Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutWA-98-157500 West 29th Avenue The City of Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80215 Wheat Telephone 303/ 237-6944 FAX 303/234-5924 June 26, 1998 Mr. George Feeney 3295 Parfet Street Wheat Ridge, CO 80033 RE: WA-98-15 Dear Mr. Feeney: Ridge Please be advised that at its meeting of June 25, 1998, the Board of Adjustment DENIED your request for approval of a 9% building coverage variance to the 25% maximum for the lot located at 3869 Union Court. Attached is a copy of the Certificate of Resolution stating the Board's decision which became effective the date of the meeting, (June 25, 1998). Should you decide to appeal the decision of the Board, you will need to notify the. Jefferson County district court in writing within 30 days of the Board's decision. Please feel free to contact me at 235-2846 if you have any questions. Sincerely, Barbara Delgadillo Planning and Development Secretary /bd cc: WA-98-15' C:\Barbara\Certifieds\wa9815.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 25th day of June, 1998. CASE NO: WA-98-15 APPLICANT'S NAME: George Feeney LOCATION: 3869 Union Court, Wheat Ridge Upon a motion by Board Member ABBOTT, seconded by Board Member HOVLAND, the following resolution was stated: WHEREAS, the applicant was denied permission by an administrative officer; and WHEREAS, Board of Adjustment application Case No. WA-98-15 is an appeal to this Board from the decision of an administrative officer; and WHEREAS, the property has been posted the required fifteen days by law and there were no protests registered against it; and WHEREAS, the relief applied for may not 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-98-15 be, and hereby is, DENIED. TYPE OF VARIANCE: Request for approval of a 9% building coverage to the 25% maximum building coverage requirement for the purpose of building a single family home. FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: 1. This request for 1,141 square foot variance would seem unreasonable given the described hardships and/or circumstances i.e., errors by design professionals. A 3,176 square foot structure may be completed without need for a variance. Approval of this request does not comply with the intent and purpose of the Residential-One Zone District and the low density residential character. Resolution WA-98-15/Feeney Page I 4. Both the Planning Commission and the City Council reviewed and approved the subdivision plan and the size of Lot 5 became part of the public record VOTE: Yes: Abbott, Hovland and Walker No: Howard, Mauro, Junker and Echelmeyer Absent: Thiessen The motion failed by a vote of 34-1. Upon a motion by Board Member ECHELMEYER and second by Board Member HOWARD the following resolution was stated: Whereas, Board of Adjustment Application Case No. WA-98-15 is an appeal to this Board from the decision of an administrative officer; and Whereas, the property has been posted the fifteen days required by law and there were no protests registered against it; 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-98-15 be, and hereby is, approved. Type of Variance: Request for approval of a 9% building coverage variance to the 25% maximum building coverage requirement for a property zoned Residential-One and located at 3869 Union Court. For the Following Reasons: Approval of this request will allow for the construction of a single story ranch style home that will allow for adequate view-sheds of the mountains for the proposed structures to the east. VOTE: Yes: Howard, Mauro, Junker and Echelmeyer No: Abbott, Hovland and Walker Absent: Thiessen The motion failed by a vote 4-3-1. Resolution WA-98-15/Feeney Page 2 DISPOSITION: A request for approval of a 9% building coverage to the 25% maximum building coverage requirement for the purpose of building a single family home was denied by a vote of 3 to 4 based on Chapter 2, Article 3, Section 2-53(d) of the City of Wheat Ridge Code of Laws which state that Board of Adjustment motions not carried are thereby deemed denied. ADOPTED and made effective this 25th day of June, 1998. A MAURO, Chairman Ann Lazzeri, Secretary of Adjustment Board of Adjustment Resolution WA-98-15/Feeney Page 3 3. The applicant must take necessary steps to properly modify the existing development plan in regard to existing parking within the period of the permit. 4. The applicant must submit a drainage report and obtain approval before any alterations are approved. 5. The parking area described must be graded and resurfaced with road-base type material. 6. The resurfaced materials must be striped to delineate the required spaces and the striping renewed as needed at the discretion of the City. 7. The City may require improvements, as needed, to the space delineations such as concrete bumpers and signage at their option. If complaints occur, or the City interprets the situation as requiring asphalt to correct specific safety or environmental hazards, they shall have that right as part of this Board's decision. The motion carried by a vote of 7-0 with Board Member THIESSEN absent. Chair MAURO advised the applicant that the request had been approved. B. Case 1Vo. WA-9845: 1This case, an application by George Feeney for approval of a 9% building coverage variance to the 25% maximum building coverage requirement for R-1 zoned property located at 3869 Union Court, was presented by Alan White. He presented slides and overhead projections of the subject property and entered the zoning ordinance, case file, packet materials, slides and exhibits into the record. He informed that the property was within the City of Wheat Ridge, all notification and posting requirements had been met and there was jurisdiction to hear the case. Mr. White reviewed the application for a 4,311 square foot single-family residence which would cover 34% of the property where Wheat Ridge Code of Laws allows for 25% coverage. He reviewed the criteria used in evaluating a variance request as outlined in the packet. Mr. White informed that staff concluded that the criteria did not support approval of the request because it did not comply with the intent of the R-1 zone district in that it would allow a larger structure on a site designed to allow for openness and low-density residential. In this case, the applicant could redesign the dwelling to fit within the footprint limitation of the 25% building coverage or allow the same amount of square footage in a two-story structure. Board of Adjustment Pages 06/25/98 Board Member ABBOTT referred to criteria no. 3 which indicated "most of the homes comply with the 25% lot coverage" and asked if there other homes in the area that exceeded the requirement. Mr. White replied that some exceed the 25% but not to the extent of 9% and informed that exceptions have been made administratively which have allowed 26-27% lot coverage. He commented that 9% exceeded any administrative authority for variance. Board Member ECHELMEYER asked about compliance of other homes in the area. Mr. White informed that, to his knowledge, there were no other homes in the. subdivision which had been granted variances regarding lot coverage or setbacks. Mr. White entered the following exhibit into the record and provided copies for Board members: Exhibit "A" - Letter dated June 22, 1998 from adjacent property owner, Lee R. Kunz, indicating that he was in favor of the 9% variance; and a letter from the applicant dated June 16, 1998 giving his response to the variance criteria. George Feeney 3295 Parfet Street Mr. Feeney was sworn by Chair MAURO. He stated that in January of 1998 the developer was notified that an approximately 3500 square foot ranch was planned for the lot. The applicant's architect called the planning department to verify setbacks and when the plans were submitted to the developer for architectural control, the developer expressed concern about the percentage of lot coverage. This was the first time the applicant was aware of this requirement. He felt that the character of the locality would only be enhanced by the design and construction of the home and stated he would be willing to stipulate in whatever form required that he would not add additional stories to the house if the variance were to be granted. He stated that a financial hardship would occur because of the costs associated with the design, legal documents, surveys and soil tests which have already been undertaken and that since he was unaware of the 25% requirement at the time of purchase, setback requirements were researched and the house was designed accordingly. He informed that he had attempted to purchase adjacent property to increase his lot size, but had been unable to do so. He stated that, although they could build in another area, it was their desire to live in Wheat Ridge and that he didn't think a request for 9% is that much when you consider he could build a 35-foot tall structure which would look terrible in the neighborhood. Board of Adjustment Page 6 06/25/98 Board Member WALKER suggested to the applicant that he might consider putting the garage underground in order to meet the coverage requirements. At this point, Mr. Feeney showed the architectural drawings to Board members and entered the following Exhibit into the record: Exhibit "B" - Elevations of the proposed structure. Chair MAURO asked if there were other individuals present who wished to speak on this issue. There was no response. Upon a motion by Board Member ABBOTT and second by Board Member HOVLAND the following resolution was stated: Whereas, Board of Adjustment Application Case No. WA-98-15 is an appeal to this Board from the decision of an administrative officer; and Whereas, the property has been posted the fifteen days required by law and there were no protests registered against 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- 98-15 be, and hereby is, denied. Type of Variance: Request for approval of a 9% building coverage to the 25% maximum building coverage requirement for the purpose of building a single family home. For the Following Reasons: This request for 1,141 square foot variance would seem unreasonable given the described hardships and/or circumstances i.e., errors by design professionals. 2. A 3,176 square foot structure may be completed without need for a variance. 3. Approval of this request does not comply with the intent and purpose of the Residential-One Zone District and the low density residential character. 4. Both the Planning Commission and the City Council reviewed and approved the subdivision plan and the size of Lot 5 became part of the public record. Board of Adjustment Page 7 06/25/98 Board Member ECHELMEYER stated that he would vote against the motion because there were four good sized houses on reasonable sized lots in that area and he felt the ranch style house would fit in very nicely with existing homes. Board Member ABBOTT commented that it distressed him to turn this application down; however, the fact that the hardships were caused by a design professional was not sufficient criteria to grant a variance. He expressed that someone in the future could come in and request a variance on the basis that the architect made a mistake. The motion failed by a vote of three in favor and four opposed with Board Member THIESSEN absent. Board Members HOWARD, MAURO, JUNKER AND ECHELMEYER voted no. (Mr. White explained that six affirmative votes are required for a super majority.) Upon a motion by Board Member ECHELMEYER and second by Board Member HOWARD the following resolution was stated: Whereas, Board of Adjustment Application Case No. WA-98-15 is an appeal to this Board from the decision of an administrative officer; and Whereas, the property has been posted the fifteen days required by law and there were no protests registered against it; 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- 98-15 be, and hereby is, approved. Type of Variance: Request for approval of a 9% building coverage variance to the 25% maximum building coverage requirement for a property zoned Residential-One and located at 3869 Union Court. For the 'Following Reason: Approval of this request will allow for the construction of a single story ranch style home that will allow for adequate view of the mountains for the proposed structures to the east. Board of Adjustment Page 8 06/25/98 Board Member HOVLAND commented that while the mountain views would be desirable, there will be homes constructed in the area which will be much taller and that he agreed the criteria do not support approval of the request. The motion failed by a vote of four in favor and 3 opposed, with Board Member THIESSEN absent. Board Members ABBOTT, HOVLAND and WALKER voted no. Chair MAURO advised the applicant that the request had been denied. C. Case No. WA-98-16: This case, an application by Brad and Marcia Bunger for a two- foot fence height variance to the four-foot maximum fence height allowing a six-foot fence for R-3 property located at 6900 West 38th Avenue, was presented by Alan White. He informed that, while the property has a 38th Avenue address, the property is located 200 feet south of 38th Avenue directly behind Marc's Restaurant. Mr. White entered the zoning ordinance, case file, packet material and exhibits into the record and informed that the property was within the City of Wheat Ridge, and all notification and posting requirements had been met and there was jurisdiction to hear the case. He informed that the staff had not received any opposition to the request. Mr. White presented slides of the subject property. He pointed out that there was secondary access to the property; however, the primary access was from 38th Avenue. He informed that regulations state that if there is a flag lot with an easement extending from the north property line to 38th Avenue, the lot line parallel to the street from which access is gained is considered the front property line and six-foot fences are not allowed along front property lines. He stated the applicants are requesting the variance to provide an adequate barrier between their home and the adjacent commercial establishment (Marc's restaurant), and stated that a six-foot chain link fence already exists along the back lot line of Marc's restaurant. Mr. White reviewed the criteria used to evaluate a variance request. He corrected variance criteria no. 5 to read: "No" instead of "Yes" in response to the question that asks if the conditions of the request are applicable to other property within the same zoning classification. He informed that it was staff s conclusion the criteria support approval of the request because of the incompatible nature of the existing land uses and from the strict definition of a front lot line on a flag lot. At this time, the applicants addressed the Board. Marcia Bunger 6900 West 38th Avenue Board of Adjustment Pa,-e 9 06/25/98 PUBLIC HEARING SPEAKERS' LIST Case No. 1.fJ4 / 5- Date: Request: ~E'D2EC- lrEc 1J~~ Fd2 f9P Pifodig~ DF /t 9~ Bra/L D/0E ~ad~2v3G~ 11 ei ,uc~ -3 816 9 U L7 io t1 Ch )R--r Speaker Name LL- (please print) Address/Phone In Favor Opposed CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE PLANNING DIVISION STAFF REPORT TO: Board of Adjustment DATE OF MEETING: June 25, 1998 DATE PREPARED: June 1, 1998 CASE NO. & NAME: WA-98-15/ Feeney CASE MANAGER: Sean McCartney ACTION REQUESTED: Request for approval of a 9% building coverage variance to the 25% maximum building coverage requirement. LOCATION OF REQUEST: NAME & ADDRESS OF APPLICANT: NAME & ADDRESS OF OWNER: 3869 Union Court George Feeney 3295 Parfet Street Wheat Ridge, CO 80033 Laura Leprino 3295 Parfet Street Wheat Ridge, CO 80033 APPROXIMATE AREA: 12,680 square feet PRESENT ZONING: Residential One PRESENT LAND USE: Vacant SURROUNDING ZONING: N: Agricultural-Two; S:, E:, and W: Residential One SURROUNDING LAND USE: N: S: E: and W: Vacant COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR THE AREA: Low Density Residential DATE PUBLISHED: June 5, 1998 DATE POSTED: June 11, 1998 DATED LEGAL NOTICES SENT: June 3, 1998 ENTER INTO RECORD: O COMPREHENSIVE PLAN (X) CASE FILE & PACKET MATERIAL (X) ZONING ORDINANCE O SLIDES O SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS (X) EXHIBITS O 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 applicant is requesting approval of a 9% building coverage variance to the 25% maximum building coverage requirement to allow a 4,311 square foot structure. If approved, the proposed single-family dwelling will cover 34% of the property. Pursuant to Section 26-15(F) of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws, a single-family dwelling built in the Residential-One zone district must maintain a maximum building coverage of 25%. Building coverage is defined, in the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws, as "the portion of percentage of the total lot area which is covered by the main and accessory buildings." Therefore, approval of this request will disallow the future development of any other structures on the site (ie.- storage sheds.) The intent of the Residential- One zone district is to provide for low-density residential character. To date, staff has not received any oppositions of this request. II SITE PLAN The property in question is located north of West 38" Avenue on Union Court. Said property is legally described as Lot 5 of the Prospect Ridge Subdivision. The subdivision was approved by City Council in 1997. As shown on the attached plat map, there are 12 lots within this subdivision, all of which are larger than the minimum lot size of 12,500 square feet. All of the lots, with the exception of lots 6 and 7, are zoned Residential-One. Lots 6 and 7 are zoned Agricultural-Two, and provide a minimum of 43,560 square feet of lot area. In the Agricultural-Two zone district, buildings may cover up to 25% of the property (or 10,890 square feet). III VARIANCE CRITERIA Staff has the following comments regarding the criteria used to evaluate a variance request: 1. Can the properly 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? Yes. If denied, the property will provide a 3,170 square foot building envelope for the main building and additional accessory structures. Most properties within the Residential-One zone district comply with the 25% minimum building coverage requirement. 2. Is the plight of the owner due to unique circumstances? No. The plight of the owner is due to the need for a large house. The proposed structure with 4,311 square feet of area will be designed as a single-story ranch style house. Pursuant to the development regulations, the applicant may design a 35' high structure with multiple stories of 3,170 square feet each. 3. If the variation were granted, would it alter the essential character of the locality? Yes. Although the existing homes in this subdivision contain more square footage (they are two- story), most of the homes comply with the 25% maximum building coverage requirement. Approval of this request will permit a larger than average home and may establish a dangerous precedent for future property owners. If the variance is approved, there is no limitation of adding additional floors to each home. 4. Would the particular physical surrounding, shape or topographical condition of the specific properly 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? No. The property in question is a 12,500 square foot square lot (110' X 115"), with little to no unusual topographic features. Therefore, this property offers plenty of development opportunities without the existence of physical hardships. 5. Would the conditions upon which the petition for a variation is based be applicable, generally, to the other property within the same zoning classification? No. All applications are reviewed on a case-by-case basis thereby changing the outcome for each request. 6. Is the purpose of the variation based exclusively upon a desire to make money out of the property No. The sole purpose of the request is to allow for a larger than normal single-family dwelling. Has the alleged difficulty or hardship been created by any person presently having an interest in the property? Yes. The applicant knew, at time of purchase, that the maximum building coverage was 25% for lots located in the Residential-One zone district. Also, within this same development, there are two lots which are 1 acre in lot area and allow a maximum building coverage of 25% (10,890 square feet of building coverage) 8. Would the granting of the variations be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other property or improvements in the neighborhood in which the property is located? No. Approval of this request should not be detrimental to the public welfare as the proposed property should comply with all other development requirements. However, approval of this request may be injurious to other property improvements as the intent of the low-density residential area is to provide for large, open lots. 9. Would the proposed variation impair the adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property or substantially increase the congestion in the public streets or increase the danger of fire or endanger the public safety or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. No. As shown on the attached site plan, the proposed structure would comply with all setback requirements, thereby allowing for adequate separation between the proposed structure and any future development on the adjacent properties. Therefore, the danger of fire or impact on public safety will not be diminished. Also, because the property will remain a single-family residential, there should not be an increase in traffic congestion. 10. If it is found in criteria 8 and 9 above that granting of the variation would not be detrimental or injurious to other property or improvements in the neighborhood, and it is also found that public health and safety, public facilities and surrounding property values would not be diminished or impaired, 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? No. The proposed request is purely for individual benefit and will not benefit the community or neighborhood. VI.. STAFF CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION Staff concludes that the above criteria does not support approval of the request. The above request does not comply with the intent of the Residential-One zone district in that it allows for a larger structure on a site designed to allow for openness and low-density residential. In this case, the applicant could redesign the dwelling to allow for the same amount of square footage in a two-story structure, allowing for less coverage on the property. Although the proposed home initially be one story in height, there are no guarantees that additional stories could be added. VII. RECOMMENDED MOTIONS Option A: "I move that Case No. WA-98-15, a request for approval of a 9% building coverage variance to the 25% maximum building coverage requirement for a property zoned Residential-One and located at 3869 Union Court, be APPROVED for the following reasons: Approval of this request will allow for the construction of a single-story, ranch-style home that will allow for adequate, viewsheds of the mountains for the proposed structures to the east." Option B: "I move that Case No. WA-98-15, a request for approval of a 9% building coverage variance to the 25% maximum building coverage requirement for a property zoned Residential-One and located at 3869 Union Court, be DENIED for the following reasons: 1. A 3,170 square foot structure may be constructed without the need of a variance. 2. Approval of this request does not comply with the intent and purpose of the Residential-One zone district and the Low-Density residential character. 3. This request will alter the essential character of the locality." OFFICIAL ZONING MAP NHEAT RI DOE COLORADO MAP ADOPTED: June 15, 1994 Lost Revisim: November 10, 1997 ® AREA REQUIRING SITE PLAN APPROVAL r•••••~ 100-YEAR FLOOD PLAIN (APPROXIMATE LOCATION ZONE DISTRICT BOUNDRY - PARCEL/LOT BOUNDRY (DESIGNATES OHNERSHIP) WATER FEATURE S 20 o a eo m eao ao SCALE 1'-100 SURVDI I w U Z W LL O O O 3 v v 0 0 0 c z SCALE 1'- 20' I 10'1 UTILITY EASEMENTS LOT 6 N 89°43'00'E 115.28' m U2 W W ~I WI U F-j Z F- O :)I U (DI LOT 5 VACANT LOT 12,697 SO.=T. S 89°43'00 "N (15.58' I _OT ? 20 0 10 20 30 PREPARED BY: LANE EN 9500 'NEST 4TH AVENU lp" TEL: (303) 233-4044 115.58 _ IDRiv_wnr J Z ~1 I ~ i r O aD A CUSTOM RANCH r o LEPRINC, RESIDENCE n I F D r0Zz D 0 COLAIANO & ASSOCIATES MICHAEL STEINHOFF Film ' ARCHITECT l 1~~ 'o P :A a L f=j C~ Gq o o hn n ~ rb~z m T. _ E 0 -oil 6 w > u~ [E71 x ^ m°o pow A A CUSTOM RANCH ® M LCHAEL D m O a m _ STEINHFF O 4 ~ y o LEP RING RESIDENCE A-rRC HITECT Z ; ' 0 0 COLAIANO 8 ASSOCIATES ® o oooo< -rl SULE I' 60 R-I ZONIN( N SATE- ~Ki33 PG'l? -ZGC#f0 CURVE DELTA AMLE RADIUS ARC C I 26.3632' 13.00 ".H' C 2 103.01'23' 13.00' 26.97- C 3 20'31 w' 13.00' S.46- C A 250.31.' 0.OO' 196.26' LINE swim L I N S9.36'I6'E L Z N 26.52'I6'E L 3 N 61. 26'12'E L A N 53.48'2.-E L 5 N IO A5 "-R L 6 N ..'02'11'• V x 63v}'00'E /.mar i- i; CHORD CHORD EEARIND 16.62' N 34.12.19-E 23..6' N 31.47-41-• 12.32' N 3.'5652-• A-2 ZMIN0 DISTANCE .2..0 ".96' y 2.02' Q 30.21' t~ ( 33."' (60' I 15.13" 05 20.00' 4 C 4(V L I'% I' CONCRETE ILLAR A-1 20NIN3 SOVTN I NDRTN 1 ] 1/.' DINT I SECTION 20 3Ci SECTION 29 Ix RAGE 2 J PROSPE A RESUBDIVISIC PROSPECT RIDGE MINOR TOWNSHIP 3 A-1 ZONIN0 R-I ZONING LLI 12. 01 SO.FT.B m I8 II IL ~ I1- ~116.00'~ ILN P•19'IT'E ~ I$ ' ~1~L5-1.6.99'~~ z LOT 12 g EASEMENT 25"I 25' 12.01 SOFT. a I TTP I CAL. S 10' UTILITY $ LOT EASEMENT 12.5" 30.FT. 10' UTILI EASEMENT 290 i 2'% 2' COMORE A AVEN V I C IN I TY PILLAR ~CENrt ";EST 361 SITE E zoNING R- IA~:[:; ZONING R-IA PI' BE CORNER SECTION 20 NE CORNER SECTION 29 3 1/.' BRASS CAP IN RANGE POINT BOX LS 13212 A-%njl6'.2'11 1319.2. PREPARED BY! LAW ENOINEERI 9300 MST I) 2AVENUE. LANE TEL; 130 3) 233-."2 cA%: °F wnegr LAND CASE PROCESSING APPL-IATION °f wHe r Planning and Development Department 7500 West 29th Avenue, Wheat Ridge, CO 80033 °ocoRno° Phone(303)235-2846 °ocoero° (Please print or type all information) Applican+ Q-5? 00XYy Address Phone,7J/ - y 1 i°'..'~59T ~,OGf City Owner~~~i~F°~ti© Address Phone City Location of request (address) X94 9' Type of action requested (check one or more of the actions liste d below which pertain to your request.) ❑ Change of zone or zone conditions [P '-Variance / Waiver ❑ Site development plan approval ❑ Nonconforming use change ❑ Special Use Permit ❑ Flood plain special exception ❑ Conditional Use Permit ❑ Interpretation of Code ❑ Temporary Use, Buildings, Signs ❑ Lot line Adjustment ❑ Minor Subdivision (5 lots or less) ❑ Planned Building Group ❑ Subdivision (More than 5 lots) ❑ Street Vacation ❑ Preliminary ❑ Final ❑ Other: Detailed description of the request: -Z iv~~f sf ~ti zo o To ae-U T Fill out the following information to the best of your knowledge. Current Zoning: Size of Lot (acres or sqg,uare footage): sa~f,~ri~c Current use: Proposed use: Assessors Parcel Number: 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, 1 m acting with the knowledge and consent of those persons listed above, without whose consent the requ d action cannot lawfully be accomplished. Applicants other than owners must submit power-of-attorne rom the ow vhich approved of this action on his behalf. Signature of Applican ubscribed and s o n to me this 'h ay of., 19 9<1 tart' Public My commission expires 1014-- ~3 Case No. Date received Receipt No. nn Related Case No. Zoning Quarter Section Map _f2~ "LEE KUNZ DEVELOPMENT 0. 4096 Youngtield Street • June 22, 1998 Mr. Allen White City of Wheat Ridge Planning & Development 7500 West 29th Avenue Wheat Ridge, CO 80033 Dear Mr. White: On behalf of myself and my wife, Maria, we have no objections to the nine percent (9%) variance on Laurie LePrino and George Fenney's lot located at 38th and Union Court. If you have any questions, I can be reached at 431-9536 or 898-1205. Sincerely, CT R. Kunz Ex,-11e>17 a`) ASE Ce98-98-15 Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80033 • (303) 431-9536 Memory To: Alan C. White and Sean McCartney From: George Feeney and Laura Leprino M' Board of Adjustment, City ofWheatridge Date: Tuesday, June 16, 1998 Subject: Proposed Variance Approval Below please find our response to the (10) questions proposed in the handout we received. 1. The property usage would remain the same, single family dwelling. 2. We do feel that the circumstances are unique. When the property was purchased in January of 1998, the developer was notified that an approximately 3500 square foot ranch was planned for this lot. Our architect called the planning department to verify the setbacks. The house was then painstakingly designed to comply with the setbacks and fit the lot When the plans were submitted to the developerfor architectural control he expressed concern that the City would not approve them based on the percentage of lot coverage. This was theftrst that we had heard about this requirement. Wheatridge is unique in this requirement. Arvada is at 30%, Denver, 50%, Lakewood, Jejfco and Arapahoe work on set backs alone. Looking around our City, we did not know this as it appears that many houses are not in compliance with this restriction. 3. It is our intention to enhance the essential character of the locality. Wheatridge has aline tradition of solidly built ranch style homes. Our intention is to build a solid, all brick home constructed offine quality materials with particular attention paid to extensive landscaping and outdoor lighting. A side load garage will enhance this design. We have no intention now, nor is there onefor thefuture to add additional stories to this house. If variance is granted, we would be willing to stipulate to this in whatever form would be appropriate. 4. A financial hardship would incur. We have already paid for the plans that are drawn. Countless hours have been spent designing and refining the existing plans. The lot has been purchased and soil tests concluded. We have also incurred legal and survey costs involved with trying to purchase additional property adjacent to ours. 5. The lot to the North of us is over an acre, the lot next to it is also over an acre. The two lots to the West of our property in the Moore subdivision also are over an acre each. As the demographics of our City change,(to accommodate the aging baby boomers) there will be an increased need for ranch style homes in our City. 6. The purpose of this request is to build a slightly smaller home than what is currently built in this subdivision and substantially smaller than what will be built on the larger lots. It is also our hope to have adequate space to park our cars in our garage, not in the driveway or the street. We also do not wish to have a shed in our backyard, but rather have all storage needs taken care of in the side load garage. 7. The only people having an interest in this property are George Feeney and Laura Leprino. We were both unaware at the time of purchase of the 25% requirement. We did research the setbacks and designed the house accordingly. 8. Again the intention is only to build a quality home that would enhance the neighborhood specifically and the City generally. With the large lots surrounding us and the front yard design complete with circular driveway the low density open feel will be maintained. 9. The proposed variation would not impair the supply of light and air to adjacent property, in fact a ranch style should increase it. It will not increase congestion or danger offire or endanger public safety. It will neither impair nor diminish property values. We suspect that our future neighbors to the east would welcome the ranch style rather than a multi level house. 10. Thankfully there are no disabilities that we are dealing with at this time. The benefit to the neighborhood and community will be a quality home, beautifully designed and built. Landscaping and lighting to enhance the overall design. A ranch style home that is consistent with otherrne homes in the Wheatridge area. We thank you for your time in response to this request. page 2 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 June 25, 1998, at 7:30 p.m. at 7500 West 29th Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado. All interested citizens are invited to speak at the Public Hearing or submit written comments. The following petitions shall be heard: 1. Case No. TUP-98-02: An application by Wheat Ridge 52 Investment for approval to surface an area for use as temporary commercial parking for the tenants of 12060 W. 52"d Avenue. Said property is zoned A-2 and located at 12060 W. 52"d Avenue. 2. - Case No. WA-98-15: An application by George Feeney and Laura Leprino for approval to increase lot coverage from 25% to 34% for construction of a single-family dwelling. Said property is zoned R-1 and located at 3869 Union Court. 3. Case No. WA-98-16: An application by Brad and Marcia Bunger for approval of a two foot fence line variance adjacent to Marc's Restaurant to screen the property. Said property is zoned R-3 and located at 6900 W. 38`h Avenue. 4. Case No. WA-98-17: An application by Lorraine Brown for approval of variance to Section 26-30(Q), Home Occupation Regulations to allow a 2'x2' home business frontal sign. Said property is zoned R-1 and located at 4430 Tabor Street. 5. Case No. WA-98-18: An application by Tom Radigan for approval of a 15' variance to the required 30' front yard setback enabling the approved dwelling units to face east versus south. Said property is zoned R-1 and located at 10845 - 10865 W. 32"d Avenue. eo2 ~ Or, e9 Barbara Delgadillo, RecotJing Secretary ATTEST: Wanda Sang, City 69k To be Published: Wheat Ridge Transcript Date: June 5, 1998 C:\Barbara\BOA\PU B H RGS\980625.wpd FROM *Laura*L-prino* PHONE NO. : 3032744799 Jan. 23 1998 02:16PM P1 o rtnxvan ar r~:OU tvGFl ;77nn,. _ ir; c;rtnrar,;~:trsi7Fis,n IFNUf . WII[-nT r'i~cc ^rr9gnr?U npc7, Troe qy~, n~ S]`~ h` YY CeI~ U m ~2idgc N, -=rING CERTIFICATT014 011Ap0 CASE NQ.~- .f..- PLANNING ComMISSION CITY COUNCIL. OARD OF ADJ USThfEt-Jt (Circle One? HEARING DATE: e-.~.._._. -._...._v.- I n a m 07- residing at as the applicant for Case No. firr --.-1..-.cam... ~1;..M , hereby certify that I have posted the Notice of Public !fearing at - o ca t i -a Yi' ( l o n) ' on this day of D!._42"Y 1911j` I 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 •1409 of this case. The sign was posted ig the positi,n ._ncwn art the low, Signature: NOTE: This forth must he submitted at Lh( Liublic 11 avAg on this case and will be placed in the applicant's case file at the Department of Community Deve-- pment. M A P. The City of 7500 WEST 29TH AVENUE WHEAT RIDGE, CO 80215-6713 (303) 234-5900 City Admin. Fax # 234-5924 June 3, 1998 Dear Property Owner: Police Dept. Fax # 235-2949 GWheat G idge This is to inform you that Case No. WA-98-15 which is a request for approval to increase lot coverage from 25% to 34% for construction of a single-family dwelling for the property located at 3869 Union Court will be heard by the Wheat Ridge Board of Adjustment in the Council Chambers of the Municipal Complex at 7500 West 29th Avenue. The meeting will be held on June 25 at 7:30 p.m. All owners and/or their legal counsel of the parcel under consideration must be present at this hearing. As an area resident or interested parry, you have the right to attend this Public Hearing and/or submit written comments. It shall be the applicant's responsibility to notify any other persons whose presence is desired at this hearing. If you have any questions or desire to review any plans, please contact the Planning Division at 235-2846. Thank you. Planning Division. C:\Barbara\BOA\PUBHRGS\wa9815.wpd CJ RECYCLED PAPER D a a w W a C U v ry _ U ~ a a 'O O a N Q N U d ~ ~ O Z y ~ al C ~ a D Of - C D j D 'd U V ~ a N - a a ~ w = O N a w O~ O L E 0 O O w U E o m # N D C a y ~ IA ~ zE L x C:a U W m N m OJ rn 4~1°m 3 3. 3 a ` v u X16 Q y m M M c~ M m O a o 'C O ~p o N r 0 ~3m o a'C O c~ro 0 m . 0 .a.UO Y'UO 2830 X00 oV ao0 ai ui ai m-- ai w N =5 D NE `~mK ~ - y S O N ~ M a ~ a V a ~ ~ v N a L 3 L 3 L 3 a ~ - a rL 6 L N ~ a ~ i N Q N w o r Y a a C) x Of 0 Of UJ ❑ ❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ z a Lc) U w N N Q °r n O `o M m M 0 W `w <°o coo m w w 0 E rn w rn F- > V z' Q Q W w ~ N O Q a } o W Uti~ it RECEPTION NO. F0539973 17.49 PG: 0001-001 742 RECORDED IN JEFFERSON COUNTY, COLORADO 1/15/98 10:46:12 WARRANTY DEED THIS DEED, Made this 12th day of January, 1998 between / 1 KSD Properties, LLC, a Colorado Limited Liability Company / tlVll, of the County of Jefferson and / State of Colorado, grantor, and Laura Leprino whose legal address is 3295 Parfet Street, Wheatridge, Colorado 80033 of the County of Jefferson and State of Colorado, grantees: WITNESSETH, That the grantor for and in consideration of the sum of ONE HUNDRED FOURTEEN THOUSAND NINE HUNDRED AND 00/100, ($114,900.00) Dollars, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, has granted, bargained, sold and conveyed, and by these presents does grant, bargain, sell, convey and confirm unto the grantee, his heirs and assigns forever, all the real property, together with improvements, if any, situate,lying and being in the County of Jefferson and State of Colorado, described as follows: Lot 5, Prospect Ridge Subdivision recorded January 17, 1997 in Book 133 at Page 47, Reception No. F0359158, County of Jefferson, State of Colorado. also known by street and number as 3869 Union Court, Wheatridge, Colorado 80033 TOGETHER with all and singular the hereditaments and appurtenances thereto belonging, or in anywise appertaining and the reversion and reversions, remainder and remainders, rents, issues and profits thereof, and all the estate, right, title, interest, claim and demand whatsoever of the grantor, either in law or equity, of in and to the above bargained premises, with the hereditaments and appurtenances. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the said premises above bargained and described, with the appurtenances, unto the grantee, his heirs and assigns forever. And the grantor, for himself, his heirs and personal representatives, does covenant, grant, bargain, and agree to and with the grantee, his heirs and assigns, that at the time of the ensealing and delivery of these presents, he is well seized of the premises above conveyed, has good, sure, perfect, absolute and indefeasible estate of inheritance, in law, in fee simple, and has good right, full power and lawful authority to grant, bargain, sell and convey the same in manner and form as aforesaid, and that the same are free and clear from all former and other grants, bargains, sales, liens, taxes, assessments, encumbrances and restrictions of whatever kind or nature soever, except general taxes for 1998 and subsequent years; except easements, restrictions, covenants, conditions, reservations and rights of way of record, if any; The grantor shall and will WARRANT AND FOREVER DEFEND the above-bargained premises in the quiet and peaceable possession of the grantee, his heirs and assigns, against all and every person or persons lawfully claiming the whole or any part thereof. The singular number shall include the plural, the plural the singular, and the use of any gender shall be applicable to all genders. IN WITNESS WHEREOF the grantor has executed this deed on the date set forth above. w KSD Properties, L C, a Colorado Limited ~tst. ~ur~)d!:(3L~y FL4 Liab' .y y Comps c~C r L1,(g r wr.,.w,.•,.a,..-.+rw.r....v~..ti,....v.n„} Daniel F. Schneider, Manager LL Q tT) STATE OF COLORADO } } ss. The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before County of Jefferson } me this 12th day of January, 1998 by KSD Properties, LLC, a Colorado Limited Liability Company by Daniel F. Schneider, Manager ~a witness my hand and official seal. w r\ C ~ LL F- !I&,: urawlluLry F, to u a,e KSD Properties, L C, a Colorado Limited Liab' i y Compa BY Daniel F. Schneider, Manager an STATE OF COLORADO } ) as. The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before County of Jefferson } me this 12th da of Jan by KSD Properties, Manager w q f c^,' No. 932A. Rev. 7-84 The grantor shall and will WARRANT AND FOREVER DEFEND the above-bargained premises in the quiet and peaceable possession of the grantee, his heirs and assigns, against all and every person or persons lawfully claiming the whole or any part thereof. The singular number shall include the plural, the plural the singular, and the use of any gender shall be applicable to all genders. IN WITNESS WHEREOF the grantor has executed this deed on the date set forth above. Y nary, 1998 LLC, a Colorado Limited Liability Company by Daniel F. Schneider, VIP NOTARY PUBLIC 370 E. Alameda Ave Suite 340 Denver, COLORADO 80209 2g5~)&24 Witness my hand and official seal. My commission expires J_ S G 0 CURVE DELTA ANGLE RADII ARC CHORD CHORD BEARING C 1 76'56'32' 15.0.. 20.15' 16.61' N 38.12,19,E " . C 2 103.0123' 15.00 26.91' 23.18 6161 w H 51 ' ' ' C 3 10'31'41' 15.00' 18.16 12.32 w N 36 58 52 C . 250.3144' .5.00' 196.16' c / I Nq/ I A-2 ZONING Q / LINE BEARING ' ' 01 STANCE ' t ' )1 L I 16 E N 59']6 62.40 li L 2 N 26' S]' 16' E 66.96' OT's I L 3 N 8I.16''E 2.01' e . `I I W L A N 53-48 24 "]6'E " " • 30.11' 26' cot R I II L 5 w x ID 60 29 . ' Y P 0 WI L 6 N .a•02'II'Y ' ' 15.11 00' RP l011 s n L1 E N 83'63 00 20. c N 69.22] SO.f T. t A C l) 4eP I I Y / ~ \ I II I / N 1 / I I I N 16.63" I II i PROSPEC A RESUBDIVISION C PROSPECT RIDGE MINOR SUE; TOWNSHIP 3 SOUTi CITY 1'X I' CONCRETE I `.Y \ Y~DETENTION 1 -I A-I ZONING PILLAR U11LIiYI POND EA MOTIEW E jSEc m /~I' I I m q-I ZONING PSEUENi1{15~`jII gOVXOLRj-/ - II1~ I A-I ZONING 30 NTi"/ _ I ] L-0 1 r ; LOT 6 SO.FT. a• 0 6•n13~~ $ z o 105.00 I II R-I ZONING I I°o 5 55 39' IJI o Ir 0, , 04 I - LLn s DD.E 10 s 115.2e. ~lJ.s SO.f i.l N 5 UTILITY - I EASEMENT J0 EE NOTE -J • H e9'.3 '00'E - LOT 5 V 1 12.69] SO.F I- b.611 S' E ITN 89•.310 l0i 9 le 5.58' .fT ol~ I 12.560 so ~rr . LOT SCALE i' - 60' 0 12556 50. FT. $ Q-1 eyddJ l'S. 11 EJ 00 S U: o ITN 86.000' 115.89 11-5 6 ' - r 9 LOT 10 1 12.528 SOFT{ 5' Z~m I I LOT S 12.530 SG .FT..$ 5' J I I , , , SE CORNER SECTION 20 NE CORNER SECTION N 3 114' BRASS CAP IN RANGE POINT BOX LS 13212 1- I 00 E 43 69 116.00'--~~ ~ 1 r' -ai ^ S 89'38''±2'w BASIS FOR BEARINGS `-1]19.2. " _ l - V SOUTH 1/4 CORNER SECTION 20 5 89-47- -E- 6 J' 1" n I I $a NORTH 1/4 CORNEA SECTION 29 A' BRASS CAP IN RANGE 11. u LOT II 528 SOFT. $ _ 12 3 I/ POINT BOX LS 13212 S I . . . 12.561 ; Ir5' I I N 99'.1 r 11 Io ~116.C0'~II o II Ir~ S. 1 - LL-M 5.•Iq'I1' O 12 $ - --116.99 I ~ 9 1 . L SO.F T.I o = 2.611 ~l S UTILITY ~L 25. 2g ' 9 a EASEYENi UTILITY I (TTP it LI EASEUENT LOT ° I I~ ZN 12.564 50.FT. X00. _ 10' UTILITY ~ EASE9ENi ~ 2q0. 15/-/- ~'n1 ~ 516 '3].vI ./>NENVE Co / / WEST }61X V I C IN I T Y / n PILLAR 1H ~NLERL V $ITE ZONING R-IA ~'.7- ZONING A-IA ~pp6 • ? .Ynnm RWL i r ~ 1:13.%Ce: - 500' o l PREPARED 9Y: LN@ E EP ~ Saw : REST (3031133-4 2 TAX ^crso1B 5Z~ a~e O~ COZ" a- da SK //-Oa RIDGE SUBDIVISION LOTS I THROUGH 4 AND TRACTS A AND B OF (VISION. BEING PORTIONS OF SECTIONS---'20 AND 29 RANGE 69 'NESS OF THE 6TH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN WHEAT RIDGE. JEFFERSON COUNTY. COLORADO MAYOR'S CERtIFICATION: THIS IS TO CERTIFY TNAT NIE CITY Of WHEAL RIGE. COLDRA00 3 40 TION OF RS CITY COUNCIL D10. ON THIS .L}_ DAY OF ^A III IA 1991. ADOPT AND APPROVE 'IIE WITHIN PLAT. ATTEST; CITY CLERK SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE:. MISSION CITY 'n RIDGE CHAIRMAN OF OF PLANNING COMMISSION I. STEVEN D. LISTER. DO HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE SURVEY OF THE BOUNDARY OF THE PROSPECT RIDGE SUBDIVISION. WAS MADE UNDER NY SUPERVISION. RE SP0NSISILIIY AND CHECKING ON OCTOBER 15. 1996 AND TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE. INFORMATION AND BELIEF. AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH ALL APPLICABLE COLORADO STATUTES. CURRENT REVISED EDITION. AS AMENDED. F v RE01SIEBCC :'JP.:'Fy e pICCCi COLORADO NUMBER UE11 9500 IA 7H AVENUE 303.233-A COLORADO 00215 ^ SOY 23}104 ~~r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fELECOMYUNICAT IONS FACILITIES. UTILITIES SMALL ALSO BE PERMITTED WITHIN MY ACCESS EASEMENTS IN THE SUBDIVISION. PERMANENT STRUCTURES AHD WATER METERS SHALL NOT BE PERMITTED WITHIN SAID EASEMENTS. 7. EXISTING EASEMENTS DEDICATED BY THE PLAT OF PROSPECT RIDGE MINOR SUBDIVISION ARE HEREBY VACATED BY THIS DOCUMENT. CE. INC. CASE HISTORY 80216 l]-0796 MS-96-5 W2-96.15 WS-96.2 BOO. 33 PAGE d9 RECEP TION i0. G045-4/S,q" DATE 97 WE DANIEL F. SCHxE:OER AND SHERRI SCNNEIDER. BEING THE DMAERS OF THE REAL PROPERTY Of 5.683 ACRES OESCRIa ED AS FOLLOWS' DESCRIPTION: COUNTY OF JEFFERSON I I SS: STATE OF COLORADO I - THE FOREGOINC~INSTRUUENT WAS ACKNOWLEDGED BEFORE WE THIS UP DAY OF .1991 BY DANIEL F. SCHNEIDER AND SHERRI E. SCHNEIDER. WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIP 5[I ' MY COMMISSION EXPIRES' %^C•Iw7 NO >flY PUBLIC KATRINALEEVVAYE IPSa LGjI HOLDER OF DEED Of TAI NOTARYPUBL IC ADDRESS ,STATE CF C.'AORAW LAKEWOOD STATE. BANK ':,~.:,,-~=,T 4.p 12:NI 1850 50. R>OS'WORTH BLVD. LAKE7n CO. BO 12 303-986.5581 L ALLEN HD TON. EXECUTIVE VICE-PRESIDENT COUNTY OF JEFFERSON 1 STATE OF COLORADO I THE FOREGOING INSTRUMENT WAS ACKNOWLEDGED BEFORE ME THIS -L-5 DAY OFS} A,.1992 BY ALLEN E. MORTON AS EXECUTIVE VICE-PRESIDENT OF LAKEW00D STATE BANK. WITNESS NY HAND AND OFFICIAL EA MY COMMISSION EXPIRES , ?99 A# PUBU c 0 1838 ,A. CJadea-v- KATRINA LEEWAYE ADDRESS HOTAAT PUBLIC STATE CF CCIOMOD ~J RECOAOER'S CERiIFiC ON NUMBER Fn ?S'9/S"C THIS DOCUMENT ACCEPTED FOR FILING IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY C✓'_UNTY -IK f GOLCLOCKDEN, CO ' ORA/D~O. OR IXECLERK LZEALDATCORpppp([ E99350 AT ~._✓JFY.-✓l. "11./~ B Y:/".Vl~iY AND RECORDERUTY a DEPUTY7CLESITL R NIFI) 10. ARY IA 1"7 REYISED DECEMBER 24. 1996 REVISED ID.'EOYEUI N I5. 1996 PREPARED OCTOBER 15. 1996 I. N. 59. 16':6'E. A DISTANCE OF 12.10-: 2. N. 76'5716-E. A DISTANCE OF 6A.98 N. 81'26A DISTANCE OF 2.02 A. N. 53'182A'E. A DISTANCE OF 30.21 5. N.10. 46.29"W. A )15TANCE OF 3J. DA 6. N. N A'021 "W. A DISTANCE OF 15.13 7. W.45'S719E. A DISTANCE OF 2]6.16' TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER 3F SAID LOT 4 THENCE S. OO'17'00`, ALONG THE EAST . IE OF LOT 1 AaD THE FAST 'THE OF TRACT d. A DISTANCE OF 807.71 FEET TO THE 'RLE POINT OF bEGINNI NG. DANIEL F. SCxrvE1CER SHERRI E. SCMNEIO R 2562 TOT 2562 LAKEWOOD L CT. CO. 80215 .2300 CO. 80215 LAKEWOOD 1W-2]3.6883 303 JOJ 4]]-6803 LOT 5, PROPECT RIDGE SUBG I V I S I ON CITY OF WHEATRIDGE, JEFFERSON COUNTY, COLORADO DESCRIPTION: LOT 5, PROSPECT RIDGE SUBDIVISION, CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, JEFFERSON COUNTY, COLORADO. CERTIFICATION: ' I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT, TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE, INFORMATION AND BELIEF THE ABOVE DRAWING IS AN ACCURATE DELINEATION OF THE SURVEY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED TRACT, MADE UNDER MY SUPERVISION AND COMPLETED ON JANUARY 9,1998, AND DOES ACCURATELY DEPICT THE DIMENSIONS OF SAID TRACT, THE LOCATION OF ALL BUILDINGS, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, WHICH WERE ON THE TRACT AT THE TIME OF SURVEY, AND THE LOCATION OF ALL EASEMENTS OR RIGHTS-OF-WAY, VISIBLY EVIDENT OR KNOWN TO ME AT THE TIME OF SURVEY. THE NOTES, AS SHOWN HEREON, ARE INCLUDED AND HEREBY M P T OF THIS CERTIFICATE. RE 1 - D LAND J /EYOR -0 LO NOTICE: ACCORDING TO COLORADO LAW, YOU MUST Mfvi~NCE ANY LEGAL ACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY WITHIN THREE YEARS AFTER YOU FIRST DISCOVER SUCH DEFECT. IN NO EVENT, MAY ANY ACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY BE COMMENCED MORE r THAN TEN YEARS FROM THE DATE OF THE CERTIFICATION SHOWN .HEREON. a 3o NOTES: i I. 5/8 INCH DIAMETER IRON PIN WITH CAP STAMPED LANE ENG SRV NC 16837 RECOVERED AT POINT SHOWN THUS:a x 2. 5/8 INCH DIAMETER BRASS WASHER SET IN CONCRETE, RECOVERED AT o POINT SHOWN THUS:O n 3. THIS SURVEY DOES NOT INCLUDE A TITLE SEARCH BY THIS SURVEYOR TO DETERMINE: A. OWNERSHIP OF THIS TRACT OR VERIFICATION OF THE DESCRIPTION SHOWN; B. THE COMPATIBILITY OF THIS DESCRIPTION WITH THAT OF ADJACENT TRACTS: C. EASEMENTS OR RIGHTS-OF-WAY OF RECORD; BUT RELIED ON INFORMATION SUPPLIED BY THE OWNER. RING SERVICE, INC. PREPARED 1/9/1998 KEWOOD, CO 80215 PROJECT 5211-1.105 (303) 233-0796 7~2 5rv*&auae *7" e4. CONTRACTOR B.SUPPLIER - INDUSTRIAL INSULATIONS WAREHOUSE - OFFICE GEORGE N. FEENEY 5600W. 13THAVENUE President LAKEWOOD, COLORADO 80214 PHONE (303) 237-1341 CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT r INVOICE NAME P' DATE: 'Pe CASENO. FEE TYPE FEE CHARGE ACCOUNT NUMBER Application Submittal See Fee Schedule 5'0 01-550-01-551 Publications/Notices See Fee Schedule 01-550-02-551 24" x 36" Blue Line $ 3.25 01-550-04-551 24" x 36" Mylar Copy $ 6.00 01-550-04-551 Single Zoning Map $ 2.00 01-550-04-551 Set of Zoning Maps $20.00 01-550-04-551 11" x 17" Color Map $ 2.00 01-550-04-551 Comp. Plan Maps $ 2.00 ea. 01-550-04-551 Comp. Plan Book w/Map $25.00 01-550-04-551 Fruitdale Valley Master Plan $ 2.50 01-550-04-551 Subdivision Regulations $ 4.50 01-550-04-551 . Zoning Ordinance $15.00 (does not include annual updates) 01-550-04-551 Copies $.15/page 01-550-04-551 Copy of Meeting Tapes $25.00/tape 01-550-04-551 Miscellaneous: 01-550-04-551 TOTAL COST: /D • U~ eApIarming\forms\invoice