zoned Residential-One C (R-1C) and located at 6390 West 39`h Avenue. Case No. WA-02-09: An application filed by Connie Gibson for approval of a 7 Y2 foot rear yard setback variance from the required 10 foot building setback for a deck or patio resulting in a 2 %2 foot rear yard setback and approval of a 9 foot 2 inch side yard setback variance from the required 10 foot building setback for a deck or patio resulting in a 10 inch side yard setback to allow for an existing deck and patio on property zoned Residential-One (R-1) and located at 3850 Urban Street. Case No. WA-02-10: An application filed by John Daus for approval of a 10 foot side yard setback variance from the required 15 foot side yard setback resulting in a 5 foot side yard setback and approval of a 1 foot front yard setback variance from the required 30 foot front yard setback resulting in a 29 foot front yard setback for the purpose of adding two additional dwelling units to an existing single-family residential structure on property zoned Residential-Three (R-3) and located at 5831 West 29`h Avenue. Case No. WA-02-11: An application filed by Kimary Marchese for approval of a variance to the fence height standard in a minimum front yard from 48 inches to 6 feet on property zoned Commercial-One (C-1) and located at 10400 West 38th Avenue. Kathy Field, Administrative Assistant ATTEST: Wanda Sang, City Clerk To be published: Wheat Ridge Transcript Date: September 12, 2002 2, W?j OvIt5 IX-1~ o rn O Q1 J V Z ~(1 a C Cc, W H C'C N y ° 7-1 n 00 0) ~ II K ¢ F~'r "O O C 0 o U ~ 00 -0 -0 10 C oU "NO =7 ~ m v J E•-! I`f fM c0 N X iN3W3SV3 unun ,0 L r Q'04 CN W I '`Yifs N W I ^r~2 9 'Oll . -o X0'9 r~-L----- 05Z LD itI 6' b sad' ab .OZ = l 3lVOS N O f ,B'CZ 0 M \ 1 0 49 >"3N ,D 4-$ : Q~ -ter u J I La 7 yw ~t I ' ~ I Ta I 'PO C5 M iN3W3Sb3 I kiniin o L s9a 9 `o a A o ~ d a U d w Lo o a~ Q ~ a Q o u Q' D 0 c D ~y ~0 0 0 o~ ~ Q Q NO aLw o~ qly r Z J ¢ O O C J } a°i W Z Eti W~ m x ~ D JU o_ o CL W Q U W W U L O Y 0 ~a y o ° 3 3 0 a°0 d U t b 120 a• 'r 0 v`g o 5 v ` }°cr CE v G =o L E' aEng~ cY so I `;I I ~ e E 6 €`g ti i Sg 2E E~n o c 6 £ R 8so=« pc°g c s` _ o °`9 SK 9 gas€ g° S:E~p Cg °°8s ea LFoo C °•bs ° ESE S ° ago Es-~2 s ?,E _49E o 5 = Sg °=c - F S °bF e~og~S i eft 8 Sae AA 8~ a ~ Case No.: wA0209 Quarter Section Map N App: Last Name: Gibson Related Cases: App: First N ame: Connie Case Histor y: Owne r: Last Name: game Owner: First Nam e: App Addre ss: 3850 Urban St. P Review Body: City, State Z ip: heat Ridge, CO 80033 App: Pho ne: 03425-0666 APN: Owner Address: ame 2nd Revie w Body: City/St ate/Zip: I 2nd Review Date Owner Phone: game Decision-making Body Project Address: 850 Appro val/Denial Date: Street Name : Urban Street City/State, Zip: heat Ridge, CO 80033 Reso/Ordinance No.: Case Disposition: I Project Planner: Pesicka File Lo cation: ctive Notes:.- Follow- Up: o.: E20 F de yard setback from the l0 ftbuildin 9 o r a deck.. BOA - 9126102 39-204-03-018 t. BOA - 9126102 Conditions of Approval: District: 01.. Date Rec eived: /3012002.. Pre-App Date: F_ CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE 09/06102 11:42 AM cdb PG CGHSTRUCTION SERV RECEIPT NO-CO13714 AMOUNT FNSD ZONING REIMBURSEMENT 90.00 ZF9V ZONING APPLICATION F 200.00 ZONE PAYMENT RECEIVED AMOUNT CK 5275 290.00 TOTAL 290.00