The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1995-10-11 BAA MINUTESr • • • MINUTES ENGLEWOOD BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEALS ENGLEWOOD.COLORADO OCTOBER 11. 1995 The regular meeting of the Englewood Board of Adjustment and Appeals was called to order by Chairman Clayton at 7:35 p.m. Members present: Seymour, Smith, O'Brien, Barber, and Clayton. Members absent: Chrisman. Also present: Nancy Reid, Ass i stant City Attorney The Chairman stated that with a quorum of five members present, four affirmative votes would be required to grant an appeal or a variance. He stated the Board is authorized to grant or deny a variance by Part 3, Section 60 of the Englewood Municipal Code. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Seymour moved: O 'Brien seconded : The Minutes of September 13, 1995 , be approved as written. Ayes: Nays: Seymour , O'Brien, Barber and Clayton . None. Absent; Abstain: Chrisman. Smith. The Chairman ruled the Minutes approved as written. FINDINGS OF FACT: The Chairman moved that the Findings of Fact for Case #11-95, Michael Ashton for 1035 East Dartmouth Avenue , and Case #13-95 , Hyman Clar for 3529 South Elati Street, be tabled due to suggested changes outlined in a memo from City Attorney Brotzman. Smith seconded the motion. The Chairman announced the Findings of Fact tabled until the next meeting on November 8 , 1995 . 1 PUBLIC HEARING -CASE #15-95: 193 East Cornell A venue Chairman Clayton set forth the parameters for conduct of the Hearing. He stated anyone aggrieved by a decision by the Board may appeal that decision to a court of record; however, such appeal must be made within 30 days of the Board's decision. The Chairman opened the Public Hearing stating he had proof of publication and posting. He asked staff to identify the request. Bob Simpson, Manager of Neighborhood and Business Development , was sworn in for testimony. He stated the applicants, Beth Mccorkle and Barb Closser , property owners of 193 East Cornell Avenue , filed for a variance to encroach into the front yard and the side yard setbacks. He explained the variance is from the Corner Lot Regulations, Section 16-5-13:A ,l-b. to encroach 2.3 feet into the required ten foot front yard setback , and 16-5-13:A ,2-b. to encroach 15.5 feet into the required 25 foot side yard setback . Mr. Simpson added that the applicants requested the variance under consideration as a result of a deck that was constructed without benefit of a permit. He concluded that staff supports the request. The Chairman asked the applicant to come forward for testimony . Beth Mccorkle , 193 East Cornell A venue , was sworn in for testimony. Ms. Mccorkle testified that they constructed a deck in June of 1995. She explained that they did not know a building permit was required until September when a building inspector advised them a building permit was necessary for the construction. During the plan review process the encroachment issues were noticed, and they were directed to apply for a variance . Ms. Mccorkle discussed the configuration of the house : it has two entrances, the main entrance from Cornell A venue , and the secondary entrance on the Sherman Street side which accesses the kitchen. She explained the previous owners added the deck on the east side (Cornell Avenue). After they purchased the house they added a deck on the Sherman Street side connecting to the existing deck on the Cornell A venue south side of the house. She stated that the current Ordinance regulations would be impossible to apply to a house built in the late 40's. She explained their site plan indicates a side yard (Sherman Street) of 19.5 feet; the corner lot regulations for side yard setbacks state 25 feet; ie: any construction on that side would be encroaching. She briefed the Board that she did a walk-through of the neighborhood and noted that a majority of the properties in the Sherman Street neighborhood did not meet the current required twenty-five foot front yard . 2 t •• • • • • Ms. Mccorkle displayed photographs of the property to assist in illustrating how the house is elevated from the ground, where the two entrances are in relation to the house and deck, and the areas of construction. She also pointed out where the original stoops were, adding that the new stairs and deck gives them better access to the house than having a separate set of stairs for each entrance. Ms. Mccorkle discussed the justification for granting the variance. She stated the first criterion is that the lot is exceptional because it is a corner lot, resulting in specific and separate setback regulations; it is unusual because the house is elevated approximately two feet above the grade and the house. The second criterion concerning public safety: dilapidated stairs were a hazard and unsafe due to the poor condition of the concrete. The deck provides a safer means of entering the house. Ms. McCorkle continued stating that the third and fourth criterion is that the variance will not adversely affect adjacent property or the neighborhood. She explained the impact of the deck to adjacent properties is minimal since the average front yard setback for Sherman Street properties is less than the required twenty-five feet. Submitted for the record were three statements from neighbors stating they favored the variance and considered the deck an improvement to the property. She concluded her testimony stating that granting the variance will provide relief for them to maintain the deck, provide access to both entrances, add to the integrity of the property and neighborhood, and will not adversely affect any adjacent or adjoining neighbors. Ms. Mccorkle answered questions from the Board members. She agreed the deck could be down scaled, not as wide, but added they are using the deck as a barbecue and picnic area. She stated they have no intention of enclosing the deck. The Chairman asked if anyone in the audience wished to testify. Barb Closser , 193 East Cornell Avenue was sworn in for testimony. Ms. Closser summarized that the deck was necessary to gain access to the south and east house entrances, that the deck was an effort to improve the property, and that they would apply for the necessary permits from the Building and Safety Division . No one else indicated a desire to address the Board, and the Chairman declared the Public Hearing closed. Discussion ensued . 3 Seymour moved: •.. Smith seconded: THAT FOR CASE #15-95, THE APPLICANTS , BETH McCORKLE AND BARB CLOSSER, PROPERTY OWNERS OF 193 EAST CORNELL A VENUE , BE GRANTED A VARIANCE TO ENCROACH 2.3 FEET INTO THE REQUIRED 10 FOOT FRONT YARD SETBACK AND TO ENCROACH 15 .5 FEET INTO THE REQUIRED 25 FOOT SIDE YARD SETBACK. THIS IS A VARIANCE FROM SECTION 16-5-13:A,l-b. AND 16-5-13:A ,2-b, CORNER LOT REGULATIONS, OF THE COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE. Further discussion ensued. Mr. Seymour stated he noticed most properties within the neighborhood have less than the required twenty-five foot front yard setback. Mr. Smith stated the deck could have been built narrower but is preferable for the applicant's use. Mr. Clayton stated there had to be some solution for gaining access to the house with the entrances several feet above grade , and the deck appears to solve that problem . The votes were locked in and members polled: Mr. Seymour voted "yes" stating the property is exceptional because corner lot regulations must be applied, the entrances are unusual due to the grade difference, that the variance will not affect the neighborhood because most front yard setbacks do not meet the required twenty-five foot setback , and the variance will grant relief to the applicants. Mr. Smith voted "yes" stating he agreed with the five criterion stated in the staff report. Ms. O 'Brien concurred with Mr. Smith . Mr. Barber concurred with his colleagues. Mr. Clayton stated he voted "yes" agreeing with his colleagues , adding that the deck is an improvement to the property. When the votes were displayed all five members present voted in the affirmative. The Chairman announced the variance was granted 5-0 and directed the applicants to contact the Building & Safety Division for the necessary permits . STAFF ADVISOR'S CHOICE: Mr. Simpson , Manager of Neighborhood and Business Development, stated he looked forward to working with the Board . He explained what was previously Community Development was now Neighborhood and Business Development. He discussed some of the projects and goals for 1996: training opportunities , and three area of focus : neighborhoods, the business community , and long-range planning. 4 • • •• • • CITY ATTORNEY'S CHOICE: Ms. Reid , Assistant City Attorney, stated she was confused about what copy of the revised BOA Handbook was the most recently approved edition . Discussion ensued. Mr. Smith suggested that appropriate month and year footnotes be inserted at the bottom of each page. Mr. Simpson assured the Board that the final edition would have that added. BOARD MEMBERS CHOICE: None. The meeting was declared adjourned at 8:05 p.m. Cathie Mahon , Recording Secretary 5