Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1994-03-09 BAA MINUTES• MINUTES BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEALS ENGLEWOOD. COLORADO MARCH 9. 1994 The regular meeting of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals was called to order by Chairman Waldman at 7:30 p.m. in the City Council Chambers of the Englewood City Hall. Members present: Seymour, Christman, Smith, Waldman, Clayton, Cohn, Welker. Members absent: None. Also present: Harold J. Stitt, Planning Administrator Dan Brotzman, Assistant City Attorney The Chairman stated that with seven members present, five affirmative votes would be required to grant an appeal or a variance. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Board Member Cohn moved that the minutes of February 9, 1994, be approved as written. Board Member Clayton seconded the motion. Upon a voice vote all members voted in the affirmative with Board Member Waldman abstaining due to not being present at the February 9, 1994 meeting. FINDINGS OF FACT: Board Member Seymour moved that the Findings of Fact for Case #4-94, Dane Lombardi, owner of 200 West Layton Avenue and 4819 South Bannock Street, be approved as written. Board Member Clayton seconded the motion. Upon a voice vote all members voted in the affirmative with Board Member Waldman abstaining. The Chairman ruled the Findings of Fact approved as written. PUBLIC HEARING #5-94 2860 South Ogden Street The Chairman set forth the procedure for conduct of the Hearing, stating that staff will present the case, and the applicant, proponents and opponents would then be heard. The Chairman opened the Public Hearing stating he has proof of publication and posting and asked the staff to identify the request. Harold Stitt Planning Administrator was sworn in for testimony. He stated the applicant is requesting a variance to encroach 7.3 feet into the required 11 foot side yard setback, which would be a variance from Section 16-4-2:1,1. Minimum Side Yard, of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance. The Chairman asked the applicant to come forward for testimony. Mr. James William Younce, 2860 South Ogden Street was sworn in for testimony. Mr. Younce stated that his property was located on the corner of Bates Parkway and South Ogden. He explained the existing structure was approximately 1,035 square feet located on a corner lot of 6,000 square feet. He stated in his opinion the only practical way to construct the addition because of the configuration of the property was toward the north side of the property. He stated his request for a variance was necessary because his proposed addition of a family room, bath and master bedroom would encroach into the side yard setback. He stated there were no alternatives because: building in the rear of the property was impractical because of the patio and various vegetation: that with only five feet on the south side of the property that was not an option; and that he did not want to convert the garage. He concluded that • the only practical way for constructing the addition was to build on the north side of the property toward Bates Parkway. Mr. Younce submitted for the record statements from four neighbors stating they have no objection to the requested variance. Mr. Younce concluded stating that the variance meets the conditions for approving a variance: that it would not affect public safety or welfare because the property is 1 ocated on a corner "T" 1 ot with Bates Parkway dead-ending at Ogden; . that the proposed addition would not cause visibility problems; that the lot is exceptional because of its size being less than the miryimum lot area of 9,000 square feet for an R-1-A zone district; that it would not adversely affect the adjacent properties or neighborhood; and that it meets the minimum variance that would afford relief. Discussion ensued and the applicant answered questions from Board members. Mr. Younce stated the house was built in 1941, that the proposal would be a tri-level configuration, that the addition would be designed to replicate the existing house, and that in his opinion the addition would enhance the overall appearance of their property. He stated that converting the garage into a family room would not provide them with the master bedroom and extra bathroom . 2 • There were no further questions from the Board and no other persons present wishing to testify. . The Chairman incorporated the Staff Report into the record and closed the Public Hearing. BOARD MEMBER SEYMOUR MOVED THAT FOR CASE #5-94, THAT THE APPLICANT, MR. JAMES WILLIAM YOUNCE OF 2860 SOUTH OGDEN STREET, BE GRANTED A VARIANCE FROM SECTION 16- 4-2: I, 1. Ml NI MUM SIDE YARD, TO ENCROACH 7. 3 FEET INTO THE REQUIRED 11 FOOT SIDE YARD SETBACK FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONSTRUCTING AN ADDITION. Board Member Smith seconded the motion. Discussion ensued on the question of the whether the request meets the five conditions for granting a variance. The Chairman asked the members to lock in their votes and give their findings of fact. Board Member Cohn voted "no" stated she did not believe the request meets the conditions for granting a variance and that the side yard setback required should be observed. Board Member Welker stated he voted "no" because there are alternatives for placement of the addition. Board Member Christman voted "no" concurring. Board Member Smith stated he voted "yes" because the variance would not impact the neighbors or neighborhood. · Board Member Seymour voted "no" stating he opposed the request because it does not meet the minimum variance and that the property is not exceptional or unique. Board Member Clayton voted "no" stating the side yard setback should be observed. Chairman Waldman voted "no" stating he concurred that the request does not meet the conditions for granting a variance . When the votes were displayed, one member voted in the affirmative, with six members voting in opposition to the request. The Chairman announced the decision and directed to the app 1 i cant that an alternative might be a solution or a variance with less modification. 3 STAFF ADVISOR'S CHOICE: Mr. Stitt reminded the members of the meeting with City Council at 6:00 p.m. Monday March 21, 1994. Mr. Stitt suggested a study session for April 13th meeting since there were no cases for a Public Hearing. BOARD MEMBERS CHOICE: Discussion ensued on the BOA Handbook. ATTORNEY'S CHOICE: None. With no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 8:25 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Cathie Mahon, Recording Secretary 4 •