Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutWA-18-10City of W heat�idge COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT City of Wheat Ridge Municipal Building 7500 W. 29" Ave. September 10, 2018 Merle Cordova Mayberry Builders 11603 Teller St. #F Broomfield, CO 80020 Re: Case No. WA -18-10 Dear Mr. Cordova: Wheat Ridge, CO 80033-8001 P: 303.235.2846 F: 303.235.2857 Revised Please be advised that your request for two independent variances: A) approval of a 2 -foot (40%) variance to the 5 -foot setback requirement resulting in 3 -foot side yard setback has been denied and B) approval of a 5 -foot (50%) variance to the10-foot rear yard setback for a detached garage on property zoned Residential -Three (R-3) and located at 2961 Ames Street has been approved. Enclosed is a copy of the Disposition of Administrative Variance Requests. Please note that all variance requests automatically expire within 180 days (February 23, 2019) of the date it was granted unless a building permit for the variance has been obtained within such period of time. Please feel free to be in touch with any further questions. Sincerely, Tammy Odean Administrative Assistant Enclosure: Approval of Variance Cc: WA -18-10 (case file) WA1810.doc www.d.wheatridge.co.us 7500 West 29th AvenueCity of Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80033 303.235.2846 Fax: 303.235.2857 Disposition of Administrative Variance Requests Case No. WA -18-10 was submitted by Mayberry Builders for approval of a two- fold variance request for property located at 2961 Ames Street for construction of a freestanding garage. Request A: A request for approval of a 2' setback variance to the 5' setback requirement for a side yard in the R-3 zone district (40% variance) resulting in a 3' side setback. WHEREAS, an application for a side setback variance was submitted for the property located at 2961 Ames Street to allow construction of a freestanding garage; and WHEREAS, City staff found basis for denial of the variance, relying on criteria listed in Sections 26- 115 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws and on information submitted in the case file. NOW THEREFORE, be it hereby resolved that a 2' side setback variance to the 5' setback requirement for a side yard in the R-3 zone district (40% variance) resulting in a 3' side setback is DENIED based on the following findings of fact: 1. The property will continue to yield a reasonable return in use. 2. This is a request of convenience, not hardship. 3. There are no unique circumstances. 4. There could be negative impacts to the property to the south if the variance is granted. Request B: A request for approval of a 5' rear setback variance to the 10' rear setback requirement resulting in a 5' setback in the R-3 zone district (50% variance) resulting in a 5' rear setback. WHEREAS, an application for a rear setback variance was submitted for the property located at 2961 Ames Street to allow construction of a freestanding garage; and, WHEREAS, City staff found basis for approval of the variance, relying on criteria listed in Sections 26- 115 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws and on information submitted in the case file.; and, WHEREAS, there were no registered objections regarding the application. NOW THEREFORE, be it hereby resolved that a 5' rear setback variance to the 10' rear setback requirement resulting in a 5' setback in the R-3 zone district (50% variance) is APPROVED based on the following findings of fact: 1. The variance would not alter the essential character of the locality. 2. The request would not be detrimental to public welfare. 3. The proposed garage location will be consistent with surrounding development patterns. With the following conditions: 1. The design and architecture of the proposed garage be similar in character to the existing house, subject to staff review and approval through review of a building permit. 2. The approved garage shall not include the attached pergola. L uren Mikul , Acting Community Development Director Date Ci -Who eof atI�iclge CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE PLANNING DIVISION STAFF REPORT TO: Community Development Director DATE: August 22, 2018 CASE MANAGER: Meredith Reckert CASE NO. & NAME: WA-18-10/Mayberry Builders ACTION REQUESTED: Approval of a 2' side yard setback variance to the 5' requirement and a 5' rear yard setback variance to the 10' requirement in an R-3 zone district at 2961 Ames Street LOCATION OF REQUEST: 2961 Ames Street APPLICANT (S): Mayberry Builders for Paul Hoffman OWNER (S): Same APPROXIMATE AREA: 6650 square feet PRESENT ZONING: Residential -Three (R-3)����._��.,�_.� PRESENT LAND USE: Single Family Residence ENTER INTO RECORD: (X) CASE FILE & PACKET MATERIALS (X) DIGITAL PRESENTATION (X) ZONING ORDINANCE 1 Case Nos. WA-18-10/MayberryBuilders for Hoffman JURISDICTION: All notification and posting requirements have been met; therefore, there is jurisdiction to hear this case. I. REQUEST The applicant, Mayberry Builders for Paul Hoffman, is requesting approval of two variances for the construction of a freestanding garage and shop on property zoned Residential -Three (R-3) at 2961 Ames Street Request A: The applicant is requesting a 2' side setback variance to the 5' setback requirement for a side yard resulting in a 3' setback in the R-3 zone district Request B: The application is requesting a 5' rear setback variance to the 10' setback requirement for a rear yard resulting in a 5' setback in the R-3 zone district. Section 26-115.0 (Variances and Waivers) of the Wheat Ridge City Code empowers the Community Development Director to decide upon applications for administrative variances from the strict application of the zoning code development standards that are not in excess of fifty (50) percent of the standard. II. CASE ANALYSIS The variances are being requested so the property owners may construct a freestanding garage with a workshop on the rear portion of their property. The proposed structure would be 600 square feet in size. The site is located at 2961 Ames Street, is zoned Residential -Three (R-3) and has 6650 square feet of lot width with 50' of lot width. The property is substandard to both the minimum lot size of 7500 square feet and lot width of 60' for a single-family residence in the R-3 zone district. (Exhibit 1, Aerial photo) This is in an older neighborhood with a mix of unit types and ages, although most of the homes in the immediate vicinity appear to be single-family homes built post -WWII or 1920's bungalows. The property was platted as a part of the Olinger Gardens Subdivision, which was approved in 1917 but the home on the property was not built until 1945. The properties to the north and south were built in 1927 and 1916, respectively. Zoning on the property is Residential -Three (R-3) with Residential -One C (R -1C) on all sides. (Exhibit 2, Zoning map) The R-3 zone district allows a variety of housing types including single- family residences, duplexes and multi -family up to 12 units per acre. (Exhibit 3, Site Photos) This neighborhood was subject to an administrative mass rezoning from R-3 to R -1C, which occurred in 1976. The subject property opted out of the R-1 C zoning and remained R-3. The closest other R-3 zoning is a block to the east along Sheridan. The existing property exceeds the minimum standards for R-1 C but, as noted above, are less than R-3 standards for a single-family lot. (Exhibit 4, ILC) The proposed setbacks are shown in the table below relative to the existing and surrounding zoning. The proposed 5' rear setback requires a variance in R-3 but is consistent with the surrounding R -1C zoning. The structure would comply with all other standards including maximum size, height, and bulk plane. Community Development Director Case Nos. WA-18-10/Mayberry Builders Zoning Min. Lot Min. Lot Min lot **Front **Side setback **Rear setback size width coverage setback R -IC 5000 sf 50' 40% 20' 5' 5' R-3 7500 sf 60' 40% 25' 5' 5' </= 10' on- site 10' > 10' Property 6650 sf 50' 23% >25' 3' proposed 5' proposed proposed lot (2' variance) (5' variance) coverage * * Accessory structure setbacks The existing home is approximately 900 square feet in size. A ribbon drive from Ames Street provides off street parking. There is no covered parking on the property. The proposed garage will measure 40' by 12' with an 8' x 15' bump -out for a workshop space at the rear. The garage will be accessible from both the existing front drive and the alley to the rear. The attached site plan shows the garage/shop extending into a covered patio. The covered patio portion is not part of this project and would need to be a detached structure in order to be built because the proposed garage is already at the 600 square foot maximum allowed for a major accessory structure. (Exhibit 5, Site Plan) III. VARIANCE/WAIVER CRITERIA In order to approve a variance, the Community Development Director must determine that the majority of the "criteria for review" listed in Section 26-115.C.4 of the City Code have been met. The applicant has provided their analysis of the application's compliance with the variance criteria. (Exhibit 6, Applicant Responses) Staff provides the following review and analysis of the variance criteria. Request A: A request for approval of a 2' setback variance to the 5' setback requirement for a side yard in the R-3 zone district (40% variance) resulting in a 3' side setback. 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. A detached garage could be constructed whether or not the variance is granted. Staff finds this criterion has not been met. 2. The variance would not alter the essential character of the locality. This area has a mix of setbacks and building placement so the side setback variance would not be discernable as altering the character of the area. However, the home to the south appears to be built either on or very close to both the common side property line and the rear property line Community Development Director Case Nos. WA-18-10/Mayberry Builders adjacent to the alley. If the garage is built at the reduced 3' setback, it could impact the adjacent residence and might even violate building code due to the proximity of the structure. There appears to be a window on the north wall of the adjacent house. 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. The applicant is proposing an investment in the property that would be possible to construct without the variance. The garage could be shifted to the north to meet the required setback. 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. While the property is 10' substandard to the required lot width, it is regular in shape, is relatively flat and is not a corner lot. The proposed setback request is based on an inconvenience rather than a hardship. Staff finds this criterion has not been met. 5. The alleged difficulty or hardship has not been created by any person presently having an interest in the property. The current property owner purchased the property in 2016, and thus is not responsible for the existing conditions, including the width of the lot. However, a detached garage could be built meeting the required side yard setback so there is no evidence of hardship. 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 proposed garage depth is proposed at 40'. This is the same approximate depth as the closest wall of the adjacent residence to the south. The request would not be detrimental to the public welfare but it would be injurious to the neighboring property and may impact the adequate supply of air and light to this neighbor. Staff finds this criterion has not been met. Community Development Director 4 Case Nos. WA-18-10/Mayberry Builders 7. The unusual circumstances or conditions necessitating the variance request are present in the neighborhood and are not unique to the property. The conditions necessitating the variance are not unique to the property. This is a neighborhood where many of the existing homes are not compliant with required setbacks However, there is room to build the garage while maintaining the required 5' setback. 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. Accessibility requirements are not applied to single-family construction. 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-family construction. Staff finds this criterion is not applicable. Request B: A request for approval of a 5' rear setback variance to the 10' setback requirement in the R-3 zone district (50% variance) resulting in a 5' rear yard setback. 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. A detached garage could be constructed whether or not the variance is granted. Staff finds this criterion has not been met. 2. The variance would not alter the essential character of the locality. This area has a mix of setbacks and building placement so the rear setback variance would not be discernable as impacting the character of the area. The minimum rear setback in the R -1C zone district is 5' so reduction of the setback from 10' to 5' should be consistent with conforming rear setbacks in the neighborhood. Both the primary structures to the north and the south appear to have non -conforming rear setbacks, as do other properties along the alley. 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. Community Development Director Case Nos. WA-18-10/Mayberry Builders The applicant is proposing an investment in the property that would be possible to construct without the variance; although the garage may need to be reduced in size from 40' in length to ensure access into it and out of it from the east. 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. While the property is 10' substandard to the required width, it is regular in shape, is relatively flat and is not a corner lot. However, due to the proximity of the rear wall of the house the garage may not be accessible from the east with a 10' setback, as designed. Reduction of the setback to 5' will enable a driver to maneuver a vehicle into and out of the garage from the east, particularly if the side setback variance is not approved. 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 current property owner purchased the property in 2016, and thus is not responsible for the existing conditions of the property, including the width of the lot. The garage could be reduced in length and not need a variance. 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. There are numerous main structures and garages, which have a zero foot setback from the alley and/or access from the alley. The request would not be detrimental to the 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. The request would not increase congestion in the streets, nor would it cause an obstruction to motorists on the street or in the alley. The proposed would not increase the danger of fire. Staff finds this criterion has been met. Community Development Director Case Nos. WA-I8-10/Mayberry Builders 7. The unusual circumstances or conditions necessitating the variance request are present in the neighborhood and are not unique to the property. The conditions necessitating the variance are not unique to the property. This is a neighborhood where many of the existing homes are not compliant with required setbacks. Many structures along the alley have zero foot setbacks, including the property to the south. Staff finds that this criterion has been met. 8. Granting of the variance would result in a reasonable accommodation of a person with disabilities. Accessibility requirements are not applied to single-family construction. Staff finds this criterion 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-family construction. Staff finds this criterion not applicable. There were no complaints registered regarding these requests. One telephone call was received in support of the variances. IV. STAFF CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Request A: Request for approval of a 2' side setback variance to the 5' side setback requirement resulting in a 3' setback in the R-3 zone district Not having found the application in compliance with the majority of the review criteria, staff recommends DENIAL of the request for a 2' side setback variance. Although there are numerous setback encroachments in the area, the proximity of the home to the south could be injurious to both the proposed structure and the adjacent structure. There are no unique circumstances with the property and this is a request of convenience, not hardship. Staff is therefore recommending Denial for the following reasons: 1. The property will continue to yield a reasonable return in use. 2. This is a request of convenience, not hardship. 3. There are no unique circumstances. 4. There could be negative impacts to the property to the south if the variance is granted. Request B: Request for approval of a 5' rear setback variance to the 10' rear setback requirement resulting in a 5' setback in the R-3 zone district. Having found the application in compliance with the majority of the review criteria, staff recommends APPROVAL of the request for a 5' rear setback variance. Staff found that this situation is not unique to this property and that numerous other structures in the area have non -conforming setbacks. It will Community Development Director Case Nos. WA-18-10/Mayberry Builders also allow maneuverability into the garage. Therefore, Staff recommends approval for the following reasons: 1. The variance would not alter the essential character of the locality. 2. The request would not be detrimental to public welfare. 3. The proposed garage location will be consistent with surrounding development patterns. With the following conditions: 1. The design and architecture of the proposed garage be similar in character to the existing house, subject to staff review and approval through review of a building permit. 2. The approved garage shall not include the attached pergola. Community Development Director Case Nos. WA-18-10/Mayberry Builders EXHIBIT 1: AERIAL PHOTO Site fn 02959 02947 102943 62934 Community Development Director 9 Case Nos. WA-18-10/Mayberry Builders EXHIBIT 2: ZONING MAP 4 03008 01010 =7 0.4001 03002 03003 02945 02943 02967 02941 02942 02063 02939 02W9 K'3 0?933 02"30 02959 02929 02M 07947 z a z z 02927 02W2 02943 02WI 02920 02M 02917 02018 62919 02916 02994 02913 02911 010 02911 02934 02930 02926 02922 02918 02914 02910 Site 1 6 1 '2933 02929 02925 02"821 1915 r,✓(13 Community Development Director 10 Case Nos. WA-18-10/Mayberry Builders EXHIBIT 3: SITE PHOTOS View of the front of subject property from Ames View of the front of property to the south from Ames - subject property is on the right Community Development Director 11 Case Nos. WA-18-10/Mayberry Builders View of the driveway and front of property to the north from Ames - photo included to provide context of mix of development patterns in the neighborhood View of the rear of property to the north from the alley garage violates rear setback requirement Community Development Director 12 Case Nos. WA-18-10/Mayberry Builders r L — Sidewall of the house to the south View of the side setback of property to the south from the alley — shows side yard setback encroachment Community Development Director 14 Case Nos. WA-18-10/Mayberry Builders EXHIBIT 4: ILC HiMG Un 22, 1 1,WL t Gcrtitc isa Lm Camtro! in 5' sem, Aa n Soy Ma is � Czar[: or co`..� ti._ fat Ih bion 4flntvcLnents r ' 1 L-26— Of F— I j1W if SboWn are hypmximtLea. SWa! 1 "rRQ LM 41 13310 M LOT 21 140k: -4 c4awdc may` Eaftw t►vrr Pfapmro Uac Community Development Director 15 Case Nos. WA-18-10/Mayberry Builders W,i. —X4 +P O i�IIC ti'6jL1�' Q r, 33 .w 6.9 1[t, 6u"LAi7G�� 4r� • {lair LOT 21 140k: -4 c4awdc may` Eaftw t►vrr Pfapmro Uac Community Development Director 15 Case Nos. WA-18-10/Mayberry Builders EXHIBIT 5: SITE PLAN Community Development Director 16 Case Nos. WA-18-10/Mayberry Builders EXHIBIT 6: APPLICANT'S RESPONSE 1. The property In question would not yield a reasonable return in use, service or Income if perrnitted to be used only under the conditions allowed by regulation for the district In which it Is located. If Variance Is approved the Garage would allow for wider and longer vehicles to use it This is beneficial to currant homeowner and also future homeowners or renters that would realize the additional benefits of a larger approach angle into the garage on the east facing entrance. This is also beneficial to the neighbors and oity as there will be less vehlces parked on the street 2. The variance would not altar the essential character of the locality, This variance would not alter the essential character on the locality. This neighborhood has great character and the designer and architect wonted hard to design a structure that would fit well in the neighborhood while also adding unique character that we feel will be pleasing to the current, Mum homeowners, but also neighbors. 3. The applicant is proposing a substantial investment in the property with this application, which would not be possible without the variance. There will be a substantial investment in the property. Without the variance, there is a potential for a less substantial invest in the property due to less room to continue Improving the property. My experience has also been that when one person on a block starts making substantial improvements, it's also nhotivates other neighbors to start making Improvements. 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 more inconvenience. Under the current setback requirements, there will be a hardship upon the owner in multiple ways. There will be less room to make future substantial Improvements to the property. Also have been witness to many homeowners that don't use their garages because they cannot fit into them with their larger vehicles these days. The Unique hardship in this case would be that homeowner at times pulls a small cargo trailer with his SUV for worts, Being able to pull into garage fully without having to leave vehicle parked on street could also be a seen as attempt to deter crime. ti. 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, Community Development Director 17 Case Nos. WA-18-10/Mayberry Builders �'r No hardships have been created that wouldn't be considered a hardship to current homeowner or future owners. We do not believe these hardships are unique to just the current home owner. But could be considered a hardship to any person having a Interest in the property. S. The grangng 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 ether things, substantially or permanently impairing the appropriate use or development of adjacent property, impairing the adequate supply of fight 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 granting of the variance would not Impair the public welfare in any way that could be reasonably foreseen. Congestion on the streets would actually be less. Does not block natural light since it is on the north side of a adjacent property that also has privacy vegetation and no windows. We are willing to address any potential fire code concenhs with additional of fire proofing materials on the side that would potentially be closer to the adjacent property. This substantial improvement in the property has to potential to increase property values in the neighborhood. T. The unusual circumstances or conditions necessitating the variance request are present in the neighborhood and are not unique to the property. Many of the properties In the neighborhood had varying setbacks and zoning +differences. We understand it's a old neighborhood much of this happened before incorporation. We would not use this as a `but they did it' excuse_ But feel the property impr+ovenwrith are not unique to just the home owner's property and fit in with the current building and set backs styles in the neighborhood. 8. Granting of the vehanoe would result in a reasonable accommodation of a person with disabilities. [Does not typically apply to single- or two-family homes.] Granting of the variance would result in a more reasonable accommodation of a person with disabilities. It would allow more side room to exit a wheel chair accessible van. This would also allow more roam for a future ramp to the house to be installed. The rear entrance of the house is where there would the potential entrance and exit for time house since the front exit Is on a raised porch. $. The application is in substantial compliance with the applicable standards set forth in the Archifecturel and Site Design Manval. [Does not typically apply to single- or two-family homes.] Community Development Director 18 Case Nos. WA-18-10/Mayberry Builders EMOF 881CPAME U2Fr A9D 4 l" I MSF 0bP1� iiIN, \v �r�ana �wA•�e it ,, PROJECT SPECIFICA71ONS WWd Faun- tetra W.a aquW F --b. Fh9 fnahl door - GARAW DOORS Vl ftubW metal dmm PA *M A%pW Camp. Shk,pk uah wfdkmoua We a Water Weld slow Baa sevallo m CASEWORK Sas POans'and Secdm br plan and eWm&n view WSLA ATKM NOfla Ba ng �daflef of hhmdegon Wad. E > BUOdklg b aseumad to ba bwjWad Inthe fMm. DRYWALL, POINT Not irdaded b bWor, egwed tramIM. ,SiV- I ........... :.... ........ a � s Aia esa T]� ROOF PIAN v Ua, - V V, MINIKQ --0 H> f Ain ASM LLT COW%)=EIf MM ONCON ICEaWATMBNEW - -favos�o�rm�[ifaer, � -�. 's . RfiNM1J3AlaCE6f6i8-� �. w._eoon+w►u , YQ ter- ,% er3 IiARA(iE SiAS H 00R 2W4 Atop Sbw W RAW. G is off =k- fortcd m,cdQada bbROmbwwwdwdumm CONSIATANM cd m m 442 Conrad Palin 0. a 234 SF a$ larr I'm = a� E > a _ a � Mw OOIJOY�1 2W4 Atop Sbw W RAW. G is off =k- fortcd m,cdQada bbROmbwwwdwdumm CONSIATANM cd m m 0. a i a$ larr I'm = a� E > a Site Plan & Floor Pians owe August 1, 2017 OW&Nw* Checker e� �� a ledkfded �j} A9TidRiY K:EtOg11ERSHJ OPoOQMT.I�BFH.lER37UEL0 � A59 swwpkftm ,y —7-7--1 11 A�:Ii�EO L{ C!X(�Q.3 l �--." - snaacfsua � vi` �' r iFLOOR 4 eORMINALBLAMMSECTHM FL�10B1®ITCEAODSxt 60AR94. Yxe I 1 � � � ' g AICO�OBWtI'FANLC 64f�.OR TDUAL � 6 � 0 ; ,�� A� IDG�OOALL ELJ.4' dC"AgIKID I —IftiS-"stoona &II n Oe _ _ 94 CJ y90"•6' I ti. BEEY$bNBL HOf@t0'tZtL EbdfDBBAtTBV DOW DOOR x00. ca= EXISYMMODFDOE _ ti GA GARAG 'F GAPJ _ I _Tar•— L 4 NORrH ELEYAT� _ �_— '. a Easy EiEVATIOf� ' coamti�L�BuwTea S I BFAMP M-TcoCELAV'E; OF ASFiL'lLYC6d' POS1E &Q�lE4 1 X99 RAFfEAS POLYkttdD TRAJ45nm LY l 1.0` iTEEI STWAPS ART3tD.R� - ��'� • •� 70 SBANASOIE TO SUPPORT MORTREUFBAUMBERS PATIMABOUV.CREMIALLOCATED ONALL RAGE 11NN MASSING . _ L—� � cAA�E MONUONTALBOARD a BATTEN ,�ivuEsrELEVATI�V _ Sue . esus FLOOR T--� $TSRAFMM — PER= 6B�,�, AT005AY�TSppC.t�'.OA EQ'.LAL. ®SPOt. LOCATED ON ALL GARNE UM Y!:E.ma O171fC.'t P6 1 93 1. �j} A9TidRiY K:EtOg11ERSHJ OPoOQMT.I�BFH.lER37UEL0 � A59 swwpkftm ,y —7-7--1 11 A�:Ii�EO L{ C!X(�Q.3 l �--." - snaacfsua � vi` �' r iFLOOR 4 eORMINALBLAMMSECTHM FL�10B1®ITCEAODSxt 60AR94. Yxe I 1 � � � ' g AICO�OBWtI'FANLC 64f�.OR TDUAL � 6 � 0 ; ,�� A� IDG�OOALL ELJ.4' dC"AgIKID I —IftiS-"stoona &II n Oe _ _ 94 CJ y90"•6' I ti. BEEY$bNBL HOf@t0'tZtL EbdfDBBAtTBV DOW DOOR x00. ca= EXISYMMODFDOE _ ti GA GARAG 'F GAPJ _ I _Tar•— L 4 NORrH ELEYAT� _ �_— '. a Easy EiEVATIOf� ' coamti�L�BuwTea S I BFAMP M-TcoCELAV'E; OF ASFiL'lLYC6d' POS1E &Q�lE4 1 X99 RAFfEAS POLYkttdD TRAJ45nm LY l 1.0` iTEEI STWAPS ART3tD.R� - ��'� • •� 70 SBANASOIE TO SUPPORT MORTREUFBAUMBERS PATIMABOUV.CREMIALLOCATED ONALL RAGE 11NN MASSING . _ L—� � cAA�E MONUONTALBOARD a BATTEN ,�ivuEsrELEVATI�V _ Sue . esus FLOOR T--� 0EEME0U.1 sPF BQM69A.YV'W r VmmLMrBATTsMWuICsOAM 6m TED' p�^ WMINCOORAFTERS I -xr- _T_,-, i -- 170 T6C.BEGOIS Ai CONW Pall'T&: CIANOWCAr 3 PER= 6B�,�, AT005AY�TSppC.t�'.OA EQ'.LAL. I LOCATED ON ALL GARNE UM Y!:E.ma OU 0EEME0U.1 sPF BQM69A.YV'W r VmmLMrBATTsMWuICsOAM 6m TED' p�^ WMINCOORAFTERS I -xr- _T_,-, i -- 170 T6C.BEGOIS Ai CONW Pall'T&: CIANOWCAr CEDARl- s.. _7REUS9 iCT0. OU GARAGE SLAB ccI 100 p„� remmw 19i -17-0S z EoC E�ICh7EOPATaraRADE Deas I �e B•- (� - � Chedc9T Q .. p to m� aU N %CGTBABWFATNA '. OR SCUM LOCATED ORALLOARAOEASI@dMA88W8 O SOQJifp ELEVATIIN Ud8tl780ARD _� � V4° c 9•-fi -- 6 700'•5' ELEVAMNS GARAGE SLAB R 100' 0° � p„� remmw 19i -17-0S macs BP AU%W aAmeBBT_ - � Chedc9T A3. 0,14'. City of Wheat __ge 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 August 3, 2018 Dear Property Owner: This is to inform you of Case No. WA -18-10 request for approval of 1) a 2 -foot (40%) variance to the 5 -foot side yard setback and 2) a 5 -foot (50%) variance to the 10 -foot rear yard setback for a detached garage on property zoned Residential - Three (R-3) located at 2961 Ames Street. 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 adjacent 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 13, 2018. Thank you. WA1810.doc www.ei.wheatridge.co.us Property is outlined in red. Ll- Site Plan rT7 IW r7.I ft rm fN BLANTON DENNIS SHELBY BLANTON BARWICK FANIA K WENDY L BURGESS ELIZABETH LEISTIKOW BRAD J 02963 AMES ST 06550 CALAMAR DR 02942 BENTON ST WHEAT RIDGE CO 80214 CUMMING GA 30130 DENVER CO 80214 MEIXUEIRO HUGO ARELLANO VICTORIA 02930 BENTON ST WHEAT RIDGE CO 80214 WADDELL JOHN R 02959 AMES ST DENVER CO 80214 RITZ BRENDA 02934 AMES ST WHEAT RIDGE CO 80214 SCHOENBERG MIKE 02938 BENTON ST WHEAT RIDGE CO 80214 Rev. 5/2014 City of Wheat,ddge COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Review Criteria: Variance 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. If Variance Is approved the Garage would allow for wider and longer vehicles to use it. This is beneficial to current homeowner and also future homeowners or renters that would realize the additional benefits of a larger approach angle into the garage on the east facing entrance. This is also beneficial to the neighbors and city as there will be less vehicles parked on the street 2. The variance would not alter the essential character of the locality. This variance would not alter the essential character on the locality. This neighborhood has great character and the designer and architect worked hard to design a structure that would fit well in the neighborhood while also adding unique character that we feel will be pleasing to the current, future homeowners, but also neighbors. 3. The applicant is proposing a substantial investment in the property with this application, which would not be possible without the variance. There will be a substantial investment in the property. Without the variance, there is a potential for a less substantial invest in the property due to less room to continue improving the property. My experience has also been that when one person on a block starts making substantial improvements, it's also motivates other neighbors to start making improvements. 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. Under the current setback requirements, there will be a hardship upon the owner in multiple ways. There will be less room to make future substantial improvements to the property. Also have been witness to many homeowners that don't use their garages because they cannot fit into them with their larger vehicles these days. The Unique hardship in this case would be that homeowner at times pulls a small cargo trailer with his SUV for work. Being able to pull into garage fully without having to leave vehicle parked on street could also be a seen as attempt to deter crime. 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. Community Development Department • (303) 235-2846 • www.ci.wheatridge.co.us No hardships have been created that wouldn't be considered a hardship to current homeowner or future owners. We do not believe these hardships are unique to just the current home owner. But could be considered a hardship to any person having a 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. The granting of the variance would not impair the public welfare in any way that could be reasonably foreseen. Congestion on the streets would actually be less. Does not block natural light since it is on the north side of a adjacent property that also has privacy vegetation and no windows. We are willing to address any potential fire code concerns with additional of fire proofing materials on the side that would potentially be closer to the adjacent property. This substantial improvement in the property has to potential to increase property values in the neighborhood. 7. The unusual circumstances or conditions necessitating the variance request are present in the neighborhood and are not unique to the property. Q Many of the properties in the neighborhood had varying setbacks and zoning differences. We understand it's a old neighborhood much of this happened before incorporation. We would not use this as a "but they did it" excuse. But feel the property improvements are not unique to just the home owner's property and fit in with the current building and set backs styles in the neighborhood. 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.] Granting of the variance would result in a more reasonable accommodation of a person with disabilities. It would allow more side room to exit a wheel chair accessible van. This would also allow more room for a future ramp to the house to be installed. The rear entrance of the house is where there would the potential entrance and exit for the house since the front exit is on a raised porch. 9. The application is in substantial compliance with the applicable standards set forth in the Architectural and Site Design Manual. [Does not typically apply to single- or two-family homes.] Meredith Reckert From: Sent: To: Subject: Follow Up Flag: Flag Status: Hi Mere, Hope you are feeling better. Tammy Odean Tuesday, August 7, 2018 3:19 PM Meredith Reckert WA -18-10 Follow up Flagged With regards to WA -18-10 I received a call today from a Mr. Johnson in support of the variance. He said this after I gave him the information re the variance. Tammy Odean Administrative Assistant 7500 W. 29th Avenue Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80033 Office Phone: 303-235-2846 Fax: 303-235-2857 www.ci.wheatridge.co.us City of dw Wheat Nj'4C14_ COMMINHYDEVITOPM1 NIT CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail contains business -confidential information. It is intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, electronic storage or use of this communication is prohibited. If you received this communication in error, please notify us Variance Request for Detached Garage 2961 Ames St. Wheatridge, CO 80214 Contractor Mayberry Builders LLC 11603 Teller St #F Bromfield, CO 80020 303-949-5276 Owner Paul Hoffman 2961 Ames St Wheatridge, CO 80214 Requesting administrative setback variance of 50% of development standards in Sec 26-211. Current side set back 5 feet, and back set back 10 feet. Requesting new side setback of 3 feet, and back setback of 5 feet. Design of garage, and more importantly front garage door, poses tight turning radius to enter garage under current setbacks. Additionally, current design and setbacks would decrease usable yard space, and decrease areas marked for greenery installation. Adjustments were made to design of garage to alleviate entrance issues, but due to engineering and code conformations, this alone would not resolve entrance issues. Garage design was to be accepting of most vehicle types and sizes for the benefit of current and future owners. We believe this variance would be accepting of neighbors and make logical sense once garage constructed. VOIJU t j� c( ire INDIVIDUAL ACKNOWLEDGMENT State/Commonwealth of 0016 rc c l 0 ss. County of L�? so->, On this the 1 day of Dav Month D(3 1 , before me, Year the undersigned Notary Public, ( Name of Notary Public personally appeared yn"r� �c(ovi, c,a�c� Pe, In Name(s) of Signer(s) HARLEY TIERHEIMER Notary Public - State of Colorado Notary ID 20124048985 My Commission Expires Aug 7, 2020 El personally known to me – OR – C�1 proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same for the purposes therein stated. WITNESS my hand and official seal. — "� - -,:: �: 0, ignature of Nota ublic Any Other Required Information Place Notary Seal/Stamp Above (Printed Name of Notary, Expiration Date, etc.) INFORMATION IN AREAS 1-4 REQUIRED IN ARIZONA. OPTIONAL IN RIGHT RIGHT OTHER STATES. THUMBPRINT THUMBPRINT OF SIGNER #1 OF SIGNER #2 Description of Any Attached /Document C ( Top of thumb here Top of thumb here E Title or Type of Document:/ �t f l�Y► c e e rt2S F8 r � I6'c 2 Document Date: 7 lNumber of Pages: 1 CL I Signer(s) Other Than Named Above: ©2011 National Notary Association • NationalNotary.org • 1 -800 -US NOTARY (1-800-876-6827) Item #25936 City of W heat K COMMUNITY DEVELOPMCNT City of Wheat Ridge Municipal Building 7500 W. 29" Ave. Sec. 26-211. Residential -Three District (R-3). Wheat Ridge, CO 80033-8001 P: 303.235.2846 F: 303.235.2857 A. Intent and purpose: This district is established to provide high quality, safe, quiet and stable medium to high-density residential neighborhoods, and to prohibit activities of any nature which are incompatible with the medium to high-density residential character. B. Development standards: Notes: (a) Corner lots shall have a minimum lot width of eighty (80) feet for both street frontages. (b) Front setback reductions may be allowed in accordance with Section 26-611. (c) Side and rear yard setback shall be fifteen (15) feet for the first two (2) stories and an additional five (5) feet for each additional story over two (2) stories. (d) Any side or rear yard which abuts a public street shall have a minimum setback of twenty-five (25) feet for all structures, with the following exception: For corner lots that are sixty (60) feet or narrower in width, this requirement shall be reduced by half. (e) Front setbacks for one -or two-family dwelling structures on lots or portions of lots which abut cul-de-sacs may be reduced to ten (10) feet for those portions of lots which abut a cul-de-sac bulb. (See Figure 26-123.3.) (f) A minimum of three thousand six hundred thirty (3,630) square feet of land area shall be required for each dwelling unit for multifamily buildings. Maximum Maximum BuildingMinimum Coverage Minimum Area Width (a) Minimum t Yard Setback (b) 25' (e) Minimum Side SetbackHeight 5' (h) Minimum Rear . .. 10' (h) Principal Buildings One -family° dwelling 35' (h) 40% 7,500 sf 60' Two-family dwelling 35' 40% 9,000 sf 75' 25' (e) 5' per story 10' Multifamily 12,500 sf (3/more dwelling 35' 40% (f) 100' 25'(e) 15' (c) 15' (c) units) Group home 35' 40% 9,000 sf 75' 25'(e) storyr 10' Churches, schools, government and quasi - government buildings, golf courses, small 35 40% 1 acre 200' 25'(e) 15' (c) 20' day care center, and nursing, elderly and congregate care homes Accessory 5' if <= 10' Buildings (g) Major 15' (h) 600 sf (per unit) N/A N/A ' 25 (e) 5 ' in height; 10' if > 10' in height Minor 10' (h) 400 sf/4 d.u. N/A N/A 25'(e) 5' 5' All Other Uses 35' 40% 7,500 sf 60' 25' (e) sryr 10' story Notes: (a) Corner lots shall have a minimum lot width of eighty (80) feet for both street frontages. (b) Front setback reductions may be allowed in accordance with Section 26-611. (c) Side and rear yard setback shall be fifteen (15) feet for the first two (2) stories and an additional five (5) feet for each additional story over two (2) stories. (d) Any side or rear yard which abuts a public street shall have a minimum setback of twenty-five (25) feet for all structures, with the following exception: For corner lots that are sixty (60) feet or narrower in width, this requirement shall be reduced by half. (e) Front setbacks for one -or two-family dwelling structures on lots or portions of lots which abut cul-de-sacs may be reduced to ten (10) feet for those portions of lots which abut a cul-de-sac bulb. (See Figure 26-123.3.) (f) A minimum of three thousand six hundred thirty (3,630) square feet of land area shall be required for each dwelling unit for multifamily buildings. (g) See Section 26-625 for additional regulations pertaining to accessory buildings. (h) Individual townhouse lots shall be exempt from minimum lot size, lot width, and interior side yard setback requirements, so long as the development parcel for the entire multi -unit townhouse building meets all standards of this section. See section 26-411.0 regarding the required plat note for townhouse lots. (i) Bulk plane regulations shall apply to all one -family dwelling primary and accessory buildings in accordance with section 26-641 The requirements of section 26-120C.2. shall not apply to require compliance with minimum lot area and/or minimum land area per unit requirements otherwise applicable to the reconstruction of multifamily dwelling units in the R-3 district, where such structures and their reconstruction meet all of the following requirements: 1. The structure was legally in existence on September 8, 1997, 2. The structure is located upon a lot which does not meet the then -applicable minimum lot area and/or minimum land area per unit requirements for such proposed reconstruction, and 3. Such reconstruction is restricted to replacement of the structure which has been destroyed. This exemption shall not apply to: 1. New construction where no replacement of a preexisting structure takes place or 2. Reconstruction of structures which were not legally in existence (as distinguished from legal nonconforming structures). C. Design standards: For site development except single- or two-family homes, development must comply with the Architectural and Site Design Manual and the Streetscape Design Manual, where applicable. (Ord. No. 2001-1215, § 1, 2-26-01; Ord. No. 1313, § 7, 10-27-03; Ord. No. 1448, § 2, 8-24-09; Ord. No. 1481, § 7, 3-28-11; Ord. No. 1547, § 12, 4-28-14; Ord. No. 1575, § 7, 7-13-15; Ord. No. 1613, 11-21-16) DATE_06,4C� FEE. sz58.94 Jcert , -,�2 c ;Z CLJEADDR ,__-_--•FA X[iOFFl4ti A ADDRE.S- -- .S —29b1 AXES S S�'R3tfir— L A N D S U R V E Y! NG - 5460 WANG R.:An • St:r-c 160 AR`iADA, Cot.opAoo 80002 (303) 420-47SS LEGAL DESCRIPTION IMPROVEMENT LOCATION CERTIFICATE ;peyCoE,,.r; Scale: 1" 20• te: tifkAdc is Based on Control as Shown, Improvement Survey Plat is Recommctuicd Precise Location of Improvements. LO;' 22, BLOCK 11, OLINGER GARDENS, COUNPY OF JEFFERSON, STATE OF COLORADO Note: Location of Fence Lines if Shown arc Approidmatc. — -Q --� --- Ferree Lmc Fcxind E3 2" Pipe y. .. 7n the basis of my knowledge, information and belief, I nereby certify that this improvement location certificate was prepared for PAUL HOFFMAN -� that it is not a Land Survey Plat or Improvement Survey Plat, and that it Is not to be;rskoT upon for the este I 'ent o f fence, building, or other future rnprovement lines. l further certify thCa ements on the above descri parcel on this date, except utility connections. are entirely w'rhin the bouf the parcel. except as shown are no encroachments upon the described premises by improvements on in:ng premises, excep ,. Icated, and that they o apparent evidence or sign of any easement. crossing or burdenint of said parcel, e t as noted. y>rrsekS .a esiab4s paperty •3orrtm ra V , rreE %+ x-,W.tse els' Y- hip 7` tN rttpfyv6ngryt „ 1, t-WrICIV ;nes b�. an ti. Suver Plat. 'he aro aw-eac rrer is aro r+uteC p E W`RT 3 AWCaATFS I?ort b ,rtn •:pn, .a: , a:: rvxr, xrecr b, xptar,ce a�1 .a use edw� Im;ca»�x C�tr` - a f * agreesnertt to at, ter Vwe'I �erecr 3i Wwrl 45 MAW . W", _- MAnfo AACG 3OF a'""" A az twvG� Robert E. Part, i 5321 or, LOT 23 b ,. Found 1 112" i NI Pipe r 133.0 60.0 25.4 m .-r, qx ta✓`c,L o —30 4 One Story 3v �^ o - ,� OT 22 Stucco c o b a c ; ' �&� o 03 r 6.9 f ,'' c 18.4 ,'; `;;::z i_ .; ¢ `4-0 ,as Concrete Drive .I . �PabPoS£ - 133.0 Note: ' LOT 21 d ' Concrete may Extend ` over Property Linc I 7n the basis of my knowledge, information and belief, I nereby certify that this improvement location certificate was prepared for PAUL HOFFMAN -� that it is not a Land Survey Plat or Improvement Survey Plat, and that it Is not to be;rskoT upon for the este I 'ent o f fence, building, or other future rnprovement lines. l further certify thCa ements on the above descri parcel on this date, except utility connections. are entirely w'rhin the bouf the parcel. except as shown are no encroachments upon the described premises by improvements on in:ng premises, excep ,. Icated, and that they o apparent evidence or sign of any easement. crossing or burdenint of said parcel, e t as noted. y>rrsekS .a esiab4s paperty •3orrtm ra V , rreE %+ x-,W.tse els' Y- hip 7` tN rttpfyv6ngryt „ 1, t-WrICIV ;nes b�. an ti. Suver Plat. 'he aro aw-eac rrer is aro r+uteC p E W`RT 3 AWCaATFS I?ort b ,rtn •:pn, .a: , a:: rvxr, xrecr b, xptar,ce a�1 .a use edw� Im;ca»�x C�tr` - a f * agreesnertt to at, ter Vwe'I �erecr 3i Wwrl 45 MAW . W", _- MAnfo AACG 3OF a'""" A az twvG� Robert E. Part, i 5321 or, or q w 10 E> (,--MPWGE PLAWORM PROJECT SPECIFICATIONS WINDOWS FAlgard Fiberglass Ultra Series, or equal ASA DOORS R-3 metal door GARAGE DOORS IM Insulated metal doors ROOFING Asphalt Comp. Shingle With continuous lee & Water Shield SIDING see Elevations CASEWORK See Plans and Sections for plan and elevation view INSULATION None excluding exterior of foundation wall. Building to assumed to be Insulated in the future. DRYWALL, PAINT Not included In interior, exposed framing. 3 ---02 t ASA ASPHALT COMPOSITE15MMUS ON CONT. ICE & WATER SMELD AtA ROOF PLAN AU.EY- Is 164 T TTTT 1 2 Covered Patio 4 234 SF jVV" FLOOR F gig NEW WNCAMA DRIVE CONNECTED TO DUSTING T PLAIN 2W -V A7 > U2 Sao urbanlrural design Inc. 252 linden street fort Collins, Colorado 970.889.4004 CONSULTANTS, �7- 06 MI—M-03 (D 0 14-- oierrby 160 M0) M C13 (L C mU v1 m A2.0 As Inclicalled M rn CD 3: E CC ltY(1) 75 E > 0 wra EL 0).0 cli Site Plan & Floor Plans M*d."M MI—M-03 AugM 1. 2017 oierrby Aullm ardnaty checisor A2.0 As Inclicalled ASPHALT COR04)WE SHINGLES ON COWL ICE & WATER SHIELD bI2RArrERS 0 24, O.C. NORTH ELEVATION see" EAST ELEVATION 21 1/4'- V -D' CPNTINOUSICEAWATER SHISIDWITH ONE LAYER OFASPACTOOMPOSMSKMLES 2XIO RAFTERS RUNNING TRANSFERSLY TSO B.M.-AW—W 70 —OPPMT HOR. TRELLIS MEMBERS 4Dft1bDN7ALBOA1RD S. BATTEN 3, WEST ELEVATION 1/4'- 1'-0` Roof FIBER CEMENT MADDING Bt.DS, r)w SCAR CENBTT FCC'CET RQSr)WAMBfT _M775'•0' PATINA BOAFV OR EQUAL. U U U U U L—J I MAIN MASSING Stotaae Platfom-s 6 6 PL%L4vmArmnc WIDUE PF ...ratRAGE SLAB W.- 3115 V")OO RAFTERS I T. ir • in ISO OECRNItG AT SATIIENB > E 0 OWOM FPAh - NODMINALL a) CISDAANOR qL,6LEC �EAz E T.O. FNDTN 'E �GAF '( t.ti A FL�IAGW. ------- -OOR .0i I IF -1 i T: ROLIGH LONGITUDINAL BUILDING sEcnON 1W. 1*41P IL? AFM 'CEMBM PATINA ODARD .O R EEN' QUAL. KICATED ON ALL "PAGE IAM M&WRIG II ©RBEwLA&E%vvxwvSffYp3, - MIGARD ULTRA -SERIES OR OR EQUAL - — - — - — - Mdpojg MmA-N Q�_Raolfj��Atklgx_ as WAINDOINS BALSAM UTRA4;ER= Storage11 t OR EQUAL Ir 7 BEErLEKft.L "DRIZONTAL BOARD S BATTM SIDING�1.5,X BATTENS ON IXID BOARDS. INSULATED STAIN TIED. AUARNUIA GARAGE DOOR VAHOR.CEDAR TRELUSHENBERS I EXISTING WOOD IMF 2!jrFN'D*T^N A,, GARAGE 'Y.6.FNDTN FW� dfY - 6'_ IF W. NORTH ELEVATION see" EAST ELEVATION 21 1/4'- V -D' CPNTINOUSICEAWATER SHISIDWITH ONE LAYER OFASPACTOOMPOSMSKMLES 2XIO RAFTERS RUNNING TRANSFERSLY TSO B.M.-AW—W 70 —OPPMT HOR. TRELLIS MEMBERS 4Dft1bDN7ALBOA1RD S. BATTEN 3, WEST ELEVATION 1/4'- 1'-0` RW W20al Ma. qo _pw-mapisp. FIBER CEMENT MADDING Bt.DS, r)w SCAR CENBTT FCC'CET RQSr)WAMBfT AFCCCE'OFJT PATINA 600b. OF f OUAL. PATINA BOAFV OR EQUAL. LOCATED ON ALL GARAGE MAOI LOCATED ON ALL GARAGE BE—NOR—GOARDISATTEN MAIN MASSING SIDING 1"S'SATTENS ON 1XI. ZtOARDS. 6 6 STAIN TBD. ...ratRAGE SLAB aw LhIENT BOARD -Plqql Odpolrl" Storage?"ationn "P. -o -w GARAGE SLAB FLOOR 1w_T urbanlrural design Inc. 252 Wen sft,--t for[ Comms, oolarado 970.889.4004 Warg@wbanruralamh.com CONSULTANTS: N FIBER CEMENT MADDING Bt.DS, r)w 0 AFCCCE'OFJT PATINA 600b. OF f OUAL. 60 LOCATED ON ALL GARAGE MAOI BE—NOR—GOARDISATTEN 36- CL co SIDING 1"S'SATTENS ON 1XI. ZtOARDS. 6 6 STAIN TBD. 0 W.- 3115 V")OO RAFTERS E CC • in ISO OECRNItG AT CANOPYONLY > E 0 a) CISDAANOR urbanlrural design Inc. 252 Wen sft,--t for[ Comms, oolarado 970.889.4004 Warg@wbanruralamh.com CONSULTANTS: SOUTH ELEVATION w . 11-V Aa "C­M%_R, *9 -PATNA _ 0 D-A—W—OR ,EQUAL LOCATED ON ALL GARAGE MAIN MASSING RM _,__ O.-Ilown I __ PdAY dm_,BdwS'I Smr�e Platform TZ. FNDTN ELEVATIONS GARAGE SLAB FLOOR M1743 oqe Auguall.W117 Dra—by AUMW GRq.eE by Ctodalir A3.0,w.11-V 0 60 ca G3 CJ 36- CL co E 6 6 0 W.- E CC WAX -AM PAINT41RAIDE D004 > E 0 a) SOUTH ELEVATION w . 11-V Aa "C­M%_R, *9 -PATNA _ 0 D-A—W—OR ,EQUAL LOCATED ON ALL GARAGE MAIN MASSING RM _,__ O.-Ilown I __ PdAY dm_,BdwS'I Smr�e Platform TZ. FNDTN ELEVATIONS GARAGE SLAB FLOOR M1743 oqe Auguall.W117 Dra—by AUMW GRq.eE by Ctodalir A3.0,w.11-V Property Owner Authorization 2961 Ames St. Wheatridge, CO 80214 Paul Hoffman authorizes Mayberry Builders LLC, and its owner, Merle Cordova to act as an agent on behalf of Paul Hoffman on matters related to construction of detached garage and property improvements. Paul Hoffman is the owner of 2961 Ames St. Wheatridge, CO 80214. Paul Hoffman 12 July 2018 Merle Cordova, Mayberry Builders LLC 12 July 2018 INDIVIDUAL ACKNOWLEDGMENT State/Commonwealth of —C6t6r o G ss. County of `q 's wl On this the day of Dd l before me, Da =— — Month — Year _ j10c-(( the undersigned Notary Public, Name of Notary Public personally appeared Ptv'� Gr/OV(- 001c �� n Name(s) of Signer(s) I j personally known to me - OR - al roved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument, and acknowledged to Fotary :EY TIERHEIMER me that he/she/they executed the same for the lic State of Colorado purposes therein stated. ID 20124048985 ion Expires Aug 7, 2020 WITNESS my hand and official seal. i nature of Notary Public Any Other Required Information Place Notary Seal/Stamp Above (Printed Name of Notary, Expiration Date, etc.) OPTIONAL This section is required for notarizations performed in Arizona but is optional in other states. Completing this information can deter alteration of the document or fraudulent reattachment of this form to an unintended document. Description of Attached Document Title or Type of Document: l r �', 6WV'Rr i�ar�, Z-4�6,-) Document Date: '2-47-- 19 Number of Pages: Signer(s) Other Than Named Above: 02014 National Notary Association • www.NationalNotary.org • 1 -800 -US NOTARY (1-800-876-6827) Item #25936 0'ul RV4F-s 57- P4()C_ t4orp M4rV J)r of 0W1U(As#t P Homestead Title and Escrow - North 710 Kipling St Suite 204 Lakawcwd, CO 80215 PHONE: 303-815-1300 FAX 303-815-1309 PURCHASERS SETTLEMENT STATEMENT SETTL ME ;T DATE: Janna 1 2016CASE NO.: RT1529702 PROPERTY ADDRESS: 2%1 Ames Shftt DATE OF PRORATION: January 15, 2016 Wheat Ridge, CO 80214 SELLEIL Rozaaas J. Dempsey and Homer D. Williams PURCHASER PaulHoffman LEGAL. DESCR7n0N: Jefferson Conroy Loan Amount ------------ $6,000.00 from Congressional Bank County Property Taxes I/l/2016thmi/15/2016 $346,500.00 Lender Credits $66:34 Sale Price of property $1,332.25 Administration Fee $392 000.00 Processing Fee $250.00 Underwriting Fees $995.00 Credit Report to Kroll Factual Data $525.00 Flood Certificaiton Fee to Factual Data $92.87 Title - Courier/Ovemight Delivery to Homestead Title & lRe row -L kwd- B $4.50 Title - E-Rscordsng Fee to Homestead Title & Escrow - Recording Fees • $30.00 Title - Loan Closing Fee to Homestead Title & Escrow Lkwd- E $14.00 Title - Real Estate Closing Fee -to Homestead Title & Esorow Lkwd- E $285.00 Title - Leaders Title Insurance $1520.00 $7.75.00 Title - (W) 8.1 endorsement $125.00 Title - (R) Form 100 $50.00 Recording Fee (Doed) to County Clerk & Recorder $50.00 Recording Fee (Mortgage) to County Clerk & Recorder $11.00 Transfer Tax to County Cleric & Recorder $126.00 Homeowner's Insurance Premium to School Insurance Agency $39.20 Prepaid Interest ($41.53 per day from 01/15/2016 to 02/01/2016) $1,543.00 from 1/15/2016 to at $41.53 per day Homeowner's Insurance 128.58 per month for 3 mo. $746.01 property Taxes 115.11 per month for 4 mo. $38534 Aggregate Adjustment $460.44 Title - Tax Cert -$358.80 Admin Fee to Madison & Company properties $30.00 Sanitation to City of Wheatridge $295.00 2016 Sanitation to Ci of Wheaitid a $50.00 Sub -totals $167.34 Due From Borrower $398,051.30 $353,898.59 TOTALS $44,152.71 $398,05130 $398,051.30 APPRO'V'ED AND ACCEPTED Sales or use taxes on personal property not included HOMESTEAD TME AND ESCROW - NORT73 assumes no responsibility for the adjustment of special taxes or assessments unless they, are Showa on the .l reasurrx,s Certificate of H ass bus. The condition of title m the property is to be determined by reference to the title evidence provided by Seller or by personal investigation The above statement of settlement is approved as of the settlement date shown above And Escrow Holder is hereby authorized to disburse as Trustee funds asindieatcd. Purchaser Paul Hof nan by Tiff yic ` as-, in Faget 6�L11 � ► l' �' �1 -�� t . Madison & Company properties Broker/Agent Casey Hug CCI Closing Agra r e;nd Escrow- Worth �/"` �Y"` s�'�.'Z .�'✓-'Z .'C s� v� s�C�' . � .� T T• �' sus .'C .' �'C a�� .� v: C .�@ T State/Commonwealth of ♦ • • r ss. County of �e� ers M On this the day of // Day J kozN Name of Notary Public personally appeared HARLEY TIERHEIMER Notary Public State of Colorado Notary ID 20124048985 My Commission Expires Aug 7, 2020 r36 before me, Month Year j�the undersigned Notary Public, f1�' rIc40YwcAn Name(s) of Signer(s) El personally known to me — OR — Vproved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same for the purposes therein stated. WITNESS my hand and official seal. nature of Notary Public Any Other Required Information Place Notary Seal/Stamp Above (Printed Name of Notary, Expiration Date, etc.) INFORMATION IN AREAS 1-4 REQUIRED IN ARIZONA. OPTIONAL IN RIGHT RIGHT OTHER STATES. THUMBPRINT THUMBPRINT OF OF Description of Any Attached Document J Top of thumb here Top of thumb here � I Q Title or Type of Document: �� rCh.As-er �/ tY'`?✓'� , Q 2 Document Date: % t-7 v Number of Pages: l Signer(s) Other Than Named Above: © 2011 National Notary Association • NationalNotary.org • 1 -800 -US NOTARY (1-800-876-6827) Item #25936 3 City of Wheat Idgc COMIT MUNY DEVELOPMENT Submittal Checklist: Variance Project Name: ! /G E4!Ej( fin/ S'gpwGt i - Project Location: 0 Rev. 5/2014 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: V 1. Completed, notarized land use application form _2. Application fee 1_x'3. Signed submittal checklist (this document) _V4. Proof of ownership—e.g. deed ✓5. Written authorization from property owner(s) if an agent acts on behalf of the owner(s) \f6. Written request and description of the proposal V 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 J 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 L7"9. Proposed building elevations indicating proposed heights, materials, and color scheme 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 to be made after the second (2"d) full review, I will be subject to the applicable resubmittal fee. Signature: Date: 4,) Name (please print):tuc CogLm o Phone: 3 O'� Community Development Department - (303) 235-2846 • www.ci.wheatridge.co.us -t. C c_. -YJ= 7�. _ --._ NOTE: Land use applications must be ► ♦ submitted BY APPOINTMENT with a City ole planner. Incomplete applications will not Wheat Ridge be accepted—refer to submittal checklists. LAND USE CASE PROCESSING APPLICATION Community Development Department 7500 West 29th Avenue • Wheat Ridge, CO 80033 • Phone (303) 235-2846 (Please print or type all information) Applicant [1444 ch ori Phone �� s tail arr ii � E Address, City, State, Zip 116-03 - ��g�(;na� tE 0 Owner f i o C— �'er"Iu Phone �6 q -�6 T-'t4Vmail Address, City, State, Zip 'Zq �, / S S i f.�51-� n1— t��OCe c. Contact fV1Ell[ C C Address, City, State, Zip Phone 301 "`4't :%G *email m1/ y1w& j ",Q,,5' -p q i C.. �OM`►� c.L arm' l3� ir-nk Ft ,-r A A ege2f-1 (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): CA (2 S 5 Type of action requested (check one or more of the actions listed below which pertain to your request): O 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) O Temporary Use, Building, Sign O Concept Plan O Major (6 or more lots) Jf Variance/Waiver (from Section 26- 11 O Right of Way Vacation O Other: Detailed description of request: 11 -Ally F04 1 IM s lo1E f5 1 3 Er T Aw--k V igoAwa— GoKk 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. Applicants other than owners must submit power-of-attorney from the owner which approved of this action on his behalf. Notarized Signature of Applicant c� State of Colorado ss County of �J �'r ZJ �lJ?'� The foregoing instrument (Land Use Processing Application) was acknowledged by me this by lel e- i.n - do ✓c !�W"-27!0 Notary Public To be filled out by staff: Date received I `j- ) � Comp Plan Design. Related Case No. Assessor's Parcel No.:3q 2 S -13-b15 Size (acres or sgft) Rev 1/22/2016 My commission expires ty / /20 _ day o 1.1l_l RNE!�0 t o Notary Public - State o1 Colorado Notary ID 20124048985 My Commission Expires Aug T, 2020 Fee $ ,?06.00 Case No. OA -134 Receipt No. C I) 56 tgta2 y Quarter Section ap Pre -App Mtg. Date Case Manager-� Current Zoning LD 1.'Af\a . - 3 Current Use Proposed Zoning Proposed Use