Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/26/2006 ORIGINAL CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT Minutes of Meeting January 26, 2006 1. CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Chair Drda at 6:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Municipal Building, 7500 West 29th Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado. 2. ROLL CALL Members Present: Tom Abbott Bob Blair Paul Drda Paul Hovland Betty Jo Page Members Absent: Bob Howard Janet Bell Dan Bybee Staff Present: Meredith Reckert, Senior Planner JeffHirt, Planning Technician Ann Lazzeri, Recording Secretary The following is the official set of Board of Adjustment minutes for the public hearing of January 26, 2006. A set of these minutes is retained both in the office of the City Clerk and in the Community Development Department of the City of Wheat Ridge. 3. PUBLIC FORUM There was no one to address the Board at this time. 4. PUBLIC HEARING A. Case No. W A-OS-20: An application filed by Advance Auto Parts for approval of (A) a variance from the maximum allowable height, maximum allowable size and setback requirements for freestanding signs and (B) a variance to the maximum size allowed for wall signs for property located at 5400 W. 38th Avenue and zoned Commercial-One (C-l). The case was presented by Jeff Hirt. He entered all pertinent documents into the record and advised the Board there was jurisdiction to hear the case. He reviewed the staff report and digital presentation. Staff recommended denial of the freestanding sign variance and recommended approval of the wall signage variance for reasons outlined in the staff report. This is the first significant commercial development within the 38th Avenue streetscape improvement area. The design elements ofthis project will likely set - 1 - Board of Adjustment 01-26-06 the tone for future redevelopment on this corridor. A 25-foot high pole sign with a 5-foot setback from 38th Avenue is inconsistent with the objectives of the Streetscape and Architectural Design Manual and the intent of the City's investment in this corridor. The allowance for two wall signs on the building provides sufficient visibility for motorists and pedestrians. Allowance of a 25-foot high pole sign in this location would also contribute to visual clutter on 38th Avenue and would not compliment the building's architecture and materials. The applicant could construct a freestanding monument style sign 7 feet in height with a 5-foot setback without the need for a variance. Ryan Kring 18034 Pierce Road Greenland, IN Mr. Kring was sworn in by Chair DRDA. He stated that good exposure through signage is very important in order to direct customers to the business. The sign requested is compatible with other Advance Auto Parts stores throughout the country. He entered two additional options for signage into the record. Copies were provided for Board members. He stated the applicant was complying with city requirements regarding landscaping and building materials. Without the city's Streetscape and Architectural Manual requirements, the building could have been set further back and had room for a larger sign without need for a variance. John Montoya 3755 Benton Street Mr. Montoya was sworn in by Chair DRDA. Mr. Montoya lives next door to the proposed building and spoke in favor of the application. He stated that the applicant's contractor had built a 6-foot fence for him and also paid for water the Montoya's allowed him to use. He stated that the signs would not bother him. Charles Durbin 3703 Ames Street Mr. Durbin was sworn in by Chair DRDA. He stated that he was not opposed to the business but spoke in opposition to the variance. He stated that the city has spent over three million dollars to improve 38th Avenue and the variance would not be compatible with other businesses in that area. The variance would also violate five sections ofthe sign code. He submitted two photos of Advanced Auto Parts store signs in Arvada. Ronald Peterson 4106 Yates Street Mr. Peterson was sworn in by Chair DRDA. He is the owner of the car wash adjacent to the proposed building. He stated that he was not opposed to the business but was opposed to the sign variance because the sign would practically block the view of his car wash. There were no other individuals who wished to address this matter. Chair DRDA closed the public hearing. Board of Adjustment 01-26-06 - 2 - Chair DRDA commented that he did not believe that a hardship had been demonstrated in this case. Board Member HOVLAND agreed that a hardship had not been demonstrated for the freestanding sign variance. There were no other individuals who wished to address this case. Chair DRDA closed the public hearing. Upon a motion by Board Member ABBOTT and second by Board Member PAGE, the following resolution was stated: Whereas, the applicant was denied permission by an administrative officer; and Whereas, Board of Adjustment Application Case No. W A-05-20 (A) 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 protests registered against it; and Now, therefore, be it resolved that Board of Adjustment Application Case No. W A- 05-20 (A) be, and hereby is, denied. Whereas, the relief applied for may not be granted without substantially impairing the intent and purpose of the regulations governing the City of Wheat Ridge. Type of Variance: A variance from the maximum allowable height, maximum allowable size and setback requirements for freestanding signs over 7 feet in height for property zoned C-1. For the following reasons: 1. The Board found the arguments of "problematic" and "awkward" as to a hardship unpersuasive as to practical benefit to visibility in this case. 2. The problem of visibility described as being addressed by the setback encroachment will not be unique to this building but common to any building built along the corridor in accordance with current design standards. The motion passed 5-0. Chair DRDA advised the applicant that this request for variance for a sign height, size and setback variance for a freestanding sign was denied. Board of Adjustment 01-26-06 - 3 - Upon a motion by Board Member ABBOTT, the following resolution was stated: Whereas, the applicant was denied permission by an administrative officer; and Whereas, Board of Adjustment Application Case No. W A-05-20 (B) 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 protests registered against it; and Whereas, the relief applied for may not be granted without substantially impairing the intent and purpose of the regulations governing the City of Wheat Ridge. Now, therefore, be it resolved that Board of Adjustment Application Case No. W A- 05-20 (B) be, and hereby is, denied. Type of Variance: A variance from the maximum size allowed for wall signs for property zoned Commercial One. For the following reasons: 1. The Board found the arguments of "problematic" and "awkward" as to a hardship unpersuasive as to practical benefit to visibility in this case. 2. The problem of visibility described as being addressed by the setback encroachment will not be unique to this building but common to any building built along the corridor in accordance with current design standards. The motion died for lack of a second. Upon a motion by Board Member PAGE and second by Board Member BLAIR, the following resolution was stated: Whereas, the applicant was denied permission by an administrative officer; and Whereas, Board of Adjustment Application Case No. W A-05-20 (B) 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 no protests registered against it; and Whereas, the relief applied for may be granted without detriment to the public welfare and without substantially impairing the intent and purpose of the regulations governing the City of Wheat Ridge. -4- Board of Adjustment 01-26-06 Now, therefore, be it resolved that Board of Adjustment Application Case No. W A- 05-20 (B) be, and hereby is, approved. Type of Variance: A variance of 28.5 square feet from the maximum allowable area for wall signs on the north elevation of the building for property zoned Commercial One. For the following reasons: 1. It does not affect the essential character of the neighborhood. 2. It is a commercial corridor and motorists traveling will expect signage to allow them to locate and safely access the property. 3. Having signage different sizes on the north and east is problematic for the shorter side of the building. 4. Constructing a wall sign on the north elevation smaller than the sign on the east may look awkward given their proximity to one another. S. Staff recommended approval of the variance. The motion failed by a vote of 3-2 with Board Members DRDA and ABBOTT voting no. (A motion for approval required a super-majority of 4 affirmative votes.) Chair DRDA advised the applicant that his request for variance for wall signage square footage was denied. B. Case No. W A-OS-21: An application filed by Paul Halliday for approval of a 2 foot rear yard setback variance from the 10 foot rear yard setback requirement resulting in an 8 foot rear yard setback and a variance to the maximum building coverage requirement for a detached garage on property zoned Residential-Two (R-2) and located at 3440 Estes Street. This case was presented by Jeff Hirt. He entered all pertinent documents into the record and advised the Board there was jurisdiction to hear tile case. He reviewed the staff report and digital presentation. He advised the Board that the request for a 2- foot rear yard setback variance had been withdrawn and only the variance to the maximum building coverage would be required at this time. Staff recommended denial for reasons outlined in the staff report. Paul Halliday 3440 Estes Street Mr. Halliday, the applicant, was sworn in by Chair DRDA. He stated that he plans to use the detached garage as an artist studio and woodworking shop. Presently, the art studio is Board of Adjustment 01-26-06 - 5 - set up in the living room and the shop set up in half of the existing detached garage. Therefore, they are not able to use the living room for its original purpose and are not able to park one of two vehicles in the garage. Adding an attached garage would infringe on the circular drive around the house, detract from the original bungalow architectural style of the house, be difficult to exactly match the existing brick and would lessen natural light on the interior of the existing residence. He entered into the record a petition signed by seven neighbors indicating their approval of the application. In response to comments from Board Member ABBOTT, Mr. Halliday stated that he has removed one of the sheds on the property and he plans to remove the others to further clean up the property. In response to a question from Board Member DRDA, Mr. Halliday stated that a smaller garage would not meet his needs. In response to a question from Board Member BLAIR, Mr. Halliday stated that the studio and shop would have no commercial use and would be used for hobbies only. Robert Connor 3470 Estes Street Mr. Connor was sworn in by Chair DRDA. He lives next door to the applicant and spoke in favor ofthe application. He commented that the applicant has already improved the property and the proposed garage would be a further improvement. There were no other individuals who wished to address this case. Chair DRDA closed the public hearing. Upon a motion by Board Member ABBOTT and second by Board Member HOVLAND, the following resolution was stated: Whereas, the applicant was denied permission by an administrative officer; and Whereas, Board of Adjustment Application Case No. W A-OS-21 is an appeal to this Board from the decision of an administrative officer; and Whereas, the property has been posted the ftfteen days required by law, and in recognition that there were no protests registered against it; and Whereas, the relief applied for may be granted without detriment to the public welfare and without substantially impairing the intent and purpose of the regulations governing the City of Wheat Ridge. Now, therefore, be it resolved that Board of Adjustment Application Case No. WA- 05-21 be, and hereby is, approved. - 6 - Board of Adjustment 01-26-06 Type of Variance: A variance to the maximum building coverage requirement for a detached garage on property zoned Residential-Two. For the following reasons: 1. A hardship is created by the ordinance requirements to allowing reeognition for very large lots related to proportions and visual impact to the neighborhood and therefore the improved use to a very large lot. 2. A petition was submitted indicating seven neighbors in approval. There were no protests registered against it. 3. Building this structure in compliance would infringe on the circular drive surrounding the dwelling, would detract from the original bungalow architectural style of the house, and would lessen natural light on the interior of the existing residence. 4. Existing sheds are proposed to be removed. This effectively and significantly reduces the effect on the neighborhood by this variance. S. The 1000 square feet allowed for a detached garage is a much smaller percentage of a .6 acre than the same 1000 feet on a standard building lot. Therefore, this oversized structure seems in proportion to the community standard. With the following condition: The design and materials shall be as illustrated in the packet by the applicant. Board Member DRDA commented that this lot is normal size in comparison with other properties in the neighborhood. In response to a question from Board Member DRDA, JeffHirt explained that, if the garage were attached, it could be larger than 1000 square feet. The motion passed by a vote of 4-1 with Board Member DRDA voting no. Chair DRDA advised the applicant that his application for variance was approved. (Chair DRDA declared a brief recess at 8:20 p.m. The meeting was reconvened at 8:28 p.m.) C. Case No. W A-OS-22: An application filed by Doug Pollock for approval of a 5 foot side yard and 5 foot rear yard setback variance from the 10 foot side yard and 10 foot rear yard setback requirement for detached garages over 8 feet in height for property zoned Residential-Two (R-2) and located at 4280 Pierson Street. This case was presented by Meredith Reckert. She entered all pertinent documents into the record and advised the Board there was jurisdiction to hear the case. She reviewed Board of Adjustment 01-26-06 - 7 - the case file and digital presentation. Staff recommended approval for reasons outlined in the staffreport. Doug Pollock 9898 West 20th Avenue, Lakewood Mr. Pollock, the applicant, was sworn in by Chair DRDA. His reason for requesting the variance is that the standard 10- foot setback would make the garage difficult to use and an existing sunroom on the south side of the house would block a large portion of the garage door. Ifthe variance is granted, the garage door would be offset as far south as possible making the garage more useable. Jill Reasoner 4240 Parfet Ms. Reasoner was sworn in by Chair DRDA. She stated that she was not opposed to the application. Board Member DRDA commented that the applicant knew the hardship existed when he bought the property and therefore the hardship would be self-imposed. Board Member PAGE asked staffs opinion on how important it is for Wheat Ridge residents to have covered parking. Meredith Reckert commented that the city would like to improve property values in residential areas. The applicant is improving a very dilapidated property which should increase property values in the area. Board Member ABBOTT commented that when this house was built, it was not a hardship not to have a garage. It is now a societal issue that people expect a garage with a single family residential property. Board Member DRDA stated that his concern was where the garage would sit. There were no other individuals who wished to address this case. Chair DRDA closed the public hearing. Upon a motion by Board Member ABBOTT and second by Board Member BLAIR, the following resolution was stated: Whereas, the applicant was denied permission by an administrative officer; and Whereas, Board of Adjustment Application Case No. W A-OS-22 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 no protests registered against it; and Board of Adjustment 01-26-06 - 8 - Whereas, the relief applied for may be granted without detriment to the public welfare and without substantially impairing the intent and purpose ofthe regulations governing the City of Wheat Ridge. Now, therefore, be it resolved that Board of Adjustment Application Case No. W A- 05-22 be, and hereby is, approved. Type of Variance: A 5 foot side yard and 5 foot rear yard setback variance from the 10 foot side yard and 10 foot rear yard setback requirement for detached garages over 8 feet in height for property zoned Residential-Two. For the following reasons: 1. The hardships are that there are no covered parking sites on the property; and there are limited alternatives for placement of a garage due to location of the sunroom addition and a larger than normal front setback. 2. If approved, the request should not have a negative effect on the essential character of the neighborhood or on property values in the neighborhood. 3. There will be no negative impact to the public welfare or other properties in the area. 4. The request would not substantially increase congestion in public streets, increase the danger of fire or endanger the public safety. S. A garage lined up with the sunroom would seriously impact the viability of the sunroom. 6. The variance would provide for practical alignment of the driveway geometry necessary to access the garage which is not provided by location meeting code standards. 7. The garage will improve the value of the property to the benefit of the ~eighborhood. With the following condition: The design and architecture of the proposed garage shall be similar in character to the existing house. Board Member HOVLAND commented that this area was developed some time ago with 5-foot setbacks. Now that city regulations have changed, the properties are no longer in conformance. The motion passed 4-1 with Board Member DRDA voting no. Chair DRDA advised the applicant that his application for variance was approved. D. Case No. W A-OS-23: An application filed by Scott Rensch for approval of a variance to the maximum fence height standard pursuant to Section 26-603 of the Board of Adjustment 01-26-06 - 9 - Code of Laws for property located in the public right-of-way adjacent to property at 3805 Garrison Street and zoned Residential One (R-l). This case was presented by Jeff Hirt. He entered all pertinent documents into the record and advised the Board there was jurisdiction to hear the case. He reviewed the case file and digital presentation. Staff recommended approval of this case for reasons outlined in the staff report. David Ebersole 3805 Garrison Street Mr. Ebersole, the property owner, was sworn in by Chair DRDA. He was requesting a variance because his side yard faces 38th Avenue and provides easy view into his property. The street and sidewalk are elevated about 5 feet above the level of the entrance to the house and he is located on a busy section ofthe street, close to a high school and between two RTD stops. A norma16 foot fence would not provide any additional privacy due to the raised grade of the property. Only 3 feet of a 6 foot fence would extend past the height of the street and sidewalk. An 8 foot fence would in essence have 5 feet visible from the street and provide more adequate privacy and elimination of road noise. There were no other individuals who wished to address this case. Chair DRDA closed the public hearing. Upon a motion by Board Member HOVLAND and second by Board Member PAGE, the following resolution was stated: Whereas, the applicant was denied permission by an administrative officer; and Whereas, Board of Adjustment Application Case No. W A-OS-23 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 no protests registered against it; and Whereas, the relief applied for may be granted without detriment to the public welfare and without substantially impairing the intent and purpose of the regulations governing the City of Wheat Ridge. Now, therefore, be it resolved that Board of Adjustment Application Case No. WA- 05-23 be, and hereby is, approved. Type of Variance: A variance from to the maximum fence height standard pursuant to Section 26-603 of the Code of Laws for property located in the public right-of-way adjacent to property at 3805 Garrison Street and zoned Residential One. Board of Adjustment 01-26-06 - 10 - For the following reasons: 1. There is an approximately 3 foot retaining wall on the south property line and a significant grade change on the property which creates a hardship for the property owners to have a true 6 foot privacy fence on the south property line. The retaining wall was built by the city. 2. The request will have a minimal effect on the essential character of the locality. An 8 foot fence at the proposed location will be less impactive given the grade change between the 38th Avenue right-of-way and the subject property. The 8 foot fence at the location proposed would have the same visual impact as a 5-6 foot fence. With the following conditions: 1. The fence height variance is approved for the fence as shown on the site plan submitted by the applicant. The applicant must submit information with the building permit which illustrates that the fence will be out of the sight distance triangle. 2. The variance is not applicable to the sight distance triangle on the subject property. The fence must adhere to all sight distance triangle requirements in the Code of Laws. 3. The property owners must obtain a right-of-way permit from the Public Works Department prior to constructing the fence in the right-of-way. Board Member DRDA offered the following friendly amendment: The applicant shall maintain the proposed fence and landscaping up to the new fence. The amendment was accepted by Board Members HOVLAND and PAGE. The motion passed 5-0. Chair DRDA advised the applicant his request for variance was approved. E. Case No. W A-OS-2S: An application filed by Jerry Kannapinn for approval of a variance from the maximum number of freestanding signs allowed on property located at 10160 West 50th Avenue and zoned Commercial-One (C-l). This case was presented by Jeff Hirt. He entered all pertinent documents into the record and advised the Board there was jurisdiction to hear the case. He reviewed the case file and digital presentation. Jerry Kannapinn 8670 Jellison Court, Arvada Mr. Kannapinn, the applicant, was sworn in by Chair DRDA. He requested a variance due to the fact that Blue Grass Terrace fronts on three streets (50th A venue, Street A and - 11 - Board of Adjustment 01-26-06 Street B). Streets A & B are private streets and are not taken into account when determining the number of freestanding signs on a property. He would like to identify the retail development from the intersection of 50th Avenue and Kipling and also have identification before the main entrance at Street B. His signage would compliment the sign program of the Arvada Ridge development and aesthetically blend into the project in both setting and architectural compatibility. This would increase the leasing space appeal for the building. Mr. Kannapinn presented an architectural rendering of the sign to the Board. Board Member ABBOTT complimented Mr. Kannapinn on the form and function of his design. There were no other individuals who wished to address this case. Chair DRDA closed the public hearing. Upon a motion by Board Member ABBOTT and second by Board Member BLAIR, the following resolution was stated: Whereas, the applicant was denied permission by an administrative officer; and Whereas, Board of Adjustment Application Case No. W A-OS-2S 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 no protests registered against it; and Whereas, the relief applied for may be granted without detriment to the public welfare and without substantially impairing the intent and purpose of the regulations governing the City of Wheat Ridge. Now, therefore, be it resolved that Board of Adjustment Application Case No. WA- 05-25 be, and hereby is, approved. Type of Variance: A variance from the maximum number of freestanding signs allowed on property located at 10160 West 50th Avenue and zoned Commercial- One. For the following reasons: 1. The request will have no effect on the essential character of the locality. The property functions as a corner lot with multiple frontages. In most cases, corner lots are allowed two freestanding signs. 2. There are unique conditions in that the property has street frontages on all sides, with only one being public right-of-way and the others being private Board of Adjustment 01-26-06 - 12- streets. Current regulations only allow public rights-of-way to be considered street frontages for the purposes of freestanding signage. 3. Staff considers the request reasonable for visibility purposes. 4. Staff has stated that as to the intent of the current code and design criteria, this private street does, in practice, function as a public street. With the following condition: 1. The signage shall be constructed as illustrated to the Board. The motion passed 5-0. Chair DRDA advised the applicant his request for variance was granted. S. CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING Chair DRDA closed the public hearing portion of the meeting. 6. OLD BUSINESS . Chair DRDA inquired about the status of appointing alternates to the Board of Adjustment. Meredith Reckert stated that staff is working on this. . A change in start time from for the Board of Adjustment meetings was discussed. This will be addressed at the next meeting. . . Board Member ABBOTT suggested that, in the future, applicants be encouraged to present photo simulations of how their signs will look from the street, etc. 7. NEW BUSINESS . Meredith Reckert encouraged Board members to attend a public planning session for the Wadsworth Corridor Plan to be held on January 27 and January 28. . Approval of minutes - September 22, 2005 It was moved by Board Member ABBOTT and seconded by Board Member HOVLAND to approve the minutes of September 22, 2005 as presented. The motion passed 4-0 with Board Member DRDA abstaining. . Election of Officers Bob Blair was elected as Vice Chair. Election of Chair will take place at the next meeting. Board of Adjustment 01-26-06 - 13 - 8. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Board Member BLAIR and seconded by Board Member ABBOTT to adjourn the meeting at 9:55 p.m. &~ cZ~; ~ Ann Lazzeri, Recording ec etary Board of Adjustment 01-26-06 - 14-