HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/25/1998i
June 25, 1998
Beard of Adjustment Page 1
06/25/98
5. PUBLIC HEARING
•
Bob Russell
RFG Management
6025 South Quebec St., Englewood
Mr. Russell, the applicant, was sworn by Chair MAURO. He infort-ned that the project
was acquired four years ago. Due to uses in the project itself they felt that additional
land for parking would be needed in the future for existing tenancies and did acquire
extra land in front of the largest tenant. He asked if the lot could be paved with asphalt
Board of Adjustment Page 2
06/25/98
considering the property is zoned for agriculture. (Susan Ellis replied that it can be
paved on a temporary basis.) Because they plan to build an approximate 5000 square
foot building on this space in the near future, he requested approval to do an AB ) base
rather than asphalt which would • much more expensive (around $20,000) to install
and remove at the time construction would take place.
In response to a previous question from Board Member ABBOTT, Mr' Russell stated
• +or" • Y - t4 hrf'#T1=i—drdt
the applicant is negotiating with the owner to take over the medians and maintain them
in good clean condition. He stated they planned to install a temporary parking lot and
stripe it and apply for a rezone in about 60 days.
John Lowe
RFG Management
6025 South Quebec St., Englewood
Board of Adjustment Page 3
06/25/98
Following further discussion, Chair MAURO asked if there were any individuals
present who wished to address this matter. There was no response.
Upon a motion by Board Member ABBOTT and second by Board Member WALKER
the following resolution was stated.
Whereas, Board of Adjustment Application Case No. TUP-98-2 is an appeal to this
Board from the decision of an administrative officer; and
the City of Wheat Ridge.
Now, Therefore, Be It Resolved that Board • Adjustment Application Case No. TUP-
98-2 be, and hereby is, approved.
Type of TUP: A request for approval to surface a vacant lot for use as temporary
employee parking for tenants of 12100 West 52nd Avenue.
For the Following Reasons:
The criteria support approval of the request. The request will improve the
parking problems within the development and the request would not appear to
adversely affect the surrounding properties or uses.
1. The permit be approved for the period necessary to following rezoning
procedures but not to exceed one year.
If the applicant chooses to request extension of the TUP, an application must be
submitted for approval by the Board prior to their existing permit expiring, or
the use must cease the day of expiration.
Board of Adjustment Page 4
06/25/98
The motion carried • a vote of 7-0 with Board Member THIESSEN absent.
Board of Adjustment Page 5
06/25/98
Board Member ECHELMEYER asked about compliance of other homes in the area.
Mr. White informed that, to his knowledge, there were no other homes in the
subdivision which had been granted variances regarding lot coverage or setbacks.
Mr. White entered the following exhibit into the record and provided copies for Board
members:
IMM
Kunz, inalcaTing mat ne was in YaTTrT-r
applicant dated June 16, 1998 giving his response to the variance criteria.
George Feeney
3295 Parfet Street
He informe ' d that he had attempted to purchase adjacent property to increase his lot size,
but had been unable to do so. He stated that, although they could build in another area,
it was their desire to live in Wheat Ridge and that he didn't think a request for 9% is
that much when you consider he could build a 35-foot tall structure which would look
terrible in the neighborhood.
Board of Adjustment Page 6
06/25/98
Whereas, Board of Adjustment Application Case No. WA-98-15 is an appeal to this
Board from the decision of an administrative officer and
- I
no protests registered against it; and
Whereas, the relief applied for may not be granted without substantially impairing the
intent and purpose of the regulations governing the City of Wheat Ridge.
4 Both the Planning Commission and the City Council reviewed and approved the
subdivision plan and the size ♦ Lot 5 became part of the public record.
Board of Adjustment Page 7
06/25/98
Board Member ECHELMEYER stated that he would vote against the motion because
there were four good sized houses on reasonable sized lots in that area and he felt the
ranch style house would fit in very nicely with existing homes.
Board Member ABBOTT commented that it distressed him to turn this application
down; however, the fact that the hardships were caused by a design professional was not
sufficient criteria to grant a variance. He expressed that someone in the future could
come in and request a variance on the basis that the architect made a mistake.
The motion failed by a vote of three in favor and four opposed with Board Member
THIESSEN absent. Board Members HOWARD, MAURO, JUNKER AND
ECHELMEYER voted no. (Mr. White explained that six affirmative votes are requirei
for a super majority.)
•
upon a rriot1oTV7yX`7=7=7er
HOWARD the following resolution was stated:
Whereas, Board of Adjustment Application Case No. WA-98-15 is an appeal to this
Board from the decision of an administrative officer; and
Whereas, the property has been posted the fifteen days required by law and there were
no protests registered against it; and
Whereas, the relief applied for may be granted without detriment to the public welfa
and without substantially impairing the intent and purpose of the regulations governinj
the City of Wheat Ridge.
I
Now, Therefore, Be It Resolved that Board of Adjustment Application Case No. WA-
98-15 be, and hereby is, approved.
Type of Variance: Request for approval of a 9% building coverage variance to the
25% maximum building coverage requirement for a property zoned Residential-One
and located at ' )869 Union Court.
For the Following Reason:
I Approval of this request will allow for the construction of a single story ranch
style home that will allow for adequate view of the mountains for the proposed
structures to the east.
Board of Adjustmerit Pa-e 8
06125/98
Board Member HOVLAND commented that while the mountain views would be
desirable, there will be homes constructed in the area which will be much taller and that
he agreed the criteria do not support approval of the request.
The motion failed by a vote of four in favor and 3 opposed, with Board Member
THIESSEN absent, Board Members ABBOTT, HOVLAND and WALKER voted no.
At this time, the applicants addressed the Board.
Marcia Bunger
6900 West 38th Avenue
Board of Adjustment Page 9
06/25/98
Board Member ECHELMEYER asked if the applicant would consider a tapered fence.
Ms. Bunger replied that they had considered that option.
Brad Bunger
6900 West 38th Avenue
Mr. Bunger was sworn by Chair MAURO. He stated that, if the variance were granted,
they planned to build a six-foot wooden fence that would be no higher than the existing
six-foot chain link behind the restaurant. He asked why the restaurant could erect a six-
foot fence. Board Member ECHELMEYER explained that the existing chain link is at
tile rear of the restaurant property which is according to code.
Marc's Restaurant about possibly replacing the chain link fence with an opaque fence.
Ms. Bunger replied that she felt it would not • right for the restaurant to pay for
Board Member WALKER suggested the possibility of asking the restaurant owner to
opaque tile chain link fence at the applicant's expense. Ms. Bunger replied that she felt
this would put the fence ownership in question.
Further discussion followed.
Upon a motion by Board Member ABBOTT and second by Board Member HOWARD,
the following resolution was stated:
Whereas, Board of Adjustment Application Case No. WA-98-16 is an appeal to this
Board from the decision of an administrative officer; and
Whereas, the property has been posted the fifteen days required by law and 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.
Board of Adjustment Page 10
06/25/98
Now, Therefore, Be It Resolved that Board of Adjustment Application Case No. WA-
98-16 be, and hereby is, approved.
Type of Variance: A request for approval of a two-foot fence height variance to the
four-foot maximum fence height requirement to allow a six-foot fence in the front yard.
For the Following Reasons:
Although the property is located approximately 200 feet from the nearest public
right-of-way, the northern property line is still considered the front lot line and
therefore must abide • the front yard requirements.
The motion carried by a vote of 7-0, with Board Member THIESSEN absent.
Chair MAURO advised the applicants that the request had been approved.
Class I home occupation and an 8-foot business sign setback variance to the 10-foot
setback requirement for R- I property located at 4430 Tabor Street, was presented by
Susan Ellis.
Ms. Ellis reviewed the correct surrounding zoning which was erroneously presented in
the staff report: north-- Agricultural One; south and east--Residential Three; and west--
Commercial One. She also corrected the surrounding land use as: north--vacant lot;
south and east--multi-fainily residential; and west--commercial site (Heine's Market).
Ms. Ellis entered the zoning ordinance, case file, packet material and exhibits into the
record. She stated that the property was within the city of Wheat Ridge, all notification
and posting requirements had been met and there was jurisdiction to hear the case,
I
Board Member ABBOTT asked Ms. Ellis to explain the hardship in this case. Ms. Ellis
replied that the applicant is the only single family residence among multi-family and
Z� 9
commercial uses in the area and they would like some means to let people know where
their business is located.
Lorraine Brown
4430 Tabor
Board of Adjust rent Page 12
06/25/98
Ms. Stewart was sworn by Chair MAURO and spoke in favor of the application.
Now, Therefore, Be It Resolved that Board of Adjustment Application Case No. WA-
98-17 be, and hereby is, approved.
Type of Variance: Request for approval of a variance for Section 26-30 of the Wheat
Ridge Code of Laws to allow a 2' x 2' home business freestanding sign for a Class I
Board of Adjustment Page 13
06/25/98
home occupation, and an 8-foot business sign variance to the l0 -foot business sign
setback requirement.
Approval of the request will not alter the essential character of this locality as
Tabor Street is more of a business than residential area.
Placement of a sign on the southwest corner of the property will not be
detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare.
The size of the sign does comply with the maximum residential sign
requirements established in Section 26-410 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws.
Board Member ECHELMEYER commented that, since the single family residenti
property is almost completely surrounded by commercial uses, the sign would not
present a negative impact on the neighborhood,
The motion failed by a vote • five in favor and two opposed with Board Member
THIESSEN absent. Board Members ABBOTT and HOWARD voted no.
Chair MAURO advised the applicant that, since the motion needed a super majority of
six votes to pass, the application was denied.
E. Case No. WA-98-18: The case, an application by Tom Radigan for approval of
foot front yard setback variance to the 30-foot front yard setback requirements for Lots
• the Marvel Minor subdivision, zoned R- I and located at 10845, 10855 and
10• 65 West 32nd Avenue, was presented by Alan White.
Mr. White informed that three lots are involved in the case: Lot I - 15,000 square feet;
Lot 2 - 17,000 square feet; and Lot 3 - 19,000 square feet, He reviewed land use,
surrounding zoning and land use and entered into the record the zoning ordinance, case
file, packet material and exhibits. He also entered the following document into the
record:
Board of Adjustment Page 14
06/25/98
Exhibit "A" - Letter dated June 18, 1998, from Thomas H. Nielsen of 10901
West ' )2nd Avenue expressing concern regarding the safety of his driveway
C�
access to 32nd; and stating his opinion that the houses on the subject lots should
face south instead of east.
ago concerning a fence height variance and felt that this matter should have been
addressed at the time the property was subdivided.
Board of Adjustment Page 15
06/25/98
Toin Radigan
5703 Xenon Way, Arvada
Mr. Radigan replied that the houseswere planned to • 2900 square feet without the]
garages and turning the houses to face south and leaving variances as they are woul
allow someone on Lot 3 to build in the private drive. The houses would have to •
redesigned because they have been designed to take in eastern and western exposur
This could be done, but the major issue is that someone on Lot 3 could build in the
private drive.
Board of Adjustment Page 16
06/25/98
Board Members ABBOTT and HOVLAND expressed their opinions that this matter is
not under the jurisdiction of the Board of Adjustment and should be taken before the
Planning Commission because the matter concerns a developer and an entire
development plan approved by the Planning Commission and City Council, and not a
home owner.
Chair MAURO asked to hear from those individuals who signed up to speak on this
Willis Alderman
10905 West 32nd
Board Member HOVLAND asked if the applicant would • agreeable to using the area
where his drive is located for their front access. Mr. Alderman replied that he would be
opposed to this and had already talked with Mr. Radigan about it.
Rob McClure
14675 Garden Road
Mr. McClure was sworn • Chair MAURO, He stated that he also owns land at 1223 )2
West 32nd Avenue. He was present at the Planning Commission meeting in 1996
1 11 41
• J ! • J i,i 1 �iml I •
Board of Adjustment Page 17
016/25/98
was interested in purchasing one of the lots and came to the City that it was discovere
his house wouldn't fit on the lot with the required setbacks. He expressed surprise th
the city would make a requirement for houses to face a certain direction. He also stat
his opinion that the road should have been on the west side of the development rather
than on the east where the city had required it to be.
There was no one else signed up to speak.
Mr. Radigan returned to the podium. In regard to the fence, he stated they exceeded
the city's mandates in regard to the setbacks in order to accommodate better visibility.
it was moved by Board Member ABBOTT and seconded by Board Member WALKE
that the Board of Adjustment withhold a decision on Case No. WA-98-18 and that th
case be referred back to the subdivision process as the appropriate avenue for appeal.
The motion carried
• a vote of 7-0 with Board Member THIESSEN absent.
Board of Adjustment Page IS
06/25198
7. OLD BUSINESS
There was no Bald business.
S. NEW BUSINESS
Board of Adjustment Page 20
06/25198