HomeMy WebLinkAboutWA-16-16City of
W heat -Midge
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
City of Wheat Ridge Municipal Building 7500 W. 29" Ave.
December 23, 2016
Marie Tapp
4401 Dover Street
Wheat Ridge, CO 80033
Re: Case No. WA -16-16
Dear Ms. Tapp:
Wheat Ridge, CO 80033-8001 P: 303.235.2846 F: 303.235.2857
Please be advised that your request for a 2 '/z -foot variance to the 6 -foot height limitation for a
fence in the Residential -Two (R-2) zone district for property located at 4401 Dover Street has
been approved.
Enclosed is a copy of the Approval of Variance. Please note that all variance requests
automatically expire within 180 days (May 18, 2017) of the date it was granted 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,
Tammy Odean
Administrative Assistant
Enclosure: Approval of Variance
Cc: WA -16-16 (case file)
WA1616.doc
www.ci.wheatridge.co.us
7500 West 29th Avenue City of
Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80033 ,whec�.t
303.235.2846 Fax: 303.235.2857 PSLdge
Approval of Variance
WHEREAS, an application for a variance was submitted for the property located at 4401 Dover
Street referenced as Case No. WA -16-16 / Tapp; 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 2 %i -foot variance to the 6 foot height limitation
for a fence for property located in the Residential -Two (R-2) zone district (Case No. WA -16-16 /
Tapp) is granted for the property located at 4401 Dover Street, based on the following findings of
fact:
1. The variance would not alter the essential character of the locality.
2. The alleged hardship has not been created by any person presently having an interest in the
property.
3. The request would not be detrimental to public welfare.
4. The slope adjacent to the property line reduces the practical effect of a 6 -foot fence in this
location.
5. The request would permit the replacement of an existing fence that is approximately the
same height.
With the following conditions:
1. A building permit shall be obtained for any portion of the fence over 6 feet in height.
2. The design of the fence shall be consistent with the application materials and provided
exhibits, subject to staff review and approval through a building permit.
ohnston`e, AICP
Director
Date
� j
TO:
CASE MANAGER:
CASE NO. & NAME
ACTION REQUESTED
City of
Wh6atP4,Ldge
CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE
PLANNING DIVISION STAFF REPORT
Community Development Director
Lisa Ritchie
WA -16-16 / Tapp
DATE: November 16, 2016
Approval of a 2 V2 -foot (42%) variance from the 6 -foot fence height limitation
to allow a fence 8 '/z -feet tall on property located at 4401 Dover Street and
zoned Residential -Two (R-2)
LOCATION OF REQUEST: 4401 Dover Street
APPLICANT (S):
OWNER (S):
APPROXIMATE AREA
Marie Tapp
Marie Tapp and Denise Signs
8,121 Square Feet (0.18 Acres)
PRESENT ZONING: Residential -Two (R-2)
PRESENT LAND USE: Single Family Residential
ENTER INTO RECORD:
(X) CASE FILE & PACKET MATERIALS (X) NEIGHBORHOOD REVITALIZATION
(X) ZONING ORDINANCE STRATEGY
Location Map
Courtesy Review
Case No. WA -16-16 / Tapp
Site
JURISDICTION:
All notification and posting requirements have been met; therefore there is jurisdiction to make an
administrative decision.
L REQUEST
The applicant is requesting approval of a 2'/2 -foot (42%) variance from the 6 -foot fence height
limitation, resulting in an 8 '/2 -foot tall fence. The purpose of the variance is to allow for the
replacement of an existing 8 '/2 -foot tall fence. The applicant recently purchased the property and has
been making a number of small investments to improve it. In this particular location, Section 26-
603.A. of the municipal code permits fences up to a height of 6 feet.
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 variance is being requested so the property owners may construct a replacement fence that is
roughly the same height as the one currently in place which is in poor condition. The property is
located in Crestview Heights Subdivision, on the northwest corner of 44ttAvenue and Dover Street
(Exhibit 1, Aerial). The existing house sits on an 8,121 square foot parcel and was original constructed
in 1971 per the Jefferson County Assessor. The property is zoned Residential -Two (R-2), as is much of
the surrounding neighborhood. To the west along 44th Place is property zoned Residential -Three (R-3),
and some property zoned Residential -One (R-1) on the south side of 441h Avenue. (Exhibit'. Zoning
M.
The R-2 zone district provides for high quality, safe, quiet and stable low- to moderate -density
residential neighborhoods, and prohibits activates of any nature which are incompatible with the
residential character. The fence height limitation of 6 -feet applies to all zone districts throughout the
City. The replacement fence is proposed to be constructed on the south property line, along 44th
Avenue. The remainder of the fencing surrounding the rear yard of the property will be constructed at
6 -feet.
The subject property faces Dover Street with its side yard abutting 44th Avenue. In this location, the
sidewalk along 44th Avenue is roughly 3 to 4 feet higher than the property line where the fence can be
constructed (Exhibit T. Qp9Xrph_ic . Due to this grade change, the existing 8 %2 -foot tall fence
provides no more privacy than a 6 -foot fence would on a property without a substantial grade change.
A search of the land use case files and the building permit files identified a building permit in 1973 for
the construction of a 6 -foot fence. There was no variance request on file for this address.
Applicant Request. Exhibit 5 e Plan. Exert 6, Photos).
III. VARIANCE CRITERIA
Variance
Case No. WA -16-16 / Tapp
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. 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.
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.
A variance will not alter the character of the locality. The date of original installation or any
subsequent modifications of the existing fence are unknown, however due to its condition it
appears to have been there for a number of years. The existing fence structure is 6400t vertical
slats stacked on three horizontal boards. Because of the unusual construction method, the total
height varies but is up to 8 feet in some areas. The new fence will be roughly the same height
as the existing fence, and will be professionally installed without the horizontal boards at the
base. Because of the similar height, the new fence is unlikely to alter the essential character of
the locality. It may actually improve the character because a new fence will be more visually
appealing than the existing dilapidated fence.
Staff finds this criterion has been met.
3. The applicant is proposing a substantial investment in the property with this application,
which would not be possible without the variance.
The applicant is proposing an investment in the property, consistent with the Neighborhood
Revitalization Strategy. It would be possible to construct a fence, however, consistent with
development standards without the approval of the variance.
Staff finds this criterion has not 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 elevation change of roughly 2 to 4 feet between the back of the sidewalk along 44�"
Avenue and the property line is a unique topographical condition of the specific property. The
subject property is lower than the elevation of the sidewalk. The effect of this slope is to
reduce the functionality of a typical 6 -foot privacy fence. The fence is in poor condition, with
many portions of it failing due to broken slats and support posts. Repairing it in its current
condition is not practically feasible.
Variance
Case No. WA -16-16 / Tapp
Staff finds this criterion has been met.
5. The alleged difficulty or hardship has not been created by any person presently having an
interest in the property.
The slope on the portion of right-of-way beyond the sidewalk to the subject property line was
not created by any person presently having an interest in the property. The applicant purchased
the property in 2015, and the existing fence was in place having been constructed by a previous
property owner.
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. The fence stops roughly 54 feet from the corner and would
not impede the sight distance triangle and would not increase the danger of fire.
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 slope on the north side of 44th Avenue continues beyond this property and impacts at least
5 properties to the west that back up to 44th Avenue. A fence height variance was approved in
1984 for a property that is approximately 90 feet west, at 8632 W. 44th Place, permitting a fence
up to 10 feet tall.
Staff finds that this criterion has been met.
8. Granting of the variance would result in a reasonable accommodation of a person with
disabilities.
This criterion does not apply to single-family homes.
Staff finds this criterion is not applicable.
Variance 4
Case No. WA -16-16 / Tapp
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.
IV. STAFF CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Having found the application in compliance with the majority of the review criteria, staff recommends
APPROVAL of a 2 '/z -foot (42%) variance from the 6 -foot fence height limitation for a property
zoned Residential -Two (R-2) and located at 4401 Dover Street. 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 alleged hardship has not been created by any person presently having an interest in the
property.
3. The request would not be detrimental to public welfare.
4. The slope adjacent to the property line reduces the practical effect of a 6 -foot fence in this
location.
5. The request would permit the replacement of an existing fence that is approximately the same
height.
With the following conditions:
1. A building permit shall be obtained for any portion of the fence over 6 feet in height.
2. The design of the fence shall be consistent with the application materials and provided exhibits,
subject to staff review and approval through review of a building permit.
Variance
Case No. WA -16-16 / Tapp
a
■
d
r
r
V
y `
■
d
. Aw,
EXHIBIT 4: APPLICANT REQUEST
Item 6. Written request and description of the Fence Variance Proposal
1. The existing fence on the south side of the property at 4401 Dover St is in severe
disrepair/condition and must be replaced. Because the property is located on the NW
corner of 44`h Ave and Dover St, the south fence faces 44`h Ave and runs adjacent to the
sidewalk. As homeowners (Marie Tapp and Denise Signs), we wish to replace the
existing fence which is nearly 8' in height with a new cedar 8' fence to be installed
professionally by Home Depot. The existing fence was originally constructed in the 1970
— 80's time period, using 6' vertical slats on top 3 stacked horizontal 2" x 6" boards (for a
total vertical height of nearly 8' in some areas). The adjacent sidewalk is elevated with a
right-of-way area that slopes downward to the backyard of the property. If the south
side fence were to be replaced according to the Wheat Ridge zoning requirements with
a maximum height of 6' (from the ground and posts), the interior of the backyard would
be visible from the sidewalk and street. 44`h Ave is a busy street and the sidewalk is
used frequently by pedestrians. In addition to maintaining the overall condition of our
property, we wish to maintain a level of privacy in the back and side yard.
2. We believe that granting the variance and allowing us to replace the existing fence
(which is already taller than the zoning code permits) would enhance the character of
the area — not diminish it.
3. We have selected Home Depot to remove and dispose of the existing fence, and
construct a new fence (8' cedar along the south side, facing 44`h Ave, and a 6' cedar
fence with a service gate on the east/front side, facing Dover St — for a total cost of
$3,900). In our opinion, we believe this is a significant investment in maintaining the
condition of our property that would not be possible without the variance.
4. There are 2 unique characteristics that present a challenge or "hardship" to us as we
considered how to address the replacement of existing fence in such poor condition.
Because our property is adjacent to 44`h Ave, our 2 challenging issues are: noise control
and privacy. The side fence runs adjacent to a busy street with heavy traffic at times —
44'h Ave — and the topographical condition of the south side of the property is unusual.
In a westward direction, beginning at approximately Dover St, 44`h Ave slopes
downward. In addition to the street and sidewalk sloping downward along 44`h Ave, the
right-of-way slopes downward and toward the fence line. The south fence is
approximately 48' in length and the sidewalk in certain areas is 12" — 18" elevated from
the ground level of the fence posts and back/side yard of the property. If we simply
constructed a 6' fence (rather than 8'), pedestrians passing by could easily peer over the
top of the fence into our back yard. In addition, we believe that constructing a taller
fence may help with the noise control causes by the vehicle traffic along 44ch
5. No, we as home owners did not cause the topographical condition that would create the
privacy issue. And, while we do drive on 44`h Ave, we really haven't caused the traffic
condition that leads to more noise in the side/back yard. And, because we recently
purchased the property about 18 months ago, we also didn't contribute to the
deterioration of the fence which came about from years of neglect by former owners.
6. No, we do not believe that granting us a variance to construct an 8' fence along the
south side of our property would be detrimental to the public or any other condition
Variance
Case No. IVA-16-16 / Tapp
enumerated in item #i6. In fact, we believe that replacing the existing
dilapidated/weathered/leaning fence with a new cedar 8' fence would be a visual
enhancement for the community.
7. Yes, we believe that other properties adjacent to 44th Ave, and in close proximity to
ours, shares similar conditions that may necessitate a fence variance.
Variance 10
Case AV ITA -16-16i Tapp
EXHIBIT 5: SITE PLAN
Variance
Case No. WA -16-16 / Tapp
av
.04
Variance 14
Case No. W,9-16-16 / Tapp
- - City of
Wheatdge
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
November 5, 2016
Dear Property Owner:
This is to inform you of Case No. WA -16-16, a request for approval of a 2'h foot
variance from the 6 foot fence height maximum, resulting in an 8 % foot fence on
property located at 4401 Dover Street and zoned Residential -Two (R-2). The
attached aerial photo identifies the location of the variance request.
The applicant for this case is requesting a variance eligible for administrative
review per section 26-115.0 of the Municipal Code to be granted by the Zoning
Administrator without need for a public hearing, Prior to the rendering of a
decision, all adiacent property owners are required to be notified of the request.
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 November 16, 2016.
Thank you.
WA1616.doc
www.d.wheatridge.co.us
CALLAS REBECCA LEE PALMER DYAN PALMER DANIEL ELMER JAMES M
4390 DOVER ST 8602 W 44TH PL 2425 S ZEPHYR WAY
WHEAT RIDGE CO 80033 WHEAT RIDGE CO 80033 LAKEWOOD CO 80227
KUETTEL THEODORE BERNHARD KUETTEL
DIANA LYNN WEYENETH ANDREW WEYENETH ANNA J DOUGLAS & SUSANNE L DAWSON TRUST
5390 KILMER ST 5945 DUDLEY CT 8622 W 44TH PL
GOLDEN CO 80403 ARVADA CO 80004 WHEAT RIDGE CO 80033
A
City Of
`�9WheatRclge
LAND USE CASE PROCESSING APPLICATION
(The person listed as contact will be contacted to answer 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): LittD ( POV (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 conditions O Special Use Permit 0 Subdivision: Minor (5 lots or less)
O Consolidation Plat O Conditional Use Permit O Subdivision: Major (More than 5 lots)
0 Flood Plain Special Exception 0 Site Plan approval O Temporary Use, Building, Sign
0 Lot Line Adjustment O Concept Plan approval � Variance/Waiver (from Section )
0 Planned Building Group 0 Right of Way Vacation 0 Other:
Required information:
Assessors Parcel Number: '% —221 ^oD ( Size of Lot (acres or square footage): g 12I 5F -
Current Zoning: 2 Proposed Zoning: N O G 1-�-ArN Glr
Current Use: S (Alfa t -C- �Ar'1 (t -Y ��'D E Proposed Use: y �f��s I tYNTi
I 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 am
acting with the knowledge and consent of those person li ted above, wi ho t whose consent the requested action cannot IaNfully be accomplished.
Applicants other than owners must submit poia er-o m 1 ter which approved of this action on his behalf.
Notarized Signature of Applicant
State of Colorado �+ }/T TAMARA D ODEAN
County of ) (� � ] .Zr_s ss NOTARY PUBLIC
The foregoing instrument (Land Use Processing Application) was acknowledged STATE OF COLORADO
y �� y QC4b� J(- y '��• MY COMMISSION EXPIRES APRIL 22, 2020
NOTARY ID 20164015481
b me this da of 20 b ) o,,Mo,�Q, a�
Notary Public
My commission expires 0/20;?b
To be filled out by staff:Date received 10-131-11, _ Fee $ ok D- Ob Receipt No.0 6 q Q Case No. Q A-/(, -r[p
Comp Plan Design. Zoning__k-' Quarter Section Map
Related Case No. Pre -App Mig. Date Case Manager
Community Development Department
7500 West 29th
Avenue • Wheat Ridge, CO 80033 • Phone
(303) 235-2846
(Please print or type all information)
Applicant IMM&
T Pt
Address 4401 POVE - ST7�
Phone),07 -356
City W{}>rftJ
N12W
State CD Zip_g'0033
Fax
�pnglL.' MA��'T14PPe�w�tc (. Gown
Owner
Address
Phone
City
State Zip
Fax
Contact
5&091 t
Address
Phone
City
State Zip
Fax
(The person listed as contact will be contacted to answer 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): LittD ( POV (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 conditions O Special Use Permit 0 Subdivision: Minor (5 lots or less)
O Consolidation Plat O Conditional Use Permit O Subdivision: Major (More than 5 lots)
0 Flood Plain Special Exception 0 Site Plan approval O Temporary Use, Building, Sign
0 Lot Line Adjustment O Concept Plan approval � Variance/Waiver (from Section )
0 Planned Building Group 0 Right of Way Vacation 0 Other:
Required information:
Assessors Parcel Number: '% —221 ^oD ( Size of Lot (acres or square footage): g 12I 5F -
Current Zoning: 2 Proposed Zoning: N O G 1-�-ArN Glr
Current Use: S (Alfa t -C- �Ar'1 (t -Y ��'D E Proposed Use: y �f��s I tYNTi
I 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 am
acting with the knowledge and consent of those person li ted above, wi ho t whose consent the requested action cannot IaNfully be accomplished.
Applicants other than owners must submit poia er-o m 1 ter which approved of this action on his behalf.
Notarized Signature of Applicant
State of Colorado �+ }/T TAMARA D ODEAN
County of ) (� � ] .Zr_s ss NOTARY PUBLIC
The foregoing instrument (Land Use Processing Application) was acknowledged STATE OF COLORADO
y �� y QC4b� J(- y '��• MY COMMISSION EXPIRES APRIL 22, 2020
NOTARY ID 20164015481
b me this da of 20 b ) o,,Mo,�Q, a�
Notary Public
My commission expires 0/20;?b
To be filled out by staff:Date received 10-131-11, _ Fee $ ok D- Ob Receipt No.0 6 q Q Case No. Q A-/(, -r[p
Comp Plan Design. Zoning__k-' Quarter Section Map
Related Case No. Pre -App Mig. Date Case Manager
IOla u/2�6 — ^^"ve
15 26
CDBP
TApp
--'� »p�LICA/ITDN FE2S
AMOUNT
PAyr,q-f p2�0,
og
LAW di,
Aplow,
----------- ---------------
�we 00
2mw.00
__-
Rev. 5/2014
City of
W heat P,jjdge
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Submittal Checklist: Variance , r /n�
Project Name: rEN(,E_ I+E[ 61+TyA"��,`f N -F,
Project Location: –1 0 1 120vQZ_ ST \AJfth If l,l P OF , CD 3003.3
Application Contents:
A variance provides relief from the strict application of zoning standards in instances where a
unique physical hardship is present. The following items represent a complete variance
application:
>/ Completed, notarized land use application form
✓2. Application fee
Signed submittal checklist (this document)
�. Proof of ownership—e.g. deed
t\&5. Written authorization from property owner(s) if an agent acts on behalf of the owner(s)
,/6. Written request and description of the proposal
✓ Include a response to the variance review criteria—these are found in Section
z26-115 of the municipal code
Include an explanation as to why alternate designs that may comply with the zoning
,,standards are not feasible
✓ Include an explanation of the unique physical hardship that necessitates relief
Survey or Improvement Location Certificate (ILC) of the property
To -scale site plan indicating existing and proposed building footprints and setbacks
Proposed building elevations indicating proposed heights, materials, and color scheme
= NM 4kVt% lA 31.E
As applicant for this project, I hereby ensure that all of the above requirements have been included with
this submittal. I fully understand that if any one of the items listed on this checklist has been excluded,
the documents will NOT be distributed for City review. In addition, 1 understand that in the event any
revisions need�tq made aj:ter the second (2"d) full review, I will be subject to the applicable resubmittal
fee. ��//
Signature: RM(
Date: �131�Z011
Name (please print). F Phone: M0 -2,07-3,516
Community Development Department - (303) 235-2846 • www.ci.wheatridge.co.us
IN
WARRANTY DEED
THIS DEED, Made this 19th day of June, 2015 between
Richard Flanagan
of the City and County of Jefferson and State of COLORADO, grantor, and
Marie Tapp and Denise Signs
whose legal address is 4401 Dover Street, Wheat Ridge, Co 80033
of the City and County of Jefferson, State of Colorado, grantees:
WITNESS, That the grantor, for and in consideration of the sum of Two Hundred Thirty -Eight Thousand
Five Hundred Dollars and No/100's ($238,500.00), the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby
acknowledged, has granted, bargained, sold and conveyed, and by these presents does grant, bargain, sell,
convey and confirm, unto the grantees, their heirs and assigns forever, not in tenancy in common but in joint
tenancy, all the real property together with improvements, if any, situate, lying and being in the City and
County of Jefferson, and State of COLORADO, described as follows:
Lot I,
Crestview Heights,
County of Jefferson,
State of Colorado.
Doc Fee
S 23.80
also known by street and number as 4401 Dover Street, Wheat Ridge, CO 80033-3249
TOGETHER with all and singular the hereditaments and appurtenances thereunto belonging, or in
anywise appertaining, and the reversion and reversions, remainder and remainders, rents, issues and profits
thereof, and all the estate, right, title, interest, claim and demand whatsoever of the grantor, either in law or
equity, of, in and to the above bargained premises, with the hereditaments and appurtenances.
TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the said premises above bargained and described, with the appurtenances,
unto the grantees, their heirs and assigns forever. And the grantor, for himself, his heirs and personal
representatives, does covenant, grant, bargain and agree to and with the grantees, their heirs and assigns, that
at the time of the ensealing and delivery of these presents, he is well seized of the premises above conveyed,
has good, sure, perfect, absolute and indefeasible estate of inheritance, in law, in fee simple, and has good
right, full power and lawful authority to grant, bargain, sell and convey the same in manner and form as
aforesaid, and that the same are free and clear from all former and other grants, bargains, sales, liens, taxes,
assessments, encumbrances and restrictions of whatever kind or nature soever, except all taxes and
assessments for the current year, a lien but not yet due or payable, and those specific Exceptions described by
reference to recorded documents as reflected into the Title Documents accepted by Buyer in accordance with
section 8.1 "Title Review", of the contract dated June 1, 2015, between the parties.
The grantor shall and will WARRANT AND FOREVER DEFEND the above -bargained premises in the
quiet and peaceable possession of the grantees, their heirs and assigns, against all and every person or
persons lawfully claiming the whole or any part thereof.
The singular number shall include the plural, the plural the singular, and the use of any gender shall be
applicable to all genders.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the grantor has executed this deed on the date set forth above.
SELLER:
Richard Flanagan
STATE OF COLORADO }ss:
COUNTY OF Denver
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this th d of June,�015by�ticha E iAgaan
NotaAy Publ'
Witness my hand and official seal. My Commission expires:
LUQM!LLA ONDO
NOTARY PUBLIC
STATE OF COLORADO
NOTARY 10 2005043tit
MY C0NWlSSQN EXPIRES FEBF JARY 1, 2017
W DJT
Warranty Deed to Joint Tennnts File No. F0518857
Property
Information
1 OF 1
GENERAL INFORMATION
PIN/Schedule: 300065783 AIN/Parcel ID: 39-221-16-001
Status: Active Property Type: Residential
Property Address: 04401 DOVER ST Owner Name(s)
WHEAT RIDGE CO 80033 3249 TAPP MARIE
Mailing Address: SAME ADDRESS AS PROPERTY SIGNS DENISE
Neighborhood: 2406 - BEL AIRE,HILLCREST HEIGHTS, MELROSE MANOR AREA
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION
Subdivision Name: 183200 - CRESTVIEW HEIGHTS
Slock Lot lKey Isection Township lRange lQuarterSection Land Sgft
0001 22 13 69 1 8121
otal 18121
Assessor Parcel Maps Associated with Schedule
omaD39-221.pdf
PROPERTYINVENTORY
Property Type RESID
Design: Ranch
Item Quality No.
FULL BATH Average 1
MAIN FIREPLCE Average 1
MAIN BEDROOM 3
SALE HISTORY
Interactive Map
Year Built: 1971 Adjusted Year Built: 1971
Improvement Number: 1 6
Areas Quality ConstructionSqft
FIRST FLOOR Average M 1124
ATTACH GARAGE Average M 1 275
Land Characteristics
Traffic Minor Arterial
Sale Date
Sale Amount Deed Type
Reception
04-02-1979
58,000 Other
79031003
07-02-1987
76,500 Warranty Deed - Joint Tenancy
87091139
02-28-2001
175,000 Warranty Deed
F1194483
10-22-2002
0 Quit Claim Deed
F1596346
08-05-2005
183,000 Warranty Deed
2005065706
11-20-2014
235,000 Warranty Deed
2014100893
06-19-2015
238,500 Warranty Deed - Joint Tenancy
2015066175
TAX INFORMATION
2016 Payable 2017
2(
2016 Mill Levy Information
Actual Value
Total
215,790
County
Assessed Value
Total
17,177
2015 Payable 2016
TBA
CLEAR CRK VLY WATER & SAN DIST
Actual Value
Total
215,790
URBAN DRAINAGE&FLOOD CONT DIST
Assessed Value
Total
17,177
Treasurer Information
View Mill Levy Detail For Year
2(
2016 Mill Levy Information
Tax District
3119
County
TBA
School
TBA
WHEAT RIDGE
TBA
CLEAR CRK VLY WATER & SAN DIST
TBA
REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION DIST
TBA
URBAN DRAINAGE&FLOOD CONT DIST
TBA
URBAN DRAINAGE&FLOOD C SO PLAT
TBA
WHEATRIDGE FIRE DIST
TBA
WHEATRIDGE WATER DIST
TBA
Total
TBA
16 2015
•J
Rev. 5/2014
City (11
`1`I heat F id -c
Review Criteria: Variance SrG /A-TTAC(4G_JD 2 PPt6SS FOR 2ES f6N-,Es
A variance provides relief from the strict application of zoning standards in instances where a
unique physical hardship is present. Per Section 26-115 of the Wheat Ridge Municipal Code,
the reviewing authority (Community Development Director, Board of Adjustment, Planning
Commission, or City Council) shall base its decision in consideration of the extent to which an
applicant demonstrates that a majority of the following criteria have been met:
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.
2. The variance would not alter the essential character of the locality.
3. The applicant is proposing a substantial investment in the property with this application,
which would not be possible without the variance.
4. The particular physical surrounding, shape or topographical condition of the specific
property results in a particular and unique hardship (upon the owner) as distinguished
from a mere inconvenience.
5. If there is a particular or unique hardship, the alleged difficulty or hardship has not been
created by any person presently having an interest in the property.
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.
7. The unusual circumstances or conditions necessitating the variance request are present
in the neighborhood and are not unique to the property.
P Granting of the variance would result in a reasonable accommodation of a person with
disabilities. [Does not typically apply to single- or two-family homes.]
The application is in substantial compliance with the applicable standards set forth in the
and Site Design Manual. [Does not typically apply to single- or two-family
�,kxArchitectural
homes.]
Community Development Department - (303) 235-2846 - www.ci.wheatridge.co.us
Item 6. Written request and description of the Fence Variance Proposal
1. The existing fence on the south side of the property at 4401 Dover St is in severe
disrepair/condition and must be replaced. Because the property is located on the NW
corner of 44th Ave and Dover St, the south fence faces 44th Ave and runs adjacent to the
sidewalk. As homeowners (Marie Tapp and Denise Signs), we wish to replace the
existing fence which is nearly 8' in height with a new cedar 8' fence to be installed
professionally by Home Depot. The existing fence was originally constructed in the 1970
— 80's time period, using 6' vertical slats on top 3 stacked horizontal 2" x 6" boards (for a
total vertical height of nearly 8' in some areas). The adjacent sidewalk is elevated with a
right-of-way area that slopes downward to the backyard of the property. If the south
side fence were to be replaced according to the Wheat Ridge zoning requirements with
a maximum height of 6' (from the ground and posts), the interior of the backyard would
be visible from the sidewalk and street. 44th Ave is a busy street and the sidewalk is
used frequently by pedestrians. In addition to maintaining the overall condition of our
property, we wish to maintain a level of privacy in the back and side yard.
2. We believe that granting the variance and allowing us to replace the existing fence
(which is already taller than the zoning code permits) would enhance the character of
the area — not diminish it.
3. We have selected Home Depot to remove and dispose of the existing fence, and
construct a new fence (8' cedar along the south side, facing 44th Ave, and a 6' cedar
fence with a service gate on the east/front side, facing Dover St — for a total cost of
$3,900). In our opinion, we believe this is a significant investment in maintaining the
condition of our property that would not be possible without the variance.
4. There are 2 unique characteristics that present a challenge or "hardship" to us as we
considered how to address the replacement of existing fence in such poor condition.
Because our property is adjacent to 44th Ave, our 2 challenging issues are: noise control
and privacy. The side fence runs adjacent to a busy street with heavy traffic at times —
44th Ave — and the topographical condition of the south side of the property is unusual.
In a westward direction, beginning at approximately Dover St, 44th Ave slopes
downward. In addition to the street and sidewalk sloping downward along 44th Ave, the
right-of-way slopes downward and toward the fence line. The south fence is
approximately 48' in length and the sidewalk in certain areas is 12" —18" elevated from
the ground level of the fence posts and back/side yard of the property. If we simply
constructed a 6' fence (rather than 8'), pedestrians passing by could easily peer over the
top of the fence into our back yard. In addition, we believe that constructing a taller
fence may help with the noise control causes by the vehicle traffic along 44tH
5. No, we as home owners did not cause the topographical condition that would create the
privacy issue. And, while we do drive on 44th Ave, we really haven't caused the traffic
condition that leads to more noise in the side/back yard. And, because we recently
purchased the property about 18 months ago, we also didn't contribute to the
deterioration of the fence which came about from years of neglect by former owners.
6. No, we do not believe that granting us a variance to construct an 8' fence along the
south side of our property would be detrimental to the public or any other condition
enumerated in item #6. In fact, we believe that replacing the existing
dilapidated/weathered/leaning fence with a new cedar 8' fence would be a visual
enhancement for the community.
7. Yes, we believe that other properties adjacent to 44th Ave, and in close proximity to
ours, shares similar conditions that may necessitate a fence variance.
�, � Tapp
4401 Dover St
7
s"afp".
k4t14 Wo
r R �► j 1
�j
I
I
i t Imp,—