Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/18/1999=719 Anne Brinkman Jerry Collins Dean Gokey Don MacDougall Nancy Snow It was moved by Commissioner GOKEY and seconded by Commissioner COLLINS to approve the order of the agenda. The motion passed by a vote of 5-0 with Commissioners SHOCKLEY and THOMPSON absent. 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Commissioner SNOW moved and Commissioner COLLINS seconded to approve the minutes of January 21, 1999 with the following amendments: On page 3, second paragraph from the Planning Commission Page 1 02/04/99 MINEWWWOEWMIM A. Case No. WZ-99-01: An application by Saulsbury Properties for approval to rezone from R-2 and R-3 to PRD and for approval of an Outline Preliminary and Final Development Plan and Plat for 3195 Saulsbury Street and 3190 Teller Street for the purpose of developing two duplexes (four units) and twelve multi-family units. Commissioner COLLINS asked who owned the detention pond on the property. Ms. Reckert replied that it was the intent that it would be the owners in the subdivision, but that the language could be clarified on the plat to clearly define maintenance responsibility. Mr. Goebel commented that the owners would be responsible for maintenance of the detention pond. Commissioner COLLINS referred to the landscaping on 32nd near Saulsbury and asked if it belonged to the ditch company. Ms. Reckert replied that the property would be in the ownership • the homeowners association but that the ditch company would have access to maintain their facilities. Commissioner SNOW asked what the code said in regard to sidewalk installation requiremen Commissioner * the reason for the request i prohibit RV ani boat parking development's parking areas which could result in people parking RVs 1 boats on street. Ms. Reckert replied that this restriction was requested because of the limited parking on the site. Chair BRINKMAN asked about fire hydrants. Reckert stated that fire hydrant should be resolved with the subdivision Planning Commission Page 02/04/99 cannot be installed until the water district loops the water through the site once the location of roads have been finally determined. He then reviewed the number of parking spaces in the development. In response to a question from Commissioner SNOW, Mr. Garbini stated that there are six ground floor units designed to be accessible to persons with handicaps. r-M-W415-1 - iii. L i i a he wanted to accomplish in the plan: (1) to preserve positive attributes of the site such as mature trees, buffers and character of surrounding neighborhood; (2) to preserve the existing house; and (3) to retain multifamily use in the R-3 area which has been in existence since the original apartments were built in 1949. Mr. Garbini stated that the developer would like to rebuild the fence along 32nd Avenue in its present location. If the fence were moved to the property line, as requested by staff, it would leave a 7 to 8-foot strip • land that would not • irrigated • maintained. The developer would like • contain all the area behind the sidewalk with the fence in order to be responsible for maintaining the area. In regard to the property owners who have water rights to the ditch, he stated that the ditch has grown over with vegetation over the years but that he would commit to cleaning the area out so water would flow smoothly. He also stated that the developer is asking for a waiver of all public improvement requirements along Saulsbury and Teller. the trees are in the ditch right-of-way and therefore the ditch company has a right to remove the trees. However, he has asked them to reserve that right in this instance. He stated that the developer's intention is to build a fence on both sides of the ditch • prevent children from wandering along the ditch. (Chair BRINKMAN declared a recess of the meeting at 9:00 pm. The meeting was reconvened at 9:15 p.m.) Planning Commission Page 5 02/04/99 plan which saves the existing house. She was not in favor of having a sidewalk on Teller because it would end at the property line. She also believed that it would be a safer option to have cars parking further off the street than they would if there was a sidewalk. Chair BRINKMAN asked if Ms. Perry used water from the ditch. She replied that, although she hadn't used the water in recent years, she wanted to preserve the water rights and that noff from the street that Poes to water the trees in the city right-of-way and on her lot. Commissioner SNOW asked how Ms. Perry felt about the drive, She replied that she preferred a through street and felt that neighboring residents would not use it as a thoroughfare. She als* stated that she did not think a speed bump was necessary but would have no objection to it and would go along with whatever the neighborhood wants. Commissioner OOKEY stated that fences can be placed across ditches as long as passage of water is not disturbed. Mr. Garbini replied that the ditch company won't allow him to put a fence in the ditch right-of-way because they want to be able to get into the ditch for Commissioner GOKEY stated that he would support a speed bump and a sign that says "private drive" which would deter through traffic. Commissioner COLLINS asked if a curb could be installed without a sidewalk. Mr. Goebel stated that he did not believe the ADA would allow that kind of a situation because it puts up a barrier. Commissioner SNOW stated that final regulations regarding this have never been issued by the board that sets regulations for the ADA. ~ Planning Commission Page 6 Chair BRINKMAN asked if there were others present who wished to address the Commission. There was no response. Planning Commission Page 7 02/04/99 Chair BRINKMAN stated that, although she is in favor of the rezone, she would have to vote against the motion if the sidewalk issue is part of the motion. She asked Commissioner SNOW if she would consider dropping that part of the motion. Commissioner SNOW replied that, based on the fact that the motion is only a recommendation to City Council, she would not drop the sidewalk portion of the motion. Commissioner lY*7& =ere an amenament to ine mo curb median to a speed bump and add a requirement for signage that would indicate "private drive" or "private entrance". He felt that such signage would discourage through traffic flow from those outside the development area, drive was a private drive or private entrance was acceptable to Commissioners SNOW and MACDOUGALL. Commissioner SNOW stated that she would prefer a separate motion concerning the speed bump. HIM - SpornitT"50"Inr -, to change the wording "mountable curb" to "speed bump". Chair BRINKMAN stated that she voted against the motion because of the condition pertaining to the sidewalks. Commissioner COLLINS stated that he voted against the motion because he felt there was need for curb and gutter for drainage control. Mr. White reminded Commissioner COLLINS that the motion only mentioned sidewalks, n curb and gutter. He also stated that he believed the issue of the curb, gutter and sidewalk should be saved for the request to waive the public improvements. I the planned residential development combined preliminary and final development plan for property located 3190 Teller Street - 3195 Saulsbury Street be approved for the following Planning Commission Page 8 02104/99 I . The existing house would be saved. 2. The proposal provides for a reduction in density by one unit from the existing approved plan and is supported by the neighborhood. 3. All requirements for a PRD outline development plan will have been met. Chair BRINKMAN stated that, although she is in favor of the final development plan, she would vote against the motion because she believes there is a need for sidewalks along this property. The motion passed by a vote of 4 to I with Chair BRINKMAN voting no, and Commissioner SHOCKLEY and THOMPSON absent. Planning Commission Page 9 02/04/99 It is consistent with the outline and final development plan if all of the prior conditions have been met. 2. All requirements of the subdivision regulations have been met. With the condition: (1) All of the conditions specified earlier plus language requested by the Public Service Company regarding their services and easements will be added to the plat face. 1 1111 Ill!''111711111 III III Ill Y1 , 11 I il IN V1 SHOCKLEY and THOMPSON absent. l o A. Planning Commission Comp Plan flearing Commissioner SNOW asked that, if the notice regarding the Planning Commission hearing on February 18 had not yet been mailed, the notice should mention there would be two additional future land use maps for discussion at the meeting. She also requested that copies of the Comprehensive Plan Committee map be available at this hearing. In reply to a question from Chair BRINKMAN, Mr. White replied that copies of the conflict map would • available for the February 18th meeting, He also stated that all versions of the Comprehensive Plan maps would be available as overlays for comparison at the Planning Commission Study Session • February 25. There was no new business. There were no committee or department reports. Planning Commission Page 10 02/04/99 13. ADJOURNMENT Commissioner SNOW moved and Commissioner MACDOUGALL seconded to adjourn th_ meeting at 10:20 pm. The motion passed by a vote of 5-0 with Commissioners SHOCKLE and THOMPSON absent. 0=4gEmmutout • Planning Commission Page 11 02/04/99 CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE PLANNING DI'V'ISION STAFF REPORT TO: Planning Commission DATE OF MEETING: February 18, 1999 DATE PREPARED: February 9, 1999 CASE NO. & NAME: WZ -99 -04 /City CASE MANAGER: FYI. Reckert ACTION QUESTED: Rezone property from R -1B to A -1 LOCATION OF' QUEST. 4000 Nelson Street NAME & ADDRESS OF APPLICANTS ): City of Wheat Ridge 7500 W. 29" Avenue Wheat Ridge, CO 8003 NAME &c ADDRESS OF OWNER(S): Sheryl and Tyler Cox 4000 Nelson Street Wheat Ridge, CO 80033 APPROXIMATE AREA: 13,000 square feet PRESENT ZONING: Residential-One B PRESENT LAND USE. Single- Family Residence Aq 1. REQUEST This is a City-initiated zone change request for property located at 4000 Nelson Street. The property is 13,000 square feet in size and has a single-family residence and accessory buildings on it. One (4000 Nelson) responded verbally, but not by mail, and was rezoned by City Council. The owners of 4000 Nelson Street wanted to retain their A- I zoning. IgIIIII 111�gigiiq�i I�gq III WIN 11 1 � ! I I H! 1 "Prior to submitting any application for a change • zone of property to a higher use than is currently permitted that is an increase in residential density, intensity, impact, or character, the applicant shall be required to hold a ne ghborhoo meeting. I RVI%r. L w zoning conditions): 1. The existing zone classification currently recorded on the official zoning maps of the City of Wheat Ridge is in error. The property was zoned A- I when the City was incorporated. Ordinance No. I I 45'rezoned t property to R-1 B. There is no mistake in the map. i Planning Commission Page 2 Z- 99- 04/City of Wheat Ridge 2. A change in the character in the area has occurred due to the installation of public facilities, other zone changes, new growth trends, deterioration or development transitions. The Comprehensive Plan designates this property as Single-Family Detached (not to exceed 9 dwelling units per acre). Lot size of the property in question is 13,000. Since this would be non-conforming A-1 property, it can only be used for single-family. The A-1 zoning will not be inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan. 4. That the proposed change of zone is compatible with the surrounding area and there will be minimal adverse impacts considering the benefits to be derived. There will be no physical changes to the property which is developed as a single-family residence. There will be no adverse impacts as a result of the rezoning to A-1. S. That there will be social, recreational, physical and/or economic benefits to the community derived by the change of zone. There will be no obvious social, recreational, physical and/or economic benefits to the community as a result of the rezoning. 6. That adequate infrastructure/facilities are available to serve the type of uses allowed by the change of zone, or that the applicant will upgrade and provide such where they do not exist or are under capacity. All utilities are currently in place. 7. That the proposed rezoning will not adversely affect public health, safety or welfare by creating excessive traffic congestion, creating drainage problems, or seriously reducing light and air to adjacent properties. There will be no physical changes to the property as a result of the rezoning. Because this will be a substandard sized A- I lot, it can only be used for single-family. The property can be used as it currently is under the existing R-IB zoning. The propertywas overlooked and rezoned to ► I B without consent of the property owner as part of the mass rezoning procedure in 1998. Planning Commission Page 3 WZ-99-04/City of Wheat Ridge 4-,5 Option A: "I move that Case No. WZ-99-04, a City-initiated rezoning of property at 4000 Nelson Street from Residential-One B to Agricultural-One, be recommended to the City Council for APPROVAL for the following reasons: I . The property was rezoned to R- I B without the property owners' consent. 2. It will be a substandard sized A- I lot which can only be used for single family." *ption B: "I move that Case No. WZ-99-04, a City-initiated rezoning of property at 4000 Nelson StreeT from Residential-One B to Agricultural-One, be recommended to the City Council for DENIAL for th following reasons: I Planning Commission Page 4 WZ-99-04/City of Wheat Ridge 4 I # 4 QR 4��' Applicant City of Wheat Ridge Address 7500 W 29th Avenue Phone 303-235--2848 City Wheat Ridge, CO 8080215 Owner Sheryl & Tyler Cox Address 4000 Nelson Street Phone 303-940-7384 City Wbeat Bid rn Rw?ir, Location of request (address) A& N n 5trgCt - Wheat Ridge, CO Type o ore o .. which pertain to your request.) rty was included in mass rezoning and rezoned to R . Puruant to City Attorney, a City-initiated, indi- Subscribed and sworn to me this 4'� day ofFl� 190.8— Notary Public My commission expires 3.-~ Iq -- M. ME # Date received Receipt PVo. Case No OR MAN Related Case No. Zoning Quarter Section Map RECEPTION NO. 921534022 ' °' ttatct•ri+ »n 11/30/9e 14:00 13.99' l RECORDED IN Etcc.udrat a l t rt COUNTY OF JEFFERSON .'f STATE OF COLORADO WARRANTY '1 Illti 131.1:1). M:a,Ic tilt 23rd tiay a,f VI�,MER. • Ial 92. it J�'} k*cRxx'tat J� [ V J & G PROPERTIES, A COLORADO GENERAL PARTwMHIP R t : +tt the "Coiwat)' of JEF M area State o �! C sjd'a. C tanl , r€t, a, ,nut nll�.R J. COX AND SHEPAI E. McNE111. !fin ��€*} r}� (+t+rst - 40 �+ry� r 5�i�r} COW R= ry r kk lit w tt`g,ai ; aktalrx` ,, . €, 00 NE7 ?Ul� ,Al lu.,i..et 111{1. ilk Lal . COW 883 P y} oaf Siae C�oaaaaiy of JEFFERSON and St.ttC atf ( "altaraulaa, grantw"•k, 1Yl`t Nliti4„ dkat d+e gtarrt + , ra , a, htr and €n eam,aferaiaoat € +rites ,+rot trr 5r*( $6}, 900. 'EIQiS'Y NINE THOUSAND NINE HUNDRED DOLT %RS AND NO 1100 -------------------- DOLLARs. t the reCCif t ttnd ,urhk acn,r or ahigh i, ta:rchy at^t n nk Eektgc h ha v grantet!" hmgained a +ld and o'"w cd. and hy" dww prexnti to grant. l argair €. ,t Il, conkk� .n%I otettirnt umtf rhr gr m1kv % the to it, ankl a „ign, fa nvkcr, nrfa In tenancy in comm" 'n but in ,pwint ten afwyk all the teat rraja ttk l wCOhl'r »nth iaiyknnetau °tat +, If .illy. ,itu,tte. IyWg a ul haittg in tlx County of JEFFERSON and Shoo of Catlotadn. de,k7theal a folhw 4 if THE SOUTH 100 FITµT OF TIT. WEST 148.91 FFZr OF TTTE EAST 165.45 FEET OF THE NC}RIFi 471 4 FET'T OF THE NW1 /4, SW 1/4 OF SECTION 21, MNSHIP 3 SOUTH,RANGE 69 WEST OF THE 6th P.M. EXCEPT THE NEST 20 FT . THERFAF DEEDED TO THE COUNTY OF JEFFERSON IN INSTRUhiI1VT` RECORDED MARCH 6, 1557 IN BOOK 1048 AT PAGE 457, ACCORDING TO THE RECX)RDED PT.AT THE F, C%J COUNTY OF JEFTLR , STATE OF COLORADO. : aI „t I sank it by ,tn ct and a)aa€tet cr :a, 4000 NELSON T T IN11EATR.IDGE, COLORADO 80033 > I"iX E1 "11ER %kith all and ,iogulm the hkrvdilamon, and alttraricnakx ^e, divirontu belonging, or in anyaia arl rtaining, the n krnion mul rcwt rcnaaindcr and n ua,aaautet,, rant i „ac, and pwtit, ShervoC and all the c rtghi” Brie. antent claim anti { C a dk n€ mil u h n aaker of the greoau*t €,), %ithcr m I:nv or uluny, o r. in arul it, the ah.nc bargained lkrenu nit, ibc hervditamca, and al c 11) IIAVFANDT0 I IOt.l) CIu and I alo t irg;tinral aced alc,ctil yl. nitia She Et *t , t utenan a unto die grantee their heir ul a „igit f erakvr. And Ette grantor( forthem , I Ves theirlicir, anti fer on.d n°Ikrv +;ntatity, tit, ctncnant, } grant. hargain '.aaad agree to and u ath the gt,nttcc,. th eir fivirX and a „kgn,, that .al the w1w of tit,: kn and J,:iixvrl of thc,c 11 j i l \4 ell u iaetl of the greaii,c, aNnc conve ed. have gaxal, ,urc” la erect„ al ,aaltrac and ink(ca,ilale c,taie taf iriltcrita€tkC, in laka, n) ft °c wiaa€ttlk €ntI tta Ve'gauxl right. fnit Inntt<r and fokful authority it, grant, Karl. aitt. wit and con%ctthe same in anannr and htrnr ,afoty ,aid, and that the kanw an free and Clear (norm at[ fornmr and who gran,. bargaine, tialca. lima, ta-,m ^t „ nu"tn , . cncunahran o and rotriction, of nhatt",cr kind at nature -Avow. except GENERAL. TAXES FOR THE YEAR 1992 AND ALL SUBSEQUENT ' T.ARS EXCEPT FOP, EASEMWrS, P,ESI`F.IG IONS, RESERVATIONS, CX}Vl.i``TANTS AND RIGHTS OF WAY OF RECORD, IF ANY, T'hc ga.anu•r(,t,Itatt aruf mill WARRANT°AND MR1 VER 1T1 Ihr ahanc- hargairwd prcmiw% in the 4oict and l Ixt „C „eau tal tl €e gr:ol wo. their heir, and :a „agaae. again,t all anti ovey lvr,on tit j ro wn+ hak,rotly ctairuing the whole tar any pan } tittn:nf. i;v WI 0 1.ss M 1111W(tF dw gratuort,a I%,, eoe olckt the, deed on the date , et rotth ah,,,v, J & G.PROPERTI A C)TARADO PARTNE 4 a tifAlt C)I C't)It)RAtx) i J1it ^T1 { O(}N ”" 1 ttc tinvi, { €ti °atyiru!II64 tka .ut<tum Ictlged hetba'1 me thi, 23rd d.n ap NOWT' i1ER ” t`7 92 ° MV t wam^ a n c,ttnak' / j fr It) loitrx„ Inv It arfil iieut „Cih tat , cal. . 'tt to Ik�ri er, taau•ra "`t "fk an•t." r nr. arw+ r, t t” ufiteritrer.7 T .M,tikarre�t.,i5irnttr "Cfl rn:ny (trtlt:°a:.)ten,..t: * @r as ",. TO: Planning Commission FROM: Alan White, Planning and Development Director aw DATE: February 11, 1999 We have scheduled a study session on the Comp Plan for February 25 and it may be more productive to discuss the alternative maps in that setting. Attached is a copy • the Land Use Conflicts Map requested by the Commission at the last hearing. I have also attached a copy of the CPRC Map as it appears in the Comp Plan document. I recommend that the Commission, at the conclusion of the hearing on the 18 make a motion continue the hearing to a date certain. It was my understanding that the 25 would be a study session, but you can continue the hearing to that date. Otherwise, the hearing should be continued to another date. We have tentatively reserved the second meeting date in March (March 18' for a Comp Plan hearing. • Park and Open Space FUTURE LAND USE MAP Public/Semi Public AER Agricultural Estate Residential (Not to exceed one unit per acre) i l F (5) Single Family Detached Residential (Not to exceed 5 du's per acre) Modified AER 21MB: Approved SF (9) • Single Family Detached Residential (Not to exceed 9 du's per acre) Roadway � OF 1dHEq T AER j Classifications p I I SF/DP Single Family and Two Family Residential (Not to exceed 7 du's per acre) Added o j P,dye Rd ARVADA ❑ Multi- Family Residential (Not to exceed12 du's per acre) U m � 0000 �' � C L Multi-Family Residential (Not to exceed 16 du's per acre) e 6 F;(s)' C UNINCORPORATED g am` c o ' BP ❑ ❑ Community Commercial Service/Employment Center JEFFERSON COUNTY ��.� ®� Di- OR ft❑ A0 BP ❑ Village Center _ 3 �n „ : SF (5) ❑ O ❑ _ Prepared by � rn El ,� �'' ❑❑ NR Neighborhood Sennng Speciality Retail Community Matters, Inc. ❑ ❑❑❑❑❑ ❑D❑ ❑_.� D ❑ ❑ ❑ a _ �❑ I ❑' BP Transitional Residential j I BP BP dt Q ❑ Small Office/Warehouse Business Center DENVER `- ' a 13 ❑ -- - -- - BP BP Business Parks/Planned Indu -- BP ❑ SP SF (9) t�I�i inns- nnr-1nn I� �❑ ❑ C - interstate 70 n G ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Cl ❑ ❑ +❑ ❑ ❑ _ - - ❑ . / � w 4acn Ave. Aye ❑ D ❑ ❑ u t✓ J' J"CJ iJ W 48th Av i / SF/DP i Interstate 70 UNINCORPORATED „ _- SF/DP JEFFERSON SF /0 P _ AER I SF (9) N + s� (�) + — �;:.. ,!_. _�m � ; SF (9) _z�...� _ SF/DP COUNTY O ' i I } _ _ ! ( dy ■ / ��...- - -- Y SF/DP u — ' " LAKESIDE SF (5) SF (5) SF ADP—, _r ❑ F (5) f i 0,..y: ! SR (5)i a - — f `; o '1 3 , � � , i �' SF 1 i i ■ 1 SF/DP - i SF/DP a _ ■ ... - �i_ i NR NR ■ ? 1 SF r5) - - i j - (5) j SM (9 �F (9 O (5) [j ■ r ■ P ■ ■ ■..m:■ ■,: .. ■ ■, ■ ■ 'S 0 - 0 ■ ♦ 0 i _ ■ ■ ■ ■ AR■ O j L. -- j SF/OP- - 4 it 1 ❑ ■ —� I ❑ MOUNTAIN ■ �, - -u _ —..:� i� j sF (s) h ,:: ,� . _ �❑ '" a ! ❑ VIEW 110 r / ' - -- -- �� • ' - -- - _- I SF1DP +,. l 1 ' ` j � .I ( ) ❑ SF/DP R O �-. ,/ SF (5) I SF/DP I SO, (9)i _I SF (5) L I i f 1 ;! in '� i Q ❑ SF (5) SF (5) w i °' %/ - i i SF (5) I j U — ' �. r > !DP 3 A s1 q � 3M Ave. - - O I ❑ ❑ IJ I /l'- F (5) -- �� ❑ I /DP _ j 77 �,� ` - SF/DP SFA �, �� ' i ER to .. i MouMi n j \�• _ 1, m SF/DP ❑ SF (5) AER A S /� - ' a 1 ��- c °� _��`_� r� - `�1 s °� i� / "� m ❑ - SF (5 a SK (9) m AER ad - - _ I SF (5) SF (5) S \. \ SF/DP ❑ J - El r T'r •. SIF ( Y SF/DP SF/DP _ ❑ / [] SF (5) W. 32nd Ave. 0�G❑❑❑ ❑C+❑•❑'❑❑ ❑❑ G❑❑O ❑D❑ -0'.. O' ❑.G- ❑ Ouu❑❑❑ nnn _❑�F/�d ❑ G❑❑❑D❑❑C�❑❑CJ❑'�000El ❑❑ Qw. 32 ndWe .� ®D�J ❑G❑ ❑ ❑❑❑ ❑Q ❑- ❑O.00❑t'� D I' ' SF (5> LAKEWOOD �° ROADWAY CLASSIFICATIONS h ` [N SF/DP ®Class 1 - Interstate Highway ' „ ® Class 2 - Major Regional Arterial Street O (a,, ■ SF (5) _ L 1 �. _ C1 ❑ D� 00 '®'©�1 00 ❑ p IL 1 _.I D 0 ❑ mo 2�t"A� -1 ❑ ^ o ■� Class 3 - Arterial Street SF/DP IJ I I NORTH - + / t` ' Class 4 - Collector Street ❑ gy m` Class 5 - Minor Collector Street I M'4 ❑! SF (9) ' �r This map is for planning use and not SIF 5 , Class 6 - Neighborhood Thru Street 1 intended for legal purposes. 0, D ❑ CTD -- 0 D ' E ❑ ❑ D°❑ ❑ t7 rJ ❑ ❑ ❑' o t� Cl -t7 ❑ D� Neighborhood Street EDGEWA TER • r s Sri I OR ? � V OL T VR %/G j� �/ _ J - ♦ � ♦ .P- '' _ '� /si.• ELF .. ��'� '.�wl.�i�'� • - � �� - -- -.rte a 'lei Y • . vc