HomeMy WebLinkAboutWA-15-08I 41� City Of
"`7`TheatRj,
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
City of Wheat Ridge Municipal Building 7500 W. 291h Ave.
August 4, 2015
Mr. Richard Squire
7205 W. 31 St Place
Wheat Ridge, CO 80033
Re: Case No. WA -15-08
Dear Mr. Squire:
Wheat Ridge, CO 80033-8001 P: 303.235.2846 F: 303.235.2857
Attached please find notice that your request for a 5 foot variance from the 25 -foot side yard
setback, resulting in a setback of 20 feet, was approved for construction of an addition on property
located at 7205 W. 31St Place.
Enclosed is a copy of the Approval of Variance. Please note that all variance requests
automatically expire within 180 days of the date it was granted (on February 1, 2016) unless a
building permit for the variance has been obtained within such period of time.
You are now welcome to apply for a building permit to construct the addition. Please feel free to
be in touch with any further questions.
Sincerely,
( Z1
Lisa Ritchie
Planner II
w woxi.wheatridge.co.us
7500 West 29th Avenue
Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80033
303.235.2846 Fax: 303.235.2857
A
City of
��Wh6atPLd e
Approval of Variance
WHEREAS, an application for a variance was submitted for the property located at 7205 W. 31 s`
Place referenced as Case No. WA -15-08 / Squire; and
WHEREAS, City staff found basis for approval of the variance, relying on criteria listed in Section
26-115 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws and on information submitted in the case file; and
WHEREAS, the Community Development Department has properly notified pursuant to Section
26-109 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws; and
WHEREAS, there were no registered objections regarding the application;
NOW THEREFORE, be it hereby resolved that a 5 foot variance to the 25 -foot side yard setback
requirement for the purpose of constructing an addition on property in the Residential -One A (R-
I A) zone district (Case No. WA -15-08 / Squire) is granted for the property located at 7205 W. 31 S`
Place, based on the following findings of fact:
1. The variance would not alter the essential character of the locality.
2. The applicant is proposing a substantial investment in the property that may not be possible
without the variance.
3. The alleged hardship has not been created by any person presently having an interest in the
property.
4. The request would not be detrimental to public welfare.
5. The proposed investment is consistent with the Neighborhood Revitalization Strategy and
other documents supported by the city that encourage property improvements.
With the following condition:
1. The addition shall be consistent with the architectural representations shown on the
submittal, or other as approved by staff.
Kenneth7ohnstone,
Community Develo
Director
F/N
Date
City of
Wh6atP...Ldge
CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE
PLANNING DIVISION STAFF REPORT
TO: Community Development Director DATE: July 6, 2015
CASE MANAGER: Meredith Reckert
CASE NO. & NAME: Courtesy / Squire
ACTION REQUESTED: Approval of a 5 -foot variance from the 25 -foot side yard setback requirement.
for property located at 7205 W. 31" Place and zoned Residential -One (R-1 A)
LOCATION OF REQUEST: 7205 W. 31s` Place
APPLICANT (S)
OWNER (S):
APPROXIMATE AREA:
Richard Squire
Richard Squire
8,892 square feet (0.20 acres)
PRESENT ZONING: Residential -One (R -IA)
PRESENT LAND USE: Single Family Residential
ENTER INTO RECORD:
(X) CASE FILE & PACKET MATERIALS
(X) ZONING ORDINANCE
Location Map
Administrative Variance
Case No. WA -1
Site
JURISDICTION•
All notification and posting requirements have been met; therefore, there is jurisdiction to make an
administrative decision.
I. REQUEST
The applicant is requesting approval of a 5 -foot (20%) variance from the 25 -foot side yard setback
requirement, resulting in a 20 -foot side setback adjacent to a public street. The purpose of this
variance is to allow for the addition of a bathroom on a single-family home on property at 7205 W. 3151
Place.
Section 26-115.0 (Variances and Waivers) of the Wheat Ridge City Code empowers the Director of
Community Development to decide upon applications for administrative variances from the strict
application of the zoning district development standards that are not in excess of fifty (50) percent of
the standard.
II. CASE ANALYSIS
The applicant, who is also the owner, is requesting the variance in order to construct a bathroom
addition to the single family residence. Mxhibit 1, Aerial).
The property located at 7205 W. 315` Place is zoned Residential -One A (R -IA). The parcel is located
on the northeast corner of W. 31St Place and Teller Street. The total lot area is 8,892 square feet (0.20
acres), per the Jefferson County Assessor. The property is located on the border of R -IA zoning, with
other parcels zoned R-lA to the south and west. To the east, property is zoned PRD. To the north,
property is zoned R-2. The neighborhood character is low density residential, with a mix of residential
zone districts in the surrounding area. (Exhibit 2, Zoning Map).
The subject lot currently contains a one-story, single-family home with an attached single -car garage
that is converted to a living space. (Ezhbt , Site otos . According to Jefferson County records, the
house was originally constructed in 1959. The residence is 1,643 square feet in size, with a covered
porch in the rear that is 253 square feet in area. Located in the rear of the property are three accessory
buildings, of which one conforms to the required 5 -foot setbacks for side and rear. A plastic shed in
the northwest corner is located approximately l'-6" from both the side and rear property lines. A
green house is located in the central portion of the rear, and it is located approximately 4'-6" from the
rear property line. No building permits were found associated with the accessory structures.
The existing home is considered nonconforming because the western side setback does not meet the
current 10 -foot minimum for a single-family residence in the R -1A zone district. Instead, the home
was constructed with a 5 -foot setback. Prior to 2003, this was an acceptable setback. Side setbacks in
the R-lA zone district were required to be a minimum of 5 -feet with a combined total of 15 feet for the
two sides. This was changed with Case No. ZOA-03-09, increasing the side setbacks to the current
standard of 10 feet on each side. Also associated with the property is a business license approving an
office use. rExhibit 4, ILC/Site Plan).
The property owner has been working with an architect to design the addition to be compatible with
the character of the remainder of the home. The addition will serve as a master bathroom for the
residence. The property currently has a single bathroom. The existing home is located 30'-0" from
Administrative Variance
Case No. WA -15 XX / Squire
the property line on the Teller Street side. The addition is proposed to extend an additional 10'-0"
toward the property line, resulting in this request for a 5'-0" setback variance. The exterior finish of
the addition is proposed to be limestone to match the front entry of the home, with a flat roofline that
will be built below the windows located under the eaves of the home.
The setback variance is requested due to the location of the master bedroom on the northeast corner of
the home. The applicant's preferred location for the addition is on the east side of the home due to
utility services entering the home on the rear of the property adjacent to the master bedroom. An
alternate possibility for the addition is on the rear of the home; however this location is not preferred
due to the costs associated with relocating the services.
The applicant is proposing a substantial investment in the property that is supported by the
Neighborhood Revitalization Strategy. Ultimately, the outcome of the variance request determines
whether or not the improvements are constructed.
The variance would result in a 20 -foot side yard setback, and the resulting single-family home would
meet other development standards including height and maximum size. The following table compares
the required R-lA development standards with the actual and proposed conditions:
R -IA Development Standards: Required Actual
Lot Area 9,000 square feet min 8,892 sf
Lot Width 75 feet min 100 feet
Single Family
Home:
Required
Proposed
Building Coverage
30% max
26.6%
Height
35 feet max
±15 feet
Front Setback
south
25 feet (min)
34 feet
Rear Setback
north
10 feet (min)
18 feet
Side Setback
east
25 feet min
20 feet
Side Setback
west
10 feet min
5.5 feet
During the public notification period neither inquiries nor objections were received regarding the
variance request.
III. VARIANCE CRITERIA
In order to approve an administrative variance, the Community Development Director must determine
that the majority of the "criteria for review" listed in Section 26-115.C.4 of the City Code have been
met. The applicant has provided their analysis of the application's compliance with the variance
criteria (Exhibit S, Analysis of Criteria). Staff provides the following review and analysis of the
variance criteria.
1. The property in question would not yield a reasonable return in use, service or income if
permitted to be used only under the conditions allowed by regulation for the district in
which it is located.
Administrative Variance
Case No. WA-15-XX/Squire
If the request were denied, the property would continue to yield a reasonable return in use. The
property would continue to function as a single-family residence, regardless of the outcome of
the variance request.
Staff finds this criterion has not been met.
2. The variance would not alter the essential character of the locality.
The variance is not likely to alter the character of the locality. The requested 5 -foot setback
will result in the remodeled residence staying in the same character as the surrounding area.
The residential zone districts and homes in the area vary, with side setbacks ranging from 5 -feet
to 25 -feet.
The proposed architectural design is compatible with other homes in the neighborhood. The
house will remain a single -story ranch style residence with architectural features to match the
existing residence. The updated fagade is expected to have a positive visual impact on the
neighborhood JFxhibit 6, Proposed Home/Exterior Elevation).
Building permit records confirm that over half of the homes in the block have reduced side
setbacks, therefore this variance request is consistent with building placement patterns in the
area.xhibit 3, Site Photos).
Staff finds this criterion has been met.
3. The applicant is proposing a substantial investment in the property with this application,
which «ould not be possible without the variance.
With the proposed addition of a master bathroom, the applicant will be making a substantial
investment in the property which may not be possible without the variance. A bathroom
addition to the home is expected to add value to the property, and the proposed investment is
consistent with the Neighborhood Revitalization Strategy (NRS) and other documents
supported by the city that encourage property improvements.
As stated in the case analysis, the outcome of the variance request ultimately determines
whether or not the addition is constructed.
Staff finds this criterion has been met.
4. The particular physical surrounding, shape or topographical condition of the specific
property involved results in a particular and unique hardship (upon the owner) as
distinguished from a mere inconvenience if the strict letter of the regulations were carried
out.
The applicant has expressed that if the variance is not approved there will be construction and
cost related hardships related to the relocation of the services entering the home on the rear.
The preferred and most cost-efficient alternative is to construct the addition into the side
setback.
Administrative Variance 4
Case No. WA-! S XX / Squire
Despite the construction and cost challenges associated with relocating the services, there
appears to be no hardship due to the topography, shape, or mature landscaping on the property.
The lot meets the width requirements for a single-family home in the R -IA zone district. The
physical conditions of the lot do not create unique hardships, and the request appears to result
from an inconvenience of design.
Staff finds this criterion has not been met.
5. The alleged difficulty or hardship has not been created by any person presently having an
interest in the property.
The current owner purchased the property in September 2002, and thus is not responsible for
the location of the services into the home or its location in relation to the property line. The
property is a corner lot which requires 25 foot setbacks on both the east and south frontages.
Staff finds this criterion has been met.
6. The granting of the variance would not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious
to other property or improvements in the neighborhood in which the property is located,
by, among other things, substantially or permanently impairing the appropriate use or
development of adjacent property, impairing the adequate supply of light and air to
adjacent property, substantially increasing the congestion in public streets or increasing
the danger of fire or endangering the public safety, or substantially diminishing or
impairing property values within the neighborhood.
The request would not be detrimental to public welfare and would not be injurious to
neighboring property or improvements. It would not hinder or impair the development of the
adjacent properties. The adequate supply of air and light would not be compromised as a result
of this request. The request would not increase the congestion in the streets. Nor would it cause
an obstruction to motorists on the adjacent streets or impede the sight distance triangle.
The request will not diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. Conversely,
the proposed addition will likely have a positive impact on the neighborhood by upgrading an
aging ranch home and promoting investment in property.
Staff finds this criterion has been met.
7. The unusual circumstances or conditions necessitating the variance request are present in
the neighborhood and are not unique to the property.
The variance request is based on the applicant's desire to construct a master bath for the home
that is financially viable, in a logical location relative to the existing floorplan, and consistent
with the character of the neighborhood.
The subject lot is one of twenty two single-family or duplex homes that have a side yard along
Teller Street or front Teller Street. Based on field work and aerial images, this variance would
be the only property that would encroach into the 25 -foot front or side setback. (Exhibit 1,
Aerial).
Administrative Variance
Case No. WA -1 S -XX / Squire
This being the case, the proposal to approve the 5 -foot variance is inconsistent with
surrounding properties in the area.
Staff finds that this criterion has not been met.
8. Granting of the variance would result in a reasonable accommodation of a person with
disabilities.
Single family homes and their accessory buildings are not required to meet building codes
pertaining to the accommodation of persons with disabilities.
Staff finds this criterion is not applicable.
9. The application is in substantial compliance with the applicable standards set forth in the
Architectural and Site Design Manual.
The Architectural and Site Design Manual does not apply to single and two family dwelling
units.
Staff finds this criterion is not applicable.
Administrative Variance
Case No. WA-I5-.iX / Squire
IV. STAFF CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Having found the application in compliance with the majority of the review criteria, staff recommends
APPROVAL of a 5 -foot (20%) variance from the 25 -foot side yard setback requirement. Staff has
found that there are unique circumstances attributed to this request that would warrant approval of a
variance. Therefore, staff recommends approval for the following reasons:
1. The variance would not alter the essential character of the locality.
2. The applicant is proposing a substantial investment in the property that may not be possible
without the variance.
3. The proposed investment is consistent with the Neighborhood Revitalization Strategy and other
documents supported by the city that encourage property improvements.
4. The request would not be detrimental to public welfare.
With the following conditions:
1. The addition shall be consistent with the architectural representations shown on the submittal,
or other as approved by staff.
Administrative Variance
Case No. WA -15 -XX / Squire
EXHIBIT 1: AERIAL
Administrative Variance
Case No. WA -1 S -XX / Squire
EXHIBIT 2: ZONING MAP
Administrative Variance
Case No. WA -1 S XX / Sguire
EXHIBIT 3: SITE PHOTOS
Administrative Variance 10
Case No. WA -15 -XX / Sguire
Shown above is the east elevation where the addition is proposed. Approximately two-thirds I
of the 14'-8" length of the addition is proposed to be concealed by the existing fence.
Administrative Variance
Case No. WA -1 S -XX / Squire
EXHIBIT 4: SITE PLAN
£CAL oercR;PrlCN
(FROWED BY THE CLiEN T)
MM FiFC-f1RX0 ON 09/00/200: A
REC. N3, 15611,90
LO1 d.
CSgONS SuMVISON,
f:AtiklY OF JEMRSON
S'AT CF COLORADO.
I
&gi tering & ce fi attu
f Dazs W(3 A< Ste J95
80UL0CR, CO WJOt
PH (30j) 443-7001
FAN' (JPJJ 44J-)830
YMNfiiu.-,s wRud
I
LOT 1 SCALE 1-=20'
UTWIT• I
1 1000 44' PoLC
° S m
� fkYl[ ° CJsCCN •
5++E0 HOUSE
5'
CMf3,�gCp
h
LOT 7
0
c+
PL'
3TOF7 @RiGtc
i5 0
�2� • � Avw
------.�_
I, I�
R
K
LO1 8
n
PPCwyK _-
85.44'
7205 W. 33ST PLACE (POSTF[))
t�
J
J
W
H
Propose S
Addition
Administrative Variance 12
Case No. WA -1 S XX / Squire
LO1 8
n
PPCwyK _-
85.44'
7205 W. 33ST PLACE (POSTF[))
t�
J
J
W
H
Propose S
Addition
Administrative Variance 12
Case No. WA -1 S XX / Squire
EXHIBIT 5:
ANALYSIS OF CRITERIA
A. I have tried to answer A but I can't seem to
come up with a lucid answer ??? I do hope that
the answer for A is covered in the response in
letters B through H.
B. This addition was designed by my architect.
Thought given both to my needs and
consideration for my neighbors.
The roof line requires the addition to be placed
on the East side. 1 believe this addition will
actually improve land values for all my
neighbors.
C. Yes 30 to 40K
D. Because this is a corner lot and has a 25ft
setback on two sides there is simply not enough
room for the addition without a variance. An
other limiting reason for the East side is that my
utilities service comes up on the north wall.
Moving that service would put the project well
over budget.
E. Yes! In the 50s this was all the space the builder
had to work with. There is not space for a
modern day addition.
F. No! the expansion is on the East side, away
from any neighbor.
G. This home was built in the late 50s. The design
in those days was 1 bath for 3 bedrooms. The
homes are similar in this area. Today home
buyers require at least 2 baths for a home this
size. I feel this addition would be necessary for
any kind of reasonable resale.
H. Yes. There are medical reasons for this
particular expansion. It has been recommended
by my doctor.
Administrative Variance 13
Case No. WA -15 -XX / Squire
EXHIBIT 6:
PROPOSED HOME PLAN
1
,
nil *.
Gsawfmrt i
-x v;
'",,�;
ll
I
bou�t*i
rfI Rs �4.vrul. cy►rr
Yap ,$ V o• 1t►Jui.to I IWs�ITweJ
1 (fi'6V6M)lVTIasIW A.r
�c1+ttc.
AL 46 W+dv
0061 Mr 0-ww(cmb"
Fx1� AT Ry1.IT 1
NrT W pq. 1
-- j -- - - ' T.• pAOW C. G. FIVUWC rQ1MF .wu L
Administrative Variance 14
Case No. WA -1 S XX / Squire
City of
Wh6-atRj:idge
POSTING CERTIFICATION
CASE NO. Vv l `� 01?
DEADLINE FOR WRITTEN COMMENTS:
I,
residing at
C
Its
.2"0-5 f - jnam
as the applicant for Case No.
Public Notice at ? 1.0
yi 2 A:;-
/Aj PC .
(address)
�^ U�ereby certify that I have posted the sign for
ocation)
on this day ofyL.j , 20 1 , and do hereby certify that
said sign has been posted and remained in place for ten (10) days prior to and including the
deadline for written comments regarding this case. The sign was posted in the position shown on
the map below.
Signature: .
NOTE: This form must be submitted to the Community Development Department for this case
and will be placed in the applicant's case file.
;� City of
/ Wheat 1��e
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
City of Wheat Ridge Municipal Building 7500 W. 29'h Ave. Wheat Ridge, CO 80033-8001 P: 303.235.2846 F: 303.235.2857
LETTER NOTICE
July 22, 2015
Dear Property Owner:
This letter is to inform you of Case No.WA-15-08, a request for approval of a 5 -
foot variance from the 25 -foot side yard setback requirement for property located
at 7205 W. 31" Place and zoned Residential -One (R -1A) zone district. The
attached aerial photo identifies the location of the variance request.
The applicant for this case is requesting an administrative variance review which
allows no more than a fifty percent (50%) variance to be granted by the Zoning
Administrator without need for a public hearing. Prior to the rendering of a
decision, all adjacent property owners are required to be notified of the request
by mail.
If you have any questions, please contact the Planning Division at 303-235-2846 or
if you would like to submit comments concerning this request, please do so in
writing by 5:00 p.m. on July 31, 2015.
Thank you.
www.ci.wheatridge.co.us
Aerial Map
is wi%.ci.v. heat ridge.coms
Site
720 5w.31 Ni
CUPPLES, NANCY A.
03130 TELLER ST.
LAKEWOOD, CO 80033
MARTIN, DONALD E., III
07190 W. 32ND AVE.
WHEAT RIDGE, CO 80033
BOROOS, MARTIN W.
BOROOS, LOIS M.
07200 W. 31 ST PL.
WHEAT RIDGE, CO 80033
STEENBURGH, JOHN L. LLOYD, ANGELINA TARUFELLI, JOSEPH G.
07200 W. 32ND AVE. 07230 W. 31 ST PL. 07245 W. 31 ST PL.
WHEAT RIDGE, CO 80033 WHEAT RIDGE, CO 80033 WHEAT RIDGE, CO 80033
I J__ _4-4-
t 1
) Q3
C
A
TO-
r
r
/
T
T
I ��
I J__ _4-4-
t 1
) Q3
C
A
r
r
FPO -C,
A. I have tried to answer A but I can't seem to
come up with a lucid answer ??? I do hope that
the answer for A is covered in the response in
letters B through H.
B. This addition was designed by my architect.
Thought given both to my needs and
consideration for my neighbors.
��. The roof line requires the addition to be placed
on the East side. I believe this addition will
actually improve land values for all my
neighbors.
C. Yes 30 to 40K
D. Because this is a corner lot and has a 25ft
setback on two sides there is simply not enough
room for the addition without a variance. An
other limiting reason for the East side is that my
utilities service comes up on the north wall.
Moving that service would put the project well
over budget.
E. Yes! In the 50s this was all the space the builder
had to work with. There is not space for a
modern day addition.
F. No! the expansion is on the East side, away
from any neighbor.
G. This home was built in the late 50s. The design
in those days was 1 bath for 3 bedrooms. The
homes are similar in this area. Today home
buyers require at least 2 baths for a home this
size. I feel this addition would be necessary for
any kind of reasonable resale.
H. Yes. There are medical reasons for this
particular expansion. It has been recommended
by my doctor.
V U tT 0 0 R O
2 o^
1 Q � Of
^U
O
to do Q x
Q
to 0tb
t
3
O
a
N
N
0
a ao
II
N
0
v v
I- O
Y
U
e--
J J
W O
J O
Z
0
O
r=
ONO
Of
w
a
H�00)
a w
J
U m � �
m 0
Q
V)DU
O w p
O �Z
U
J
�Z�O_
OZF-.
V)
om0�-
LAJ H
Z()
0
u -i
1S 2j3�I31
W
00 U
z
ujO
J
a
O
N
0
a ao
O
N
0
v v
I- O
Y
U
z �
T'oc`
V y T
° E
W O
J O
Z
0
UZ
p0
ONO
Of
0 r
t/)w0
H�00)
a w
>LLQ'
ow0
U m � �
m 0
w00^
W
V)DU
O w p
O �Z
U) LL
J
�Z�O_
OZF-.
waww
om0�-
LAJ H
CL.- 0
Z()
0
u -i
1S 2j3�I31
W
00 U
z
ujO
J
e a v a u a
-kVM3AI80 'ON 0
0
a a a
O
a ao
U
2
0
v v
T v
Y
U
r) w�
T'oc`
V y T
° E
v a
_O
V W 0
0
u
N T u -
:,9 ~
m
U=
a°
>D 4U
}
van"N
0
O
=Of0
w
off-oma„o o
V)
LAJ H
CL.- 0
E c
0 =
0
1,�
_\
v w
N E a c
O y 0
^ O c U
W Z
�~ L�
O W 0
w
!E E a °
` o> o o V a
0
U l.i a
WW Z
.z•u
° o O a T... 0 3 0
H� E OC va ov
z a o w
t0
�� r of
<> Q
IYaQ
to
vJcEN m
°
U
FW%' O Z
o a
Uui3
poop L
.NM O c 0...
N
to
r W C W L c
b° N
y •E to a L 0°
Q:
Q W w
O F- Z
E N
'
w > O v
06
F- Q
Q 0
VI o
-jU E a o z
-0 ...1-9 N
v w o v D o
V~� J Z
0
c° .0 Q
oLL.
°nw ° ov
NY„c
Z 0 w
I—
-v?co
JW U Q
O
ov'oo N; u
cnaCf W CLZ
J
e a v a u a
-kVM3AI80 'ON 0
0
a a a
O
U
2
W
T v
d
T'oc`
V y T
° E
z
p C -.0 w- O
_O
OU
0
u
N T u -
:,9 ~
L)�
-n" OU
�/�
>D 4U
van"N
Q)
=Of0
\
off-oma„o o
LAJ H
CL.- 0
E c
0 =
0
Z a
_\
v w
N E a c
O y 0
^ O c U
�~ L�
O W 0
o v00
o` ova
!E E a °
` o> o o V a
m
U l.i a
WW Z
O'r ° V
auv c
C.
° o O a T... 0 3 0
H� E OC va ov
z a o w
�� r of
<> Q
IYaQ
>Lc=�°a
?I'
vJcEN m
°
U
FW%' O Z
o a
Uui3
poop L
.NM O c 0...
W c Qc F. J
0 6
r W C W L c
b° N
y •E to a L 0°
Q:
Q W w
O F- Z
E N
'
w > O v
N N° N
L 0. c o 3
F- Q
Q 0
VI o
-jU E a o z
-0 ...1-9 N
v w o v D o
V~� J Z
0
c° .0 Q
oLL.
°nw ° ov
NY„c
Z 0 w
, y0
-v?co
JW U Q
u~ _E...�-
ov'oo N; u
cnaCf W CLZ
C LL 0OC
o
yV o
LLJGZ
o o
�Unoo
wJ U W
ya
VU
°�C,
°og
aEO<
)=f-m w p�
gid”=o
....L.OaTC
c)
Li
a O W
J} n, cO O=
)L m
�L �•-u
O o OV
s
vQ M,
O` o c C C
y
Z
G
y N
N
OLLI N L y 0
J°>°;
= O LL n'0 Li a=
u TZV
V- j y
VLn
V V v
Z
om
O ow
a r 0
N zo
00-.9
o'V
�
LLI 0< o O Q
J. V N E u�
C°
V)Z�Q~ V)
ui
m`r:c;n0
v NnLC�E.
ZZpaO
o�
oF-
°v T
-i
t=
wZ
-d
L�ZV)
�4
Dm
:2 wJ
V--Iv!^�vDt
vL 30cC0C.
�CL
u t~ -W
$o opOo
Q_ o Tv
oc c° N E v -Ei
ao v v 04 y
a 2
FO-' ��~ ir W -i F--
L W 00
rn
V.L.. •m9 02 Ot
H Z O z CL
N w O V)
u 0 oc° o
._ Z, E T
N v L a E O c
Z�
OX~ZI- O�
z z
�Oo'aNicc�
°0E": zcc0
of
U p 3 Q a
O ` c v 0
0CLUV`
z a 0 0 c C
HNmOJOWOZ
CL >,>0
y.c..I uLE
vi� c"o
Z ZN�aww0
NO r` GT
Ups l�rn.0 C 2
wWH w2<
N O > a
E °-' N'E o
v
oc°r1oi o °o
m
W W zmZ
v v.
o`DaTm
0 o c
oN v»� °:u
0 V)WZof
o a m w V) 0- pU
a D N% N C
O Q o O V O
W} X T-
E a .D V yv_, p
J T:2 T E .. N
-c TD v
w QF-' WI-
F-- a Z�F•-0
Q} W a Z
N -odEn
.L+ O -6 W
°
vo>Doo"2,
E T T U a
i) a Q U
c° N a
V D - V c N 12
> cEEocuj
O
O
L�W >LLJP W
--5cIJpC
CL0 0 c° x v u`°wm
f-
�O= Ogma
T or u„
E=vN9,0 .0.
I
w F-��WW
UV) Zd>UW
z0 NO
`v�o2 vu
N:.o O 3 O Y
u u vo c ao
M
�f
~OJ�O U
°va aiv"
0
~v=-°D_d vnz
`va o._ V
NNC=� Z aNZ
N=—QI�z 2W
.0 mZE
v u� E
tva TMm
cU=- u v 0 oco c
0
Co
aoN
O L E
Z - to
D O V
ao
ZJ N== Ea -` 4o
OM
M
Assessor Property Records Search
Property
Information
GENERAL INFORMATION
Schedule: 022217 Parcel ID: 39-264-03-026 Print Helo
Status: Active Property Type: Residential
Property Address: 07205 W 31ST PL
WHEAT RIDGE CO 80033
Mailing Address: SAME ADDRESS AS PROPERTY
Neighborhood: 2405 - BARTHS, COULEHAN GRANGE, WHEAT RIDGE AREA
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION
Subdivision Name: 279200 - GIBBONS
n
Lot Key Section Township Range QuarterSection Land Sqft
0008 26 3 69 8892
Total 18892
Lessor Parcel Maps Associated with Sched
pmap39-264.pdf Graphic Parcel Mao P1aoOuest Lecaticr
PROPERTY INVENTORY
Property Type RESID Year Built: 1959 Adjusted Year Built: 1959
Design: Ranch Improvement Number: 1 v
Item Quality No.
FULL BATH Average 1
MAIN FIREPLCE Average 1
MAIN BEDROOM 3
WOOD STOVE 1 1
01-22-1970
0
12-04-1998
139,000
12-04-1998
0
12-04-1998
0
10-24-2000
179,900
)6-17-2002
0
)9-03-2002
207,000
)2-28-2004
0
L1-18-2006
0
Treasurer Information
Areas Quality Construction Sgft
FIRST FLOOR Average M 1643
COVERED PORCH Average 253
ATTACH GARAGE Average M 312
RES BLDG/SHED F 232
farranty Deed - Joint Tenancy
ersonal Representative Deed
atter or Letters
eath Certificate
rarranty Deed - Joint Tenancy
eath Certificate
rarranty Deed - Joint Tenancy
uit Claim Deed - Joint Tenancy
uit Claim Deed
View Mill Levy Detail For Year
2013
2012
2013 Mill Levy Information
Tax District
3142
County
TBA
School
TBA
WHEAT RIDGE
TBA
REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION DIST.
TBA
URBAN DRAINAGE&FLOOD CONT DIST
TBA
URBAN DRAINAGE&FLOOD C SO.PLAT
TBA
WHEATRIDGE FIRE DIST.
TBA
WHEATRIDGE SAN. DIST.
TBA
I
Total
TBA
Send mail to 3sse-sor_?co.ie�ersn.ce.us with questions or comments about this Web site.
Web site information current through:
City of
"�qW heat Ijdge
LAND USE CASE PROCESSING APPLICATION
Community Development Department
7500 West 291h Avenue • Wheat Ridge, CO 80033 • Phone (303) 235-2846
(Please print or type all information)
Applicant Address
City State_
Zip
Phone
Fax
Owner
A, SvttL�
Address �LG S
L4–)�l Phone
City LV.�
T c i) 4 ['�
State C 0
Zip X 0 0 3 Fax
Contact
Address
Phone
City
State
Zip Fax
(The person listed as contact will be contacted to ans,.ver questions regarding this application. provide additional information %when necessary. post
public hearing signs. will receive a copy of the staff report prior to Public Hearing. and shall be responsible for forwarding all verbal and written
communication to applicant and owner.)
Location of request (address): 145 A 434) L k
Type of action requested (check one or more of the actions listed below which pertain to your request):
Please refer to submittal checklists for complete application requirements; incomplete applications will not be accepted/
O Change of zone or zone cotiditions
O Consolidation Plat
O Flood Plain Special Exception
O Lot Line Adjustment
O Planned Building Group
Detailed description of request:
O Special Use Permit
O Conditional Use Permit
O Site Plan approval
O Concept Plan approval
O Right of Way Vacation
1 r•
O Subdivision: Minor (5 lots or less)
O Subdivision: Major (More than 5 lots)
O Temporary Use. Building, Sign
Variance/Waiver (from Section .�L
O Other: —�
A -c -r C_ Li
Required information:G
Assessors Parcel Number: 3 9 `— 0-4 Size of Lot (acres or square footage): V
Current Zoning: Proposed Zoning:
Current Use:�Proposed Use:
l certify that the information and exhibits herewith submitted are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and that in filing this application. I ant
acting with the knowledge and consent of those r ns l' ted birhose consent the requested action cannot lax ftllr be accomplished.
Applicants other than owners must submit pow -of a11on n v j the ner wlnclr approved of this action onn his behalf.
Notarized Signature of Applicant
State ofColo ado
County, of } ss
The foregoing i rument (Land Use Processing Application) was acknowledge TERESAA. RUSSELL
b me thisNOTARY PUBLIC
day of 20�� by i P.
i ( STATE OF COLORADO
NOTARY IB 20074000874
S W §§MMI@RI®N €ItRIR1® JANUARY 06, 0011
Notary Public
My commission expires / /20 19
To be filled out by staff:
Date received
Comp Plan Design.
Related Case No.
Fee $ Receipt No. Case No.
Zoning Quarter Section Map
Pre -App Mtg. Date Case Manager
City of Wheat Ridge
a7/t15/2815 13:47 CDAA
ZONING PPPLICATION FEES
CDA0ii51' AMOUNT
1 -MLD ZiNING APPLICATION FE6 208.88
PA' I ^fit N l RECEIvED AMOUNT
CHECK: 6517 L188.88
TOTAL 288.88