HomeMy WebLinkAboutWA-99-157500 West 29th Avenue The City of
Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80215 Wheat
Telephone 303/ 237-6944
FAX 303/234-5924
June 30, 1999
Mr. Ben Bandimere
13831 w. 54`h Ave.
Arvada, Co 80002
RE: WA-99-15
Dear Mr. Bandimere:
Ridge
Please be advised that at its meeting of June 24, 1999, the Board of Adjustment DENIED your request
for a 953 square foot lot area variance from the 9,000 square foot minimum lot area requirement and a
15 foot lot width variance from the 75 foot minimum lot width requirement to allow the construction
of a duplex at 4470 Lee Street.
Attached is a copy of the Certificate of Resolution stating the Board's decision which became
effective the date of the meeting, June 24, 1999. Should you decide to appeal the decision of the
Board, you will need to notify the Jefferson County district court in writing within 30 days of the
Board's decision.
Please feel free to contact me at (303) 235-2846 if you have any questions.
Sincerely, Barbara Delgadillo
Senior Secretary
/bd
cc: WA-99-15
C ABarbara\BOA\CORRES P\wa9915.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 24th day of June, 1999.
CASE NO: WA-99-15
APPLICANT'S NAME: Ben Bandimere
LOCATION: 4470 Lee Street
Upon a motion by Board Member ABBOTT, seconded by Board Member BROWN, the following
resolution was stated:
WHEREAS, the applicant was denied permission by an administrative officer; and
WHEREAS, Board of Adjustment Application Case No. WA-99-15 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 in recognition that
there were three protests registered against it; and
WHEREAS, the relief applied for may 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-
99-15 be, and hereby is, APPROVED.
TYPE OF VARIANCE: A request for a 953 square-foot lot area and 15 foot lot width variance for
property located at 4470 Lee Street.
FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS:
The property is located in an area surrounded by several apartment structures and adjacent to
an existing church. The applicant will be required to comply with existing setbacks
established for this specific zone district; therefore, approval of this request should not
substantially alter the essential character of the locality.
2. Granting of this variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other
properties or improvements in the neighborhood as approval of this variation will only
permit a change in density. The granting of this request will result in minimum density
impact as it will enable the increase of only one additional family.
Board of Adjustment
Resolution WA-99-15
Page two (2)
The ownership of the existing duplex on the adjacent lot has been short-term which points to
the less than desirable location for long-term single family occupancy. The single family
occupancy would exist completely surrounded by multi-family or commercial.
4. The subdivision of this parcel by City Council created one standard and one substandard lot
related to the allowable size for construction of two duplexes. As a legal duplex has been
constructed on lot 2 since the previous time the Board heard this request and for the above
stated reasons, it would now seem economically unfeasible to build a single-family
occupancy on this lot.
VOTE: YES: ABBOTT, BROWN, HOWARD
NO: ECHELMEYER, HOVLAND, THIESSEN
ABSENT: JUNKER, MAURO
DISPOSITION: A request for a 953 square-foot lot area and 15 foot lot width variance for
property located at 4470 Lee Street for the purpose of building a duplex, was denied by a vote of 3
to 3 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 24th day of June, 1999.
BOB HOWARD, CHAIR
Board of Adjustment
Ann Lazzeri, Secretary
Board of Adjustment
CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
Minutes of Meeting -
June 24,4999_ _
1. CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by Chair
HOWARD at 7:30 p.m. on June 24, 1999, in the Council Chambers of the Municipal
Building, 7500 West 29th Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado.
2. ROLL CALL
Members Present: Tom Abbott
Michelle Brown
Bill Echelmeyer
Bob Howard
Paul Hovland
Karen Thiessen
Members Absent: Susan Junker
Linda Mauro
Staff Present: Meredith Reckert, Senior Planner
Chris Cramer, Summer Intern, Planning Department
Ann Lazzeri, Secretary
The following is the official set of Board of Adjustment minutes for the Public Hearing of June 24,
1999. A set of these minutes is retained both in the office of the City Clerk and in the Department
of Planning and Development of the City of Wheat Ridge.
3. APPROVE THE ORDER OF THE AGENDA
Chair HOWARD announced that Case No. WA-99-16 (item 4B on the agenda) had been
withdrawn by the applicant.
4. PUBLIC FORUM
(This is the time for anyone to speak on any subject not appearing on the agenda.)
There was no one signed up to speak.
5. PUBLIC HEARING
A. Case No. WA-99-15: Application by Ben Bandimere for approval of a 953 square foot lot
area variance from the 9,000 square foot minimum lot area requirement and a 15 foot lot
width variance from the 75 foot minimum lot width requirement to allow the construction of
a duplex at 4470 Lee Street. Said property is zoned R-2A.
Board of Adjustment Minutes Page 1
06/24/99
This case was presented by Meredith Reckert. She distributed excerpts from the minutes of
the December 11, 1997 and January 22, 1998 hearings which pertain to this case. After
Board members had an opportunity to read these documents, she reviewed the staff report,
presented slides and overheads of the subject property and answered the ten criteria involved
in granting a variance. All pertinent documents were entered into the record. She stated
staff s conclusion that the criteria does not support the request to allow for development of a
duplex. Although staff felt approval of the request would not alter the essential character of
the locality or increase traffic congestion, the property is large enough and wide enough to
allow for the development of a single-family structure as a use by right. Staff s
recommendation is for denial. She also noted that staff received three phone calls in
opposition to this application.
In response to a question from Board Member BROWN as to the nature of the opposition,
Mr. Cramer replied that he received one phone call from a citizen who did not give a reason
but just wanted her opposition to be a matter of record.
Meredith Reckert clarified the lot lines on the subject property at the request of Board
Member ABBOTT.
Ben Bandimere
13831 West 54th Avenue, Arvada
Mr. Bandimere, the applicant, was sworn in by Chair HOWARD. He stated that he bought
the subject property in 1992 and was required to dedicate 20 feet of the land for right-of-way
to widen Lee Street which reduced the size of his lot considerably. He has considered
building a single family home on the lot, but has had the property for sale for the past nine
months and no one has expressed any interest. However, he stated that there has been a lot
of interest in the duplex built on the first lot. He immediately sold each unit and one has
been resold. He did not believe this location was suitable for a single family residence.
In response to a question from Board Member BROWN, Mr. Bandimere presented a
elevation of proposed duplex.
Board Member THIESSEN asked the applicant if he was made aware of the 20-foot land
dedication requirement at the time of his subdivision application. Mr. Bandimere replied
that he knew he would have to dedicate some land, but didn't realize at the time how much
land would actually be involved. In response to another question from Board Member
THIESSEN, Mr. Bandimere stated that he was aware that he could have built a four-plex
structure on the land but felt a duplex was more desirable. A four-plex would require rental
of the units, whereas the duplex units could be sold to individual owners.
Mr. Bandimere stated that he has attempted to purchase a portion of the property to the north
to expand the lot area, but the owner is not interested in selling at this time. He felt that
construction of duplexes in this area would actually improve the neighborhood.
Board of Adjustment Minutes Page 2
06/24/99
Board Member HOVLAND asked if the applicant could consolidate his two lots into one.
Ms. Reckert explained that this would be impossible because he no longer has ownership of
the duplex:
Board Member ABBOTT commented that this piece of property appears to be an island in
the middle of mismatched zoning and asked if R-3 zoning would allow a duplex to built on
this lot. Ms. Reckert replied that a zoning change would make no difference as far as
density requirements are concerned. She also commented that there are also physical
limitations presented by the irrigation ditch on this piece of property.
Upon a motion by Board Member ABBOTT and second by BROWN, the following
resolution was stated:
Whereas, the applicant was denied permission by an administrative officer; and
Whereas, Board of Adjustment Application Case No. WA-99-15 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 in recognition
that there were three protests registered against it; and
Whereas, the relief applied for may 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-99-15
be, and hereby is, approved.
Type of Variance: A request for a 953 square-foot lot area and 15 foot lot width variance
for property located at 4470 Lee Street.
For the following reasons:
1. The property is located in an area surrounded by several apartment structures and
adjacent to an existing church. The applicant will be required to comply with
existing setbacks established for this specific zone district; therefore, approval of this
request should not substantially alter the essential character of the locality.
2. Granting of this variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to
other properties or improvements in the neighborhood as approval of this variation
will only permit a change in density. The granting of this request will result in
minimum density impact as it will enable the increase of only one additional family.
Board of Adjustment Minutes Page 3
06/24/99
The ownership of the existing duplex on the adjacent lot has been short-term which
points to the less than desirable location for long-term single family occupancy. The
single family occupancy would exist completely surrounded by multi-family or
commercial.
4. The subdivision of this parcel by City Council created one standard and one
substandard lot related to the allowable size for construction of two duplexes. As a
legal duplex has been constructed on lot 2 since the previous time the Board heard
this request and for the above stated reasons, it would now seem economically
unfeasible to build a single-family occupancy on this lot.
Board Member THIESSEN stated that she would vote against the motion because City
Council approved the subdivision for single family use on the subject lot and, therefore, a
substandard lot was not created. Although she understands the owner's dilemma, she does
not feel the criteria substantiate a unique situation requiring a variance.
Board Member ECHELMEYER stated that he would vote against the motion because he felt
a single family unit is be feasible for the lot.
Board Member requested an amendment to his motion to modify reason no. 4 as follows: As
a legal duplex has been constructed on Lot 2 since the previous time the Board heard this
request and, for the above stated reasons (No. 1, 2 and 3) it would seem that Lot 1 is truly
undesirable as a single family occupancy lot and it would seem unfeasible to build a single
family home on said lot. Board Member BROWN, who seconded the motion, agreed to this
amendment.
Chair HOWARD announced that five affirmative votes would be required to approve the
motion.
The motion failed by a vote of 3 to 3 with Board Members THIESSEN, HOVLAND and
ECHELMEYER voting no.
Chair HOWARD informed the applicant that his request for variance had been denied.
B. Case No. WA-99-18: An application by Thomas Little for approval of a freestanding sign
variance to allow an additional freestanding sign. Said property is zoned C-1 and located at
7605 West 44th Avenue.
The case was presented by Meredith Reckert. She reviewed the staff report, presented slides
and overhead projections of the subject area. She answered the ten criteria used in
considering a variance and entered all pertinent documents into the record. Staff concluded
that, although there wasn't a hardship attributed to this case and there were no unique
circumstances found that would warrant this request, approval would not alter the essential
Board of Adjustment Minutes Page 4
06/24/99
CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE
PLANNING DIVISION STAFF REPORT
TO: Board of Adjustment
DATE OF MEETING: June 24, 1999 DATE PREPARED: June 9, 1999
CASE NO. & NAME: WA-99-15\ Bandimere CASE MANAGER: Sean McCartney
ACTION REQUESTED: Request for approval of a 953 square foot lot area variance to the 9,000 square foot
lot area requirement and a 15' lot width variance to the 75' lot width requirement.
LOCATION OF REQUEST: 4470 Lee Street
NAME & ADDRESS OF APPLICANT(S)
Benjamin Bandimere
13831 West 54`s Avenue
Arvada, CO 80002
NAME & ADDRESS OF OWNER(S)
APPROXIMATE AREA:
PRESENT ZONING:
PRESENT LAND USE:
SURROUNDING ZONING:
SURROUNDING LAND USE:
Same
8,047 square feet
Residential Two-A
Vacant
Nand E: Agricultural-One and Commercial-One,
W:Planned Residential Development, S: Agricultural-One
N:Single Family Residential, E: and S: Church, W: Multi
Family Residential
DATE PUBLISHED: June 4, 1999
DATE POSTED:
DATED LEGAL NOTICES SENT:
June 9, 1999
June 2, 1999
ENTER INTO RECORD:
Q COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
(X) ZONING ORDINANCE
Q SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS
(X) CASE FILE & PACKET MATERIALS
(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.
A^ l
I. REQUEST
The applicant is requesting approval of a 953 square foot lot area variance to the 9,000 square foot lot
area requirement and a 15' lot width variance to the 75' lot width requirement to allow the construction
of a duplex in a Residential-Two A zone district. Currently the parcel is vacant and shown on the
survey as Lot 1.
The applicant originally requested approval of this variance before Planning Commission on January
18, 1996. At the time, the applicant was also requesting approval of a rezoning from Agricultural-One
to Residential-Two A and a two-lot minor subdivision. Planning Commission reviewed the request for
the variance and discussed the future problems that approval of the request may bring to the area.
Planning Commission denied the variance request based upon insufficient evidence in support to the
variance criteria. The rezoning and subdivision were eventually approved by City Council. A copy of
the Planning Commission minutes is attached.
The applicant is requesting the same variances as requested before the Planning Commission. Since
approval of the rezoning and minor subdivision, the applicant has developed a duplex on the property
shown as Lot 2. It should be stated that the applicant will need to comply with the existing
development regulations established in the Residential-Two A zone district (i.e. - 30' front yard
setback, 5' side yard setback and a 10' rear yard setback for the main structure), whether a single-family
dwelling or duplex is built on the lot.
To date, staff has not received any opposition regarding this case.
II. CRITERIA
Staff has the following comments regarding the criteria to evaluate an application for a variance:
1. Can the property in question yield a reasonable return in use, service, or income if
permitted to be used only under the conditions allowed by regulation for the District in
which it is located?
Yes. According to Section 26-45 (F), of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws, a one-family dwelling
in the Residential-Two A zone district can be located on a 7,500 square foot property with a 60'
lot width. Therefore, if the request is denied, the property may yield a reasonable return in use,
service and income.
2. Is the plight of the owner due to unique circumstances?
No. The property was subdivided with the intention that it was to remain a single-family
parcel. The applicant knew, during the subdivision process, that the property was substandard
in lot width and lot area for the development of a duplex. Also, there are other vacant
properties throughout the city which contain substandard dimensions within their parameters.
Board of Adjustment Page 2
WA-99-15/Bandimere
A-l
3. If the variation were granted, would it alter the essential character of the locality?
No. The property is located in an area that is surrounded by several apartments structures and
adjacent to an existing church. Also, the applicant will be required to comply with the existing
setbacks established for the specific zone district. Therefore, approval of this request should
not alter the essential character of the locality.
4. Would the particular physical surrounding, shape, or topographical condition of the
specific property involved result in a particular hardship (upon the owner) as
distinguished from a mere inconvenience if the strict letter of the regulations were carried
out?
No. The property currently exists as a primarily rectangular lot. Although the southern
property line meanders to the east at a slight angle, there is an adequate building envelope
established that would permit proper development of a sizable residential structure.
5. Would the conditions upon which the petition for a variation is based be applicable,
generally, to other property within the same zoning classification?
Yes. There are several properties throughout the city of Wheat Ridge which exist as
substandard lots of record, which would be permitted to apply for the same type of variance.
6. Is the purpose of the variation based exclusively upon the desire to make money out of the
property?
Yes. The applicant would be permitted, by right, to develop a single-family residence.
However, development of a duplex would probably create more of a market value for the
property.
7. Has the alleged difficulty or hardship been created by any person presently having an
interest in the property?
Yes. The hardship has been created by the applicant who has sole interest in the property.
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. Granting of this variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other
property or improvements in the neighborhood as approval of this variation will only permit a
change in density. Any development on the site will be required to comply with the setbacks
established in the Residential-Two A development regulations.
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?
Board of Adjustment
WA-99-15/Bandimere
A~ 3
No. As previously stated, any development on this site would be required to comply with the
setbacks established in the specific zone district, therefore approval of this request should not
impair the adequate supply of light and air to the adjacent properties. Also, approval of this
request will not substantially increase the congestion in the streets as approval of the request
will only allow for the development of a duplex.
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. Approval of this request is neither a benefit for the community nor for the reasonable
accommodation of a handicapped person. This request is based solely upon individual benefit.
III. STAFF'S CONCLUSION
Staff concludes that the above criteria does not support the request to allow for development of a
duplex. Although staff concludes that approval of the request will not alter the essential character of
the locality, or increase congestion in the streets, the property is large enough and wide enough to
allow for the development of a single-family structure, permitted by right.
IV. RECOMMENDED MOTIONS
OPTION A: "I move that Case No. WA-99-15, a request for a 953 square foot lot area and 15' lot
width variance, for property located at 4470 Lee Street, be DENIED for the following reasons:
1. The evaluation criteria does not support approval of this request.
2. The applicant may build a single-family residence without need of a variance.
3. Planning Commission originally denied the request."
OPTION B: "I move that Case No. WA-99-15, a request for a 953 square foot lot area and 15' lot
width variance, for property located at 4470 Lee Street, be APPROVED for the following reasons:
1. Approval of this request should not alter the essential character of the locality.
2. Approval of this request should not impair the adequate supply of light and air to the
adjacent properties."
E:\McC=ey\cue files\WA-99-15.WPD
Board of Adjustment
WA-99-15Bandimere
A-4
Page 4
SITE
OFFICIAL
ZONI N6 MAP
NHEAT RIDGE
COLORADO
MAP ADOPTED: -k+ne 15, 1994
Last Revision: September 19, 1996
0 AREA REQUIRING SITE PLAN APPROVAL
100-YEAR FLOOD PLAIN
(APPROXIMATE LOCATION)
ZONE D15TRICT BOUNDRY
- PARCEL/LOT BOUNDRY
(DE5IGNATE5 OWNERSHIP)
- WATER FEATURE
+ DENOTES MULTIPLE ADDRE55FS
NE 21
SCALE 1'-400
DEI'ARTI'BIT Of R"W, AIO DUBLRIEW - 735-2853
A-s
s~r>= 5~trvE~'
in
V
n
L
z
J
z
Q
Q
-
°OINT JF
N 39
5J' 15°
BEGINNING
CV
~ 1
I p
i
I
7
3
.
~ o
'1~
A
4
/
3G 00 r-
P
Lf) v
1T
.
v
~
J
i
-
w
LOT 2
/
9019.69
S. F.
I
r
I
_I
I r
Jam/
98
W
z
z
EAST 1/4 ON44ER
w
U
SEC. z,.rs,Mw
ctt OF !NEAT ZUGE
3RAS5 CAP M RM .(E
30X
Q
Q
/
,
i o
-,av Ems. 100.00
i.. N
IDa of CO
MER
A
I j
i
1 _
\ ~11
S
1
,I
I II
y Ili r
k
`r I
tD I
V -
Ii
LJ
A-}
Q
14
~ I
Go NO
- i Sa do
Sx/o ex /O
NOOK p/ooK
/2x 19 40 £ nI;L I~~ 12 X l4
Limon /Zr7OM SX/0 I~ K$ hcn II~p ivin
0 0 /Gt<he~ 5 Roo
❑ O
~ ~ O 4 1
4 '
- I
A C l.. l
I-
r6 x 21 //1__6~~X ~-1 I
I ~4COsG V~rG9G I i
I
I 1
z TS' I6 ' 6 2' 1 v
p ~opos~p FIRST ~~oo~z..
0
II
I
II
I
I,
I
1
40 a Yo
I
I I
T
I
i
II
Yo .v yo - -
I
/5Xv2
/5X 12
Bcdroom
~1
O
a9edroom No. /
I
r
y 1
~I
1~r
I ~
OPEN To
I
rj
I
LrvinS ~~?`h
_
I
OPEN TU
-
I
Li v vri Room
I
-
I
I
36
I
vvxf2
$cdrvom
N• Z'
vrxvz
13~droom N, 2
I
i.
.I
I it
III
i
I
Yoa YO
` I
q0• U
II I I
- -
I I~
I
,
I
I I I
I
I I
II Nj
I
2 ! Z' I
-L
I'
l
_ _
I
yr
-
Yo'
A' ' l
FPvPo,.;Cp ipECOf4b Fux~pl
Planning Commission Minutes Page 2
January 18, 1996
3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
4. APPROVE THE ORDER OF THE AGENDA
Commissioner ECKHARDT moved to approve the agenda for the meeting
of January 18, 1996 as printed. Commissioner WILLIAMS seconded
the motion. Motion carried 5-0.
5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The minutes for the meeting of January 11, 1996 will be available
at the February 1, 1996 meeting.
6. PUBLIC FORUM (This is the time for anyone to speak on any
subject not appearing under Item 7 of the Public Hearing
section of the agenda.)
No one had signed the roster, nor came forward at that time to
speak.
7. PUBLIC HEARING
1. Case No. WZ-96-1: An application by Benjamin Bandimere
for approval of a rezoning from A-1 to R-2A for
property located at 4470 Lee Street.
2. Case No. MS-96-1: An application by Benjamin Bandimere
for approval of a two-lot minor subdivision with
variances for property located at 4470 Lee Street.
Mr. Gidley presented the staff report, which included both Case
No. WZ-96-1 and MS-96-1. Entered into the record and accepted by
the Chairperson were the Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Ordinance,
Subdivision Regulations, case file, packet materials and
exhibits.
Commissioner RASPLICKA asked if the parcel was large enough to
accommodate a triplex.
Mr. Gidley stated that if the parcel was not subdivided, 12,500
square feet would be needed and the parcel is large enough.
Commissioner RASPLICKA asked if it was necessary that the utility
easement be located through the center of the parcel.
Mr. Gidley stated that the Subdivision Regulations require that
there are five-foot side and rear lot easements. If the parcel
was not subdivided, the easement through the middle of the
property would not be necessary.
A-10
Planning Commission Minutes
January 18, 1996
Page 3
Mr. Gidley reminded Commission that three separate motions were
required. The motion regarding the variance requires a greater-
than-majority vote, or four out of five members.
Chairperson LANGDON asked if the variance should be voted on
first. What happens if the variance is denied?
Mr. Gidley explained that
approval of the variance.
to put a duplex on Lot 2,
to 9,000 square feet a si
1. If the parcel was not
triplex on the property.
the rezoning to R-2A could pass without
The.applicant would still be allowed
and upon increasing the square footage
zgle-family home could be placed on Lot
subdivided, the owner could put a
Ben Bandimere, 13831 West 54th Avenue, Arvada, was sworn in. Mr.
Bandimere stated he originally had planned to build two houses on
the property, however, the appraisal done did not support his
plan. He had also considered a four-plex, but decided two
duplexes would work better.
Commissioner CERVENY asked if the property was large enough to
support a four-plex.
Mr. Gidley stated that a minimum of 4,000 square feet of land
area is required for each dwelling unit in multi-family
buildings. The applicant has more than the 16,000 square feet
required.
Commissioner CERVENY asked if a four-plex would have advantages
over two duplexes, other than one meeting Subdivision
Requirements and the other does not?
Mr. Gidley stated that he felt that the four-plex structure would
have a better relationship on the whole parcel, than two duplexes
on two smaller lots. He explained that this was true because you
have individual side lot requirements and also individual private
property associated with the smaller lots.
Commissioner CERVENY mentioned possible pros and cons of owner-
occupied versus renter-occupied units.
Mr. Gidley reminded Commissioner CERVENY that the same argument
could be made for any R-2A zone district having a substandard lot
situation. He reiterated that the variance criteria asked "How
is this parcel different from any other R-2 zone district in the
City?" He elaborated.
Commissioner CERVENY asked if approving the variance might set a
precedent for further actions?
A-II
Planning Commission Minutes
January 18, 1996
Page 4
Mr. Gidley stated that when a subdivision is under deliberation,
unless unusual/unique circumstances exist, staff will recommend
compliance with recommendations. In this case, no unique/unusual
circumstances were found.
Commissioner CERVENY asked if the fact that a duplex would be
allowed on the whole parcel, but that two duplexes would not be
allowed on the subdivided lot, would be considered unique or
unusual circumstances. He thought that the two duplexes might
actually enhance the neighborhood. He elaborated.
Ms. Reckert answered that there was quite a bit of vacant land
left, especially in that area.
Mr. Gidley noted that because of numerous small, in-fill lots
within the City, this type of request will not be unusual. He
reminded Commission that most variance requests are for
individual lots and are referred to the Board of Adjustment. He
elaborated.
Commissioner CERVENY asked what Board of Adjustment would do, for
example, if the parcel was already subdivided and requested such
a variance.
Mr. Gidley answered that they had denied and approved some such
cases. He added that he did not know nor could he predict what
the Board would do in the incidence Commissioner CERVENY
mentioned.
Mr. Reckert informed Commission that should the Subdivision be
approved, denial of the variance request would not preclude an
applicant from applying for variance again in the future.
Commissioner ECKHARDT suggested the possibility of staggering the
unit fronts, attaching them only a corners. He explained.
Mr. Gidley noted to Commission that the greatest possibility for
ownership would exist if the variance request was denied.
Commissioner ECKHARDT stated he was not concerned about
ownership.
Mr. Bandimere stated he had concerns about a four-plex being
maintained. He noted that should duplexes be allowed, an owner
could live in half, renting the other half and make sure that the
units were maintained.
Commissioner ECKHARDT suggested condominium ownership could be
done.
A-17-
Planning Commission Minutes
January 18, 1996
Page 5
Mr. Bandimere noted that it was costly to set up condominium
ownership.
Commissioner RASPLICKA asked if a four-plex was constructed,
would the units have to be attached?
Mr. Gidley answered yes.
Chairperson LANGDON asked that Mr. Gidley further explain Mr.
Bandimere's options should the variance not be granted.
Mr. Gidley answered that if the subdivision was approved but the
variance denied, Mr. Bandimere or another applicant/owner would
have the option of doing a consolidation plat and after one year
has passed any owner can reapply for variance request.
Chairperson LANGDON asked if that was only if the lots were still
unimproved.
Mr. Gidley stated yes, that was correct.
Commissioner ECKHARDT moved that the request for rezoning from C-
1 and A71 to R-2A for property located at 4470 Lee Street be
Approved for the following reasons:
1. The request is compatible with the surrounding use;
2. It is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan; and
3. The evaluation criteria presented support the request.
Commissioner RASPLICKA seconded the motion. Motion carried 5-0.
Commissioner ECKHARDT moved that the request for lot area and lot
width variances associated with a proposed minor subdivision be
Denied for the following reason:
1. The variance evaluation criteria do not support approval.
Commissioner RASPLICKA seconded the motion. Motion carried 4-1,
with Commissioner CERVENY voting no.
Commissioner ECKHARDT moved that the request for approval of a
two-lot minor subdivision for property located at 4470 Lee Street
be approved for the following reason:
1. All requirements of the Subdivision Regulations have been
met.
With the following condition:
1. The plat be redesigned to allow for one R-2A single-family
lot and one R-2A duplex lot.
Ik -13
Planning Commission Minutes Page 6
January 18, 1996
Commissioner CERVENY seconded the motion.
Commissioner CERVENY suggested that since the request for
variance had been denied, perhaps the applicant would not care to
subdivide the lot.
Mr. Bandimere considered his options.
Commissioner ECKHARDT asked if there was a possibility of
purchasing additional land.
Mr. Bandimere answered that he had tried to purchase additional
land, but had no success. He explained.
Commissioner CERVENY stated that Commission was awaiting Mr.
Bandimere's decision whether he wished to proceed with his
subdivision request.
Discussion followed.
Commissioner ECKHARDT thought that if the subdivision was
approved, but not recorded, it would make no difference.
Mr. Gidley reminded those present that the case would go next to
City Council, who will make a decision on the zoning request.
The applicant can appeal Planning Commission's decision on the
subdivision and variance to City Council.
Discussion followed regarding various options for the applicant
and procedures for same.
Mr. Gidley went through the pros and cons for the various options
the applicant has, explaining them to the applicant.
Mr. Bandimere decided to leave his request as is.
Commissioner ECKHARDT's motion regarding the subdivision request
carried, 5-0.
3. Case No. WZ-96-2: An application by Terry Kunz for
HJH, L.L.C., for approval of a final development plan
and plat for PCD zoned property within the Town Center
Master Plan area. Said property is located at 4010
Wadsworth Boulevard.
Meredith Reckert presented the staff report. Entered and
accepted into the record by the Chairperson were the
Comprehensive-Plan, Zoning Ordinance, Subdivision Regulations,
case file, packet materials and slides.
A,IH
TO
DATE
TIME AM
RM
H
FROM
- /
/KKi_ ll.~
AREACODE
NO
N
O
.
A~
6~o
E
M
M
s
s
9^
s
E
M
G
O
E
SIGNED
PHONEO~
BACK CALL ETURNED S EYO U' ❑ AGWILL AINALL ❑
WAS M.~ UNGENTE]
-
TO
DE J `
TIME AM
PM
H.
H
FROM
A
AREA CODE ,
yam
'
3 ✓
A
`
.J
Np
.
N
OF
6
ptp~4b v~(-A
`algz Z~cC~
EXT.
E
M
E
1D~
W ~y~
-?DZ
xlp~l
M
s
L
~f~
t
E
A
/(A c40~ IAI~i
E
O
~
t9Ct''i~
~qfy~;
SIGNED
PHONED
BACK RETURNED ~ SEEI'UUO
~ GAINALL ~
WAS IN
1 11
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 24,1999, 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. WA-99-15: An application by Ben Bandimere for approval of a 953 square foot
lot area variance from the 9,000 square foot minimum lot area requirement and a 15 foot
lot width variance from the 75 foot minimum lot width requirement to allow the
construction of a duplex at 4470 Lee Street. Said property is zoned R-2A.
2. Case No. WA-99-16: An application by Charles Corson for approval of an eight foot
front yard setback variance from the 30 foot minimum front yard setback requirement for
the addition of a 14'x 14' dining roorn/sunroom/front porch area. Said property is located
at 6435 West 4511 Place and zoned R-2.
Barbara Delgadillo, Recording Secretary
ATTEST:
Wanda Sang, City Cl
To be Published: Wheat Ridge Transcript
Date: June 4, 1999
CABs b.a\B0A\PUBHRGS\990624.wpd
The City of
7500 WEST 29TH AVENUE WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO 80215 Wheat
9Ridge
June 2, 1999
Dear Property Owner:
This is to inform you that Case No. WA-99-15 which is a request for a 953 square foot lot area
variance from the 9,000 square foot minimum lot area requirement and a 15 foot lot width
variance from the 75 foot minimum lot width requirement to allow the construction of a duplex
at 4470 Lee Street 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 24, 1999, at 7:30 p.m.
All owners and/or their representative of the parcel under consideration must be present at this
hearing. As an area resident or interested party, 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\wa9915letter.wpd
(303) 234.5900 • ADMINISTRATION FAX: 234-5924 POLICE DEPARTMENT FAX: 235-2949
a
d
c
d
c
m
~
_
a
C
~
d
c
~
y
N
u
m
~
a
a
m
Q
a
i
c
„
'
d
~
y
a
D:
°
c
z
d
?
dl
z
c
a
a
K
I
K
>
~ O
I
p
N
O~
Is
m
:
.
y
O
l
E
0
o
`
°
y U
L
O R
o a c
1 .0
d ~
#
10
10
10
i0
~
10
10
N
N ~ =
a 9
d
N
O)
~
~
T
W
0)
m
Q7
m
x
d d
Q
m
U
m
m
m
rn
Q
m
m
m
m° ~
3
3
3
3
~
3
3
3
v
O
N
a°
M
co
M
co in
c~
M
O
O
°
N
O
N O
j O
T O
p
m
rnQ
fqo
m
oy
dQC
ma m
U
41
d
N
N
jL O
O~N
U
2
ya
°)O
L ~U
E'E
R
O
d"oU
TL O
d V oU
NL O
d V aL)
'
dL O
Y V S
U
O
>a~
O
~n0
s~
-24
cv~
O
y+
N
a
a
v cb -m
~
r U
'
W
Q Y m
16 U
m~
lp 1n m
~
m ah m
~
o eh m
3
c~ m
OZ
G1 d
/
d
d
Q
ik a•
d.-
C
d 10 d
c a
one
c ~-o
ikv
d r d'
#a_
~
0:
ita
m
i Q
4f'
M
y
{Q -Q a.o
N
`
010
N N
W a
N O
N
d t0 d
m
C 10
d N
NiO
d N ~p
~0
C N
N
Ul N R
_
Q N c~
~
r
a
° d
N O
d
~2 Q
O° d
E° d
o° d
00
L
a
i
~
?i
L
3
w
F-
00
ow, x
❑ ❑ El ® ❑ ❑
z
d
U_
W ~
a
a
W
T
OOi
m
W
U' co
`o
~ co
`
M
n
n
M
M
o°i
M
M
_
m
v
m
v
m
v
m
v
m
a
m
v
m
v
rn
a
m
W 0
E
U
o
z
W zz
Q Q
x~a
LL
N
Z
0 < Z
o
z
2 z
LO
a
d
n
U~
~I
adi
0
W
d
N
O
P,
A
b
~i
^ U
FO
v
c
d
a
z
y
H
d
d
~
d
N
Q
d
C
v
d
U
u
m
a
c
i
Z
WI
K
c
7
I
I
I
R'
>
R'
~ O
0
m
w ~ N
.
O
Q
a
`y w o
L 0 N
as c
1 .0
M L E
"
#
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
x r a
x~ m a
N
m
W
m
A
rn
A
rn
O)
rn
W
m
W
rn
Q7
rn
d
Q m°$
U
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
U_
0
•
N
IG
G
0.
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
G
C
d O
d O
> O
d O
V d O
d- O
q O O
O
61
N Q N
c Q N
O a M
N Q W
O Q W
O Q N
N¢ N
d
N
7 V NO
0
co V r0
0
d REDO
V O
W CEO
O. ~
d d'MO
'
V =~O
_
N
L
a
p
Z rim
m
m
3
m~c~ m
Z V N N
o 3~ m
N N 6 i
U' 36i m
z d
N d
Iv 3~ A rn
d
d3vi m
m
a
v 3#
d
a
t # a
# 3
d # a
a # a
d # :4
d m
Y
y
N
Q
61 N
a K
61 N
v~ CL
°a
m K
U N
c
C N
c
61 N
m K
N
la V 6_
O 0
N
O O m
p m
p R
QI 0 16
21 p N
0 K C 6) N
N
O
p
KEU U
0
E
W
m
❑ ❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑
Z
a,
LO
v
N
Y
4
LU
O
o
m
6NO
ro
m
m
m
mN
Q
O
m
e
a
v
v
v
v
v
_
W O
E
m
rn
m
rn
rn
rn
m
Z
Q W z
w=a
Co
93
p
LL
N
0
Z
a
<
OW z
LO g
V I~ ~ a
~I
d
d
d
N
N
.
N
C
J
a
~
O
a
K
a
~
Q
m
u
v
`
c
~
Z
>
-
dl
U
9
'p
U
N O
y ;5
A=
0
a
d U
0
L O R
Ed o
R ~ .
y r v .
'
#
d
N
~O
~O
t0
~O
i0
m
~O
rn
d
o a
x d R
N
R
m
m
m
m
m
rn
m
m
m
rn
rn
rn
Q m
U
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
U
_
_
•1O
N
d
M
M
M
M
M
O
M
M
A
>
>
>
>
>
m
v
>
>
O
c
yQ
o¢
C
Q
s¢
a¢
~
N
d
d
N
N
'C L
dao
O
U
V L
xv
O
'oU
c L
cc
O
L
ram
W
O
U
V L 0
v~U
L
m -N
O
U
U L
mv'"~
O
U
N
o
p V N
K co
rn
J V
c
N
A
U V ry
O
M
N
N
:m
d
Z O
p
2.
d
R O
U
d
(O V
p
~
d
3:
9
3
~
a_
3
-o
i
d
a_
Y
N
N
Q
~O
C
~
N ~O
~
d ~O
r
~
t0
~
~ ~O
~
N
C t0
~
O t0
d N
(Q -6
p.d _
`
_
J N
O
N
G N
0
N
N
N N
U
~p
CrI
N
V~
U N d
'O
`
L
O
L
O
d
~
O
L
O
L
~
c O
>
t
3
O
c y d
d~
°a
3
3
3
O
N
W ` d N
S 2
C
O
m
O
~ U
R
U.6 LL W
E
❑ ❑ ❑
Z ❑ ❑
z
d
.2
W N
Q
o
m
m
r
m
r
r
m
m
m
u~
m
-
a
aro
C7 0
`o
m
a
o
a
o
m
~ 00
a
n
n
rn
n
m
n
rn
~
rn
°r
m
h
rn
W O
E
m
V
Z
=
w
aa
Z
O
s~o
LL
p
N
O~Q
K
z
a
0W
z
0 3:
d
Una
a
3I
Q
N
O
W
on
U
a
0
E
R
z
0
W
a
7
U
U
~i
y
U
P,
0
C
z~
F
b
C
O
L
d
.a
N
U
a
w
0
m
z
A
H
D
d
C
d
N
O
N
9
•
d
NY
G
C
O
z
d
~
NI
O
~
K
C
-y
a
D
I
a' >
~
j O w
N
N ~ O
O~
r? c N
N
N
O
N R O
L
a
O jp
as c
o.2
N a a
x R a
R
m
m
rn
rn
rn
m
m
m °tR.
U
3
3
3
3
3
3
U
O
a
(
N
°
O
0
G -
a
'y
M
a
U) a
M
M
G
C
R O
W O
N O
`
R O
R °
9 R O
3 m
m
rn m
E
m
a aD
c eD
GI
`1
N
O E V
U
U o
~
E L 1r UO
v
L O
Yv°U
L U
W
`3v°
C L O
Q oU
= L° O
>v°U
N
d
a
D
m
N 2
o
o
a m
= ~ m
3 4
o N rn
`
2
D N[~ rn
f
~ rn
y
Q
r p
c i k; 0
T
a
y
i i t a
6# U
# a
R a ?'-NO
m
Uo m
So m
ao `m
Uo m
Uo m
uo m
_
~ U R R
a
L
L
L
R ~ L
L
N L
N
❑ c R N
~
d
o v
a
)
v
E
R
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
z
m
N
u
T
W N
Y
Q
th
m
N
m
m
O
m
Ol
~
Op
ado
Vr p
o
N
~
°
~
~
M
°
M
0 p
M
°
M
M
n
M
n
n
w 0
E
r
m
rn
m
m
rn
rn
U
z
W Z
Q Q
O
l7
Cl
)
~ CD
N
O~: Q Z
a
Z
Lil
z
v
E5 LO a
~I
of WHEAT LAND USE CASE PROCESSING APPLICATION of WHEATP
Po ~ o
Planning and Development Department
7500 West 29th Avenue, Wheat Ridge, CO 80033
cot OR pO~ Phone(303)235-2846 oo~oR POo
(Please print or type all information)
Applicant efi ~b w~. Address 3 ~T~ ,z1(44 Phone
City 24
Owner Address 04vr Phone `e2c)Y3~
City, y s ~ll C r 970-0 -6 Z_
Location of request (address) ~7
Type of action requested (check one or more of the actions listed below which pertain to your request.)
❑ Change of zone or zone conditions [A 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:
a 40T
Fill out the following information to the best of your knowledge.
Current Zoning: 4
Size of Lot (acres or square footage): ~Ztq
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, 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 qwner which approved of this action on his behalf.
Signature of Applicant
Subscribed and worn to me this day of 19
Notary Publi
My commission expires~-~~~~
Date received Receipt No. 39 Case No. 1a)A_e1 T71
Related Case No. NA Zoning Quarter Section Map
WHEAT RIDGE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
MINUTES OF MEETING: December 11; 1997 Page 3
not the case, they are not really 100% done until the chairman
signs them.
Board Member HOWARD questioned what the by-laws states, and Mr.
White read the section and noted it is not clear what constitutes
final action. Board Member HOWARD feels the by-laws should be
changed before any action is taken on the motions. This will not
prevent the cases from being heard tonight.
Board Member ABBOTT suggested on this one particular resolution tc
make a motion putting it into effect the date it was signed, but
it was noted the actual date is not known. Board Member WALKER
feels at the time the resolution-is voted upon should be the
effective date; the rest of it is just paperwork. Mr. White said
resolution needs to make clear to the applicants that the
resolution.becomes effective on this date. Board Member THIESSEN
suggested it should perhaps state in the resolution itself when it
will take effect; thus eliminating any 30 days waiting period.
Mr. White said he thinks the problem is more when the case is
denied. Board Member THIESSEN disagreed with a resolution taking
effect when it is signed. Discussion followed regarding approving
the minutes without attached resolutions.
Motion was made by Board Member MAURO to table the voting of
minutes and resolutions and move them back under New Business.
Motion was seconded by Board Member THIESSEN, and carried
unanimously.
3. PUBLIC FORUM (This is the time'for anyone to speak on any
subject not appearing on the agenda.)
No one came forward to speak
4. PUBLIC HEARING
A. Case No- W9-97-11! An application by Ben Bandimere for approval of
a 953 square foot lot area variance to the 9,000 square foot lot
area requirement, and a 15' lot width variance to the 75' lot
width requirement for a duplex. Said property is zoned
Residential Two-A and located at 4470 Lee Street.
Sean McCartney presented the staff report. All pertinent
documents were entered into record, which Chairman HOVLAND
accepted.
WHEAT RIDGE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
MINUTES OF MEETING: December 11, 1997 Page 4
Board Member HOWARD said the frontage of this property is 60' wide
and then it narrows down twice and asked what is the width
narrowed down to, and Mr. McCartney replied 50 feet. Board Member
HOWARD asked if anything is built on Lot 1, would it have to be
15' away from the property line, and Mr. McCartney said no, the
Code of Laws for R2-A establish a minimum side yard setback of 5'
for all structures. He added there would be approximately 10'
between structures.
The applicant, Ben Bandimere, 13831 W. 54th Avenue, Arvada, CO,
was sworn in. He explained the duplex to the south has the
required 5' setback. He entered two drawings into record, labeled
Exhibit `A', for all members to review. He asked the board to
bear in mind these two units have been sold to young couples just
starting out and both parties are satisfied.
Board Member ECHELMEYER asked what is the width of the second
unit, and Mr. Bandimere replied 40'. Board Member ECHELMEYER
asked what was the width of the present unit, and Mr. Bandimere
answered 551. Board Member ECHELMEYER noted the plot plan is
inaccurate for the smaller duplex.
Mr. Bandimere entered two more drawings, labeled Exhibit `B'
Discussion followed.
Lucile Knowlton, 4471 Kipling Street, was sworn in. Ms.
Knowlton's main concern is there is an easement on her property
that has not been used for 40 years and believes it has reverted
back to her (the property owner), and said according to the
applicant's survey, part of the old easement is on his property,
leaving only 3' from her garage to his property line. For the
benefit of both parties, she feels this should be investigated.
Ms. Knowlton is not against this application, she just wants to
know where the property lines and easement are.
Board Member ECHELMEYER asked staff if they knew anything-about
the easement reverting back to the original property owner, and.
Mr. McCartney answered easements are created on the individual
property for utility companies and he has never heard of a shared
easement with two properties. Mr. White commented easements are
usually vacated and recorded with the county by agreement with the
property owner and easement holder. Ms. Knowlton said she just
wants to make sure Mr. Bandimere is not taking property away from
her.
WHEAT RIDGE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
MINUTES OF MEETING: December 11, 1997 Page 5
Mr. Bandimere said he has had the property survey and is just
going on what the surveyors have stated. Board Member THIESSEN
said this sounds like a property line dispute and feels the
request will be effected. Mr. McCartney said these issues cannot
be settled tonight and if the Board feels this is pertinent
information, staff would suggest continuing the case until more
information is brought forward.
No further questions were asked.
Motion was made by Board Member THIESSEN, and seconded by Board
Member MAURO to continue this case indefinitely until more
information is submitted regarding the property line dispute.
Motion carried 8-0.
C. Case No TTIP-97-11: An application by Janet Gunn for approval of a
Temporary Use Permit to allow a 5th wheel trailer as a permanent
structure and living quarters. Said property is zoned
Residential-One and located at 12310 W. 42nd Avenue.
Susan Ellis presented the staff report. All pertinent documents were
entered into record, which Chairman HOVLAND accepted.
Board Member ABBOTT spoke on the building inspector's comment and
said the intent was to tell him to enforce that part of the
electric code and not the applicability. Discussion followed.
Ms. Ellis stated she took into consideration the Board's concerns
last year with this being a Temporary Use Permit for a permanent
structure. It is kind of confusing, however she cannot alter what
the applicant requests on the application.
Larry Davis, 12310 W. 42nd Avenue, was sworn in. He discussed the
letter submitted, and confirmed, even though it was worded
`permanent' in last year's and this year's application, this is
NOT a permanent structure. He apologized for being late with this
year's application, but they were a bit-confused and did not fully
understand the procedure.
Board Member ECHELMEYER asked if the request is through the end of
August 1998, and Mr. Davis replied yes. Their ward, Michael,
graduates high school in May, however they have to get him off to
college in August. Mr. Davis pointed out Michael is graduating
high school at the age of 16.
WHEAT RIDGE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
MINUTES OF MEETING: December 11, 1997
Page 6
Board Member THIESSEN questioned alternatives and Mr. Davis said
they will not wait until the end this time to look for
alternatives and will start making plans immediately.
Marnie Boom, 4225 Vivian Street, was sworn in. She lives across
the street to the north of the applicant. She is in favor of the
request as the property is kept very nice and there has never been
a problem with noise or anything.
Aidan Ridley, 12350 W. 42nd Avenue, was sworn in. Mr. Ridley
lives immediately to the west of the applicant. He and his wife
would like to see this permit approved because they are good
neighbors and take care of the property.
Michael Phillips, the applicant's ward, 12310 W. 42nd Avenue, was
sworn in.- He asked that this permit be approved because as a 16
year-old senior high student he is under a good amount of stress,
and having to move at this time would create more. He will be
leaving for college in August, so the permit will be only until he
graduates from high school.
Board Member HOWARD wanted to know if this is not granted, why
would he have to move, and Mr. Phillips said that Mr. Davis helps
out financially and helps with the upkeep of the house. If Mr.
Davis has to move, they cannot afford to stay in the house and
will be forced to move as well.
Board Member ECHELMEYER was confused and Mr. Davis stated he owns
and lives in the trailer, and he and Ms. Gunn are co-owners of the
house which she and Michael live in. Mr. Davis further explained
the living situation and added he and Ms. Gunn are not married.
The trailer (RV) will be put on the market for sale late spring
and he will look for another residence.
No further questions were asked.
Motion was made by Board Member ABBOTT that Case No. TUP-97-11, an
application by Janet Gunn, be APPROVED for the following reasons:
1. The applicant has demonstrated that a personal and temporary
hardship exists.
2. The lot is oversized and backs on to Clear Creek open space.
3. The RV is a 1995 model and kept in near new condition.
4. Fire separation from adjacent structures is adequate.
5. Two adjacent property owners testified in favor of the
request.
- m- _
. ~ ~ t. a _.........,..w,,..
.rte ~ ~ a~ ~ ~ ~ ~r
G
i {
t d ~
i 5 ~9 r }j¢
S(E i.
A
i '
i
t }
${t 4s? 1
i~ pr
i 3 .
if V
f ~ i
i
{ 7
2 C
`„Y
1
~i ~k .i!!.1 r~ f Jilelt.~~ fAeallYA
_ -1.
_g
CITY C3F 4~i}-IEAT R~
8f2~4SS C~#' RA~V
i}
F i i
~ x i r 9
a 3
~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ POIt~1T ~3~
~ ~ ~ d~ ~ ~ a ~s ~i~. ~ a d ter ~erBrsa
~ 1
' ~R£~'' R ~F PL~NlNG~ D ~£I~L~P~IENT
~ ~ o ~ ~ T ~ s ~ ~ ~ t- +C~ : a
~ 4j r~ ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ ~ ~ f'M
~ ~ ~
Pi.M~tNtNG CflMl~IlaS14N T3F~CA~i
Tl^1!~ ~S T~ ~£RTIFY itiV ~i.Ad`~ ~~i fi`t' ~i~ PS.~'~;~ii~~ ^~1~~t~'.;~#~t^
~ '•iE ~37"~ C3F ~llF~#£~1T RlF3G~. Cf~ 0.
~
~ ',~J 1 i ~
1
' 3
r
~ ~ tJ~~ ~ ~ o ~
~F S
~ ~ ~ ~ i
- b- -
b
1°
~ ~ T.B i~l NEV. 1 {l0.~(3 ~ Tt?P ~F'
t f
z~ S
{3jQ
S
S 2
t s
5
i 1 F
N~1Yt'~t'S C£RTIFlt~ATE i
'~5 ~5 T{3 T3-!AT C'I'TY' ~~,T ~Z9 ~l.~f 0, 8Y ~iC~~3~1 13~
X1'1' t;~N~~. ~1a fl~i '~-iE 1 ~ i~+~Y ~~i_ ~ 9 ~y ,~i~C3PT ,~l9 ~ -ii.t~ ~urr~tf~ ~t ~'t' ~~tt^~ ~rf^~sr~- T~,t~ nrnir sic ~..~cs3cr~ nc i
iVI1i. LMVV T.I iN• iVl1L L i 6.-M AN
~V. 44TH AVENUE
SCALE 30$ 3. t~NGS BASED flN THE A C" 1&1~ ^Co "MI Co klAr* J'%l I A M"rT7~ ^ir' I 'Tr%IAJ& WWI lfr*t I rl I -•.r` - 1 Y
~ I 30 100 its 53 'N'EST AS BEAR! SAID SEC'T10N. BOTH ilaN OF WHEAT RIDGE M{3NUiA NOVEMBER 109 1995 ALL WONIJ#~ifN75 ON SITE a; a
13,470 BRAUN RC 3 t
GOLDEN, COLORAI y 3
303-279-4479 i
a)
U
C
O
m
°
0
~
N
)
O
O
ti
Z
LL
O
E¢ aS
~N c
p
E~ Opp
O d 0
oc
(D 3 0
o
EEQns
E 2of
_
_
a0U53:
a
U d ~ O
¢
O
co = ~ O
=
a
o
W
W
o
> 3'0
p
ce)
0` a)
00`
a)
U.
d
a)
co
m
macs
-
0)
d
Co
v
W
rn
c
co c~
¢
as
a)
m
co
M
m
Z
Mp
m
o
V
N
LU
¢
a) 0 0
m
m
(n
¢
M
(n
V'
J
Z
CC a3 N CD
O
Z
O.
E
E
a5
a)
Z
cu
Z
N
w
ai
N
o
-O
ili
F
t
a)
m
o
1
w
-j
LL
0
a
'a
¢
(u
E
0)
Z
°
'L
d
a
¢
L
a
¢
o
c
a
m
Z
:o
r
a
a)
2
a)
m
a
a
3
3
a
a
3
n
3
°
m
w
c
m
aa)
U
¢
¢
0
0
¢
U
¢
0
0
0
(L
cn
U
O
m
0
m
a)
E
m
a
rn
`0
rn
a
0 N
O
CO (p
O O
Z C D
-a a) O
CL G :N¢
O m m t01. N
m o a>> a) > > O o
m d Of w o 0
a a Q a m 0 c
0) a 0. CL 0 cc 0
R= N N¢¢ X U U
a
r
U
2
a)
C
al
a
U
0
n