HomeMy WebLinkAbout20211855.tiffMINUTES OF THE WELD COUNTY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING
Tuesday, July 6, 2021
A regular meeting of the Weld County Board of Adjustment was held on Tuesday, July 6, 2021, in the
Hearing Room of the Weld County Administration Building, 1150 O Street, Greeley, Colorado. The
meeting was called to order by Lonnie Ford at 10:06 a.m.
Roll Call.
Present: Lonnie Ford, Kathryn Wittman, Bruce Johnson, and Todd Baker.
Absent: Karl Kohlgraf, Michael Wailes, Gene Stille.
Also Present: Maxwell Nader, Department of Planning; Bob Choate, County Attorney; and Kristine
Ranslem, Secretary.
Bob Choate, County Attorney, stated that the Chair and Vice -Chair for the Board of Adjustment were not
able to make it today, therefore, Robert's Rules of Order allows you to elect a Chair for the purpose of the
hearing today.
Bruce Johnson moved to have Lonnie Ford serve as Chair today since he is the most experienced member
in attendance. Kathryn Wittman seconded that motion.
Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 4).
Yes: Bruce Johnson, Kathryn Wittman, Lonnie Ford, Todd Baker.
Motion: Approve the May 4, 2021 Weld County Planning Commission minutes, Moved by Kathryn
Wittman, Seconded by Lonnie Ford. Motion passed unanimously.
CASE NUMBER: BOA21-0002
APPLICANT: MARTHA FUELL-KRUEGER
PLANNER: MAXWELL NADER
REQUEST: APPEAL FOR A VARIANCE FROM SETBACK REQUIREMENTS OF
SECTION 23-3-440.C IN THE E (ESTATE) ZONE DISTRICT.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOT 2 BLOCK 1 FROMAN RANCHETTE, BEING PART OF SECTION
18, T1 N, R65W OF THE 6TH P.M., WELD COUNTY, COLORADO.
LOCATION: NORTH OF AND ADJACENT TO SAGEBRUSH WAY;
APPROXIMATELY 285 FEET EAST OF CR 37.
Maxwell Nader, Planning Services, presented Case BOA21-0002, reading the recommendation and
comments into the record. The Department of Planning Services recommends denial of this application.
Should the Board of Adjustment recommend approval of this application the following condition shall be
attached:
1. A Building Permit shall be applied for to permit the porch addition and the reroof.
Lonnie Ford asked if the house is setback 20 feet. Mr. Nader said that the house is back 20 feet and
reminded the board that the house still didn't meet the original setbacks of 30 feet on the development
standards that are no longer in existence. He said that if the porch was not present, the house would meet
the 20 -foot setback requirement.
The Chair asked if the applicant was available. The applicant was not available.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application.
No one wished to speak.
Rhonda Patterson-Eachus, 18034 Sage Brush Way, stated that she lives catty -corner from the applicant.
She said that Ms. Fuell-Krueger has improved her home and added that this structure won't interfere with
anything. She added it would be sad if she had to take it down because it has greatly improved her property.
1
CO fr un : Go.t;on 5 2021-1855
O7/I9 /21
The Chair closed the public portion of the hearing and asked if the applicant was available.
Martha Fuell-Krueger, 18075 Sagebrush Way, stated that she has lived here 28 years and never had any
problems with anyone. She hired a licensed contractor to build the porch and assumed that he obtained a
building permit. She added that her house is two (2) feet within the existing setback.
Ms. Krueger said that they are currently living in Florida so they don't make it back often. She added that
she plans to sell her home, retire and move to Florida.
Mr. Ford asked staff to clarify if the house meets the setback requirements. Mr. Nader said that according
to the applicant's testimony the house encroaches two (2) feet into the required setback, regardless of the
porch. He added that the porch encroaches an additional 11 feet into the 20 feet setback.
Bruce Johnson stated that he feels that the applicant didn't have knowledge of what the setback was
because of the commonality of the neighborhood. He said he would probably have a different opinion if it
was a deck, but believes it would be a hardship to modify that porch and added that the job was done quite
well and not entirely the applicant's fault. Mr. Johnson said that his judgement is that she is not solely
responsible for this. He suggested approving this application.
Todd Baker agreed and added when you hire a professional to do a job and pay them you expect that they
know what they are doing. He said that it sounds like maybe not anyone knew what the setbacks were and
agreed with Mr. Johnson.
Kathryn Wittman added that when the subdivision was built it was such a hodge-podge that even the builder
didn't conform to the requirements at the time.
Motion: Approve BOA21-0002 along with the Conditions of Approval as proposed by Staff, Moved by
Kathryn Wittman, Seconded by Bruce Johnson.
Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 4).
Yes: Bruce Johnson, Kathryn Wittman, Lonnie Ford, Todd Baker.
CASE NUMBER:
APPLICANT:
PLANNER:
REQUEST:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
LOCATION:
BOA21-0003
KEITH REIERSTAD
MAXWELL NADER
APPEAL FOR A VARIANCE FROM OFFSET REQUIREMENTS OF
SECTION 23-3-440.D IN THE E (ESTATE) ZONE DISTRICT.
LOT 6 BLOCK 1 FROMAN RANCHETTES, BEING PART OF SECTION
18, T1 N, R65W OF THE 6TH P.M., WELD COUNTY, COLORADO.
SOUTH OF AND ADJACENT TO SAGEBRUSH WAY;
APPROXIMATELY 285 FEET EAST OF CR 37.
Maxwell Nader, Planning Services, presented Case BOA21-0003, reading the recommendation and
comments into the record. The Department of Planning Services recommends approval of this application.
Mr. Johnson asked if there is a way for this building to be moved. Mr. Nader stated that the applicant can
answer that question.
Keith Reierstad, 18074 Sage Brush Way, stated that the barn is built on a foundation and was built in two
(2) parts so moving it would be extremely difficult and expensive. He added that he has not heard any
complaints from the neighbors.
Mr. Ford asked if a permit was obtained for this. Mr. Nader said that there was but staff was unable to
locate the building permit. He added that this is very unique and hypothetically could meet the offset
requirements in the ag zone district.
Mr. Reierstad asked if this variance is approved, would it be valid for future owners of the property. Mr.
Nader replied yes for this structure only.
2
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application.
No one wished to speak.
Mr. Baker said that this was done properly and proper building permits were obtained. He said that there
was nothing that the homeowner did that would cause them this issue themselves. If this wasn't caught
when original building permits were obtained then he doesn't know why this shouldn't be approved.
Motion: Approve BOA21-0003, Moved by Todd Baker, Seconded by Kathryn Wittman.
Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 4).
Yes: Bruce Johnson, Kathryn Wittman, Lonnie Ford, Todd Baker.
CASE NUMBER:
APPLICANT:
PLANNER:
REQUEST:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
LOCATION:
BOA21-0004
PATRICIA OSTHOFF
MAXWELL NADER
APPEAL FOR A VARIANCE FROM SETBACK AND OFFSET
REQUIREMENTS OF SECTIONS 23-3-440.C AND 23-3-440.D IN THE
E (ESTATE) ZONE DISTRICT.
LOT 3 BLOCK 1 FROMAN RANCHETTE, BEING PART OF SECTION
18, T1 N, R65W OF THE 6TH P.M., WELD COUNTY, COLORADO.
NORTH OF AND ADJACENT TO SAGEBRUSH WAY;
APPROXIMATELY 115 FEET EAST OF CR 37.
Maxwell Nader, Planning Services, presented Case BOA21-0004, reading the recommendation and
comments into the record. Mr. Nader noted that these structures were built prior to the applicant purchasing
this property. The Department of Planning Services recommends approval of this application.
Patricia Osthoff, 18129 Sage Brush Way, Brighton, Colorado, stated that she doesn't have much to add.
The house was like that when she purchased it. The garage in question is not a new garage and is used
as a shed. She added that both structures were on site prior to purchase.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application.
No one wished to speak.
Motion: Approve BOA21-0004, Moved by Bruce Johnson, Seconded by Kathryn Wittman.
Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 4).
Yes: Bruce Johnson, Kathryn Wittman, Lonnie Ford, Todd Baker.
CASE NUMBER:
APPLICANT:
PLANNER:
REQUEST:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
LOCATION:
BOA21-0005
JAY AND RHONDA EACHUS
MAXWELL NADER
APPEAL FOR A VARIANCE FROM OFFSET REQUIREMENTS OF
SECTION 23-3-440.D IN THE E (ESTATE) ZONE DISTRICT.
LOT 5 BLOCK 1 FROMAN RANCHETTES, BEING PART OF SECTION
18, T1 N, R65W OF THE 6TH P.M., WELD COUNTY, COLORADO.
SOUTH OF AND ADJACENT TO SAGEBRUSH WAY; EAST OF AND
ADJACENT TO CR 37.
Maxwell Nader, Planning Services, presented Case BOA21-0005, reading the recommendation and
comments into the record. Mr. Nader said that the applicant's submitted a letter that they were unaware of
offset requirements. The Department of Planning Services recommends denial of this application. Should
the Board of Adjustment approve this application, staff recommends the following conditions of approval be
attached:
1. A building permit shall be applied for to permit the two (2) structures.
3
Mr. Ford asked if these structures are permittable. Mr. Nader said that the applicants will need to discuss
that with the building department. He added that he didn't measure them out but there may be one of the
structures that are small enough it doesn't require a building permit.
Rhonda Eachus, 18034 Sage Brush Way, Brighton, Colorado, stated that she is guilty and added that they
are portable buildings so she didn't think she needed a permit because they are portable. She didn't know
that she needed a 15 -foot offset requirement from the property line. She said that they are big and may
need a crane to have them moved.
Mr. Ford asked what the size of the small structure is. Ms. Eachus didn't know and Mr. Nader added that
a rough estimate is 286 square foot. Therefore, it would require a building permit as it is over 200 square
feet. Mr. Nader added that he has not received any complaints on this property.
Ms. Wittman asked what the structures are sitting on. Ms. Eachus replied that it is dirt.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application.
Keith Reierstad, 18074 Sage Brush Road, stated that he appreciates having those buildings where they
are because they provide a visual and audio buffer between the Eachus's property and his property. He
added that he likes having the privacy of a screen on his western property boundary and would be
disappointed if those buildings were to be moved.
Mr. Johnson said that if the buildings are moved it might do more damage than good. He added that if the
impacted neighbor doesn't want it moved then it is hard for him to argue against his request.
Mr. Baker said that he is concerned with having to show a reason to approve that variance where in this
case they don't have that.
Ms. Wittman said that the structures are big enough to require permits so she would be in favor of approving
it with the condition that building permits be obtained.
Ms. Eachus said that she thinks she is running into a close amount of allowable buildings on her property.
Mr. Nader said that the 4% Rule does applies but very quickly the code is changing the 4% Rule to a lot
coverage of 50%. Bob Choate, County Attorney, said it really doesn't have to do with the decision today.
Mr. Nader added that it would be a USR permit to go before the Planning Commission if she would exceed
that 50% coverage rule.
Ms. Wittman asked if these buildings can be dismantled and then moved. Ms. Eachus said that this
company is out of New Mexico so she wouldn't do that.
Mr. Johnson said that this one is difficult even though if falls in a lot of the same setbacks. He added that
it is common and too bad that we as consumers don't know a lot about whether permits are required and
what the setbacks are because that is not what our way of thinking. He said that he would like to approve
the variance because it is so similar in setback to the other cases approved today and would like to be
consistent.
Mr. Ford asked if there is a problem with the Fire Protection Code if this case is approved. Jose Gonzales,
Assistant Building Official, stated that if the structure is within five (5) feet from the property line, it has to
be protected. If it is five (5) or more feet away, then fire protection is not required.
Mr. Ford asked what protections are required. Mr. Gonzales said it would require a 1 -hour firewall that
would consist of inch of drywall on either side of the wall. Mr. Ford asked if there are structures close to
these buildings on the neighbor's property. Mr. Nader said from aerials and the site visit he is not aware of
any structures close to these buildings.
4
Motion: Approve BOA21-0005 along with the Conditions of Approval as proposed by Staff, Moved by
Bruce Johnson, Seconded by Kathryn Wittman.
Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 4).
Yes: Bruce Johnson, Kathryn Wittman, Lonnie Ford, Todd Baker.
Lonnie Ford said that because it requires a building permit, the applicant will be required to make substantial
changes to the building in order to meet the permit requirements.
Meeting adjourned at 11:15 am.
Respectfully submitted,
Kristine Ranslem
Secretary
5
Hello