Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutWA-01-0812650 WEST 64TH AvENuF, SUITE #E-507 ARvADA, COLORADO 80004 TELEPHONE: (303)425-7338 FROM CAL.: (800) 624-4157 FACSIMILE: (303) 425-7560 THE LAW OFFICES OF WILLARD V. JONES LICE SM MCOWA WAND CALIFORMA wvjonesIma&etr mnd October 19, 2001 VIA FAX (303) 235-2857 AND MAIL Mr. Alan White Director of Planning & Development City of Wheat Ridge 7500 West 29th Street Wheat Ridge, CO 80215 Re: Withdrawal of Appeal Lee and Sharon Brooks 2941 Chase Street Dear Mr. White: OF COUNSEL, MASSIE, BERMAN & MILLERICK 1620 FIETU AvENUE, SUITE 750 SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92101 TELEPHONE: (619) 239-7790 FACSIMILE: (619) 239-7796 ~A j As you know, we represent Lee and Sharon Brooks with regard to approval of the site plan for their proposed home at the above- referenced address. After having revised the site plan to comply with City building code requirements as applied by Planning Division staff, and upon receipt of your approval this morning, on behalf of Mr. and Mrs. Brooks we are hereby withdrawing their appeal to the Board of Adjustment of the prior City Planning Division denial. Our understanding of the requirements applicable to the home of Mr. and Mrs. Brooks is as follows: 1. The basement is not a separate "story" because the finished floor level above it (i.e., the first floor's finished level) is not more than six (6) feet above average grade of the lot for more than fifty percent (50%) of the home's perimeter; and 2. The home is otherwise a one-story building because the highest point of the building is less than twenty (20) feet above the average grade of the lot; and 3. Average grade is calculated by averaging the finished grade of each of the sides, and averaging those four numbers; and Mr. Alan White October 19, 2001 Page 2 4. The total footprint of the house must cover less than forty percent (40%) of the lot, which will be accomplished by covering with the roof only the southerly portion (about 1,285 square feet) of the deck between the house and the garage, resulting in 38.99% coverage; and 5. As a condition to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the City will require from Mr. and Mrs. Brooks a foundation elevation certificate consistent with the calculations in Items 2 and 3 above. We truly appreciate your assistance and courtesy as we have negotiated this process with the Planning Division. You have put a human face on the City which does it great credit. Please contact me with any questions in this regard. Very truly yours, T e Law Offi of Willard V. Jones c: Lee and Sharon Brooks 10/19/2001 11:46 3034257560 wv JONES LAW uhFlctS tlAut ni TIE LAW OFFICES OF WILLARD V. JONES 12650 W. 64TH AVENUE, SUITE E-507, ARVADA, COLORADO 80004 TELEPHONE: (303) 425-7338; (800) 624-4157 (PROM CALIFORNIA) FACSBELE: (303) 425-7560 #ofpge -N DATE: 10 - 14 - o i TIME: 1! :'16 /aw,. PHONE PAX TO: /,Y(y~rn L1t. - P(g .~.vp Qtrtr e 3o3~z7s - Lfr57 1 FROM: (n t t ~~a.Q s MESSAGE: c ,tf-ao.,J,.4- or- ~m--C HARD COPY TO FOLLOW: Y~ S [Uraed 9omdmdenueaader applKWOlswead is iaWAdDaly 6x the asa rmt the iamaded recitdem, or Nm motdayae or aEnar n:sponafhla for vering the ficdmk to dm inteaded racildem, you = mi fieddmt any dksaminadon. disvibuon or aapy3rg ofthis ficsWc trictly leoldbited. uhave mm veddds ale in sear, please amtfy es lnmm %tcly by tele*OW, Andtemm ate migUW fiCUMle toes U the aSaims pmd service Thank yoa. 10/19/2001 11:46 3034257560 WV JONES LAW OFFICES PAGE 02 12650 Wes? 64TII AVENUE, SLMT OF-507 ARVADA, COLORADO 80004 TaZMONE: (303) 425-7338 FROM CAL.: (800) 6244157 TACSDIU£: (303)425-7560 TBE LAw OFFIGEs OF WILLARD V. JONES LAcF mmCAIDPAOO.WDCA FORNJA W-jW slaw@ h M= October. 19, 2001 VI1► KAX .(303) 235-2$57 AM MAIL Mr. Alan White. Director of Planning & Development City of Wheat Ridge 7500 West 29th Street Wheat Ridge, Co 80215 Re: Withdrawal of Appeal Lee and Sharon Brooke 2041 Chase Street Dear Mr. White: OF COUNSEL, MASSIE, BERMAN & MILLERICK 1620 FIFTH AvexuE, SuaE 750 SAN DmGo, CALIFORNm 92101 1ELEPRONE: (619) 239-7790 FAcsnDm, B; (619) 239-7796 As you know, we 'represent Lee and Sharon Brooks with regard to approval of the site plan for their proposed home at the above- referenced address.. After having revised the site plan to comply with city building code requirements as applied by Planning Division staff, and upon receipt of your approval this morning, on behalf of Mr. and Mrs. Brooks we are hereby withdrawing their appeal to the Board of Adjustment of the prior City Planning Division denial- Our understanding of the requirements applicable to the home of Mr. and Mrs. Brooks is as follows: 1. The basement is not a separate "story" because the finished floor level above it (i.e „ the first floor's finished level) is not more than six (6) feet above average grade of the lot for mote than fifty percent (50%) of the home's perimeter; and 2. The home is otherwise a one-story building because the highest point of the building is less than twenty (20) feet above the average grade of the lot; and 3. Average grade is calculated by averaging the finished grade of each of the sides, and averaging those four numbers; and 10/19/2001 11:46 3034257560 WV JONES LAW OFFICES PAGE 03 Mr. Alan White October 19, 2001 Page 2 4. The total footprint of the house must cover less than forty percent (40%) of the lot, which will be accomplished by covering with the roof only the southerly portion (about 1,265 square feet) of the deck between the house and the garage, resulting in 38.99% coverage; and 5. As a condition to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the City will require from Mr. and Mrs. Brooks a foundation elevation certificate consistent with the calculations in Items 2 and 3 above. We truly appreciate your assistance and courtesy as we have negotiated this.process with the Planning Division. You have put a human face on the City which does it great credit. Please contact me with any questions in this regard. Very truly yours, e Law Offi of Willard V. Jones c: Lee and Sharon Brooks CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ORIGINAL Minutes of Meeting October 25, 2001 1. CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by Chair BROWN at 6:30 p.m. on October 25, 2001 in the second floor conference room of the Municipal Building, 7500 West 29th Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado. (The business portion of the meeting was preceded by dinner and viewing of a video entitled Managing your Public Official's Liability.) 2. ROLL CALL Members Present: Tom Abbott Michelle Brown Paul Drda Bill Echelmeyer Paul Hovland Bob Howard Jerry Montoya Kent Young Staff Present: Alan White, Planning Director Travis Crane, Planner Ann Lazzeri, Secretary The following is the official set of Board of Adjustment minutes for the Public Hearing of October 25, 2001. 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 - -T-here-va&-no-one-signed-speak.-spear- - - 4. PUBLIC HEARING A. Case No. WA-01-08: (continued from September 27, 2001) An application filed by Lee and Sharon Brooks for an interpretation of a story as defined by Section 26-123 of the City of Wheat Ridge Code of Laws and approval of an 8-foot side yard setback variance from the required 15-foot side yard setback resulting in a 7- foot side yard setback to the south and a 10-foot side yard setback variance from the required 15-foot side yard setback resulting in a 5-foot side yard setback to the north for property zoned Residential-One (R-1 C) and located at 2941 Chase. Plans for this case were revised and variances were no longer needed. The application was withdrawn on October 19, 2001. Board of Adjustment Page 1 10/05/01 ORIGINAL CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT Minutes of Meeting September 27, 2001 1. CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by Chair BROWN at 7:30 p.m. on September 27, 2001 in the Police Training Room, 2nd floor of the Municipal Building, 7500 West 29th Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado. 2. ROLL CALL Members Present: Tom Abbott Michelle Brown Paul Drda Bill Echelmeyer Paul Hovland Jerry Montoya Kent Young Members Absent: Bob Howard 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 September 27, 2001. 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-01-08: An application filed by Lee and Sharon Brooks for an interpretation of a story as defined by Section 26-123 of the City of Wheat Ridge W Code of Laws and approval of an 8-foot side yard setback variance from the required 15-foot side yard setback resulting in a 7-foot side yard setback to the south and a 10-foot side yard setback variance from the required 15-foot side yard setback resulting in a 5-foot side yard setback to the north for property zoned Residential-One C (R-1C) and located at 2941 Chase Street. The case was presented by Travis Crane. He reviewed the staff report and gave a PowerPoint presentation of the subject property. All pertinent documents were entered Board of Adjustment Page 1 09/27/01 into the record and accepted by Chair BROWN. Mr. Crane submitted copies of comments from two neighbors who expressed opposition to the application. These comments will be made a part of the official record as well as a part of the case file. He reviewed the criteria involved in consideration of variances and advised the Board that there was jurisdiction to hear the case. Staff recommended denial of the request for reasons outlined in the staff report. Board Member HOVLAND questioned the lot coverage. Mr. Crane explained that if the garage is attached with a common roofline it would approach 40%. If it is a detached garage it would be 36-37% lot coverage. Alan White said that if a garage shares a common roofline with the house it is considered to be attached. Lee Brooks 2941 Chase Street Willard Jones 650 Mr. Brooks, the applicant, and Mr. Jones, attorney for the applicant, were sworn in by Chair BROWN. Mr. Jones argued that because the basement is only 5-1/2 feet above ground level, it should not be considered a story. The applicants originally designed the house to have a basement and two stories. After talking with the neighbors, they have agreed to remove the top story which would result in a single-story structure if the basement is not considered to be a story. There was discussion of grade levels on the property. Board Member ABBOTT commented that building height is measured from the average grade of a property and commented that it would be helpful to have documentation showing the basement height from average grade. Ken Nelson 10182 West 70th Drive, Arvada Mr. Nelson, architect for the project, was sworn in by Chair BROWN. Mr. Nelson argued that the basement is not of sufficient height to be considered a story under the code. Since the top story has been eliminated from the design, the house should be considered a single story with basement and, therefore, a variance would not be needed. In response to a question from Board Member ABBOTT, Alan White stated that it is staff's opinion the basement does constitute a story based upon the plans presented. Board of Adjustment Page 2 09/27/01 Board Member MONTOYA asked if the criteria regarding adequate light and air would be met with the removal of the top story. Alan White replied that the house to the north would be pretty close. In response to a question from Board Member MONTOYA, the applicant explained that their engineer has determined the basement cannot be dug any deeper due to a high water table. Board Member DRDA asked if there were documented details of the applicant's new plan for the Board's review at this time. Mr. Crane replied that the plan was not available at the meeting. Mr. Jones suggested that if the definition of a story can be resolved, the applicant would know whether or not he would need a variance. He was of the opinion that the new plans would fit more into the character of the surrounding neighborhood and would not interfere with adequate light and air to adjacent property. Kristy Marshal 2992 Chase Street Ms. Marshal was sworn in by Chair BROWN. She lives just north of the subject property and stated that she was in favor of the application and that the proposed house would increase property values in the neighborhood. She also stated that, with the removal of the top story, there would be no problem with adequate light and air to her property. Board'Member ABBOTT did not believe the Board could make a decision at this time without knowing the average grade of the property. In summary, Mr. Jones stated that several criteria would no longer apply with the new design. These are as follow: it would not change the character of the neighborhood; it would improve property values in the neighborhood; it would not interfere with air and light to neighbors; the design provides for accommodation of a handicapped person; and there is a hardship due to the high water table. Board Member ECHELMEYER expressed concern that the proposed size of the house would definitely change the character of the neighborhood. Board Member MONTOYA stated that it is very important to consider the fact that the house has been designed for ADA accessibility. Ms. Campbell 2939 Chase Street Ms. Campbell was sworn in by Chair BROWN. She stated that her house is actually three feet from the property line and not four and one-half feet as earlier stated. Board of Adjustment Page 3 09/27/01 There was discussion regarding the continuance of this case to the October Board of Adjustment meeting in order to have adequate information to make a decision. Mr. Jones stated that waiting another thirty days would present a problem for the applicant who would like to get started before bad weather sets in. It was moved by Board Member DRDA and seconded by Board Member ABBOTT to continue this case to the next regularly scheduled Board of Adjustment meeting (October 25, 2001) unless evidence is presented to staff prior to such meeting sufficient to allow staff to determine that, based upon such evidence, a variance is not required. The motion passed 6-1 with Board Member ECHELMEYER voting no. 5. CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING Chair BROWN declared the public hearing closed. 6. OLD BUSINESS A. Discussion of New Bylaws Alan White reviewed the draft of revised Board of Adjustment bylaws which were included in the packet. The following changes were suggested: • Page 3, item 4, line 6 should be changed to read: ".....at the next regularly scheduled meeting of the Board Page 4, item 5, line 3 should be changed to read: applicant may be at the scheduled hearing and ask for a postponement in person or notify staff of a request for postponement before the hearing date. A sentence should be added to the end of the paragraph to read: "In case of a postponement, applicant will be required to change the date on the sign. " • Page 4, item 6, line 2 - Language should be added to provide that if the case is postponed to the next meeting due to failure of the applicant to appear, the case should be scheduled as the last public hearing on the agenda. • Page 5, item 2, line 2: The word "upon" should not be stricken. • Page 5, item (g), first line should read ......are found to exist......... It was moved by Board Member HOVLAND and seconded by Board Member DRDA to approve the revised bylaws with the suggested amendments. The motion passed 7-0. Board of Adjustment Page 4 09/27/01 City of Wheat Ridge Planning and Development Department Memorandum TO: Board of Adjustment FROM: Kathy Field, Planning Secretary,, i SUBJECT: Case No. WA-01-08 DATE: September 27, 2001 I received a couple of calls this afternoon with comments regarding Case No. WA-O1-08 from the following area property owners unable to attend tonight's meeting: Marlene Sullivan 2932 Chase St. Please see attached email. Arlene Northrup 2934 Chase St. Her only comment was that it seems "out of place". In Page 1 of 1 To: kathyf@ci.wheatridge.co:us Subject: CASE WA-01-08 To Whom It May Concern: My schedule will not allow me to attend the Board of Adjustment meeting tonight when case number WA-01-08 is discussed. I would like to express my opposition to size and height of the proposed structure at 2941 Chase Street. Briefly, my concern is that any waivers now to the city codes will open the door for other structures which can change the entire character of our "old Wheatridge neighborhood". Thanks you, Marlene M. Sullivan sullivamnm@uswest.net Printed for Kathy Field <kathyf@city.ci.wheatridge.co.us> 9/27/2001 CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE PLANNING DIVISION STAFF REPORT TO: Board of Adjustment DATE OF MEETING: September 27, 2001 DATE PREPARED: September 18, 2001 CASE NO. & NAME: WA-01-08 CASE MANAGER: Travis Crane ACTION REQUESTED: Request for an interpretation of a story as defined by Section 26-123, and approval of an 8 foot side yard setback variance from the required 15 foot side yard setback resulting in a 7 foot side yard setback to the south, and a 10 foot side yard setback variance from the required 15 foot side yard setback resulting in a 5 foot side yard setback to the north. LOCATION OF REQUEST: 2941 Chase Street NAME & ADDRESS OF APPLICANT(S): Lee & Sharon Brooks NAME & ADDRESS OF OWNER(S): Same as Above APPROXIMATE AREA: PRESENT ZONING: PRESENT LAND USE: SURROUNDING ZONING: SURROUNDING LAND USE: DATE PUBLISHED: DATE POSTED: DATED LEGAL NOTICES SENT: 6,250 square feet Residential-One C District (R-1C) Residential N, S, E,&W:R-1C All surrounding land use is medium density single-family residential, (R-IC). September 6, 2001 September 13, 2001 September 13, 2001 ENTER INTO RECORD: ( ) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN (X) CASE FILE & PACKET MATERIALS (X) ZONING ORDINANCE ( ) SLIDES ( ) SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS (IQ 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. I. REQUEST The property in question is located at 2941 Chase Street and is currently zoned Residential-One C, R-1 C (Exhibit 1, Zoning Map). A single family house which occupied the property has recently been demolished. The applicant (owner) is requesting approval of two setback variances, and is seeking an interpretation (Exhibit 2, Applicant Request). The first request, which shall herein be referred to as Request A, is an interpretation of a story as defined by Section 26-123 of the City of Wheat Ridge Code of Laws. The second request, herein referred to as Request B, is an 8 foot side yard setback variance from the required 15 foot side yard setback resulting in a 7 foot side yard setback to the south. The third request herein referred to as Request C, is a 10 foot side yard setback variance from the required 15 foot side yard setback resulting in a 5 foot side yard setback to the north (Exhibit 3, Application and Exhibit 4, Deed). The purpose of these requested variances is to allow for the proposed house to encroach into both side yard setbacks. It should be noted that each of the side yard setback variance requests are based upon the side yard setback requirements for a three story structure in the R-I C district. Should the Board of Adjustment not agree with the interpretation of a story, lesser setback variances can be approved. II. SITE PLAN The property is rectangular in shape and is typical of surrounding lots in the neighborhood. A permit was obtained July 30', 2001 from the City for demolition of the existing structures on the lot. Shortly after, a building permit was submitted for construction of a 2,309 square foot house (Exhibit 5, Site Plan). III. INTERPRETATION (Request A) Chapter 26 of the Code of Laws defines a story as: "That portion of a building included between the upper surface of any floor and the upper surface of the floor next above, except that the topmost story shall be that portion of a building included between the upper surface of the topmost floor and ceiling or roof above. If the finished floor level directly above a usable or unused underfloor space is more than 6 feet above grade, as defined herein, for more than 50% of the total perimeter or is more than 12 feet above grade, as defined herein, at any point, such usable or unused underfloor space shall be considered as a story. For residential buildings, each 10 feet of building height shall be considered a story." For the purpose of determining setback requirements based upon this definition of "story", building height shall be measured from average grade of a building to the highest point of the building. The site plan which was submitted details a structure with a partial above ground basement with two full stories. The structure is almost 35 feet in height, the maximum allowable height in the R-1C district. Using this definition of a "story", staff determined that the house is three stories, resulting in required fifteen foot setbacks on each side (Exhibit 6, Elevations). Regardless of the determination of a "story" as defined by Chapter 26, the proposed structure will still need a setback variance for both the north and south sides. If Request B is granted, the proposed structure will be only 11.5 feet from the house to the south. If Request C is granted, the proposed structure will be only 12.5 feet from the house to the north. The applicant is proposing a house with a building footprint of 2,309 square feet of building coverage, or 36.9% of the total lot area. A maximum of 40% building coverage is allowed in R- 1C. The average building footprint for houses on this block is 885.67 square feet. Staff Conclusions and Recommendation: The regulations are being applied correctly and consistent with other requests. Staff recommends the Board of Adjustment uphold this interpretation. IV. VARIANCE CRITERIA (Request B - south side yard variance) Staff has the following comments regarding the criteria used to evaluate a variance request: 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 may still be used for a single family residence. 2. If the variation were granted, would it alter the essential character of the locality? If the house were built as planned, it could potentially alter the character of the neighborhood. The proposed structure will be almost 35 feet in height, and it would be located only 11.5 feet from the existing structure to the south. The height and mass of the structure is out of scale with the neighborhood. 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 has a typical rectangular shape and is relatively flat. The lot meets all minimum requirements in respect to lot area and minimum frontage of the R-1C zone district. There is a slight slope from north to south on the lot, however, it does not render the lot unsuitable for building. 4. Has the alleged difficulty or hardship been created by any person presently having an interest in the property? Yes, the hardship has been created by the owner. The owner has proposed a house that is too large for the lot. A two story house with a buildable area of 2,550 square feet can be constructed without the need for any variances. 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? This request could possibly impair the adequate supply of light and air to the house to the south. The existing house to the south is 4.5 feet from the property line, and this request will place a structure within 11.5 feet of this existing structure. This request will not likely increase the congestion of public streets, danger of fire, or endanger public safety. It is not likely that property values would be impaired as a result of this request. 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 an individual benefit for the property owner, and would not produce a benefit or contribution to the neighborhood or community. Approval of this request would not result in the reasonable accommodation of a person with disabilities. STAFF CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION Staff has concluded that the requested variance would allow for a house to be built on a lot that does not have the width needed for a house this size. Therefore, staff recommends DENIAL for the following reasons: 1. The request could potentially alter the essential character of the locality. 2. The alleged hardship has been self-created. 3. The request could potentially impair adequate supply of light and air. 4. The variance would not result in an accommodation of a person with disabilities. V. VARIANCE CRITERIA (Request C - North Side Yard Variance) Staff has the following comments regarding the criteria used to evaluate a variance request: 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 may still be used for a single family residence. 2. If the variation were granted, would it alter the essential character of the locality? If the house were built as planned, it could potentially alter the character of the neighborhood. The proposed structure will be almost 35 feet in height, and it would be located only 12.5 feet from the existing structure to the north. The height and mass of the structure is out of scale with the neighborhood. 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 has a typical rectangular shape and is relatively flat. The lot meets all of the minimum requirements for lot area and lot frontage for the R-1 C zone district. There is a slight slope from north to south on the lot, however it does not render the lot unsuitable for building per the zoning code. 4. Has the alleged difficulty or hardship been created by any person presently having an interest in the property? Yes, the hardship has been created by the owner. The owner has proposed a house that is too large for the lot. A two story house with a buildable area of 2,550 square feet can be constructed without the need for any variances. 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? This request could possibly impair the adequate supply of light and air to the house to the north. The existing house to the north is 5 feet from the property line, and this request will place a structure within 12.5 feet of this existing structure. This request will not likely increase the congestion of public streets, danger of fire, or endanger public safety. It is not likely that property values would be impaired as a result of this request. 6. If criteria a through c 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 an individual benefit for the property owner, and would not produce a benefit or contribution to the neighborhood or community. Approval of this request would not result in the reasonable accommodation of a person with disabilities. STAFF CONCL USIONS AND RECOMMENDATION Staff has concluded that the requested variance would allow for a house to be built on a lot that does not have the width needed for a house this size. Therefore, staff recommends DENIAL for the following reasons: 1. The request could potentially alter the essential character of the locality. 2. The alleged hardship has been self-created. 3. The request could potentially impair adequate supply of light and air. 4. The variance would not result in an accommodation of a person with disabilities. 1 1 1 W 3]NO E AYE i 19 319 3195 R~3n 31]6 3tl' 182 23191 3159 3160 317 0 - 165 3140 3 45 3150 3353 3128 313 m 30 91 312] 3133 312 3120 aim ' 10 3109 3t0 3110 ' 3100 310 OD W 310.3 3095 N m 3076 3077 30)6 305 3059 N 3( R 3031 3022 302 3050 3015 a 3015 3020 R~3m 3020 3006 5965 590 N 3003 3002 3002 . . 3002 300'. Ashland Rese rvoir 1 N N 2930 2931 2926 2921 31 < 2922 2919 0fii - W 29TH AVE - F N W 26TH AVE W 28TH AVE OFFICIAL ZONING MAF NHEAT RIDGE COLORADO MAP ADOPTED: June 15, 1994 Last Revision: January 9, 19,35 Site uu uu 3196,1 3195 3196 3195 ` 319 3160 31T1 3177 3153 130 3139 3148 3137 313D 3119 3110 3 3106 3044 3101 3036 307] W" 3030 3033 305) 0 02) 3058 3009 11OL4 3009 3010 300] 1 3002 3001 3002 M03 2945 2946 2967 2942 2942 2 2930 2941 2938 F 2936 2933 F 2930 2959 F N 2934 2929 Z 2923 2 N W 0 1 2932 292, 2922 2943 U 1 E < V L2921 m 2920 2923 a: 2917 2918 2919 2930 2115 2914 2913 2910 2910 2911 2906 2 2903 2902 2901 2900 2901 1 1 r 14 G _ 38 m N 2730 ~ O ZIGHARD HART ESTATE PARK ~ 27zD N ~ 2710 N N w Y;~;I I ~ D a O u e~mo ZONE DISTRICT BOUNDRY - PARCEL/LOT 50UNDRY (DESIGNATES OWNERSHIP) --'-s-a CITY LIMIT LINE WATER FEATURE * DENOTES MULTIPLE ADDRE55E5 le-9o-u EDGEWATER SE 25 ream o w lao xa 90~ 4W SCALE 1'=400 J2TMNT OF PLANNING Alm OEVELOFMSJi - 285-2852 Variance - City of Wheat Ridge Property location: Lee and Sharon Brooks 2941 Chase Street Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80214 This request for a variance is based on the interpretation of Sec. 26-208, Residential-One C District (R-IQ. A. Intent and Purpose: This district is established to provide high quality, safe, quiet and stable, medium-density single-family residential neighborhoods, and to prohibit activities of any nature which are incompatible with the medium- density residential character. B. Development Standards: One-family dwelling Maximum Height ......................................35' Maximum Building Coverage .............................40% Minimum Lot Area 5,000 S.F. Minimum Lot Width 50' Minimum Front Yard Setback 30' Minimum Side Yard Setback ...............................5'(e) Minimum Rear yard Setback ...............................10' (e) Minimum setback for the first story and five (5) feet for each additional story. Please refer to the drawings included with this packet. This variance request is: Lto establish the first floor 2.tha the two (2) story setback be 7' on the south side and 3.that the two (2) story setback be 10' on the north side. 1. Establish the first floor: The foundation must be set above the established water table. As a result, the downhill side of the foundation is above ground. The surface area of the foundation perimeter is 192' x 9'. The total is 1458 square feet. The area above ground is 72' x 5.6' This total is 403.2 square feet. Exposed foundation is 403.2/ 1458 = 27.6%. The exposed area of the foundation is not concrete but standard framing and siding to match the rest of the exterior. 2. Two (2) story setback be 7' on the south side The surface arevf the second floor inside the 10' setback is shown to be 132 square feet. The total surface of the south elevation is 1453.5 square feet. The 132 square feet surface area inside of the 10' setback is 9.1 % of the total surface area. Also, the room area inside of the 10' setback is 27 square feet. 3. Two (2) story setback be 10' on the north side The surface armof the second floor inside the 10' setback is shown to be 264 square feet. The total surface of the north elevation is 1095 square feet. The 264 square feet surface area inside of the 10' setback is 24.1% of the total surface area. Also, the room area inside of the 10' setback is 48 square feet. °f r LAND USE CASE PROCESSING APPLICATION pwrar ` P Planning and Development Department _ ° ac 7500 West 29`^ Avenue, Wheat Ridge, CO 80033 ° coioRppO Phone (303) 235-2846 cot oeno° (Please print or typ fo io DD Applicant - 4PeWc.5 Address 2_94l CUs't41'c Phone 5'03yLZb3S~ City W"A,- 4>r R- State CS? Zip 4A - Fax Owner Address Phone CitState Zip Fax Contact 'yrN~i(Vhl~{IJ Addresst0192- W 70T-kDtZ- Phone -?e-33zzZlJ City "JAOA State Zip OW04-1(vQ~{ Fax (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): 2--q40 6: om rr- 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: Detailed description of request: kT °i A-(-- t4t&p " 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 submit power-of-attomey from the owner which approved of this action on his behalf. \\``sosrgw9F P Signature of Applio?tP: ' O a-lz~ Subscribed and sworn to me thi day of 20C) J_ a ` '4 ` ~ p i ~ `ve q Nzl a01111111 ~Pd Notary Public MY COMMISSION EXPIRES: My commission expires 7 _ o a July ,0 2002 Date received V3 O t Fee $a96. no Receipt No. 7y,) Case No. Li-)4- -O /-0.0 - Comp Plan Desig. Zoning le- / C. Quarter Section Map Z &a! Related Case No. Pre-App Mtg. Date - Case Manager <2R J-it/E t 0 4 L7 0 M G 6I 'SSG 0 W. C - - U- x 0 s G -0 _1 ~ 0 xs Z'3GZT - Uz. LAG=GCS ey O td F,.ri z-\ z Lau az -a U04 U , ~ v~-~ ol 93, -Z I K JI W Q H a N N O W V O 0 ~Z ~ O E aV. a: y I T W 00W~ ~ U) a v D O U O N b u m x 0 0 0 6 o n+ T p p QD a W 00 ~ a) J-, ~ P + Pa , 0 T ¢ rl o O o 14 x 0 O U N alO ro .a a) o m ml r~4 c 9 F h x zz ma ~ ' ~ O F i. y... sw O Na y~0 0>; m ~ y in ~ a~i Q ~ A p ~ 3 L ~ v -J Q O y O F y CY 11; d N a y a > b0 O ~4 CD a > F ro O a) a 0 V A w 0 o N °F 0 ~4 ? O a) a al a~ w p > w u w o o 9 c4my O F y = R m A V W a (n } ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N m ~ A O .p 'J O G O W C arJ U o y N o s+ro s b A ' on U rn w N N d d m 0 Q 5 ro o s c A J 0 0 ,-I N y m a •G a O w N v W a 0 P ~ ro j x d + v N bbo r - .3 C an d N •rGi ~ N c A a, ~ ~ G a oUrn F y ~ p c .b ro F ~ ^c C N v 'J O O ' Q w ~ h CF ~ _~1 ~ Y U acp y N N d ; N F N N ba O . . . O 0 r 00 a• F D T A 'ri F r O U O ° N O v ❑ .uy v ~ ~ w O c FL p v m U v ' ` te " W ~ : y ~ t ~ r . F, a x F G N m~ z~ y i w n v i U a•°tJ" N W T N oz v i v ~ y ~a 3 4s a y M G c4 v o t°. 3'O M ° a: v G h O 44 44 a A s O Q w .°Jo N m ro 6 x O ~ 3 0 U ° OH p ce C a 0 m w ~ s F T D rn a Q d r" 686L 9 9 Nnr N O a ri a z ,z•17 a J ti6 ~6 3sbH~ 1 ~ 6 Z v s~oozg ~aNS~ ~ 7 nv 0 d D o 'L z 0 259 a4t2`vJ ~aN~3n~~,d O'sl ~S 1191HX3 ~N l av`~o ccj -r 0c o` O ;l ~ r x r X FT .=-0 Z fD C C) M Z o X- U X fT IX U EXHIBIT 6 5Da77f Skf~51 w ~o c a~ { 4te ~o a~' POSTING CERTIFICATION CASE NO. PLANNING COMMISSION / CITY COUNCIL / BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT (Circle One) HEARING DATE: I, l 47gmo/<~S (name) residing at (address) as the applicant for Case No. Public Hearing at hereby certify that I have posted the Notice of (location) on this f `t day of S; -p-, /sC2 20 4M , and do hereby certify that said sign has been posted and remained in place for fifteen (15) days prior to and including the scheduled day of public hearing of this case. The sign was posted in the position shown on the map below. Signature: (-6~ NOTE: This form must be submitted at the public hearing on this case and will be placed in the applicant's case file at the Department of Planning and Development. eAplanni nglformslpostingcert Rev. 616/01 MAP f~ At v ~ F P2av,~~ 7500 West 29th Avenue The City of Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80215 Wheat Ridge Telephone 303/ 235-2846 FAX 303/235-2857 September 13, 2001 Dear Property Owner: This is to inform you that Case No. WA-01-08 a request for an interpretation of a story as defined by Section 26-123 of the City of Wheat Ridge Code of Laws and approval of an 8 foot side yard setback variance from the required 15 foot side yard setback resulting in a 7 foot side yard setback to the south and a 10 foot side yard setback variance from the required 15 foot side yard setback resulting in a 5 foot side yard setback to the north for property zoned Residential- One C (R-1C) and located at 2941 Chase Street will be heard by the Wheat Ridge Board of Adjustment in the Police Training Room, 2"d floor of the Municipal Complex at 7500 West 29th Avenue on September 27, 2001, 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\pubnotice\wa0108.wpd 'Jr L W 32 AVE o_ ~ F R s 0 9182 3195 U Q ene 9110 =410 R , 3165 5150 50 9121 N m 9119 9110 z 9109 ZZ3~~~ I ~ U 310 3 3s 3100 3101 9095 ~ 0 N ~ ~ M c 9019 3015 so~ 5%5 Ashland Reservoir NE~~ I u u u u 3196 3M 1 3145 9176 3143 Also 3153 3155 5145 3137 3132 9121 51W 311 3120 3105 51g 3102 9101 3100 Y S 30'16 905] Som 3'15] 9050 3790 °AD 9010 3904 19 30TS °.fU 3rol 6 2995 n a 2950 rc 2945 2994 a 2995 2945 2961 2945 o_ j 2944 250 2991 042 '-3 2941 2999 2937 2990 , 2999 2998 R 2 VW 2934 2919 2994 • 2930 2959 2931 F pep - M51 N 2932 0 :1 j 2429 N 292A 2 - 1 2921 2926 2922 296 u~ SA ml ~ 2922. 2919 ~ 2922 ~ 2921 u~l 2920 2929 P19 24yJ 2911 2916 A17 m 2916 2919 2 j 2910 - WTS 2914 2913 T!°..0 1 2914 2909 2914 2910 2909 2910 ?110 2911 2905 2gp5 2qW 2905 1906 2909 n 2901 2 902 mi 22902 2 11 2Po2 24JI 2900 - M W 5]W 9]W I ~ of T? i . R I ' 5540 C -1C R-3 SNICK u6 AJATER Ave - 14 A W M9 AVE R-3 I !ICHARD HART :5TATE PARK „pHD_ G L.__._-__.~ FPSEWATER 2 R OFFICIAL ZONING MAID WHEAT RIDGE COLORADO MAP ADOPTED: June 15, 1994 Last Revision: July 14, 1999 ZONE D15TRICT 60UNDRY PARCEL/LOT DOUNDRY VE5IGNATE5 OWNE125NIP) CITY LIMIT LINE WATER FEATURE DENOTE5 MULTIPLE ADDRE55E5 5E 25 9 m IW u9 5'G +oo 5CALE 1-400 PARMW OF RING AND PMOPNW - 235.2852 a m`I N c W `a ~ d u N c ~ a ~ a g v a ~ N U c ~ ~ z _ NI K c ~S 'a P a a ~ N rno m = d _ : . N o ~ a a p~ U L p N O p C N O # y C a - d O O O O O O O O O 0 X~~ a ~ o jo 0 0 0 0 0 o O U _ Q CIO d V V V O Y ~ H y ~ C O O ~ ~O N d O N O = N O O t O T« y N O 'a0 ~F Q N W «a0 Ny N «O N 0100 RN W 'O « W N Vl > «00 =(n a?> N Q O O U t6 co N C) s O d ~ N N NO U 0 j NO U O e0 N W O mU NO N mU ..L.. EO y U a W 2 A O w - ¢ N ~ m L y ~ m L d = 0 X_ l O ~ y L m L y U ` Y d 0 U @0 C U - 272 y N U 01 d a Q 26 Y W D U OI Z' a _ m N OI U W N1 C N 9 . > . u a 3 C e 6 O _ N W ca 0 ' N y y G~ K m~ ~ a0 3 Nm _ N~ E 1 N O l0 ZO of O C a j m N {C -Q ,6'O_ N C! N N N A D. N N ¢ NN N Cam.. Z " Up y ~ T ~ C m G L L a L ~ t C ~ y i ~ "6 L O uM 3 3 w 3 N 3 c y m a v M= O (L) W O O d.. n y ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ z ~r0 ~ Ol b N (Np lip (~D (~O v rn m M m m m rn rn `m W a ° v ° ° v v ° o ~ N y@~ O O v N N m N v N N N N N V ~ N ® a n n ~ ~ n n n r ~ 0-° 0 E 1O iO v a v' g e v g v 1- V z a o o o o o o 0 QQLu z0 O n r ;z n W = 0 = h 0 ~ LL N O N O;Q z a z z a2 I d Un~ a SI v 0 E w a° 0 a R E z U iw go c d T b U y .1 O 2 ro F q d C d ~ d N d d N v ` l ~ v a K d c a "m u u G Z ? dl m au' c 7 I I I d' > C v ~ o ` o N p~ 1~ w C ~ N . o E a d a o y u ` o m L o c E E m o m'=" a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N C O - l d v U Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q m 0 0 .R N a° e v M v a v d o v - H v C M _ d wU))~ 0U)) W E(n ~NOp w o O O O m y O m W O G I O a N O O G I `I N d_ Z N Q J N N U U d N _T N U m y d V IL r d d L y m a. M Ol L CD L W O W N W m ai N W m N L d L U m U m U m m d 3 U m M J U m L+ p m p m ja t U m d a s m n K d m M mN = w c v K K m o c'i m K v K gy K ^ s m ICa dU N C Nm cm., dNm LNm mm.. Nm Tm JNm m R'Nm cm... ONm m... mNm ' N l0 _ m m L Q L co L J t L L L L C L 0 m N G Y v_i p wcvm ~ ' d ~ ~ no d... o. ~U U~LLW E m ~ ~ m m °r n n n n d d M M M M M M M M M r W Y a m v m m m ° m m v m v m v m v N O O N N v N N N N N y 00 N N n n n a r to n Im n 1d IN N 1N 1d 1A 1d F-; V ' o 0 0 0 0 0 0 z 0 Q Q Lu n n n r n n n N 0 Oda Z a O W z C) 3 Una a ~I . 9 m C w m d .U d N u ~ v a m U d a o d ~ z mi ' w v a c D D I K > rc D o N C 1~ ~ N N w - d v E 'a Q a 0 y` W U L O jp E 1 c m w :O ~ # O O O O O O y r D - m m m U Q Q Q Q Q Q N a m 3 3 3 3 3 3 U _ p D m N _ N N d a CO v < ,d, M O 0 ~ p ct0 Lf~m ca m Nm p p w CO cN d V y -co fmO N N E o iz = a Q c~ O a ~ y O N $ Zt°' ~vU m Mm U Ua-6 6 ~U o D U °i aU d T m o rn m ap+ N a d' OO dM 3 = d' ON >i 'C O 2 _ R -O 6D 00 m N UO N t0 N N C N l0 c N R - V f c m d L ! t D W C ~O L CL W ¢ L m Y L L ~ ° D 3 N ~ C y N m N ° a m z S E d 1 N O U N Q ~.U W E m .n r so n r r m n rn r o ao LO d U M M M M M M r dl.l N C a rn m m m m m I v o O m N m N m N m N m N N 0 ~ d N N ~ i0 N to N a uynyi N ~ ~ uni uni ~ 0 o O o > Q Q W Z Z O n O n o n r n `n O x~o ~ ~ s ~ ? 0 a Z o W F- LO r.- 3: a N Q N 0 w en U. a 0 z N N N a N ° b ~i d U .U. a O z ° ro U v T v N a N N fL O d 7 z Y F C: k 1 ) MetroScan / Jefferson (CO) : Owner :Ceaser Robert J Parcel :021102 Site :2929 Chase St Wheat Ridge 80214 Xfered :04/01/1977 Mail :2929 Chase St Wheat Ridge Co 80214 Price :$32,500 Use :1112 Res,Improved Land Phone :303-232-4375 Bedrm: 2 Bath:1.00 TotRm: YB:1918 Pool: B1dgSF :1,013 Ac: MetroScan / Jefferson (CO) : Owner :Rivera Mary J Parcel :021111 Site :2921 Chase St Denver 80214 Xfered :08/17/1994 Mail :2921 Chase St Denver Co 80214 Price :$40,000 Use :1112 Res,Improved Land Phone Bedrm: l Bath:1.00 TotRm: YB:1932 Pool: B1dgSF :624 Ac: * : MetroScan / Jefferson (CO) : Owner :Harlan Paul L Parcel :021222 Site :2927 Chase St Wheat Ridge 80214 Xfered :02/16/1993 Mail :PO Box 140265 Edgewater Co 80214 Price Use :1112 Res,Improved Land Phone Bedrm: 3 Bath:1.00 TotRm: YB:1946 Pool: B1dgSF :1,385 Ac: : MetroScan / Jefferson (CO) : Owner -:Lazalde Alvaro B Parcel :021278 Site :2928 Chase St Wheat Ridge 80214 Xfered. :05/06/1976 Mail :2928 Chase St Wheat Ridge Co 80214 Price :$33,900 Use :1112 Res,Improved Land Phone :303-233-8651 Bedrm: 3 Bath:1.50 TotRm: YB:1939 Pool: B1dgSF :816 Ac:. MetroScan / Jefferson (CO) : Owner :Sullivan Marlene M Parcel :021281 Site :2932 Chase St Denver 80214 Xfered :05/03/1995 Mail :2932 Chase St Denver Cc 80214 Price Use :1112 Res,Improved Land Phone :303-237-7869 Bedrm: 3 Bath:1.75 TotRm: YB:1940 Pool: B1dgSF :1,020 Ac: : MetroScan / Jefferson (CO) : Owner :Hilliker Suzanne E/Keith P Parcel :021286 Site :2930 Chase St Wheat Ridge 80214 Xfered :04/03/1995 Mail :1369 W 133Rd Way Westminster Co 80234 Price :$67,000 Use :1112 Res,Improved Land Phone Bedrm: 2 Bath:1.00 TotRm: YB:1922 Pool: B1dgSF :986 Ac: : MetroScan / Jefferson (CO) • Owner :Johnson Robert N/Bettie C Parcel :021317 Site :2926 Chase St Wheat Ridge 80214 Xfered :11/01/1993 Mail :11605 W 73Rd Ave Arvada Co 80005 Price :$51,100 Use :1112 Res,Improved Land Phone :303-422-8713 Bedrm :3 Bath:1.75 TotRm: YB:1939 Pool: B1dgSF :816 Ac: : MetroScan / Jefferson (CO) • Owner :Gray Cameron J Parcel :021354 Site :2935 Chase St Wheat Ridge 80214 Xfered :06/18/2001 Mail :4507 Gibraltar St Denver Co 80249 Price Use :1112 Res,Improved Land Phone Bedrm :2 Bath:1.00 TotRm: YB:1938 Pool: BidgSF :764 Ac: MetroScan / Jefferson (CO) • Owner :Jackson Randy L/Kerry A Parcel :021358 Site :2936 Chase St Wheat Ridge 80214 Xfered :08/22/1994 Mail :2936 Chase St Wheat Ridge Co 80214 Price :$74,000 Use :1112 Res,Improved Land Phone :303-238-3142 Bedrm :3 Bath:1.75 TotRm: YB:1931 Pool: B1dgSF :829 Ac: : MetroScan / Jefferson (CO) • Owner :Fliethmann Sandra J Parcel :021368 Site :2938 Chase St Wheat Ridge 80214 Xfered :12/04/1996 Mail :2938 Chase St Wheat Ridge Co 80214 Price :$120,000 Use :1112 Res,Improved Land Phone Bedrm :l Bath:1.75 TotRm: YB:1927 Pool: B1dgSF :920 Ac: MetroScan / Jefferson (CO) • Owner :Northrup Arlene Mae Parcel :021377 Site :2934 Chase St Wheat Ridge 80214 Xfered :02/01/1993 Mail :2934 Chase St Wheat Ridge Co 80214 Price Use :1112 Res,Improved Land Phone :303-233-0937 Bedrm :2 Bath:1.00 TotRm: YB:1942 Pool: B1dgSF:875 Ac: Information compiled from various sources. Real Estate Solutions makes no representations MetroScan / Jefferson (CO) • Owner :Brooks Sharon R Parcel :021438 Site :2941 Chase St Wheat Ridge 80214 Xfered :06/14/1989 Mail :12225 W 35Th Ave Wheat Ridge Co 80033 Price Use :1112 Res,Improved Land Phone :303-940-0787 Bedrm:2 Bath:1.00 TotRm: YB:1927 Pool: B1dgSF :842 Ac: * : MetroScan / Jefferson (CO) • Owner :Campbell Lorretta M Parcel :021443 Site :2939 Chase St Wheat Ridge 80214 Xfered :05/23/1974 Mail :2939 Chase St Wheat Ridge Co 80214 Price :$25,000 Use :1112 Res,Improved Land Phone :303-233-2598 Bedrm: 2 Bath:1.00 TotRm: YB:1936 Pool: B1dgSF :985 Ac: * : MetroScan / Jefferson (CO) • Owner :Weitzel Lynn L Parcel :021494 Site :2942 Chase St Wheat Ridge 80214 Xfered :04/05/1995 Mail :2942 Chase St Wheat Ridge Cc 80214 Price :$98,200 Use :1112 Res,Improved Land Phone :303-202-9283 Bedrm: 2 Bath:1.00 TotRm: YB:1927 Pool: B1dgSF :1,020 Ac: Information compiled from various sources. Real Estate Solutions makes no representations MetroScan / Jefferson (CO) : Owner :Brase-Robert D Parcel :021135 Site :2994 Depew St Wheat Ridge 80214 - Xfered :11/09/1993 Mail :2994 Depew St Wheat Ridge Co 80214 Price :$88,000 Use :1112 Res,Improved Land Phone Bedrm: 4 Bath:1.75 TotRm: YB:1941 Pool: B1dgSF:1,216 Ac: MetroScan / Jefferson (CO) • Owner :Boschee Aaron/A E J Parcel :021216 Site :2938 Depew St Denver 80214 Xfered :04/09/2001 Mail :2938 Depew St Wheat Ridge Co 80214 Price :$167,500 Full Use :1112 Res,Improved Land Phone Bedrm: 2 Bath:1.75 TotRm: YB:1940 Pool: B1dg SF:784 Ac: • MetroScan / Jefferson (CO) • Owner :Palmer Matthew J Parcel :021220 Site :2944 Depew St Denver 80214 Xfered :04/06/2000 Mail :2944 Depew St Denver Co 80214 Price :$164,500 Use :1112 Res,Improved Land Phone Bedrm: 2 Bath:1.00 TotRm: YB:1927 Pool: B1dg SF:933 Ac: • MetroScan / Jefferson (CO) : Owner :Marshall Kevin J/Christy A Parcel :021240 Site :2995 Chase St Wheat Ridge 80214 Xfered :11/06/1997 Mail :2995 Chase St Wheat Ridge Co 80214 Price :$137,500 Use :1112 Res,Improved Land Phone Bedrm: 3 Bath:1.75 TotRm: YB:1938 Pool: B1dg SF:1,066 Ac: MetroScan / Jefferson (CO) • Owner :Johnson Dorothy N Parcel :021263 Site :3001 Chase St Wheat Ridge 80214 Xfered :02/07/1984 Mail :3001 Chase St Wheat Ridge Co 80214 Price Use :1112 Res,Improved Land Phone :303-233-1310 Bedrm: l Bath:1.00 TotRm: YB:1919 Pool: Bidg SF:613 Ac: • MetroScan / Jefferson (CO) • Owner :Joseph Debbi Parcel :021344 Site :2934 Depew St Edgewater 80214 Xfered :05/27/1997 Mail :2934 Depew St Edgewater Cc 80214 Price Use :1112 Res,Improved Land Phone Bedrm: 3 Bath:1.00 TotRm: YB:1929 Pool: B1dg SF:765 Ac: • MetroScan / Jefferson (CO) • Owner :Jefferson County Housing Authority Parcel :021413 Site :3002 Depew St Wheat Ridge 80214 Xfered :03/27/1992 Mail :6025 W 38Th Ave Wheat Ridge Co 80033 Price Use :9139 Exempt,County,Land Phone :303-422-8600 Bedrm: Bath: TotRm: YB: Pool: Bldg SF: Ac: • MetroScan / Jefferson (CO) • Owner :Hyland Patricia C Parcel :021474 Site :3002 Chase St Wheat Ridge 80214 Xfered :05/17/2001 Mail :7960 E Phillips Cir Englewood Co 80112 Price :$135,000 Full Use :1112 Res,Improved Land Phone Bedrm: 2 Bath:1.75 TotRm: YB:1937 Pool: B1dg SF:996 Ac: • MetroScan / Jefferson (CO) • Owner :Busse Michael Andrew/Angela S Parcel :021506 Site :2932 Depew St Wheat Ridge 80214 Xfered :04/03/1998 Mail :2932 Depew St Wheat Ridge Cc 80214 Price :$105,500 Use :1112 Res,Improved Land Phone :303-462-3153 Bedrm: 2 Bath:1.00 TotRm: YB:1929 Pool: Bidg SF:1,089 Ac: • MetroScan / Jefferson (CO) • Owner :Montoya Kenneth R Parcel :021509 Site :2994 Chase St Wheat Ridge 80214 Xfered :10/31/1997 Mail :2994 Chase St Wheat Ridge Co 80214 Price :$84,000 Use :1112 Res,Improved Land Phone Bedrm: 3 Bath:1.75 TotRm: YB:1939 Pool: B1dg SF:909 Ac: Information compiled from various sources. Real Estate Solutions makes no representations 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 September 27, 2001, at 7:30 p.m. in the Police Training Room, 2"d floor 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 petition shall be heard: Case No. WA-01-08: An application filed by Lee & Sharon Brooks for an interpretation of a story as defined by Section 26-123 of the City of Wheat Ridge Code of Laws and approval of an 8 foot side yard setback variance from the required 15 foot side yard setback resulting in a 7 foot side yard setback to the south and a 10 foot side yard setback variance from the required 15 foot side yard setback resulting in a 5 foot side yard setback to the north for property zoned Residential-One C (R-1C) and located at 2941 Chase Street. Kathy Field, Senior Secretary ATTEST: Wanda Sang, City Clerk To be Published: Wheat Ridge Transcript Date: September 6, 2001 Q\Kathy\B0A\PUBHRGS\010927.wpd I a W a CAR ;ORT n x ,.1 X n- X ° ~ L w O D Q= 1 0-° ` jj X J J k O c D O L m 13.0, p21dE1YA~1 RANCH 2y~. ~E #2995 WOODEN so`rrp 93.9z° . 4V LANDSCAPE TIE WALL lb- .o SSZ It-o- z~ o I LOT (x250 SF 1 Fc!j8&jyT VS09 SF 3 -9 Z CVVG .,UE - 125. o` X -X x x- c IYj. Y•5 Y.C 'i 6a' Y'-cF°~ ~rt i F 1P'Cwd ~f~y Tl i. .a Fem.; • •~Wre-.vu.l..aar+a..iwr>, ~ v- ~a~"i.vs t~ 13`a ` 4 13 d 27. o h 0 yi .LE-E ~SNaRGV aQOOKS I 2941 C14ASE 2& 2`. [n ~ i ~O a .:a vL l; J . 1. NtBeemdupY4liepa I ' >•P y ; „ B ~ f I - mdm(p Ylvd]OIy i IAAT O.SBUSN' . P I ~S i ~ I OtlIyW~ 2 R96J ' C ~ WOOwpmu ' . ~ 1{~AN:~ 3 G19W vyC~Y lm ti l Mrr wea m v xNb~mC _ ' s~^fO AU Fiav~nop aa.w.-®~s o.e - ~ I me~emwgmz - .mmmue>. Wmhawtl~ au l.m 'All. r I n ~ wN• bvwm Fes' f 9L - ~ 9. FbdNb.bQWbO _ mom~wM'Mxem ~ I ~ Gluu~. I. 0.-19gLLimWiabLa Y . vwew 19EmsWam ➢ 9 2.g-/4~O.C- a y YY .v E/{ST ~ I . . b.ub.:dcy IWI .1 H n F.'✓Aj/0.VS Saver ;4.'. /e' C~Nrm Fi vs 17 Lwt hY6 sfrv ,derMM- e Ado/ ( A-Y 4~ I'. I! ~I i'. I, r,.,,a , W. "W Civil T LAND DESCRIPTION: Design b LAND SURVEY PL 2941 CHASE STREET Group, inc. 8795 Ralston Road, Ste. 240 Arvada, Colorado 80002 LOT 23, BLOCK 9, OLINGER GARDENS E XXXXXXXXXXXX 303-431-0505 Fax: 303-431-7176 CHECK PRINT FOR OFFICE USE ONLY! date: 1/17/01 ALB E-mail: engineering@civildgroup.com nor-►~~+ LOT 23, BLOCK 9, OLINGER GAR CITY OF WHEATRIDGE, COUNTY OF JEFFERSON, BLOCK 10 BLOCK 3 1 FOUND N0. 2 REBAR 90'07' PLAT ~TeT~ (~F (~~I ~RADO _ 90'09'38" AM S r W o ~ Fes'. o z ~ W N > M is ~ ~ i BLOCK 4 z 'S J = W O C7 ~ i Z Q ~ F--~ ic) ( ~ c i 4 FLOOD PLAIN. t n COMMUNITY PANEL #085079 0005 B w f S 1 t k 1 I { f 1 S i CERTIFICATION: 1 CIVIL DESIGN GROUP, INC., DID NOT COMMITTMENT. CIVIL DESIGN GROUP, PLAT AND FOUND MONUMENTS TO D EASEMENTS, AND RIGHT-OF-WAYS. ®~e LEGEND: I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS LAND JIM SULLIVAN. I FURTHER CERTIFY 11 1 FOUND MONUMENT AS NOTED ABOVE DESCRIBED PARCEL, ON THIS t ham: A CONNECTIONS, ARE ENTIRELY WITHIN 3 k A ~ ~ ~ DEPEW STREET EXCEPT AS SHOWN, THAT THERE AR CONCRETE DESCRIBED PREMISES BY IMPROVEME EXCEPT AS INDICATED AND THAT TH l H o ~ N t; ~ V is v ~ ' I ~ h I tr t u r, 6 r:r' _ i is i e~'+1 t y rr HIS z; _ ~~v t?,. S'' i, ~ r-- _ 4 ~ GRAVEL DRIVE SIGN OF ANY EASEMENT CROSSING PARCEL, EXCEPT AS NOTED. i~ wry P ;N~ r3N ~''fia Yi y~_ ~ .:.f i 1 _ ~ ~ I 4 BLOCK 8 - - - INTERIOR LOT LINE ~'r y . 'f. ;T 1.. , S ~ l:' ~ . ~ s. Q t_ Vj ev. c~,~ H x 4' CHAIN LINK FENCE nn Y ~ti ~ ~ A~ W k y ~ .'dam-;;~t®r iV i ~I 1 . ~sr~cr ~ ae~ - \d x u'3 k-~Jl`t -A... WEST 30TH AVEN U E 1 - ::..r.4,,,~.. ~wr/ 1j. 4 i \T ~e (50' R.O.W. PLAT BOOK 3 PAGE 30) 1 t+~~+ ~ ~ p ~ g © o`~ ~ ~ Q c , cn ~ . . ~ ~ . fl Q ' . ~ U'l ~ c~ . , a , ~ , . o o ~ 90'07' PLAT +~g^ R' ` a A 90'09'38"AM . { K VJ - r tv 4~ oy~ ~ ' w~, ~ __m _ _r~. Ar.. a ~v - 2' HIGH ROCK WALL ~ ~ ry o tfi ~ ' ~ tq 4' HIGH CHAIN LINK ~ P ~ y FENCE f~~\ ~Iv/ MASONARY a n nn A (1 ~fl l~2995 I ~ wnnn~ti I o _ 1 ~ LV `tV vv Q. Q A 3 ' SCALE 1 L c NOTICE: Ci v II Desmign 04 ACCORDING TO COLORADO LAW, C.R.S 13-80-105, YOU MUST COMMENCE ANY LEGAL ACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY WITHIN 1: c Group, Inc. Lo 4 THREE YEARS AFTER YOU FIRST DISCOVERED SUCH DEFECT. IN NO EVENT Engineers + PI MAY ANY ACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY BE rs + Planners + Surveyors COMMENCED MORE THAN TEN YEARS FROM THE DATE OF THE 8795 Ralston R CERTIFICATION SHOWN HERE ON. Arvada, Colora 'sston Road. Ste. 240 303.431.0505 Fair 303-431-7176 N F.. A Civil ~S LAND DESCRIPTION: Design ELEVATION SHO 2941 CHASE STREET Group, Inc. 8795 Ralston Road, Ste. 240 Arvada, Colorado 80002 303-431-0505 Fax: 303-431-7176 CHECK PRINT FOR OFFICE USE ONLY! date: 1/17101 ALB E-mail; engineering@civildgroup.com LOT 23, BLOCK 9, OLINGER GAR CITY OF WHEATRIDGE, COUNTY OF JEFFERSON, EST 30TH AVEN U E e- (5 0' ~0' R.O.W. PLAT BOOK 3 PAGE 30) o,,. i oo. oh xxxxxxxxxxxx O~~ e onr~ic BEI ASSUMED E 2' HIGH ROCK WALL ~ ~p~ ' pp~ X00 c~ „~O 4' HIGH CHAIN LINK FENCE ~ n~A~n~iARY STATE OF COLORADO  d o`" 3 CAR 4 4 ~ SORT o ti ti i 4 Qc~X~ m fi i 4 4 d N ~ J ~ ~3'__HIGH a funktxvP+.w :Fm rv.. 'iNr rsn-.~-9k4t±deMEa&msu+awmwuwe~.ew+i~'abstSS F~"~nn.` ~,w.'kV u+€',cW [f~'~' ~ • ~x~ Mww ..~:-wmrrewtwnsw.5i~we`mSwwwms.m~e^meemww . .py~nroti,~ ♦ 1 S Q o ~ Q~ WIRE Q ~~~~~a-~°^ MESH Q ~~^W X ~a _ FENCE p 4 wJ' ~.o~ W Q a 1. ~ x 3 ~ ~ L ~-,~Q 4~ W ~ a o' ~ o' 20' 0o O O ~~y C H O SCALE 1"=10' „ V / ~ `1 I LI N 3 ~ S.C~ 9~~ FE o ~ I k a v <f< X X Q x ~4 ~ ASPH. ~ ~ 8 ~ - WOOD 0 0 0 0 0 W J a 3 N FRAME ALLEY C~ a ti ~~yo ~°'6 GARAGE ° o of o x x x x OkP~' ~D`~h Q ~ a Z ° _ ~ THE CERTIFICATION DATE REP U I SITE CONDITIONS AS THEY EXI ~ TIME OF ORIGINAL FIELD WOR LO i 1.9' 2.1' Q ~ SITE CHANGES INCLUDIN 3 TOPOGRAPHY, IMPROVEM ACREAGE, EASEMENTS OR ENCUMBRANCES AND/OR OW CHANGES MAY HAVE OCCURR WILL NOT BE REFLECTE ~~j~` Civil Design Group, inc. 4' HIGH CH 3 i i OCopyright 2004 .All rights Reserv NOTICE: \ N 3 l a  ACCORDING TO COLORADO LAW, C.R.S 13-80-105' YOU MUST COMMENCE ANY LEGAL i~ a ACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY WITHIN THREE YEARS AFTER YOU cloviol tD Ul ~ M u N o a FIRST DISCOVERED SUCH DEFECT. IN NO 4 EVENT MAY ANY ACTION BASED UPON ANY 0) C3 0 M LO DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY BE COMMENCED MORE N r L THAN TEN YEARS FROM THE DATE OF THE Engineers + Pla d CERTIFICATION SHOWN HERE ON. 8795 Ralston Ro Arvada, Colorad d? a h r r ~ S - ~ ~ - l I t A 4 i t ~ ~ ~ [ ~ a I r I r ~ • 4; r i A t A f I ~ t f i ' & i i ~ i w { ~ ~ 1 Y ~ A x r { b d 4 4 r f f 1 a a I t t f p ~A~~ i f f ~ 1 t 4 6 f Y" I 6 t t ~ a ® f } e k r I i 1 t x { a t > t f r , r , p ~ ww k e 1 I P i....... ° I A ` a f i 3 r ` ~ i f E ~y ~ ~rrrrrAwerrir auall~li f I m I E f { + r ( I e ~ / ~ I ~ - I ~ _ ~ _ w . 4 I _ ~ _ ~ R. rim . I y 1 a ~ ¢ a * e m a ~ ~ ` ~m ~ • n , ~ c i $r a ~ r , K ~ i r 9 ! R +~r 518" R ~ ~ ~ M - _ I t e 11 ! c t, ,r P Y 1 i ~ ~ v.+►~r. ~p T'.'.. •t v r ~ 1 e p 1 0 - r Y_~ f ..~...P,~-,-~ - - - - - wwwwwr mow. ~ ~ Ye i7i i ~ Vpii i1+~Il~ilip~V#i ~ # 1 a m ~ ■ ■ s ■ t W +►T e 0 0 4 ~ 4 ~~{{~~~~~~~~qq■~ # A ~[7M A I s 4 1 f • r 4 ~ M 1 t ~ 1 1 1 ~ 4 i 7~ { F p l r !fit ~ a o p e B ~ I M /F/ s s b f l a 3 _ _ f ~ a . Lt t s A 1 ~ I ~ i i ~ ~ t 9 A a r a 3 e 8 't i A f i k e r ~ ~ 4 a ~ k e t a i i i _ , i I ! ~ 4 I ~ Z 1 a F e i m f ar ~ R r i - _ # ~~~rr _ Iw f 1 a t { . a 4+ rrr a- 9$ ! $ f ~ s e t 50"77V4 i r i 3 E F 4 SA -1 C 9 A i 9 M Ya l i i i i E Sep 251121001 F f a`~j~n t e f;; s~ti, _`..R3 ~ s w 3"-~" st3" "I S Tv,~~ ~TvPJ 4,, TREADS ~■~r~ C9" ` ~ a tam. i j e j, J i Y w s + i M .t K 3 ~/4" osa ~ ors-ic"o.c Irt, t ~ L__,. P II 4. N 9 I II L~~ L. I I I r I I i! iIIII - 1, ii 'e I r~ _i ns,3 ~ ~  ,r • ~ ~ a ~1 * • ` ~r I ~9~vt~0~-r'it~~c/ I ~u~~. _ 8. R-19 batt insulation in 2 ~ ~ walls or R- 13 bait in 2x f ~ Z ~ ,~C 9 ~ ~~f S~ S ~ ~GI,~, t~/ ~ ~t/tl'E~DB SEad garage walls. t~~011 lll ~Xf? ® M • • ~ • s - . ~ J aY T ~ 9. R-30 batt or blown G~~.GiIG~ L'~'~'r ~ insulation in ceiling 'W j1 4 F{h h ~ ~ I »w,.e.. 7 Z' bt. ~j ,!o ~ D L SG ~ul~~ 27. L~O J~/~i~~ SF/~ minicm,m. 1 i . i . 1` / ~ 4 ~ r r ~o i t_. IIU~ 3 J ,.~_.~~..~.nm~. i~ I"°"'1~`°T°°'°~~I - - - _ .~r , r t' L .r__ f t 1 't 1 R +'r.. .ppyyq I .w+~~wr-+..:.....x.+.. +~+r4'e ~w+nwnvmmn~... ....e„»..+..~....~a.+~-.w,.......e-a..a~w>uwwaM.!w,,,,y,..m.~ien a.w.arrsw:.r~.w+~wrs~Wrvm+w~~..,..- ...-.--.~,hv.n.w. 5 ~ ~ .,....e.+.~.~••-•.++~+e• -..e...~...-m-,:..-.«-.....a«w+..+..~..........,,......,m... yaw»y..x. rewneww~w.~.s+a.. .:m..,~wm..,.+~.....e~.......~.,.,_.......«. r~ L F- r...r..' uw......r...ag=,. r.ww..u  J` L: Z /t - 1 ~ out x L 1 ~ L C 4 t i e a ~ ~1 ~ ~ t~l Ww~..T I 1' t. W r s 4 rf 3 e w+r. 6 ..L y y ~ /"'1 M Id. ~f f t. ff r f r c; e Ml ~ t . - i .,-..,._..~,.......t w ~ y "4 ~ ~ 5~ ..~.~_~wwwn,w.. . YnaW W « ~:.ww,.,, _,..aw.. , ...n...........~.~.,-w...uw..".y,*°e.^°`~.' `b4. -E ...,„......a.wr. ~ o .a h .,i ~ i • . . ~ _~.~..a_..d.,. 1 ~ ~ gr ~ 4 1 J ~w~n~ n~~~r~art~as ~ 3 - - _ _ ~ i~ 4 ~ ~4 1 R r - I ~ _ _  , ,.w..~,.,. ,.n...w - lrl Xq r R 3 t~ W 50 1 8 $~t i~ 2X4 w „w~ '"a o ~ ~r gars e w s. 8 R•30 ! wn att or o ,i O N . `n Hsu tan ~n fling ~ V~ O a G m~~:mum, w ~ ~ ~ 'S%.4I2 D~'Ti~i/L t i J ~1 _ . ~'/rte b M r"~ rTl n r_ L/1 _ _u~w_ ..~,.,....~..~.e..._~_..~.._ CC3 Q m~.a.,.~,........~..~.W~.....,.,...... _ _.e.~...W..~,........,~.~.__~...~.....~,~.~..~,..,~._ W ~ ~ ..a... ~,~r..,,.~_._,~.._.4.w..__.,...._..~. v,,,~..~~. ~,....~~,..~,..~.^p.__n..._._..~._„~..~.~. _ __4 ._a... ~ ~ ~~.__.,,.~.~r~...~.~. _ ~.W.....~._ ~_~-~.~.-,-.-~~.~.~.._>~.~.-..i . , ....~......_....~~,W,~.~.....~..~~.......__~.._~......~..~.~.,~._~_.«...~.....,..~.._~......ti..~~...,~,~..~..~~..,...~....,... _ ; ~w.. ~..i a _.~..w...~..~._...._.__,~ M.,__. _ ....v...__~..~,...w.._~_,....~.~._.,.,_..w.~ .~....e....~..~, _ ,~rv...~___.__ I _ . _ a_ ~ o .......y. ~,w.~ , -.,.a.,...._e........ _ p. o~ O L ~ ap w-~. z ~c~~ 3 g ao c ~ Y °a~ r_ Z  5 Ou 77~i SA -1 Aug 10, 2001 N i J t d' G N O 00 i O i ; ~ i t. I ~ O O 9 1 i ~ 1 ~ ~ U f t I I I f( I ~ ~ ~ { i II a~ ~ ~ -v 3 1 i j r ~ c~ 1 s ' k i o~ U [[i f f ~ ~ a~ I ~ A i s F r-~ N i" a ~ ~ 3 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ S I r- i 1 I • ' ~ { ~ I - rte: u; a a r ~ r Qe i Q ~ i 'i i { ~ . ~ i I i! i ;1 ~~GtF ao~~tr Ij f /g'+Cirk,4t F'trf V • 4 t Att.~~,, low/ A~i~v r 9 - I,  ~ H. R 19 bntt iasuladoa walls of R 13 belt is ~ ~ ~ _ _ r~ _ r • d j garage walls. j ~ It 30 batt of I~owu in~ut~cion in ca6ng miinimwn. i r~ Y ` P 9 _ d ~r l~~ Vi4Ti~/.S Y. 1 l i f.• i ~4 ~C S Z r-r~ ~ ~ :Q ~ ~ i ~ A~t.~-K~- l~/bN FiEv.4r~o~v I d i { v SA 6 i f i I f Sep 25,2001 ik d . ~.«w.~:;:~ «,r~.,_,«.:._ ..M.~4.,..~.,,~,rk~.«.„.e....+.,.-w:».a.-.....u~..,.P~.-a~„~,,..~a~,z..,..,,:b.a....,...;~.,~,,.«~ ?gip` I~Atl M~ 9 F ~ . ~I"""1 e j N ~M ~w 9 aww~w _ _ _ ~ ~.,.r,.., ~ W A~~1 f~ ~ - ~ s s _ . ~i f 1 f -  8. R-19 belt iasularion i walls or R-13 batt in . ~ ~ulation in 2ac6 O 4 3 batt in 2x4 garage walls. gw,~"~ 9. R-30 belt or blown ~u~o~ ~ ~ ~ ° ~a insulsrioa is ceiling minimum. ~~Ooo v~E-,aw } 6 ~ ~r S, ~ ~c~ 2.4 , t ~0 6F ~+~4-Ge ~ a ~ CC3 . 0 ~ ~ P 4~ ~ .-•r ~ T ~ W ~~■i~~ ~ ~ ~ o ~O ~o$ o~~ z s~~ 3~~ ao s ~ i SA -2 July 30, 2001 CHURCH & Associates, Inc. ENGINEERS & GEOLOGISTS SOILS AND FOUNDATION INVESTIGATION PROPOSED RESIDENCE 2941 CHASE STREET WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO Prepared for: KEN B. NELSON CO. ATTN: KEN NELSON 10182 WEST 70TH DRIVE ARVADA, COLORADO 80004 JOB NO. 14249 AUGUST 13, 2001 DENVER 4501 Wadsworth Boulevard Wheat Ridge, CO 80033 CASTLE ROCK 303.660.4358 303.463.9317 Fax: 303.463.9321 EVERGREEN 303.816.1455 LOVELAND 970.663.2124 TABLE OF CONTENTS SCOPE I CONCLUSIONS I PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION 2 SITE CONDITIONS 2 INVESTIGATION 2 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 3 BUILDING FOUNDATIONS 4 SLAB-ON-GRADE CONSTRUCTION 5 LATERAL LOADS AND SUBSURFACE DRAINAGE 6 SURFACE DRAINAGE 7 LIMITATIONS 8 FIGURE I - SITE PLAN AND LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY BORING FIGURE 2 - LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING FIGURES 3 THROUGH 7 - SWELL-CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS FIGURE 8 - TYPICAL INTERIOR FOUNDATION AND UNDERSLAB DRAIN APPENDIX A - IMPORTANT INFORMATION ABOUT THIS REPORT SCOPE This report presents the results of a soils and foundation investigation for a proposed residence at 2941 Chase Street in Wheat Ridge, Colorado. The purpose of our investigation was to evaluate subsurface conditions at the site and provide geotechnical recommendations for the proposed construction. The report presents a description of subsurface conditions encountered at the site, recommended foundation system, and design and construction criteria influenced by the subsurface conditions. The report is based on data developed during the field and laboratory investigations and our experience. A summary of our findings and recommendations is presented below. CONCLUSIONS 1. Subsurface materials encountered in the test hole (TIT) consisted of 6.5 feet of very stiff, sandy clay overlying very hard, silty claystone with sandy lenses to the maximum explored depth of 30 feet. Samples of sandy, clay from 1 and 4 feet indicated low expansion potentials when wetted. Samples of claystone from 9, 14, and 19 feet also exhibited low expansion potentials when wetted. 2. Free water was encountered in the boring at 19 feet during drilling. When the boring was checked 15 minutes and 4 days after drilling, ground water was measured at 29 and 7 feet, respectively. The boring had caved to 24.5 four days after drilling. 3. The proposed structure can be constructed with either a spread footing foundation system bearing on native clay, with a low risk for movement due to potentially expansive soils or a drilled pier foundation bottomed in the claystone bedrock. Design and construction criteria are presented in the body of the report. 4. The soils are suitable for support of slab-on-grade construction, but there will be a low risk of movement or cracking due to expansive soils. Any slabs supported on grade should be free to move vertically, and not tied to the structure. 5. Positive drainage down and away from all foundation walls should be established and maintained at all times. Soils and Foundation Investigation Job No. 14249 Page 2 PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION A single-family residence with garden-level basement and detached garage are proposed at the site. The location of the existing residence is presented on Figure 1. The proposed residence will consist of concrete and wood frame construction and relatively light construction loads are anticipated. Foundation elevations of 1.5 and 4 feet below the existing ground surface are anticipated for this report. SITE CONDITIONS The site is located in a developed residential area on the west side of Chase Street in Wheat Ridge, Colorado. The proposed residence is to be located on the central portion of the site, encompassing the existing structure's building envelope. A residence and detached garage are currently located in the central portion of the property and are proposed to be demolished. The existing one-story, residence with a basement is approximately 60 years old and is assumed to be founded on spread footings. The main residence structure appears to have preformed satisfactorily. Evidence of slab heave was observed in the surrounding exterior slab-on-grade construction. The property is basically flat and has a good cover of landscaped grass and trees. INVESTIGATION Subsurface conditions were investigated on July 26, 2001 by drilling one exploratory boring at the location indicated on Figure 1. The boring was advanced using a 4-inch diameter continuous flight auger powered by a CME-45 drilling rig. Samples were taken at select intervals using a California sampler, which was driven into the soil by dropping a 140-pound hammer through a free fall of 30 inches. The number of blows required to drive the sampler into the soil is known as a penetration test. The number of blows required for the sampler to penetrate 12 inches is evaluated and gives an indication of the consistency or relative density of the soils and bedrock. The results of the penetration tests and Soils and Foundation Investigation Job No. 14249 Page 3 logs of the material encountered are presented on the Log of Exploratory Boring, Figure 2. Samples were returned to the laboratory where they were visually classified and appropriate testing was assigned to evaluate the engineering properties of the soil layers. Laboratory testing consisted of moisture-density determinations, swell-consolidation tests, and percent passing 200 sieve analyses. The results of the laboratory testing are presented on Figures 2 through 6. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Subsurface materials encountered in the test hole (TH) consisted of 6.5 feet of very stiff, sandy clay overlying very hard, silty claystone with sandy lenses to the maximum explored depth of 30 feet. Free water was encountered in the boring at 19 feet during drilling. When the boring was checked 15 minutes and 4 days after drilling, ground water was measured at 29 and 7 feet, respectively. The boring had caved to 24 feet when checked four days after drilling. Additional subsurface details are presented on Figure 2. The geotechnical practice in the Denver area uses a relative scale to evaluate swelling potentials. When the sample is wetted under a surcharge pressure of 1000 pounds per square foot (PSF), the measured swell is classified as low, moderate, high, or very high. The following table presents the relative classification criteria. Additional important information regarding geotechnical risk is included as Appendix A. Risk Category Percent Swell Und 1000 PSF Surcharge P Low 0 - <2 Moderate A 2 - <4 High 4 - <6 Very High Greater thaSwell-consolidation test results for samples of sandy clay from 1 and 4 feet exhibited low expansion potentials (1.4 and 0.3 percent, respectively) when wetted under a surcharge pressure of 1000 Soils and Foundation Investigation Job No. 14249 Page 4 PSF. Samples of silty, sandy claystone from 9, 14 and 19 feet exhibited low expansion potentials (1.5, 0.3, and 0.5 percent, respectively) when wetted. Swell-consolidation test results are presented on Figures 3 through 6. BUILDING FOUNDATIONS The soils at the anticipated foundation elevations of 1.5 and 4 feet below the ground surface consists of sandy clay with a low swell potential that is underlain by claystone bedrock. The clayey soil is suitable for a spread footing foundation system, but there is a low risk of movement due to expansive soils. The relatively high swell pressures observed in the upper sandy clay increase the risk of shallow garage foundation movement or cracking. If the owner can not accept this risk of movement then a drilled pier foundation bottomed in the claystone bedrock should be used. Spread footings should be designed with a maximum allowable bearing pressure of 3000 PSF and a minimum dead load pressure of 1000 PSF. The large dead load pressure is due to the relatively high swell pressure observed at the foundation depth. Any fill encountered at proposed foundation elevations should be removed and replaced with controlled fill. New fill should consist of granular materials, such as silty to clayey sand, and should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum standard Proctor dry density (MPD), per ASTM D698, within 2 percent of the optimum moisture content (OMC). The spread footing foundation should be designed and constructed to meet the following criteria. 1. All footings must be supported by native sandy clay. Any soils loosened by the excavation or forming process should be removed from the footing areas prior to placing concrete. The footing excavations should be observed by a geotechnical engineer to confirm subsurface conditions. The excavations must not be allowed to lose moisture. Any moisture loss may increase the swell potential. 2. We recommend minimum footing widths of at least 16 inches for continuous footings, and 24 inches square for concrete pads, which support columns. Larger sized footings may be necessary depending on the load of the structure. Soils and Foundation Investigation Job No. 14249 Page 5 3. Continuous foundation walls should be reinforced to span local anomalies in the subsoil. A minimum reinforcement of at least two, No. 5 grade 60 bars top and bottom in all foundation walls is recommended. Walls should be reinforced to span an unsupported length of 10 feet. 4. Footings must be protected from frost action. Footings should be covered with a minimum of three (3) feet of soil for frost protection. A drilled straight shaft pier system is a foundation option that will have a lower relative risk for movement. A drilled pier foundation should be designed and constructed in accordance with the following criteria. 1. Drilled piers should have a minimum length of 16 feet and a minimum bedrock penetration of 6 feet. Piers should be designed for a maximum allowable end bearing pressure of 30,000 PSF and an allowable skin friction (side shear) of 2,000 PSF for the portion in bedrock. Piers should be designed for a minimum deadload pressure of 10,000 PSF times pier end area. If minimum deadloads can not be obtained, the piers should be lengthened using 1,500 PSF in side shear along the pier perimeter. 2. All piers should be reinforced full length to resist uplift forces of 21,200 pounds for 12-inch piers and 17,650 pounds for 10-inch piers. Dead loads can be subtracted from these uplift forces. Reinforcement should extend into grade beams of foundation walls. A minimum 4-inch void forming material should be placed between the piers to concentrate dead loads and avoid contact with potentially expansive soils. Sonotubes must be used to form the top of the pier and avoid "mushrooming" the tops of piers. 3. Groundwater was encountered at 21 feet in during drilling and was measured at 7 feet in the boring when checked 4 days after drilling. When checked 4 days after drilling, the boring had caved to 25 feet. Therefore, dewatering may be required during drilled pier installation. We suggest the foundation contractor drill a preliminary pier hole to evaluate the groundwater and cave conditions at the time of foundation construction. Concrete should be onsite at the time of drilling and placed immediately after the pier is drilled and inspected thus minimizing the potential for dewatering. If groundwater enters the boring, tremie (underwater) concrete placement will be necessary if dewatering cannot minimize groundwater infiltration. Concrete should not be placed in more than 3 inches of water. 4. The installation of the piers should be observed by a representative of our office to confirm piers are bottomed in suitable material and holes are properly cleaned. SLAB-ON-GRADE CONSTRUCTION The proposed garage and basement will utilize slab-on-grade construction. Some slabs also may be supported near the ground surface. Slab-on-grade construction will have a low risk of movement due Soils and Foundation Investigation Job No. 14249 Page 6 to expansive soils and some slab cracking and differential movement may occur. The slabs should be constructed as "floating" slabs, which are free to move in the vertical direction. If fill soils are used, a non-expansive granular soil such as a silty to clayey sand should be used and compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of the MPD within 2 percent of the OMC. The following design and construction details for slab-on-grade construction are recommended. 1. Slabs should be separated from exterior walls and interior bearing members. Vertical movement of the slabs should not be restricted. 2. Slab bearing partitions should be minimized. Where such partitions are necessary, a slip joint should be constructed to allow free vertical movement of the partitions. Slip joints should allow at least 1.5 inches of vertical movement and should be monitored and maintained by the owner after construction. 3. Underslab plumbing should be eliminated where feasible. Where such plumbing is unavoidable it should be thoroughly pressure tested during construction. 4. Plumbing and utilities, which pass through the slab, should be isolated from the slab with expansion joint material. 5. If a forced air heating system is used and the furnace is located on the slab, we recommend provision of a 6-inch collapsible connection between the furnace and the duct work. The above design and construction criteria will not prevent movement, but will reduce damage if movement occurs. Exterior flatwork may settle if supported by backfill which has not been compacted adequately. We recommend all non-structural exterior backfill be compacted to at least 90 percent of the MPD (95 percent under structural areas), within 2 percent of the optimum moisture content. LATERAL LOADS AND SUBSURFACE DRAINAGE Below grade walls must be designed for lateral loads. For "active" conditions, the walls should be designed for an equivalent fluid pressure of 40 pounds per cubic foot (PCF). For "at rest" conditions, equivalent fluid pressures of 50 PCF should be used. These loads do not include swelling pressures, Soils and Foundation Investigation Job No. 14249 Page 7 hydrostatic loads or surcharge loads such as sloping backfill or vehicles. Expansive soil should not be used for backfill. Due to the potential for higher ground water levels after construction and during wet periods,. a basement sub-slab drainage system should be installed on this site. This system should consist of an 8-inch compacted gravel layer below the basement slabs. Four-inch diameter perforated rigid PVC pipe should be installed at the bottom of the gravel layer at 15 feet on center, and routed to an interior perimeter foundation drainage system. A geotextile filter fabric should be installed between the soil and the gravel layer to keep the gravel clean, and plastic should be installed between the gravel and the concrete slab to reduce moisture migration through the floor slab. A typical interior and underslab drain detail is presented on Figure 8. Based on the site topography the drain should lead to a sump where water can be removed by pumping. SURFACE DRAINAGE The risk for wetting of foundation soils can be reduced by carefully planned and maintained surface drainage. This is particularly important at this site where the clay and claystone will heave when the moisture content increases. The following precautions should be observed during construction and be maintained at all times after the structure is completed. 1. Excessive wetting or drying of open foundation excavations should be avoided as much as possible during construction. 2. Backfill adjacent to foundation walls should be moistened and compacted. Any settlement of backfill after completion of the structure should be repaired and positive drainage reestablished. 3. The ground surface surrounding the structure should be sloped to drain away from the structure in all directions. A minimum slope of 12 inches in the first 10 feet should be established. 4. Roof downspouts and drains should discharge well beyond the limits of all backfill and irrigated landscaping should not be placed with in 10 feet of the foundation walls. Soils and Foundation Investigation Job No. 14249 Page 8 5. Plastic membranes should not be used to cover the ground surface immediately surrounding the structure. These membranes trap moisture and prevent normal evaporation from occurring. LIMITATIONS Although the boring was located to obtain a reasonably accurate determination of foundation conditions, variations in the subsoil conditions are possible. If conditions different from those described are encountered in excavations, we should be notified. Excavations should be observed by a representative of our office. The cost of construction observations is not included in this investigation. An environmental assessment of the site is outside our scope of work for this project. If we can be of further service in discussing the contents of this report, or in the analysis of the influence of subsurface conditions on the design of the structures, please call. Sincerely, CHURCH & Associates, ? L Mark J. Vessely, P.E. MJV/csc 3 copies sent t v ~ `v~ O>• Q yr 339; PROPOSED RESIDENCE 2941 CHASE STREET WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO 30TH AVENUE NOT TO SCALE h w w (n w a U SITE PLAN AND LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY BORING JOB NO. 14249 FIGURE 1 TH-1 12/12 WC = 16.9 DD = 107 -200 = 69 16/12 WC = 25.7 5 DID 100 5 4 DAYS 50/12 WC = 28.3 10 DD = 97 10 200 = 67 F-- w LL 50/6 WC = 27.0 15 DID 101 15 0 - 50/6 WC = 23.7 IVA DD=104 4 DAYS 25 25 15 MIN 50/6 EXPLANATIONS: CLAY, SANDY, VERY STIFF, MOIST, BROWN CLAYSTONE, SILTY, SANDY LENSES, VERY ® HARD, MOIST, OLIVE, BROWN fl 12/12 INDICATES THAT 12 BLOWS OF A 140 POUND HAMMER FALLING 30 INCHES WERE ~J REQUIRED TO DRIVE A 2.5 INCH O.D. SAMPLER 12 INCHES 4 DAYS INDICATES DEPTH TO TEST HOLE CAVE AND THE TIME AFTER DRILLING Z~--w THE MEASUREMENT WAS TAKEN 0 INDICATES DEPTH TO FREE WATER AND THE NUMBER OF DAYS AFTER DRILLING THE - MEASUREMENT WAS TAKEN NOTES: 1. THE EXPLORATORY BORING WAS DRILLED ON 7-26-2001 USING A 4-INCH DIAMETER CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGER POWERED BYA CME 45 DRILLING RIG. 2. WC = WATER CONTENT(%) DD = DRY DENSITY (PCF) -200 = PERCENT OF FINES PASSING THE NUMBER 200 SIEVE. LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING JOB NO. 14249 FIGURE 2 F- w w w 8 7 6 5 O 4 3 W 2 1 0 -1 -2 0 ~ -3 N ~ -4 0 U -5 -6 -7 -8 0.1 i i I i EXPANSION UNDER CONSTANT PRESSURE DUE TO WETTING i i i i i I 1 I 1 10 100 APPLIED PRESSURE - ksf Sample of Clay, sandy, From TH-1 @ V Natural Dry Unit Weight = 107 PCF Natural Moisture Content = 16.9 % JOB NO. 14249 SWELL - CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS FIGURE 3 8 7 6 5 O 4 p 3 W 2 1 0 -1 -2 0 ~ -3 ~ -4 0 U -5 -6 -7 -8 0.1 i i i I I I i I EXPANSION UNDER CONSTANT PRESSURE DUE TO WETTING i i I i i i I I i I 1 10 100 APPLIED PRESSURE - ksf Sample of Clay, silty, From TH-1 @ 4' Natural Dry Unit Weight = 100 PCF Natural Moisture Content = 25.7 % JOB NO. 14249 SWELL - CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS FIGURE 4 8 7 6 5 4 p 3 W 2 1 0 0 -1 -2 -3 -4 0 U -5 -6 -7 -8 0.1 I i i i EXPANSION UNDER CONSTANT PRESSURE DUE TO WETTING I i I I I I i i 17f I I -Lill 1 10 100 APPLIED PRESSURE - ksf Sample of Claystone, sandy, From TH-I @ 9' Natural Dry Unit Weight = 97 PCF Natural Moisture Content = 67 % JOB NO. 14249 SWELL - CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS FIGURE 5 x 7 6 5 II W 3 2 1 EXPANSION UNDER CONSTANT PRESSURE DUE TO WETTING I c 0 I 1 i -2 -3 -4 U ~ -5 -6 i -7 i i -8 FT- I 0.1 1 10 APPLIED PRESSURE - ksf Sample of Claystone, sandy, From TH-1 @ 14' Natural Dry Unit Weight = 101 PCF Natural Moisture Content = 27.0 % 100 JOB NO. 14249 SWELL - CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS FIGURE 6 8 7 6 5 0 4 p 3 iC W 2 EXPANSION UNDER CONSTANT 1 PRESSURE DUE TO WETTING c 0 -1 _2 -3 -4 O U -5 -6 -7 _g 0.1 1 10 100 APPLIED PRESSURE - ksf Sample of Claystone, sandy, From TH-1 @ 19' Natural Dry Unit Weight = 104 PCF Natural Moisture Content = 23.7 % JOB NO. 14249 SWELL - CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS FIGURE 7 I to O o GRAVEL SPECIFICATIONS: CLEAN WASHED GRAVEL 100% PASSING 1.5" 60-100% RETAINED BACKFILL #4 MAXIMUM 3% PASSING #200 BASEMENT WALL 4-6 MIL LINER OR EQUIVALENT IMPERMEABLE MEMBRANE O O BASEMENT SLAB .0 00~ 6"-8" MIN n n. MIRAFI 140N OR EQUIVALENT DRAINAGE FILTER FABRIC 4 INCH DIAMETER SLOTTED PLASTIC PIPE. THE DRAIN LINE SHOULD BE LAID ON A SLOPE RANGING BETWEEN 1/8 TO 1/4 INCH DROP PER FOOT OF DRAIN. NOTE: DRAIN PIPE SHOULD BE 12 INCHES BELOW FLOOR AT THE HIGHEST POINT AND SLOPE TO SUMP WHERE WATER CAN BE REMOVED BY PUMPING OR TO A POSITIVE GRAVITY OUTLET. TYPICAL INTERIOR WALL AND UNDER SLAB DRAIN JOB NO. 14249 FIGURE 8 Appendix A Important Information About The Report The data collected by Church & Associates during this investigation was used to provide geotechnical information and recommendations regarding subsurface conditions on the site investigated, the effect of those conditions on the proposed construction, and the foundation type for the named client. The stratification lines indicated on the boring log are approximate, and subsurface conditions encountered during construction may differ from those presented herein. This uncertainty cannot be eliminated because of the many variabilities associated with geology- For example, material and engineering characteristics of soil and bedrock may change more gradually or more quickly than indicated in this report, and the actual engineering properties of non-sampled soil or rock may differ from interpretations. Quantitative conclusions regarding the performance of geotechnical structures prior to construction are not possible because of the complexity of subsurface conditions. Rather, engineering judgments and experience are used to estimate likely geotechnical performance and provide the necessary recommendations. Put another way, we cannot be sure about what is not visible, so the collected data and our training and experience are used to develop predictions and recommendations. There are no guarantees or warranties implied or expressed. The owner and/or client must understand that uncertainties are associated with geotechnical engineering, and they, the owner and/or client, must determine the level of risk they are willing to accept for the proposed construction. The risks can be reduced, but not eliminated, through more detailed investigation; which costs more money and takes more time, and through any appropriate construction which might be recommended as a result of that more detailed investigation. To reduce the level of uncertainty, this report was prepared only for the referenced client and for the proposed construction indicated in the report. Unless authorized by Church & Associates in writing, the owner will assume additional geotechnical risk if this report is used for any construction that differs from that indicated in the report. Our firm should be consulted well before changes in the proposed construction occur; such as the nature, size, configuration, orientation, or location of any improvements. Additionally, the knowledge and experience of the local geotechnical practice is continually expanding and it must be understood the presented recommendations were made according to the standard of practice at the time of report issuance. If the construction occurs 1 or more years after issuance of the report, the owner and/or client should contact our firm to determine if additional investigation or revised recommendations would be advisable. The geotechnical practice in the Denver Region must consider the risk associated with expansive soils. and bedrock The geotechnical practice in the Denver area uses a relative scale to evaluate swelling potentials. When the sample is wetted under a surcharge pressure (loading) of 1000 pounds per square foot (PSF), the measured amount of swell is classified as low, moderate, high, or very high. Table 1 presents the relative classification criteria for the percentage of expansion based on initial sample height at the indicated surcharge pressure. Table I Risk Category Percent Swell Under a 1000 PSF Surcharge Pressure Low 0-<2 Moderate 2 - <4 High 4-<6 Very High Greater than 6 Source: Colorado Association of Geotechnical Engineers, Guideline for Slab Performance Risk Evaluation and Residential Basement Floor System Recommendations (Denver Metropolitan Area), 1996 Important Information Page 2 The relative classification can be correlated to potential slab damage as follows: Low: slab cracking, differential movement, and heave; moderate: slab cracking and differential movement, partial framing void and fumace plenum closure; and high to very high: large slab cracking and differential movement, closed voids, closed furnace plenum, and possible pipe rupture. (These effects are based on monitoring and observations by several firms in the Denver metropolitan area and are not limited to the relative classification. More or less damage can occur in all classifications because of the uncertainty associated with subsurface conditions and geotechnical engineering.) It is important to note that measured swell or soil expansion is not the only geotechnical criteria for the type of floor and foundation recommendations. Additional criteria considered include: a. soil and bedrock type and variability, b. stratigraphy, c. ground water depth and anticipated post-construction moisture conditions, d surface water drainage and features, e, post-construction landscaping and irrigation, f. construction details and proposed use, and g. local experience. Post-construction landscaping and owner maintenance will greatly affect structures on expansive soils and bedrock. Typically, irrigated landscaping increases the soil moisture content above the pre- construction water content. Slabs, pavements, and structures significantly reduce evaporation of soil moisture. Therefore, post-construction heave and resulting damage to buildings and other improvements are likely to occur on sites with expansive soils because of the high probability that subsurface moisture content will increase as the property and surrounding area is developed Poor owner maintenance, such as negative slopes adjacent to foundation walls and irrigated landscaping adjacent to the foundation, also will significantly increase the risk of damage from expansive soil and bedrock. The property owner; and anyone he or she plans to sell the property to, must understand the risks associated with construction in an expansive soil area and also must assume responsibility for maintenance of the structure. The owner and prospective purchasers also should review "A Guide to Swelling Soils for Colorado Homebuyers and Homeowners," which is a special publication (SP 43) produced by the Colorado Geological Survey to assist homeowners in reducing damage caused by swelling soils. CASE LOG Case No. [,U - rtso f ate Action Tak n Initials VIC- r G i ►a ug al w I I ~ i I I i I ~ Case No.: A0108 Quarter Section Map No.: SE25 App: Last Name: Brooks Related Cases: App: First Name: Lee & Sharon Case History: Interpretation of story Owner: Last Name: definition & variance ame based on setback per Owner: First Name: ame additional story App Address: 941 Chase_St'. Review Body: BOA City, State Zip: heat Ridge, CO 80214 App: Phone: 303.422-7352 APN: 9-254-11-014._ Owner Address: ame 2nd Review Body: City/State/Zip: ame 2nd Review Date: Owner Phone: ame - Decision-making Body: gpA Project Address: 941 Approval/Denial Date: Street Name: Chase Street ! City/State, Zip: heat Ridge, CO 80214 ! Reso/Ordinance No.: Case Disposition: Conditions of Approval: Project Planner: rane/Pesi File Location: dive Notes: Follow-Up: District: Date Received: /3112001 . Pre-App Date: F_