HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/26/2006
ORIGINAL
CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
Minutes of Meeting
October 26, 2006
1. CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER
The regular meeting of the Wheat Ridge Board of Adjustment was called to order
by Chair BELL at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers of the Municipal
Building, 7500 West 29th Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado.
2. ROLL CALL
Commission Members Present:
Tom Abbott
Janet Bell
Bob Blair
Paul Drda
Paul Hovland
Bob Howard
Larry Linker
Davis Reinhart
Staff Members Present:
Travis Crane, Planner II
Ann Lazzeri, Recording Secretary
3. PUBLIC FORUM
There were no individuals present who wished to address the Board at this time.
4. PUBLIC HEARINGS
Prior to presentation of cases, all individuals who wished to testify during the
hearings stood and were sworn in by Chair Bell.
A. Case No. W A-06-1S: An application filed by Richard Moreno for
approval of (A) an 800 square foot variance to the 1000 square foot
maximum resulting in an 1800 square foot bam AND (B) a request for
approval of a 9- foot side yard setback variance from the 15- foot side yard
setback requirement resulting in a 6- foot side yard setback on property
zoned Residential One (R-l) and located at 6671 West 26th Avenue.
The case was presented by Travis Crane. 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 approval of
both variance requests for reasons outlined in the staff report.
Board of Adjustment
October 26, 2006
- 1 -
Board Member BLAIR noted that the property owner immediately to the east at
6655 West 26th Avenue did not sign the letter ofsup~ort. He also asked what the
nature of the structure is at the rear of 6655 West 26t. Mr. Crane explained that
the structure appeared to be a garage with a smaller structure that appears to be a
shed; however, there would be no separation issue with either of those structures.
Richard Moreno
6671 West 26th Avenue
Mr. Moreno, the applicant, presented a digital depiction of the proposed bam
addition. In response to the question raised by Board Member Blair, he stated
that he had a conversation with the property owner of 6655 West 26th and she is in
agreement with his plans.
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-06-1S (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 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 Case No. W A-06-1S
(A) be, and hereby is approved.
For the following reasons:
1. The increase in size ofthe existing barn and attached structures is
negligible as explained by staff during the hearing. The increase in
structure size will accommodate covered storage for hay.
2. The increase in square footage to the barn will not change the
character of the locality. There are at least two accessory structures
in the neighborhood which are at least 1,200 square feet in size. The
property directly to the north has an outbuilding approximately 1,200
square feet in size.
Board of Adjustment
October 26, 2006
-2-
3. Many adjacent properties have multiple outbuildings which create a
cluttered landscape. The addition to the existing barn will create one
cohesive structure on this property and remove two existing ancillary
structures.
4. The request would not be detrimental to the public welfare. The barn
is located in the extreme northeastern corner ofthe property. The
closest residential dwelling unit is over 105 feet to the closest point of
the barn.
5. The applicant testified that he had discussed the issue with his
neighbor directly to the east and had obtained a verbal approval.
6. Staff recommended approval.
With the following conditions:
1. The two existing structures shall be removed from the property.
2. No additional ancillary structures may be added.
3. The barn addition may not be occupied by horses.
The motion carried 8-0.
Upon a motion by Board Member ABBOTT and second by Board Member
DRDA 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-06-15 (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.
Now, therefore, be it resolved that Board of Adjustment Case No. W A-06-15
(B) be, and hereby is approved.
Board of Adjustment
October 26, 2006
- 3-
For the following reasons:
1. The request will not change the character of the locality. Many
accessory structures on adjacent parcels do not meet the required 15-
foot side yard setback requirement.
2. The request would not be detrimental to the public welfare and will
not impact the adequate supply of air or light to adjacent properties
nor increase the danger of fire.
3. The lot is 9 feet short ofthe required lot width of 100 feet in the R-l
zone district. The deficient lot width relates directly to the need for
the variance for a side yard setback.
4. The applicant testified that he discussed the issue with the neighbor
directly to the east and received verbal approval.
5. Staff recommended approval.
The motion carried 7-1 with Board Member HOVLAND voting no.
B. Case No. WA-06-16 An application filed by Jason Timmes for approval
ofa IS-foot I-inch side yard setback variance from the 30-foot side yard
setback requirement when adjacent to a public street resulting in a 14-foot
ll-inch side yard setback for property zoned Residential-Two (R-2) and
located at 4675 Lamar Street..
The case was presented by Travis Crane. 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 approval of
the variance request for reasons outlined in the staff report.
Board Member HOVLAND asked if a greater setback is required due to the
height of building. Mr. Crane replied that it would not be an issue in R-2 zone
district.
Board Member HOWARD asked if the code would allow the applicant to enclose
the front porch. Mr. Crane replied that enclosure ofthe porch would require a
vanance.
Board Member ABBOTT commented that the bulk plane mass is not an issue
with the overall house, but the bulk plane mass is affected by the encroachment.
He also asked for clarification as to whether the request was for a side yard or
front yard setback. Mr. Crane replied that it was a front yard setback. The staff
report contained an error in stating it was a side yard setback.
Board of Adjustment
October 26, 2006
-4-
Board Member DRDA commented that the angular design seems to be out of
character with the neighborhood and asked about the percentage oflot coverage.
Mr. Crane stated that maximum lot coverage is not exceeded.
In response to a question from Board Member BELL, Mr. Crane explained that a
property owner could "pop the top" on a single story house as long as it is in line
with the existing structure and within the 35-foot height limitation. There would
be no need for a variance unless there was a setback issue.
Jason Timmes
4675 Lamar Street
Mr. Timmes was sworn in by Chair BELL. He clarified that he did not plan to
enclose the covered porch. He stated that, although there were no immediate
houses with second stories, there is one located at 46th Place and Newland as well
as 45th Place and Newland. The angular construction is due to the current layout
of the house and an attempt to save part of his back yard. He wants to enlarge his
1250 square foot structure in order to stay in this Wheat Ridge neighborhood and
raise a family.
Board Member ABBOTT commented that he liked the design which is in keeping
with revitalization, however it is quite an encroachment and suggested that the
third bay ofthe garage could be moved back to lessen the variance.
In response to a question from Board Member HOWARD, Mr. Timmes stated
that he plans to use the existing garage for storage.
Rhonda Champion
6420 West 46th Place
Ms. Champion lives directly to the west of the applicant's property and she voiced
her opposition to the variance on the basis that it would change the character of
the locality and would be detrimental in regard to the availability oflight. She
expressed frustration with the city's zoning ordinances that have only been
addressed three times since the city's incorporation. She noted that the posted
sign and the certified letter sent to neighbors indicated that the variance was for a
side yard setback and not a front yard setback She stated that she also spoke with
neighbors who did not feel the posting and notification were clear as to what the
applicant intended to do. She also stated that the letter of support did not
accurately reflect where the people live. She objected to the plans for a two-story
dwelling because the neighborhood is comprised of one-story structures and she
presented several photographs of the neighborhood. She stated that she had
contacted other neighbors who were also in opposition. She further stated that the
proposed variance would affect her privacy.
Chair BELL reminded Ms. Champion that the only issue under consideration is
the request for a setback variance. A two-story home is allowed in the zone
district as long as it does not exceed the height limit.
Board of Adjustment
October 26, 2006
- S -
Board Member ABBOTT asked Ms. Champion if she would still object to the
variance ifthe portion of the structure involved in the variance was limited to one
story. Ms. Champion replied that she would have no objection to that portion of
the structure being one story but was still opposed to having the entire addition
being two stories.
In response to a question from Board Member ABBOTT, Mr. Crane stated that an
error was made in the posting as well as the certified letter that stated the variance
was for a side yard setback rather than a front yard setback.
Chair BELL asked if others were present who wished to address this matter.
Hearing no response, she closed the public hearing on this case.
Board Member HOVLAND expressed concern as to whether or not the case could
proceed in light ofthe posting and notice errors.
Board Member DRDA commented that, although there was an error in posting,
the intent is not affected.
Board Member REINHART agreed that the notice was adequate, however, in the
presence of opposition he favored reposting and continuance of the hearing.
Board Members LINKER, ABBOTT, BLAIR and HOWARD agreed that it
would be best to repost and continue the hearing.
It was moved by Board Member REINHART and seconded by Board
Member HOVLAND to continue the hearing to December 13, 2006.
Board Member ABBOTT offered a friendly amendment to require reposting
and republishing of the hearing. The amendment was accepted by Board
Members REINHART and HOVLAND.
The motion carried 8-0.
5. CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING
Chair BELL closed the public hearing.
6. OLD BUSINESS
There was no old business to come before the Board.
7. NEW BUSINESS
A. Chanl!e in Meetinl! Date
Board of Adjustment
October 26, 2006
- 6 -
It was moved by Board Member DRDA and seconded by Board
Member BLAIR to cancel the regularly scheduled Board meetings of
November 23 and December 28 to hold one meeting on Wednesday,
December 13, 2006 at 7:00 p.m. The motion carried 8-0.
B. Approval of Minutes of September 28, 2006
Board Member HOWARD requested an amendment to the first page
of the minutes to indicate that Board Member Linker was present.
It was moved by Board Member DRDA and seconded by Board
Member BLAIR to approve the minutes as amended. The motion
passed unanimously.
C. Tour of Wonderland Homes - Chair BELL encouraged Board Members
to attend.
D. Case No. W A-06-12 - Travis Crane referred to the meeting of September
28, 2006 when the applicant in this case was denied a request for
rehearing. The City Attorney's opinion is that the 30-day window for an
applicant to appeal to District Court begins at the time the request for
rehearing is denied.
8. ADJOURNMENT
It was moved by Board Member DRDA and seconded by Board Member
BLAIR to adjourn the meeting at 9:00 p.m. The motion passed unanimously.
~~
Wet Bell, Chair
tLc ~~^~
Ann Lazzeri, Recordin e etary
Board of Adjustment
October 26, 2006
- 7 -