HomeMy WebLinkAboutWA-09-02City of
" WheatWdge
7500 West 29th Avenue
Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80033
303.235.2846 Fax: 303.235.2857
Approval of Variance
WHEREAS, an application for a variance was submitted for the property located at 2800 Gray
Street referenced as Case No. WA-09-02/Fish; and
WHEREAS, City staff found basis for approval of the variance, relying on criteria listed in Section
26-115 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws and on information submitted in the case file; and
WHEREAS, the Community Development Department has properly notified pursuant to Section
26-109 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws; and
WHEREAS, there were no registered objections regarding the application;
NOW THEREFORE, be it hereby resolved that a 122 square foot size variance for a detached
garage; increased from the 600 square foot maximum to 722 square feet AND a 5 foot side yard
setback variance for a detached garage over 8 feet in height; decreased from the 10 foot side yard
setback to 5 feet (Case No. WA-09-02/Fish) is granted for the property located at 2800 Gray Street
to construct a detached garage, as described, based on the following findings of fact:
Request A 122 square foot variance to the maximum size for a detached garage.
1. The applicant is proposing to invest a substantial amount into the property.
2. There will be no negative impact to the public welfare or other properties in the area.
3. The request would not substantially increase the congestion in public streets,
increase the danger of fire or endanger the public safety.
4. There have been no protests submitted during the ten-day public notification period.
With the following conditions:
1. The design and architecture of the proposed garage be similar in character to the
existing house, subject to staff review and approval through review of a building
permit.
2. An Improvement Location Certificate (I.L.C.) prepared by a licensed professional
surveyor must be submitted at the time of building permit in order to ensure all
measurements of the existing conditions are accurate.
Request B: 5 foot side yard setback variance.
The variance would not alter the character of the area in which
it is being requested.
2. The applicant is proposing to invest a substantial amount into the property
without which, the garage would be difficult to construct.
3. Mature landscaping that was in place prior to the current owner has created a
hardship on meeting the setback requirement.
4. There will be no negative impact to the public welfare or other properties in the area.
5. The request would not substantially increase the congestion in public streets,
increase the danger of fire or endanger the public safety.
6. There have been no protests submitted during the ten-day public notification period.
With the following conditions:
1. The design and architecture of the proposed garage be similar in character to the existing
house, subject to staff review and approval through review of a building permit.
2. An Improvement Location Certificate (I.L.C.) prepared by a licensed professional
surveyor must b submitted at the time of building permit in order to ensure all
mea u eme s o he existing conditions are accurate. V -01
~z Jjl_ 0
ennet Johns e, CP Date
Community D lopment Director
CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE
PLANNING DIVISION STAFF REPORT
TO: Case File DATE: April 30, 2009
CASE MANAGER: Adam Tietz
CASE NO. & NAME: WA-09-02/Fish
ACTION REQUESTED: Request approval for a five (5) foot side yard setback variance to
the ten (10) foot required setback for a detached garage over
eight (8) feet in height and a 122 square foot variance to the 600
square foot maximum for a detached garage on property zoned
Residential-One C (R-1C).
LOCATION OF REQUEST: 2800 Gray Street
APPLICANT (S):
OWNER (S):
APPROXIMATE AREA:
Quentin Fish
Quentin Fish
8,015 square feet (.18 acre)
PRESENT ZONING:
PRESENT LAND USE:
ENTER INTO RECORD:
Residential-One C (R-1C)
Single Family Residential
(X) CASE FILE & PACKET MATERIALS
(X) ZONING ORDINANCE
Location Ma
Site
Administrate
Case No. Wi
JURISDICTION:
All notification and posting requirements have been met; therefore, an administrative
decision may be made.
1. REQUEST
The applicant is requesting approval of a five (5) foot side yard setback variance to the
required ten (10) foot side yard for a detached garage over eight (8) feet in height, in the
R-1C zone district, resulting in a five (5) foot side yard setback. The applicant is also
requesting a variance of 122 square feet to the 600 square foot maximum for detached
garages in the R-1C zone district. Both the requests will result in the construction of a
new 400 square foot detached garage with the existing 322 square foot detached garage to
remain.
Section 26-115.C (Variances and Waivers) of the Wheat Ridge City Code allows the
Director of Community Development to grant administrative variances from the strict
application of the zoning district development standards. Administrative variances are
allowed for up to 50% of the development standard.
II. CASE ANLYSIS
The property is zoned R-1C which allows for single family dwelling units as well as
detached garages, sheds and other ancillary buildings. The R-1C zone district has less
restrictive development standards than in the R-1 zone district and also allows for smaller
lots. These development standards were established to provide high quality, safe, quiet
and stable medium density residential neighborhoods, and to prohibit activities of any
nature which are incompatible with these residential characteristics.
The R-1C zone district allows for forty (40) percent maximum building coverage. The
site contains a 1,088 square foot home with a 322 square foot detached two car garage
making the lot coverage 17.4 percent. The proposed garage will be constructed in the
southeast corner of the lot and will be 400 square feet in size. The construction of the
garage will increase the lot coverage from 17.4 percent to 22.4 percent.
The existing home has frontage along Gray St. The lot is 50 feet wide and
approximately 160 feet deep. The lot is relatively flat but it does have a slight uphill
slope from the front property line extending east to the home. The backyard is flat and
contains several large, mature trees along with other improvements (Exhibits 1-3,' Site
Photos),.
In addition to the mature landscaping and other improvements in the rear yard, there
exists a 322 square foot, single car garage that is in fair condition and is accessed by a
driveway via Gray St (Exhibit 4;'SW Photo). The garage, like most other garages and
sheds in the neighborhood, has a non-conforming setback as it was built prior to the 2001
zoning code. Prior to 2001, the side yard setback in the R-1 C zone district was only five
(5) feet.
Administrative Variance
Case No. WA-09-02/Fish
The garage does not meet needs of the applicant as it is now fairly common for homes to
have at least a two car garage. As a result of it being smaller than ideal, the garage is
used as a workshop and not for vehicle parking. The existing garage will remain in place
after the new garage is built as the applicant has indicated demolishing the existing
garage would add significant cost to project and loss in value to the property.
The new garage is proposed to be constructed in the southeast corner of the property
(Exhibit 5, Site Plan). The garage will replace an existing concrete parking slab, which is
in poor condition (Exhibit 6, Site Photos). It will be 6 feet directly behind the existing
garage and will gain access to public streets by an alley that runs behind the home. The
new garage will not exceed the maximum size for a detached garage by itself. Since the
existing garage is proposed to remain, the size of the two (2) garages combined will
exceed the 600 square foot maximum. The garage is proposed to be 400 square feet
which is typically considered the minimum size for a two car garage in order to
accommodate the vehicles of today. Smaller two car garages can be built but they
typically house smaller vehicles.
The proposed garage is proposed to be five (5) feet from the southern property line. The
large trees and other improvements in the back yard do hinder the ability to construct a
garage of this size with the required ten (10) foot setback. If the garage were to be
constructed with the required setback, it is likely that at least one tree would have to be
cut down with other landscaping improvements that would be required to be removed. If
the new garage were to be built so it was an addition to the existing garage, the five (5)
foot side yard setback would be meet city zoning requirements as building at the same
setback line when constructing onto an existing structure is permitted regardless of the
setback requirements. If this were the case, a variance to the side yard setback would not
be required.
Based on the Land Use Atlas records, there appears to be multiple detached garages in
the area that have had variances to the side yard setbacks. Nineteen (19) properties in the
quarter section have requested and received variances to the side yard setback. Of those
nineteen (19), four (4) are within a one block radius of the applicant. Additionally, 1
variance to the 600 square foot maximum garage size was approved. Although only one
variance has been approved for a larger garage, site visits do reveal that there are several
garages on the same block that exceed the size limitation as well (Exhibits 7410, Aerial
and site photos).
The applicant has expressed the proposed garage will be built of quality construction and
will match the existing home. It will be consistent with the existing home and garage
using the same siding, shingles and other materials.
III. VARIANCE CRITERIA
In order to authorize an administrative variance, the Director must determine that the
majority of the "criteria for review" listed in Section 26-115.C.4 of the City Code have
been met. The applicant has provided their analysis of the application's compliance with
Administrative Variance
Case No. WA-09-02/Fish
the variance criteria (Exhibit 11). Staff provides the following review and analysis of the
variance criteria.
Request A: Variance to the maximum size for a detached garage.
The property in question would not yield a reasonable return in use, service
or income if permitted to be used only under the conditions allowed by
regulation for the district in which it is located.
If the request were denied, the property would continue to yield a reasonable
return. The property currently has a single family home and a detached, single car
garage on it. They may remain in this manner regardless of the outcome of the
variance request. If denied, the applicant could still construct an additional
detached garage on the lot but the garages would have to meet the 600 square foot
size limitation.
Staff finds this criterion has not been met.
2. The variance would not alter the essential character of the locality.
If the request were granted, the character of the locality would most likely not be
altered. The new garage will be accessed from the alley and will be unable to be
seen from the front of the home and the existing garage will not be able to be seen
from the rear of the home. The two garages will act as "screens" for each other.
Since the proposed garage will be a separate structure it will not appear to be as
out of scale as one large garage may.
In addition, there is record of one size variance being granted for a garage in the
area as well as several others that exceed the 600 square foot size limit with no
records of variances.
Staff finds this criterion has been met.
3. The applicant is proposing a substantial investment in the property with this
application, which would not be possible without the variance.
The applicant is proposing a substantial investment in the property. If the
applicant was not asking for a variance to the maximum size for a garage they
physically still would be able to construct a detached garage on the lot that meets
the size requirement but it would not be able to be a two car garage as desired by
the applicant.
The garage is proposed to be only 20 feet by 20 feet. The size of the proposed
garage is typically considered the minimum requirement for a two car garage in
order to house the larger vehicles of today. Smaller two car garages can be
Administrative Variance 4
Case No. WA-09-02/Fish
constructed but their capacity is limited to two smaller vehicles, such as compact
and sub-compact vehicles
Staff finds that this criterion has been met.
4. The particular physical surrounding, shape or topographical condition of the
specific property involved results in a particular and unique hardship (upon
the owner) as distinguished from a mere inconvenience if the strict letter of
the regulations were carried out.
The lot is the minimum size that is allowed in the R-1C zone district, is
rectangular and is relatively flat. The lot has several mature trees in the rear yard
along with other landscaping improvements that would have to be removed in
order to construct the garage in a different location than proposed with this
variance. The lot coverage on the property will remain well below the 40%
maximum at 22.4%
Staff finds this criterion has been met.
5. The alleged difficulty or hardship has not been created by any person
presently having an interest in the property.
The hardship described above relates to the topography and shape of the property.
The variance being requested to exceed the maximum garage size limit has been
created as the result of a single, detached garage that was constructed by other
persons prior to the current property owner having an interest in the property. If
there were a smaller or no garage on the property, a variance to the size limit
would likely not be required. In addition, if the proposed two-car garage was to be
constructed to meet the 600 square foot maximum with the existing garage still in
place, it would be too small for two cars.
Staff finds this criterion has been met.
6. The granting of the variance would not be detrimental to the public welfare
or injurious to other property or improvements in the neighborhood in
which the property is located, by, among other things, substantially or
permanently impairing the appropriate use or development of adjacent
property, impairing the adequate supply of light and air to adjacent
property, substantially increasing the congestion in public streets or
increasing the danger of fire or endangering the public safety, or
substantially diminishing or impairing property values within the
neighborhood.
Staff concludes that the request would not be detrimental to public welfare and
would not be injurious to neighboring property or improvements. It may have a
positive impact on property values in the area. It would not hinder or impair the
Administrative Variance
Case No. WA-09-02/Fish
development of the adjacent properties. The adequate supply of air and light
would not be compromised as a result of this request.
The request would not increase the congestion in the streets, nor would it increase
the danger of fire. It also wouldn't cause an obstruction to motorists on the
adjacent streets and would not impede the sight distance triangle.
Staff finds this criterion has been met.
7. The unusual circumstances or conditions necessitating the variance request
are present in the neighborhood and are not unique to the property.
The properties and homes in the vicinity are similar to the subject site and the
majority of detached garages do meet the size requirement. There are several
properties that have garages that exceed 600 square feet throughout the
neighborhood. Many properties in the neighborhood have existing structures and
vegetation that existed prior to the City's adoption of the zoning regulations,
which present similar challenges.
Staff finds this criterion has not been met.
8. Granting of the variance would result in a reasonable accommodation of a
person with disabilities.
Single family homes and their accessory structures are not required to meet
building codes pertaining to the accommodation of persons with disabilities.
Staff finds this criterion is not applicable.
9. The application is in substantial compliance with the applicable standards set
forth in the Architectural and Site Design Manual.
The Architectural and Site Design Manual does not apply to single and two
family dwelling units. It should be noted that any building over 120 square feet in
any zone district is not permitted to be metal.
Staff finds this criterion is not applicable.
Request B: Side yard setback variance.
1. The property in question would not yield a reasonable return in use, service
or income if permitted to be used only under the conditions allowed by
regulation for the district in which it is located.
If the request were denied, the property would continue to yield a reasonable
return. The property currently has a single family home and a detached, single car
garage on it. They may remain in this manner regardless of the outcome of the
Administrative Variance
Case No. WA-09-02/Fish
variance request. If denied, the applicant could still construct an additional
detached garage on the lot but the garage would have to meet the side yard
setback requirement.
Staff finds this criterion has not been met.
2. The variance would not alter the essential character of the locality.
If the request were granted, the character of the locality would most likely not be
altered. The property is located in a residential area where nearly all the homes
have detached garages with access to an alley that have been constructed with a
side setback of 5 feet. The homes and their garages in the area were constructed
in a time where the required setback was only five (5) feet prior to the 2003
zoning code changes.
Staff finds this criterion has been met.
3. The applicant is proposing a substantial investment in the property with this
application, which would not he possible without the variance.
The applicant is proposing a substantial investment in the property. If the
applicant was not asking for a variance to the maximum size for a garage they
physically still would be able to construct a detached garage on the lot that meets
the side setback requirement but at least one large tree and other landscaping
improvements would have to be removed.
The applicant does not wish to remove the trees so without the variance the
applicant would have to construct a smaller garage. The garage is already
proposed to meet the typical minimum size standard for a modern, two car garage.
Without the variance, the applicant would not be able to construct a garage that
has room for two vehicles.
Staff finds that this criterion has been met.
4. The particular physical surrounding, shape or topographical condition of the
specific property involved results in a particular and unique hardship (upon
the owner) as distinguished from a mere inconvenience if the strict letter of
the regulations were carried out.
The lot is the minimum size that is allowed in the R-1C zone district, is
rectangular and is relatively flat. The lot has several mature trees in the rear yard
along with other landscaping improvements that would have to be removed in
order to construct the garage with the required setbacks. The variance request to
the side yard setback is being requested as a result of the trees which do pose a
hardship on building the garage in a location that meets the side yard setback.
Administrative Variance
Case No. WA-09-02/Fish
Staff finds this criterion has been met.
5. The alleged difficulty or hardship has not been created by any person
presently having an interest in the property.
The hardship described above relates to mature landscaping that was in place
before the owner of the property currently had an interest in the property. At least
one of the trees would have to be removed if the garage were to be constructed
with the required setbacks.
Staff finds this criterion has been met.
6. The granting of the variance would not be detrimental to the public welfare
or injurious to other property or improvements in the neighborhood in
which the property is located, by, among other things, substantially or
permanently impairing the appropriate use or development of adjacent
property, impairing the adequate supply of light and air to adjacent
property, substantially increasing the congestion in public streets or
increasing the danger of fire or endangering the public safety, or
substantially diminishing or impairing property values within the
neighborhood.
Staff concludes that the request would not be detrimental to public welfare and
would not be injurious to neighboring property or improvements. It may have a
positive impact on property values in the area. It would not hinder or impair the
development of the adjacent properties. The adequate supply of air and light
would not be compromised as a result of this request.
The request would not increase the congestion in the streets, nor would it increase
the danger of fire. It also would not cause an obstruction to motorists on the
adjacent streets and would not impede the sight distance triangle.
Staff finds this criterion has been met.
7. The unusual circumstances or conditions necessitating the variance request
are present in the neighborhood and are not unique to the property.
There are unique circumstances in the neighborhood that necessitate the request
for a variance. The properties and homes in the vicinity are similar to the subject
site in that nearly all of them have detached garages that are accessed via the alley
behind the home. Nearly all the detached garages are within five (5) feet of the
property line, as well. The neighborhood was built during a time when five (5)
foot setbacks were required. The reduced setback would be in line with
conditions that are present in the neighborhood.
Staff finds this criterion has been met.
Administrative Variance
Case No. WA-09-02/Fish
8. Granting of the variance would result in a reasonable accommodation of a
person with disabilities.
Single family homes and their accessory structures are not required to meet
building codes pertaining to the accommodation of persons with disabilities.
Staff finds this criterion is not applicable.
9. The application is in substantial compliance with the applicable standards set
forth in the Architectural and Site Design Manual.
The Architectural and Site Design Manual does not apply to single and two
family dwelling units. It should be noted that any building over 120 square feet in
any zone district is not permitted to be metal.
Staff finds this criterion is not applicable.
IV. STAFF CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Each request requires a separate motion. The requests are exclusive of each other, which
is to say, One "Request A" can be approved without "Request B" and "Request B" can be
approved with out "Request A".
Request A
Having found the application in compliance with the majority of the applicable review
criteria, staff recommends approval of the request for a 122 square foot variance to the
600 square foot maximum for a detached garage in the R-1 C zone district. Staff has
found that there are unique circumstances attributed to this request that would warrant
approval of a variance. Therefore, staff recommends APPROVAL for the following
reasons:
1. The applicant is proposing to invest a substantial amount into the property.
2. There will be no negative impact to the public welfare or other properties
in the area.
3. The request would not substantially increase the congestion in public
streets, increase the danger of fire or endanger the public safety.
4. There have been no protests submitted during the ten-day public
notification period.
With the following conditions:
1. The design and architecture of the proposed garage be similar in character
to the existing house, subject to staff review and approval through review
of a building permit.
Administrative Variance 9
Case No. WA-09-02/Fish
2. An Improvement Location Certificate (I.L.C.) prepared by a licensed
engineer must be submitted at the time of building permit in order to
ensure all measurements of the existing conditions are accurate.
Request B
Having found the application in compliance with the majority of the applicable review
criteria, staff recommends approval of the request for a five (5) foot side yard setback
variance to the ten (10) foot setback required for a detached garage over eight (8) feet in
height in the R-1 C zone district. Staff has found that there are unique circumstances
attributed to this request that would warrant approval of a variance. Therefore, staff
recommends APPROVAL for the following reasons:
1. The variance would not alter the character of the area in which
it is being requested.
2. The applicant is proposing to invest a substantial amount into the property
without which, the garage would be difficult to construct.
3. Mature landscaping that was in place prior to the current owner has
created a hardship on meeting the setback requirement.
4. There will be no negative impact to the public welfare or other properties
in the area.
5. The request would not substantially increase the congestion in public
streets, increase the danger of fire or endanger the public safety.
6. There have been no protests submitted during the ten-day public
notification period.
With the following conditions:
1. The design and architecture of the proposed garage be similar in character to
the existing house, subject to staff review and approval through review of a
building permit.
2. An Improvement Location Certificate (I.L.C.) prepared by a licensed engineer
must be submitted at the time of building permit in order to ensure all
measurements of the existing conditions are accurate.
Administrative Variance 10
Case No. WA-09-02/Fish
h
nr
n
Administrative Variance 11
Case No. WA-09-02/Fish
x'
w
Administrative Variance 12
Case No. WA-09-02/Fish
Budget Garages
Construction Company Inc.
I- 5777 East Evans: Avenue Denver, Colorado 80222
T- 303.757.1800 F-303.757.0433
tx V 1t. /V T t /V r 1-1)1'1
1.900 GQq.1 .S T
w R abF do.
8o 2 +y
~~oo l~7'LA~J ST.
1
t'.
T
Q
P
h F`~UNr -
u~
N
U FUSS`S
~ r t rh~sl:
I V 2
~4 1J~
13'
S~
~ cos q~~
w x'
Jv-
i r frt ~t'w~ *~Ff- 3z2
ac (off ' y o0
'n¢w 3r'ee'4 ~o~s~ ~0.rc5i Y~ +1 '~~2
fA L l ~f
k
Q'
Administrative Variance 13
Case No. WA-09-02/Fish
v
Case No. WA-09-02/Fish
s
Case No. WA-09-02/Fish
x
oV
c
s
Administrative Variance 16
Case No. WA-09-02/Fish
City of Wheat Ridge - Variance Criteria for Review
A. The property in question would not yield a reasonable return in use, service or
income if permitted to be used only under the conditions allowed by regulation
for the district in which it is located.
In order to meet the variance, I would need to tear down a perfectly good existing
garage to meet the 600 sq feet total garage space requirement. I would like to add a
new 2 car garage that is accessible from the alley. The existing garage can only hold
1 car and is only accessible from the driveway in the front of the house. The existing
garage is also used as a workspace instead of a garage.
B. The variance would not alter the essential character of the locality.
No. There is a house on the same alley (2628 Gray St.) that has a 1,200 sq foot
garage. The new garage would be painted the same colors as the house and the
other existing garage.
G. The applicant is proposing a substantial investment in the property with this
application, which would not be possible without the variance.
Tearing down the existing garage to meet the 600 sq feet of total garage space
would Increase the cost of the project substantially.
The particular physical surrounding, shape or topographical condition of the
specific property results in a particular and unique hardship (upon the owner) as
distinguished from a mere inconvenience.
N/A k
S
E. If there is a particular or unique hardship, the alleged difficulty or hardship has
not been created by any person presently having an interest in the property.
The existing garage was present when I bought the property. ~
tv
F. The granting of the variance would not be detrimental to the public welfare or
injurious to other property or improvements in the neighborhood in which the
property Is located, by, among other things, substantially or permanently
impairing the appropriate use or development of adjacent property, impairing the
adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property, substantially increasing the
congestion in public streets or increasing the danger of fire or endangering the
public safety, or substantially diminishing or impairing property values within the
neighborhood.
Granting the variance would not be detrimental to the public or injurious to other
properties. The garage would be built on the south side of my property so any
shading would be on my property. The garage will be accessible from the alley so it
would reduce congestion on the street. It should also increase values around the
property since it will be replacing a dilapidated parking area.
G. The unusual circumstances or conditions necessitating the variance request are
present in the neighborhood and are not unique to the property.
Administrative Variance 17
Case No. WA-09-02/Fish
Yes. There are other garages larger that 600 sq feet near the house. There is also
another property down the alley (2612 Gray St.) that has two separate garages.
H. Granting of the variance would result in a reasonable accommodation of a person
with disabilities.
Yes.
1. The application is in substantial compliance with the applicable standards set
forth in the Architectural and Site Design Manual.
Yes. The specifications of the garage are being submitted for you to review.
k
i~
ti.
ti
N
O
r
Administrative Variance 18
Case No. WA-09-02/Fish
4I d1 A
J City of
Wheat -Midge
POSTING CERTIFICATION
CASE NO. WA-09-02/Fish
DEADLINE FOR WRITTEN COMMENTS: April 24, 2009
(name)
residing at 2 SOo GvP y S4 wl e„~ xjq GO
(address)
as the applicant for Case No. WA-09-02/Fish , hereby certify that I have posted the sign for
Public Notice at 2
t tVD ~T
(locati
'411
n)
on this 15 day of April 2007 , and do hereby certify that
said sign has been posted and remained in place for ten (10) days prior to and including the
deadline for written comments regarding this case. The sign was posted in the position shown on
the map below.
Signature: 0
NOTE: This form must be submitted to the Community Development Department for this case
and will be placed in the applicant' s case file.
FISH QUENTIN E
2800 GRAY ST 39-254-21-037 7008 3230 0003 5514 6881
WHEAT RIDGE CO 80214
KEATINGE KIMBERLY
KEATINGE MICHAEL 39-254-21-036_ 7008 3230 0003 5514 6898
2810 GRAY ST
WHEAT RIDGE CO 80214
POTTER CAROLYN I
8569 FENTON ST
39-254-21-038
7008
3230
0003
5514
6904
ARVADA CO 80003
VAN DOK FRANK
2745 FENTON ST
39-254-21-013
7008
3230
0003
5514
6911
WHEAT RIDGE CO 80214
CLEWS DWIGHT E
2765 FENTON ST
39-254-21-014
WHEAT RIDGE CO 80214
7008
3230
0003
5514
6928
COTO DIEGO
COTONICOLASITA
2775 FENTON ST
39-254-21-015
7008
3230
0003
5514
6935
WHEAT RIDGE CO 80214
PARDI KENNETH G
2809 GRAY ST
39-254-22-011
7008
3230
0003
5514
6942
WHEAT RIDGE CO 80214
KAISER DANIEL J
39-254-22-012
2801 GRAY ST
7008
3230
0003
5514
6959
WHEAT RIDGE CO 80214
s~Ae
City of
Wheatj
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
City of Wheat Ridge Municipal Building 7500 W. 29`h Ave. Wheat Ridge, CO 80033-8001 P: 303.235.2846 F: 303.235.2857
CERTIFIED LETTER NOTICE
April 15, 2009
Dear Property Owner:
This is to inform you of Case No. WA-09-02, a request for administrative
variances of (1) a 5 foot side yard setback variance from the 10 foot side yard
setback requirement and (2) a 122 square foot variance to the 600 square foot
maximum allowed for a detached garage on property zoned Residential-One C (R-
1C) and located at 2800 Gray Street
The applicant for this case is requesting an administrative variance review which
allows no more than a fifty percent (50%) variance to be granted by the Zoning
Administrator without need for a public hearing. Prior to the rendering of a
decision, all adiacent property owners are required to be notified of the request
by certified mail.
If you have any questions, please contact the Planning Division at 303-235-2846 or
if you would like to submit comments concerning this request, please do so in
writing by 5:00 p.m. on April 24, 2009.
Thank you.
WA0902.doc
www.ci.wheatridge.co.us
NE 25
J
I
I I^
1
1
ml
I ^
I ^I„
1 „1 al
m1
1 al 11
Z I
I~JI
_1 _1
I I,. ,I
I I1
3190
~
e
$
3195
5i%
31
5
gi
3199
3195
31
3145
O
-
.
~
31%
-
3RG
31m
31
3P6
3143
J100
31%
3102
319,
_
3159
31W
~HQ
3153
3156
3,a
3170
3175
3, ]0
J
3165
3110
31<6
319
3153
31.
3140
3131
3132
121
m
LL
31P
3139
3119
31m
fo5
v~
$
3165
3130
31.
312J
3119
R-3
"
"
X31 `3
3110
Z
3109
S
310,
]114
1
3fo1
3101
110
3,06
3,03
3101
~2
0
3
95
31. L
L
-~C
1
3103
Z
W
31%
m65
3990
3095
3101
3,
4
4
~
9
9
1m95
!
m6]
R
J
-
N
A
,
ID42
R-3
.
=2
NRi
W 30TH AVE
a95
q
Ef5
a31
a90
E15
6
a6]
-
2913
E!2
b11
miC
912
ait
n R-3
39a,
9y
E37
a30
a39
a30
2939
a30
a3>
A5HLAN[)RE5ERV0IR
a3
4
a34
a33
am
a9
7
gp
am
9 i
V
39II
a2z
_ E21-.
W
a1]
af0
qf]
am
a,9
af0
(Qa15
a10
a,G
913
a15
E14
a13
a14
2613
13
-
9,4
alp
9n
ato
xp9
ap5
a%
-`645
a%
945
a%
2345
9W
3943
_~pfi--
C-7
3af
2501
a3,
m
a3,
r
52U
~i
- ~I rv
L $
m% m h 2YS 1009 q Y 3895 -
< 285 m9p m]5 xHR m" W, I$ x%] n mf -m91 R-3
w 20a 2- 2%9 m55 „ : N zHI5 .2 i 051
. 20
V, zrc] u,5
!C p
W 2659 29]0 ze4s Z >030 7010 xBl] _-m]! x%0 m90
785, 36a 7035 Z°Z 7831 2. q 3 &3'1
004m2911 209 zefs LL 2930 2°ZI ry R- a 2030 m9 R 381 ze3p x63
769 20ss mm
2. two 20s z9a. Q.
UI V1x813 24m .__]BL n m,9 mm _ 291 _39zs mm IT
-
2e2s zwp al9 0
_ rv; 0
R'1 mP R
-a 2795 xam 6 V zms N12
~ 2. 299 2m5 391 x900 2W1 n
291] H 13
m ¢
2Bm 2. ¢ 2910 Ylls W28TH AVE 1 g„g pR'3
2&0 m 29 2]95 g 3101 nm5 p• uNi ^rv
W:28 A m9o a45 $1m ° n4
369s 769 nu z>za p
2]P N 11 2]89 F 2x30
m% x99
711 „ 13 K . 4s 2712 1 & 2 r]ss
mm xfisp RICHARD HART zixo
os R m p
mfi] mop J - 8 99 ESTATE PARK a im
R-3 LLJm99 m3o U '~9"6I!3`.1) 2 m 2]W ..'1',:
R 7C- e
x626 mM
X, " Z64f MS x6K m9 H $ m19 _:~IFin o
mt0 gg F % gg
.NLE RED B $ w G I
m,6u mta 265 _ 4
mxi9 m z ism n = PHD Q ~ EDGEWATER
mzs W °t
26°692 n °v{ „ n V
_ ~ Pms ~ z9e 9¢ ?6ID EDGEWAIER B OL 1 $ n
A 3]569] 290 P45 _ SUP WZ-90.13
-W 26TH.AVE-"aarv_*'awwvtcv:.-4d~s-'7v9
CITY LIMITS
OFFICIAL PARCEULOT BOUNDARY SE 25
ZONING MAP (DESIGNATES OWNERSHIP)
WHEAT I EAT 1 RIDGE WATER FEATURE
COLORADO ' DENOTES MULTIPLE ADDRESSES
100-YEAR FLOOD PLAIN o 100 2CO A00 900 rem
(APPROXIMATE LOCATION) mmmmi
owxetx °
G " DEPARTMENT OF MAP ADOPTED: June 15, 1994
I°a^°O PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT Last Revision: Sentemhel 10. 2001
cli
CID I r- IC)o Irn1 p
N N N N N M N N u
N
zQ) Loom
1=
o
80
6i
y
.
,y
O
00 M O O
W
i
O
O I (n
U
N
N
LL C7
O z
m~~ O p
M
CL
.
N
M
M
N
CO
M
O]
d'
CO
(V
O
N
O
N
N
I
L
O
N
O
O
O
N
O
O N
O II\
m O N M m C9 ^ O O O
^
CO O O O O O O = O O O O O O O
M
co
CD N\ co
7ncot
^ O O) O
O O /1 W O O O
~ r O N M Z ~ O
J
m
O FaO--, ° O ° Lo
' ~Q O C
O
vLo O co
O m p O O O O ~ p
in O O O O O O
Budget Garages
8 Construction Company Inc.
5777 East Evans Avenue • Denver,
Colorado 8022?
303/757-1800 • FAX 303/757-0433
TO ✓t_rv 1 1 A) t'lSt{
Date 2-
20~
o d
a 7
A
n 2
1
Ho
e Phone
a
C.
,
2
m
L.v 9 7'; r Al J "?o 2. / c!
Phone A ' 'a
-306
r
Specifications of Garage to be Constructed
Size - t X2= >2 - O.D. ROOF - HIP ❑ GableN Reverse Gable ❑ Attached ❑ Detached V. Other ❑
Overhead Door Size X SteeIV Panel ❑ Flush ❑ Insulated ❑ Door Heights
Wall Studs 2" X 4" ? - O.C.. Wall Height `7? Cross Ties
O.C. Span Rafters 2" X 42
Roof Sheathing 7/16 OSB
Undersiding~ Top Plates 2"X 2" X 4"
Gable Ends I- 1
Felt ..15#
Exterior Siding~I - I I ' ~'>^Sit hr A Corner Studs 2" X 4" (3)
Headers r Z ) y Y t i,_ .
Shingle i a uv ht 1 rr
Service Door Steel 3'0 x 6'8" ❑ RH `&LH
Hurricane Clips YES
Seamless Gutters l t Ermto-
Alum. Sliding Windows Size
Overhang -
Sides --V.
Windbrace TO CODE Trim i~ t'; u ; 1 pv4
Motion Light ❑ Yes 2~No
Eave Drip Edge YES
Concrete') ] WireV Steel ;k2 Fib' rgl s Driveway Size
2. 0 F'A. 10'
r.'
'''yy
Electric: Standard p~Yes fflrNo
urvey ❑ Yes No
APPROX. LENGTH 2 outlets, switch, insk3e Ijgtlt, outside light.
Stem Wall 0 Yes 2'ho i"h 10i Retaining Wall Opener Plug, s IP-No Pump Concrete ❑ Yes `fl No
Raise Elec. Mast ❑ YeE7 No
Garage Door Opener Electric Upgrading: To Code
V Included ❑ Not Included 6"a SubPanel/220 ❑ Yes UNo Firewall ❑ Yes 'E} No
'
Painting By Homeowner {L7 Yes ❑ No I'• Vol CleanUp klYes ❑No
-
Landscaping ❑ Yes `q No Sprinkler System Install ❑ Yes 1,0 No Demo ic] Yes ❑ No Permit V Yes ❑ No
Additional Info b L 13i z) i~l f trt , 1 j :z t t / ? i ~ ~ ijr &w A t Q 41!k4 ° t` t Au r c 7-
0 1 SIT! 7rIn7•J.Jl i t'';i, l»/(7 G-4 ~~2~"y iA 1-,6/J VA All of the above work to be completed in a workmanlike manner according to standard construction practices for the sum of
00
Payments On Start 3 On Lumber Del. ~Z 3 On Completion 1,? Dollars $ ia7. x
PLEASE ALLOW 3TO 8 WEEKS FOR APPROXIMATE COMPLETION OF PROJECT
All alteration or deviation from the above specification involving extra cost of material or labor will only be executed upon
written orders for same, and will become an extra charge over the sum mentioned in this contract. All agreements must be
made in writing, for the protection of both parties. All surplus materials belong to Budget Garages.
Budget Garages guarantees all workmanship and material for two years. (Except concrete).
Budget Garages does not guarantee concrete - cracking, chipping, pitting or flaking.
Budget Garages is not responsible for power and communication lines over the garage or driveway.
Budget Garages is not responsible for normal damage to landscape or boundary fencing.
Payments due hereunder shall be made according to the schedule set forth in this agreement.
"YOU THE BUYER, MAY CANCEL THIS TRANSACTION AT ANY TIME PRIOR TO MIDNIGHT OF THE THIRD BUSINESS
-DAY AFTER THE DATE OF THIS TRANSACTION. SEE ATTACHED NOTICE OF CANCELLATION FORM FOR AN
EXPLANATION OF THIS RIGHT." By signing this contract, the customer gives Budget Garages the right to pull a credit report.
Budget rages..
By / Customer Date "
Approved and ountersigned
By
Social Security #
Customer Date
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
RI IYFRC RIGHT Tn CAMCCI
WARRANTY DEED
THISIIEED, Mudethu 28th day of Augaast 2003,
between Steven A. Hanson
of dte County of Jefferson airtlSmeaf Colorado
grman,and Quentin E. Fish
whosclecaladdressis 2800 Gray Street, Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80219
ofthe County of aetterson aa(Maleof Colorado ,em'antec:
W I'INESSC'I'li, Thal the grmlor, for and ha crnuiderdion of the snm ul ONE HUIVDKED NINETY FOUR
THOUSI\ND FIVE HUNDRED AND N0/100
DOLLARS. ($194, 500. 00
the receipt and sohwiency of whi,lb is hereby acknowledged, an granted, Isopmed, sold read elnveyeQ and by these presents
does grant bwguiu, sell, convey and coufmn mato die ynntee, his heirs wad assigns forever, all the real pmpeaty mgslMr 601
h npmveinnnts, if any, siwalc, lyuig and being in the Corm ty of Jefferson and State of Colored,,
descrbed as follows;
-Lot 12, Leonard Subdivision,
County of Jefferson, State of Colorado
also knmm Vy street wad number as 2800 Gray Street, Wheat Ridge, Cclorade 50219
'fOG1:T'I IIi12 with all mttl singular We ieredimmenls raid agapmaemmees themunb belonging, nr in avywise :appemaining, and
the reversion mad reveasioas, lenminder wad mnaainders, rents, issues :md profit, thereof, and all the ,state, right, title, interest.
claim and o1n ad whatsoever of the graulm: either is law ur ,quity, of, in :and to the above bveamed premises, with rtes
hereditumenls wul appartenanees.
'f0 HAVE AND TO HOLD me said premises alcove ban coned end descrbed, with the appmtenames, ow. We gramme, his
heirs mad :,,signs I'mevee And tie gnanmr for laiii'dl' his heiax raid pononul repa'esentaliets, does covaumn, grml, bargain and
."i,e to and with the grantee, his Ilea, and assigns. Iiat at thi, Bane of ibe ens,afmg seed dalivuy of these l a"eals, ho is well
seized of the premises above conveyed, ins goad, sum, pmiml, .dasolwe and iualeasible cstaw of mli,iil.bl e, m Isles, in
@e simple, mid has good n hl, full power mad lawful wtll.iby to gaan4 bargava, sell and convey Ito sarle is nvamerand form
as afoasaid, amd that the sails am Iiee and clear from all former and ollaa grmis, bargains, sales, liens, Wms, asses5naenU,
axis nbmnces abd -,stn"ions of whatever kind or mama sever except N, taxes I'or the ewTena year, a lien but not yet due
and payable, vad thane specific Exeeptioae described by reference fn recorded dowmencs as rellecled in the rill,,
Ductnuents accepted by Uuyer in aenordaalln wfda section 8a I'Pitle Itcviewi, of Ow eontraef dated
Ju1V 11, 2003 benveeaa the parries.
The fp si shall and will WARRANTAND FOREVER DEFEND the above-bargained premises in the quiet and peaceable posse-
sion of be gaeo., his hens and assigns, agamsa all wul every paason or persons lawftally claiaatimg Ilse Whole or wry Poll nlei'of.
The aegahw number shall include the plibel, Wa plural the singaler, and dm ass W may gender shall be applieahle to all genders.
IN W ITNF.SS WHEREOF, Ne gramor has executed Ibis deal on Is, date set hrlh above.
St A. Hanson
Hy:
Deanna Kurz, A .oniey-in-Each LEFN A. WILLIAMS
N
Ce OTARY PUBLIC
~Tal'E OF COLORADO
My Commission Expiros Miry 10, 2007
STATEOF COLORADO )
ss.
COIfN7YOF DOUGLAS )
'Tree fnrcgoing insawnent was acbubwledged before me llais 28th day of August 2003 by
Deam,a L. Kurz as Attorney in Fact for Steven A. Hanson//
My Conubaissinnexpirss: May 10, 2007 _ -wim nay v adw rcial sell.
Notary Fubl
A. Wil.li.ams
"1-11.111 mu~n a..an.~,..,n~.~.h.. rs........ I.-I / H.4 NI125381Ca3
REAL PROPERTY TRANSFER DECLARATION
(u)-1000)
GENERAL INFORMALION
'urpnse: The Rcal Property Transfer Declaration provides essential information to the cowrty assessor to help ensure fair and uniform
esussmenu for all property for pmpeliy lax purposes. Refer to 39-14-102(4), Colorado Revised Soaums (CR.S,).
tegnirements; All conveyance documents (deeds) subject to the documentary fee sahinitted to the county clerk and recorder for
u:ordation muss be ncmmpanied by a Real Property Trunsler Declaadion. 77nis du:laamion must he completed ;nd signe+l by
he grantor (seller) or gnanleo (buyer). Rtier to 39-14-102(I)(a), CR.S.
'enalty for Nnneornpliance: Whenever a Reail Properly Trnsfer Ueclm'alion does not accompany the died, the clerk and recorder
lotiI ies the county assessor who will send it notice to the buyer reyuMing That the dcclmmiot be zeu nu al within dolly days aller
he notice is mailed.
f the Real Properly Transfer Declaration is not retumul to the comity assessor within the 30 days of notice, the assessor may impose a
den thy of $25.00 or, 025%, (.00025) of the sale price, whichever is greater. This Penalty may be imposed for rery subsequent year that
he buyer fails to submit the declaration until the property is sold Refer to 39-14-102(I)(h), C_R S.
1mrtnhdv iality: The assessor is required to make the Real Property Transfer Declaration available for inspection to the buyen
iowever, it is only avalable to the seller it the seller filed the detlaradon. Information derived from the Real Property Tedlsler
)eclada cal is available to any taxpayer or rery agent of such taxpayer subject to con] iderit aky rcquiremcnls as provided by law.
2eler to 39-5-121,5, CI2.S. and 39-13-102(5)(c), C.R.S.
Address and/or legal description of the real property sold, Plu-asc do nod use 13 0, box uumbcs.
2800 Gray Stret_t Wheat Ridge Colorado 80214
Type of properly purchased: Single family Residential ❑ Townhorne ❑ Condominium ❑ Multi-Unit Res
❑ Commerical ❑ Industrial ❑ Acricultural ❑ Mixed Use ❑ Vacant Land ❑ Other
i. Date of closing:
8 28 2003
Dale of contract if different than dale of closing:
7 11 2003
tito~Day year
Total sale price: Inolading en teu1 mad pnaonal Panpetly.
$ 194,500.00
_
Was any personal property included 111 the transaction? Pun-meJ plapenyNnalJ indnac, bur isnM linuaN tq mnpaing.Amµc,fmc saanJing
upplinnces, ulnipn end, invuuury, familnre. If me Ina mad grope , is not listed, am denim purcL'nsc pa ee will he....... tied be to, the, oud,a,,a,ie
3 tat, CRS. s
3J I
( Yes ❑ No IfYes, approxinnnleValue $ Describe pt
tf~ 0~ana«
Did tht total sale price include it trade or exchange of additional real or personal property? If yes, give me appmxinmie value of die goods
s of ahc Jaw of closing 1
E 6YraLS 'f~y~/,'No II'yes,valie$
If yes, % this transaction involve a tl ade under IRS Coale Section 10319 ❑ Yes ❑ No
TWas 100'8 interest in the told property porcltased? mad °ue" 11 only a pnabJ Inmae.,a is bea., pureba,ed.
Yes ❑ No it no, inlcrost purchased IT.
is this nb':arsitiniod among related parties? iudicate wbetlnx Lilt huyer orsd4r an relied ReIledpuniu indadepusons"iain me'aum Lvuily,
business of{du lys, oraf in. aul...FOaalions.
❑ Yes 0t No
Check rely Jot the following that apply to the condition of the improvements at the time of punchus,
❑ New ❑ Excellent ❑ Good Average ❑ Fair ❑ Poor ❑ Salvage.
the property is financed, placse Complete the following.
. Total amount financed. $
Ty ae of fnancing: (Check all that apply)
New
I I Assumed
❑ Seller
❑ Third Party
❑ Combination; Explain
2. Terms:
Val'iable; starting intereatjEale I
Fixed; Interest rate
Length of time - ears
Balloon payrrlent ❑ Yes 14 No. If yes, a rlAth One date
3. Please explain airy special term', seller concessions, or f a icing laid :ny other informal. n that would
the mmis oI sale.
Sl L7L~D_ 90?106- LcSi J
'or panpzrties other that residential (Residential is defined as: single family detachedl, lownhomes, apartments tmd condlominiums)
lease complete questions 14-16 if appl cabic. Otherwise, skip to 1117 to completes
PTDx
1 of 2
19kp PIRM87CM
Did the purchase price include a f ranchise or license fee? ❑ Yes `P' No
If yes, franchise or license fee value S-
_-Did the purchase price involve an installisait lmld contract? ❑ Yes ~No
If yes, dire of contract
If this w¢es It vacmn land st e, was an on-sire inspcetion of the Property conducted by the buyer prier to the dosiag?
❑ Yes ❑ No
Inarka: Ylu~n mdudc any ud hies] Infommliun consuming am e.Iu You way 1-11, inax,nnn..
. Signed this-, 2uth day of__Auclust 2003
Fse- Wu Ili, n ,nih, and Yur. hm . vi lu-m m e of the p~~ ws m Ile, lemsacnon sign the d-einomu, :unt InduJe un :eldron wed a de,i1Lw
phone salsa., Please ftsignare buyer ar seller.
t :Tot -
Signatw'e of Granleo(BUY.') or Grantor(Scllcr) ❑
. All future correspondence (tax bills, properly valuations, etc) regarding this property should be rnailed to
Address (smiling) Daytime Phony,:
City, state and Zip code
Page 2 of 2
=left 111.0 3,11 6'1(`A3
Q WHEgT
ham ~~p LAND USE CASE PROCESSING APPLICATION
C m Community Development Department
7500 West 29th Avenue, Wheat Ridge, CO 80033
o Phone (303) 235-2846
OZ 0 R P 0 (Please print or type all information)
Applicant ~neh~ is~ Address ZgOD (a a,, V Phone 720-T37-6366
City Wl e~i h',J~e Stater CO tip gozltl Fax
Owner 01th411,1 rlst Address 2800 (ao-ti„ !0 Phone 720-1 Y9-6306
City vvk .,4 P J ( State C O Zip Y D2_/ L/ Fax
Contact OLA&J,h rash Address Phone
City State Zip Fax
(The person listed as contact will be contacted to answer questions regarding this application, provide additional information when necessary, post
public hearing signs, will receive a copy of the staff report prior to Public Hearing, and shall be responsible for forwarding all verbal and written
communication to applicant and owner.)
Location of request (address): 2 800 S1 l i< tai r
Type of action requested (check one or more of the actions listed below which pertain to your request):
Application submittal requirements on reverse side
❑ Change of zone or zone conditions ❑ Special Use Permit
❑ Consolidation Plat ❑ Subdivision: Minor (5 lots or less)
❑ Flood Plain Special Exception ❑ Subdivision: Major (More than 5 lots)
❑ Lot Line Adjustment ❑ Right of Way Vacation
❑ Planned Building Group ❑ Temporary Use, Building, Sign
❑ Site Development Plan approval t$f Variance/Waiver (from Section )
❑ Other:
Detailed description of request: r s z de yu.J zel r 'a c back At /61
'kJ a 122 X -f4 yai 1 vct -lo k, 1 c i kr o4 66D~% D 'K 4k /1 1C
zone v, 11
J iI4
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-attorney from the owner which approy this action on his behalf.
Signature of Applicant l
Subscribed and lo~eftrys~ ay of H p~ 20 6 R
`c
N~• tbUBOd'. blic
9p mission expires
To be filled out by staff: q t
Date received Fee $ ZO0 0-tteceipt No. ~W4)063fL Case No. Al' - B 9-
Comp Plan Desig. Zoning l2-/ Quarter Section Map SAS'
Related Case No. Pre-App Mtg. Date Case Manager Z-L74_e
CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE
04/03/09 8:43 AN ed6h
Quentin Fish
RECEIPT NO:CDB001348 AMOUNT
FMSD ZONING APPLICATION F 200.00
ZONE
PAYMENT RECEIVED AMOUNT
CK 763 200.00
TOTAL 200.00