Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1996-08-14 BAA MINUTESl , •• • • CITY OF ENGLEWOOD BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEALS AUGUST 14, 1996 I. CALL TO ORDER: The regular meeting of the Englewood Board of Adjustment and Appeals was called to order at 7 :35 p .m., Chairman Smith presiding . Members present : Barber, Clayton, Fowler, Kuhlman, O'Brien, Seymour, Smith . Members absent : None. Also present : Nancy Reid, Assistant City Attorney Harold Stitt, Community Coordinator Chairman Smith announced with a quorum of seven members present, five affirmative votes will be required to grant a variance . He stated the Board is authorized to grant a variance by Section 16-2-8 of the Englewood Municipal Code . II. REQUEST FOR REHEARING CASE #6-96: 3201 South Sherman Street Chairman opened the public hearing stating a letter from Four Seasons had been submitted requesting a rehearing for Case #6-96 . He called for the question. Mr. Clayton moved : Mr. Seymour seconded : THAT THE REQUEST BY MR. VISSER FOR A RECONSIDERATION OF CASE #6- 96 BE CONSIDERED . The motion was not acted upon. Discussion ensued . Issues of concern were what the new evidence is , and why the owner was not present at the public hearing held on June 12 , 1996 . Mr. Clayton amended the original motion : Mr. Seymour agreed to the amended motion : THAT THE REQUEST BY MR . VISSER FOR A REHEARING FOR CASE #6-96 BE CONSIDERED . 1 The amended motion was not acted upon . The Chair recognized a gentleman from the audience requesting to be heard. Mr. Michael Dilatush, was sworn in for testimony, stating he was manager of the Sherman Manor apartment complex, was a tenant at the complex, a member of EDDA, and a Neighborhood Watch Captain . He stated he was present before the Board to humbly apologize for not being present at the June 12, 1996 public hearing . He added both he and Mr. Visser, the owner of Sherman Manor, realize their negligence at not being present. Mr. Dilatush discussed the case under consideration . He stated the residents of Sherman Manor were elderly, the oldest being 92 years of age, and having an awning placed over the steps to the sidewalk would provide protection for the residents during the winter months. He conceded that he understood the proposal from Four Seasons was denied because several board members questioned whether the proposed awning would be wide enough to provide protection for the residents . He concluded that both he and Mr. Vissar considered the awning necessary for protecting the residents from the winter elements, and that he would welcome any comments or questions from the Board. The Chairman directed Mr. Dilatush to explain to the Board what new evidence he had to present. .· . •• All members concurred with the question . Discussion ensued. Mr. Barber established that • according to the memorandum from Mr. Stitt included in their packets, a re-hearing could only be considered if there was new evidence, evidence that was not presented at the original public hearing . Discussion ensued . The Chairman discussed and outlined the procedures for a re-hearing: that the applicant must clearly understand that in order to have a re-hearing, the request for such hearing must be a written summary explaining what the new evidence is, why it was not presented at the original hearing, and how it would affect the decision by the Board . The Board members then weigh the evidence, and vote on whether or not to have a re-hearing. The Chairman recognized a request from Mr. Barber to table the motion for a re-hearing until the meeting next month. Mr. Barber moved : Mr. Clayton seconded : THAT THE MOTION FOR THE REQUEST BY Mr. VISSER FOR A RE-HEARING FOR CASE #6-96 BE TABLED UNTIL THE NEXT PUBLIC HEARING ON SEPTEMBER 11, 1996. The motion carried by a voice vote . 2 • • • The Chairman emphasized to the applicant that the required information as discussed includes: a written request explaining the new evidence which should be forwarded to staff in preparation for the September 11, 1996 meeting . He added the tape from the June 12, 1996 would be available to them, and copies of the minutes . ID. PUBLIC HEARING -CASE #7-96. 15 East Quincy Avenue Jack York, applicant The Chairman opened the public hearing stating he had proof of publication and posting, and asked the staff to present the case. Mr. Harold Stitt, was sworn in for testimony. He explained that the case under considerat ion is to expand a registered nonconforming use by enlarging the existing 240 square foot detached garage by 680 square feet. He stated the request is a variance from Section 16-6-1 :E . Nonconforming Use of Building or Structure, of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance. Mr. Stitt discussed the subject property stating the lot is 30 feet wide by 100 feet deep and located in the R-2, Medium Density Residence District. It is considered nonconforming because it does not meet the residential requirements : the lot is only 3,000 square feet, and the principal building 737 square feet. The centerline of the alley adjoining the west side of the property is the boundary between the R-2, Medium Density Residence District and the B-2, Business District. Mr. Stitt further discussed the uses of the property. In 1911 the primary structure was constructed and used for residential and various retail uses . Miscellaneous uses continued to operate ranging from a print shop to an insurance agency until 1979. On September 5, 1979, a request to rezone this property was considered by the Planning and Zoning Commission . The Commission determined that a residential use could not occur without significant expansion because the structure consisted of only two rooms and a half bath. It was the decision of the Planning and Zoning Commission to deny the request for rezoning to the B-2 Business District because of the impact that could occur on adjacent residential uses. The Commission also decided that the Board of Adjustment and Appeals was the proper venue because it would give the residents in the neighborhood an opportunity to be notified of any changes to the property . On November 10, 1982 , Mr. York came before the Board requesting permission to convert the nonconforming use to wholesale auto parts . Mr. Stitt entered into the record a copy of a land use map, and read into the record the decision made by the Board of Adjustment and Appeals Case #20-82 (exhibits #1 and #2). He explained a variance was granted to change the nonconforming use from the sale of space heaters to an office and warehousing of small auto suppl ies. He explained the "use" is nonconforming because a business is being operated in a resident ial zone district. Mr. Stitt concluded stating that the unusual circumstances for the case under consideration dates back to 1911 when the primary structure was constructed, and the unique and subsequent uses operated from the property . 3 The Chainnan asked the applicant to come forward for testimony . Mr. Jack York was sworn in and began his testimony stating his request was to enlarge the existing garage with an addition 20 feet by 34 feet. He explained that his request was to have a larger storage building for his merchandise . He entered into the record statements from two neighbors in favor of the variance request (exhibits #3 and #4). Mr. York answered questions from the Board . He responded that he has owned the property since 1982, that in November of 1982 he requested a change in the nonconforming use from the sale of space heaters to operating a business in warehousing of small auto supplies, and an office. Discussion ensued . Questions directed to Mr. York pertained to the placement of the existing structures on the property and if he received a location survey when he purchased the property. He used the easel to illustrate the dimensions of the lot , approximate placement of the structures, and proposed garage addition . Mr. Stitt entered into the record a map from the 1982 BOA case file , and the nonconfonning registration to Arapahoe County (exhibits #5 and #6). Mr. Kuhlman and Mr. Barber asked if the Building and Safety Division reviewed the proposed addition . They questioned what kinds of auto supplies would be stored in the garage, questioned the use of the structure relative to classification of the building and occupancy, and concluded a review of the types of auto parts to be stored was necessary in order to determine if there were any hazardous materials . Ms . Reid , Assistant City Attorney, assisted with interpretation of the request , and the .• nonconfonning use . She explained that Mr. York can continue conducting business at the subject location due to the variance he received from the November BOA hearing in 1982 . She further explained that Mr. York is not requesting a different "use" but requesting to expand the nonconforming use currently being operated . Ms. Reid pointed out that the nonconforming regulations are very restrictive and any changes to extend or expand require a variance ; that the request is for a variance to expand an existing nonconforming use in the R-2 zone district. After considerable discussion, and due to infonnation not available , the following motion was made . Mr. Seymour moved : Ms . Barber seconded : THAT CASE #7-96 BE CONTINUED UNTIL THE NEXT PUBLIC HEARING ON SEPTEMBER 11, 1996 . AYES : NAYS : ABSTAIN: ABSENT : Seymour, Clayton , O 'Brien, Kuhlman , Barber, Smith . Fowler. None . None . The motion carried . 4 • •• The Chair directed the applicant to have the following information and documents available for the September 11 , 1996 Public Hearing : a Certificate of a current site plan of the property, an improvement survey showing property lines , and a site plan showing placement of structures on the property . IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: June 12 , 1996 Chairman Smith called for the motion . Seymour moved : Ms . O 'Brien seconded : THAT THE MINUTES FOR JUNE 12 , 1996 BE APPROVED AS WRITTEN. AYES : NAYS : ABSTAIN: ABSENT : Seymour, Clayton, O 'Brien, Barber, and Smith . None. Fowler, Kuhlman .. None. • The motion carried. • V. APPROVAL OF FINDINGS OF FACT: Four Seasons, 3201 South Sherman Street The Chairman called for a motion . Seymour moved ; Clayton seconded : THAT THE FINDINGS OF FACT, CASE #6-96 , FOUR SEASONS , 3201 SOUTH SHERMAN STREET, BE APPROVED AS WRITTEN. AYES : NAYS : ABSTAIN: ABSENT : Seymour, Clayton, O 'Brien, Barber, and Smith . None . Fowler, Kuhlman . None . The motion carried . 5 VI. ELECTION OF VICE CHAffi: The Chairman asked for a motion. Mr. Clayton made the motion, Mr. Seymour seconded the motion that Ms. O'Brien be nominated to serve as Vice-Chair. All members voiced approval. VII: STAFF ADVISOR'S CHOICE: None. VIII. CITY ATTORNEY'S CHOICE: None. IX. BOARD MEMBERS CHOICE: Mr. Fowler was welcomed as the new member to the Board . X. ADJOURN: With no further business to come before the Board, Mr. Seymour made a motion to adjourn, Mr. Kuhlman seconded the motion . The meeting adjourned at 8 :55 p .m . Respectfully submitted : Cathie Mahon F:\DEP'JWBD\GROUP\BOA RDS\BOA \AUGUST MINS .DOC 6 •• • •