Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-10-221. 2. 3. r City of Wheat ' idge BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT Minutes of Meeting March 10, 2022 CALL MEETING TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Chair PAGE at 7:00 p.m. This meeting was held virtually, using Zoom video -teleconferencing technology. As duly announced and publicly noticed, the City previously approved this meeting format in order to continue with normal business amid the COVID-19 pandemic and the related public emergency orders promulgated by the State of Colorado and the Wheat Ridge City Council. Before calling the meeting to order, the Chair stated the rules and procedures necessitated by this virtual meeting format. ROLL CALL Board Members Present: Alternates Present: Board Members Absent: Staff Members Present: PUBLIC FORUM No one wished to speak at this time. PUBLIC HEARING A. Case No. WA-22-02 Dan Bradford Michael Griffeth Paul Hovland Thomas Burney Betty Jo Page Larry Richmond Laura Sicard Todd Hansen Janet Bell Lauren Mikulak, Planning Manager Alayna Olivas-Loera, Planner I Tammy Odean, Recording Secretary The case was presented by Ms. Olivas-Loera. She entered the contents of the case file and packet materials, the zoning ordinance and the digital presentation into the Board of Adjustment Minutes March 10, 2022 record. She stated all appropriate notification and posting requirements have 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 variances: Request A) a 0.7-foot (14%) variance from the 5-foot side yard setback requirement for a detached garage and Request B) a 0.9-foot (18%) variance from the 5-foot side setback requirement for a home addition on property zoned Residential -Two (R-2) and located at 3655 Holland. Staff recommends denial of this variance based on the criteria for review, but acknowledged that there are unique circumstances attributed to this request that warrant approval. Member PAGE asked if there are any other buildings in the neighborhood that are close to property lines. Ms. Olivas-Loera said there is none that she is aware of, and Ms. Mikulak added the encroachment is so slight it is not perceptible to the human eye and will not stand out in the neighborhood. Member GRIFFITH asked if the Foundation Setback and Elevation Certification form is a part of the building permit process. Ms. Mikulak said it is a requirement if the structure is within 20% of the setback. Member Burney inquired if the neighbor to south had any comment regarding the garage or addition. Ms. Olivas-Loera confirmed there has been no comments from the neighbor. Carl Maes, applicant 3655 Holland Ct. Mr. Maes gave a brief explanation of why he is asking for 2 variances today. He explained the surveyor never staked out the property line and the contractor took the measurement 5 feet from the retaining wall assuming it was the property line. He mentioned he has had conversations with Xcel Energy, and they are fine with the setbacks as they sit. Mr. Burney asked how far along in the project the contractor is. Mr. Maes said everything was framed out before the stop work order was issued. In response to a question regarding utility easements, Ms. Mikulak explained when and how they are created, but mentioned they are not always used for the installation of utilities and in this case the utilities are overhead. Board of Adjustment Minutes March 10, 2022 2 Brian Moore, sub -contractor 1621 Jackson St. Mr. Moore explained that he is the sub -contractor because the contractor is ill, and he gave a brief explanation of how the errors occurred. He mentioned that the step of getting the foundation setback certification done was overlooked because at inspection of caissons on the addition, everything was approved and they didn't know there was a Setback Certification form to complete. He admitted there was some miscommunication at the time of inspection; along with a page on the plan set being incorrect, when the measurement was taken. In response to questions regarding the slab the garage sits on, Mr. Moore mentioned that if the variance is not approved then a new slab will have to be poured and the garage moved. He noted the addition is on 30-foot caissons and it would be very difficult to move the addition off those if the variance is not approved. Public Comment No one wished to speak at this time. Ms. Mikulak explained the building inspection procedures. Member HOVLAND mentioned it is difficult to point fingers on where the failure occurred, and it could be expensive to correct. Member GRIFFITH said to not set a precedence with this case, and it will be a hard decision to make. Member HANSEN does not feel it is right to build in a utility easement. Member BURNEY said this does not seem intentional and the neighbor to the south has no complaints. Upon a motion by Member GRIFFETH and seconded by Member BRADFORD, the following motion was stated: WHEREAS, application Case No. WA-22-02 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 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 Board of Adjustment Minutes March 10, 2022 3 NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that Board of Adjustment application Case No. WA-22-02 be, and hereby is, APPROVED TYPE OF VARIANCE: Request for approval of two variances on property located in the Residential -Two (R-2) zone district in order to construct a new detached garage and home addition in the rear yard: Request A: a 0.7 foot (14%) variance from the 5-foot side setback requirement resulting in a 4.3-foot setback for a detached; and Request B: a 0-.9-foot (18%) variance from the 5-foot side setback requirement resulting in a 4.1-foot setback for an addition to the existing dwelling. FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: 1. The property continues to function as a single-family residence. 2. There were no complaints from neighbors. 3. The unique condition from this case and there was an existing structure previously in this place. WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. The design of the proposed garage and addition shall be consistent with representations depicted in the application materials, subject to staff review and approval through review of a building permit. A friendly amendment was offered to add the following reason accepted by Member BRADFORD: 4. There would be a substantial investment for applicant to correct. Motion carried 8-0. 5. CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING Vice Chair PAGE closed the public hearing. 6. OLD BUSINESS 7. NEW BUSINESS A. Approval of Minutes — February 25, 2021 It was moved by Board Member HOVLAND and seconded by Member Thomas GRIFFETH to approve the minutes as written. The motion passed 5-0-3 with Member BURNEY, RICHMOND and HANSEN abstaining. Board of Adjustment Minutes March 10, 2022 4 8. B. Resolution 01-2022 It was moved by Member SICARD and seconded by Member HOVLAND to recommend approval of Resolution No. 01-2022, a resolution establishing a designated public place for the posting of meeting notices as required by the Colorado Open Meetings Law. C. Election of Officers Elected Chair: Betty Jo Page Elected Vice Chair: Michael Griffeth ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Member GRIFFETH and seconded by Member SICARD to adjourn the meeting at 8:49 p.m. Motion carried 8-0. 4t Betty Jo a Chair Tammy Od Recording Secretary Board of Adjustment Minutes March 10, 2022 5