Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/27/2000 ORIGINAL CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT Minutes of Meeting January 27, 2000 1. CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by Chair HOWARD at 7:30 p.m. on January 27, 2000 in the Council Chambers ofthe Municipal Building, 7500 West 29th Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado. 2. ROLL CALL Members Present: Tom Abbott Michelle Brown Bill Echelmeyer Bob Howard Paul Hovland Susan Junker Linda Mauro Karen Thiessen Staff Present: Meredith Reckert, Sf. Planner Mary Austin, Planner Bob Goebel, Public Works DirectorlFlood Plain Administrator Ann Lazzeri, Secretary The following is the official set of Board of Adjustment minutes for the Public Hearing of January 27,2000. A set of these minutes is retained both in the office of the City Clerk and in the Department of Planning and Development of the City of Wheat Ridge. 3. APPROVE THE ORDER OF THE AGENDA It was the consensus of the Board to approve the order of the agenda. 4. PUBLIC FORUM (This is the time for anyone to speak on any subject not appearing on the agenda.) There was no one signed up to speak. 5. PUBLIC HEARING A. Case No. WF-99-01: An application by John and Wendy Ammon StOffer for a Class II flood plain exception to construct a single family residence on piers within the 100-year Flood Plain Flood Storage District. The property is zoned R-IA and located at 3365 Union Street. Board of Adjustment 01/27/00 Page 1 This case was presented by Mary Austin. She reviewed the staff report, presented slides and overheads of the subject property and entered all pertinent documents into the record. She advised that all notification and posting requirements had been met and there was jurisdiction for the Board to hear the case. Staff recommended approval for reasons outlined in the staff report. Following brief discussion, the applicant appeared before the Board. Lee Storrer 3365 Union Street Mr. Storrer was sworn by Chair HOWARD. He stated his desire for approval of his application. In response to a question from Board Member ECHELMEYER, Mr. Storrer explained that the line of trees was within his property line by approximately ten feet. He also demonstrated the location of the proposed house on the overhead. In response to a question from Chair HOWARD, Mr. Storrer replied that there would be no basement in the house. Mr. Goebel invited questions from the Board. Board Member ABBOTT asked if the code administrator's concerns mentioned in the staff report had been resolved. Mr. Goebel replied that his concern was related to whether or not the proposed dwelling fell under the definition of "structure for human occupancy." This is a unique situation; the house will be constructed so that the house itself will be above the flood plain level. But because the foundation piers for the structural occupancy portion was in the flood plain, the codes administrator felt it should come before the Board of Adjustment for proper review. Board Member MAURO referred to previous discussions which indicated a new flood plain would be defined for this area. Mr. Goebel.replied that in 1994-95 there was a problem with the Lena Gulch channel that flowed behind these properties from 32nd Avenue. Through the city's maintenance contract with Urban Drainage and Flood Control District (UDFCD) Lena Gulch was improved by widening the channel, making it somewhat deeper and wider and installing rock lining to stabilize the bank. These improvements were accomplished and have reduced the flood plain. However, the city must abide by the old flood plain until a flood plain study is completed and an amendment to that flood plain map takes place. Board Member ABBOTT asked if there would be restrictions regarding outside storage, solid fences, etc. that could trap debris during a flood. Mr. Goebel replied that fences would not be allowed unless it could be proven that the fence is of a break-away design that would not affect water flow. Further, the elevated portion of the house would be in an area oflow velocity rather than in the flood way. He also explained that the piers were designed to prevent danuning of debris; and, further, the requirement for one foot of free board above the water surface elevation to the bottom ofthe beam holding the house up would also allow for debris to pass through. Page 2 Board of Adjustmeni 01/27/00 , Elizabeth Polivka 12001 West 32nd Drive Ms. Polivka was sworn by Chair HOWARD. She stated that her residence was to the south . and across the creek from the proposed structure. She submitted a letter from her husband (who was unable to attend the meeting) stating opposition to the application. Mr. Polivka's objections were based upon his evaluation of the hydrologic analysis prepared by the applicant's engineer in his capacity asa geologist. His letter was made a part of the record. She stated that her husband has had contact with Bob Goebel concerning this matter. She also testified that she had seen a video (taken before they purchased their house) showing flood waters coming very close to the rear of their home. She stated that her husband has also contacted UDFCD regarding this matter. Mr. Goebel stated that he met with the Polivka family the night before this meeting and walked the property. He stated that the video she referred to was made before channel improvements took place. The channel improvements should prevent flood waters from . coming so close to their house. Mr. Goebel stated that he took the highest water surface elevation (determined to be the result of a 100-year storm) and added a foot to that to determine the bottom of the beam that supports the house. Board Member ECHELMEYER stated that he saw a large accumulation of driftwood located where the stream bends to the northeast. In response to a question from Board Member ECHELMEYER, Mr. Goebel stated that he didn't talk to neighbors to the north or south of the property other than the Polivka's. Marie Osse 12061 West 32nd Drive Ms. Osse was sworn by Chair HOWARD. She stated her opposition to the application. She did not believe a house should be built in this flood plain area. She referred to three major floods which have occurred on her property since it was purchased in 1962; however, channel improvements have taken place since that time. She also noted that there is a ten- foot easement on the north side of Lena Gulch for the Colorado Ditch Company and she thought the row of trees mentioned earlier by Board Member ECHELMEYER may represent the property line. She also .stated that, since channel improvements have taken place, the proposed house could probably be worked out, but she wanted to make sure the Storrer's weren't using any property that was in the easement. Board Member ECHELMEYER asked why there were no written protests to this application. Ms. Polivka replied that they were not notified ofthe application. Meredith Reckert explained that, in addition to publishing the application, the city is only required notify adjacent property owners and such notification took place. Board Member ABBOTT asked Mr. Goebel ifMr. Polivka's questions had been resolved during their meeting. Mr. Goebel replied that he didn't believe all of the questions had been Page 3 Board of Adjustment 01127/00 resolved and, therefore, he suggested that Mr. Polivka write a letter to the Board since he would not be able to attend the meeting. Ms. Osse stated that flood waters topped the rock barriers two years ago and came up to her patio which is adjacent to the stream. She asked the Board to consider that all the properties upstream from the proposed structure could be affected. Ms. Polivka stated their concern with the piers which could cause debris to back up and create a damming effect during a 100-year flood. John Stephens 12060 West 32nd Drive Mr. Stephens was sworn by Chair HOWARD. He stated his opposition to building the subject house in a flood plain. He was also concerned about debris backing up against the piers during a flood. He stated that he has seen flood waters come above the rocks and also go over 32nd Avenue. Board Member ABBOTT asked for Mr. Goebel's opinion regarding government flood plain elevations as opposed to resident's who testify that they have seen water higher than the government lines show. Mr. Goebel replied that, as an engineer, he can only address technical elements and the board must determine philosophical issues. Mr. Goebel explained that the flood plain boundary is based on rainfall data, calculations, etc. Board Member ABBOTT asked how a dam break would compare to a 100-year flood. Mr. Goebel replied that a dam break would be of greater velocity and waters would rise more quickly than in a 100 year flood. David Osse 12061 West 32nd Drive Mr. Osse was sworn by Chair HOWARD. He stated that he believed it was necessary to change the flood plain boundaries to match up with the Lena Gulch improvements. Marie Osse returned to the podium and asked why the channel improvements stopped at Lewis Meadows City-owned open space to the east ofthe subject property. Mr. Goebel stated that there were plans to continue channel improvements through the Lewis Meadows area, but when the City purchased the area for open space, it was decided to leave the area in a natural condition. If requested to do so, staff would approach City Council about improving the flood channel through this area. Stan Ankoviak 12141 West 32nd Drive Mr. Ankoviak was sworn by Chair HOWARD. He expressed opposition to the application and expressed concern about the piers catching debris and causing a danuning situation. Board of Adjustment 01/27/00 Page 4 Doug Trieste 14372 West Yale Place Mr. Trieste was sworn by Chair HOWARD. He stated that he was the hydrologic engineer for the applicant. He commented that the Federal Emergency Management Association (FEMA) has a strict set of rules to serve as guidelines. He stated that those rules were followed to the letter in this case, and the proposed house meets all those standards. Studies show clearly that Mr. Storrer's property is completely out of the flood way and the piers in question would receive a maximum of 1.1 feet of water during a 100 year flood with velocities of 2 feet per second. He noted that one foot of water cannot float large pieces of debris. Board Member ECHELMEYER asked to know Mr. Trieste's credentials. Mr. Trieste stated that he worked with the Bureau of Reclamation for fifteen years as a flood plain specialist and hydraulics engineer. Board Member ECHELMEYER expressed concern about the difference between flood plain guidelines and testimony from residents in the area concerning water in their yards. Board Member THIESSEN responded to Mr. Trieste's comments and stated that, although the Board does not have the jurisdiction to make flood plain regulations, the fact that a property meets a certain criteria is not a guarantee that a property will receive a special exceptions permit. The case has to be made to the Board that the application will not be detrimental to the area; and, while an application meets certain criteria, there may be some philosophical and precedence problems associated with the application. The Board must decide if the application will be detrimental to the area. Meredith Reckert suggested that if the Board felt a need to receive further information, the hearing could be continued until the information received from Ms. Polivka could be evaluated by the applicant's engineer. Ms. Polivka indicated that she would be in favor of continuance so that her husband could testify in person. Mr. Storrer indicated that he did not desire a continuance. 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 anadministrative officer; and Whereas, Board of Adjustment Application Case No. WF-99-01 is an appeal to this Board from the decision of an administrative officer; 'and Board of Adjustment 01/27/00 Page 5 Whereas, the property has 'been posted the fifteen days required by law, and in recognition that there were no written protests registered agaifist it, but also in recognition that there were verbal concerns expressed to this Board from adjacent neighbors; Whereas, the relief applied for may be granted without substantially impairing the intent and purpose of the regulations governing the City of Wheat Ridge. Now, therefore, be it resolved that Board of Adjustment Application Case No. WF-99-01 be, and hereby is, approved. Type of Exception: Request for a class II flood plain special exception permit to construct a single-family dwelling on piers within the flood storage district. For the following reasons: 1.. The property in question is zoned Residential I-A and the proposed use of the property for a single family dwelling is permitted as a principal use in that district. The lot is of sufficient size for the district in that it exceeds the minimum requirements for lot area and width. The property is located within the single family residential area; therefore, the proposed use is compatible with the surrounding neighborhood and is in conformance with the City's Comprehensive Plan. 2. Referrals were sent to Bob Goebel, Director of Public Works and Flood Plain Administrator, and to Bill DeGroot, Chief of the Flood Plain Management Program for the Urban Drainage and Flood Control District. Mr. DeGroot responded with no objections as long as the proposed first floor is a minimum of one foot above the 100-year flood plain elevation. 3. Upon completion of his review ofthe application, Mr. Goebel outlined his findings in a letter dated December 6, 1999 (attachment 7): "It is a requirement of the Flood Storage District that the first floor elevation be established a minimum of one foot above the base flood elevation. Therefore the lowest part of the structure, supported by the piers, shall be at a minimum elevation of 5, 447.1 feet above sea level." This elevation will be verified during construction and an elevation certificate from a professional land surveyor must be submitted prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. With the following conditions: I. All engineering provisions as set forth in the letter from Bob Goebel, Director of Public Works, as submitted to the Board shall be complied with to the satisfaction of the city. Board of Adjustment 01/27/00 Page 6 2. No storage of any kind, fence, playground equipment or any other item which could in any way impact the flood storage area or the flood way shall occur within the flood storage area or flood way portion ofthis property. This shall include areas under the elevated portion of this structure. 3. Bob Goebel, Director of Public Works, shall review the engineering questions outlined in a letter to the Board, dated January 26, 2000 from William G. Polivka, 12001 West 32nd Drive and determine their merit as related to this case. Board Member THIESSEN questioned the accuracy of the elevation figure of 5,447.1 feet. Bob Goebel stated that he would verify the elevation to make sure that it is one foot above the highest water surface point on the property. Board Member ABBOTT commented that ifMr. Goebel's review ofMr. Polivka's letter reveals a negative impact, the matter would come back to the Board of Adjustment. Mr. Trieste commented that the one-foot elevation as defined by FEMA cannot be changed. Board Member ECHELMEYER stated that he would vote against the motion based on his obligation to the surrounding neighbors in regard to potential flooding problems. Board Member THIESSEN asked what the applicant's options would be if the application were to be denied. Meredith Reckert explained that the applicant could appeal to the District Court. Also, if he changed the application and brought in new information, he could reapply. A vote was taken on the motion which carried by a vote of 7 -1, with Board Member ECHELMEYER voting opposed. Chair HOWARD advised Mr. Storrer that his application had been approved. (Chair HOWARD declared a recess at 9: 15 p.m. The meeting was reconvened at 9:20 p.m.) B. Case No. WA-99-28: An application submitted by Jeff Nielsen for approval ofa 10-foot side yard setback variance from the 15-foot side yard setback requirement in an R-I zone district for the purpose of constructing a 24- foot by 24- foot detached garage on property located at 3281 Routt Street. This case was presented by Mary Austin. She reviewed the staff report, presented slides and overheads of the subject property and answered the criteria involved in granting a variance: All pertinent documents were entered into the record. She advised that all notification and posting requirements had been met and the Board had jurisdiction to hear the case. Staff recommended denial of the application for reasons outlined in the staff report. Board of Adjustment 01/27/00 Page 7 Board Member HOYLAND questioned the 10-foot rear yard setback. Mary Austin explained that the standard rear yard setback is five-feet, but ten feet are required in this case due to an existing utility easement. Jeff Nielsen 3281 Routt Street Mr. Nielsen, the applicant, was sworn by Chair HOWARD. He explained that his request for the variance is due to the high water table in the middle of his back yard. With a variance, he could locate his garage outside ofthe high water table situation. He would also like to keep as much open space in his back yard as possible. He noted that he has already lost five feet due to the easement. There is a 7-inch caliper tree in the back yard which he would like to save. If the variance is not granted, this tree would be about a foot from the garage. He also wants to keep a straight driveway. He had two exceptions to the variance criteria: (1) Criteria No.3 states that there are currently no encroachments into side yard setbacks in this neighborhood; however, there are several situations in his neighborhood where such encroachments exist. (2) Item No.6 states the existing garage for the home currently meets required minimum side yard setbacks. He stated that he currently has 14.5 feet, rather than 15 feet. He also felt there were two unique circumstances associated with his request. The first unique circumstance is the water that flows under the surface through the yard; and the second circumstance is the 5- foot easement which results in a 10- foot rear yard setback. Mr. Nielson also obtained signatures from the four adjacent property owners indicating they did not object to such a variance. In response to a question from Chair HOWARD, Mr. Nielsen stated that there would be no need to move the street light to accommodate the driveway. Upon a motion by Board Member THIESSEN and second 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-99-28 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 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-99-28 be, and hereby is, denied. Board of Adjustment 01127/00 Page 8 Type of Yariance: A I 0- foot side yard setback variance from the 15- foot side yard setback requirement in an R-I zone district for the purpose of constructing a 24- foot by 24-foot detached garage. For the following reasons: I. The Board fmds that a hardship does not exist because there is adequate room on the site for locating the garage to avoid the physical features indicated on the site plan and still meet the required setbacks. 2. If the variance were granted, it could alter the essential character of the locality. 3. This hardship is self imposed because of his desire to add another garage. There is no topographical or other consideration for the property since it is rectangular and flat. 4. If the variance were granted, it could potentially impact the amount oflight and air to the adjacent property. The motion for denial passed by a vote of7-1 with and Board Member BROWN voting opposed. Chair HOWARD informed the applicant that his request for a variance had been denied. C. Case No. W A-OO-Ol: An application by Jayne Armstrong for approval of a 360 square foot variance from the maximum building coverage of 600 square feet for the purpose of constructing a 960 square foot detached garage on vacant property zoned R-3 and located south of7650 West 47th Avenue. This case was presented by Mary Austin. She reviewed the staff report, presented slides and overheads of the subject property and answered the criteria involved in granting a variance. All pertinent documents were entered into the record. She advised that all notification and posting requirements had been met and the Board had jurisdiction to hear the case. Staff recommended approval with conditions and reasons outlined in the staff report. Ms. Austin distributed copies ofa court case decided in 1971 concerning this property. This case concerned the covenants of the subdivision when originally platted. There was a restriction that only single family residences be allowed; and that no multi-family dwellings would be allowed. The court did find that the covenants are not superseded by the city's zoning ordinance. However, it is staff s opinion that the request for variance is still valid because it does not conflict with single family residential requirements. Page 9 Board of Adjustment 01127/00 In response to a question from Board Member THIESSEN, Mary Austin explained that if the lots are consolidated, the zoning would remain the same. Jayne Armstrong 7650 West 47th Avenue Ms. Armstrong, the applicant, was sworn by Chair HOWARD. She stated that she is an antique car collector and would like to purchase the subject lot adjacent to her property to build a four-car garage to store her cars. She stated that she does not intend to use the garage for a business, but only for her own personal use. She plans to locate the garage twenty feet from the west side ofthe fence so she would still have the use of both of her driveways. The garage will be a Tuff Shed structure. In response to a question from Board Member HOYLAND, Ms. Armstrong stated that if the variance request were to be denied, she would not purchase the property. Board Member HOYLAND asked if Ms. Armstrong would be required to pave the first twenty feet of her driveway and, if so, would she have to pave both sides. Meredith Reckert replied that she would only be required to pave the first twenty feet of one side of her driveway. Zach Armstrong signed the public hearing roster but indicated he did not wish to address the Board. Debbie Fidrich 7737 West 46th Avenue Ms. Fidrich was sworn by Chair HOWARD. She requested that the Board's decision be based upon the residential guidelines which have previously been established. She stated that she was not opposed to the proposed garage as long as it was used for storage and not repair of automobiles. Steve McAden signed the public hearing roster but indicted he did not wish to address the Board. Pat Fisher 7609 West 47th Avenue Ms. Fisher was sworn by Chair HOWARD. She stated that Jayne Armstrong. and Steve McAden informed Ms. Fisher that she was planning to purchase the lot adjacent to her property for the purpose of erecting a four-car garage. When asked if she planned to do car repair and refurbishing, Ms. Armstrong said no; however, Mr. McAden said they would be doing repair, but would not be gunning engines. She expressed concern about the garage being turned into a car repair facility and asked, ifthis happened, that the garage be screened from view of 46th Avenue and limit be placed on noise. She also asked that cars not be stored on the property while waiting for repair. She stated that she would have no Page 10 Board of Adjustment 01127/00 objection to the garage if it is used for storage purposes and occasional refurbishing of a car. Board Member ABBOTT asked for clarification regarding R-3 zoning. Meredith Reckert explained that R-3 zoning does not allow a commercial business, but does not preclude someone from working on their own vehicles. There is no limit to the number of cars that can be parked in R-3 zoning as long as they are licensed and operable and that they are parked on a gravel or concrete surface. (Chair HOWARD declared a brief recess at 10:35 p.m. The meeting was reconvened at 10:40 p.m.) Upon a motion by Board Member HOYLAND and second 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-OO-OI 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 written 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 ofthe regulations governing the City of Wheat Ridge. Now, therefore, be it resolved that Board of Adjustment Application Case No. W A-OO-Ol be, and hereby is, approved. Type ofYariance: A 360 square foot variance from the maximum building coverage of 600 square feet for the purpose of constructing a 960 square foot detached garage. For the Following Reasons: 1. The Board finds that based upon all evidence presented, and based upon the Board's conclusions relative to the ten specific questions to justify the variance, the variance and facts in this case support the granting of this request. 2. In addition, the property may not yield a reasonable return in service if permitted to be used only under the regulations of the Residential-Three zoning district as it lacks public street access. Board of Adjustment 01127/00 Page 11 3. Approval of the variance will not alter the essential character ofthe locality as the area in general is zoned Residential-Two which would allow a structure of up to 1000 square feet on the property. 4. Approval of the request would not impair the adequate supply of light and air to adjacent properties or endanger public safety. With the Following Condition: 1. The applicant must submit a consolidation plat to combine the property in question with the property owned by the applicant at 7650 West 47th Avenue prior to the issuance of a building permit. Board Member ECHELMEYER expressed concern that a future owner of this property could turn it into a business and indicated he would vote against the motion because he is not in favor of businesses encroaching into neighborhoods. Board Member ABBOTT commented that the consolidation requirement would offer some protection against commercial uses for this area. Meredith Reckert stated that notes could also be placed on the pfat stating that no commercial uses would be allowed. Board Member ABBOTT offered the following amendment: "Condition No.2 - A plat note, to be recorded, will be added to state that this garage will be used for personal, non-business use only." The amendment was acceptable to Board Member HOYLAND. The motion passed by a vote of 7-1, with Board Member ECHELMEYER voting opposed. Chair HOWARD advised the applicant that her variance was granted. 6. OLD BUSINESS There was no old business to come before the Board. 7. NEW BUSINESS A. Annroval of Minutes It was moved by Board Member ABBOTT and seconded by Board Member HOYLAND to approve the minutes of December 9, 1999 as presented. The motion carried by a vote of7-0 with Board Member JUNKER abstaining. B. Susan Junker - Meredith Reckert announced that cake would be served immediately following the meeting to acknowledge Susan Junker's last Board meeting. Susan will be moving out of the Wheat Ridge area. Page 12 Board of Adjustment 01/27/00 . 8. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Board Member HOYLAND and seconded by Board Member BROWN to . adjourn the meeting at 11 :00 p.m. The motion carried unanimously. ~c~ LlKAYZu- L BO HOWARD, ChaIrman Board of Adjustment a u ~ 0( ~'7P'A .~ Ann Lazzeri, secretary Board of Adjustment Board of Adjustment 01127/00 Page 13