HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005-07-13 BAA MINUTES•
•
MINUTES
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEALS
July 13, 2005
I. CALL TO ORDER
The regular meeting of the Englewood Board of Adjustment and Appeals was called to
order at 7:30 p.m. in the Englewood City Council Chambers, Chair Carlston presiding.
Members present: Carlston, Cohn, Green, Shotwell, Smith
Members absent: O'Brien, Sprecace
Staff present: Anthony Fruchtl, Planner
Nancy Reid, Assistant City Attorney
Chair Carlston stated there were five members present; therefore, four affirmative votes are
required to grant a variance or appeal.
Chair Carlston stated that the Board of Adjustment and Appeals is empowered to grant or
deny variances by Part 111, Section 60 of the Englewood City Charter. Variances granted
by the Board are subject to a 30-day appeal period. Variances are effective at the end of
the appeal period. Building permits for construction associated with an approved variance
will not be issued until the appeal period is ended. Building permits must be obtained and
construction begun within 180 days of the variance's effective date.
Chair Carlston set forth parameters for the hearing: The case will be introduced; applicants
will present their request and reasons the variance should be granted; proponents will be
given an opportunity to speak; opponents will address the Board; and then staff will address
the Board .
II. CASE #VAR0506-0001
Budget Garages
4336 South Jason Street
Chair Carlston declared the Public Hearing open, stating she had proof of publication. She
introduced the case by stating it is a variance to encroach 9 feet into the required 25 foot
front setback. This is a variance to Table 16-6-1 .2 the Englewood Municipal Code.
Merrill Miller, 5777 East Evans Avenue was sworn in. Mr. Miller testified he has four
photographs of the sign posted on the property in his camera that he cannot currently
present to the Board. The sign was posted on the property 16 days ago on June 28. He
will print the photographs and give them to staff tomorrow .
1 -
•
•
Mr. Miller stated he applied for a permit on behalf of the homeowner to build a garage and
realized that due to the unusual shape of the lot, a garage could not be built without a
variance. The homeowner has a boat and has been cited for having the boat parked on the
street. One of the reasons for the garage would be to move the boat off the street.
The lot is oddly shaped; the property is situated in a cul-de-sac as indicated on the vicinity
map. The other properties in the cul-de-sac are somewhat rectangular or larger; the
owner's property is a partial pie-shaped lot. A drainage ditch located on the rear of the
property cuts off the ability to construct the garage on the back of the yard. Also there is a
very steep slope on the rear of the property. He is unaware whether or not the drainage
ditch is currently active. They considered moving the garage to the rear, but due to the
ditch and the steep slope it wasn't feasible . This left the homeowner with no other
recourse but to apply for the variance.
Mr. Miller testified that the surrounding neighbors were contacted, and they do not have
any problems with the variance request.
Mr. Smith clarified that the garage is 20' x 20' and the driveway is 16 feet. Mr. Miller stated
that was correct.
Referring to the elevation drawings, Mr . Cohn stated it appeared the garage is 24'x24'
according to the scale. Mr. Miller responded that he probably used the original drawings
and did not notice that he hadn't scaled it down . The garage is placed very close to the
house, and he understands there are building considerations for the permit process. He is
also aware of the Code restrictions with regards to it being close to the house.
Ms . Shotwell clarified that the existing garage is proposed to be converted to habitable
space. Mr. Miller stated that was correct. Ms. Shotwell asked why the existing garage
could not be expanded into a two-car garage and the house expanded for habitable space
to the rear of the house, which would not require a variance .
Mr. Miller responded that the house is very small and expanding the house to the rear
would not create enough usable space for the homeowner; he could possibly build a 1 O'x8'
addition if built in the rear. He could also possibly build a triangular-shaped room in the
rear, but it would not compliment the house nor would it be very usable livable space. He
stated he struggled with various options, and the option before the Board was the best he
could come up with.
Chair Carlston asked for the square footage of the house. Mr. Miller stated the current
livable square footage of the house is approximately 900 square feet. It would be
increasing about 180 square feet. Chair Carlston clarified that it is more beneficial to build
a new two-car garage and convert the existing garage to livable space than to extend the
rear of the house .
2
-
•
•
-
Mr. Miller responded that the rear of the house has a patio which is an important
characteristic of the house. The middle of the rear yard slopes up, which is where he
originally considered placing the garage.
There were no other persons present to testify for or against the variance. Chair Carlston
incorporated the staff report and exhibits into the record and closed the public hearing.
Mr. Smith moved;
Mr. Green seconded:
THAT CASE VAR0506-0001 4336 SOUTH JASON STREET, BE GRANTED A VARIANCE
TO ENCROACH 9 FEET INTO THE REQUIRED 25 FOOT FRONT SETBACK TO
CONSTRUCT A DETACHED GARAGE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
1. THAT THE PROPOSED DETACHED GARAGE REMAINS DETACHED FROM THE
PRINCIPAL STRUCTURE.
2. THE EXISTING DRIVEWAY SHALL BE REMOVED AND COMPLY WITH
SECTION 16-6-10: d {6 ) (a) (3 ).
THIS IS A VARIANCE TO TABLE 16-6-1.2 OF THE ENGLEWOOD MUNICIPAL
CODE .
Mr. Smith stated he drove by the property. There are nine houses in the cul-de-sac. He
counted 10 vehicles and 1 motorcycle on the street; 9 vehicles in driveways, 2
snowmobiles, 1 boat, and 1 camper parked throughout the cul-de-sac. He stated that
taking even two of those off the street would be worth the effort. Turning around in the
cul-de-sac is extremely difficult with all the vehicles parked on the street. Mr. Smith noted
the aerial photograph provided by staff shows 13 vehicles parked on the street.
Chair Carlston stated she believes the applicant made a good point regarding the first
criterion about extending the house into the rear yard. From the aerial photograph, it does
show that the yard drops off which could be dangerous .
Mr. Smith asked if that is the City ditch . Ms. Reid confirmed that it is an active City ditch
from April to October. Mr. Smith stated if a garage or addition were built in the rear, there
could be seepage or other problems from the ditch .
With no further discussion, the secretary polled the members' votes .
Mr. Smith stated he voted "yes." The property has unique physical conditions which are
the size and shape of the lot, as well as the topography in the rear which are peculiar to the
property. The variance is consistent with the intent of the zone district which is to add a
garage and to remove vehicles from the street. It will not permanently impair the use or
development of adjacent or conforming properties because it will help them as well and
3
•
•
those properties are already developed. It is not a self-imposed hardship; there appear to
be at least three vehicles per household in the cul-de-sac which is not uncommon.
Mr. Green, Mr . Cohn, Ms. Shotwell, and Chair Carlston voted "yes", concurring with Mr.
Smith
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
Carlston, Cohn, Green, Shotwell, Smith
None
None
O'Brien, Sprecace
The Chair announced the motion approved by a 5-0 vote.
The Chair instructed the applicants to contact staff for any additional or necessary
information . Ms . Reid reminded the applicant to provide staff with the photograph of the
sign to complete the posting requirement. Mr. Miller stated he would hand deliver the
photographs.
Ill. APPROVAL OF TELEPHONE POLL
Chair Carlston asked for consideration of the telephone poll conducted on June 8, 2005
Mr. Smith moved;
Ms. Shotwell seconded: TO RATIFY THE TELEPHONE POLL CONDUCTED ON
JUNE 8, 2005 .
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
Carlston, Cohn, Shotwell, Smith
None
Green
O'Brien, Sprecace
Motion carried. The Chair announced the motion approved by a 5-0 vote.
IV. STAFF ADVISOR'S CHOICE
Mr. Fruchtl stated there were no cases to be heard at the August meeting; he asked if the
Board wished to meet. It was the consensus of the Board to not meet on August 10.
V. CITY ATTORNEY'S CHOICE
Ms. Reid stated she had nothing further.
VI. BOARD MEMBER'S CHOICE
Mr . Smith complimented staff on the Board's packet and for including the aerial
photograph.
4
•
•
There was no further business brought before the Board . The regular meeting was declared
adjourned at 7:40 p .m .
5
-