Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008-12-10 BAA MINUTES• • • ~ 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call CllY OF ENGLEWOOD BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEALS DECEMBER 1 O, 2008 MINUTES Present: John Smith Ill, Douglas Cohn, Carson Green, David Sprecace, Miodrag Budisa Absent/Excused: Marcia O'Brien, Sue Purdy, Staff-Assistant City Attorney Nancy Reid. Chair Smith stated there were five members present; therefore, four affirmative votes are required to grant a variance or appeal. Chair Smith 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 Smith 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. Staff will give a preliminary overview of the variance before testimony is taken. ltl1 3 . Public Hearing: Case #VAR2008-013 Logan Matlen 3233 South Logan Street Chair Smith stated he had proof of publication and posting. He introduced the case by stating it is a variance to encroach 15 feet into the required 25 foot front setback. This is a variance to Table 16-6-1.1 of the Englewood Municipal Code . • • • Brook Bell, Planner, was sworn in and provided a brief overview of the property. Mr. Bell stated an additional neighbor's statement was received and submitted to the Board. The original porch was enclosed as a sunroom in 1974 and encroaches approximately 7 feet into the front setback. The proposed deck will encroach an additional 6.5 feet for a total encroachment of 13.5 feet into the front setback which is less than the applicant's 15 feet encroachment. Mr. Bell reviewed the photos included in the Board's packet. f?] Logan Matlen, 3233 South Logan Street, was sworn in. Mr. Matlen testified that he made mistakes in the protocol of the project. His goal was to improve the property and neighborhood at large. He has tried to correct those mistakes . The project is to replace an existing unenclosed front porch that had fallen into disrepair. Unfortunately there are issues regarding zoning which he hopes can be resolved. Mr. Cohn asked if the proposed porch was larger than the existing, uncovered porch. Mr. Matlen responded that the proposed porch is roughly the same size. Mr. Cohn stated th e Building Department states in the staff report that the deck is 30 inches in height. Mr. Matlen stated the deck is 29 inches at its highest point. Mr. Cohn asked the applicant if he is willing to meet the Building Department's conditions. Mr. Matlen stated he intended to meet those conditions for matter of public safety . Chair Smith asked if the fence was located between the applicant's property and the neighbor who is objecting to the variance. Chair Smith also asked if the fence was conforming. Mr. Matlen stated that was correct; the fence was built and financed by both property owners . He spoke with Mr. Bell regarding correcting the height of the fence . Chair Smith stated it is somewhat disingenuous for the neighbor to complain about the view from his front porch when he is looking at a fence . He doesn 't understand how the applicant's porch would decrease any view. Mr. Matlen stated that unfortunately the neighbor is not present. Chair Smith asked staff if the fence is conforming. Mr. Bell responded that if the fence is over three feet it does not conform. A reason it might appear taller is because it sits on a retaining wall. Mr. Green asked if the other neighbor was contacted since there wasn't a neighbor statem e nt. Mr. Matlen stated he attempted to contact the owner of the property but was unable to do so. Mr. Bell stated the case was distributed to seven City departments. The Building Department comments are standard. He stated he will follow-up with Mr. Matlen regarding the fence . • • • Mr. Green asked if the applicant had gone through the normal permit process could staff have approved any distance into the front setback. Mr. Bell responded that an unenclosed porch that is less than 30 inches high can project 30% into the front setback, which in this case would be 7.5 feet. The existing structure is already encroaching 7 feet, so the applicant could have gone out an additional six inches. Mr. Green asked why the objecting neighbor's original statement, showing no objection or support, wasn't included in the Board 's packet. Mr. Matlen stated it was not returned to him until after the May 8 application submittal. Since the neighbor didn't indicate his approval or objection, he didn 't feel it was pertinent. Mr. Matlen submitted the statement to the Board. Chair Smith confirmed that the neighbor, Mr. Sickles, contributed to the fence. Mr. Matlen stated Mr. Sickles contributed half of the funds to build the fence. ~ There were no other persons present to testify for or against the variance. Chair Smith incorporated the staff report and exhibits into the record and closed the public hearing . Motion: THAT CASE VAR2008-013 FOR 3233 SOUTH LOGAN STREET BE GRANTED A VARIANCE TO ENCROACH 15 FEET INTO THE REQUIRED 25 FOOT FRONT SETBACK. THIS IS A VARIANCE TO TABLE 16-6-1.1 OF THE ENGLEWOOD MUNICIPAL CODE. Moved by Doug Cohn, Seconded by David Sprecace The Board discussed self-imposed hardships. There are other porches in the neighborhood that encroach into the setback, however, the subject porch encroaches further than those on the block. The porch appears well constructed. The Board discussed the opposing neighbor's statement. With no further discussion, the secretary polled the members' votes. Mr. Green voted yes. The house pre-dates the Englewood Building Code. Unique conditions exist because the house currently sits into the setback. The previous porch was enclosed in 1974 and the Code has been updated since that time. The applicant is replacing an old and decrepit deck with one that is well built, safer, and easier for people to physically navigate. There are multiple houses on the block that are situated into the current setbacks. The deck does not look out of character for the neighborhood. The variance is not self-imposed because the applicant did not choose to construct the house where it is located on the lot. He has a valid reason for wanting a porch and the current • • • locatio n is the only place it can be constructed without moving the hous e or tearing down the ex isting enclosed porch. Mr. Sprecace concurred with Mr. Green. H e further stated that the house is at a hi g h e r grade than the land which creates a difficulty and hardship for the applicant. Mr. Cohn, Mr. Budisa, and Chair Smith concurred with Mr. Green and Mr. Sprecace. Vote: Motion passed (summary: Yes= 5, No= 0) Yes: John Smith 111, Douglas Cohn, Carson Green, David Sprecace, Miodrag Budisa. The Chair instructed the applicant to contact staff for any additional or necessar y inform ation . 4. Approval of Email Poll a. Case #VAR2008-005, 4367 South Logan Street Motion: Email Poll , Action: Approve, Moved by Carson Green, Seconded by David Sprecace. Vote: Motion carried by unanimous vote (summary: Yes= 5) . Yes: John Smith Ill , Douglas Cohn, Carson Green, David Sprecace, Miodrag Budisa, 5 . Staff's Choice Mr. Bell stated there is a case to encroach into the bulk plane scheduled for January 14. 6. Board Member's Choice The Board expressed their appreciation to the City for the holiday dinn e r. tt] 7. Adjourn There was no further business brought before the Board. The reg ular meeting was declared adjourn~ /s~n Nancy Fen ton, Recording Secretary Approved: Januar y 14, 2009