Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/22/1996 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 MINUTES OF MEETING August 22, 1996 • 1. CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by Chairman WALKER at 7:31 P.M. on August 22, 1996, in the Council Chambers of the Municipal Building, 7500 West 29th Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado. ROLL CALL: MEMBERS PRESENT Tom Abbott Bill Echelmeyer Paul Hovland Bob Howard Susan Junker Linda Mauro Karen Thiessen Robert Walker MEMBERS ABSENT None STAFF PRESENT: Sean McCartney, Planner Susan Ellis, Code Enforcement Mary Lou Chapla, Secretary PUBLIC HEARING The following is the official set of Board of Adjustment minutes for the Public Hearing of August 22, 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. • . WSEAT RIDGE BOARD OF ADJCTSTMENT MlivuiaS OF MEETING: August 22, 1996 Page 2 2. APPROVE TSE ORDER OF THE AGENDA Motion was made by Board Member ECHELMEYER, seconded by Board Member JUNKER, that the agenda be approved as printed. 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 SEARING A. Case No_ WA-96-16; An application by 3M National Advertising for approval. of a 32' billboard height variance to the 32' billboard maximum height allowance for a billboard to be re-located within the B-2 billboard overlay zone district. The property is zoned Light Industrial and is located at 4909 Marshall Street. Sean McCartney presented the staff report. All pertinent documents were entered into record, which Chairman WALKER accepted. • Board Member MAURO brought to the Board's attention that the posting for this case had not been up for the full 15 days required by law prior to the hearing. Discussion followed. Motion was made by Board Member MAURO, seconded by Board Member HOWARD, that Case No. WA-96-16, be continued until the next scheduled meeting in October. Motion carried 8-0. B. Case No. WA-96-19; An application by 3M National Advertising for approval of an 18' billboard height variance to the 32' billboard maximum height allowance for an existing billboard in the B-2 billboard overlay zone district. The property is zoned Commercial-Two and located at 6285 W. 48th Avenue. Board Member HOWARD brought to the Board's attention that the posting for this case had not been up for the full 15 days required by law prior to meeting date. Motion was made by Board Member HOWARD, seconded by Board Member JUNKER, that Case No. WA-96-19, be continued until the next scheduled hearing in October. Motion carried 8-0. C. Case No_ WA-96-24; An application by Gene Pastor for approval of a 3'6" side yard setback variance to the 5' side • yard setback requirement to allow a detached garage 18" from the side property line. The property is zoned Residential- Two and located at 3815 Carr Street. . WHEAT RIDGE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MINUTES OF MEETING: August 22, 1996 Page 3 Sean McCartney presented the staff report. All pertinent documents were entered into record, which Chairman WALKER accepted. Board Member ECHELMEYER stated he did not consider the shed well-shielded from Carr Street because one can look right down the alley and see right in to that shed, and Mr. McCartney said you can see the shed from Carr Street, however the setback is such a distance to shield it adequately. Board Member ECHELMEYER asked the exact size of the shed, and Mr. McCartney answered 210 square feet or 30' x 7'. The applicant, Gene Pastor, 3815 Carr Street, was sworn in. Mr. Pastor said the shed will not be permanent, he just needs it for temporary storage. The slab has been there for some time. When he is through with the temporary storage he will take the shed down at no expense to anyone but himself. Board Member ECHELMEYER asked what would be the time limit, • and Mr. Pastor answered it could be up to five years he really doesn't know, it is just a matter of when the belongings could be sold or gotten rid of. Board Member ECHELMEYER thought five years would not be considered temporary, and Mr. McCartney reminded him this is not a TUP it is a variance, therefore time. is not an issue. Chairman WALKER said the staff report's condition of building the shed with fire resistant material does not sound to be compatible with a temporary structure, and Mr. Pastor assured he will follow all building and fire codes. Board Member HOVLAND asked what type of material will have to comply, and Mr. McCartney replied he understood the building inspector to require a type of siding with 5/8' sheetrock inside. Board Member ABBOTT stated in keeping with the one-hour fire resisting regulations, there cannot be any openings/windows along that south side unless they use fire resistant windows. Board Member ECHELMEYER asked if the materials being stored will remain there until it is disposed of, and Mr. Pastor answered no, they would be moving stuff in and out. • Board Member ECHELMEYER asked if placing the shed to the north of the garage present a hardship, and Mr. Pastor WSEAT RIDGE SOARD OF ADNSTMENT Miavvi~S OF MEETING: August 22, 1996 Page 4 replied that it would definitely ruin the backyard and the neighbors to the west side could look through and see the shed. Board Member MAURO wanted to know if any of the storage would be combustible, and Mr. Pastor replied no. No one spoke for or against this request and there were no complaints registered. Motion was made by Board Member ABBOTT, that Case No. WA-96- 24, an application by Gene Pastor, be DENIED for-the following reasons: 1. There are no unique circumstances or persuasive hardship. 2. There is adequate buildable space on the northwest portion of the property that would preclude the need for a variance. . Motion was seconded by Board Member ECHELMEYER. Motion carried 7-1, with Board Member THIESSEN voting no. D. Case No_ WA-96-25: An application by Barbara Sileo for approval of a 15' side yard setback variance and a 15' rear yard setback variance to the 15' side yard setback and 15' rear yard setback requirements to allow for an attached garage. The property is zoned Residential-One and located at 3845 Dudley Street. Sean McCartney presented the staff report. All pertinent documents were entered into record, which Chairman WALKER accepted. Board Member ECHELMEYER noted there were two different plans on the site plan for the garage and wanted to know which proposal was the applicant choosing, and Mr. McCartney answered the applicant at the time of submittal was unsure which one they would go for but perhaps she could shed some new light. Board Member ECHELMEYER commented one of the plans would border totally on two different properties, and Mr. McCartney agreed. It was noted there had not been any objections registered regarding this case. Board Member HOWARD asked if this is a one story residence and Mr. McCartney said it is a single story ranch, however he is not sure if there is a basement. . WBEAT RIDGE BOARD OF ADNSTMENT Mirvvr.e.S OF MEETING: August 22, 1996 Page 5 Board Member HOWARD questioned if there was a slope from the north to the south property line, and Mr. McCartney said there is a slight elevation change to the north. Mr. McCartney stated if this is approved, staff would request a detailed site plan. Their main concern is what the space is between the existing garage corner and the property line. Board Member ABBOTT asked if it was required under the city ordinance to build a retaining wall, and Mr. McCartney said Public Works department requires that there be a load bearing wall built for a retaining wall to be planed upon, and that is automatically in the building permit. The applicant, Barbara Sileo, 3845 Dudley Street, was sworn in. Ms. Sileo stated they have lived in their home since 1472 and love it for many reasons, one of which is the good neighbors they have. They have always needed more space but would like to invest more in their home now that their kids are gone. The home is all on one level and has no basement. • They have no family room and only one small bathroom. They want to convert the current garage into a family room and second full bath. They have measured every which way around the yard and have not been able to come up with anything very feasible. They cannot build up because of the arthritis that effects her knees, ankles and legs and adding stairs is not a very good or wise idea for her. Ms. Sileo continued saying they have looked at buying another home but they do love it where they are at and want to stay in this location. Also, they have not found anything suitable in their price range and on one level. They are committed to staying in Wheat Ridge. Their neighbors are very supportive of their request; and the neighbors to the west are in the audience tonight. They want to tuck the addition back into the corner to be as unobtrusive as possible and not infringe on their neighbors. She assured they would comply with the 1994 Building Code. Board Member ABBOTT said the problem he has is that to him the hardship is not her medical condition but the lack of room in their house. He has a problem with this large of a request and was wondering about alternatives, such as building the new garage in front of the existing garage, and that would only require one setback variance. The geometry might even be better than the proposed location. Ms. Sileo said she has measured that and does not believe there is room between the property line since it is only 20 feet. That would cut into the walkway and the front porch. . WHEAT RIDGfi BOARD OF ADJIISTMENT Mliv~iaS OF MEETING: August 22, 1996 Page 6 Discussion followed regarding measurements with Ms. 5ileo saying they want to do what is best for the property and be most pleasant to the eye. Board Member ABBOTT is concerned also with the one plan that will leave a triangle of space behind the proposed garage totally unaccessible. Since the wall has to be fire- resistant with no openings in that wall, how will the triangle be accessed. Mr. Sileo was sworn in and stated he does not feel that the above plan will be very plausible. The other plan (the one with the dotted line) is the one most likely they will go with and it will have less impact architecturally and only impact neighbors, therefore the triangle is not relevent. They have to see if this granted and then get an architect to plan it out and help with designing, then it will be up to the architect and the city codes. Board Member THIESSEN questioned the Callas' letter, and Ms. Sileo said they would like to get a zero lot line setback, • but if that is not possible, then they would try for a 5' lot line setback. The Callas' merely supported us whatever we decide. Board Member HOVLAND wanted to know what is the size of the proposed garage and Ms. Sileo they would like it 25' x 25' or smaller; depending on what the architect would come up with. It was noted the applicants have no basement so there is no storage in the house to speak of and currently they use their garage for storage. Discussion followed with Board Member HOVLAND suggesting other plans which would move the proposed garage either to the south side or north side of the current garage. Ms. Sileo added a double garage would not fit and it would be so narrow that a second car could not get in, plus they have a beautiful Redbud tree that they would hate to have to get rid of it. Board Member ECHELMEYER suggested cutting the proposed garage in half building one-half behind the existing garage and build the other half to the south, and just re-arranging the areas. Mr. Sileo said the current garage's back wall is a solid brick bearing wall, plus the roof line would have to be changed. • Board Member ABBOTT said the reason they are going to all this trouble is again, the only hardship is the applicants are out of storage and need a family room and bath. He . WHEAT RIDGE HOARD OF ADJIISTMENT MINOTES OF MEETING: August 22, 1996 Page 7 would have a hard time constructing a motion based on the medical hardship. Further suggestions followed with discussion. Mr. Sileo feels part of the concern is visual and feels building the structure in the front will not be visually appealing as it would building it to the rear. Both neighbors are in support of this request if the garage is tucked back in to the rear of the property and they need to take them into consideration. Ms. Sileo added they have thought about this for a long time and have turned it every which way but loose trying to come up with a solution. Board Member HOWARD asked will the garage with the dotted line be attached to the house, and Mr. Sileo said the architect will decide what looks best and what will work, they might even decide on a breezeway that would open up into the new family room. Board Member HOWARD suggested making the garage smaller and pulling it away from the lot line. • Mr. McCartney noted there would still have to be a variance, only not as much as what is being requested. Mr. Sileo asked the Board since they have the approval of their neighbors on both sides, what is the problem with this approval, and Ms. Ellis said the basis of the variance is not whether people approve or disapprove. The Board bases their decision on whether there is a hardship and is it needed and necessary, not who approves or disapproves. Ms. Sileo asked what type of a variance would be needed in the rear of the property, and Mr. McCartney answered it would be a 10 foot variance. The code states you need 15 feet on the rear and on the side as a setback. Chairman WALKER asked what the width of the applicant's lot is from north to south, and Mr. Sileo replied 75 feet. Chairman WALKER said the Board is trying to be in favor, but it is hard to make a motion or approval of a variance when you don't know what you are really approving. Maybe a different solution at a different time with more detail would maybe go. Ms. Sileo asked if an architect's drawing is how specific it should be, and Chairman WALKER answered at least something more than them all drawing on the same sheet of paper. • Mr. Sileo said at the same time it is just as difficult for them to come to a decision because they do not know what the • AlSEAT RIDGE BOARD OF ADNSTMENT MIaru'iaS OF MEETING: August 22, 1996 Page 8 Board will allow. Their next step is to contract an architect and contractor to see how it could be done, so they need to know what to work with. Board Member THIESSEN asked if they grant the variance would it be permanent, and Mr. McCartney replied yes, and what will be created is a buildable envelope and the applicants can build up to that or less, but cannot build over. Board Member ABBOTT wanted to know if the applicant does not pull a building permit will the variance goe away, and Mr. McCartney said the code states 180 days is allowed to obtain a building permit. Mr. Sileo asked since everyone wants to make this work, could the Board grant them a zero setback and a 10 foot setback, then at least they could come up with a design. If they can't make it work, they could then come back and try to get the extra 5 feet. That would at least set some guidelines for the architect. . Board Member ECHELMEYER commented he had never seen a zero -- property line setback variance. It seems to him there can be more pencil work done in moving the house to the -- northwest. That would give them the rooms they need and keep the garage the way it is now. Board Member ECHELMEYER asked many times there were variance property line in the last few not many, but these cases are basis and the decision has to and not past variances. Mr. McCartney if he knew how ~s granted right up to the years, and he replied probably reviewed on a site by site be made for the site itself Claudia Callas, 8701 W. 38th Avenue, was sworn in. Ms. Callas said there is one zero lot line in their neighborhood on the corner of 38th & Dover Street. Motion was made by Board Member ABBOTT, that Case No. WA-96- 25, an application by Barbara Sileo,-be approved for the following reasons: 1. The current structure has no basement and inadequate storage, bath and living area. 2. Adjacent neighbors are in support of the variances. 3. Building up is precluded by the stated medical condition by the applicant. • 4. Significant problems with geometry of the site and existing structure for alternative locations. • WHEAT RIDGE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MINUTES OF MEETING: August 22, 1996 Page 9 5. There is at least one other zero lot line setback in the neighborhood. WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITION: 1. The garage comply with the 1991 Uniform Building Code requirements for a structure built to meet one-hour fire resistant material. Motion died for lack of second. Board Member ABBOTT changed the motion to be a 15' sideyard setback variance and a 10` rear yard setback variance to allow construction of a two-car garage. Motion was seconded by Board Member HOVLAND. Motion carried 6-2, with Board Members MAURO and ECHELMEYER voting no. Resolution attached. E. Case No. WA-96-27: An application by Warren Hughes for approval of a variance to allow a two-cubic yard trash . dumpster on property zoned Agricultural-One and located at 10880 W. 47th Avenue. Susan Ellis presented the staff report. All pertinent documents were entered into record, which Chairman WALKER accepted. Board Member ABBOTT said there is staff report that the dumpster no than the front wall of the house, dumpster is in a more restrictive replied no, their main concern is front yard anywhere. a recommendation in the be any further forward however he feels the location now, Ms. Ellis that it is not in the Board Member THTESSEN said the recommendation is that the dumpster be maintained in a clean, safe and healthy manner and be dumped weekly and asked how is something like that enforced. Ms. Ellis said keeping the dumpster in a clean, safe and healthy manner is written in the ordinance, so that any complaints or observations of that nature will end up in a citation. The applicants could get a harsher citation because they specifically asked for this variance. It should be dumped weekly and if events lead to overflowing, then perhaps it should be dumped twice a week, or even more. Staff does not want to see the dumpster only half full of manure and then setting there all week, it has • to be dumped regardless. • WHEAT RIDGB 80ARD OF ADJUSTMENT Mia~~iES OF MEETING: August 22, 1996 Page 10 Chairman WALKER said with the dumpster that far back, does it still need to be enclosed, and Ms. Ellis replied yes, it needs to be enclosed so it is screened from view from any adjacent properties and the street. It appears the back is already screened, so it will need to be screened on the left side and screened on the right side. Chairman WALKER asked how many animals are on that property, and Ms. Ellis replied two horses. Board Member THIESSEN asked does she know long the dumpster has been there and Ms. Ellis replied no. Board Member HOWARD wanted to know are horses allowed in any part of the city, and Ms. Ellis answered yes, as long as they have the proper square footage of 9000 square feet for the first horse and 6000 square feet for each additional. Chairman WALKER noted the site was only 12,500 square feet for the two horses, and Ms. Ellis replied there is a possibility they have more horses than allowed but that is a . whole other issue and will be handled by Code Enforcement. Ms. Ellis said she checked with Animal Control and even though there are several properties with larger animals there is only one other dumpster that she knows of allowed through a variance. Others dispose of animal debris by selling it, hauling it away to the landfill, or sometimes they rototil it under. John Scott Ota, 10840 W. 48th Avenue, was sworn in. Mr. Ota lives on the property east of the applicant. He has no problem with the dumpster and knew when he moved into the house two years ago that the applicants have horses. The dumpster is dumped regularly and cleaned. The dumpster does not overflow and he has no site or odor problem, and feels if they have to get a smaller dumpster it would cause more problems. Warren and Trina Hughes, 10880 W. 47th Avenue, was sworn in. Ms. Hughes addressed the criteria in the ordinance on dumpsters. They are single family but she feels the zoning classification and use of the property was not entirely considered in the ordinance. The neighborhood. is mixed and allows for the keeping of large animals. The dumpster is used for hay, straw and manure and not used for trash storage. She feels the use could be looked at a little bit • differently by people who have agricultural properties because the rules seem to apply more for tract homes and subdivisions. . WHEAT RIDGE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MINUTES OF MEETING: August 22, 1996 Page 11 Ms. Hughes continued saying the dumpster is dumped weekly, the manure is picked up and put in the dumpster weekly, and also the trash truck services it weekly, so everything is kept very clean and sanitary. They want to be good citizens and neighbors and feels they do comply because they have had the dumpster 2 1/2 years and have had no complaints and noted this case came before the Board because of an observation by the code officers and not complaint. She thinks that speaks well for the way they maintain their property. Ms. Hughes stated .this will.-create a hardship because of the additional expense of hauling manure in any other fashion. The dumpster cost $36 a month, and dump fees alone would be $74 a month. To Comply with some of the criteria would cause an economic hardship for them also. She said if the dumpster is screened, the trash company would make them place it on a concrete slab. They surveyed the area and took 16 pictures of unscreened dumpsters, so they feel this regulation makes them having to maintain a standard above what the commercial businesses have to. • Board Member THIESSEN commented if there is a standard above and beyond a business district, it is because of the very fact it is residential and it should look like residential. Board Member ECHELMEYER asked if the applicants would have trouble with fencing the dumpster in, and Mr. Hughes said it could be fenced in except they put road base material in that area because it tends to pack hard and does not create a bog and makes cleaning a lot easier, and the dumpster is setting on that. They've had trouble with the trucks coming in picking the dumpster up and banging bang it around a couple of times to clean it out, then slamming it down. He is wondering if they poured concrete they would have to make such an obtrusive pad to get the correct support so it would not crack. He would like to have that portion of concrete elevated so that the drainage of the property is not going under the dumpster as they need to keep that area dry as possible. Board Member ECHELMEYER asked if he understood that the city has made this recommendation as a condition as to whether it will be approved. Mr. Hughes guessed if it was absolutely necessary, they would have to comply but it would be expensive. Ms. Hughes said to please consider the carelessness of the drivers. • Chairman WALKER suggested moving the dumpster farther west toward the corner of the shed and then they would only have WHEAT RIDGE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MuvvinS OF MEETING: August 22, 1996 Page 12 two side closures and would that fulfill the needs. Mr. Hughes replied the truck cannot get a proper angle to get to the dumpster if it is moved west. Board Member MAURO realized the agricultural land in Wheat Ridge is disappearing and asked if this variance is granted is it permanent, and Ms. Ellis replied yes. However if there are no longer large animals on the property, staff would want the dumpster removed. The ordinance pertains to the use of the property and this is a residential use even though the zoning is agricultural. Board Member MAURO asked if there is any additive to reduce odor or insects, and Mr. Hughes said they clean it out every weekend unless it is frozen (then it is cleaned out as soon as it thaws). Containment and no liquids help keep the odor down. Sometimes he adds a small amount of lime to help with- odor also. Board Member HOVLAND asked how is it determined if this is an agricultural or residential use since there is a home, and is there a size constraint that determines this. Ms. Ellis said this is a residential use because there is no . harvesting or anything like that going on. Having large animals is not an agricultural use because it is allowed on Residential-One property. In Wheat Ridge's zoning, horses alone do not classify it as an agricultural use, and if it did, all properties in the city that have 9000 square feet would be considered agricultural use. Mr. Hughes said one of the documents from the city states the dumpster does not have to be screened if it is 100' back on the property, and Ms. Ellis stated that is for commercial properties only. Board Member HOVLAND asked what sides have to be screened, and Ms. E11is replied it needs to be screened from view from the street and all adjacent properties, and if the house screens one side of it, then that is fine. Discussion followed. Ms. Ellis said the only other things allowed in Agricultural-One zone district and not in residential are fish hatcheries and road side stands. Board.Member THIESSEN asked if the dumpster has been there the entire 2 1/2 years the applicants have lived there, and Mr. Hughes answered yes. • WHEAT RIDGE BOARD OF ADNSTMENT MINIITES OF MEETING: August 22, 1996 Page 13 Motion was made by Board Member HOVLAND, that Case No. WA- 96-27, an application by Warren Hughes, 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 nine specific questions to justify the variance, the evidence and facts in this case do support the granting of this request. 2. No complaints were registered against this request. WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. The dumpster be placed behind the front setback of the home. 2. The dumpster must be enclosed by a six foot fence so as to be screened from view from adjacent properties. 3. The dumpster must be maintained in a clean, safe and healthy manner. 4. The dumpster must be dumped weekly regardless how full it is. • 5. The dumpster must be removed from the property when the animals are removed. Motion was seconded by Board Member JUNKER. Board Member HOWARD asked if the word 'solid' was needed in the wording of the motion, and Ms. Ellis replied the 'screened from view' should cover that concern. Board Member ABBOTT stated he will be voting against the motion because the hardships and circumstances do not appear unique to this property, and there are widely used alternatives for disposal of livestock waste. There are many properties that virtually fit this description. Board Member MATIRO stated she agrees with Board Member ABBOTT and will be voting no. Motion DENIED by a vote of 4-4, with Board Members MAURO, ABBOTT, HOWARD, and WALKER voting no. Resolution attached. 5. CLOSE THE PIIBLIC HEARING 6. OLD BIISINESS A. Discussion on previous cases and precedent setting. • WBEAT RIDGE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MI,.v~ia5 OF MEETING: August 22, 1996 Page 14 B. Member MAURO wanted comments noted and recorded in the minutes tonight that the weeds at 2777 Kendall Street had not been cut. The weed problem was brought to attention at the prior meeting. C. Board Member ECHELMEYER talked about the traffic report from Public Works for Case No. WA-96-10. D. Further discussion on various topics including posting rules and regulations followed. E. Board Member HOVLAND wanted to know where we are at regarding the 10th factor in the criteria. Mr. McCartney stated it has been forwarded onto Planning Commission and City Council for review. F. Board Member HOWARD brought up the subject of billboards. Mr. McCartney read the definition and discussion followed. 7. NEW BUSINESS A. Motion was made by Board Member HOVLAND, seconded by Board Member THIESSEN, to hold a special Board of Adjustment meeting on October 10, 1996, to hear only • the two continued 3M National Advertising cases. Motion carried 8-0. B. Approval of Minutes: Motion was made by Board Member MAURO, seconded by Board Member HOVLAND to approve the minutes of August 8, 1996, as amended: Page 8, paragraph 5, line 2, change the number '1,960' to '960' square feet. Page 18, paragraph 5, line 8, change 'precedence' to 'precedent'. 8. ADJOURNMENT Consensus to adjourn the meeting. Meeting adjourned at 10:40 p.m. ~~~ ~~~~ Mary L u apla, Secretary • B O A R D O F A D J U S T M E N T PUBLIC FORUM ROSTER - AUGUST 22, 1996 - THIS IS THE TIME FOR ANYONE TO SPEAK ON ANY SUBJECT NOT APPEARING UNDER ITEM 3 OF THE PUBLIC HEARING SECTION OF THE AGENDA. Name and Address Please Print ~" •