HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/27/2001
ORIGINAL
CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
Minutes of Meeting
September 27, 2001
1. CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by Chair
BROWN at 7:30 p.m. on September 27,2001 in the Police Tnuning Room, 2nd floor of
the Municipal Building, 7500 West 29th Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado.
2. ROLL CALL
Members Present:
Tom Abbott
Michelle Brown
Paul Drda
Bill Echelmeyer
Paul Hovland
Jerry Montoya
Kent Young
Members Absent:
Bob Howard
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
September 27, 2001. A set of these minutes is retained both in the office of the City Clerk and in
the Department of Planning and Development ofthe City of Wheat Ridge.
3. PUBLIC FORUM
There was no one signed up to speak.
4. PUBLIC HEARING
A. Case No. W A-OI-08: An application filed by Lee and Sharon Brooks for an
interpretation of a story as defined by Section 26-123 of the City of Wheat Ridge
Code of Laws and approval of an 8-foot side yard setback variance from the
required IS-foot side yard setback resulting in a 7-foot side yard setback to the
south and a 10-foot side yard setback variance from the required IS-foot side yard
setback resulting in a 5-foot side yard setback to the north for property zoned
Residential-One C (R-IC) and located at 2941 Chase Street.
The case was presented by Travis Crane. He reviewed the staff report and gave a
PowerPoint presentation of the subject property. All pertinent documents were entered
Board of Adjustment
09/27/01
Page 1
into the record and accepted by Chair BROWN. Mr. Crane submitted copies of
comments from two neighbors who expressed opposition to the application. These
comments will be made a part of the official record as well as a part ofthe case file. He
reviewed the criteria involved in consideration of variances and advised the Board that
there was jurisdiction to hear the case. Staff recommended denial of the request for
reasons outlined in the staff report.
Board Member HOVLAND questioned the lot coverage. Mr. Crane explained that if the
garage is attached with a common roofline it would approach 40%. If it is a detached
garage it would be 36-37% lot coverage.
Alan White said that if a garage shares a common roofline with the house it is considered
to be attached.
Lee Brooks
2941 Chase Street
Willard Jones
650
Mr. Brooks, the applicant, and Mr. Jones, attorney for the applicant, were sworn in by
Chair BROWN.
Mr. Jones argued that because the basement is only 5-1/2 feet above ground level, it
should not be considered a story. The applicants originally designed the house to have a
basement and two stories. After talking with the neighbors, they have agreed to remove
the top story which would result in a single-story structure if the basement is not
considered to be a story.
There was discussion of grade levels on the property. Board Member ABBOTT
commented that building height is measured from the average grade of a property and
commented that it would be helpful to have documentation showing the basement height
from average grade.
Ken Nelson
10182 West 70th Drive, Arvada
Mr. Nelson, architect for the project, was sworn in by Chair BROWN. Mr. Nelson
argued that the basement is not of sufficient height to be considered a story under the
code. Since the top story has been eliminated from the design, the house should be
considered a single story with basement and, therefore, a variance would not be needed.
In response to a question from Board Member ABBOTT, Alan White stated that it is
staff s opinion the basement does constitute a story based upon the plans presented.
Board of Adjustment
09/27/01
Page 2
Board Member MONTOYA asked if the criteria regarding adequate light and air would
be met with the removal of the top story. Alan White replied that the house to the north
would be pretty close.
In response to a question from Board Member MONTOYA, the applicant explained that
their engineer has determined the basement cannot be dug any deeper due to a high water
table.
Board Member DRDA asked if there were documented details of the applicant's new
plan for the Board's review at this time. Mr. Crane replied that the plan was not available
at the meeting.
Mr. Jones suggested that ifthe definition of a story can be resolved, the applicant would
know whether or not he would need a variance. He was of the opinion that the new plans
would fit more into the character of the surrounding neighborhood and would not
interfere with adequate light and air to adjacent property.
Kristy Marshal
2992 Chase Street
Ms. Marshal was sworn in by Chair BROWN. She lives just north of the subject property
and stated that she was in favor of the application and that the proposed house would
increase property values in the neighborhood. She also stated that, with the removal of
the top story, there would be no problem with adequate light and air to her property.
Board' Member ABBOTT did not believe the Board could make a decision at this time
without knowing the average grade ofthe property.
In summary, Mr. Jones stated that several criteria would no longer apply with the new
design. These are as follow: it would not change the character of the neighborhood; it
would improve property values in the neighborhood; it would not interfere with air and
light to neighbors; the design provides for accommodation of a handicapped person; and
there is a hardship due to the high water table.
Board Member ECHELMEYER expressed concern that the proposed size of the house
would definitely change the character of the neighborhood.
Board Member MONTOYA stated that it is very important to consider the fact that the
house has been designed for ADA accessibility.
Ms. Campbell
2939 Chase Street
Ms. Campbell was sworn in by Chair BROWN. She stated that her house is actually
three feet from the property line and not four and one-halffeet as earlier stated.
Board of Adjustment
09/27/01
Page 3
There was discussion regarding the continuance of this case to the October Board of
Adjustment meeting in order to have adequate information to make a decision. Mr. Jones
stated that waiting another thirty days would present a problem for the applicant who
would like to get started before bad weather sets in.
It was moved by Board Member DRDA and seconded by Board Member ABBOTT
to continue this case to the next regularly scheduled Board of Adjustment meeting
(October 25, 2001) unless evidence is presented to staff prior to such meeting
sufficient to allow staff to determine that, based upon such evidence, a variance is
not required. The motion passed 6-1 with Board Member ECHELMEYER voting
no.
5. CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING
Chair BROWN declared the public hearing closed.
6. OLD BUSINESS
A. Discussion of New Bylaws
Alan White reviewed the draft of revised Board of Adjustment bylaws which
were included in the packet.
The following changes were suggested:
. Page 3, item 4, line 6 should be changed to read: "... ..at the next regularly
scheduled meeting of the Board............."
. Page 4, item 5, line 3 should be changed to read: "..... . applicant may be at
the scheduled hearing and ask for a postponement in person or notifY staff of a
request for postponement before the hearing date. A sentence should be
added to the end ofthe paragraph to read: "In case of a postponement,
applicant will be required to change the date on the sign. "
. Page 4, item 6, line 2 - Language should be added to provide that if the case is
postponed to the next meeting due to failure of the applicant to appear, the
case should be scheduled as the last public hearing on the agenda.
. Page 5, item 2, line 2: The word "upon" should not be stricken.
. Page 5, item (g), first line should read..... . are found to exist.........
It was moved by Board Member HOVLAND and seconded by Board
Member DRDA to approve the revised bylaws with the suggested
amendments. The motion passed 7-0.
Page 4
Board of Adjustment
09/27/01
7. NEW BUSINESS
A. Minutes from June 28, 2001
It was moved by Board Member HOVLAND and seconded by Board
Member YOUNG to approve the minutes as presented. The motion passed
7-0.
B. Public Officials Liability Video
There was a consensus ofthe Board to have a dinner meeting prior to the October
25th meeting. The video will be presented during dinner.
8. ADJOURNMENT
It was moved by Board Member ECHELMEYER and seconded by Board Member
YOUNG to adjourn the meeting at 9:35 p.m.
C-:."" ~L\o~ D~
MICHELLE BROWN, Chair
Board of Adjustment
CL~
Ann Lazzeri, Secretary
Board of Adjustment
Board of Adjustment
09/27/01
Page 5