The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2011-03-09 BAA MINUTES.. • • • .----------~' BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEALS MINUTES MARCH 9, 2011 1. Call to Order The regular meeting of the Englewood Board of Adjustment and Appeals was called to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Englewood City Council Chambers, Chair Green presiding. 2. Roll Call Present: Carson Green , Jordan May, David Pittinos, Sue Purdy, Angela Schmitz, Assistant City Attorney Nancy Reid , Brook Bell, Planner II Absent/Excused: John W. Smith, 111, David Sprecace, Marcie O'Brien ~tll Chair Green stated there were five members present; therefore, four affirmative votes are required to grant a variance or appeal. Chair Green stated that the Board of Adjustment and Appeals is empowered to grant or deny variances by Part Ill, 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 Green 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. l?lJ 3. Englewood Superintendent Brian Ewert, Superintendent of Englewood Schools, addressed the Board regarding a proposed bond issue. He presented a PowerPoint slideshow and highlighted the following: • Contract received and under review for Flood Middle School. • The current economy and its impact on the school budget, decline in pupil count, safety issues and age and condition of current facilities. Page 1of5 ' • • • !ill • 70 % of current students are qualified as living in poverty. • Board approved a 5 -10 year plan. • District will apply for an $8,000 ,000 grant to be matched by the Dist r ict. Money to be used for renovation of Englewood Middle School. • Potential impact of a bond/mill levy increase on the local taxpayer. • Architect's drawing of what a combined middle and high school might look like. 4. Public Hearing: Case #VAR2011-002 Dav id R. and Alice K. Philip 3159 South University Boulevard Ch air Green declared the public hearing open , stating he had proof of posting and publication. He introduced the case by stating the applicants are requesting a v ariance to encroach 2. 5 feet into the required 7 foot south side setback for a length of 30 lineal feet to construct a one-story addition. This is a variance to Table 16 -6- 1.1 of the Englewood Municipal Code. Brook Bell , Planner 11 , was sworn in . Mr. Bell provided an overview of the property utilizing PowerPoint slides. The property is zoned R-1-A; the majority of the lots are 9,000 square feet or larger. Neighbor notifications were received from the north , south , and the west; none of those neighbors objected to the variance request. A previous variance was granted on the property in 2001 to encroach the same distance into the 7 foot setback to enclose a covered patio. The current case would maintain the same south line of the building. The existing house is approximately 1,645 square feet; the proposed addition is 420 square feet . David Philip , 3159 South University Boulevard , was sworn in. Mr. Philip testified that his in-laws are elderly, need assistance , and will be moving in with he and his wife . The only viable option to add the addition was on the south. Mr . Philip explained why other options did not work -utilities, easements , access to the garage , etc . The side setback has changed since their house was built in 1955. If the addition were shifted to meet the setback, they would lose visibility to the backyard from their dining room . It would also make a complicated roofline transition. Mr . Philip stated there is heavy opposition in the neighborhood against adding a second story . The other issue is his wife is handicapped and with the medical needs of his in-laws, maneuvering stairs is not a good option . P age 2 of 5 • • • Answering questions from the Board , Mr . Philip approximately 14 feet is needed to have an accessible hallway and bathroom. The applicant reviewed the flow of the home and addition for the Board . Mr. Philip testified the addition is a necessity to accommodate the needs of his family. After reviewing all the designs and options with his architect, the presented design is the only one that works with the existing house. Chair Green stated he drove by the property; there is a fence so the addition will not be very v i sible from the street. He inquired about the trees; Mr. Philip responded that the trees are on the neighbor's property. There is a total of 18 feet between his house and the neighbor's house. The house currently has three bedrooms. Further , they have a high functioning autistic adult child who lives with them as well. [fll Mr. Bell stated the request was reviewed by seven City departments. Even with the addition , the property still meets lot coverage requirements. There were no other persons present to testify for or against the variance . Chair Green incorporated the staff report and exhibits into the record and closed the public hearing . MOTION: THAT CASE VAR2011-002 , 3159 SOUTH UNIVERSITY BOULEVARD , BE GRANTED A VARIANCE TO ENCROACH 2.5 FEET INTO THE REQUIRED 7 FOOT SOUTH SIDE SETBACK FOR A LENGTH OF 30 LINEAL FEET TO CONSTRUCT A ONE- STORY ADDITION. THIS IS A VARIANCE TO TABLE 16-6 ~1.1 OF THE ENGLEWOOD MUNICIPAL CODE. MOVED BY ANGELA SCHMITZ SECONDED BY JORDAN MAY Chair Green stated this case is "what variances are for." The addition follows the ex isting line of the building. It is within the intent of the zone district. The existing neighborhood i s not going to be negatively impacted; it cannot be seen from the street. The neighbors support the variance. It is not self-imposed because the house was built before the current setback was enacted. Mr. May stated the applicant did a great job detailing why this option was the best that fit his circumstances and the variance was a necessity rather than a convenience. The neighbor to the south wrote a comment: "We have absolutely no issues with this addition." Presumably that is the neighbor that would be most impacted. This variance will promote health and safety and comply with the Build i ng Codes because i t is a necessity for the family. Ms . Purdy stated the house is located within Hampden Hills which has HOA covenants prohibiting a second story . P age 3 of 5 • • • Ms. Reid stated covenants are a private agreement between a homeowner and the neighborhood association. The Board cannot use covenants as a basis for granting a variance. It does not excuse the four criteria. With no further discussion , the secretary polled the members' votes. Ms . Schmitz , Ms. Purdy, Mr. May , and Mr. Pittinos voted yes. Chair Green voted yes. The existing house was constructed in 1955. All permits were obtained and approved at that time. The addition will follow the existing building line; it will not have a negative affect on the surrounding properties. It would be a ha r dship to deal with the unusual roofline and unusual flow to relocate the addition. It is within the intent of the zone district regulations to secure public health , safety and welfare. It will improve the property by adding an addition that is handicapped accessible. It will not negatively impact the use or development of the adjacent conforming property. It will only be visible to one property and that homeowner strongly supports the variance. There will be 18 feet between the structures. It is not a self-imposed difficulty or hardship because the existing structure was built in conformance to the Codes in existence in 1955. The applicant is maintaining the foundation and roof lines . Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes= 5.) Yes: Carson Green , David Pittinos, Sue Purdy , Jordan May , Angela Schmitz The Chair instructed the applicant to contact staff for any additional or necessary information. [?] CASE VAR2011-003 John Krauklis 2701 South Pennsylvania Street Chair Green declared the public hearing open, stating he had proof of publication; however, the property was not posted. The case will be continued to April 13 , 2011. There was no objection to continuing the case. [tlJ 5. Approval of Minutes February 9, 2011 Motion: APPROVE THE FEBRUARY 9, 2011 MINUTES AS WRITIEN. Moved by Sue Purdy Seconded by Angela Schmitz Page 4 of 5 .. • • • Vote: Motion carried by unanimous vote (summary: Yes =5). Yes: Carson Green, Sue Purdy, David Pittinos, Angela Schmitz , Jordan May 6. Findings of Fact Case #VAR2011-001, All Recycling Motion: APPROVE FINDINGS OF FACT IN CASE #VAR2011-001 , ALL RECYCLING , INC., AS WRITIEN. Moved by Angela Schmitz Seconded by Sue Purdy Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes= 5). Yes: Carson Green , Sue Purdy , David Pittinos, Angela Schmitz , David Sprecace l?] 7. Staff 's Choice Staff had nothing further . 8. Attorney's Choice Ms. Reid clarified the Board's role with regards to neighborhood covenants . Di scussion ensued regarding covenants . 9. Board Member's Choice The Board had nothing further. 10. Adjourn The Board had nothing further. The meeting adjourned at 8:30 p.m . P age 5 of 5