Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1987-02-11 BAA MINUTES• BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEALS ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO FEBRUARY 11, 1987 I. CALL TO ORDER. 9 11D The regular meeting of the Englewood Board of Adjustment and Appeals was called to order by Chairman Fish at 7:30 p.m. Members Present: Seymour, Hal l agin, Fish, Lighthall and Welker. Members Absent: Brown. Also Present: Dorothy Romans, Staff Advisor Nancy Reid, Assistant City Attorney Mary Alice Rothweiler, Planner I Chairman Fish stated that there was a quorum of five members, and four affir- mative votes will be required to grant a variance. The Board of Adjustment and Appeals is authorized to grant or deny a variance by Part 3, Section 60 of the Englewood Municipal Code. II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES. Chairman Fish stated that the Minutes of January 14, 1987, were to be con- sidered for approval . BOARD MEMBER SEYMOUR MOVED THAT THE MINUTES OF JANUARY 14, 1987, BE APPROVED AS WRITTEN, WITH A CORRECTION ON PAGE 10, SHOWING MS. LIGHTHALL, RATHER THAN MR. FISH, ASKED MR. YODER IF HE WOULD AGREE WITH A VARIANCE. Ms. Lighthall seconded the motion. Upon a vote, all five members present voted in the affirmative, and the Chair- man ruled the Minutes were approved as amended. III. APPROVAL OF FINDINGS OF FACT. BOARD MEMBER SEYMOUR MOVED THAT THE FINDINGS OF FACT IN CASES # 1-87, 3-87, AND 4-87 BE APPROVED AS WRITTEN. Mr. Welker seconded the motion. Upon a vote, all five members present voted in the affirmative, and the Chair- man ruled the Findings were approved as written. IV . CASE #28-87. 900 West Tufts Avenue The Chairman opened the Public Hearing for Case #2-87, for John and Jennifer Pi etrus for property 1 ocated at 900 West Tufts Avenue. The Chairman stated that he had proof of posting and publication, and asked that the Staff identi- fy the request. -1 - ' . • Mary Alice Rothweiler, Planner for the City of Englewood, was sworn in for testimony. She stated that the applicants were requesting a variance to per- mit the construction of a detached garage which would be eight feet from the east side property line instead of 25 feet. This is a variance from Section 16.5-13 a (2) (b), Minimum Side Yard on Corner Lots. John Pietrus, 900 West Tufts, was sworn in for testimony. He said that he and his wife had tried to find alternate locations for their garage, but are of the opinion that any construction which would meet the Zoning Ordinance would split their lot into unusable portions and not give them any privacy. He stated that putting the garage to within eight feet of the east side property line would not affect the neighborhood or the environment negatively. He sub- mitted pictures of their house and of other homes in the area which have simi- lar garages at about the same setback as was proposed. Mr. Pietrus said that the shape of his lot, and the fact that it is a corner lot with typical loss of privacy in the back yard, make a variance necessary. The regulations do not permit a six foot fence to give privacy in the back yard, but the garage would shield the patio from passersby. A short driveway would make snow removal easier. He noted that across Tufts there is a small garage on the long side of the street with no more than ten feet of setback. Mr. Pietrus said the garage would be about 23 feet from the street, and 36 feet to the west boundary. He said they would remove the storage shed in the back yard if granted the variance. The Chairman asked if there were any other speakers in favor of the variance. Robert Repair, 4610 South Inca Street, was sworn in for testimony. He said others in the neighborhood have similar garages, and this would give the Piet- rus family privacy in their back yard. Gene Schmeckpeper, 4665 South Inca Street, was sworn in for testimony. He said he lives three houses to the south of the subject property. Mr. and Mrs. Petrus are good neighbors who have improved their property. He asked that the Board grant the variance. Dale Martin, 4620 South Inca Street, was sworn in for testimony. He said that the house was moved in from the greenbelt on Galapago Street and was poorly pl aced on the 1 ot. The house has not been cared for in the past, and the Pi etrus family has improved the house; therefore, he was in favor of the variance being granted. There were no speakers present in opposition to the request. The Chairman incorporated the Staff Report into the Record, and asked if the Staff had any further statements. Mrs. Romans said there were no further comments. The Chairman closed the Public Hearing for Case #28-86. BOARD MEMBER SEYMOUR MOVED THAT THE APPLICANTS, JOHN AND JENNIFER PIETRUS, BE GRANTED A VARIANCE FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 900 WEST TUFTS AVENUE TO PERMIT CONSTRUCTION OF A DETACHED GARAGE WHICH WOULD BE 8 FEET FROM THE EAST SIDE PROPERTY LINE INSTEAD OF 25 FEET. THIS IS A VARIANCE FROM SECTION 16.5-13 a (2) (b), MINIMUM SIDE YARD ON CORNER LOTS. Mr. Hallagin seconded the motion. -2 - .. • After some discussion, the Board Members locked in their votes, and gave their findings as follows. Mr. Seymour said no evidence had been presented that was not presented at the original hearing. He voted "no". Mr. Hallagin said everyone should have a garage for protection and safety, but it is not necessary for it to be set so close to the street. Ms. Lighthall voted "yes", saying no matter where the garage is placed there is a problem. Mr. Welker said there are exceptional circumstances in shape of the lot. The spirit of the ordinance and the neighborhood would not be harmed by this variance. Mr. Fish concurred with the affirmative votes. When the votes were displayed, three members (Lighthall, Welker and Fish) had voted in the affirmative, and two members (Seymour and Hallagin) opposed granting the variance. The Chairman ruled the variance was denied because four affirmative votes are required to grant a variance. After some discussion it was suggested that a variance be granted for some relief from the 25 foot setback requirement. BOARD MEMBER SEYMOUR MOVED THAT THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR CASE #28-86 BE REOPENED . Board Member Lighthall seconded the motion. All members present voted in favor of reopening Case #28-86. Mrs. Romans said that Mr. Pietrus would appreciate consideration of their con- structing the garage in line with the house. She stated that the Pi etruses had been erroneously told before they bought the house that they could put up a six foot privacy fence behind the sidewalk on the east side of the property. Relying upon this information, they purchased the property and then were told they could only install a 42 inch fence which is at least 50% open. It was at this point that they decided to pursue the construction of the garage rather than the privacy fence. Discussion followed. BOARD MEMBER SEYMOUR MOVED THAT JOHN AND JENNIFER PIETRUS BE GRANTED A VARIANCE FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 900 WEST TUFTS AVENUE TO PERMIT CONSTRUCTION OF A DETACHED GARAGE WHICH WOULD BE 15 FEET FROM THE EAST SIDE PROPERTY LINE INSTEAD OF 25 FEET. THIS IS A VARIANCE FROM SECTION 16.5-13 a (2) (b), MINI- MUM SIDE YARD ON CORNER LOTS . Board Member Lighthall seconded the motion. The members locked in their votes, and gave their findings as follows: Mr . Seymour said 15 feet was reasonable, and he voted "yes". - 3 - • • • Mr. Hallagin said after considering the matter he would chang e hi s vot e t o "yes" . Ms. Lighthall and Mr. Welker said they voted "yes" for the reasons previou s l y given. Mr. Fish said that the nature of the property causes a hardship, this is the minimum variance that can be granted to give relief, there will be no damage to the neighborhood, and the spirit of the Ordinance will not be violated; therefore, he voted yes. When the votes were displayed, all five members had voted in the affirmativ e, and the Chairman ruled the variance was granted. V. DIRECTOR'S CHOICE. Mrs. Romans informed the Board that Mr. Brown would miss the next three meet - ings while he is vacationing in Sun City and that he had discussed his plan s with Mayor Otis. She also noted that the Rules and Procedures Manual require s an election for Chairman and Vice Chairman at the February meeting. Discussion followed concerning nominations. Mr. Brown's name was discus s ed inasmuch as he has been serving as Vice Chairman, but Mr. Fish said that Mr. Brown did not want to be Chairman. BOARD MEMBER SEYMOUR NOMINATED MR. WELKER FOR CHAIRMAN FOR 1987. Board Member Fish seconded the nomination . Upon a vote, three members voted in favor, one voted against, and one ab- stained. The Chairman ruled Mr. Welker was elected Chairman. BOARD MEMBER LIGHTHALL NOMINATED MR. BROWN FOR VICE CHAIRMAN FOR 1987. Board Member Welker seconded the nomination. All five members present voted in the affirmative, and Chairman Fish ruled that Mr. Brown would be Vice Chairman for 1987. The meeting adjourned at 8:45 p.m . -4 -