HomeMy WebLinkAbout1993-10-20 BAA MINUTES..
•
•
•
HINlffES
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEALS
ENGLEWOOD. COLORADO
OCTOBER 20. 1993
The regular meeting of the Englewood Board of Adjustment and Appeals was called
to order by Chair Waldman at 7:30 p.m.
Members present: Seymour, George, Smith, Clayton, Welker, and Waldman.
Members absent : Cohn.
Also present: Dan Brotzman, Assistant City Attorney
Harold Stitt, Planning Administrator
The Chair stated that with six members present, five affirmative votes would be
required to grant an appeal or a variance. The Chair stated the Board is
authorized to grant or deny a variance by Part 3, Section 60 of the Englewood
Municipal Code .
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
Board Member Seymour moved that the minutes of September 8 , 1993, be approved as
written.
Board Member Welker seconded the motion.
Upon the call for a vote on the motion, all six members voted in favor of the
motion, and the Chair ruled the minutes for September 8, 1993, approved as
written .
PUBLIC HEARING -CASE #7-93:
2355 West Hillside Avenue
The Chair opened the Public Hearing stating the procedure for the meeting would
begin with the variance request identified by City Staff, and the applicant and
those that wish to speak would then have the opportunity to be heard. The Chair
advised that any person(s) aggrieved by the Board's decision has the right to
have the decision reviewed by the District Court of Arapahoe County and must file
within thirty (30) days from the date of their decision.
The Chair opened the Public Hearing stating he had proof of publication and
posting, and asked the staff to identify the request .
"'
Harold Stitt •
Planning Administrator
was sworn in for testimony. Mr. Stitt stated that the applicant, Mr.
Wallace Claridge, who resides at 6586 South Crocker Street, Littleton, is
the property owner of the subject property at 2355 West Hillside Avenue.
Mr. Stitt explained that the request is for an amendment to Case #24-83,
at which time a variance was granted to permit the construction of three
(3) two-family structures on the subject property. Mr. Stitt stated that
the amendment would permit, in addition to the three two-family
structures, three single-family structures on the subject property.
Mr . Stitt advised the Board that since no development has occurred on the
subject property, that the variance is technically still in effect because
the Zoning Ordinance in 1983 did not specify that action (obtaining a
building permit) be taken within 180 days from the date the variance is
granted.
Mr. Stitt concluded that the staff was recommending that the request be
approved on the basis that single-family structures would lessen the
density of the development and broaden the development potential of the
property.
The Chairman asked the applicant to come forward for testimony.
Oran Claridge
540 East Amherst Avenue •
Englewood, Colorado
was sworn in for testimony. Oran Claridge explained he shared ownership
of the subject property with his father and would testify in his behalf.
Mr. Claridge stated that when the variance was granted in 1983 to
construct duplexes, it was their intention to develop the site and provide
affordable housing for families. Mr. Claridge stated they were not able
to develop the property with duplexes, and stated that he was currently of
the opinion that three single-family units would be more conducive with
development of the site. Mr. Claridge concluded that they have a
prospective buyer contingent upon the amendment being granted to permit
the construction of single-family structures on the subject property ..
Mr. Claridge entered into the record statements from two neighbors in
favor of the request.
The Chairman asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to testify in
favor of the request.
Michael Brady,
Brady Construction
was sworn in for testimony. Mr . Brady stated he was the prospective buyer
of the subject property and was of the opinion that three single-family
structures would be conducive to the neighborhood. Mr. Brady concluded
that the building envelope for the placement of the structures would have
a five foot (5') side yard setback, be ten feet (10') between structures.
and that the twenty-five foot front yard setback would be observed .
2 •
•
•
•
The Chairman asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to testify in
opposition to the request.
Steven Puryear,
2320 West Harvard Avenue
was sworn in for testimony. Mr. Puryear stated that he was present at the
public hearing in 1983 for the subject property and at that time voiced
his opinion against the proposal, and remained in opposition to it. Mr.
Puryear stated that he was of the opinion that there was an abundance of
rentals in the neighborhood, that there were parking problems, and that he
was of the opinion that properties in the area would be devalued.
Mr. Puryear concluded that in his opinion having three units on two lots
should not be allowed on the subject property.
Billy Miller,
2319 West Harvard Avenue
was sworn in for test i many. Mr. Mi 11 er stated that he agreed with
previously stated statements by Mr. Puryear and concluded that he was of
the opinion that three units should not be allowed on two lots.
Doreen Goldstein,
2272 West Hillside Avenue
was sworn in for testimony. Ms. Goldstein stated she is part-owner of a
duplex across the street from the subject property. Ms. Goldstein stated
her concerns are : the structures that are duplexes in the neighborhood are
placed too close together. and the yard are too small with virtually no
yard in the front and a limited area in the back of the houses. Ms .
Goldstein concluded that she was also concerned with the devaluation of
her property.
There were no further speakers for or against the variance request.
Discussion ensued concerning placing a condition in the motion that wou 1 d specify
either single-family or duplexes would be constructed on the subject property .
After further discussion, the Chair requested the applicant approach the podium.
Oran Claridge
2355 West Hillside Avenue
approached the podium. When questioned if he would rescind the variance
granted in 1983 to build duplexes and agree instead to three single-family
dwe 11 i ngs only, he stated that although it was the intent of their
prospective buyer, Mr. Brady, to build single family units, he was not
willing to rescind the right of his variance granted in 1983 to build
duplexes.
The Chair incorporated the Staff Report into the record and closed the public
hearing .
3
BOARD MEMBER SEYMOUR MADE A MOTION THAT FOR CASE #7-93, FOR MR. WALLACE CLARIDGE. •
PROPERTY OWNER OF 2355 WEST HILLSIDE AVENUE, TO AMEND CASE #24-83, WHICH GRANTED
A VARIANCE THAT PERMITTED THREE (3) TWO-FAMILY STRUCTURES TO BE CONSTRUCTED ON
THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, AN AMENDMENT TO PERMIT THE CONSTRUCTION OF THREE (3)
SINGLE-FAMILY STRUCTURES TO BE CONSTRUCTED ON THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.
Board Member Smith seconded the motion.
Discussion ensued.
Board Member Clayton made a motion to amend the motion to include the following
conditions as follows:
OR
AND
AND
THAT THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE SITE SHALL BE AS FOLLOWS:
1.) THE CONSTRUCTION OF THREE SINGLE-FAMILY STRUCTURES ONLY;
2.) THE CONSTRUCTION OF THREE TWO-FAMILY STRUCTURES ONLY;
3.) THAT THERE BE NO CHANGE IN THE CONFIGURATION AND NUMBER OF FAMILY
STRUCTURES ONCE CONSTRUCTION ON THE FIRST STRUCTURE HAS BEGUN;
4.) THAT CONSTRUCTION OF A SINGLE OR TWO-FAMILY STRUCTURE SHALL ACT AS
A WAIVER OF THE VARIANCE FOR THE TYPE OF STRUCTURE NOT CHOSEN.
Board Member Seymour agreed to the amended motion and Board Member Smith seconded •
the amended motion.
The members locked in their votes and gave their findings as follows:
Board Member Smith voted "yes" stating that in his opinion granting the amendment
observes the spirit of the ordinance, would not adversely affect the neighborhood
or adjacent properties and would be consistent with what is present in the area.
Board Member Clayton voted "yes" stating that he favored three single-family
units instead of three duplexes.
Board Member Welker voted "yes" concurring with previous statements from other
members.
Board Member George voted "yes" concurring, adding that in her opinion the
single-family units would be better than the duplexes.
Board Member Seymour voted "yes" concurring.
Chair Waldman voted "yes" concurring.
When the votes were displayed, all six members had voted in the affirmative.
The Chair announced that the amendment to Case #24-93 granted and directed to the
applicant that the variance is active for 180 days from this decision .
4 •
I ,
•
•
•
PUBLIC CASE -#9-93
3400 South Race Street
The Chairman opened the Public Hearing stating he had proof of publication and
posting, and asked the staff to identify the request.
Harold Stitt
Planning Administrator
stating the applicant, Kent Village Townhouse Association, represented by
L.C. Fulenwider, Inc., Agent, request was for a variance to construct a
twelve foot solid privacy fence along the east property line, for a
distance of 130 feet from the southeast corner of the property. This
would be a variance from the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance, Section 16·4·
17:C,3. rear yard fences, maximum height of six feet.
The Chairman asked the applicant to come forward for testimony.
Jenna Penn, Property Manager
for Kent Village Townhouse Association
L.C. Fulenwider, Inc.
1125 17th street, #2500
Denver, Colorado
was sworn in for testimony. Ms. Penn stated the request for the fence
height was to provide security and privacy for the residents at Kent
Village. Ms. Penn further explained that the southeast corner area around
the pool and clubhouse was parallel to Hampden Avenue and their concern is
with the residents security, and traffic noise. Ms. Penn stated that for
the sake of the residents, the extension of the fence would provide
security and safety, and reduce some of the traffic noise from Hampden
Avenue.
Ms. Penn submitted for the record a statement from their neighbor, the
Denver Seminary, stating they had no objection to the request.
Ms. Penn concluded that the variance would substantially benefit the Kent
Village residents, would not adversely affect their adjacent neighbors,
the Denver Seminary, and that no further modifications would be requested.
The Chairman asked if there was anyone present in the audience who wished to
testify.
The Chair incorporated the Staff Report and closed the public hearing.
BOARD MEMBER WELKER MADE A MOTION THAT A VARIANCE BE GRANTED FROM THE
COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE, SECTION 16-4-17:C,3, REAR YARD FENCE MAXIMUM
HEIGHT OF SIX FEET, FOR CASE #9-93, FOR THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AT 3400 SOUTH RACE,
KENT VILLAGE TOWNHOUSE ASSOCIATION, TO CONSTRUCT A TWELVE FOOT SOLID PRIVACY
FENCE 130 FEET ALONG THE SOUTHEAST PROPERTY LINE.
Board Member Smith seconded the motion.
The members locked in their votes and gave their findings as follows:
5
Board Member Clayton voted "yes " stating the request meets the conditions for •
granting the variance.
Board Member Welker voted "yes" concurring .
Board Member George voted "yes " stating the conditions were met.
Board Member Seymour voted "yes".
Board Member Smith voted "yes".
Chair Waldman voted "yes" stating it observes the spirit of the Ordinance, will
not adversely affect the adjacent property, and grants the app l icant the minimum
variance with the least modification of the Ordinance .
When the votes were displayed all six members had voted in the affirmative. The
Chair directed to the applicant that the fence was approved , 6-0, and informed
the applicant that the building permit for the fence must be filed within 180
days from the date of this decision .
STAFF ADVISORS CHOICE:
Harold Stitt directed the Board to review the handout he provided concerning the
concrete and paving districts issue that will be on the November ballot.
Mr . Stitt also informed the Board members that as a result of trimming the 1994 •
City budget , members serving on boards and commission pay was being eliminated.
CITY ATTORNEY'S CHOICE:
None.
BOARD MEMBER CHOICE:
None.
With no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at
8:35 p.m .
Respectfully submitted,
Cathie Mahon, Recording Secretary
6 •