Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/04/1999X XV31 US s Minutes of Meeting January 21, 1999 1. CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER- The meeting was called to order by Chairman BRINKMAN at 7:30 p.m. on January 21, 1999, in the Council Chambers of the Municipal Building, 7500 West 29th Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado. 2. ROLL CALL: Commission Members Present: Anne Brinkman Commission Members Absent: Staff :Members Present: Tom Shockley (excused) Alan White, Director of Planning & Development Ann Lazzeri, Minutes Specialist . PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Planning Commission Page 1 01/21/99 January 7, 1999 Planning Commission as amended. The motion passed by a vote of 6-0 with Commissioner SHOCKLEY absent. ii i iiij I II I IF 1=11IM11131 : 1111 111 1 11 !! 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 use map which was approved by the Comprehensive Plan Review Committee (CPRC) in September of 1997. Commissioner SNOW asked if language as suggested by the CPRC would have to be changed. Mr. White replied that he thought the policies suggested by the CPRC were all workable within any of the maps. Planning Commission Page 2 Ol/2l/99 IV-] to I awlit I It 94 01 ON 04 zRits 1. JoAnn Fisher 7645 West 47th Avenue Mr. White explained that the process is in thebeginning stages and that he anticipated several more meetings and work sessions by the Planning Commission before a vote is taken and forwarded to City Council for final adoption. Planning Commission Page 3 01/271/99 detailed master plan could be accomplished to protect citizens with these types of unique problems. Commissioner THOMPSON asked Ms. Fisher if it was her desire for the area along Wadsworth • stay residential rather than commercial because • associated increase in traffic. Ms. F sher replied that she would prefer no additional commercial businesses, but if it had to • she would prefer businesses that closed at five • six o'clock. I I Susan Seeds 6147 West 35th Avenue development. She stated that CPRC didn't want to ignore the fact that many neighborhoods have existing duplexes nor did the committee want them to be incompatible which she felt happened • the alternative maps. Commissioner SNOW asked Mr. White if he had discovered errors where land was erroneously named park land. Mr. White replied that this was simply a copy of the old plan. Commissioner SNOW stated that citizens who lived along Lena Gulch voted to keep the area in private ownership, Commissioner GOKEY commented on the density issues and stated that density is not the only issue involved in good planning. He felt that some multi-family units look fine depending upon the quality of the architecture, etc. Planning Commission Page 5 01/21/99 Planning Commission Page 6 01/21/99 Denise Midroy 3401 Fenton Ms. Midroy stated that she presently resides at 3401 Fenton and is in the process of moving to another property she owns at 4686 Parfet which is an undefined agricultural parcel. She urged the Planning Commission to maintain this parcel as, agricultural. Susan Seeds returned to the podium. She stated that some of the open undefined property was listed as vacant while some were being used. The intention was not to remove agricultural listings from the map, but felt this was a way of saying the land was being used and was not vacant. Chair BRINKMAN asked if there were others present who wished to address the Commission on this matter. There was no response. Commissioner SNOW moved and Commissioner THOMPSON seconded that the Planning Commission conduct a study session at 7:30 p.m., February 25, 1999 to review public comments. The motion passed by a vote of 6-0 with Commissioner SHOCKLEY absent. a # Commissiol secon* WPA-99-01 to 7:30 p.m., February 18, 1998, in the City Council Chambers. The motion passed by a vote of 6-0 with Commissioner SHOCKLEY absent. 8. CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING 19MR18MI&I #hum • 11 Planning Commission Page 7 01,21/99 13. ADJOURNMENT Commissioner SNOW moved and Commissioner GOKEY seconded to adjourn the meeting at 10:35 p.m. 21=11 M w-lA•• I It 1 - 4= tm N-11 Planning Commission Page 8 01/21/99 ACTION REQUESTED: Rezone from R•2 and R -3 to PRD, approval of as outline, preliminary and final development plan and plat LOCATION OF REQUEST: 3295 Saulsbury Street/3190 Teller Street (X) ZONING ORDINANCE 0 SLIDES (X) SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS (X) EXHIBITS Q OTHER JURISDICTION: The property is within the City of Wheat Ridge, and all notification and pasting requirements have been met; therefore, there isjurisdiction to hear this case. City Council has directed staff to expedite the land use case review process. The public hearing in front *f City Council will be February 22, 1999. 1 do t= M11 I mjcc�o' +1 for development. Subsequent to the Council approval, discussions began between the developer and several neighborho residents, one of whom was interested in saving the existing house. In the spirit of compromise, the developer agreed to submit a rezoning application to the City for rezoning to Planned Residential Development. On the development plan submitted and supported by the neighborhood, the existing house remains and one of the duplex units • the south is removed. I A meeting for neighborhood input was held on January 12, 1999. The following persons were in attendance: Meredith Reckert - City staff Alec Garbini - project architect Planning Commission Page 2 Z -99 -0I /Saulsbury Properties Whe r « # # ! # # # # . # # t i sanitary sewer mains in Teller Street and Saulsbury Public Service Company has requested specific language which has been added to the plat face. Consolidated Mutual Water company has approved service to the property subject to district rules and regulations. Ridge The Wheat Fire District requested changes to the turn radii private drive « the streets. Fire hydrant installation will be required along both Teller and Saulsbury. Twenty-four feet in width for the private drive is adequate with no parking. This drive area must be designated "no «. Planning Commission Page 3 WZ-99-O I /Saulsbury Properties V. REZONING CRITERIA Staff has the following comments regarding the criteria used to evaluate a change in zoning (change of zoning conditions): 1. The existing zone classification currently recorded on the official zoning maps of the City of Wheat Ridge is in error. The R-2 and R-3 zoning on the property was in place when the City of Wheat Ridge incorporated. There is evidence in the commissioners' journals that the property was rezoned to its current classification from A- I in 1949. There is no mistake on the City zoning maps. 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. There have been very few changes to the area which is predominately developed with single- family residences. West 32n Avenue is classified as a Class 5 street (Minor Neighborhood Collector) and continues to carry fairly heavy volumes • traffic. A 1996 traffic count on 32" Avenue, just east of Teller Street showed an average daily traffic count of 4650 vehicles per day. The north half of the property has historically been used as multi-family dwelling units. 3. That the change of zone is in conformance, or will bring the property into conformance, with the City of Wheat Ridge Comprehensive Plan goals, objectives and policies, comprehensive land use plan and other related policies or plans for the area. I The Comprehensive Plan designates this property as Single-family and duplex (not to exceed 7 du's per acre). Total overall density as proposed for the entire property is 8.4 units per acre. If the lots are looked at individually, the multi-family lot = 10.9 units per acre, the single-family I = 3.1 units per acre and the duplex lots = 6.7 units per acre. • The allowable maximum density for a PRD is 16 units per acre. The allowable maximum density for R-3 development is 12 units per acre. Although the proposal exceeds the density standard designated in the Comp Plan, it is still well within the maximum limits for the existing zoning and proposed zoning. 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. Planning Commission Page 4 WZ-99-0 •99-0/Saulsbury Properties 5. That there will he social, recreational, physical and/or economic benefits to the community derived by the change of zone. There will be no obvious social or recreational benefits as a result of this rezoning. There will be economic benefits by way of increased property taxes and values and increased buying power in the community. III I 1 11 1 � I I IBM 1111111161111 a 9. That the zoning will not create an isolated or spot zone district unrelated to adjacent or nearby areas. I This will be the only Planned Residential Development zoning in the vicinity, although there is residential zoning on all sides. Planning Commission Page 5 WZ-99-0 I /Saulsbury Properties 10. That there is a void in an area or community need that the change of zone will fill by providing for necessary services, products or facilities especially appropriate at the location, considering available alternatives. It is impossible for staff to ascertain whether the change of zone will fill a void service, products or facilities within the community. An outline development plan has been provided which establishes allowed density at 17 units comprised of single-family residence, four duplex units and twelve multi-family units. Access points and general design parameters for minimum landscaping, maximum building height, and minimum perimeter setbacks are defined by this document. All requirements for a Planned Residential Development outline development plan have been met. Since the rezoning is supported by the neighborhood, a recommendation of approval is given. The first two lines in the document title should be transposed so that it is recorded property with kfferson County. This should be made a condition of the approval. The final development plan provided is consistent with the outline development plan in terms of density, and general design parameters. Development on the property consists of the twelve multi-family units currently under construction and the existing single-family residence on the north half. On the south portion development consists of two duplex structures and enclosed garages for half of the multi-family units. Access for all units except for the existing house is by way of a 24' wide private drive running between Teller and Saulsbury Streets. A speed hump has been shown within the drive to discourage through traffic. No parking will be allowed along the private drive. No changes will occur to the existing single-family residence and garage. Access to the house is from Teller Street via the existing driveway. No changes are proposed to the Rocky Mountain Ditch. There will be no public access to this open area. Existing trees have been incorporated into the project design where possible. In September of 1997, the City adopted site design requirements as an amendment to the Planned Residential Development zone district. These design requirements were intended to "encourage the Planning Commission Page 6 WZ-99-Ol/Saulsbuty Properties creation of safe, adequate and attractive developments, establish quality appearance, and to minimize property values." They have been included in this staff report as Exhibit 'C'. Staff has the following comments relative to these standards: T that all requirements for a PRD final development plan have been met. For these reasons, a recommendation of approval is given with the following conditions: Planning Commission Page 7 WZ-99-Ol/Saulsbury Properties 4. For Saulsbury Street, designate "5' of right-of-way dedicated by plat, recorded at reception # 5. A note be added prohibiting RV and boat parking. The proposed four-lot minor subdivision will allow the multi-family structure with associated parking and overflow parking to be contained within Lot 1. Lot 2 will contain the existing single-family residence and garage. Lots 3 and 4 will encompass the two duplex buildings. Lots 1, 2 and 4 will share access from the common private drive/emergency access lane. Because this is a planned development, no variance is needed for this to occur. This easement will also accommodate water main line looping. A 5right-of-way dedication will occur for Saulsbury Street. A signature block for the Rocky Mountain Water company has been provided. The applicant will not be enclosing the ditch. Theditchcompany has concurred. All trees over V in diameter in size which are in good health have been shown on the document with note prohibiting their removal. I Notes regarding the maintenance of common elements and rights of access have been included on the front sheet. All requirements of the City's Subdivision Regulations have been met, therefore, a recommendation of approval is given. Public Service Company has requested that specific language be added to the plat. This language should f to page 1. It is a standard for the City to require the installation of public improvements along the public street frontages of new development projects. This requirement would include, but may not be limited to, the installation of curb, gutter and sidewalk. As an alternative, if there are no public improvements on adjacent properties, the City may require the builder/developer to sign a development agreement with financial guarantees for future installation of these improvements. Jbc — applit — cant in this — case has requested that the installation of public improvements along'feller and Saulsbury Street be waived. The only body empowered to waive this requirement is City Council, however, Staff feels it appropriate for Planning Commission to make a recommendation. A letter of justification has been included under Exhibit 'D. Discussions with the Director of Public Works have revealed that only oncewas the installation of public improvements totally waived, This was a substantial single family remodel in District 111. Mr. Goebel is worried about setting precedent for this type of request, among other things, and recommends that the public improvements be installed. See attached memorandum included as Exhibit 'E. Planning Commission Page 8 WZ-99-Ol/Sautsbury Properties X. RECOMMENDED MOTIONS REZONINQ Option A: "I move that Case No. WZ-99-0 1, a request for approval of a rezoning of property located at .3 190 Teller Street/3195 Saulsbury Street from Residential-Two and Residential-Three to Planned Residential Development and for approval of an Outline Development Plan, be APPROVED for the following reasons: I . The existing house will • saved. 2. The proposal provides for a reduction in density by one unit from the existing, approved plan and it is supported • the neighborhood. 3. All requirements for a PRD outline development plan have been met. I The first two lines in the document title be transposed so that it is recorded properly with Jefferson County." *ption B: "I move that Case No. WZ-99-0 1, a request for approval of a rezoning of property located , M • Street/3195 Saulsbury Street from Residential-Two and Residential-Three to Planned Ikesidential Development and for approval of an Outline Development Plan, be DENIED for the following reasons: FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN Option A: "I move that the request for approval of a Planned Residential Development final development plan for property located at 3190 Teller Street/3195 Saulsbury Street be APPROVED for the following reasons: I . The existing house will be saved. 2. The neighborhood supports the revised plan. 3. The proposal is consistent with the intent and purpose of the PRD site design guidelines. 4. All requirements for a Planned Residential Final Development plan have been met. With the following conditions: I The first two lines in the document title should be transposed so that it is recorded properly with Jefferson County. 2. Show fire hydrants adjacent to Teller and Saulsbury Streets. Planning Commission Page 10 WZ-99-Ol/Saulsbury Properties Option B: "I move that the request for approval of a Planned Residential Development final ,ievelopment plan for property located at 3190 Teller Street/3195 Saulsbury Street be DENIED for the following reasons: [ 2. ].° SUBDIVISION PLA Option A: "I move that the request for approval of a minor subdivision plat for property located at 3190 Teller Street/3195 Saulsbury Street be APPROVED for the following reasons: I . It is consistent with the outline and final development plan. 2. All requirements of the Subdivision Regulations have been met. R ME 'I liffill, MONISM IMF IF Option B: "I move that the request for approval of a minor subdivision plat for property located at 3190 Teller Street/3195 Saulsbury Street be DENIED for the following reasons: l. 2. 3. WAIVER OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS Option A: "I move that the request for waiver of the requirement for the installation of public Street/3195 Saulsbury Street be DENIED for the following reasons: \ / � Planning Commission Page I I Option B: "I move that the request for waiver of the requirement for the installation of public improvements along Teller Street and Saulsbury Street adjacent to property located at 3190 190 Teller Street/3195 Saulsbury Street be APPROVED for the following reasons: I, 2. E:',Ro;kcrtkwz990 I b,wpd Planning Commission Page 12 W -99 -4! /Saulsbury Properties t, R -2 st .Y 11 I-M 0 1 # �. h9 Vt h l�jj A - 4 T w kd K AM tw h _-_ _ v M I E � M 9 r� I E � M r� n' rc MR � _rF I E � M r� I E � M Z!i RECE DA ► t • The foregoing plot is opproved for filing, and conveyance of the streets /roods, porcels and easements Is acceptable by the City of Wheat Ridgge County Stote of Colorado, this day of T9�.,.._,.» The County shalt undertake maintenance of any such streets roads and public ways only after construction thereof has been satisfactorily completed by the developer and accepted by the City of Wheat Ridge. m ayor utd +ties aril sorwes, had tr* on4eed and for !tier 'subdivider or orm"it eats made by or therefor which are approve the City of Whe poict at Ridge, and such sums shall not be paid by Wheat Ridge, Colorado. and that an Hem so constructed or Installed when accepted by the City dge. Col a, shall become the sate property of said City except Items owned by municipally rtrTiNes and or the Mountain States telephone and Telegraph Company which items, when or ktstait , shad remain the property of the owner and shall not become the property of the Holder of deeds) of trust hereby releases claim to areas dedicalsd to public use. STATE OF COLORADO) COUNTY OF JEFFERSON) The foregoing Instrument was acknowledged before me this day of A.D. 19_„___, by WItMOSS rriy hoed and ofirtiol seol. My Commission expires o or+� ubI c Q ERS SAULSBURY PROPTRTIESAWL A COLORADO LIMITED LIABILITY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP CORPORATION BY: HAROLD R. SMETHRJ.S, MANAGING PARTNER 15AS COLE BOULEVARD SUITE 227 GOLDEN, COLORADO 90401 (303) 233 *3447 Of' O SAULSBURY PROPERTIES. UIP. A COLORADO LIMITED LIABILITY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP CORPORAT) MY C OMMISSION Z.... NOTES t,) THE EMERGENCY AND SERVICE VEHICLE ACCESS EASEMENTS SHOWN HEREON SHAD. BE CONSTRUCTED AND MAINTAINED BY THE OWNER ANG SUBSEOU @NT OWNERS, HEIRS, SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS, IN THE EVENT THAT SUCH CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE IS NOT PERFORMED BY SAID OWNER, THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE $HALL HAVE THE RIGHT TO ENTER SUCH EASEMENTS AND PERFORM NECESSARY WORK, THE COST OF WHICH SAID OWNER, HEIRS, SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS AGREES TO PAY UPON BILLING. 2.) THE STORM DETENTION AREA SHOWN ON THE APPROVED DRAINAGE PLAN SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED AND MAINTAINED BY THE OWNER ANE SUBSEQUENT OWNERS, HEIRS, SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS. IN THE EVENT THAT SUCH CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE IS NOT PERFORMED BY SAID OWNER. THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE SHALL HAVE THE RIGHT TO ENTER SUCH AREA AND PERFORM NECESSARY WORK, THE COST OF WHICH SAID OWNER, HEWS, SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS AGREES TO PAY UPON BILLING.. 3.) THE SUBJECT PROPERTY LIES IN FLOOD HAZARD ZONE C - AREA OF MINI MAL FLOODING. 4.) THE UTILITY EASEMENTS SHOWN ARE DEDICATED FOR THE INSTALLATION, M AINTENANCE, AND REPLACEMENT OF ELECTRIC GAS TELEVISION CABLE AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES. UTILITIES SHALL ALSO BE iiERMthED WITHIN ANY AG EASE AND PRIVATE STREETS IN THE SUBDIVISION. PERMANENT STRUCTURES ANT+ WATER METERS SHALL. NOT BE PERMITTED WITHIN SAID UTILITY EASEMENTS. 5.) PRIOR TO THE REMOVAL OF ANY TREE SHOWN ON THE FACE OF THIS PLAT. APPROVAL MUST BE RECEIVED FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT. REMOVAL OF THESE MATURE TREES WILL BE ALLOWED ONLY WHEN IN DIRECT CONFLICT WITH A BUILDING FOOTPRINT PROPOSED WITH NEW HOME CONSTRUCTION. 6.) THE NORTH I65' OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS ZONED R-3. THE REMAINDER OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS ZONED R"-2. fy lerk City Seat PLANNING CQMMS O CERTIFICATE This Is to certitY the within plot has been approved by the plannlD Commission of the City of Wheat Ridge, Colorado. City of Wheat Ridge Director of Public Works City of Wheat Ridge Director of Parks and Recreation Commission City of Wheat Ridge Director of planning and Development City of Wheat Ridge City Engineer Rocky Mountain Water Company ✓R . � . 6 ACCEPTED FOR FILING IN THE DIME OF THE CLERK AND RECORDER OF JEFFERSON COUNTY, AT GOLDEN, COLORADO, ON THIS DAY Or 1997 _ AT _ O'CLOCK _.M. PLAT BOOK , PAGE NO. , UNDER RECEPTION NO. CLERK AND RECORDER DEPUTY CLERK " Rt n Nt qa-- Q�^�trsr� --crto T OF 2 vi tslt"Vi t I tvi/°\r- BOOK RECEPTION NO. DATE 4 0 WE ! B D 7 S I 01t Z- R- c 1 7 0N ,- D R-2 b WEST 31ST PLACE S 40' ROW IY I F"FJU'S Z-0 P-2 32ND AVENUE 60 ROW BA% OF KARW. .1 LEGEND 0 TREE C FOUW f* A CAP. LS 14112 CASE HISTORY MS-98-3 CHERRY LANE SU RD'I VIC XIN Z , rjN`-D R-2 -- ---- — 1 20F2 LOT 2 TQi I I� LOT 3 FT. 1562 & 4 S Q. 4 t 13234M SO. FT. ISM28 SO� 'o qVI - v 5! UlbUYY tAISMINIt (TYp-) L IRACKS -.P. - - - - - - .....,. _........,.1.. L — ,, o —ow-J- M7.2z .1 LEGEND 0 TREE C FOUW f* A CAP. LS 14112 CASE HISTORY MS-98-3 CHERRY LANE SU RD'I VIC XIN Z , rjN`-D R-2 -- ---- — 1 20F2 133HS Rl LD co z > 0 > > z m z I?QW3AVd 11WdSV ^311 mias) e3ilm aw gam ^3N U341M aNV ISM A3N d31ino aw gam 7NXISIX3 --------- 3Mh431jI 9NI13i)(3 31443313 !)NIISIX:3 3 NIVW SWO SNUSIX3 0 It 13W ONIISIX3 31"VW # 63^3S MIS SNIISIX3 x -771 , V3^3S ASVIINVS ONIISIX3 -AAv.twz;- 3A9VA 31" ONIISIX3 INVOUN ONIISIX3 I - -n -n Wom )nvp rn A m rn 3J3 IMONO3 434V^ 9NIISIX3 — xm ll t 3WI1 d31V^ ONIISIX3 slxm UVIN ms U -P, Zobrf ON303-1 U J -. C) I cr), —A 01 coo SWVU ZIN A • 24! ry Asu lit 0 X r! 4IiR*.'uwRirwwRrns'1 W, • • wr eRM pR § 26-25 e 7� % C e I WA f Est *Editor's note-4)rd, No. 1997-1097, adopted Sept 22, 11 1997 added a new paragraph Cl) to § 26-25 (IV)(BXI). Inas- much as Ord. No. 1997.1092, adopted Sept 8. 1997, already added paragraph (1), the editor has added these new provi- sions as (M). Supp. No. 20 1748 ZONING AND DEVELOPMENT 26-25 and other elements of the de- Complement existing res- 'velopment could not be reason- idential development in ably altered to. scale and location; • Minimize adverse impacts Ensure compatibility by on any existing residence the use of adequate set- or area zoned for residen- backs, landscaping, barri- tial use; ers or transition zones, and • Reduce disruption to the building height consider- existing terrain,, vegeta- aeons; tion, habitat areas or other Provide an adequate sy- natural site features; tem of pedestrian and bi- * Reduce or consolidate the cycle pathways and walk- number of access points ways in conformance with onto a Class 2, Class 3, or the City of Wheat Ridge's Class 4 arterial or collec- adopted Parkas and Recre- for street as defined in the ation Plan as well as the adopted Roadway Classi- Jefferson County Open (cation Standards for the Space Plan; City of Wheat Ridge; Have exterior walls of all • Improve pedestrian, bicy- primary structures de- cle and vehicle safety signed on a pedestrian within the site and from scale by, the site to adjacent uses 0 Fragmenting them or streets, into smaller or mul- Improve pedestrian and bi• tiple planes; cycle connections within it Providing adequate the site and from the site vertical landscaping to adjacent uses, and bering; Provide additional living a Placing wall texture landscaping and site arisen- or architectural re- hies; lief at eye - level; Preserve existing land- and/or caping and site a eni- a Clustering small ties; scale elements such Reduce the visual intru- as planter walls sion of parking areas, stor. around the primary age areas and similar ac- structure. cessory areas and • Insure that ground floor structures. uses, if a commercial com- 3. All development including build. ponent for the general pub. ings, walls and fences shall be lic is included, are ori- so sited to: ented toward the • Preserve drainage ways in pedestrian with storefronts as natural state as possi- that open onto the street ble without channeliza• as well as other piles- ion or engineered struc- trian oriented spaces. tures or as required by Provide a landscaped area other agencies; at least ten (10) feet wide Supp. No. 20 1748,1 26 -25 upp. Into. 2 0 1748.2 t tt! a. a r r -r ♦ r �. ^ a♦ r � r r t t R # # ! ! t t t . t R ! t t i # ! ' t f t R # ! t t # # #" t • R ! . t upp. Into. 2 0 1748.2 ww 4 4. ; Q�CLVLI If I I 1W Cole Boulevard, Suite 227, Golden, CO $0401 Tel: 303-233-3447 / Fax: 303-239-8616 City of Wheat Ridge Planning and Development Department 7500 West 29th Ave. 0 Wt Z- to i ) .#— Al Re: Happy Landing Subdivision / West, 32nd Ave. and Saulsbury Please note that at the neighborhood meeting of January 5, 1999, which was held to present the plans for this property to the surrounding neighbors comments were made about a number of residents about the need for the curb, gutter, and sidewalks on Teller and Saulsbury Streets. Regarding Saulsbury Street, it was noted that in providing the additional right of way and adjacent sidewalk it would be necessary to remove 3 trees north of the property entrance which have circumferences in excess of I foot. These trees could remain if the sidewalk was deleted in this area. Also noted were a number of minor trees which exist between the right of Utz] if sidewalk in our plans, but are not clear about the actual utility of this design given the change in location and elevation. the street from the subject property. The new sidewalks being proposed will sidewalk and the adjacent properties. Approved Date 7 DEPARTMMrr Of FURUC WOR= r the intersections of 32n avenue. Adequate • street parking is crucial to the function of the development by providing for itself without impacting neighbors across the street. Pedestrian movement is also enhanced and made safer. If overflow parking is across the street, guests will have to cross traffic to get to and from their destination within the development. Tenants will not have protected access to RTD public transit along 32 ,11, • to the walks along w w w Type of action requested (check o�e or more of the actions listed below which pertain to your requesl 10 ion to the best of your knowledge. f it I certif that the information and exhibits herewith submitted are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and that in f iling this application, I am acting with the knowledge and consent of those persons listed above, without whose consent the requested action nnot lawfully be accomplished. Applicants other than owners must submit power-of-attStn Y f rom the o%k ic� approved of this action on his behalf. 1 I ak IMEMOMM WZNXIM�'I WWWWW" ► I&M, 3 d and sworn to me this ASWL day o Igm— Notary Public� My commission expires -aq -93- 2 Quarter Section Nlap