Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/08/1996 W H E A T R I D G E B OAR D O F A D J U S T M E N T Mii~uiBS OF MEETING August 8, 1996 • 1. CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by Chairman WALKER at 7:32 P.M. on August 8, 1996, in the Council Chambers of the Municipal Building, 7500 West 29th Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado. ROLL CALL: MEMBERS PRESENT: Bill Echelmeyer Paul Hovland Bob Howard Linda Mauro Karen Thiessen Robert Walker MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: Tom Abbott Susan Dunker Meredith Reckert, Planner Sean McCartney, Planner Mary Lou Chapla, Secretary PUBLIC HEARING The following is the official set of Board of Adjustment minutes for the Public Hearing of August 8, 1996. 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. • WHEAT RIDGE BOARD OF ADJIISTMENT MiaruaES OF MEETING: August 8, 1996 Page 2 2. APPROVE THE ORDER OF THE AGENDA Motion was made by Board Member HOWARD, seconded by Board Member THIESSEN to approve the order of the agenda. Motion carried 6-0. Chairman WALKER requested an extra item be placed on the agenda to schedule a special meeting. -Board Members MAURO and HOVLAND stated they would be out of town on that day. Motion was made by Board Member THIESSEN, seconded by Board Member HOVLAND to hold a special meeting of the Board of Adjustment on September 12, 1996 provided there be a quorum. Motion carried. 3. PUBLIC FORIIbI (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. TUP-96-4: An application by Robert and Star • Malouff for the approval of a Temporary Use Permit to allow a mobile home as a temporary structure on property zoned Residential-One and located at approximately 2777 Kendall Street. Sean McCartney presented the staff .report. All pertinent documents were entered into record, which Chairman WALKER accepted. Chairman WALKER asked if the trailer on the site is part of this construction plan and Mr. McCartney replied yes. Board Member ECHELMEYER wanted to know if that 5emi- tractor/trailer will be on the site in addition to the applicant's trailer, and Mr. McCartney replied yes. The semi has been approved with the building permit so both will be on the site during construction. Board Member MAURO asked if the grasses are maintained and Mr. McCartney answered he does not know. This issue was brought up before but he plans on bringing it up again to Code Enforcement. The ordinance states that any grasses or weeds over 12 inches are in violation. Board Member HOVLAND said this is mentioned in the staff report, but they cannot do much landscaping during • construction except to the degree of keeping them below height. WSSAT RIDGE BOARD OF ADJIISTNENT NiiruiaS OF NESTING: August 8, 1996 Page 3 Mr. McCartney said this is basically for the existing landscaping and making sure that it does not overgrow and become unsightly. Board Member HOVLAND said they mention they would have water and sewer hook-ups, so he is assuming there is electric and gas if it is necessary. Mr. McCartney said the applicant could answer that better, but their main concern is the water and sewer taps. Board Member HOWARD wanted to know how wide is the dedicated Kendall Street at that area, and Ms. Reckert replied Kendall Street is 40 feet wide but is entirely in the city of Edgewater. The city of Wheat Ridge starts at the western line of Kendall Street and the applicant's eastern property line. Board Member HOWARD stated then there should be no concern for the right-of-way dedication, and Ms. Reckert replied not at this time. The applicant, Robert Malouff, 2596 Fenton Street, was sworn in. He said he feels staff pretty much pointed out everything, they are wanting to move the mobile home on the land while they build a home, and of course they need somewhere to live in the meantime while they sell their other home. The mobile home will be placed on the south border and set back 30 feet. There is a 40 foot right-of- way down the street, but they will not be encroaching into that at a11. They will be taking their sewer down Kendall Street. There is electricity in the back property line and gas and water are in the street; so those are not a problem. Board Member THIESSEN said then actually they will not begin construction until they sell the other residence, and Mr. Malouff said as soon as the subdivision is complete and the residence they live in now is sold. Meredith Reckert told the Board the subdivision is scheduled for Planning Commission on September 5th. Board Member HOWARD asked staff since the applicant is going before the Planning Commission, why are they not hearing this request for the temporary use also. Ms. Reckert said that was a very good point, but she believes because they wanted to get on the property sooner than the planning commission could hear the case. WSEAT RIDGE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT • MINUTES OF MEETING: August 8, 1996 Page 4 Board Member MAURO asked staff if there had been any objections registered by any of the neighbors, and Mr. McCartney replied no. Keith Daly, 2001 Otis Street, was sworn in. Mr. Daly is representing the United Church of Christ and they are in the contracting stage with the applicants. They wanted to lend their word of support and to say they are very much in favor of request. Board Member HOVLAND asked if only the one lot will be subdivided, and Mr. Daly answered yes. The lot comes right up to the southern edge of the church parking lot. Board Member ECHELMEYER wanted to know if they actually owned this piece of ground, and Mr. Daly answered yes, and will be sold as soon as the applicant is ready to go. Board Member ECHELMEYER asked what about the piece that will stop at the end of the applicant's property next to their parking lot that used to be a playground. Mr. Daly said it is still going to be there. There are also four large trees • there which are not part of the site in question and the church maintains them. Board Member ECHELMEYER asked if that area is large enough to subdivide, and Mr. Daly replied no. He does not believe it is even half as large as the site in question. Chairman WALKER asked is the three pieces of land south and west church land, and Mr. Daly said no, everything south of the southern border is owned by other parties. Mr. David Eckman, 6345 W. 29th Ave, who lives just north of the church, was sworn in. He said he just wanted to know what was going on regarding this being single-family, the trailer would be temporary, and there was not going to be any multi-family construction. Mr. McCartney stated he was correct on-his concerns. Chairman WALKER asked if he objected to the request, and Mr. Eckman replied no. Motion was made by Board Member HOVLAND, that Case No. TUP- 96-4, an application by Robert and Star Malouff, be APPROVED for the following reasons: 1. The Board finds that based upon all evidence presented . and based upon the Board's conclusions relative to the five specific questions to justify the temporary WBEAT RIDGE BOARD OF ADJIISTMENT • Mii~~ia5 OF MEETING: August 8, 7.996 Page 5 use permit, the evidence and facts in this case do support the granting of this request. WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. Existing grasses and landscaping be maintained during construction of the single-family residence. 2. Inclusion of a temporary parking surface of road base or gravel will be installed to prevent erosion and tire ruts on the site. 3. The temporary use permit shall be for 1 year or upon completion of the single-family dwelling, which ever occurs first. 4. Setback and utility hook-ups be per code. Motion was seconded by Board Member THIESSEN. Motion carried 6-0. Resolution attached. B. Case No. WF-96-1: An application by Carol and Howard Noble for approval to build an addition to a house in the 100-Year Flood Plain in a Residential-One zone district and for property located at 11254 W. 38th Avenue. • Sean McCartney presented the staff report. All pertinent documents were entered into record, which Chairman WALKER accepted. Board Member HOWARD asked since the address is 11254 W. 38th, does that property go all the way to 38th Avenue, and Mr. McCartney replied the drive goes all the way to 38th Avenue and feeds all of the residences within this area. Their mailbox is also on 38th Avenue. Chairman WALKER wanted to know if that property to the north and east that has been subdivided is part of their property, and Mr. McCartney said no. The applicant, Howard Noble, 11254 W. 38th Avenue, was sworn in. Mr. Noble stated they want to add on to their house and they are in the flood plain so need the Board's permission to do that. Board Member HOVLAND-after reading #5 in the staff report, said it says 'the portable water system and a single drain system both of which will be sealed to prevent any flood water from entering the system', and wanted that clarified. Mr. Noble replied it is a sealed pipe because they are not putting a sink in this room now, it will be in the future. The water and drain pipes will be in the crawl space, and that is getting close to the flood plain. GTBEAT RIDGE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT • MINUTES OF MEETING: August 8, 1996 Fage 6 Board Member HOVLAND said if there where ever flood waters high enough to come over the top of the sink it is obviously not sealed that well, and Mr. Noble replied that is true but the study shows the flood waters are 2.7' below the floor, so if the hydrology studies say the flood can never get within three feet below the floor, he doesn't know how it could get in the sink. Mr. Noble said he supposes that could be right but if water gets into the sink then they have other problems. Board Member MAURO was concerned about how emergency vehicles reached his house and if they go down the gravel road or down Quail Street, and Mr. Noble said they have never had to do that yet. He had talked to the fire chief a few times and he said he would come down the gravel driveway, but he would be angry because it would scratch his trucks. Mr. Noble also owns the property to the east that dead ends at Quail Street, so they could get in-that way. It has a regular black-topped road with a turn-around for the trucks, so there are two ways in. Board Member ECHELMEYER asked staff regarding this six month • period for approval by FEMA, what haNN~..s if after you finish the job you do not get approval from FEMA. Is that locked in that you do your job and you are automatically approved six months later. Mr. McCartney said he would have to do some research into that question. Mr. Noble spoke saying the FEMA study has changed the flood zone map because the improvements to Lena Gulch downstream from his property. It really doesn't have anything to do with the decision tonight, for we are applying for permission to build in the floodplain and that permission is predicated on proof they will not effect the flood flows or flood water surface in any way--so those are two separate issues. If the FEMA change is approved then this was all unnecessary. The applicants did not want to wait because they did not know how long something like that would take. Board Member ECHELMEYER questioned the flood plain administrator saying they are going to do certain things, such as channel the stream that comes in the applicant's backyard and move it over, or level it out and if he for some reason does not get the job done you are still back in the flood plain. Mr. Noble said that is what is being determined tonight; that his building in the flood plain as it is today will have no effect on the flood plain or flood waters. After • the flood plain administrator does his work, they would not have to come in and do this because they will be out of the WSEAT RIDGE BOARD OF ADJ[JSTMENT • MINIITES OF MEETING: August 8, 1996 Page 7 flood plain. Board Member ECHELMEYER said in essence his whole home is in the flood plain now, and Mr. Noble said correct. Board Member ECHELMEYER asked then is this a six month approval upon finishing the channel, or is it six months from one pond and Ms. Reckert stated she does not know what schedule they are on. Mr. Noble said he was told that a letter was sent to Washington based on some engineering done by Futura Engineering for the Quail Cove Subdivision. Their engineer studies show that his house is not in the flood plain at all, but since the maps are still made up for the old way of FEMA, they still have to do this. • Ms. Reckert said anytime anyone is dealing with a federal agency things move very, very slowly. Applying to Washington to get the map approval is probably going to be a lengthy process. However, it does sound like they have made the determination that the Noble's house is already out of the flood plain based on improvements Chat have already happened downstream. Mr. Noble said again the point he is saying is their house is not in the flood plain now, but until Washington reviews that study and approves the changes that have happened, then technically, they are still in the flood plain. Chairman WALKER reiterated that if the improvements to the flow area take place then his whole house will not be in the flood plain and this would be a moot point, Mr. McCartney said yes. No further questions were asked. Motion was made by Board Member HOVLAND that Case No. WF-96-1, an application by Howard and Carol Noble, be APPROVED for the following reasons: 1. The Board finds that all evidence and facts presented in this case do support the granting of this request. WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: • 1. The finished first floor elevations be no lower than 5417.94' above sea level and that a certification of elevation be done by a registered engineer, other than - the applicant, at the time foundation forms are set and prior to placement of concrete. WSEAT RIDGE BOARD OF ADJIISTMENT . MiaruiBS OF NESTING: August 8, 1996 Page 8 2. All other floodproofing provisions specified in Section 26-206 (F) of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws be followed. Motion was seconded by Board Member ECHELMEYER. Motion carried 6-0. Resolution attached. C. Case No. WA-96-23: An application by Tom and Isabel Abbott for approval of a 400 square foot building coverage variance to the 1000 square foot maximum building coverage allowance for a detached garage on property zoned Residential-One and located at 10780 W. 35th Avenue. Sean-McCartney presented the staff report. All pertinent documents were entered into record, which Chairman WALKER accepted. Chairman WALKER wanted to know if the applicant is planning on any fuel storage, and Mr. McCartney said he did not inform us any and if he is he would have to be mentioned for fire reasons, which would be something that would be addressed on the building permit. • Board Member HOVLAND said by looking at the measurements given it is closer to 960 square feet, and Mr. McCartney said the information given was directly from the applicant as well as the site plan. The applicant might have more information to reveal but at this point he would assume it is 1400 square feet. Board Member HOWARD asked if there is a definition in the zoning ordinance for 'estate sized property', and Mr. McCartney answered no, that is a determination that staff makes to define other than just larger than a minimum sized lot; it is just a decorative definition. The applicant, Isabel Abbott, 11254 W. 35th Avenue, was sworn in. Ms. Abbott said they are asking for the variance only because to get all of the stuff out of sight from her and her neighbors. The building will help in housing all of this expensive equipment that Mr. Abbott has, as the weather does take its toll on it and it would be better if it were in a building. Board Member THIESSEN asked basically from the street this will look like a little hill, and Ms. Abbott said yes, kind of a berm with grass. Board Member ECHELMEYER asked if this is set below the . ground and how far, and Ms. Abbott replied it is below the WHEAT RIDGE BOARD OF ADJIISTMENT • MiavuiaS OF MEETING: August 8, 1996 Sage 9 ground, about 3-3 1/2 feet below the surface. The driveway will decline a little bit. Board Member ECHELMEYER wanted to know if the exposed brick work to the back will be covered with soil also, and Ms. Abbott said the brick work is decorative enough not to cause any problems, so she does not think it will be covered up. Board Member ECHELMEYER said the dirt will only run across the top and down both sides and either end will be a building. Ms. Abbott added there will not be any fuel storage. Board Member HOWARD said the information they have on the size of that garage appears to be less than 900 square feet so has there been a change, and Ms. Abbott said she believes they asked for additional square footage because of the way it is bermed. The walls will be a little bit further out from the foundation so we needed that extra square footage for work space/work shop. Board Member HOWARD said then basically rather than the 900 square feet that was submitted on the drawing, it is • actually for 1400, and Ms. Abbott replied yes. Board Member HOWARD asked the applicant what the final elevation will be at the top, and Ms. Abbott said there will be at least a foot of dirt at the top or crest and the total elevation will be about 14 1/2 feet, so with 3 1/2 feet underground it should only be 11 1/2 feet. Board Member HOWARD said the intent is to cover this with lawn or native grass, and Ms. Abbott said it will be wild grass and flowers--she prefers ground cover so maybe there will be some of that also. Board Member ECHELMEYER asked has there been anyone who expressed opposition, and it was noted there was none received. Motion was made by Board Member HOWARD, that Case No. WA-96- 23, an application by Tom and Isabel Abbott, be APPROVED for the following reasons: 1. The Board finds that based and based upon the Board's nine specific questions to evidence and facts in this of this request. • 2. This request conforms to a upon all evidence presented conclusions relative to the justify the variance, the case do support the granting L1 setback requirements. WSEAT RIDGE BOARD OF ADJITSTMENT • MINO'TES OF MEETING: August 8, 1996 Page 10 3. This is a very unusual and novel design for a detached garage. WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITION: 1. A complete set of-certified plans by a registered engineer be submitted prior to the issuance of a building permit. Motion was seconded by Board Member MAURO. Board Member ECHELMEYER asked if the condition could be enlarged to include drainage and grading details as part of the engineer's report. Board Member HOWARD felt that was not necessary as that will be included in the plans for a building permit, but he guessed he could add it ixi. The amended condition read: • 1. A complete set of certified plans by a registered engineer containing structural, drainage and grading details be submitted prior to the issuance of a building permit. Motion carried 6-0. Resolution attached. D. Case Nn, wA-96-10: An application by Joyce Harrelson and Naomi Brown for a fence height variance in a sight distance triangle and in a front yard for property zoned Residential-One and located at 6800 W. 29th Avenue. Sean McCartney requested a 5 minute recess. Meredith Reckert presented the staff report. All pertinent documents were entered into record, which Chairman WALKER accepted. Board Member ECHELMEYER asked weren't there inspectors out while the wall was being poured, and Ms. Reckert replied that Public Works noticed it first and the she went out and issued a 'stop work' order. The forms were already put up and filled. Board Member ECHELMEYER asked if she stopped work on the concrete or iron, and Ms. Reckert answered concrete. Board Member ECHELMEYER asked if the iron is causing the problem and Ms. Reckert said yes. i WHEAT RIDGE BOARD OF ADJ[TSTMENT MINUTES OF MEETING: August 8, 1996 Page 11 Board Member ECHELMEYER asked if she would have given a permit if there was no iron involved, and Ms. Reckert said yes. After looking at the calculations, she informed the board that the applicant would be okay if the wrought iron weren't on top. Board Member THIESSEN asked if the city ordinance in the works is passed, wouldn't this portion of the fence be moot, and Ms. Reckert answered yes. Board Member THIESSEN wanted to know if that ordinance is a result of this particular case, and Ms. Reckert stated she thinks it is more of a general concern with other residences as well. Board Member THIESSEN asked is there a time concern with this as opposed to waiting to see if the city passes the ordinance, and Ms. Reckert replied the proposed ordinance really only effects about the last 5 feet of fence on Pierce Street, which is 48" in the front yard. Board Member HOVLAND said there are two different measurements on different pages, and wanted to know which one is correct. Ms. Reckert explained one drawing shows the intersection of Pierce Street and W. 29th Avenue. It shows where the fence begins, the location of the tree, and how far things are from the edge of the asphalt on both sides. The sight triangle that was established goes so far south on Pierce Street that it wasn't possible to get it all in the same drawing. Ms. Reckert explained both measurements and said that along Pierce. Street there is a substantial grade drop from the top of the retaining wall to their actual yard. This was illustrated by the next drawing. Soard Member ECHELMEYER asked what the height will be in the 80~ opening within this proposed amendment, and Ms. Reckert answered the fence along Pierce Street is 24 1/2 feet long. The drawing shows the intersection at 29th Avenue where the fence starts. It is approximately 18 inches high where the concrete form starts with a 40 inch fence on top of that. At the farthest point along Pierce Street it is 3'4" plus a 40 inch fence which makes it 80 inches to the top and from the outside edge of the wall. Board Member ECHELMEYER asked what is in the works with a possibility of going 6 feet, and Ms. Reckert said at the minimum front setback line it will be able to exceed 48 inches if the fence is 800 opened. The wrought iron fence • does conform to the 80~ opened. However, staff would not WHEAT RIDGE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT • MYav~issS OF MEETYNG: August 8, 1996 Page 12 support a taller fence in the sight triangle even if the ordinance is adopted. Board Member HOWARD said in the slides there is a measurement of 3'4" (40 inches), and M5. Reckert said this area is again the retaining wall with the 40 inch wrought iron fence on top. The height in some places is 6'8" from grade to the top of the fence. Evan Lipstein, attorney for the applicant, was sworn in. Mr. Lipstein showed the video tape showing different views of the site. He talked during the viewing and said he wanted the board to see what the vision is there and what one can see from various vantage points. The case, he feels, presents an unusual situation that really involves an improvement to the site triangle situation on this corner. There was a fence in approximately the same location as the new fence for many years. It was covered with vines and bushes making the vision on the corner very much problematic. The property also has drainage problems and it was this issue that • started the whole construction process. The owner built a retaining wall to keep the run-off from 29th Avenue out of their front yard and out of their house. This necessitated removal of the old fence and the vines and bushes that were obscuring vision then. To provide some degree of security for their front yard they wanted to still have a fence in part because of people, cars and dogs. There. is really no serious visual problem. Regarding Criteria #2: Mr. Lipstein said he feels there are some unique circumstances because the intersection may be problematic from the data the traffic department has, but they don't know why or exactly what is causing the problem at that intersection. They cannot relate previous collisions to lines of site. They also have the unique condition of the drainage problem, the flooding that required the removal of the old fence and the installation of the retaining wall. Criteria #3: Mr. Lipstein said the essential character of the neighborhood is single-family residential and this really doesn't have much to do with the sight triangle. Neighbors will testify that they feel the neighborhood is enhanced by the addition of this improvement. Criteria #4: There is a physical problem being the issue of S the drainage. If there was no flooding on this property the applicants would not have had to put up the retaining wall WSEAT RIDGE BOARD OF ADJIISTMENT • Milvuis.S OF MEETING: August 8, 1996 Psge 1~ and the old fence would have stayed in place. The sight problem would have been worse than now with the retaining wall and wrought iron fence. Criteria #5. This unique combination of problems probably- doesn't exist elsewhere (at least they don't know of any), and there will be no precedent established unless somebody else on the corner has a sight and drainage problem and comes before the board. They agree with #6. Criteria #7: The idea of a self-imposed hardship. The contractor is here tonight to speak but he did indeed start work without a permit and he certainly should not have done that. The contractor did turn in a drawing to the building department showing a 24" high retaining wall and a 42" fence. It is not drawn to scale, but the numbers were on there. Ms. Reckert interjected that the drawing she showed to Mr. Lipstein was supposed to be with the variance application, the drawing he brought in for the building permit just showed the retaining wall and they were not the same. Mr. Lipstein said that is not what he was told. The • homeowner is responsible in complying with the ordinance, and once the matter was brought to the contractor's attention he did try to comply. There was simply confusion that lead to the situation. Criteria #8: This particular wrought iron fence is constructed with 1/2 inch wide bars and 4 inch spaces, and to his calculations it totals 89% open, so it certainly complies with the ordinance coming forward next month. This fence is not totally transparent, but it is close to that, and there really isn't a substantial obstruction of vision for drivers on either street from this particular construction. Mr. Lipstein agrees this should have been handled differently but it is a situation where the property owner has a couple of unique problems and have attempted in good faith to solve the problem of drainage and the problem of security in their front yard. The common sense approach is that this is essentially a transparent fence and granting the variance requested would be an appropriate action. Chairman WALKER asked on the various views they took from Pierce Street looking westerly on W. 29th, what was the height of the camera at that point, and Ms. Brown answered it was filmed with a hand-held camera. • TRSEAT RIDGE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT • Mia~~ic.S OF MEETING: August 8, 1996 Page 14 Board Member ECHELMEYER said Mr. Lipstein's comment about this not being a high accident corner has been disproved by the traffic engineer and the report he filed as to the number of accidents over the last five years. Mr. Lipstein said he did not mean to say that this was not a high accident corner, what he meant was why these accidents occur. Bill Funk, 2930 Otis Court, was sworn in. Mr. Funk has lived in the area for almost 32 years and knows this corner quite well. Safety wise he feels this is a definite improvement. He feels there will always be accidents at this corner, but he can almost guarantee there will be less with the improvement. The trees and shrubs from the old fence caused more of a danger. One should not have to depend on that stop light (meaning there is no one coming through) to turn. Mr. Funk is in favor of granting the variance. Lonnie Duline, 6805 W. 29th Avenue, spoke saying he has lived there for 20 years and seconds the motion to approve • the variance. This is a bad intersection and has been that way since it has been there. He warns all of his relatives to slow down no matter what light they've got there or to stop before they go through it. He can't help but think this will decrease the accidents on that corner, and said it improves the whole neighborhood. This will also help the applicants handle their drainage problem that the city could not or did not go in and help. Mr. Duline feels this is a great improvement. Jerry Johnson, 6801 W. 29th Avenue, which is directly across the street and north of the applicant's property. The drainage problem is not only on 29th Avenue it is also a drainage problem that goes across his property. Mr. Johnson said there was an old drainage ditch many years ago, in the 20's and 30's. Anew subdivision was built and all the paving and landscaping increased the flow of water that comes down and through the properties. They put a drain in and building the berm helped, but it still could not handle the amount of water, sometimes there are 8 inches of water coming through their yard. They also did some landscaping on their property and that helped some. Mr. Johnson feels this is an improvement from a traffic standpoint and from a drainage standpoint. Linda Larson, who lives to the west of the applicant's • property, feels they have done a real good job with the aesthetics of the property. She said when she goes out of WHEAT RIDGB BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT • MiivuiaS OF MEETING: August 8, 1996 Page 15 her driveway she can see quite a few feet down on Pierce and feels this really helps with the vision and the safety. Patrick Espinosa, the contractor of the fence spoke saying they were cleaning up the area on March 10th when the Chief Building Inspector stopped and asked what they were doing. Mr. Espinosa told him they were getting ready to put up a fence. The inspector asked Mr. Espinosa if_he had a permit, and he said no, he then came right down to the city and applied for a permit. The permit was issued on March 11th. They were getting ready to pour Concrete when Meredith and a gentleman from the building department came down and asked him to stop work because he did not attach the plans with the permit. Mr. Espinosa said he did turn the plans in. Ms. Reckert said to be honest the drawing that was turned in did not reflect what was happening on the property. Chairman WALKER asked what time element expired between the time they first saw him starting, and Mr. Espinosa said just two days. • Board Member ECHELMEYER asked if the steel piping and height above the wall had been taken into consideration when the original plans were submitted, and Mr. Espinosa replied yes. Board Member ECHELMEYER asked if he did the steel work, and Mr. Espinosa answered yes. The original plan incorporated the cups for the posts to fit into as well as the height. Board Member THIESSEN said she misunderstood that the original plans submitted were for the retaining wall and did not include the ironwork on top. Ms. Reckert entered into record a copy of the original plans labeled Exhibit 'C'. Board Member THIESSEN commented that that they have heard a lot about the property in regards to the drainage, have been approved for the retaining been such a benefit to the drainage, what is in question tonight. Ms. Rey she wanted to clarify uniqueness of this and the applicant would wall which is what has but that is not really ~kert agreed. Lonnie Duline spoke again saying there is a good number of cars that have went into their yard and some have even hit their house. This fence that is so much in question is there for aesthetics but also to keep the cars out of their yard. The strength of the fence seems to be sturdy to keep most of those cars out. • WHEAT RIDGE BOARD OF ADJQSTMENT • MuvviaS OF MEETING: August 8, 1996 Page 16 Board Member THIESSEN expressed her concerns and wondered why the board is looking at this tonight when there is an ordinance in the works that may take care of it without granting a variance. Ms. Reckert explained the ordinance will take care of the small portion of fence that is in the front yard but it does not do anything with-the sight triangle, and that is the issue here. Board Member THIESSEN felt there was a worse sight problem there before when things were within code. Ms. Reckert added she did not check any code files to see if the applicants had been cited for violations. Board Member THIESSEN said it looks to her like there is still a tree and a bush that is more of-a problem for sight than the fence itself. Ms. Reckert commented there is a beautiful, almost 5 foot in diameter, Maple tree there. Jerry Johnson spoke again saying putting in this new fence has opened up that corner for sight. The bush they are referring to is behind that 19 foot portion to the front of the house and doesn't affect the sight triangle. The tree • is the only possible problem, however, a small car still has a perfect view now as it is now. Gary Shaver, 2880 Pierce Street, spoke and said that he agrees with all that has been said. He has lived there 12 years and has probably seen 24 wrecks at that intersection, and he feels the speed limit is what is the cause. There is high volume traffic on 29th and on Pierce Street. His opinion is that it doesn't have anything to do with the site now that it is cleaned up. Cars have gone into various yards over the years and he thinks the speed should be slowed down. Board Member HOVLAND asked staff what grounds is there for a continuance pending the outcome of the possible ordinance, as this effort seems to be wasted if that should pass. He does not think the sight distance is really an issue, but more the issue of the fence height. The Board has had many cases before and never granted a fence height that is beyond the limits. The ordinance might make some of this a moot point. Ms. Reckert reminded him they will still have the issue of the sight triangle. Board Member HOVLAND said he realizes this has been continued several times already and is sure the applicant and everyone involved would like some resolution on it, but will it all be in vane. F78EAT RIDGE BOARD OF ADJIISTMSNT • MI,ruinS OF MEETING: August 8, 1996 Page 17 Steve Nguyen, traffic engineer for the city, stated that the concern of the Public Works department is the fence, not the wall. The intersection is signalized but the people going north bound on Pierce. and making a right turn going east has to sight the traffic coming from the west. Mr. Nguyen entered into record two photos labeled Exhibit 'D', that shows how a motorist making a right turn onto W. 29th would view the traffic from the west. The motorist making a right hand turn does not have the. same view as from the front looking into the fence_ The visibility is almost zero. Mr. Nguyen said the main objective of a sight triangle is to provide the turning traffic with adequate distance so that they may execute a turn safely. Anything that obstructs their sight line increases their time and distance to make a turn safely. A fence. or anything else that is in the sight line therefore increase the distance and more than likely will be an accident because that is not enough time to react due to inadequate sight distance. As you can see in the first photo, the wrought iron fence where the motorist have to view have no vision of an oncoming car to the west. Board Member ECHELMEYER asked Mr. Nguyen if he prepared the report for Ms. Reckert and what did he find in the type of accidents, and Mr. Nguyen said yes he prepared the report and he found predominantly the accidents were broadsides. He did not actually study the citations, but there were no particular reasons why they ran the signal. Board Member ECHELMEYER asked if the accidents seem to occur on Pierce or on 29th, and Mr. Nguyen said there is not a predominant direction as the accidents occur going all four directions. Board Member ECHELMEYER wanted to know if there had been any accidents since the wall went up in March, and Mr. Nguyen replied two on March 4, and another one in June. Two broadsides and one rear-end collision (which he feels did not have anything to do with the sight distance). Board Member HOVLAND asked if he knew the direction of the vehicles, and Mr. Nguyen said the two accidents in March were collisions between north bound and west bound. The one in June was the rear end collision. Board Member THIESSEN asked his opinion if the accident was caused more by that tree or more by the fence. Mr. Nguyen said the tree is mainly the problem but the minimum distance • that is used is south of the tree and the line pretty much blocks out the sight. WHEAT RIDGE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT • Mia~vicS OF MEETING: August 8, 1996 Page 18 Board Member THIESSEN agreed it is not open when looking at the fence from an angle. Board Member HOWARD asked if there are sight distance triangle problems on any of the other three corners, and Mr. Nguyen replied yes there is. Ms. Reckert said the proposed ordinance says that a fence that is 80"s open; can be over 6 feet high in the front yard. It says that within regulated sight distances it can be approved if the Director of Public Works, Police Department and Zoning conclude it is not a hazard. In this situation it can pretty much be concluded that it is a hazard. Board Member ECHELMEYER asked Ms. Reckert if she knew where the other sight hazards are on that corner, and she replied the northeast corner has a sight distance problem as the house is set closer to the sidewalk and they also have a 6 foot fence. Board Member THIESSEN commented there is safety in theory and safety in actuality. Safety in theory is statistics and reports, where safety in actuality, nobody is more concerned about that than the people who live in the area whose safety is at risk day in and day out. It seems like most of the people from that area feel safer as a result of this fence. `That doesn't take away the fact that we have a problem with the possibility of setting a precedent she is concerned about its possibility that the unique characteristics of this property may be more due to the drainage. The tree is an unique characteristic also. The uniqueness of the drainage is not a concern at this point because we are talking about the fence and not the retaining wall. She is feeling pulled both ways. Board Member ECHELMEYER said he was also pulled both ways because he can hear the accidents from where he lives. He also sees the people whipping down Pierce Street. He wanted to know how to relate this to the other times the board turned down a request. There is a possibility if the amendment goes through, the last 3-4 feet of this fence could be slanted to comply with the 6 foot height. Board Member ECHELMEYER felt this should be looked at for six months to see what happens in the way of accidents, because he really feels this is a real problem. Chairman WALKER asked if that was a suggestion for a temporary use permit, and Board Member ECHELMEYER said he • feels the board should put this thing on hold until the city has had an opportunity to take a look at the change. WSEAT RIDGE BOARD OF ADJIISTMENT • b11LVVlE:$ OF MEETING: August 8, 1996 Page 19 Naomi Brown spoke on the history of this site with the accidents and cars that have ended up in front yards. Upon a sight visit Mr. Middaugh said he personally could not see anything that would interfere with the retaining wall and fence. This has cost them a lot. To start out with something so simple and it's now a real serious tragedy. Bumper posts were placed around the corner on Pierce and 29th Avenue. She feels the accident problem is mainly speed and traffic and has nothing to do with the fence. Board Member HOWARD asked staff if there was a traffic count both on Pierce and W. 29th, and Mr. Nguyen answered yes, but he does not have it with him. Board Member HOWARD wanted to know if that traffic taunt justifies a signal at that intersection. Mr. Nguyen said to make a determination there would have to be a warrant study done, and without that he cannot tell. Board Member HOWARD commented that might eliminate some of the problems if every car that got to that intersection had to stop. . Mr. Nguyen said it would take at least two weeks to get that data. He added even having stop signs will be another negative effect because there is not a single stop sign on Pierce from 44th to 26th. Motorists would not be expecting a stop sign, so they would run it anyway. Ms. Harrelson said they can learn there's a stop sign, but Mr. Nguyen said if they can learn there's a stop sign, then they can learn there's a signal too. Board Member MAURO said taking a tally of the accidents is not going to tell why the accidents occurred. Discussion followed regarding reasons for accidents and perhaps postponing the case. Board Member WALKER suggested having the iron part of the fence put back up to see how it would look, and asked how long can the fence be up. Ms. Reckert answered they had hoped to resolve this tonight but it doesn't sound like that is going to happen. It could be requested to have the fence remain up however it could still be a month to a month and a half before the ordinance gets passed. Board Member THIESSEN asked if this ordinance limits the height, and Ms. Reckert said yes, it limits it to six feet. • WHEAT RYDGB BOARD OF ADJIISTMENT . Mia~uir,S OF MEETING: August 8, 1996 Page 20 It was suggested to put up a 'no right turn on red light' sign on northbound Pierce for the drivers that would be making a right turn onto 29th Avenue. Ms. Harrelson offered if the concern is safety then 'no right turn' signs should be placed on all four corners, and Mr. Nguyen replied that request would be for the Director of Public Works to decide. Ms. Harrelson added the reasons for the accident is not because of sight distance. The signal hangs in the middle of the street with no obstruction. Ms. Reckert said it sounds like there is more information that people would like us to gather, a continuance could be put on our September 12 meeting unless Mr. Nguyen needs more time. Chairman WALKER agreed and mentioned leaving the fence up. He said the unfortunate thing is this board is trying to give the citizens permission to violate a city ordinance. That is not to be taken to lightly because of the safety issue. • Board Member THIESSEN said she is not sure what information is being asked for, she had asked about the ordinance pending; that was her concern for continuance. As far as the other information goes, they are bound by their criteria and the city code and have to pay attention to the traffic engineer. They will postpone it to see the results of this possible change. Ms. Reckert suggested to postpone it until council makes a decision. Motion was made by Board Member THIESSEN, seconded by Board Member ECHELMEYER to continue this matter until the board knows the outcome of the ordinance from city council. Board Member HOWARD asked if this is a continuance for decision or for additional information and discussion. Board Member THIESSEN said they have to make their decision in a public hearing---so it will be continued for a decision. Board Member HOWARD added he thinks they are anticipating what the ordinance is going to be and even with the ordinance there will still be the variance request. The ordinance is not going to encumber everything that is in this particular case. Motion carried 5-1, with Board Member HOWARD voting no. • WHEAT RIDGE BOARD OF ADJIISTMENT • MINIITES OF MEETING: August 8, 1996 Page 21 Board Member HOVLAND asked if the fence would stay or go. Discussion followed. Ms. Reckert said clarified by saying the reason the board wanted the fence up was to go out and physically see it, and that has happened. It was not to see if there were any accidents. Motion was made by Board Member THIESSEN that the fence be taken down. It was noted that no motion was needed as the part of the fence that is in violation-has to come down anyway. S. CLOSE TH8 PIIBLIC HEARING 6. OLD SII52NESS 7. NEW BII5INESS A. Approval of Minutes: Motion was made by Board Member MAURO, seconded by Board Member THIESSEN, that the minutes of June 27, 1996 be approved as printed. Motion carried. • 8. ADJOIIRNMENT Motion was made to adjourn the meeting and carried. Meeting adjourned at 10:25 p.m. Mar L~ Chapla, Se retary • B O A R D O F A D J U S T M E N T