HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/28/2001
CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
Minutes of Meeting
June 28, 2001
ORIGINAL
I. CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by Chair
HOWARD at 7:30 p.m. on June 28, 2001 in the Council Chambers of the Municipal
Building, 7500 West 29th Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado.
2. ROLL CALL
Members Present:
Michelle Brown
Paul Drda
Bill Echelmeyer
Paul Hovland
Bob Howard
Jerry Montoya
Members Absent:
Tom Abbott
Kent Young
Staff Present:
Alan White, Planning Director
Meredith Reckert, Sr. Planner
Travis Crane, Planner
Ann Lazzeri, Secretary
The following is the official set of Board of Adjustment minutes for the Public Hearing of June
28, 200 I. 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. W A-OI-03 - (continuedfrom May 24, 2001) An application filed by
Compass Montessori for approval of a 1.5- foot front yard setback variance from
the required 30-foot front yard setback resulting in a proposed 28.5-foot front yard
setback for property located at 10399 West 44th Avenue and zoned Restricted-
Commercial (R-C).
The case was presented by Meredith Reckert. She reviewed the staff report, presented
slides and overheads of the subject property and reviewed variance evaluation criteria.
All pertinent documents were entered into the record and accepted by Chair BROWN.
Board of Adjustment
06/28/01
Page 1
She advised the Board that there was jurisdiction to hear the case. Staff recommended
approval of the request for reasons outlined in the staff report.
Board Member MONTOYA commented that the one protest received by telephone was
based upon an objection to the addition itself rather than the setback so, therefore, the
protest did not appear to be valid in this case.
Michael O'Hara
1860 Blake Street, Denver
Mr. O'Hara, representing Compass Montessori, was sworn in by Chair BROWN. He
stated that an error occurred in the survey and the plans that led to the building exceeding
the setback by 1. 5 feet.
Burke Munger
4025 Field Drive
Mr. Munger was sworn in by Chair BROWN. He serves on the governing board of
Compass Montessori and has been involved in the building process. He stated that it was
not intended to exceed the setback and it was his understanding that it resulted from a
mathematical error in the plans.
Upon a motion by Board Member MONTOYA 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. WA-OI-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 in
recognition that there was one protest delivered by telephone and that protest was
against the building addition rather than the setback;
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-
01-03 be, and hereby is, APPROVED.
For the following reasons:
1. The encroachment ofthe new addition would not alter the essential character
of the neighborhood.
Board of Adjustment
06/28/01
Page 2
2. The requested variance would not impair the adequate supply of light and
air to adjacent properties.
3. It would not be detrimental to the public's welfare or injurious to other
properties in the area.
Type of Variance: A 1.5 foot front yard setback variance from the 30-foot front
yard setback required in an A-I zone reducing the setback to 28.5 feet. The purpose
of the variance is to allow the existing building to remain in its present location.
When construction of the building was finished, it encroached upon the 30-foot
front-yard setback by 1.5 feet.
Board Member ECHELMEYER stated that, while he would support the motion, he
would like to see situations concerning setbacks incorporated into future city inspections.
The motion passed 6-0 with Board Members ABBOTT and YOUNG absent.
B. Case No. WA-OI-07 - (continuedfrom May 24,2001) An application filed by
Abundant Grace Fellowship for approval of a waiver to the parking lot buffer
requirement on the northern parking lot of property located at 4535 Wadsworth
Boulevard and zoned Residential-Two (R-2).
The case was presented by Travis Crane. He reviewed the staff report, presented slides
and overheads of the subject property and reviewed variance evaluation criteria. All
pertinent documents were entered into the record and accepted by Chair BROWN. He
advised the Board that there was jurisdiction to hear the case. Staff recommended denial
of the request for reasons outlined in the staff report.
In response to a question from Board Member DRDA as to why a solid fence was not
also required along the west side ofthe property, Alan White explained that a solid fence
is required next to properties that are low and medium density. The property to the west
is a multi-family property that does not fit into this requirement.
Board Member HOVLAND referred to a letter from the adjacent neighbor who was in
favor of the variance and suggested the possibility of installing a gate in the fence to
allow the neighbor to have access to his garden area.
Doug Crook
6025 Miller Street
Mr. Crook, representing the applicant, was sworn in by Chair BROWN. He was in
agreement with the staff report and stated that he would abide by the Board's decision.
He stated that he did not realize at the time the original permit was issued that he had the
option of requesting a variance. Because of the location of the residence, he did not
believe lights from cars in the parking lot would be a problem. He stated the main
purpose for the request was to save money for the church by not having to erect a fence.
Board of Adjustment
06/28/01
Page 3
Board Member ECHELMEYER expressed concern that a variance runs with the land,
and while the variance might not present a problem at this time, it could cause a problem
in the future when the adjacent property changes hands. Board Member HOVLAND
agreed with this concern.
In response to a question from Board Member HOWARD, Mr. Crook stated that the
parking lot is in use three nights a week in addition to Sunday mornings. The church also
has a gentlemen's agreement with the adjacent office building where the church uses the
office building parking for overflow on weekends and the office building uses the church
parking for overflow on weekdays.
Board Member MONTOYA advised the applicant that he would not support the request
since the fence was agreed upon before the building of the lot and he is now coming back
for a variance. Mr. Crook agreed that this was his fault because he did not realize that he
could apply for a variance and did not deliberately intend to deceive the city.
Board Member DRDA clarified that the adjacent neighbor would not be denied access to
his property if the fence is built, but would be denied some convenience in entering the
property .
The applicant was advised that a super-majority of five affirmative votes would be
required for a motion to pass.
Upon a motion by Board Member MONTOYA 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. WA-OI-07 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 one letter was
registered from a neighbor in favor of it;
Whereas, the relief applied for may NOT be granted 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-
01-07 be, and hereby is DENIED.
For the following reasons:
Page 4
Board of Ad justffient
06/28/01
1. Approval of the waiver could possibly alter the essential character of the
locality.
2. This waiver is based solely on a desire to save money.
3. The buffer requirement was an original condition of approval of the parking
lot.
Type of Variance: A waiver from the requirement ofthe parking lot located
adjacent to the residentially-zoned property and the screening required pursuant to
Exhibit 2 of the application and pursuant to Section 26-503(e)(I) ofthe code
requiring this fencing or vegetation buffer.
The motion for denial failed by a vote of 4-2 with Board Members HOWARD and
BROWN voting no and Board Members ABBOTT and YOUNG absent.
Upon a motion by Board Member HOWARD 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. WA-OI-07 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 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. W A-
01-07 be, and hereby, is APPROVED.
Type of variance: A waiver from the requirement of the parking lot located
adjacent to the residentially-zoned property and the screening required pursuant to
Exhibit 2 of the application and pursuant to Section 26-503(e)(I) ofthe code
requiring this fencing or vegetation buffer.
The motion for approval failed by a vote of2 to 4, with Board Members
ECHELMEYER, DRDA, HOVLAND and MONTOYA voting no and Board
Members ABBOTT and YOUNG absent.
The request for variance was denied based on Chapter 2, Article 3, Section 2-53(d) of the
City of Wheat Ridge Codes of Law which state that Board of Adjustment motions not
carried are thereby deemed denied.
Page 5
Board of Adjustment
06/28/01
5. CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING
Chair BROWN declared the public hearing closed.
6. OLD BUSINESS
A. Wal-Mart at 32nd and Youngfield - Board Member ECHELMEYER inquired
about the status of the temporary use permit requested by Wal-Mart. Travis Crane
explained that Wal-Mart withdrew their application.
7. NEW BUSINESS
A. Approval of Minutes - It was moved by Board Member HOVLAND and
seconded by Board Member DRDA to approve the minutes of April 26, 2001
as presented. The motion passed 6-0 with Board Members ABBOTT and
YOUNG absent.
B. Discussion of New Bvlaws - Alan White presented the staff report setting forth a
copy of revised Board of Adjustment Bylaws.
Board Member DRDA commented that his understanding of the bylaws was that
a super majority vote is required for approvals and only a simple majority for
denials. He cited item 2 under Article IV: Disposition of Cases. He requested
clarification from the city attorney on this matter.
Board Member MONTOYA expressed concern about making a motion for
approval when he plans to vote against it.
Board Member ECHELMEYER requested clarification regarding the requirement
for the Board to hear every case that comes before it (Article V, item 2).
Alan White asked the Board to consider changing the requirements for a quorum
from five members to a majority of the duly appointed members comprising the
Board at that time.
Alan White also asked the Board to consider changing the meeting time from 7:30
p.m. to 7:00 p.m. There was a consensus of the Board that the meeting time
remain at 7:30 p.m.
There was consensus of the Board to direct Alan White to have further
discussions with the City Attorney regarding the bylaws in light ofthe questions
and concerns expressed by the Board. Another draft of the bylaws will be brought
to the Board for consideration at a future meeting.
C. Semi Parking Board Member HOWARD referred to signs that used to be in place
at 44th and Ward Road that stated semi's were not allowed to park on private
Page 6
Board of Adjustment
06/28/01
property or public thoroughfares. He requested that these signs be posted again. Alan
will check into this.
8. ADJOURNMENT
It was moved by Board Member HOWARD and seconded by Board Member DRDA to
adjourn the meeting at 9:20 p.m. The motion passed unanimously.
~~{\~.{t~n-,-
MICHELLE BR , Chair
Board of Adjustment
~~
Ann Lazzeri, Secretary
Board of Adjustment
Board of Adjustment
06/28/01
Page 7