Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/26/18I City of WheatP,idge BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AGENDA April 26, 2015 Notice is hereby given of a public hearing to be held before the City of Wheat Ridge Board of Adjustment on April 26, 2015, at 7:00 p.m., in the City Council Chambers of the Municipal Building, 7500 W. 29" Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado. 1. CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER 2. ROLL CALL 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 4. PUBLIC FORUM (TMs is the time for anyone to speak on any subject not appearing on the agenda.) 5. PUBLIC HEARING A. Case No. WA -18-02: An application filed by Mala Sandoval for approval of two requests 1. Request for approval of a 24 -foot (96%) variance to the 25 -foot side yard setback requirement for yards which abut a public street. 2. Request for approval of a 120 square foot (100%) variance to the 120 square foot limit for a metal accessory buildings in the Residential -Two (R-2) zone district located at 6001 West 32°a Avenue. 6. CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING 7. OLD BUSINESS S. NEW BUSINESS A. Approval of Minutes— March 22, 2015 9. ADJOURNMENT Individuals with disahilities are encouraged to participate in all puhlie meetings sponsored by the City of WheatRidge. Call Sara Spaulding, Puhlie Information feud, at 303-235-2377 at least one week in advance of a meeting ifyou are interested in partieipating and need inclusion assistance. TO: CASE MANAGER: CASE NO. & NAME: City of Wh6atP,iLd �ge CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE PLANNING DIVISION STAFF REPORT Board of Adjustment Scott Cutler WA -18-02 / Sandoval DATE: April 26, 2018 ACTION REQUESTED: Approval of (A) a 24 -foot (96%) variance from the 25 -foot side yard setback requirement for yards which abut a public street in the Residential -Two (R-2) zone district and (B) a 120 -square foot variance (100%) to the 120 -square foot limit for metal accessory buildings in residential zone districts. LOCATION OF REQUEST: 6001 W. 32nd Avenue APPLICANT/OWNER: APPROXIMATE AREA: PRESENT ZONING: PRESENT LAND USE: Mala G. Sandoval 9,321 Square Feet (0.214 Acres) Residential -Two (R-2) Single Family Residential ENTER INTO RECORD: (X) CASE FILE & PACKET MATERIALS (X) ZONING ORDINANCE Location Map Site 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) a 24 -foot (96%) variance from the 25 -foot side yard setback requirement for yards which abut a public street and (B) a 120 -square foot variance (100%) from the 120 -square foot limit for metal accessory buildings in residential zone districts. The purpose of this variance is to legalize an existing structure that the homeowner constructed without obtaining a Building Permit. The building complies with all other zone district requirements for accessory structures, including size and height. Section 26-115.0 (Variances and Waivers) of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws empowers the Board of Adjustment to hear and decide on variances from the strict application of the zoning district development standards. Variance requests of over 50% from the development standards are required to be heard at a public hearing before the Board of Adjustment. II. CASE ANALYSIS The variance is being requested so the property owner may keep an existing freestanding, enclosed carport on the eastern portion of the lot in the driveway area that was installed recently without the required building permits. The property is located on the northwest corner of W. 32nd Avenue and Harlan Street and is part of the Supernor Minor Subdivision. The existing house sits on a 9,321 -square foot parcel and was originally constructed in 1922, per the Jefferson County Assessor (Exhibit 1, Aerial). The property is zoned Residential -Two (R-2), as are the properties to the west along W. 32nd Avenue and north along Harlan Street (Exhibit 2, Zoning Map). Properties to the southeast are zoned Residential -Three (R-3). Across Harlan Street to the east is the Sons of Italy building, which is zoned Residential -One C (R -1C), as are the residential properties to the north and east. Most properties in the area consist of single-family homes, though there are some duplexes along W. 32nd Avenue and south on Harlan Street. Case History The applicant received a Stop Work Order from the Building Division on January 11, 2018 (Exhibit 3, Stop Work Order). The applicant was advised to submit plans for approval of the building, requiring a building permit and subsequent inspections. Previously, the structure was more of a temporary carport with a tarp -like cover, and the Stop Work Order was received when the applicant covered that structure with more permanent metal siding and doors. The tarp cover was destroyed in the May 2017 hailstorm (Exhibit 4, Hail Damage). After meeting with the applicant, Planning Division staff provided a letter with options to bring the property into compliance with City Code, dated February 14, 2018 (Exhibit 5, Compliance Letter). Because the Building Division requires the building to be permitted, it must also meet the R-2 zoning regulations, which includes setbacks and building size. In addition, City Code prohibits metal buildings over 120 square feet in any residential zone district (Sec. 26-625.C. Lc). Staff presented three options, which are explained in more detail in the letter: 1) Remove the building from the property Board ofAdfustment 2 Case No. WA -18-02 /Sandoval 2) Apply for a metal building size variance and/or a setback variance, with a public hearing at the Board of Adjustment 3) Apply for a building permit to construct a new carport or garage that meets all requirements for property in the R-2 zone, then decommission the old building as a condition of approval The applicant chose option two, which has prompted this variance request. The applicant has been cooperative throughout the process and has attempted to correct the situation through the proper channels. The site plans (Exhibit 6) show the location of the structure in relation to other conditions on the property. While the property line is located approximately 0.5-1.5 feet from the edge of the carport, the property line is located approximately 12 feet from the edge of pavement on Harlan Street, and approximately 9 feet behind the existing split -rail fence. This results in a perceived setback from Harlan Street of approximately 13 feet. The fence and landscaping helps provide some screening of the carport, though in wintertime they are less effective. The location of the property line, shown in Exhibit 6, indicates that a large portion of the driveway is actually located in City right-of-way for Harlan Street. The site photos provided (Exhibit 7) show some of the improvements on the property, which include a one-story single family home, the structure in question, and two sheds. Development Standards The parcel meets minimum standards for the R-2 zone district. The following table compares the required R-2 development standards with the actual and proposed conditions: R-2 Development Standards: Required Actual Lot Area (one -family dwelling) 9,000 square feet (min) 9,321 square feet Lot Width (corner lots) 80 feet (min) 80.7 feet x 115.5 feet Building Coverage 40% max —20% with carport) Major Accessory Building: Required Proposed Building Building Size 1,000 square feet (max) 240 square feet **Metal buildings limited to 120 square feet** Height 15 feet (max) 8.5 feet Setback (side adjacent to a 25 feet (min) 1 foot public street) If the structure was not a metal building, the applicant would be allowed up to a 1,000 square foot major accessory structure. Two minor accessory structures are located in the backyard, which are limited to 400 square feet combined. Moving the structure to the west side of the property (side yard) is possible but likely not practical due to the lack of driveway and access to the rear yard. Alternative placement in the rear (north) yard is potentially feasible, but due to the position of the house, fence, and shed, it may be difficult to drive a vehicle into this space. Board ofAdjustment Case No. WA -18-02 /Sandoval Metal Buildings As stated above, City Code prohibits metal buildings over 120 square feet in any residential zone district. Accessory structures over 120 square feet may have metal siding if the material has a textured wood grain appearance similar to horizontal clapboard. The current siding is painted green and does not give the appearance of textured wood, so the building would not be exempt from the 120 square foot maximum in its current iteration. The City does not regulate architecture of single-family homes or accessory buildings, though revisions to the building materials such as paint color or texture may be added as conditions of approval, if the Board is inclined to grant the variances. Public Comment As of the date of distribution of this staff report, April 20, 2018, the City has not received letters from surrounding property owners. If letters arrive between the delivery of this staff report and the Board of Adjustment hearing, they will be entered into the record and provided to the Board members during the hearing. The applicant has stated in their written request (Exhibit 8) that neighbors do not have an issue with the location of the structure. 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 their analysis of the application's compliance with the variance criteria, which also includes a more detailed history of the structure and the reasons for constructing it (Exhibit 8, Written Request). 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 requests 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. However, if the variances were denied, the property would not have useable protected car storage, which is a common expectation of homeowners in Wheat Ridge. Staff finds this criterion has not been met. 2. The variance would not alter the essential character of the locality. Request A: The small shed at the northeast corner of the property has a similar side setback at approximately 1 -foot and has been on the property since at least 2004, according to aerial imagery. The home at 3190 Harlan Street (directly southwest from the subject property) is set back approximately 8 feet from the property line, and has a similar perceived setback of 15 feet from the edge of pavement. Staff has concerns about the structure being set back only 1 -foot from the right-of-way line, as no other structures in the area besides the small shed have setbacks that small. The shed is a smaller structure and is also set behind a taller fence. Board ofAdfustment Case No. WA -18-02 /Sandoval Request B: The Sons of Italy property across Harlan Street to the east has at least two metal accessory structures that are over 120 square feet, though they are set back at least 25 feet from the property line. Despite this, the City has made the policy decision that large metal structures are not residential in character, and are arguably more appropriate in industrial or agricultural zone districts. Staff finds this criterion has not been met. 3. The applicant is proposing a substantial investment in the property with this application, which would not be possible without the variance. Approval of the variances will allow the existing structure to be legalized. If the variance for the side setback was not approved, the applicant would either have to remove the structure altogether, or relocate it in the side or backyard where it could meet the R-2 setbacks. A carport in that location would not have street access in the side yard unless a new driveway was created, which would require the removal of a large portion of the front/side yard and add significant expenses. The investment to clad the structure with metal siding and make it more permanent would be lost if the variance were not approved. However, this investment likely does not meet historical thresholds for what constitutes a substantial investment. A full-sized garage, attached wood -framed carport, or home addition more closely meets this criteria. The carport will help protect the owner's vehicle from the elements, as the previous tarp roof was destroyed by the May 8, 2017 hailstorm. However, the applicant will potentially need to invest more in the structure in order to meet building code requirements, if the Board is inclined to grant the variances. 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. Request A: While the lot meets all of the requirements for properties in the R-2 zone district, the location of the right-of-way line relative to the property improvements presents a unique hardship. A portion of the existing home encroaches into the required side setback of 25 feet and is positioned such that there are few feasible locations for a garage or carport on either side of the home. Potential carport locations may require other setback variances, or a petition for an additional driveway location, which could be cost/time prohibitive. Currently, no driveway access points or curb cuts are located on W. 32°d Avenue, and adding an additional driveway would be expensive. Much of the existing horseshoe driveway is located in City right-of-way, as well as the split rail fence and landscaping area along Harlan Street (Exhibit 6, Site Plan). Request B: The shape and physical conditions of the property do not impose a hardship on the applicant when determining an appropriate size for a metal building. Staff finds this criterion has been met for Request A and has not been met for Request B. Board ofAdfustment Case No. WA -18-02 /Sandoval 5. The alleged difficulty or hardship has not been created by any person presently having an interest in the property. The applicant created their own hardship by starting construction to clad the temporary carport with medal siding without obtaining a building permit, and by proposing a design which does not comply with the applicable zoning standards. While they originally inquired with the City that a temporary structure for car storage would be allowed, that structure remained on the property since at least 2014. No complaints were received between when the structure was originally placed on the property and today, and no enforcement action was taken until the Stop Work Order in January 2018. There are no provisions in the City Code regarding temporary car storage, nor are there timelines imposed on property owners. Staff finds this criterion has not 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. While the structure is quite close to the right-of-way, the roofline is low and is partially screened by landscaping and fencing, so 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 addition would not impede the sight distance triangle and would not increase the danger of fire. Due to the style of the metal building, it is possible that the building could impact property values because it appears to be more temporary in nature than the wood and masonry structures in the area However, the City has not received complaints about this structure, and the applicant noted in their application that their neighbors are in support of the location (Exhibit 8, Written Request). Because the building is low to the ground and partially obstructed by fencing and landscaping, staff finds that the building would not substantially diminish property values. Staff finds this criterion has been met. The unusual circumstances or conditions necessitating the variance request are present in the neighborhood and are not unique to the property. As with many older properties in Wheat Ridge, the existing primary structure does not meet current setback standards for its zone district, as a small portion of the home is within 23 feet of Board ofAdfustment Case No. WA -18-02 /Sandoval the property line. Several properties in the immediate vicinity, including the properties across the intersection to the southeast (3190 Harlan Street and 3195 Gray Street), would require variances in order to construct accessory buildings, or to be rebuilt altogether as viable homes. It is common in the area for the right-of-way line to encroach into a driveway or parking area for the property, particularly when there are no sidewalks. Many times homeowners are not aware of where their true property line is located because the right-of-way line is significantly behind the edge of street or sidewalk. Staff finds that this criterion has 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. Criteria Review Summary Staff has provided the below table to summarize the above analysis of the application's compliance with the variance criteria, since there are two requests. Criterion Number Request A side setback Request B metal building) 1 Does not meet Does not meet 2 Does not meet Does not meet 3 Does not meet Does not meet 4 Meets Does not meet 5 Does not meet Does not meet 6 Meets Meets 7 Meets Meets 8 Not Applicable 9 Not Applicable IV. STAFF CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Not having found the application in compliance with the majority of the review criteria, staff recommends DENIAL of (A) a 24 -foot (96%) variance from the 25 -foot side yard setback requirement for yards which abut a public street and (B) a 120 -square foot variance (100%) from the 120 -square foot limit for metal accessory buildings in residential zone districts. Staff has found that there are not Board ofAdfustment Case No. WA -18-02 /Sandoval unique circumstances attributed to this request that would warrant approval of a variance. Therefore, staff recommends denial for the following reasons: 1. Both requests do not meet a majority of the criteria staff uses to analyze variance requests. 2. The request will result in a structure that alters the essential character of the locality. 3. The request does not meet historical thresholds for what constitutes a substantial investment. Board ofAdfustment Case No. WA -18-02 /Sandoval EXHIBIT 1: AERIAL Board ofAdjustment Case No. W4-18-02 / Sandoval EXHIBIT 2: ZONING MAP Wheat 1111:09c Geographic'O Information Systems Legend O Subject Property Residential -One C (R-1 C) (� Residential -Two (R-2) J Residential -Three (R-3) >r_ r11 A49 Fe 1 32ND AVE j J� v Ki. Iss 12 Sure Pane Coomuau POfe=non ,. N C 1.. aCe "I Zone Daum: NHne3 Board ofAdjustment 10 Case No. W4-18-02 / Sandoval EXHIBIT 3: STOP WORK ORDER 6 A i CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE Building Inspection Division (303) 2345933 Inspection line (303) 235-2855 Offl e • (303) 237-8929 Fav INSPECTION NOTICE Inspection Type: S w O Job Address: io c o P w 31> Permit Number: H0,he0 LU ACI v��ed 1 r -1 I��r n el I ❑ No one available for inspection: Time S I AM/&M Re -Inspection required: Yes No When Corrections have been made, cell for rednspeetion at'+n228:-5e23 Date: I n 1 IF Inspector: 'T -D DO NOT REMOVE THIS NOTICE Board ofAdjastment 11 CaseNo. WA-18_02/Sandoval EXHIBIT 4: HAIL DAMAGE The above diagram was submitted by the applicant to document the damage caused by the May 2017 hailstorm. Board ofAdjustment 12 Case No. W4-18-02 / Sandoval EXHIBIT 5: COMPLIANCE LETTER (full letter on following page) Board ofAdfustment 13 Case No. WA -18-02 /Sandoval I City of Wheatf4dge COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CityofWheat Ridge Municipal Building 7500W.29'"Ave. Wheat Ridge, CO 80033-8001 P: 303.235.2846 F: 303.235.2857 February 14, 2018 Mala Sandoval 6001 W. 32"d Avenue Wheat Ridge, CO 80033 Dear Ms. Sandoval: Please allow this letter to serve as a response to our meeting two weeks ago and to the site plan the Community Development Department received from you. Per City Code, Section 26-625.C.1.c, metal accessory buildings over 120 square feet are not permitted in any residential zoning district. The building on your property appears to be over 120 square feet and would not be permitted. You may apply for a variance to the allowed square footage for metal accessory buildings, however, staff is not able to support this request. Due to the nature of the request, the variance would have to be presented to the Board of Adjustment at a public hearing. In addition to the materials being out of compliance with the code, the current location of the structure is not permitted because it does not meet setback requirements for accessory structures in the Residential -Two (R-2) zone in which your property is located. The required setback for yards which abut a public street is 25 feet from the property line. Again, staff is not able to support a variance from the required setback for the existing structure. We are able to work with you to locate potential alternate locations on your property for car storage. While alternate solutions may still require setback variances, a different design and location may be more likely to be supported by staff and will help bring your property into compliance with the current requirements. There are three options to bring the property into compliance: 1) remove the building from the property, 2) apply for a metal building variance and/or a setback variance (the next available hearing date at the Board of Adjustment is March 22, 2018, with a February 28 application deadline), or 3) apply for a building permit to construct a new carport or garage that meets the setback requirements for your lot, and then decommission the old building as a condition of building permit approval. Please respond in writing by Friday, March 2, 2018 to indicate which of these three options you wish to pursue. A compliance timeline will be established based on your preferred option. Failure to move forward with one of these three options will result in code enforcement action. If you have any further questions, feel free to contact meat scutler(&ci.wheatridee.eo.us or 303- 235-2849. S�iinnc rely, Scott Cutler Planning Technician cc: 6001 W. 32"dAvenue address file Board ofAdjusbnent 14 Case No. WA -18-02 /Sandoval 2t, Shed Studio 25' _tp House _g At ^^Landscaping Structure Buffer ■ I ■I I ■i■liilll ■1111111■I■1 ■I■11l��Il�'�111111■I■111111■I■■■ i 1111I11 li!����■■������rl 11111 _ll .�■11111ii�111111.:1IIII I■ II■111111�1:11/i11�1:11111� I�II�If�1■I■111 ■IIIN�J 1111Fem!,\I\lllll�I I � 1111111111l� I � 111111■I■ 11�!11■I■111 � ■1- f-0j►li111t■ol■11111g, ■1111111■I INE,, ii'i�'!►�IiiI' II ,1���1■I�' �111111 i1111■ til !M =il■C'IIIC■ 111111■ 1 II■111 111111 �� 111111 I I II ■I■111111■I■ ■■I■111111■I■111111 ■1■111111!1■111111�ICInlllili ■ ■1111111■ ■■ ■ ■■ � �■111111 111111 � . 11111 ' .' 1111■ ■ �!■ ■ HIM mini 111111■11111■I:111111�mffl■IIIIILii9li1111� �'��� iii■1111111'\11■IlllrlR 111■1 ■■I �® �■I ■1■�1��11�: ■I■I _ ■IN IN ll Ll■ 1111Impm:���:�:��C1111■ 1111■ Illnl■ :�u�ll i �IIIIII■�■11111�1�1�1,� ll�l� aln�iI■111111ln�:li'l Eli ■I, ■��:1 ■■ ■■I ■■I ■��:�11111■1■111■II:11111111 ■i -iiii� ■■I ■■I ■I■111111 NEI ■�■111111► ■L1111111■II�U111■ ■I■■1111■I■Ill■1■I�111111■1�11111ii11:■1111. _- � ��p1iM��!l�1�1u'■■111111■1■11/'11■ � ��11: ■■� �I 1111: ■■� ■■I ::i I■111111.1.111■1■I■111111■I■1111111■111111■ (not to scale, provided by applicant) Structure Board of-4djustment 16 Case No. W4-18-02 / Sandoval EXHIBIT 7: SITE PHOTOS View of the property looking south down Harlan Street towards W. 32nd Avenue. The structure can be seen in the center of the photo, painted green and partially obscured by the landscape buffer. The small shed in the northwest corner of the property is to the right. Board ofAdjustment 17 Case No. W4-18-02 / Sandoval A view of the property looking north from W. 32nd Avenue. The structure is behind the trees and white vehicle parked in the driveway. A view of the structure from Harlan Street. It is set back approximately 13 feet from the edge of the street, but only 1 -foot from the property line. Board ofAdjustment 18 Case No. W4-18-02 / Sandoval A view of the property in October 2014, courtesy Google Street View. The structure can be seen in the center of the photo. The September 2014 iteration of this view shows the structure being assembled. The position of the structure has not changed since the initial placement. Bort ojAdjustment 19 Care No. WA -1802 /Sandoval EXHIBIT 8: WRITTEN REQUEST (full letter on following page) Board ofAdfustment 20 Case No. WA -18-02 /Sandoval March 22, 2018 City of Wheat Ridge Community Development Department 7500 West 29th Ave. Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80033 Attn: Scott Cutler My house was built in 1922 before Wheat Ridge was incorporated. When Wheat Ridge incorporated the property line was moved approximately 11'/: feet inward. My house is now short of the setback requirement approximately 3 feet. It is a corner lot and the driveway is off of Harlan St. When I moved I called the city to see if I needed a permit to put a temporary car storage and was told no. This was all I could afford. I was not told of any time limit. I replaced the tarp twice. After the hail storm the tarp was totally destroyed and my car received hail damage. My car is a 2002 Thunderbird that was in perfect condition and has under 16,500 miles. When my husband and I bought it we had a 3 car garage which the car was stored in. When my husband passed away I could no longer stay in our house at 7000 West 35th Ave. We were self- employed and built a successful accounting/tax service and real estate business from scratch. It was just my husband, myself and an occasional helper. Not only did I loose my husband, best friend but my job and of course my income. Savings only last so long so I sold the house we had lived in for 23 years. Even worse the real estate market, after he died, was really bad. I didn't even know where I was going to live. We owned the house at 6001 West 32nd which was a rental that the payment was $300 over the rent we were receiving. I saw this house as my only option. After the hail storm I decided to replace the ugly silver tarp and had the metal siding put up. It is more functional and much better looking. I thought I was making a repair and did not realize this would need a permit. I can't afford a garage and the location of my car storage is on my driveway. This is when I found out I did need a permit and I can't meet the setback requirements. In order to meet the setback requirements I would have to put a driveway on the other side of my house which would then require access to 32"d Ave. This is financially not possible for me and I don't think I would get a permit for access to 32nd Ave. This is why I am requesting a variance for the car storage I have now. I have talked to neighbors and they don't have a problem where it is located now. Sincerely, �Ma Sandoval 6001 West 32nd Ave. Board ofAdjustment 21 Case No. W4-18-02 / Sandoval I City of WheatRi c BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT Minutes of Meeting March 22, 2015 1. CALL MEETING TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Acting Chair Bell at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers of the Municipal Building, 7500 West 29' Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado. 2. ROLL CALL Board Members Present: Janet Bell Dan Bradford David Kuntz Betty Jo Page Larry Richmond Alternates Present: Board Members Absent: Staff Members Present: Ii NIL 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 4. PUBLIC FORUM No one wished to speak at this time. 5. PUBLIC HEARING Rocco Germano Michael Griffeth Thomas Abbott Sally Banghart , Paul Hovland Gerald Dahl, City Attorney Meredith Reckert, Senior Planner Scott Cutler, Planner I Tammy Odean, Recording Secretary A. Case No.WA-18-04: The case was presented by Scott Cutler. He entered the contents of the case file and packet materials, the zoning ordinance and the digital presentation into the record. He stated all appropriate notification and posting requirements have been met and advised the board there was jurisdiction to hear the case. He reviewed the presentation and staff report. Board of Adjustment Minutes March 22, 2018 1 The applicant is requesting approval of a 14 -foot (93.3%) variance to the 15 -foot minimum side yard setback. The purpose of this variance is to allow for the construction of a carport. The variance request would result in a 1 -foot side yard setback, but the proposed carport would meet all other development standards including height and maximum size for the zone district. Member GRIFFITH asked if the other accessory structures are included in the maximum building coverage for the property. Mr. Cutler confirmed they are all included. Member KUNTZ asked if the RV in the picture is going to be placed in the carport. Kenneth W. Penn, Applicant 4675 Parfet Street, Wheat Ridge Mr. Penn said that is exactly why he wants to build the carport, for RV storage. Member BRADFORD asked if Mr. Penn is aware that the building department might have other fire related requirements because the structure will be close to the property line. Mr. Penn said he was not aware of that, but the carport will be metal so he will talk with the building department. Member KUNTZ asked if there were any easements on the property. Mr. Cutler said there were none shown on the Improvement Location Certificate. Mr. Dahl explained the voting process for the Board Members. Because there are 7 members present, a super majority of 6 votes is needed to approve a variance per the Board of Adjustment bylaws and Section 2-53 of the City's Code of Laws. Further, if six votes for a variance are not obtained on a motion to grant, the variance is denied and a resolution of denial is automatically entered. A motion to deny a variance need pass only by a majority of quorum present in order to be adopted, and in that case a resolution of denial is entered. Upon a motion by Member KUNTZ and seconded by Member PAGE, the following motion was made: WHEREAS, application Case No. WA -18-04 was not eligible for administrative review; and WHEREAS, the property has been posted the fifteen days required by law and in recognition that there were no protests registered against it; and Board of Adjustment Minutes March 22, 2018 WHEREAS, the relief applied for may be granted without detriment to the public welfare and without substantially impairing the intent and purpose of the regulations governing the City of Wheat Ridge; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that Board of Adjustment application Case No. WA -18-04 be, and hereby is, APPROVED TYPE OF VARIANCE: Request for approval of a 14 -foot (93.3%) variance from the required 15 -foot side setback for accessory buildings in the Agricultural -One (A-1) zone district. FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: 1. The variance would not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. 2. The applicant is proposing a substantial investment in the property with this application which would 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 the public welfare. 5. The request is consistent with the existing conditions in the surrounding area, as a majority of the properties in the area contain primary or accessory structures that encroach into the required side yard setbacks for the A-1 zone district. WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. The design and architecture of the proposed carport shall be consistent with representations depicted in the application materials, subject to staff review and approval through review of a building permit, and subject to a final zoning inspection. Motion carried 7-0. B. Case Nos.WA-18-05 and WA -18-06: The case was presented by Meredith Reckert. She entered the contents of the case file and packet materials, the zoning ordinance and the digital presentation into the record. She stated all appropriate notification and posting requirements had been met and advised the board there was jurisdiction to hear the case. She reviewed the presentation and staff report. The applicant is requesting approval of two requests 1.) request for approval of an 18 - foot (56.25%) variance allowing the height of a billboard structure to be raised to 50 feet from the 32 -foot maximum height allowance, and 2.) request for approval of a 15 -foot (50%) variance allowing for a 15 -foot side yard setback from the 30 -foot minimum side yard setback adjacent to a street or right-of-way. The purpose of these variances is to allow for the construction of a billboard. Board of Adjustment Minutes March 22, 2018 Member GERMANO asked what the status is for the funding of the Kipling/I-70 interchange reconstruction project. Ms. Reckert said the City is still in the process of acquiring funding by CDOT and the City of Wheat Ridge. Once funding is available, the project will commence. Member KUNTZ asked why City Council does not want to see billboards any higher than the 32 -foot height limit. Ms. Reckert explained that, among other things, City Council is concerned about aesthetics and visual clutter. Member GRIFFETH thanked Ms. Reckert for her presentation and asked about reciprocity with CDOT and asked whether staff asked CDOT for their opinion on the billboard or if staff was required to talk to CDOT about their opinion. Ms. Reckert said staff chose to get their opinion. Member GRIFFETH asked about the letter from CDOT which was signed by Nancy Terry and asked if she is qualified to address this matter. Member KUNTZ interjected and said he has worked with her in the past and she is very knowledgeable on the subject and is one of CDOT's senior managers and looks out for CDOT's best interests on the state's highways. Member GRIFFETH asked if CDOT intends to take more land then what is shown on the ROW for the Kipling/I-70 project. Ms. Reckert said yes and the property owner will be compensated for that. Member GRIFFETH also asked if there are any projections on what the City will receive in taxes if the billboard is installed. Ms. Reckert and Mr. Dahl agreed that would be a question for the applicant. With regard to landscape and signage improvements at the interchange, Member GRIFFETH stated he didn't understand why the City spent a lot of money on landscaping in ROW but are going to restrict someone from building a billboard. He also wondered why the City Attorney is present at the meeting tonight. Mr. Dahl said he is present at the meeting tonight at the request by staff which is common on more complex cases. He has defended other billboard cases and is here to make sure the record is correct and that the decision is defensible. Member GRIFFETH then asked about the cap of 16 billboards in the City of Wheat Ridge and wanted to know how many applied for this vacancy. Board of Adjustment Minutes March 22, 2018 Ms. Reckert said 2 applied for the vacancy and that there are very strict requirements on where these billboards can be placed. Member RICHMOND asked about Exhibit 6 of the applicant's submittal package, on page 8 showing an arrow to the top of the guard rail and the caption saying the elevated road way is 25 feet in height. He would like to know if it is the roadway or the guardrail. Ms. Reckert clarified that this exhibit is from the applicant so they need to answer the question. The applicant then had an opportunity to make their presentation. They handed out an additional exhibit. Scott Andel, Civic Signs, Ltd., Applicant 6669 Serena, Castle Pines Mr. Andel gave a brief presentation and went through the information included in the agenda packet. He said the I-70 overpass is 25 feet in height to answer Member RICHMOND's question. Member GRIFFETH asked Mr. Andel if he knew whether the application was going to be presented to CDOT and if there was a chance to respond to the CDOT letter. Mr. Andel said no but they met with CDOT a few days ago and added that the aesthetic issue was new to them. Ultimately, both the City and CDOT need to approve the request for construction. Member GRIFFETH wondered about the cost of the flag study and Mr. Andel replied that said it cost a couple thousand dollars in addition to surveys. Member PAGE asked if there is any other location on the site for a billboard. Mr. Andel said no because he doesn't want to encroach on the other buildings. Member PAGE asked about the east side of the property. Bob Micsak, Civic Signs, Ltd., Applicant 617 S. Corona Street Mr. Micsak said that pursuant to the CDOT letter, it was indicated they would have no objection to the billboard being installed on the east side of the property and would a support a 10'-15' setback in that location. Ms. Reckert clarified that the billboard needs to meet the rear setback requirement which is based on the height of the sign. A 25' rear setback is required but a reduction of that setback cannot be granted at this meeting because it was not advertised as a variance. Board of Adjustment Minutes March 22, 2018 Member GRIFFETH asked about the possibility of the City of Wheat Ridge having advertising on the billboard and if this could be a condition of approval and being a guarantee. Mr. Micsak said that could be a consideration and the "City of Wheat Ridge" would appear on the sign at all times with the upgraded sign. Mr. GRIFFETH asked if this billboard will be an LED sign, and approximately how much the billboard will cost. Mr. Micsak said no, it will be static vinyl wrap screen because the City does not allow LED billboards. He added the billboard will cost approximately $75,000 plus more depending on the design and soil testing. Member BELL is curious about the CDOT plans and suggested that erection of the billboard could be delayed until the Kipling/I-70 interchange is complete. Mr. Micsak indicated that there are contractual obligations with the land owner and that the City has tight timelines for the permitting process. A building permit needs to be submitted by April 8a' or 9th IWF Mr. Dahl explained the City has strict time frames that Civic Signs needs to meet and that is why they can't step back and wait. In response to a previous comment from Mr. Griffeth, Ms. Reckert explained that the money invested into the landscaping in the ROW is not a "throw away" project. The City of Wheat Ridge "welcome" sign can be disassembled and moved to a different location. Mr. GERMANO told the Applicant they had a compelling presentation and the applicant has swayed his decision and thinks the 32 -foot billboard height limit is too restrictive. With regards to the setback, he expressed that this is a unique parcel and if CDOT constructs the interchange project, the applicant has been forewarned and the billboard will have to come down. He then asked about the change in ownership of the land owner and if that will have any effect on the billboard. Mr. Micsak said there is an easement on the property which is separate from the building and the sign can stand separate from the building. Member KUNTZ clarified that CDOT will pay to move the sign if need be, not the owner. He commented that the elected City officials have declined to modify the City's restrictive billboard height. He continued that this is a city wide issue and the billboard regulations affect all in the City not just in this small area. He would like to see the interchange rebuilt. Tom Helgeson, Kipling Land, LLC 4890 Kipling Street, property owner, Mr. Helgeson said he bought the land in 2003 and is in favor of the billboard. Board of Adjustment Minutes March 22, 2018 Member GRIFFETH asked the owner if he knows how much he will pay the City in taxes from the revenue from the billboard. Mr. Helgeson said he is not sure. Mr. Micsak noted that there will be an increase in the valuation of the property. Member Page asked why the applicant could not choose a different location in the City for the billboard. Mr. Micsak said there is no other location that meets both the city and state requirements for a billboard. Member GRIFFETH stated he is in support of the sign and height and can be swayed on not supporting the setback. Member PAGE said she will not support the proposal and agrees with Member KUNTZ' concerns about the height, the concern of final elevation and for traffic safety. She fears the erection of the billboard will inhibit the Kipling/I-70 interchange proj ect. Member BELL stated she will not be supporting the applicant for a number of reasons, and that she agrees with Member KUNTZ. Mr. Dahl stated the Board must take two separate votes — one on each application. On each application if the motion is to approve, it requires six votes in order to grant the variance; if the motion is to deny, it must pass by four votes (a majority of members present). k Upon a motion by Member PAGE and seconded by Member KUNTZ, the following motion was made: Case No. WA -18-05 WHEREAS, application Case No. WA -18-05, a request for approval of a 15' setback variance, was not eligible for administrative review; and WHEREAS, the property has been posted the fifteen days required by law and in recognition that there were protests registered against it; and WHEREAS, the relief applied for may not be granted without detriment to the public welfare and without substantially impairing the intent and purpose of the regulations governing the City of Wheat Ridge; and NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that Board of Adjustment application Case No. WA -18-05 be, and hereby is, DENIED Board of Adjustment Minutes March 22, 2018 TYPE OF VARIANCE: Request for approval of a 15 -foot (50%) variance from the 30 -foot minimum side yard setback adjacent to a street/right-of-way for property located in the Restricted Commercial (RC) zone district. FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: 1. The side setback variance is inconsistent with the long-term vision for the I-70/Kipling interchange. 2. The subject property would continue to yield a reasonable return in use and function as an office building if the variance were denied. 3. The billboard can still be built if the setback variance were denied. 4. Granting of the variance will negatively affect the I-70 /Kipling interchange reconstruction project. 5. CDOT objects to the variance. Motion failed 3-4, with Members BELL, GERMANO, BRADFORD and GRIFFETH voting no. Member KUNZ questioned Member BELL's vote based on her testimony as not in favor of the variance. Mr. Dahl requested the Recording Secretary clear the board and have the Board vote again on the motion; Dahl stated that a yes (green) vote is to deny and a no (red) vote is to grant. Member BELL stated "I meant to support staffs recommendation which was to deny." Vote taken again. Motion carries 4-3 with Members BRADFORD, GERMANO and GRIFFETH voting against; therefore, the variance was denied. Case No. WA -18-06 Upon a motion by Member KUNTZ and seconded by Member PAGE, the following motion was made: WHEREAS, application Case No. WA -18-06, a request for approval of a height variance, was not eligible for administrative review; and WHEREAS, the property has been posted the fifteen days required by law and in recognition that there were protests registered against it; and WHEREAS, the relief applied for may not be granted without detriment to the public welfare and without substantially impairing the intent and purpose of the regulations governing the City of Wheat Ridge; and Board of Adjustment Minutes March 22, 2018 NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that Board of Adjustment application Case No. WA -18-06 be, and hereby is, DENIED TYPE OF VARIANCE: Approval of an 18 -foot (56.25%) variance to the maximum height of 32 feet for a billboard resulting in a 50 -foot tall billboard in the Restricted Commercial (RC) zone district. FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: 1. The height variance is inconsistent with the long-term vision for the I- 70/Kipling interchange. 2. The subject property would continue to yield a reasonable return in use and function as an office building if the variance were denied. 3. The variance would alter the essential character of the locality. 4. During the review of sign code and billboard regulations, City policy makers have chosen not to extend the maximum height for billboards. Motion failed 2-5 with BRADFORD, GERMANO, GRIFFETH, PAGE and RICHMOND voting against. Therefore, the motion failed to pass. Mr. Dahl stated that because the motion to deny failed, the Board had yet to take a final action on the case, and that a motion to approve was in order. Upon a motion by Member Griffeth and seconded by Member GERMANO, the following motion was made: WHEREAS, application Case No. WA -18-06 was not eligible for administrative review; and WHEREAS, the property has been posted the fifteen days required by law and in recognition that there were no protests registered against it; and WHEREAS, the relief applied for may be granted without detriment to the public welfare and without substantially impairing the intent and purpose of the regulations governing the City of Wheat Ridge; and NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that Board of Adjustment application Case No. WA -18-06 be, and hereby is, APPROVED TYPE OF VARIANCE: Approval of an 18 -foot (56.25%) variance to the maximum height of 32 feet for a billboard resulting in a 50 -foot tall billboard in the Restricted Commercial (RC) zone district. FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: 1. The height variance is inconsistent with the long-term vision for the I- 70/Kipling interchange, however there should be an exception considering other factors. Board of Adjustment Minutes March 22, 2018 2. The subject property would continue to yield a reasonable return in use and function as an office building if the variance were approved. 3. The variance would not alter the essential character of the locality. 4. During the review of sign code and billboard regulations, City policy makers have chosen not to extend the maximum height for billboards, however the Board of Adjustment feels this is an exception to the policy. WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. The sign be in substantial compliance with documents that have been submitted. 2. The City of Wheat Ridge has guaranteed advertising to be determined at a different meeting. Mr. Dahl stated if a member wished to grant the variance, vote yes (green button); if the member wished to deny the variance, vote no (red button). By the requirements of Code of Laws and the BOA Bylaws, a motion to grant a variance must pass by 6 votes (of 7 members present), and if not, a resolution of denial is automatically entered. The motion failed 4-3 with KUNTZ, BELL and RICHMOND voting against. Under Code 2-53 and the Board of Adjustment bylaws, this action denied the variance application. 6. CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING Acting Chair Bell closed the public hearing. OLD BUSINESS NEW BUSINESS A. Approval of Minutes — December 14, 2017 It was moved by Member KUNTZ and seconded by Member GRIFFETH to approve the minutes as written. The motion passed 5-0-2 with Board Members GERMANO and PAGE abstaining. B. Resolution 01-2018: Establishing a designated public place for posting of meeting notices as required by the Colorado Open Meetings Law. It was moved by Member GRIFFETH and seconded by Member GERMANO to approve Resolution 01-2018 establishing a designate public place for posting of meeting notices as required by the Colorado Open Meetings Law. The motion passed 7-0. Board of Adjustment Minutes March 22, 2018 10 Member PAGE asked about Lily Griego's seat and Ms. Odean said that Member Richmond has been sworn into her vacated seat. Member Bell asked about better hearing devices for meeting. 8. ADJOURNMENT Acting Chair Bell adjourned the meeting at 9:26 p.m. Sally Banghart, Chair Tammy Odean, Recording Secretary Board of Adjustment Minutes March 22, 2018 11 WHEAT RIDGE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT CERTIFICATE OF RESOLUTION (TEMPLATE) CASE NO: WA -18-02 APPLICANT NAME: Mala Sandoval LOCATION OF REQUEST: 6001 W. 32nd Avenue WHEREAS, the application Case No. WA -18-02 was not eligible for administrative review; and WHEREAS, the property has been posted the fifteen days required by law and in recognition that there were/were not protests registered against it; and WHEREAS the relief applied for may/may not be granted without detriment to the public welfare and without substantially impairing the intent and purpose of the regulations governing the City of Wheat Ridge NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that Board of Adjustment application Case No. WA - 181802 be, and hereby is, DENIED. TYPE OF VARIANCE: Request for approval of (A) a 24 -foot (96%) variance from the 25 -foot side yard setback requirement for yards which abut a public street in the Residential -Two (R-2) zone district, and (B) a 120 -square foot (100%) variance from the 120 -square foot limit for metal accessory buildings in residential zone districts. FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: 1. Both requests do not meet a majority of the criteria staff uses to analyze variance requests. 2. The request will result in a structure that alters the essential character of the locality. 3. The request does not meet historical thresholds for what constitutes a substantial investment.