Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/23/2002 ORIGINAL CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT Minutes of Meeting May 23, 2002 1. CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by Vice-Chair ABBOTT at 7:30 p.m. on May 23, 2002 in the city council chambers of the municipal building, 7500 West 29th Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado. 2. ROLL CALL Members Present: Tom Abbott Bob Blair Paul Drda Bill Echelmeyer Paul Hovland Bob Howard Members Absent: Jerry Montoya Kent Young Staff Present: Alan White, Planning Director Travis Crane, Planner Ann Lazzeri, Secretary The following is the official set of Board of Adjustment minutes for the Public Hearing of May 23,2002. A set of these minutes is retained both in the office ofthe City Clerk and in the Department of Planning and Development of the City of Wheat Ridge. 3. PUBLIC FORUM There was no one signed up to speak. 4. PUBLIC HEARING A. Case No. W A-02-03: An application submitted by Gordy and Kathi Jack for approval of a 10.5 foot side yard setback variance from the required 15 foot side yard setback resulting in a 4.5 foot side yard setback for the purpose of allowing a storage shed on property zoned Residential-One (R-l) and located at 3360 Independence Court. This case was presented by Travis Crane. He reviewed the staff report and gave a Power Point presentation depicting photographs and layouts ofthe subject area. All pertinent documents were entered into the record and he advised the Board there was jurisdiction to hear the case. Criteria used in the evaluation of a variance request were reviewed. Board of Adjustment OS/23/02 Page 1 Staff determined that the variance criteria did not support approval of the variance request and therefore recommended denial. In response to a question from Vice Chair ABBOTT, Travis Crane stated that no letters of opposition to the request had been submitted to staff. Further, there was no one signed up to speak in opposition to the request. Kathi and Gordy Jack 3360 Independence Court Kathi and Gordy Jack, the applicants, were sworn in by Vice Chair ABBOTT. Kathi Jack testified that they experienced some confusion about the setbacks. Last October, when they checked with the Planning Department about setback requirements, they were told there was a 5-foot rear yard and IS-foot side yard setback requirement. They interpreted that the location for their proposed shed was in the rear yard. They were told it was not necessary to obtain a building permit at that time. Therefore, they built a retaining wall to make a level spot for the shed. In February, they checked with the city again to see if it was necessary to obtain a building permit before they poured the foundation for the shed and were told it would not be necessary because of the amount of concrete involved. They poured the concrete and ordered the shed kit. When the kit was received and measured, they realized they would be 5-6 inches into the setback and brought this to the attention of the Planning Department when they came in for the building permit and were advised to apply for a variance of 6 inches. The following day, they were notified by the city that the shed was actually going to be located in the side yard which would require the variance presently under consideration. She further stated that there are at least three sheds on their street that are visible and less than five feet from the property line so the proposed shed would not change the character of the neighborhood. The proposed location is the lowest point on the property and, due to the location of several mature trees, there isn't another suitable location for the shed. In summary, she stated they believed they made a sincere attempt to comply with city regulations and did not feel the shed would alter the character of the neighborhood. Five neighbors have indicated they are not opposed to construction of the shed (two were verbal and three were signatures turned in with the application). In response to a question from Board Member HOVLAND, the applicant stated she turned in a document with their application which contained signatures of three neighbors indicating they were in favor of the variance. Alan White entered this document into the record. Board Member BLAIR asked about construction materials. The applicant stated it would be wood frame with greenhouse windows on the south and a shingled roof on the north. They plan to paint the shed a pale green. Ms. Jack submitted a catalog showing a picture of the shed they plan to build. The catalog was entered into the record. Board of Adjustment OS/23/02 Page 2 Vice Chair ABBOTT suggested that staff clarify information given to applicants in the future to prevent this kind of misinterpretation. Alan White stated that the Planning Department is presently working on a handbook of planning terms, etc. for the public. Vice Chair ABBOTT asked if there were others present who wished to address this matter. Hearing no response, he closed the public hearing. Board Member HOWARD stated that he believed the applicant had presented a very good project and he would vote in favor of the variance. Board Member BLAIR commented that he believed the shed would be an improvement and would look better than the vacant concrete pad. Vice Chair ABBOTT stated that he supported the application partly because the proposed structure would be an attractive potting shed. He also commented that he believed staff acted in a proper manner. Upon a motion by Board Member HOVLAND and second by Board Member HOWARD, 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-02-03 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 Wllereas, there were no protests registered against the application; 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. W A- 02-03 be, and hereby is, APPROVED. Type of Variance: Request for approval of a 10.5 foot side yard setback variance from the required 15 foot side yard setback resulting in a 4.5 foot side yard setback for the purpose of allowing a storage shed on property zoned Residential-One (R-l) and located at 3360 Independence Court. For the following reasons: Page 3 Board of Adjustment OS/23/02 1. As there are other nonconforming sheds in the area, impact to neighboring property is lessened. 2. The location minimizes the height impact as it is in a lower portion of the yard. 3. There was an apparent genuine misunderstanding as to the setback regulations after an apparent diligence in obtaining the information by the appellant. 4. The neighbors who would be most affected have indicated their approval. With the following condition: The shed must be built according to the design presented. The motion passed unanimously. Vice Chair ABBOTT advised the applicants their application was approved. B. Case No. W A-02-04 (to be continued to a date uncertain) - An application filed by Victor Olson for approval of an I I-foot side yard setback variance from the required 30-foot side yard setback when adjacent to a public street, resulting in a 19- foot side yard setback for the purpose of constructing a garage on property zoned Residential-Two and located at 2620 Upham Street. Alan White informed the Board that all required information had been received from the applicant and requested that the case be continued to the next Board of Adjustment meeting to be held on June 27, 2002. Vice Chair ABBOTT opened the public hearing. There was no one signed up to speak to this matter. It was moved by Board Member DRDA and seconded by Board Member HOWARD to continue Case No. W A-02-04 to June 27, 2002. The motion passed unanimously. C. Case No. WA-02-02: Request for a rehearing of Case No. WA-02-02 which was denied by Board of Adjustment on April 25, 2002. Vice Chair ABBOTT reopened Case No. W A-02-02. Jeff Petty Jeff Petty, the applicant, was sworn in by Vice Chair ABBOTT. He requested a rehearing of his case based upon new evidence he has to present. After the last Board of Adjustment meeting, he met with neighbors in attendance who expressed concern about the condition of the property. He also met with other neighbors in the neighborhood who had the same concerns. As a result, he has worked during the past month to repaint, remove dead trees, clean the yard, and plant flowers and grass. Since this work has been Board of Adjustment OS/23/02 Page 4 done, fifteen neighbors have signed a petition indicating they are in favor of a rehearing and that they are not in opposition to the structure being used as a duplex. This petition was entered into the record. The neighbors were aware that Mr. Petty would appear before the Board to request a rehearing. He stated that he plans to landscape the corner including a short fence to prohibit cars from driving across. He testified that there is room for four cars to park in the driveway. Mr. Petty submitted photographs which showed the improvements he has made. These were entered into the record. Board Member BLAIR stated that he lives near the subject property and has noticed a significant improvement in the condition of the property. Vice Chair ABBOTT asked if the present driveway meets standards for a duplex. Alan White stated this would be evaluated and included in the staff report if a rehearing is held. The driveway as it affects the sight triangle will also be examined. Board Member HOVLAND commented that four of the reasons for denial at the last meeting were related to neighborhood opposition. Since there seems to have been a change in the neighborhood concerns, he would be in favor of a rehearing. It was moved by Board Member DRDA and seconded by Board Member ECHELMEYER to rehear Case No. W A-02-02 based upon significant new evidence presented at this meeting. The motion passed 4-1 with Board Member HOWARD voting no. Vice Chair ABBOTT advised the applicant that his case would be reheard. 5. CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING Vice Chair ABBOTT declared the public hearing closed. 6. OLD BUSINESS There was no old business to come before the Board. 7. NEW BUSINESS A. Variance Decisions - Board Member DRDA questioned whether or not cases should be decided on whether or not neighbors like or dislike a certain project. Alan White commented that findings should be based upon facts and evidence presented during the hearing and public comment should be considered based upon relevance to the variance criteria. B. 2941 Chase Street - Board Member ECHELMEYER asked about the status of the house at 2941 Chase Street. Alan White explained they have worked with the owner and the project is in compliance with code. Board of Adjustment OS/23/02 Page 5 C. Green Goddess - Board Member HOWARD asked about the status ofthe Green Goddess business at 44th and Moore. Alan White explained that one-year temporary use permits are no longer allowed, however, any uses in the A-I district consisting of garden stands, etc. had until the middle of April to submit a rezoning application and could continue to operate as long as the application is in process. The owners of Green Goddess met the deadline and are working with staff on their application for a planned commercial development. D. 12141 West 32nd Drive (Ankoviak) - There was a question about the status of the lawsuit in this case. Alan White informed the Board that the judge decided in favor of the city and stated the Board did a good job in presenting reasons for denial. C. Minutes of April 25, 2002 - It was moved by Board Member ECHELMEYER and seconded by Board Member DRDA to approve the minutes of April 25, 2002. The motion passed unanimously. 8. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Board Member DRDA and seconded by Board Member ECHELMEYER to adjourn the meeting at 9:00 p.m. The motion passed unanimously. /~~ TOM ABBDTT, Vice Chair Board of Adjustment ~ Ann Lazzeri, Secretary Board of Adjustment Board of Adjustment OS/23/02 Page 6