Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutWA-17-09City of W heat Ridge COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT City of Wheat Ridge Municipal Building September 5, 2017 Jeff Wood 19483 E. Tufts Cir. Centennial, CO 80015 Re: Case No. WA -17-09 Dear Mr. Wood: 7500 W. 291h Ave. Wheat Ridge, CO 80033-8001 P: 303.235.2846 F: 303.235.2857 Please be advised that your request for a 12.5 -foot variance (50%) from the minimum side yard setback requirement of 25 feet for yards which abut a public street on property zoned Residential - Two (R-2) for the purpose of constructing a detached accessory structure on property located at 3090 Reed Street has been approved. Enclosed is a copy of the Approval of Variance. Please note that all variance requests automatically expire within 180 days (February 28, 2018) of the date it was granted unless a building permit for the variance has been obtained within such period of time. A permit has already been submitted for the detached garage; but ask that you bring, to the Planning Department, an amended site plan. Please feel free to be in touch with any further questions. Sincerely, Tammy Odean Administrative Assistant Enclosure: Approval of Variance Case Report Cc: WA -17-09 (case file) WA 1709.doc www.d.wheatridge.co.us 7500 West 29th Avenue City of Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80033 ,�Wheat 1Cg1c 303.235.2846 Fax: 303.235.2857 Approval of Variance WHEREAS, an application for a variance was submitted for the property located at 3090 Reed Street referenced as Case No. WA -17-09 / Wood; 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 12.5 -foot variance (50%) from the minimum side yard setback requirement of 25 feet for side yards which abut a public street on property zoned Residential -Two (Case No. WA -17-09 / Wood) is granted for the property located at 3090 Reed Street, based on the following findings of fact: 1. The variance would not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. 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. Existing conditions on the property present a particular and unique hardship. 5. No objections were received regarding the variance request during the public notification period. k 'JL'k-- �-&/o- erne stone, ICP Vale ommunity Develor ent Director r City of Wheat R109C CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE PLANNING DIVISION STAFF REPORT TO: Community Development Director DATE: August 29, 2017 CASE MANAGER: Scott Cutler CASE NO. & NAME: WA -17-09 / Wood ACTION REQUESTED: Approval of a 12.5 -foot (50%) variance from the 25 -foot side yard setback requirement for side yards which abut a public street, allowing a 24 -foot by 24 - foot garage to be constructed on property located at 3090 Reed Street and zoned Residential -Two (R-2). LOCATION OF REQUEST: 3090 Reed Street APPLICANT/OWNER: Jeff Wood (Woodwork Real Estate LLC) APPROXIMATE AREA: PRESENT ZONING PRESENT LAND USE 9,523 square feet (0.219 acres) Residential -Two (R-2) Single Family Residential ENTER INTO RECORD: (X) CASE FILE & PACKET MATERIALS (X) ZONING ORDINANCE Location Map Site JURISDICTION: All notification and posting requirements have been met; therefore, there is jurisdiction to hear this case. I. REQUEST The applicant is requesting approval of a 12.5 -foot (50%) variance from the 25 -foot side yard setback requirement for side yards which abut a public street. The purpose of this variance is to allow for the homeowner to construct a 24 -foot by 24 -foot garage in the rear of their yard along W. 31 St Avenue. The garage will comply with the required 5 -foot side yard setback on the south side of the property and the required 10 -foot rear setback on the east side of the property. 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 owner may construct a garage in the southeast corner of the lot which abuts W. 31 st Avenue. The property is located at the corner of Reed Street and W. 31 St Avenue (Exhibit 1) in the Palmyra Gardens Subdivision. The existing single-family house sits on a 9,523 square foot parcel and was originally constructed in 1957 per the Jefferson County Assessor; there is currently no garage on the property. The property is zoned Residential -Two (R-2), as are all of the surrounding properties on Reed Street, W. 31St Avenue and W. 32"d Avenue to the north, Quay Street to the east, and W. 30d` Avenue to the south (Exhibit 2). The surrounding land uses are primarily single-family homes, with some duplexes. The R-2 zone district provides for high quality, safe, quiet and stable low to moderate -density residential neighborhoods, and prohibits activities of any nature which are incompatible with the low to moderate -density residential character. In the R-2 zone district, a major accessory structure generally requires 5 -foot side setbacks. However, since the side yard abuts a public street, W. 31St Avenue, the required side yard setbacks increase to 25 feet for all structures. The proposed garage will therefore encroach upon this required setback, prompting the request for a 12.5 -foot variance from the side setback (50%). The garage will adhere to the required 10 feet rear setback for accessory buildings over 10 feet in height, and the required 5 -foot side yard setback on the southern property line. The primary reason for the variance request is based on the unusual shape of the lot, which is trapezoidal in shape. The lot is 86 feet wide at the front property line and narrows to only 46 feet at the rear property line. This irregular shape combined with the 25 -foot side setback make it virtually impossible to locate an average size garage without a setback variance. Per City code, garage setbacks cannot be between 5 and 18 feet in length. The purpose of the regulation is to allow setback encroachments where there will not be the possibility of vehicles parked in the driveway extending into public rights-of-way (Sec. 26-625.C). In this case, however, the property line is located approximately 12 feet away from the edge of pavement on W. 31 St Avenue, as shown in Exhibit 3. This would result in a driveway with a minimum length of 24.5 feet, 6.5 feet Administrative Review 2 Case No. WA -17-09 / Wood greater than the required driveway setback of 18 feet. This is an ideal setback based on code requirements. The proposed garage location (Exhibit 3) is at the rear of the property accessed from W. 31 st Avenue, which is the most logical location. The applicant submitted a second site plan indicating where a garage could be located if it adhered to the 25 -foot setback requirement (Exhibit 4, Location with Required Setbacks). A garage in this position would shift to the west and bisect the rear yard, limiting usable space and blocking views to the rear of the property from the main house. Further, it may not be possible to meet the 5 -foot south setback and there could be interference with the 5 -foot utility easement along the south side of the property (Exhibit 5). The site photographs provided indicate the current conditions of the rear yard and the existing sheds that will be replaced by the garage (Exhibit 6). They also show the existing unimproved right-of-way on W. 31St Avenue, which acts as a buffer to the property and increases the perceived setback. The applicant is proposing a substantial investment in the property, particularly since the existing home does not have a garage. Development Standards The parcel meets minimum standards for the R-2 zone district. However, the lot narrows towards the east, so while the lot is 86 feet wide along Reed Street, it is only 46 feet wide at the rear property line. The garage meets the standards for major accessory structures in residential zones. The following table compares the required R-2 development standards with the actual and proposed conditions: R-2 Development Standards: Required Actual Lot Area 7,500 square feet min 9,523 square feet Lot Width (corner lots) 80 feet (min for both frontages) 86 feet (west) 136 feet (north) Building Coverage 40% max 23.9% (with garage) Major Accessory Building: Required Proposed Garage Building size 1,000 square feet max 576 square feet Height 15 feet (max at roof midpoint) 15 feet Side Setback(along W. 31 St Ave. 25 feet min 12.5 feet Side Setback south 5 feet (min) —12 feet Rear Setback (east) 10 feet (min) 10 feet III. VARIANCE CRITERIA In order to approve a variance, the Board of Adjustment 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 a short analysis of the application's compliance with the variance criteria (Exhibit 7). 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 Review Case No. WA -17-09 / Wood 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 is not likely to alter the character of the locality. The R-2 zone district allows accessory buildings of the proposed size and height. The existing single-family home is approximately 20 feet from the property line along W. 31St Avenue, which is less than the 25 - foot setback requirement. While the proposed garage has a reduced setback, the City's right-of-way maps indicate 12-15 feet of unbuilt right-of-way between the edge of asphalt and the property line (Exhibit 3, Proposed Location). This open space results in a perceived setback of 24.5 feet at minimum, increasing to nearly 30 feet along the western side due to the angle of W. 31 st Avenue. This helps to reduce the visual impact of the garage within the setback area, and provides for a driveway that would allow vehicles to be parked safely without blocking access along W. 31 st Avenue. Other homes in the area have detached garages of a similar size and in similar locations. Some of these garages have nonconforming setbacks, including 3010 Saulsbury Street located one block away. The south and east property lines have thick rows of mature trees, shrubs, and vines, which would help obscure the view of the garage from neighboring properties to the south and east. 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 a substantial investment in the property, consistent with the Neighborhood Revitalization Strategy. Constructing a garage would allow the applicant to store vehicles currently parked in the front driveway. Additionally, a garage is a standard feature for a contemporary homeowner which will increase the value of this property. Building a garage that conforms to the street -facing side setback requirements is difficult due to the narrowing lot; it would result in a 0 -to -5 foot setback on the south side of the property. If the rear setback needed to be less than 5 feet, the garage could not be built due to the existing utility easement (Exhibit S). As noted in the Case Analysis, the location of the garage would also have to shift to the west, resulting in a garage in the middle of the rear yard, effectively bisecting the property and limiting access and visibility to the rear corner of the yard. Given the shape of the lot, and the 25 -foot side setback requirement, it is virtually impossible to make this investment without a variance. Staff finds this criterion has been met. Administrative Review Case No. WA -17-09 / Wood 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 property has an irregular shape in that it narrows towards the rear property line, from 86 feet wide at the front to only 46 feet at the rear. At the rear, the developable area is only 16 feet wide. The existing home does not meet the required setbacks of 25 feet and is positioned such that only a detached garage would be feasible on the property. An attached garage meeting all setback requirements would require demolition of a covered porch and result in the lack of a usable backyard. Exhibit 3 indicates the logic behind the proposed location of the garage. It maximizes usable rear yard space and limits the size of the driveway. 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. Because the current owner neither platted the lot, nor constructed the home in its current location or orientation, the difficulties have not been created by any person presently having an interest in the property. 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, and would not increase the danger of fire. It is unlikely that the request would impair property values in the neighborhood. The request complies with sight triangle requirements for driveways. Staff finds this criterion has been met. Administrative Review Case No. WA -17-09 / Wood 7. The unusual circumstances or conditions necessitating the variance request are present in the neighborhood and are not unique to the property. The property in question is unique in the area due to its irregular shape. Some homes and accessory structures in the surrounding area do not meet the 25 -foot setback requirement for lots which abut a public street. However, most homes in the area are conforming to the R-2 development standards, and most lots are rectangular in nature. 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, or their associated accessory buildings. 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 12.5 -foot (50%) variance from the required 25 -foot side yard setback for side yards which abut a public 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 wou(notal r the essential character of the neighborhood. 2. The alleged hardsn been created by any person presently having an interest in the property. 3. The request would not be detrimental to public welfare. 4. Existing conditions on the property present a particular and unique hardship. 5. No objections were received regarding the variance request during the public notification period. With the following conditions: 1. The garage shall be set back 12.5 feet from the property line measured tangentially from the closest corner of the garage to the closest point on the property line. 2. The design and architecture of the garage be similar in character to the existing house and consistent with representations depicted in the application materials, subject to staff review and approval through review of a building permit. Administrative Review Case No. WA -17-09 / Wood EXHIBIT 1: AERIAL Administrative Review Case No. WA -17-09 / Wood EXHIBIT 2: ZONING MAP Administrative Review Case No. WA -17-09 / Wood EXHIBIT 3: PROPOSED LOCATION Note: The carport shown in this photo at the northern portion of the house has since been demolished. i N Administrative Review Case No. WA -17-09 / Wood EXHIBIT 4: LOCATION WITH REQUIRED SETBACKS ti r •' ti� t j Administrative Review 10 Case No. WA -17-09 / Wood EXHIBIT 5: UTILITY EASEMENT Note: The property lines, shown in tan, are up to 5 feet off from the actual property line. For reference, the home is set back 5 feet from the southern property line. The utility easements are 10 feet wide with 5 feet on each property. Administrative Review 11 Case No. WA -17-09 / Wood EXHIBIT 6: SITE PHOTOS View of the property facing east from Reed Street. The garage would be located behind the house and would be fully or partially obscured by the house from this angle. Administrative Review 12 Case No. WA -17-09 / Wood �krq r,-- 14C, ..M y� View of the frontage on W. 31St Avenue. The garage would be located behind the home, at the middle of this image behind where the existing gate is located. The driveway would be expanded, shifted east, and extend at minimum 12.5 feet into the property. MEN K An additional view of the backyard from W. 31St Avenue, looking south. The garage would be located in the middle of this image and would adhere to the required rear setback of 10 feet. The rear property line is located in the stand of trees at the far left of this image. Administrative Review 13 Case No. WA -17-09 / Wood An additional view of the backyard looking towards the existing house. The property line along W. 31 St Avenue is approximately where the fence is located, 12-15 feet from the edp-e of pavement. Administrative Review 14 Case No. WA -17-09 / Wood EXHIBIT 7: WRITTEN REQUEST �Gcr wo0c, mQm be,- a- OWN., 0,$2 �cJaeo work Re*i £S7g7G l..LG J (�7MCr A,o v Tb AS -k- 4✓ Al/Arr uvca A (oNq 31s -r S -r. Do TO >�, A j, -Ii As e(bper-y IS A-"3" T 3A-'A3c_ Tkpy will be oc7,av��o w:b1 hAve zo be m6V90 so CIoSL To Z>`e {rotiae +tio r >�a Wll( h.vLe.. TO PIAY be4m+s Z/" 914rA-3C PrJ p 04Y or 5"),-, 0A15 %pub• wM would l ka zo Wove zhe jArAqC back tip AIoNj Ytie. back, cd zk,- prapc,-r/. Gc)c M40 TL. s UA r i A rica A Yo La A 5�'a g L , ry this ProPxr-cy , Sept CIO es No r A ve. A 0q,"5e Administrative Review 15 Case No. WA -17-09 / Wood EXHIBIT 8: RECOMMENDED SITE PLAN Administrative Review 16 Case No. WA -17-09 / Wood r. City of /Wheat f kjAe MUNiTy DEVELOPMENT City of Wheat Ridge Municipal Building 7500 W. 29" Ave. Wheat Ridge, CO LETTER NOTICE August 18, 2017 Dear Property Owner: 80033-8001 P: 303.235.2846 F: 303.235.2857 This is to inform you of Case No. WA -17-09, a request for approval of a 12 '/2 foot (50%) variance from the minimum side yard setback requirement of 25 -feet for an accessory structure on property located at 3090 Reed 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 August 28, 2017. Thank you. W A 1709.doc www.ci.w h eatridge.co.0 s 03125 031 to p l'. ul 03070 06930 03075 1 VANWINKLE DONALD D VANWINKLE RYAN KLOSKE JANELLE CARISSA KLOSKE MORRIS EULA MAE RICKI D ALEXANDER P 03075 QUAY ST 03070 REED ST 06985 W 31ST AVE WHEAT RIDGE CO 80033 WHEAT RIDGE CO 80033 WHEAT RIDGE CO 80033 HOLDEN RODNEY G HOLDEN DALE M HUBER ALASTAIR T HUBER BETTINA B 03095 REED ST 03125 REED ST WHEAT RIDGE CO 80033 WHEAT RIDGE CO 80033 eC y_3?N❑N°0r'Oa0r" -0�pRc' —Y° c adi o�amw.O_C>d ' b+aYy0 >, csAdC oyUc•Oa„"'�"°. Oaa�� mo�o+ w 0oc, Yco� y wse�y0 bccc �O4Eomva,C�3?�Uo = `,ONQai �¢°CC>•y, -;0a>EU;pq�) , QY yU , �U mFbby C h pC p> p 0 C , C C E °C -p °>; '` N«'" y v ° ;U 0 C > b °RiU�Cc°i aocoob0o ai w00 r7 � o UU Y o R C e+ E +cd Y > w C 7 O bUo y UCc. O Oy 0 U Q 0E� � G �� d O �j� td y °GaU) to C w00 0^ c M C R0°Eo It 0 Uai w b) •o UaCcU o" .0pEYV) 4 O w p Y °>y��0 wc o .�> w? 0 o o o; 0,O pUc o oUo U c A pp ° ~' ° O sU U y U U U � d 'Y�.aRacc�cd)d.+ r. F M O ti R U WbU.y"°�o°LRc�°cU>oCooN .pD�dPpW�FA%dvWUaUEWd..a."a ]+i, UC -i7 ►PF~.�.;a oti«cd+ oMc3Uyr _FWP'F�OaCad"G)s. aae}N^cCwpp°Eaeo' 3Oo.�3oa°a�°C)i 'Yai c�>:,oE- UOo-d0.ro 0•U�0a., Cwio N�.+a�Uo�)' o�CaU'c owra3. f ONC°N'° ,b^o; cyLCs°.'. w�°Oc? �C3a�i b'°°oyCF®YU c ° N'Ody° NN '.�+n°' 3Yvc w >aad, w Eayte�°N0 +c'�a> .RUC c o•aa�),• •om .LccRUm °C°eU? CcvEydCvi • yy��yoo �'Z""o o cE9�o uAti�°id'aA?°ao.0c bha> ba A^h`�omi�cY7U'°[m°osoC�^Uccocd ' i 'btC'cUccoyS3.zoi ; > ° o ° 4. o a) cd O o o R wY°° A S Cd oRo ° 0c o ° ° `oac>z eCC O _ U ° G o Yp i ib au ° o UZ Cd ° K i 0 ° E M U M -ed JL) c v •E r ° ao a to 13 > A ) p�~ 0a° 00°cd O'yy x tit a° a N°� >p z > O to 0 cd U i O C O i' G Cd C >,.d �>, 'sa% U- U O o0C4)Y o > O°dA >aa o (' Cd mc p p h Uo ,b E U Q, �Oc O p y °o '" o aU o Oqj° ` „ C en N, cd E °aCp 0 O '— o ° oq a)b0 eV C o r O -on U p- Y rn O z pam' U icC O O U ) TC"-04. >, U wc'a UC o U).0 W dU E , ocz eo •p 'z g° °W pba1, Y Ua Cd 0c° ` o o a °' > `° . U C E t5 > Z ❑ W p�-' U ':'oU w o R p pE.U O y p ca aEU U1 O o 00r. coo hc° o °c° U to U� id 0owo cd m >,�°o of cd ODb w i 0 se w o o .o r. �,abD w�U a►o o 5°z DO d�0�c •a U' - -0 r- cti. > 0w�®Z 'o ° O E ao '0�v•L° ce ~7 co O .°" UN C p ? O _ 'd (Z °O V U z °o ao ° ; > ° �A °o Cm N °y O N O O U � p UW o >° yc Z .� wG Oo 0 ~`CObaaw°so3aR E ba cd U Odo o°:moow$>ho:.0 C cO Cd > O V EwaoHCp E ° gaO O O a r. 0 ° 0`� c s? ,- QU C >Z U Z C� �w CaOao O p O p cE aO o ^ �•> o c R d o Z=U c aU c e 0 cca 0 0 z W 8 > U � cO�U i 1 o6UOZ 2i>,~:1)0Cd wi wa ° U o � a z al �PEO_ o`' ° ci o —0 0.2 7 00 • EU �oyv > RN co 'o dL�-o 0 z 0Epcd o o 0 E C - u� ) ) cEwyc_oooU- -•^.�l°cc7a� OuVOG�F--:] VW0GWCaWvZaO��ia FRWPOvFadr'r�;,_,•smE=p>as wvc°o, .+C���v--' >b`v°" o_Q^yvc�EE" U °ov . PF; d, U•Rk U Ui a°a o^rri, yr3 ' w.vU iPoid -� c p°3p EUc> • �U AcyFF v' UWPP: Y�UWOsa.v>'�U °c>,o•U oa, Wc0i w3yc w'oU~yO 3 sUri w�0zU ° U vO °Eo , oAA .': - G ocdUUn k �°Epo o o oU U m ° U c c d co.0 M 4.W bE acoeb 9- mo40, M U >ZZ�cboU o>° E oo 0zW = Weo pwF> W z U w a°o°�=U ai °aiU o..WU>°= Wocu t.4 -oO�oacz oUEU E E uw o Co 4. o 0 U o'eo 0 U W nd °z o Cd UOEZonOn� W►EpW0�O°-�y =�3N3?, mid W CUWvF d'�b° e> > doZ z •O 0.4 s o. NFU Z o o �r u cCod U o O y0 as c Q �a, 0 bo 0 C v^ y ° oO 0.y 0 U U L7 W o O" or�,, r °o .o R U o z Pk C ,W d io oU 0° on 0 �. j NF 00 o o W U Y o W I ZO 00^U U 00 bA c ro Y W '' n ;C C° on •p o ona;o ' O pU o O 0 Z ra cp di 00 o h U Uo :a E U - ° n U Cd > oU e� aw, $ox F = ° ° r0 w 0 a u�.4 ZAy9 g ei o a UC U Uo v vi " `0 Y r®00 9 o� U cU C.C U UU •, U •� , , as Ca an ,. ro 7P4e4,- --r 1, , 5 erolOer % r IN� J�✓�Y1S� 7frYa� �.cw�ll b� ori IYlaVeC� So closZL 70/ Zke. �wbe, TtilA? Tb A s k- -/C)J,r A v A rr` c-,./C.Q. a 10 iq-r a-5 e ry ro 7P4e4,- --r 1, , 5 erolOer % r IN� J�✓�Y1S� 7frYa� �.cw�ll b� 1aGt�►e�l�p w�bl hp ya bc. IYlaVeC� So closZL 70/ Zke. �wbe, TtilA? Play be k,�,s vie. iq-r a-5 e ry wO'A id 11 k -4 za fv► o ve z he � A- Aje_ b - �P?K�e-, bF�c. p�oPy. (,c% /Ilcep - tis U14r)ANce yo AYOw A 5fr-q34.- CD -&j rtti-S f"P.Pw y , 5 �� does No r L,e AS�r���. O3, A r 0 gr yrs ,q k; J4'.'% it it -, 5� fir_ 4.� : Ok =I ff 0*1 �i Rev. 5/2014 ( ity of W heat 1 ic,11 e COMMUNiry DEVELOPMENT Submittal Checklist: Variance p Project Name: 3010 9e"y1) s -r Project Location: 30 qU 9f,e0 9-1 CA e, po g e, Go g6033 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: /1. Completed, notarized land use application form Z2. Application fee Signed submittal checklist (this document) ✓4. Proof of ownership—e.g. deed --"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 26-115 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 7. Survey or Improvement Location Certificate (ILC) of the property ✓✓"8. To -scale site plan indicating existing and proposed building footprints and setbacks _9. Proposed building elevations indicating proposed heights, materials, and color scheme t�& I h'•uL. 'r 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, I understand that in the event any revisions need tq�e,/,ade�fter/the second (2nd) full review, I will be subject to the applicable resubmittal fee. �� , '1. 9�`� v v " 7 Signature: Date: S-7-(-7 Name (please print): Phone: Community Development Department - (303) 235-2846 - www.ci.wheatridge.co.us City of Wheat Ridge @911712617 14: y�g CDBA ZONING APPLICATION FELS CDA@16234 FMSD ZONING APPLICATION FEES 1111OUNT PAYMENT RECEIVED 200.06 CHECK: 1023 TOTAL MOUNT 255300.00 --- -- -----.----_--_..____-..._-___L JQl QQ NOTE: Land use applications must he A ♦ submitted BY APPOINTMENT with a � W, City OF planner. Incomplete applications will not _ W heat Wiid e be accepted—refer to submittal checklists. 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 JFr- CAJ0013 Phone 3o3—G/8-53SEmail 4,�FF4.�oc�wocD work �9/N, Address, City, State, Zip 19V 83 E 7AS G l ✓ Owner Woo ac,.aa ric Real t s7sl r r— LZX—Phone Address, City, State, Zip Email Contact JkFF Wood Phone 33-6,f,'? Email �cFFc.�oap LvcyoAw Address, City, State, Zip a (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): 39 90 Ree -p S1 Type of action requested (check one or more of the actions listed below which pertain to your request): 13 Change of Zone or Zone Conditions O Special Use Permit O Subdivision — specify type: O Planned Development (ODP, SDP) O Conditional Use Permit O Administrative (up to 3 lots) O Planned Building Group O Site Plan O Minor (4 or 5 lots) C3 Temporary Use, Building, Sign O Concept Plan O Major (6 or more lots) 03 Variance/Waiver (from Section 26-______) Cl Right of Way Vacation 0 Other: Detailed description of request: -to la -5 So 9cJr,47 e— C'9".., f' --r ry 0.4c -L V4rc) 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 persons listed above, without whose consent the requested action cannot lawfully be accomplished. Applic pts other than ow ers must sv&MRA Dt@g ttorney from the owner which approved of this acti o his behalf. NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF COLORADO Notarized Signature of Applicant ! NOTARY ID 20164015481 State of Colorado OMMISSION EXPIRES APRIL 22, 2020 County of �I SS er g } ss The foregoing instru ent (Land Use Processing Application) was acknowledged by me this day of , 20 % by �PN Qoo� My commission expires Notary Public To be filled out by staff: Date received 21 - li -17 Fee S Case No. 7 -69 Comp Plan Design. Receipt No. Quarter Section Map _5C ;Z& Related Case No. Pre -App Mtg. Date Case Manager �s"� #r Assessor's Parcel No. _39 2L t4- n i-© 3-1 Current Zoning Current Use Size (acres or sgft) jS723 4 (-�- Proposed Zoning Proposed Use Rev 122/ 2016