Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998 Resolution No. 046• RESOLUTION NO . ~ SERIES OF 1998 A RESO ,UTION AUTHORIZING AN ENCROACHMENT INTO THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD'S RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR A RETAINllW WALL AT 4096 SOUTH CHEROKEE STREET. WHEREAS, the Owner of 4096 South Cherokee Street ha requested an encroachment into the City's Right-Of-Way for purposes of building a retainm;g wall on the property; and WHEREAS , the Owner of 40!16 Suuth Cherokee Street h;,,s been denied an administrative encroachment pursuant to the Englewood Municipal Code I l-3-4(C); and WHEREAS, t he Owner requests approval of the encroaccment as described in Attachment A, by the Englewood City Council punuan to E.M.C. ll-3-4(D ); and WHEREAS, the City Council finds s ufficient cause t(1 approve the encroachment into the City's Right-Of-Way; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO, THAT: 5.eililm.l. Th e City Council finds sufficient cause to apprc..-e the encroachment into the City's Right-Of-Way. Subject to the following conditions: 1. The so le encroachment shall be a retaining wall bcilt adjacent to the existing s idewalk , less than twelve inches (12") behind ~ sidewo!k, and which conforms with the description in Attachment A. 2. This encroachment shall be s ubj ect to all other ter.ns and conditions relating to encroachments in E .M.C. Jl-3-4(Al and 11-3-4( including "sigh t t riangle" regulations for all fe n ces . ADOPTED AND APPROVED this 17th day of February, 1998. fJJiJ J ,iq,.---::-:: I, Loucrishia A. Ellis, Ci ty Clerk fo1;.;he City of Englewood. Co,Jli;rado, hereby certify the above is a true copy of Reso lution No~, Series of 1998. (~ . t Za>»Alrl-<Ltf ~ Loua-,.shia A. Ellis ATTACHMENT A [!] • COUNCIL COMMUNICATION Date IAgamlltem I Subject Encroachment Agreement • February 17, 1998 11 Ci 4096 S. Cherof.ee Initiated By Staff Source Robert Simpson , Director of Neigh borhood and Neighborhood and Business De velopn,ent COUNCIL GOAL ANO PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION There has been no previous action on thlis property. RECOMMENDED ACTION Busi ness Development Council cons id eration of a resolution tor an Encroachment Agreement BACKGROUND, ANALYSIS , ANO ALTERNATIVES IDENTIFIED In November of 1997, Ms . Joanne Swarnson , property owner of 4096 South Cherokee Street, hired Mr. Michael Hommel of "Designs by Sundo\Cllll ", to erect a stone wall around the property . Mr. Hommel started the project without benefit of a pennit or license . Rocks for the retaining wall were delivered to the subject property; many of the rocks were on public right-of -way on Cherokee Street. A Nottee of Violation was issued by Code Enforcement to Ms. Swanson on November 21 , 1997, for oostruction of publ ic rig ht-of-way. On November 24 , 1997, the Building Insp ector issued a Stop Work On:ler for work begun without benefit of a permit or contractor's license . Mr. Michael Hommel , Designs by Sundown. subsequen tly applied for a building permit and contractor's license on November 24 , 1997. On January 12 , 1998, Ms . Swanson. ar.itf Mr. Hommel appeared in court as a result of lhe Notice of Violation . Th e court ordered Ms . Swanson to resolve the encroachment problem promptly. Encroachments into public right-of-way are authorized by Section 11 ·3-4:C , of the Englewood Municipal Code . En croa chment Agreenents are joi ntly issued by the Depa rtment of Neighborhood and Busines s Developme nt. and the De:iartment of Pub lic Works . and must comply with certain conditions . Neighborhc od and Business Development staff reviewed the Encroachment Agreement and finds it will have no negat ive impact on the ne ighborhood. and it will not adversely affect adjacent property . However, the proposed Encroachmen Agreement was not approved by the Director of Public W o rks because the retaining wall does not me,si the condition of placement at least one foot behind lhe sidewalk , a requirement in Section 11 -3-4 (A). Englewood Municipal Code. • Ms . Swanson is appealing the adm in1si:-a1,:0 denia: of an encroachment. ANANCIAL IMPACT No direct City Impact. UST OF ATTACHMENTS • Building permit application and site plan • Ms . Swanson's letter sent to Mayor Bums and copy to City Manager on January 2, 1997 • Memo from NBD office with criteria for Encroachment Agreement-with proposed Pe rmit of December 10, 1997 • Memo from Director of Public Works denying approva l of Encroachment Al, reement • Letter confirming alternatives for Ms. Swanson from from Assistant City Attorney afte r the January 12 , 1998 , court appearance for Ms. Joanne Swanson . • Proposed Resolution A • • OF BUILDING AND SAFETY NGLEWOOO, COLORADO EX AMPL ES ----------------------- ll'lOT :OUN 0 U .. .-.. c 11 EO IWHEH R(Q't)) STY U 011 TVl'E Q -'ORE .H AN ,., ... c~u1 l't EIGHT C Lf.5S 1w.,,. ,c· . .:.-"EN UNCMUI 0COANUt LOT Cl lNTE II IOA LOT PQS'T SIZE __ , __ w ~ gl;.~:=.~~11 '-r.°oTr • Cl• Clo Cle OCC Ull'•HC Y OROUP S 01V . TYl'E CONSTA • AG HI CT USE ZONl 1--------------------------; /02 lEN 01Hf.EiUfllG lf 7lil!CII AIIIC .ll NUU!ER OF SQUARES 1--------------------------i 1omumc {Otl ,~lUIUlHO E."'GlEW-000 T AX LICENSE NO . YALUAflOfrf OF \UTEJI IA.l !OllEUCa1c,u fO UL'l•l AC:(w 1 .. r::a:·0•1o1 o w Nl •t1NC:W OIIIO IJ,IOII .. ,.rllllAlS l'::I Ulll' ...... r UIO !N lrAU.HIONt 'Ol\/H!O/ol I"'• Cltl>U S .. ou::.a.ao•1o•ouoi-111uN C:[:H•· •uo1u w•• H SII IJIC" ·o ,,~ ... ? l •C:c -•us lt(IIIA AICS ________________________ 1---------------i VALUAT IO N , ') ½ 0 S2 ---------------------------1-•-•_ .. _ .. _,_, _ _.__lr-.,..,.;/==,.,...-----i I PE .iU,IITFEE ---------------------------DOUILE FSE Cl S >-------;..---------< P'.,1,N YES = I Pl >-N ~E VI E'N :u FtlED HOC S use r u oe ;:i osr:-I PAID : $ ---------------------------APPA QVEO NOrt.S TO .,,1.,c.un n •1,1 H •UI Wlf! l(QIJ a o r;tl' Wtll l•II(;. JlUWI IHG 1<£A il•G . ~[TAIH!HG ,ous I J ["'Ol!?!O N '[~MIT EJ,iA[! 110 fS n o 11 ISSUUC( U..l l £U MQll,C (S srono IY n u r "IW(. 11.11 sncr10MS 0 111 ~JCl\i,1-lt)N CAL L "IMUI U:FC IIE l :~O '"· II .&LL ,'10111,C OO#E JNCP "'!i,$c l'E.1 WIT ·J.E ,01unu •c:Hrs FULL 11u,oNStllL ITY FC A CO MPlJ.INCf '#lfH "HE JN tfCl'V IUll.0\IIIG -:cac •NC -OntEa .. ,,uci11LE !"IG L!:"#000 OAO L'UNCES l{QUIAD 115'!.:·io•s s-• ... If l.£0UiSUO ONE 'JIO ll1wu; ou IN .I Q'I I NC[ 8 Y :lATE i'EAI.I IT ISSUA HCE ::i,t.tE il·HS FOR U IS .a 111!:iU.t lf O NL Y 'NWE~ 'I Al !O,.fi:O ~ELO W lO'IO "tlllLOY Jflil 1Ci,.Si: ::.t1tucr•s l,wi,,.•·u•E os !~":;.• . .E_c~••!.:·-.6:.::a:::;i"";;,~-------==.l.!.ll!.::.:.;..t...:,,;.;_L ____________ _j r ·- ~ l ~ 1 ' t• • De<:ember 2. l 997 Mayor Tom Bums Cicy Manager's Office 3400 S. Elui St. Englewood, CO 80 I 10 De:ir Mayor Bums : JOANNE E. SW ANSON 4096 SOUTH CHEROKEE STREET ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO 80110 (303) 789-4726 RECEIVED DEC 3 1997 CITY MAN·AGERS OFFICE ENGLEWOOD . COLORADO I am writing as a h.JmeOwner within the cicy oi Englewood. R.ec:ndy I have experienced s.-:>mc difficulcy wilh cbe City of Englewood in my attempt 10 have a landscping wall built around my property . This lener is to inform you of this difficulcy , as I believe it is something you should be aware of. During November. 1997 I hired an outfit called "Designs by Sundown ", represented by Michael Hommel, to build a rock landscnping wall 10 replace one whicr. has been in serious aeed of repair sine: [ moved in seven ye:us ago . ! was unaware that a permit was required for landsc:lping type work. Apparently , Michael Homme l was also unaware of this as he bas done woric for other cities where no such permit is required. On Friday , November 21st. Michael's worxcrs delivered the roclcs in front of our house on Cherokee Sa-eet in order 10 begin work on Monday . November 24th . Unforrunllll'1 1y, the roclcs were partially in the street and. admittedly , a danger to through traffic. Fonuna.tely , the City had put up barricades to ~vent an y problems. [ arri ved home that Friday evening to find cbe rocks and a Notice of Violation from the Citv with a note to oil so meone named Nick right away. I called Nick Johnson . Traffic Specialist for Public Works , apologizing for the problem and aslcing whal exactly he needed from me . Mr. Johnson provided me •Nith limited information but did say that we needed. at the very least, 10 move the rocks over into the parking-lane . I qien oiled Michael at home and told him the roc1cs were in the , ·~1 3I\d.irppeliiii g traffic. He had someone at my house fim thing the next day to move '--'ne·rd'c1cs•ilfto the parking lane . Ni ck Johnson late r told Michael this was unacceptable . !f so , why did he tell me to have them moved into the parking lane ' On Monday , November 24 th , Michael's workers began work wi1h ou1 a permit. however sto~ work at the request oi the City . To his credit. as soo n as Michael became aw= of tbe paperwork required to complete ihe job , he was at the City office fili ng the req uired paperwork. Toe Zoning and Building Dcparanems were having a disagreement on whether a pennit was acrually require d (if the y don 't know. how are we supposed to know?). [ am still unc lc:ir as to whether this permit is re:illy required' l'vlichael spent a mini mum of three hours at Cicy offic:-; ~onday, the 24th. and Tuesday. the "5th . ir. an attempt to complete th e requirem ents. Dun ng his Mo nday meeting with Nic k Johnson .. \lr. Johnso n :ibruptl y informed Michae l he was go ing to lunc h. Mic hae l waited until ~lr. Johns on rerurned from lunch to fi nish the ir meeting. On Wednesday. as \-lichae! was moving the rocks out oi the meet :ind onto our pro perty . due to Mr . Johnson's d.isatisiac:io n with th e locltion of the rocks. he was again asked to s10p wo rk as Mr . Johnso n wanted a re vi sed traffic control plan. It seems Mr. Johnso n is not sarjsri . d with much of :inythmg . Mayor Toln &vm·Pau I•2 i We then 3lso di.!covered a problem widl m Eciaaaciunlnt Apaemenr aa I wanted the wall built riiht up IO tbc sidewallc. I was also--!Im dlis was a problem :is one can drive uoundTEn1Jewooc1 • see several wails baii1I rip up io die sidewallc. Why it seems to be such a problem widJ my wall. I don 't laJC,w _ [ specific::llly requested the wall up to lhe sidewalk as I a111 a disabled person and I am imci=singly •mable 10 mainuin the weed problem growing in chm section. Michael Hammel and I have been extremely~ and cooperative with the City ro this point H~wever. last week we were bodl issied summons by Marilyn Llmb. a Code Enforcement Officer. My summons specificdly swes "Obsauction of Public Right-of- Way" and "Encroachment Agre:ment N~ Jud requires me ro appear on December 17111. Mayor Burns. in all honesty , I must you rlw I feel this summons is the mosr ouaageous wasu: of ra.~payer money I have= be:ud of. Further, I feel that Michael has experienced unre:isouable harassment by J:ll"""d Johnson and the City, City worxc:s have been banging out around my house alm011 ci!aily since this began. Some of the City workers have been exa-emely helpful brlt tbme lDll aren't an, c:wsing what I feel to be unnecessary problems. Ate these people =5iden:d "customer service"? If so , there is a re:i.l lack of a-aining! Neither Michae l nor r cave n:sisted anything the City has requested. howe ver my patieace is running short L ...now hesitation. will tell you that Michael and I should probably have done our rese:ucil :mi! cantac".ed the City prior to beginning work. This has been a !=ming experience for bcxi:I of us. At this point, I would like ro know whal = '!:le done to cxpedire construction of this wall . My undersranding is that Nick Johnson aee:is to ai:prove lhc pennit but has not done so yet He told me this morning be is waitia&<llll the "plan". I bad to c:311 him 10 find this out bcc=c be failed to communicate this co ~ involved. The Zoning Dept will provide him with a copy of our Improvement Survey Ce:tific:lre today. This should be all that is necessary . I would also like to k:now if it is a-uly ~ for me to appear in court over this, particularly since I am scheduled for some i111!FY on December I 0th and. may be unable to appear. I have a full time job and will eoougil wort due to the surg,~ry. An arraignment and bearing an, rwo more ieeµ,sa far time off. In this resp,.<:t. I fe,::i the City is upseaing my livelihood. as wetl as my a=pc to make my property t),,aer. I 3FPreciare yo ur cc nsider:ltion and loolt fmrward ro he:iring from you. Vcr:J Truly Yo~ \ _, "f'-~e.-------Joanne E. Swanson cc: Gary Scars City Manager • TO: FROM : SUBJECT: L,ATE : Bob Simpson, Director of Neighborhood & Business Dev elopment Chuck Esterly, Di.rector of Public Wod:s Cathie Mahon, Planning Technician 4096 South Cherokee Street -Encroachment Agreement December 10, 1997 This memorandum is two-fold: 1) consideration of criteria for an encroachment ~em:; 2) recent photos of identical retaining walls within the subject neighborhood. CRITERIA: Consideration of an encroachment must meet the following 5 criteria: The first criteria• is that there are e.,ceptional conditions or circumstances relative to lire properry that compliance with the regulations would result in a hardship to the properr;, ov,m-_ Toe property is exceptional due to several circumstances : it is a corner property , and the prc;c:ry bas a 4 to 5 foot slope on the Oxford Avenue and Chtrokee Street sides of the propert:·. A hardship would be incurred if the homeowner is not per:nitted to have a retaining wall in an effort to shore-up the slope. In an effort to maimain those d.ttficult areas, the owner has pUI! in landscaping that is maintenance free . As mentio11eci in t!J: letter ,o the City Manager, dacd December 2, 1997, the owner is handicapped, an<', in an dfort to maintain the public rigb:t of way, accepted the contractor 's proposal to have a retaining wall abutting the sidewalk. The second criterion is that the encroachment wi/1 observe the spirit of the Ordinana and protect the puhlic safery and we/fare throug.• the just application of the regu/a11ons. The proposed placement of the retaining wall will not impact public safety and welfare of me applicant 's property , adjacent property or neighborhood. The third criter ion is that the encroachment wi/1 not adversely ajfecr adjacent properry or die neighborhood Toe retaining wall will not adversel y affect adjacent property or within me neighborho od. as reflected by the existing retaining walls in the neighborhood, illustrated in me attached photographs . NOTE: Photographs were taken of existing retaining wal ls in the subject stree t, Cherokee.. illld the two surrounding streets: Bannock and De laware. As referenced by the photographs : 5 South Chero kee (directl y across from 409 6 Soul!; Cherokee ), the three propertie s in the 4000 block of Delaware , (4068. 4070 . 4080 So uth Delaware ) and 3997 and 400! Sl.luth Bannoc k. have retainin g wal ls: therefore one more within the 4000 blocks of Bann ock. Cheroke e. and De laware will have no impact in the neighborho od. The fad glffrim is dlar drr a,crr,at:luna,r wlll not impact or impair the u.rc or d4ve/opr,unt of adjaunt propmy. Gr,aa 1be fad 1hl& din a DO laa lba;l 1911iuirt ~•.ill ill ,m hundred block of each S!mt, di.~ apeemmt -id have-no Impact wil.l_:,11 ~ neiahf,orhood D0r will it G!mdie aljamlt prapaty. 'i"he fifth qil,cfp,'f. is ... OIC1'tNlclunlmt 18 "-,_, modJj/catlon MCU.fary lo grrl1lt ,.,;.1 /0 1/w propary ---1llc prapmai relaining wall ~ represcms,a. minor modification of the fm:e/retainina wall iqallliom of the Zoning Ordimmce. In conclusion. if the Clry requires removal of the 1-mining W>l!I already constructed on Cherokee, and if the Ci ~ does -allow die property OWllcr f0 have the proposed relaining wall, the City would be sol,jca fir ma:tift mfon:ement of the zoning regula!iom. SiJlgling out thL!l property owner, wha~ rmoandiu& ..rope:rcy ownm have: I) fililcd to obtain a building permit, and 2) fiiilcd to get a.:i m:uw:hmc:m agreement for thrir relaining walls, retlCCI! that this property OWllcr has been subjcar,d to selec:tivc enforcement by the City . Cc : Gary Seas, Clry Manager Address file ·"..IW1l/OOWS.OESJCTOl'.WV BR!ER:ASE'MEMO .OOC • • • ENCROACHMENT PERMIT AND INDEMNITY AGREEaNT THIS A3REEtAF.NT, made lho 81f\ w,y of December, 1997, -Iha City of .Englewood, Co loredo , • mumclpol 'eorporwllon; and Jo...,. E. S.WM.1u n, 4098 South CiierolhlB Street, Englewood, Colorado 80110: «.111 owned!II of a certain parcol of real property legally deaeribed ar. Lo ts 21 -23 Bloc k 14, Broadwoy Helgh1 1, PPII 2077•03·3· 11 ·009. 1111d commonly known as : 4096 South Cherokee Street. TIie City of Englewo .... , Colorado, hereby g11nt1 to Hkf ownertst ..... property at . the above deacrlbed location p1Jrmi c1!0n t:1: .,act I relatning w.ill -,p1ch woutd e,,c,oach 10.4 ff',t into publi c rlght •of-w ay to the back of the Cherokee Streat s.dewalk , and 15 .2 feet Into public rloht of way to the back of sidewalk along Oxford Av on ue . The aforet1ald property ownerlal and their heirs and n sl gns ~d .-.J agree lhot : 1. This permission 111 revocable et will and without cause the Ci ty o f Englewood without heating md without notice other than No tice of Revocation . 2 . The property ownerlsl shan remove said 1t,ucturet1J hon, rt. pubJic r ight-of- we'v within thtrtv 1301 days after recetvlnv Notice of Revoc:alliml by peflonal service or certified mail. 3. That said pro perty ownerlsl are ost.1 pped to deny the ritht 10f the City of 4 . Englewoo d, Colorado , to revok e the Encroachment Pe'lrit to deny tho properly rl ghlo of n ld City . Tha~ said property owne1lsl agrees to reimburse and tndemmify the City of Engl!wood , Colorado , for all necessary expenses of wha~e, 1ature that mav bo Incurred In rovoking th is Pe ,mlt, removing the structurre placed in the public rlght•of•way, or any other expense es a resut t of grantin g the Encroachment Permit. 5 . That the said property owner lsl sh all ma in tain insurance ce.'!Bf'eg e sufficie'"lt to satisfy any liability arising as e resul t of this En croechroent PeJmit end Indemnity / 'lreement , end th e Ci t y o l Eng lewood shall be heft:I harmless from any end all Uebltitles arising fr om this octl on. 6 . This ag reement sh ell inur e to the benefit of end be binding pen the heirs, executors, admin istra tors , assigns , and successo,s of the rn;,ectlve parties. IN WITNEr,s WHERE i:.. th e parties heve set their hands the G.Jr y and year first written ab11vti . City of Englewood a munic ipel corporetiom __:JyOwner: . ~~~ MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: Bob s~__i:~eighlJOrhood and B~ D~opment Chuc~;:-op,e&orofPublic Works DATE: J&Duary 7, 1998 SUBJECT: ENCROACHMENT PERMIT, 4096 S. CHEROKEE ST. We c.mnot approve the proposed Er=achment Permit and Indemnity Agreement as written. The requimne.lts of the already issued Building Permit need to be adh! red to. Public Wodcs .conditions , that are part of the Building PCtDllt, ;.::;!;;.!; !:he wall must be one (1) foot behind the melt of walk and must respect the corner sight tri&Dgle for traffic. The proposed Encroachment Agreement violaie:: both requimnents . The sidewalk in this area is only 2' 8" wide , making the one foot setback mandatory . The sight llriangle is necessary for traffic safety . 1w .::: RickKahm LaddVostty NickJo:--..'lSun Paul Kapaun Nancy Reid • Pnn1ed on Recycled Psi:,er.~ City o-: Englewood .?FFICF; Oi' THE CITY ATTORNEY Danilf L Bn>Czmln, Cly-=~:~~~:=, Ms.JolUIIle Swnnson 4096 South Cherokee Stnet Englewood, Colorado 80110 Regarding: Summons & Complaint No.329128. J.IOOSoull!Elad-env-.Colofldo II0110-Zl04 ~ (303) 782-%320 r-(303) 782-2331 ! am enclosing the Copy of the Englewood ll=icipaI Code you requested. l\s you can see, frcm this ordinance and a5 we discussed, there an, a,r:am requirements which must be met before you can u:quire an encrnachment a greement far a ~landscape wall of the kind you wiah to construct. Your wall, as it is cnmmtly desig:,ed does not comply with those requirements. To finish the wall as it currently lays, you mast eet app!t>val frcm the City Council. I suggest you speak with the Neighborhood and Bumiess IJe,,,eJcpment Depanment for information on how to ask for that approval. In the alternative you can: l. Move the wall back the distance reqmred by .he Code and obtain a:i administrative encrnachment agreement from the way. 2 . Move the wall back so that it is IDC:3Ie<i cm yc;m property and construct the wall after obtainin~ a pernrit. If you wish to do tlm, I suggest that you contact Public Works for help in determining the exact property iin~ 3. Remove the wall. As noted in your Deferred Prosecution, you =t scive your enaoacbment problem promptly. Sin~erely ,, . D, /2it//t 77 ! -~L Nancy N( Reid, Assistant Ci,v Attorney