Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/15/1998CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE PLANNING COMMISSION Minutes of Meeting October 1, 1998 L CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by Chair THOMPSON at 7:30 prn. on October 1, 1998, in the Council Chambers of the Municipal Building, 7500 West 29th Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado. 2. ROLL CALL: Commission Members Present: Ann Brinkman Dean Gokey Don MacDougall Toni Shockley Janice Thompson Commission Members Absent: Staff Members Present: 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Jerry Collins (Excused) Jim Dunn Nancy Snow (Excused) Sean McCartney, Planner Meredith Reckert, Sr. Planner Ann Lazzeri, Minutes Specialist The following is the official set of Planning Commission minutes for the public hearing of October Z:� 11:� 1. 1998, A set of these minutes is retained both in the office of the City Clerk and in the Department cif Planning and Development of the City of Wheat Ridge. 4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Chair THOMPSON requested discussion of Planning Commission Chair appointment under "New Business." Commissioner GOOEY requested discussion of privately owned schools tinder "Old Business." Meredith Reckert requested an item to be added under "Discussion Items." Plannin- Commission I Page 1 101,0111198 It was. moved by Commissioner GOKEY and seconded by Commissioner SHOCKLEY that the agenda be approved as amended. 'rhe motion carried by a vote of 5-0 with Commissioners COLLINS, Dt JNN and SNOW absent. Commissioner MacDGUGALL moved and Commissioner GOKEY seconded to approve the minutes as presented. The motion passed by a vote of 4-0, with Commissioners COLLINS, Dom, and SNOW absent and Commissioner SHOCKLEY abstaining. 6. PUBLIC FORUM There was no one signed up to speak before the Commission. 7. PUBLIC HEARING A. Case No.WV-98-04: An application Submitted by Russ and Jan Anderson for approval of a vacation Of unused public right-of-way for a portion of Marshall Street for the purpose of maintainino the area. Tile area is zoned A- I and C- I and located adjacent to 6465 West 48th Avenue (north of 1-70). This case was presented by Sean McCartney. He reviewed the staff report and presented slides and overheads of tile subject property and advised that there was jurisdiction for the Commission to hear the case. He entered the comprehensive plan, zoning ordinance. subdivision re-ulations, case file, packet materials and exhibits into the record w4lich were accepted by Chair THOMPSON, He stated that this case had previously been approved by the Planning Commission on November 20, 1997 and then denied by City Council oil the basis that the right-of-�vay could be used for future development and might be needed to access those possible developments. He stated staff s opinion that, since this right-of-way has never been improved .and there are no plans for future use, it is unlikely to be developed in the future. He stated staff's conclusion that, because this portion of public right-of-way has not been used as a street nor does it provide access to an adjacent parcel since it serves no other purpose than a utility easement for the existing Public Service power poles, the proposed vacation Should be approved as requested. Commissioner BRIN KIWI AN asked if this application satisfies the previous concerns of City Council. Mr. McCartney replied this application will answer the City Council's concerns in that the original request dealt with three existing billboards which have since been removed and tile right-of-way remains vacant, Z� Commissioner BRINKMAN asked if there were feasible alternatives for use of this land. Mr. McCartney replied that no additional structures Could be placed in that area. Plannim Commission Page 2 1001"98 In response to a question fi•orri Commissioner MacDOUGALL. Mr. McCartney replied that Disabled American Veterans owns tile one property to the wvest. In response to a question from Chair THOMPSON, Mr. McCartney stated that all issues with .Jefferson County have been satisfied. John Bradley 2201 Ford Street, Golden Mr. Bradley was sworn in by Chair THOMPSON. He stated that he is an attorney representing the applicants, He stated that the previous concerns of City Council have been addressed, and that there have been no protests or concerns expressed by the neighborhood. Ile stated that the applicants were looking forward to the privilege and responsibility of rnaflltalnlnl; the subject property in order to improve the overall condition of the neighborhood. Chair THOMPSON asked if there were any other individuals present who wished to address this matter. There was no response. It was moved by Commissioner SHOCKLEY and seconded by Commissioner GOKEY that Case No. WV-9 8-04, an application for approval of a right-of-way vacation of an unused portion of Marshall Street (approximately 6465 West 48th Avenue) be recommended to the City Council for APPROVAL for the following reasons. The property is. and has always been, unused for street or access purposes, The Director of Public Works finds that there is no other need for the property other than a utility easement for Public Service, The reclUeSt ,vill not hinder the future improvements established oil the Wheat Ridge lt7 Comprehensive Plan. 4, Staff recommends approval. The motion carried by a vote of 5 -d with Commissioners COLLINS. DUNN and SNOW absent. B. Case No. MS-98-05: An application submitted by C. B. l ser for approval of a minor two- lot Subdivision as well as a maximum building coverage variance and front, side and rear yard setback variances for the purpose of selling one lot, The property is zoned R-2 and located at 6745 West 32nd Avenue, This case - ,vas presented by Sean McCartney. Ile reviewed tile staff report and presented slides and overheads of the SLIlaject property and advised that there was jurisdiction for the Commission to hear the case. He entered the zoning ordinance, subdivision regulations, case file. packet materials and exhibits into tile record which were accepted by Chair THO,\01-'SON. Ile stated staff's conclusion that a Subdivision Is required to allow the sale of I nd i - vidUal structures as well as to review the proposal in regard to development Plannin- Commission page 3 10/01/98 regulations for the R-2 zone district and. further, that approval of tile variances are required to allow the subdivision to occur. He stated that staff recommended approval in that the request kvould not chanize the physical attributes of existina structures which have remained on-site for a number of years, and would not be detrimental to the surrounding neighborhood. Commissioner BRINIKMAN asked for clarification regarding concerns of the Wheat Ridge Sanitation District relating to a SeNver easement. Mr. McCartney replied that there is an existing se line oil the property and that the easement Could be established on the plat before recordation. Chair THOMPSON asked if the proposed - variance would apply to future buildings ifthe present buildings \Vere to be destroyed. Mr. McCartney replied that Gerald Dahl, City Attorney. advised that the Commission could place conditions on the approval which kk establish the variances for existin(II, structures only. Ms. Reckert stated that \, Dahl had also SLIO-ested a condition Which Would provide that any change Of use for the Current 11reellhOUSe Structure Would have to comply with Current regulations. Cleii Gidley 8684 West Warren )rive, Lakewood IMr. Gidley %vas sworn in by Chair THOMPSON. He stated that lie is - Vvith the firm of Zoning and Planning Associates, representing the applicant in this case. He stated that the present lot lines are nonconforming rather than illegal in that tile lot lines were established long before the City of Wheat Ridge was incorporated. In regard to staff suggestions for a fire-rated wall to be retrofitted into the greenhouse, lie stated that this requirement would not fit With tile Purpose of a greenhouse and, therefore. the of would not be agreeable to this condition. He also stated that the applicant Would prefer not to inove the lot lines in by three feet. I le referred to his memorandum dated September 2 1, 1998, to the Planning Commission (which is contained in the packet) and requested approval ofthe application. In response to a question from Commissioner GOOEY, Mr. Gidley replied that tile present greenhouse has been ill use year-around since 1959. Commissioner BRINK%MAN refierred to the request for fire rated walls in the greenhouse and asked ifthe applicant would rather move the lot lines or Install tile tire rated walls. Mr. Gidley replied that the applicant would be more agreeable to the lot line aqjustnlent, however, this would require a variance to the west setback and increase tile variance on the north side but Would have no other negative effect oil the applicant. In response to a question frown Chair THOMPSON regarding tile purpose of the fire wall, Ms, Reckert replied that it was the opinion of the City's building official that a fire wall was necessary, She suggested that a lot line adjustment and a variance to the rear setback would probably be the most desirable solution. Plannin- Commission Page 4 I 01 1 98 In response to a question from Chair THOMPSON'. Mr. Gidley replied that the applicant understood all of the issues related to nonconforming uses. Z:� Chair THOIVIPSON expressed concern that the greenhouse Could be used for another Purpose SLICII as stora(le some time in the future. Ms. Reckert stated that she believed the intent of the code applied to all operating greenhouse; however, there was the option to place this as a condition of approval, Steve Lister 15320 Great Rack Road, Brighton , Mi% Lister was sworn in by Chair THOMPSON. stated that lie performed the surveys and prepared tile drawings for the application. He stated that lie could not understand how tile applicant C01.11dcornply with Public Set Company's setback requests given the configuration of the area. Ms. Reckert replied that the Public Service Company letter contained their standard lan"Llage used for any SUbdiviston. Since tile buildings are already in place. she t"Cit it would be possible to modify the language Which Could also be placed as a condition ot'approval. Commissioner 'lac }tit. referred to the three-foot section on the South side of" lot one, and asked the status of the mechanical equipment. Mr. N/IcCartney referred to Ms. Reckert's C011CCI that this Could cause the Mechanical equipment to actually extend over the property line and. therefore, a three-foot property line adjUStruent would be desirable to allow for the extension of the mechanical CCILlipment. Commissioner MacDOUGALL asked ifU reqUirements Would be met if the lot line were 111OVed three fcCt to tile SOLltll. IN"Ir. i% replied that Situation would meet UBC reqUireillentS. In response to a question from Chair 'I'HO)vIPSON in regard to tile necessity ofthe second fire rated wall. %1r. McCartney replied that a requirement Could be made for a variance to allow for the required space between the greenhouse and the residential structure. Mr. Gidley noted that the ( is Currently two feet from the lot title and therefore would require only as one -foot variance, Chair THOINMI asked INvIr. Gidley if his applicant Would be agreeable to these conditions. Mr. Gidley replied that his client reluctantly agreed. It was moved by Commissioner BRINKMAN and seconded by Commissioner GOKEY that Case No. IMS-98-5, as request for approval ofa 26 maxiniurn building coverage variance R)r the ;greenhouse known as lot one, a 27-foot front yard setback variance for tile "reelillOUse known as lot one. a 246ot side yard setback variance for tile greenhouse known as lot one, as 20 -foot side yard setback variance when abutting a public right-of-way for the greenhouse known as lot one, a 5-foot rear yard setback vat for the single Fanli1v residence kilo\vri as lot two, and a 1 -foot side yard setback variance for the single family residence knom,'n as lot two, for property zoned Residential-Two and located at 6745 West 32nd AVVIlUe be approved for the following reasons: 1 commission Pa-e 5 I Wo 1 /98 I .�kpproval of tile variance request will not change the physical attributes of the existing Structures. z:1 2. Approval of the request should not be detrimental to adjacent properties or 1111provernerim Approval of the request should not be detrimental to the essential character of tile locality. With the following conditions: Anv chance in use of lot one would have to comply With current reOUlations. If fifty percent of anv existing structures oil either lot one or lot two are destroyed, tile new structures would have to comply with current regulations. The motion carried by a vote of 5 with Commissioners COLLINS, DUNN and SNOW absent. It kv as moved by Commissioner BRINKNIAN and seconded bv Commissioner GOOEY that Case NV IMS-4-5, a request for approval of a two-lot minor subdivision on property zoned Residential-T%vo and located at 6745 West 32nd Avenue, be APPROVED tor the following reasons: 1 . A subdivision is required to allow for individual ownership of the existing lots. 1 All requirements of the Subdivision Regulations have been met. With tile folloxvillo? conditions: I Public Service Company language be modified by planning staff and included on the subdivision plat, 2. Fasernent directed by tile Wheat Ridge Sanitation District be shown oil the subdivision plat. The motion carried by a vote of 5-0 with Commissioners COLLINS. DUNN and SNOW absent, S. CLOSE T11E PU13LIC HEARING Chair'FHOMPSON declared the public hearing portion of the meeting closed, 9. OLD BUSINESS A. Privately Funded Schools Commissioner GOO referred to the upcoming ballot issue reu I .ardirio tile VOLICher system for private schools. He expressed concern reprding the lack ofcontrol by the City of Vheat Ridge in regard to privately owned schools which are funded by the State being developed within tile City of Wheat Ridge. He stated that while the Plannio" commissioll E' (e 6 I Wo 1. 98 scho(ils have definite impacts on the neighborhoods, the City has no control over building permits. traffic Studies. etc. He stated that if the property is owned by the state. it is exempt fl-0111 CIt• reOUlations; but if it Is privately owned property. it Should tall under the same criteria as other privately owned property in the City of Wheat Ridge. 13. Conivi Plan In response to a question from Conlillissi oiler BRINKMAN, ,Meredith Reckert presented as brief update on the Status of the Comprehensive Plan. 10. INEW BUSINESS A. -tk nning �Coni�niissio�nCh air THOINIPSON suggested that the nexv Chair ) �)oin�tnient oaf be elected the rneetinor before the appointment to give that person some time to prepare for the position. Ms. lZeckert replied that she would take this matter before staff for discussion. B. Bus Stop at 44th and Ward Road Chair THOMPSON requested that the bus Stop located in front of the Total gas station at 44th and Ward be relocated to a less hazardous location. 1% i\ replied that statfWOLIld initiate this matter with the Regional Transportation District. C. Vehicle Sales - In response to a question from Chair TI-10IMPSON, Ms. Reckert presented a brief update oil the proposed ordinance to ban private vehicle sales in places such as vacant lots. 1). Conference in Estes Park In response to a question from Commissioner BRINKNIAN, Commissioner GOKEY presented as brief Summary of the conference, 11. DISCUSSION ITENIS A. I'lannin" ("'onimission StUdv Session Ms. Reckert distributed a nlemorandLIT11 concerning the study session to be held on October 15 with the City Attorney to discuss the scope of authority and appropriate decision making during tile public hearing process. She asked Commission members to contact her if they had additional comment or sm—estions in regard to (IiSCLISSion items. It was tile consensus of the Commission to start tile study session at 6: p.m. 12. COMMITTEE AND DEPAREMENT REPORTS There were no committee or department reports. Plannim— C0111111issiosi Paoe 7 10,01,98 13. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Commissioner SHOCKLEY and seconded b Commissioner GOKEY to adjourn the meeting, at 9 :10 a,m. Janice'llionipson. Chair Ann Lazzeri. Recotiding Secretary t Plannin" Comillissioll I Page 8 I WO 11,98 City of Wheat Ridge Planning and Development Depaftment Memorandum TO: Planning Commission FROM: 4redith Reckert, Senior Planner DATE: October 1, 1998 O As you know, we are having a dinner meeting/study session on October 15, 1998, with the City Attorney to discuss scope • authority and appropriate decision making during the public hearing process. Attached are several scenarios derived from cases we have processed during the past year. Please review ' the examples given and submit comments to me. If you can think of other situations • questions for discussion, forward these to me • Barb Delgadillo in writing no later than October 7 for inclusion in the packet. • •� Ir•!' I - i fl Irl -7 7as t-- Y zning on I 1 • • 7 of the property and R-3 zoning on 1/4. Existing on the property is a business which has been operating ' for 30 years. The property is nonconforining relative to t•day's conunercial regulations for landscaping, access, paving and residential buffering. The purpose of the rezoning request is to consolidate zoning. No building expansions are planned. Does PC have the authority to approve standards above and beyond existing regulations (IE, an 8' high fence to provide buffering when a 6' fence is already in place) when no variance is published? Would it be legal grounds for denial because the applicant refuses to ask for a variance as part of his original request.? mmms • mmmm� BE • • 98im As part of a subdivision approval to separate adjacent, existing structures on a single property, a setback variance is required. If the variance is granted, can the existing structure expand in line with the varied setback? If destroyed, can the structure be rebuilt with the varied setback? m