Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/27/2002 ORIGINAL CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT Minutes ofMeetiug June 27, 2002 1. CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by Chair MONTOYA at 7:30 p.m. on June 27, 2002 in the city council chambers ofthe municipal building, 7500 West 29th Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado. 2. ROLL CALL Members Present: Tom Abbott Paul Drda Bill Echelmeyer Paul Hovland Bob Howard Jerry Montoya Kent Young Members Absent: Bob Blair Staff Present: Alan White, Planning Director Travis Crane, Planner Mike Pesicka, Planning Tech Ann Lazzeri, Secretary The following is the official set of Board of Adjustment minutes for the Public Hearing of June 27,2002. 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. PUBLIC FORUM There was no one signed up to speak. 4. PUBLIC HEARING A. Case No. WA-02-04: An application filed by Victor Olson for approval ofa 16.5 foot side yard setback variance from the required 30 foot side yard setback, when adjacent to a public street, resulting in a 13.5 foot side yard setback for the purpose of constructing a garage on property zoned Residential-Two (R-2) and located at 2620 Upham Street. Mike Pesicka introduced this case and stated there was an oversight regarding a front yard setback that staff wasn't aware of at the time of publication for the side yard setback variance. Since the front yard setback variance was not included in the publication for this hearing, staff requested a continuance of the hearing. The applicant was in Board of Adjustment 06/27/02 Page 1 agreement with the continuance. Alan White stated that the applicant would not be responsible for publication charges associated with this continuance since it was caused by a staff oversight. It was moved by Board Member ABBOTT and seconded by Board Member YOUNG that Case No. W A-02-04 be continued to the next Board of Adjustment meeting at the recommendation of staff and desire of the applicant. The motion passed 7-0 with Board Member BLAIR absent. B. Rehearing of Case No. W A-02-02 - An application submitted by Jeff Petty for approval of a 600-square-foot variance from the 12,500-square-foot minimum lot area requirement to allow an additional dwelling unit on property zoned Residential-Two (R-2) and located at 4695 Wadsworth Boulevard. This case was presented by Mike Pesicka. He reviewed the staff report which contained new evidence submitted by the applicant. New photos of the property were also presented during the staff report. In response to questions from Board Member ABBOTT, Alan White explained that even though there are three kitchens in this structure, the property is zoned R-2 which would not allow a triplex. The maximum use for the structure could only be a duplex. Further, the city traffic engineer has reviewed the parking situation and determined there is adequate parking space for a duplex and there is also sufficient room between the driveway and Wadsworth. Jeff Petty Mr. Petty, the applicant, was sworn in by Chair MONTOYA. At the previous hearing, there was much opposition from the neighbors regarding the parking, condition ofthe property and a desire that a duplex not be allowed in the subject location. Since that time, Mr. Petty has cleaned up the property, installed new landscaping, etc. He spoke with surrounding neighbors who indicated they are pleased with the improvements and, with the exception of one neighbor, now have no objections to his request to use the property as a duplex. He agreed with closing the curb cut onto Wadsworth and the request to pave the first 25 feet of his driveway. His research also revealed several duplexes as well as apartment buildings exist in the surrounding neighborhood. Board Member ABBOTT asked if people were living in the structure at present. Mr. Petty replied that two people are presently living in the structure. One of the people is living there while he is working on the property and is paying no rent. Board Member DRDA asked if Mr. Petty would be agreeable to permanently closing the garage door which presently faces Wadsworth. Mr. Petty indicated he would be agreeable to this to prevent ingress/egress from Wadsworth. Page 2 Board of Adjustment 06/27/02 In response to questions from Board Member HOWARD, Mr. Petty explained he plans to have two living units--one on the first floor and one on the second floor. There are 'separate entrances for each unit. Board Member ABBOTT asked if it would be necessary to have approval from CDOT to close the curb cut on Wadsworth. Mr. White replied that he will check with CDOT to see what the requirements are. Patricia Fisher 7609 West 47th Avenue Ms. Fisher was sworn in by Chair MONTOYA. She asked to submit a copy ofthe Wadsworth Corridor Plan as well as a copy of city regulations concerning R-2 property. Chair MONTOYA questioned whether the Board had jurisdiction to base its decision on the Wadsworth Corridor Plan which addresses right-of-way that mayor may not occur. Alan White informed the Board that a decision on a variance should only be based on current conditions. Chair MONTOYA therefore disallowed submittal ofthe Wadsworth Corridor Plan as evidence. The R-2 zoning requirements were already a part of the staff report. She read the following statement into the record: "Our covenants state that Hillcrest Heights was a one-family subdivision (R-l). Sometime over the years that was changed to R-2. Most of the homes in our subdivision now are R-2 and I don't think that was made clear at this meeting A large number of homes already have the room to add apartments within their homes and adequate parking on their property. Once an exception is made here. many of these homeowners might also want duplex status. That would change the character of our subdivision from one-family to rental. The decision here will be cited by anyone seeking a variance in the future. Jefferson County still ' shows this home as a one-family residence. The outside entrance to the secondfloor of the residence was added last year. They also show the property was bought years ago by Alma and Cornelius Holden who probably were family members sharing apartments within the home. I have never known that home to be a rental. You also speak of the home next door that is zoned R-3. At one time, there was a lot over a half-acre connected to that home that was sold and I have never seen an 'apartment for rent' sign on that home. It always said 'house for rent '. The property does not have adequate parking on or in front of it to support dWlex status. There is no parking on Wadsworth and there is a sight restriction on the 47' Avenue side. There is a single unpaved driveway that would accommodate three cars in a row at most. If the driveway were extended around the back of the home with an exit on Wadsworth, would the property then meet code? Would paving part of the lot for parking make for more code violations? This is already a very dangerous corner. The north side of 47th Avenue across from the home has the same sight restrictions and is known as 'breakdown corner' because it is the only place that disabled vehicles, cars and trucks, coming south on Wadsworth have to pull over. If this place is usedfor permanent parking because there is inadequate parking on Mr. Petty's property, these disabled vehicles will have no choice but to park in the middle of Board of Adjustment 06/27/02 Page 3 the street, blocking the entrance to our subdivision and tying up traffic on Wadsworth. This has happened many times in the past when vehicles have parked temporarily in this area. Colorado has afull disclosure real estate law, and the Real Estate Commission stated to me that the 15 feet deeded to the state would have shown up on the title commitment unless waived. That, coupled with the fact that Jefferson County doesn't show this property as a legal duplex or multifamily should take Mr. Petty back to real estate for a release since there are severe penalties if he were not given these facts. I request that the panel review the findings of the Court of Appeals of the lawsuit I submitted at the last meeting along with the Wadsworth Corridor Plan for Hillcrest Heights and deny the variance. " Chair MONTOYA restated the jurisdiction of the Board and reminded Ms. Fisher that the property is zoned R-2 which makes a duplex legal. He asked Ms. Fisher ifthe new evidence presented by Mr. Petty made a difference to her. She replied it made some difference and commended Mr. Petty for cleaning up the property but expressed concern about disabled cars parking on 47th. Board Member DRDA asked about setback requirements. Alan White explained that the city cannot request setbacks to be met on an existing structure which was built in 1958. Setbacks Can only be required on new construction. The setbacks were also affected by the State acquiring 15 feet of right-of-way along Wadsworth. Board Member YOUNG commented that the focus should be on whether a variance should be granted to allow Mr. Petty to do necessary remodeling to use the structure as a duplex in an R-2 zone. He asked if curbstones could be set to close the curb cut onto Wadsworth. Alan White will check with CDOT regarding curbstones as a temporary solution until final action by CDOT. Board Member ECHELMEYER stated that since Mr. Petty had addressed the neighbors' concerns by cleaning up the property and there is a long list of neighbors who are not opposed to his using the property as a duplex, he would vote in favor of the application. Chair MONTOYA stated that concerns of neighbors had also been met by eliminating the Wadsworth curb cut and permanently closing the garage door. Upon a motion by Board Member ABBOTT and second by Board Member ECHELMEYER, 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-02-02 is an appeal to this Board from the decision of an administrative officer; and Board of Adjustment 06/27/02 Page 4 Whereas, the property has been posted the fifteen days required by law; and in recognition of protests registered against and petition registered for; 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- 02-02 be, and hereby is, APPROVED. Type of Variance: A 600 square foot variance from the 12,500 square foot minimum lot area requiremeut to allow an additional dwelling unit on property zoned residential (R-2). For the following reasons: 1. This structure now directly abuts and is very proximal to Wadsworth Boulevard. It no longer appears economically viable as a best use being single- family, owner-occupied as originally constructed. 2. The variance would not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other properties. 3. The proposed additional unit would not impair the adequate supply of light and air to adjacent properties. 4. The proposed additional unit would uot substantially increase the congestion in public streets, endanger the public safety nor increase the danger of fire. 5. The footprint of the current structure will not be increased in dimension as a result of the variance. 6. A petition was submitted signed by several neighbors expressing their views that they have no objection to this structure being allowed to exist as a duplex. 7. The City traffic engineer has reviewed and approved the street access from this property. With the following conditions: 1. The curb cut off of Wadsworth Boulevard must be closed and access to the property shall be limited to West 47th Avenue. In addition, the first twenty- five feet of driveway shall be paved, pursuant to Section 26-501(D)(1). 2. Current garage door facing Wadsworth must be abandoned and permanently sealed. A new garage door accessing from the west will be allowed. 3. A certificate of occupancy will not be issued by the City until all conditions required by the Board are met. Board of Adjustment 06/27/02 Page 5 Board Member HOWARD questioned the certificate of occupancy when the structure is already occupied by two different individuals. Chair MONTOYA called Mr. Petty back to the stand to explain. Jeff Petty explained that both individuals live in the downstairs portion which presently consists of two separate units with kitchens and bathrooms. He stated that the upstairs portion is unoccupied. He plans to eliminate one kitchen downstairs which will result in one 3-bedroom living unit on the lower level. Board Member ABBOTT commented that whether or not the units are occupied relates to the city's code determination and the Board's jurisdiction relates only to whether or not the variance should be granted. Chair MONTOYA agreed with Board Member ABBOTT and informed the applicant that six affirmative votes will be required under the super-majority stipulation for the variance to be approved. The motion failed by a vote of 5-2 with Board Members DRDA and HOWARD voting no and Board Member BLAIR absent. Chair MONTOYA advised Mr. Petty that his application had been denied. C. Case No. W A-02-05 - An application filed by Jim Dent for approval of a 10-foot rear yard setback variance from the required 10- foot rear yard setback resulting in a 0- foot rear yard setback for the purpose of constructing a garage on property zoned Residential-One C (R-IC) and located at 3235 Ames Street. This case was presented by Travis Crane. He reviewed the staff report, presented photographs and layouts of the proposed application, and entered all pertinent documents into the record. He advised the Board that proper noticing and publication requirements had been met and there was jurisdiction to hear the case. He pointed out information recently received and not included in the packet, regarding the Uniform Building Code which states that any structure built on a zero setback may not have any doors or windows and the wall on the property line must be a one-hour fire wall. Staff recommended denial of the application based upon reasons outlined in the staff report. In response to a question from Chair MONTOYA, Mr. Crane stated that the UBC requirements were not brought to his attention until today and therefore the applicants were not aware of the requirements. Discussion ensued as to whether the hearing could take place based on the new information. Alan White commented there are two possibilities: (I) approve a variance that is less than advertised; (2) approve the requested variance, contingent upon approval by the building inspector. There was a consensus to proceed with the hearing. Board of Adjustment 06/27/02 Page 6 Jim Dent 3235 Ames Street Mr. Dent, the applicant, was sworn in by Chair MONTOYA. He stated he was requesting a zero setback because without it, 500 square feet of his property would be wasted. If the garage were built with a ten-foot setback there would be sixteen feet from the alley to the garage. People already dump trash on their property near the alley and an additional 16 feet would make more room for people to dump trash. The apartment building across the alley from his property has a fence built right on the property line. Other existing garages in the neighborhood are located right on the alley. Mr. Dent stated he had contacted neighbors who were in favor of his application. In reply to a question from Board Member HOWARD, Mr. Dent stated there is not enough room to build a garage on the side ofthe house. He stated that they would not build a garage if a variance is not granted because it would take up most of their back yard. Mr. Dent did indicate that he and his wife would have to discuss whether or not they wish to pursue the proj ect if the requested variance is reduced by three feet. In reply to a question from Commissioner HOVLAND, Alan White replied the proposed garage would meet lot coverage requirements. In reply to a question from Commissioner ABBOTT, Mr. Dent stated he has definite plans to remove the existing storage shed if he builds a garage. He also stated that he believes the garage will increase the value of his property as well as the value of the surrounding neighborhood. Chair MONTOYA asked if anyone else wished to address the Board concerning this application. There was no response. Upon a motion by Board Member ABBOTT 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-02-05 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. Board of Adjustment 06/27/02 Page 7 Now, therefore, be it resolved that Board of Adjustment Application Case No. W A- 02-05 be, and hereby is, APPROVED. Type of Variance: Ten-foot rear yard setback variance from the required ten-foot rear yard setback resulting in a zero foot rear yard setback. For the following reasons: 1. The Board finds persuasive the argnment presented by the applicant that the existence of a required 10 foot setback between the alley and garage door as proposed creates considerable opportunity for illegal dumping and other activities to occur thereby creating a public nuisance to the detriment of the neighborhood. 2. Signatures in approval of the requested variance were submitted by four immediately adjacent neighbors. 3. The existing back yard does not appear to hold a practical alternative location for the proposed garage. 4. Other structures occur along the alley with a zero foot or minimal setback. 5. The request would appear to present no injurious effects on public welfare, safety, property values nor present an increase in fire hazard. 6. The existing mature willow tree will need to be removed whether the setback is approved or not to allow construction as proposed. With the following conditions: 1. The structure must be constructed as per Exhibit C presented to the Board related to construction materials, architectural design, paint, door and window style, etc. 2. Existing encroaching shed will be removed, not to be relocated on the property. 3. The structure as proposed must be approved by the city building official particular to openings occurring within three feet of the property line. The motion passed 7-0 with Board Member BLAIR absent. Chair MONTOYA advised Mr. Dent that his request for variance was approved. 5. CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING Chair MONTOYA declared the public hearing closed. 6. OLD BUSINESS There was no old business to come before the Board. Board of Adjustment 06/27/02 Page 8 7. NEW BUSINESS A. Minutes of May 23. 2002 - It was moved by Board Member HOWARD and seconded by Board Member YOUNG to approve the minutes with a correction on page six under the "Green Goddess" item to show the location as 44th and Moore rather than 44th and Wadsworth. The motion passed 6-0 with Chair MONTOYA abstaining and Board Member BLAIR absent. 8. ADJOURNMENT Chair MONTOYA declared the meeting adjourned at 9:20 p.m. a~e::;~~~ Ann Lazzeri, ecretary Board of Adjustment Page 9 Board of Adjustment 06/27/02