Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutWZ-96-1 & MS-96-1~.. ~.ma ti TO: Meredith Reckert, Planner II FROM: Greg Knudson, Development Review Engineer ''< DATE: February 28, 1995 SUBJ: 4470 Lee Street, WZ-95-6/Bandimere -Rezone A-1 to R-2A The Public Works De partment has reviewed the referral for the rezoning request at the above referenced address and has the following comments: -~ 1. We will need a site plan that delineates proposed contours in order to properly direct site drainage away from all proposed structures and along existing property ~/~''' lines. This plan can include erosion control requirements. 2. It is my understanding at this time that Mr. Bandimere wants to place the standard t~~ ~A,,,~ section of curb, gutter and walk along the Lee Street frontage. I have received approval from Bob Goebel that this work could he completed by the Citv's ruQ approval from Bob Goebel that this work could he completed by the Citv's rurh -~ ~~,1~ ~9 ~ C ana gutter replacement program. Please be_aware that. the owner, in addition to the cost of the concrete improvements, will also be financially obligated to pay for those costs to improve the asphalt section of Lee Street as needed to meet City standards. 3. The required right-of-way for Lee Street (20') has been obtained unofficially by process of the previous referral for this site and is awaiting approval by city council. 4..The plat submitted is currently being reviewed by Chuck Braden. For your information, the latest review comments are attached. 5. Traffic has reviewed this referral, and has no comment at this time. .i ~~,_. cc: Glen Gidley, Community Development Director John Oss, Sr. Project Engineer ~ ~ ~ Steve Nguyen, Traffic Engineer John McGuire, City Surveyor 7 Chuck Braden, ROW Technician File rna cr:y of ~V~Th e at ADMINISTRATIVE PROCESS APPLICATION ~Rid~re Department of Planning and Development 6 7500 West 29th Ave., Wheat Ridge, CO 80033 Phone (303) 237-6944 Applicant~EXIJF}]~d~n/,~j DI/~lr~'L~Address ~.~831 yt.). Sc/~ ,Q tJC Phone ~ ~~~~ ~~~ yZ0-~f3IS Owner Address ~~ Phone " Location of request ~f ~f ICJ i~~F Si. Type of action requested ('check one or more of the actions listed below which pertain to your request.) .' Change of zone or zone conditions Variance/Waiver. Site development plan approval 8 Nonconforming use change Special use permit Flood plain special exception Conditional use permit Interpretation of code Temporary use/building permit Zone line modification Minor subdivision Public Improvement Exception g Subdivision Street vacation 8 Preliminary Miscellaneous plat -`- Final Solid waste landfill/ ^ ** See attached procedural 'guide mineral extraction permit for specific requirements. ^ Other Detailed Description of request ~ ~jNf~C-T ~ ~ A _' ~ p r2 - A ~~ ~ ~, i n/<m v~ - o~ a~ ~vv r~ua« List all persons and companies who hold an interest in the described real property, as owner, mortgagee, lessee, optioriee, etc. NAME ADDRESS PHONE I certify that the information and exhibits herewith submitted-are true and correct to .the best of my knowledge and that in filing this application, I am acting with the knowledge and consent of those persons listed above, without whose consent the requested actior, cannot lawfully be accomplished. Applicants other than owners must submit power-of-attorney-from the owner. which approved of this action on his behalf. Signature of Applicant Subscribed and sworn to me this ~~day_of ~~~t~_ 19 ~c~~ ,a a ~ C`cx~.~gc~ - , Notary P blic SEAL My commission expires ~ ~ ~~ -~ Date Received ~/ lU - c/S -Receipt No_._:~S~l~ Case No. R i ~s i THE LOCATION OF THIS MEETING IS .CITY HnI,T~- ?_rid FT,QCR- 75~ ~ th r'V'-'tS THE TIME AND DATE FOR THIS MEETING IS FB 7. 1995 rT 7:0o p.m. , THE PURPOSE FOR THIS PROPOSAL IS are?~Nr, m~. ~+rrnV! (`ON~TRUCTION ~F ~ FOUR PL~X IS PROPOSING A.REZONING FROM O R-2k The City of Wheat Ridge has adopted a requirement that, prior to application for rezoning of property to a higher use, or for properties in excess of one (1) acre, and for Special Use Permits which allow a special use of land, an applicant must notify all residents within 600 feet and invite them to a Neighborhood Input Meeting. The purpose for this meeting is to allow the applicant to present his proposal to the neighborhood and also to allow the neighborhood to express directly to the applicant, their concerns,, issues and desires. A staff planner will attend the meeting to discuss City policy and regulations and the process involved, however, the planner will remain impartial regarding viability of the project. Keep in mind that this is not a public hearing. Although a synopsis of the meeting will be entered as testimony, it is the public hearings in front of Planning Commission and City Council where decisions are rendered. If you want input in the decision-making process, it is imperative that you attend the public hearings. The kinds of concerns residents normally have include the following: * is the proposal compatible with surrounding land uses and zoning? * Are there adequate utiiities and services in place or proposed to serve the project? * What is the impact on our streets? * Where will the storm drainage go? * How will the project be designed to enhance rather than detract from the neighborhood? * What specific changes can be made in the proposal to make it more acceptable to me? After attending the following space and concerns, issues or proposal. Please s required to provide application. NOTICE OF NEIGHBORHOOD INPUT MEETING FOR REZONING Neighborhood Input Meeting, please use the the back of this form to list any specific suggestions which you may-have regarding this Cgn it and give it to the applicant, as he is these forms to the City along with his PRINT Nl1ME ADDRESS PHONE <pc>notice/neighborhoodmtg/zk NOTICE OF NEIGHBORHOOD INPUT MEETING FOR REZONING -` I$ PROPOSING A,REZONING FROM TO R-~;; THE LOCATION OF THIS MEETING ISJ min=,.,r THE TIME AND DATE FOR THIS MEETINGZIS Hnit- 2nd FT,CCR- 750 '~J _, th yzrF THE PURPOSE FOR THIS PROPOSAL IS F''F ~ 195 ` 7'00 p m 7' ~ ('0 UCT 0 OF FOUR-PLE;{ -`~~a~ =•ab acopzea a requirement that, prior to application for rezoning of property to a higher use, or for properties in excess of one (1) acre, and for Special Use Permits which allow a special use of land, an applicant must notify all residents within 600 feet and invite them 'to a Neighborhood Input Meeting. The purpose for this meeting is to allow the applicant to present his proposal to the neighborhood and also to allow the neighborhood to express directly to the applicant, their concerns,. issues and desires. ~ ~~s.ff t,la:.nar gill attend the maeting •~o discuss City policy and regulations and the process involved, however, the planner will remain impartial regarding viability of the project. Keep in mind that this is not a public hearing. Although a synopsis of the meeting will be entered as testimony, it is the public hearings in front of Planning Commission and City Council where decisions are rendered. If you want input in the decision-making process, it is imperative that you attend the public hearings. The kinds of concerns residents normally have include the following: * Is the proposal compatible with surrounding land uses and zoning? * Are there adequate utilities and services in place or proposed to serve the project? * What is the impact on our streets? * Where will the storm drainage go? * How will the project be designed to enhance rather than detract from the neighborhood? * What specific changes can be made in the proposal to make it more acceptable to me? After attending the Neighborhood Input Meeting, please use the following space and the back of this form to list any specific concerns, issues or suggestions which you may have regarding this proposal. Please sign it and give it to the applicant, as he is required to provide these forms to the City along with his application. __ , .,moo a tiv~ o.F iir~~ -"-"' "^'°a ADDRESS PHONE <pc>notice/neighborhoodmtg/zk NOTICE OF NEIGHBORHOOD INPUT MEETING FOR REZONING IS_PROPOSING A.REZONING FROM THE LOCATION OF THIS MEETING IS CITY $riT,r~_ grid FLC'CR- 7 00 '.J = th r''.,~ THE TIME AND DATE FOR THIS MEETING IS F3B 7, 19n5 ::'" 7.00 p m THE PURPOSE FOR THIS PROPOSAL IS R~~'7(`Ni~' TO hTTC'vJ CGN3TRUCTTON C~ FCUR PL„{ - _„s ~~ ••==~a~ n~uye nas aaoptea a requirement that, prior to application for rezoning of property to a higher use, or for properties in excess of one (1) acre, and for Special Use Permits which allow a special use of land, an applicant must notify all residents within 600 feet and invite them to a Neighborhood Input Meeting. The purpose for this meeting is to allow the applicant to present his proposal to the neighborhood and also to allow the neighborhood to express directly to the applicant, their concerns,, issues and desires. A staff planner will attend the meeting to discuss City policy and regulations and the process involvsd, however, the planner will remain impartial regarding viability of the project. Keep in mind that this is not a public hearing. Although a synopsis of the meeting will be entered as testimony, it is the public hearings in front of Planning Commission and City Council where decisions are rendered. if you want input in the decision-making process, it is imperative that you attend the public hearings. The kinds of concerns residents normally have include the following: * Is the proposal compatible with surrounding land uses and zoning? * Are there adequate .utilities and services in place or proposed to serve the project? * What is the impact on our streets? * Where will the storm drainage go? * How will the project be designed to enhance rather than detract from-the neighborhood? * What specific changes can be made in the proposal to make it more acceptable to me? After attending the Neighborhood Input Meeting, please use the following space and the back of this form to list any specific concerns, issues or suggestions which you may have regarding this proposal. Please sign it and give it to the applicant, as he is required to provide these forms to the City along with his application. PRINT NAME ~~ ADDRESS ~~ jt~~ ~ ~ +~ `~ ~ ~Ol~-3 PHONE <pc>notice/neighborhoodmtg/zk VALLEY WATER DISTRICT P.O. BOX 9 12101 WEST 52ND AVENUE WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO 80034 TELEPHONE 424.9661 March 1, 1995 City of Wheat Ridge P. O. BoX 638 Wheat Ridge, CO 80034 ATT: Meridith Reckert Dear Meridith, .. _. r--~~ ~r nr`i` `,.~.)'. N1N~ & o ,. In reference to planning review response for WZ-95-6/Bandimere at 4470 Lee and our phone conversation of 3-1-95. Valley Water District has a 12" water mainline in Lee Street. The Owner would be required to purchase the appropriate size water tap from the Valley Water District and run the service line to units at their expense. If you have any questions, please call me at 424-9661. Sincerely, VALLEY WATER DISTRICT ~~~;~~ ~ Robert Arnold District Manager RA:ad Arvada Fire Protection District FIRE MARSHALS' OFFICE P. O. Box 3-D ARVADA,COLORADO80001 CITY OF WHEAT Telephone (303) 425-0850-FAX (303) 422-4569 ~ ~~(~]-{ n~', MAR C 9 1995 March 3, 1995 ~~~ LI ;_c, Ms. Meredith Reckert PLANNING & DEVEL-^;~:~~ENT Wheat Ridge Department of Community Development 7500 W. 29th Ave. P.O. Box 638 Wheat Ridge, CO. 80034-638 RE: Bandimere 4470 Lee St. Dear Meredith, We have reviewed the site plan for this location and have the following comments. 1. Fire protection is provided to this site by Station 2, 12195 W. 52nd Ave. and Station 1, 7900 W. 57th Ave. 2. The fire lanes that are now in-place at the Ptrarmigan pro9ect including signs will need to remain. TJFC 91 10.206: 3. We would request that if all. possible off street parking be provided so that the fire lane would not be obstructed by parked vehicles. 4. Hydrant locations will need to be approved by the Valley Water District and the Fire Marshal's Office. UFC 91 10.501(a). 5. The owner will need to submit the size of the building, construction type and roof type to determine the required fire flow. UFC 91 Appendix III-A. Sincerely, Arvada QFire Protection District ~.r !J Steve Steig eder Deputy Fire Marshal 7500-WEST 29TH AVENUE - _ ~ -The Cify Of P.O. BOX 638 _ WHEAT RIDGE. CO 80034-0638 (3031 234-590C (,~ ~ cheat City Admin. Fax # 234-5924 Police Dept. Fax # 235-2949 ~ ~idge November 27, 1995 The Wheat Ridge Department of Community Development has received a request for ~proval of a rezoning from A-1 to R-2A and approval of a two-lot at the property described below. Your response to the following questions and any comments on this proposal would be appreciated by nPCemher 6 1ggS No response from you by this date will constitute no objections or concerns regarding this-proposal. CASE NO: WZ-95-6/Bandimere LOCATION: 4470 Lee Street REQUESTED ACTION: Rezoning from A-1 to R-2A and approval of a two-lot minor subdivision PURPOSE: Construction of two duplexes APPROXIMATE AREA: Approximately 17,000 square feet 1. Are public facilities or services provided by your agency adequate to serve this development? YES NO If "NO", please explain below. 2. Are service lines available to the development? YES NO If "NO", please explain below. 3. Do you have adequate capacities to service the development? YES NO If "NO", please explain below. 4. Can and will your agency service this proposed development subject to your rules and regulations? YES NO If "NO", please explain below. 5. Are there any concerns or problems your agency has identified which would or should affect approval of this request? Please reply to~~j~;~~zr/~~~~'%~~ ` M. Reckert Department of Planning & Development DISTRIBUTION: _. X Water District (Clear Creek X Sanitation District (Valley ) X Fire District (Arvada ) Adjacent City ( ) X Public Service Co. X US West Communications State°-Land Use Commission X State Geological Survey X Colorado Dept. of Transportation Colorado Div.. of Wildlife X X TCI of Colorado t~ Rr~~"drd PrY~rr Jefferson Co. Health Dept. Jefferson Co. Schools Jefferson Co. Commissioners Denver Water Board W R Post Office W R Po13ce Dept. W R Public Works Dept. W R Parks & Recreation Com. W R Forestry Div. W R Building Div.-- <pc>referralform TO: Meredith Reckert, Planner II FROM: Greg Knudson, Development Review Engineer c, DATE: November 27, 1995 SUBJ: 4470 Lee Street, WZ-95-6/Bandimere -Rezone A-1 to R-2A & approval of a two lot minor subdivision The Public Works Department has reviewed the Planning Department referral dated November 27, 1995 for the rezone A-1 to R-2A and approval of a two lot minor subdivision, and has the following comments: 1. We will need a final drainage study submitted for review and approval. 2. We will need a completed application for dumping/landfill permit and fees due submitted for review and approval. In conjunction with this permit an erosion control plan may need to be submitted for review and approval. 3. We will need to process a development agreement for those improvements along the Lee Street frontage. If the owner chooses to construct these improvements then an engineered set of construction drawings, in conformance with City requirements, will need to be submitted for review and approval. A suitable form of escrow/surety will need to be submitted for these improvements prior to issuance of a building permit. Finally, the appropriate right-of-way construction permits will need to be processed prior to any work in the right-of-way commencing. 4. The preliminary plat has been forwarded to Chuck Braden for review. GWK cc: Glen Gidley, Community Development Director John Oss, Sr. Project Engineer Steve Nguyen, Traffic Engineer John McGuire, City Surveyor Chuck Braden, ROW Technician Fle lJ VALLEY WATER DISTRICT P.O. BOX 9 12101 WEST 52ND AVENUE WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO 80034 TELEPHONE 424-9661 November 29, 1995 Meredith Reckert City of Wheat Ridge 7500 West 29th Avenue Wheat Ridge, CO 80214 Dear Meredith, In reference to Case No. W2-95-6/Bandimere, Valley Water District has the following comments. 1. Water taps and water service lines would need to be installed to each separate building structure. 2. Additional fire hydrants may be needed to meet Arvada Fire Protection District Requirements. If you have any questions, please call me at 424-9661. Sincerely, VALLEY WATER DISTRICT ~jGUL~ Robert Arnold District Manager }~ ~• Arvada Fire Protection District P. 0. Box 3•D ARVADA, COLORADO 60001 Telephone (303) 424-3012 - FAX (303) 422-4569 December 2, 1945 Ms. Meredith Reckert Wheat Ridge Department of Community Development 7500 W. 29th Ave. Wheat Ridge, CO. 80034-0638 RE: Bandimere 4470 Lee St. Dear Meredith, We have reviewed the site plan for this location and have the following comments. 1. Fire protection is provided to this site by Station 2, 12195 W. 52nd Ave.. and Station 1, 7900 W. 57th Ave. 2. Fire lanes that are now existing at the Ptarmigan complex will need to remain and that will include future and existing No Parking Fire Lane signs. UFC 91 10.205. 3. The owner will need to submit construction information on the buildings including size, roof construction and set backs to determine required fire flow and if additional hydrants are needed. UFC 91 10.501, Appendix III-A. Sincerely, Arv~ada~Fire Protection District t5 eve Stei e Deputy Fire Marshal rWiYIVING & DEVELOPf~ENT • ~_I J • ~:~~~arvz~~d~ ~~~~ ~r~D ~~~~~~°r r~~~~?e~ CONTACT NUMBER 1 DATE: 4 DEC,1995 SUBDIVISION NAME: ENGINEER: NAME: PHONE KE FENWI K (303) 279-447 FAK: .(3.03). CITY REPRESENT TIVE• CHUCK BRA~Rty REMARKS: D SCR PT ON NOT COR_RF~T W. 15'.pREVTO SL DRD C_A'rED (#F003$?97) NEED N/S DI_MENSIONS ON L.OT NEED SI NAT RE & NOTARY BLOCKS .FOR OWNER .. WHE~~OT 3 AS REF~'FRFNCFD BY A E~ mA EMFNm E'~GINEER REPRESENT TIVE KEN FENWTru REMARKS: OK How contact made: person PHONE letter fax REPRESENTATIVE: BANDIMERE MrrTnR crTRnTV STON Remark: Remark: Remark: Callback_1_Date: Callback_2_Date: Callback 3 Date- City: _ Engineer: Public Service December 12, 1995 City of Wheat Ridge Planning Department 7500 W. 29th Avenue P.O. Box 638 Wheat Ridge, CO 80034 CIfY OF ~NHEAT RIDGE ~ rnr~nn n~ ~,~-x,14 ;3w5 _ ~~u_. PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT Public Service Company of Colorado 2701 W.7th Avenue Denver, CO 802044114 Public Service Company of Colorado (PSCo) acknowledges receipt of the preliminary plot plan of _9 _ PROJECT TITLE PSCo has examined the proposed plan of the above-captioned project and suggest that defuung easements for electric and gas service should be delayed at this tune. Easements cannot be adequately delineated at this time due to the uncertainty of the service needs and locations to allow For the most desirable system design. Easements shall be granted to PSCo when service locations are made known for the constnuction, operation, maintenallce~and reop~a~emeAts~ofVU~rovertacross, and under streets, uotilty aasementseand othe~rlpubliepla es or property gu or common area. Approval of electric and/or gas service to this properly is subject to PSCo rules, regulations and tariffs on file and nr effect with the State Public Utilities Commission, State of Colorado. Please note, PSCo has existing gas and/or electric distribution facilities in this area. The developer should contact Dick Miller 425-3811 regarding utilization or relocation of the existing facilities. PSCo would also like to remind the developer to have all utilities located prior to construction. If you have any questions regazding the above subject matter, please contact the at 571-3735. Thank you, j Z,r~~-i Teresa Wilson Right-of-Way Processor TW/pg ~~ -5001NES~ ''P.'H aVENUC P.o Box ~:s The City o1 WHEAT RIDGE CO SC03 ~~063? , . , fit _.,-~~ ~1Vheat City Acmv, P,3z x 2,.!-593. Pd ce Dea Fa> = 335-298 Ridge December 14,.1995 Mr. Benjamin Bandimere 13831 West 54th Avenue Arvada CO 80002 Dear Ben: I have reviewed your request for rezoning and subdivision and have scheduled a public hearing for January 18, 1996. Prior *_c that meeting, the following items must be added to the plat or addressed otherwise: 1. "Preliminary Plat" needs to be removed from the title. 2. What is the scale? 3. Adjacent zoning and subdivision information is missing. 4. Need centerline location for Lee Street. 5. ..Add note regarding zoning on property (proposed zoning assuming approval). 6. The note regarding cross-access should be removed. 7. Reception number of right-of-way dedicated by separate document. 8. Address and phone number for owner and surveyor is missing. 9. Add dimensions for front property lines. 10. Remove building footprint. 11. Add utility easements. 12. Move the floodplain note. 13. If there are ditches crossing the property, they should be shown with their appropriate easements with a signature block for the ditch company. 14. Mountain States Telephone and Telegraph should be changed to U.S. West Communications. 15. City Engineer's certificate should be changed to Director of Planning and Development. The minimum lot area for a duplex lot in the R-2A zone district is 9000 square feet with 75 feet of lot width. Since both lots are below that minimum, Staff will be processing the request with variances. You may want to consider changing one of the lots to single family size where only 7500 square feet of area is needed with 60 feet of lot width. c~ .. n9r. Ben Bandimere December 14, 1995 Page 2 Please find attached redmarked copies of the plat and development plan. attached also are referral responses received from outside agencies. Sfyou have questions regarding any of the above, do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely yours, ,. , ~ ^~ r,: i Meredith Reckert Planner MR:slw attachments cc: WZ-96-1 \~ • NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Notice is hereby given that a Public Hearing is to be held before the City of Wheat Ridge Planning Commission on January 18, 1996 at 7:30 p.m. at 7500 West 29th Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado. A11 interested citizens are invited to speak at the-Public Hearing or submit written comments. The following petitions shall be heard: 1. .Case-No. WZ-96-1: An application by Benjamin Bandimere for approval-of a rezoning from A-1 to R-2A for property located at 4470 Lee Street. Said property is legally described as follows: A tract of land in the Northeast quarter of Section 21, Township 3 South, Range 69 West of the 6th P.M. in Jefferson County, State of Colorado, more particularly described as follows: Beginning at a point-that is 1529.75 feet south and 447 feet West from the Northeast corner of `said Section 21; thence West 215 feet; thence South 193 feet; thence northeasterly 289 feet-more or less to the Point of Beginning, County of Jefferson, State of Colorado, as described in Reception Number 94046061 of the records of Jefferson County, Colorado. 2- Case No. MS-96-1: An application by Benjamin Bandimere for approval of a two-lot minor subdivision with variances for property located at 4470 Lee Street. Said property is legally described as follows: A tract of land in the Northeast quarter of Section 21, Township 3 south, Range 69-West of the 6th P.M. in Jefferson County, State of Colorado, more particularly described as-follows: Beginning at a point that is'1529.75 feet south and 447 feet West from the Northeast corner of said Section 21; thence West 215 feet; thence South 193 feet; thence northeasterly 289 feet more or less to-a Point of Beginning, County of Jefferson, .State of Colorado, as described in Reception Number 94046061 of the records df Jeffer'son'-County, Colorado. 3. Case No. Wz-96-2: An application by Terry Kunz for HJH; L.L.C., for approval of a final development plan and plat for PCD zoned property within the Town Center Master Plan area. Said property is located at 4010 Wadsworth Boulevard and is-.legally described as-follows: -. Lots 2 and 3, Currier~Subdvision, City of Wheat Ridge, County of-- Jefferson, State of_Colorado. 4• Case No. MS-96-2: An application by Gerald M. Biehl for approval of a two-lot minor subdivision for property located at 3600 Young.field Street. Said property is legally . described as follows: ..~ A PORTION OF-THE EAST ONE-HALF OF THE NORTHWEST ONE.-QUARTER OF SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 3 SOUTH, RANGE 69_WEST OF THE 6TH P.M., DESCRIBED-AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT 654.32 FEET NORTH OF THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION'-29,- - AND 60.00 FEET EAST-OF THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST ONE-HALF OF THE NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 29; THENCE N 00°51'8" W PARALLEL TO THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST ONE-HALF OF THE NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 29, A-DISTANCE OF 667.82 FEET TO-.THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHEAST ONE-QUARTER OF-THE NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 29, THEN N 89°28'1" E ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHEAST ONE-QUARTER OF THE' NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 29, A DISTANCE OF 150.00 FEET, THENCE.N 00°51'8" WEST PARALLEL TO THE-WEST LINE OF THE EAST ONE-HALF OF THE NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 29, A DISTANCE OF 200.00 FEET; THENCE S 89°28'1" W PARALLEL TO THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHEAST ONE-QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 29, A DISTANCE OF 150.00 FEET; THENCE N 00°51'8" W PARALLEL TO THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST ONE-HALF-OF THE NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 29, A DISTANCE OP 135.19 FEET TO,A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE ON A CURVE TO THE RIGHT WHOSE RADIUS IS 182.00 FEET AND WHOSE CHORD BEARS N 37°51'1" E, A DISTANCE OF 227.66 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE N 76°34'0" E ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF WEST 38TH AVENUE, A DISTANCE OF 701.69 FEET TO --- THE NORTHWEST CORNER-OF RIDGEVIEW ACRES THIRD FILING, A PLATTED SUBDIVISION IN THE OFFI-CIAL RECORDS OF JEFFERSON COUNTY COLORADO; THENCE 5.00°43'5"- E ALONG THE WEST_LINE OF SAID RIDGEVIEW ACRES THIRD FILING, A DISTANCE OF 670.33 FEET TO SHE-SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHEAST ONE-QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 29; THENCE S 89°28'1" W ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHEAST ONE-QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 29, A DISTANCE OF 0.67 FEET TO A POINT ,WHICH IS 885.00 FEET EAST OF THE WEST LINE OF THE-EAST .ONE-HALF OF THE NORTHWEST_ ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 29; THENCE S 00°51'8" E PARALLEL-TO - -- THE'WEST LINE OS THE EAST-ONE-HALF OF THE NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 29, A DISTANCE OF 1162.99 FEET TO A POINT 160.00 FEET NORTH OF THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 29; THENCE S 89°31'7" W PARALLEL TO__THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 29, A DISTANCE OF 192...34 FEET; THENCE S 00°51'8" E PARALLEL TO THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST. ONE-HALF OF THE NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 29, A DISTANCE OF .130.. 00 FEET; THENCE S 89°31'7" W PARALLEL TO THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHWEST ONE=QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 29, A DISTANCE OF 342.6b FEET 'TO A POINT 3.50.0.0 FEET EAST OF THE WEST. LINE OF THE EAST ONE-HALF OF THE NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 29; THENCE N 00°51'8" W PARALLEL TO THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST ONE-HALF OF THE NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF__SAID SECTION 29, A DISTANCE OF 600.00 FEET; SI3ENCE S 89°31'7" W PARALLEL TO THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID.SECTION 29, A DISTANCE OF 150.00 FEET;- THENCE N 00°51'8" W PARALLEL TO THE-WEST LINE OF THE EAST ONE-HALF OF-.THE NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 29, A DISTANCE. OF 24.32-FEET; THENCE S 89°31'7" W PARALLEL TO-.THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SECTION 29, A DISTANCE OF 140.00 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF- BEGINNING, CONTAINING AN-AREA 29.969 ACRES MORE OR LESS_ ATTEST: Wanda Sang, City Clerk To be Published: January 4, 1996. Jefferson Sentinel b:\a11896.phn Sandra Wiggins, Secretary- The JEFFERSON SENTINI* 1224 Wadsworth Blvd Lakewood, CO 80215 259-9840 __ CiS/S THE CITY CLERKS OFFICE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE w 7500 W. 29TH AVENUE WHEAT RIDGE, CO 80215 INVOICE: LEGAL NO~iICE PU4.31_ICATI Our number: JW0212.104 tour ~:denti*~ PUBLICATION DATES: 96/U.L; u4 through 9b/O1: U4 NUMBER OF LINES: 192 COPIES REQUESTED: , ~,. Printir~g: &U_bq ~-/U[ Copies: J.00 TOTAL DUE: - s 8V _6.:} AFFIDRVII'S ISSUED AFTF'R RECF=IP'I' OF Thank you fiat advertising in the Jefiierson Sentinel Ncnwspa p~ W~ The JEFFERSON SENTINELS 1224 Wadswortl-~ Blvd _ 'n Lakewood, CO .80215 N`5 'E 239-9890 - - - - - - THE CITY CLERKS 01='f--IL'E _ CITY OF WHEAT RIllUE 7500 W. 29TH AVEIVUE WHEAT RIDGE, CO 80215 O1/OS/4E INVOICE: LEGAL NOTICE PUBI..ICATIC Our number: JW0212. Iii c, Your iuen tific PUBLICATION DATES: 96/Oii04 throuyr: 96/01/04 NUMBER OF LINES: 192 COPIES REQUESTED: 3 -- -- Printing: -- - -- yi~_64 - _ Copies: 0.00 TOTAL DUE: y L'~0,64 AFFIDAVITS IS`'~L1ED AF"iER RECEIPT OF P Thank you '(or advertising in tht_ Jei fer'SOrz Sen t. t+url Newspapers! `J -500 N1EST 29TH AVENUE P.o. EoX s3a The Crt_y of WHEAT nIDGE. CO 80034-0838 X303) 234-5900 Wheat Ci,y Ad:^;n. Fax = 234-5924 Police Dept. Fax ~ 235.2949 ~ld~e January 3, 1996 This is to inform you. that Case No. W7-9Fi-1/MC-gti_1 which is a request fOr annrnval of a rP~oninc~ frr,m A 1 to R-9A nci a~T CTal of a +vsr,_lnt minor anhr7ivicion ifih ~~^ri nra- for property located at 4470 Lee Street will be heard by the Wheat Ridge P omm's io in the Council Chambers of the Municipal Complex, 7500 West 29th Avenue at 7:30 b m , On ,7an„arv 1R, 199 Fi All owners and/or their legal counsel of the parcel under consideration must be present at this hearing before the Planning C'oIILmicSinn As an area resident or interested party, you have the right to attend this Public Hearing and/or submit written comments. It shall be the applicant's responsibility to notify any other persons whose presence is desired at this meeting. If you have any questions or desire to review any plans, please contact the Planning Division. Thank you. PLANNING DIVISION <pc>phnoticeform'. .;~ a„ .., r.,r:: 4 Dear Adjacent Property Owner: _ __ If you have received this notice, you reside or own property adjacent to a property involved in a land use case being processed by the City of Wheat Ridge. This notice is intended to inform you of the process involved in land use development applications. _ _- Prior to application for rezoning or special use permit, the developer is responsible for holding an informal neighborhood meeting. The. purpose of the meeting is to provide the opportunity for citizens to become aware of a proposed development in their neighborhood and to allow the developer to respond to citizen concerns in the design of their project. All residents within 600 feet are required to be notified of the meeting. A staff planner will attend the meeting to discuss City policy and regulations and the process involved, however, the planner will remain impartial regarding viability of the project: Keep in mind that this is not a public hearing. Although a synopsis of the meeting will be entered as testimony, it is the public hearings in front of Planning Commission and City Council where decisions are rendered. If.you want input in the decision- making process, it is imperative that you attend the public hearings. The public hearings you will be attending-are quasi-judicial in nature. Please do not contact your Planning Commissioners or . Council .people to discuss .the merits. of a case prior to the public hearing. It could jeopardize your representatives' ability to hear the case. If you are an adjacent property, you may have the right to file a "legal protest" against the application. The result of this --- Filing is that it requires a 3/4 majority of City Council to approve a request. . If you have questions regarding any of the information given above, do not hesitate to contact a planner at the City .off ices by calling 235-2846. The Planning & Development Department is open Monday through Friday 8:30 a.m. through 5:00 p.m. <pc>adjpropowner . ~:. ~'=` _.~- - _ ~ ~= ~ ~~= ~ ~ ~ - ~i•i ~ rti y" 00 I I _:r n } ~ .es es ~ tom- • ' Q ~~,~ ttB © '~ , i •e: ~ } ." ~ ~ '' ,w ti '`~ ~ \ ~.~ ~i.GE ' `' ~ ~ ~ a ilk - ~ c. ~ 1~ = o \ ~? ~ U ~ \vh,P~1 ~ r ~ h N o x~ ~;,, '~ ~ ~~o { , ~ ' ~~`- Q o .~ ~ ~.1I 2i U ~ ~ ~ ~ F, ~~ ~ o - a, q •~i E s tU' N b~ F4 I f Ol S ~~~~ 'SS3ki0Otl Nkif713l1 dO lHOltl 3H1 IOl3AN3 d0 d01 ltl ki3NOLLS 30tl1d i1NtllkiOdWl .,- ~ v - ~ F 7 k { s. i r a i e J g i ~ .' w li - W \ ~ .. ~ U U 2 w o a ~ a ~ ~ w > H U w W W ¢ N ~ ~ es o x ~x ~ c Y .~ .. 4 s1 ~y W~1 ~ 'Y L Y yL P~f ~ ~ ~ W SG S Re ~a~ ~ ~ 5L5 `COh 2'C6 d r~~ ~'y~ O ~\~ V~/~ ~ ~ ~ H _ ~ lV 0 w v ~a z ¢ O = U N (7 N ~ IL ¢ 3~ o¢ n 3 0$ d w y r X ~ T ~ .~ m ~~ ryry O y O ¢- ~ • N ~ N m ~ E ^ W c y ~ LL y U d o a I N a Q~ n y o N a b n W m °c' ~ ^ c ~ ,~ h'' V ~b 'c a~~i O r (V U ~ Q~ U ~ ~_ ~ N d O V > ~ ~ ~ ¢ ~ ~ Q ~ ~€ .~ `~ v ~ a ~ 0 _ aPO ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ 1 ~ ~ Sid ~ ~ E ~ v ~ ~ ~4 ~ 6 9 s x~~ ~ ~. w a~~ s E X30 o sd a ~ w Q ~ N .b ~tiST ~ W }.1 f M •• 4 I.~~ c~ a ~ N V m N 'cE5 sA ~ ~ +^) R ~, E~~ v :~ 5 Yas Lq ~ m o 0$2 16 .1.1 ~ m { a W o ~' L~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ m I t N ~ ~ • i F~ ~ g LL fi , 1 , p _ . q i0a D n Q ~ ~ K v' Q f~ a¢ V E E ~ N e^E ~ ¢ v '1 ~ !~1 iC~ N - ~s m v a..~ ~ C e~yy o. ! ic~cg~~a~Fm< (n 4W1~~~~ •`+i Ci Iln ti a \ e : ~ i w w •~ a m o. ~ M1 Z tr7 ~ .°_' CC O a ~ rl W m O IL (\ m a ~ ~ T\• N ~ N ~ U ~ Q a -~ ~' V o + N W ~ ~ _ p ~ j O °- ~n o a o O ri a ~ of N d U n_ a ILL °w iy ~ w G' ~+ GAF ~ ¢~ ~ a.e ~ ao a °a i~1 &' CV .-. ~~ a Z w uF 5 @` !3 C* \ w W¢ j Lil ~= W rv{ v ~~ 6] W W Oj F 2 ~ ~ p ~ OFo W a aw ~ ~ ! ~ Z~ LL Q !` 44 ~ _ 3 ~ oy _~ O o !ff !}h E U' ~m w °a t SV F =O ~ ~ ~ ep~ ` O N O Q dq 3 ( $ ~Q ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ p I` p b~ ~ o ~ ~ r3 ~ p~p _ ~ .. ~=~ Z P3 ri ~G Fit ~ ~ ~ws ~ U ~¢ W - ~~ ¢ ¢ m Cn d ~ ¢ ¢ m it if 9L5 'COh 2'CS d f 'I ~.- - - ,~ ~ m C ~~ 0 'J a u ~ t,7t ~' ~ a .r v rd '. Ca a ~ H ~ Sri V ~ O'~ ~ i^a ~ a~Ni 2 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r ~ ry ~ ¢ ¢ m .~ ,u S3 ~ rt C? Ca3 s"S'`+ 4BC~ ;x tl L ~ ~ a 2~ v LY l}} 'q~, W Y^3 ~ ~ t J t~ 4 F~2 ~ ~ V•t n ~ ~ Cd ~ ~ ~ +~ EL5 ~Oh 2'C6 d la I Z I- W _- B Q / a W_ m W ~ d T ¢ y W ~ N O U '~ -~ ~.,/ ~ N IYX-.I. O hj ~. ~ ~ ~ o a ~ r o5 Z F W . ~ ,~ M ~ : '. m a E,) r. ~ r' m °' ¢ 9 m ~ ~ ~ ~ 3 lD ~ w ~ E r &f ~ Q Q ~ T M ~ m E iy ~ ~ ~ y m ~ ~ E LL N ~ a ~ a_ O a W ~,,, _ LL ~ O LL \ c«t C3 U O LL al w i ~, ~ a U ~~ °w 'oE t~ M ~° 'p c~ d E< ^.3 q6 W- ~3yZp~ 4; GS W¢ C LL Uz q ~ ~ !^'~ ~? C Q U6 V"f isk+ VW 00 W ~ ¢~ ~i N sR ~W 30 u r ~O Ki ^~('~ 4+ I $Oy OO ~ O Z 6 s~ ~? s3 oLL ( ~G~ ~- .fit Q o ~ ~ ~ ~ w ~+ ~'^~ m a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a OQ5 'I~h 2`C6 d ~p N ~x ~ a~ ~'o `~ a Q m ~ ~ c a > o 'mm ¢' M1 r m vi m E 7 ~ W D m ° m r O m N pp N> 9 N Q a N N N ~ T '6 'O y ,,,~ ~ a N _. z ' 3 U ~ N ~ ~ m U ~ ~ ~~ m O ` a ` ~ ~ ~ J ~ a ~ o < ~ .E £ v v r c6 ~ E ~ o ~ ~~~ ~ ~ F.3 f ~ ~~ ~ ; ~ ~ E ~ ~~m ~ Q F y oa3 ~ 4 .a f m ~ d ~m ~ ~ 1 r ~ . ~ ~ SS EE ~ ~ +" ~ m m ,E~~ ~ ~ K ` ~ _ s ~`og b £ a ~ k ~a oaf ~~ ~v ' @ ' t " y 0. t ~ 5$$ o L: tl ~' i1 ti I M ~ N f^ F ~~~ .2 [C d ° "~ ~a]~ ` I p ~ ¢~ a \. ~ i' v va EE= ~ o Q ~ m s ~ 3 e _ M - ~ i _= ;dl +. ,..t b rh tiv. x"! o ~ C o~ ~ O J ~ ~ Ira Z LL ...+ o a Qo U ¢ ~O YS Y W i F y ~ f q{ y q ~( ~ YYrtrt - A ~~ ~ O ~ +4 Q M ~ 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ w ~ aI wI U W ~I W 'fit a r Z ~ ra W L ~ ~ p I S L I- ry ~ ~V U ~~ n FT U -"W F lA W i ra ~. m ~ N ^ ~ ~ O is ~ w ~~ m a ~ w ro N ~ a 1- W a ~ ~ ~ y ~ U I W N t l + CJ ~~: ~ 0 1 ~ o • n m a W a n Z L N W ~ ~ Q U ~ F y ~ ~ o O O ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~ M ~ ~ ,~ ~ o ~: ~ m ~ ~ ' Q ~ ~ is ~ ~ ... W ~ ~ ~ r ~ ~ ~ ~ v .._ n ~ ~ y f'i $ ~ a> ~ N ~ J w -~~ ~jy "~~ ~ ~ C ~ ~ 4.n V' SO N 4 ~ r fp ~ r-( y+~d ?, W Y3 3k Q ~ of ~ "^3 O~"+ • + } ~'p~o N 0..1 f~ i ¢ Q .~ ~ ^,. ~ L7 - ~ 7" fi • R ~ R M E i3 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a ui ~ tti a J '~ ~ m `- f~lJ 0 y O ! v W 4 LL U ~ ~ , ~ ~ ~ ~ \ ~~{~ a ~ ~. r~ ;,. ~~ .u o° ~ ¢ t ~~ ~- ~ r F f s ~j fF~ A v ~~ ~ ~ ¢ ~ O Q 6 W .+ ( "'~ Y !~I w~ Z y L ~~ .LF' G~ Q ZO /~ ~ v zy. 30 ~` F O 1r~a 9`3 V• ~N ~ O :Zi a ny ~. ~f 1..~ Y $ fJ ~¢ 2 1 gK ~ a U t " a ~ ~ O ~ ~ e T R~ O ' fU Q f T\ O R j Z 6 yyi . SS ~ ~ ~ ~ ^Y ~ O 2 y ~ a ~ I O d I °~~ ' 8G5 'IOh 2'I6 d f 2L5 'C~h 2'C6 d I F¢ C U m m U ~. lb C7 ILL a WYt 4. W U O tL a w U W tr ¢0 d w0 ~ P~ \ LL Q Z W Y 6 rW ~ LL UZ ~j TY ~ \/ < ~ 6 o Zd U6 }y w v ° r~ ,t,{ m 30 " ~ ~ Z `.fie V' i S '1? ~ OFW w _ = W ~ e ~ y Y (~} . ~ Oc ~ J a t1 ~ Y'+ sf. p~jF ~ U N¢ U ~ ;a W M O N c ~ = = z ~ t ~7 ~ ~ w. ' ~ i 6L5 'COh 2'C6 d ~.... i - ,.. F- ~ ~ - - - - - - - __ --- ~ a I, ~o ~'~.m. u7 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ A~~ 6c W i ~ aqi m m E `.~ ~ h D ~ ~ ~ W ~ D ~ (70 ~11 ~ fL y_o ~_° ~, o I.L ~ ~ ~ ~ ° I_i ~a ~ o ~ z ~N ¢~= n m ~ ~' ¢ m ~ J fL ¢ W m ¢ 3 CC F-- ~' _ 3°c'O ^ o z ~ ~-'' U .~ -~ ~ U ? ~-l ~-'' U m ~ .m a~~i U Wm u~$Q5 (~) ° '- a ~ m .a ~ w d ~ J'~l m m ~ ~ jam( ~ yI, 1- ~~ d, ^ ~ 0 ~* ~ ro O o ¢ Q O v ~ F r~ ~ O o ~' ~~~ 114 ~ ~ `~~~ ~ C / ~ ~Y g r ~ a#a d 082 st ~ ~ ~ c ~ r~ ..~ ~ ~ m ~ m w ~.~ > .., 8 odd ~ ~ ~, ~ +B ) m `m m ~' .o •^t 5 ~~ ~ g O ( a c ° D ~ v1 1 a ~ aci d ~ `1 Ilq y ~ E g@~F o ca ~i .~ .7r CI Q ¢ a' G`i N Q V ~ ^ i a c a°i b ~ ° ~ ~ d ?GI sd AT ~ I '- r{ i3 ~ I ~ I .- R .°,~C $ ~ ¢ a SST ~ ~ EST /rf' N I T caa Ld¢~° C .5 ~ ~ m E ~ X ~+ ..ta ~ E r{ » > > M p ~"~ ~~ ~ `O ~ 91 ~ C ZU a>~6~~«Q fn ~ 11 ~Y/WS m ~ ~ ~ j ' l W w R ~ Q W V ~ UI~ ~ E e V f ° a 6" v ~ A4 W I a i v~ ¢3 Gs o ~ ~ ~ _ W~ c ~ w' o ~,~ U a~ 4 ~ ~ >~ ~ o ~ rs ~~ ~ w ~ ~ i w ~p ~"rrp»ww O ~ ~d~' I ~ aF ~ M ~ ° °aZ SI r~ r u Vi 'M U ~." S~iG 2 w ~ ~s4f' +"E ~ ¢ ~a .F'4 ~f &~3 ~~ Ew + °LL~ ~ I"S ~ z w~ v rW ~ w = ~ ~ Fi.F N `Ip C¢. , I ~o ~ ~ ~o. ~ d1 ~ 1 a ~o R~ ~Ce r+{ I o~ ~ a °~ ~ C73 =8 oy w ~ "z 7i '~P E^1. st < ~ ?•C .L9 SCS 1 oa * ° `r'E ri a - ~ ~ ry L71 0 ~ zi 41 ~' ~ ~ ~$ a rUr ~o ~ ~ 1 o z°o¢ E ~ .'S s{ - _ .d'.". tl~ 'i: SR I ~ oW °w_ 6 ~~ 33 S{ V C c wa ~ ~ ~ ~ tie` k4l po ~ o ~ ``"(. ~ 1 ~ a oe w z ~ ~ ¢ 1^L °I » ~ O ACT 1# ~ `I {3 y''Y ~«. m ~ w > Z ~ e'# ~ (Y ~ 6 cwi h- .~.! Cf ffi ~ ~ I ~ ~tsf tdt +~~}f a ~ e m ~ d ~ h ~ W "y : d j ~ cwi ~ w iii"' ''~ (~ 'O ~5h ~ a `C95 'COh 2'C6 d LL5 'IOh 2'~6 d ~ ~ hL5 'IOh 2`C6 d (. ! CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE PLANNING DIVISION STAFF REPORT TO: Planning Commission DATE OF MEETING: January 18, 1996 DATE PREPARED,,: January 1Q 7996 -- CASE NO. & NAME: WZ-96-1 & MS-96-1/Bandimere CASE MANAGER:rMeredith Reckert ACTION REQUESTED: Rezoning from C-1 & A-1 to R-2A & 2-lot minor subdivision with variances LOCATION OF REQUEST: 4470 Lee Street NAME & ADDRESS OF APPLICANT(S): Benjamin Bandimere, 13831 West 54th Ave., Arvada 80002 NAME & ADDRESS OF OWNER(S): Same ----------------------------------------- APPROXIMATE AREA: .4 acre PRESENT ZONING: C-1 and A-1 PRESENT LAND USE: Vacant SURROUNDING ZONING: N: A-1, C-1; S E: A-1; W: PRD SURROUNDING LAND USE: N: low density res.; iE: vacant; W: multi-family COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR THE AREA: Commercial Activity Center ---------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------ ATE PUBLISHED: January 4, 1996 DATE POSTED: January 4, 1996 DATED LEGAL NOTICES SENT: January 3, 1996 AGENCY CHECKLIST: (XX) ATTACHED ()NOT REQUIRED RELATED CORRESPONDENCE: (XX) NONE ------ --------------------------------------------- -- - ----- - TER INTO REGORD• _ _ ., (XX) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN (XX) CASE FILE & PACKET MATERIALS ( XX) ZONING ORDINANCE ()SLIDES ( XX) SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS (XX) EXHIBITS ( )OTHER RISDICTION: _ _ .. The property is within the City of Wheat Ridge, and all notification and posting requirements have been met, therefore, there is jurisdiction to hear this case. i Planning Division Staff Report Case No. WZ-96-1Bandimere I. REQUEST _ Page 2 This application is a three-fold request for property located at 4470 Lee Street. All three requests are included in this report, however separate motions are required. The requests are: 1. A rezoning from AgricuRural-One and Commercial-One to Residential-Two A; 2. A two-lot minor subdivision plat with variances; and 3. Lot area and lot width variances. Staff would note this case was published as a rezoning from A-1 to R-2A. After further study of the zoning maps, it was determined that there is a small piece of C-1 at the very northeast corner. Staff believes that Planning Commission has jurisdiction in this case but it will have to be corrected prior to the City Council public hearing. II. AGENCY REFERRALS Valley Water will require water taps and service line extensions. Public Works will require a drainage report. If the developer constructs curb, gutter and sidewalk, construction drawings will be required. Adequate right-of-way is in place. Arvada Fire District may require hydrant installation. All agencies can serve the property with certain improvements. III. NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING„ _ _ , _ A meeting for neighborhood input was held on February 7, 1995. The following persons were in attendance: Benjamin Bandimere (applicant) Meredith Reckert (Staff) Opal Keeney, Ptarmigan Condos, #3-105 Elaine Pepper, Ptarmigan Condos, #7-101 Erma Reckard, Ptarmigan Condos, #8-105 Richard Jennings, Ptarmigan Condos, #8-102 John W. Frost, Ptarmigan Condos, #2-104 Robert Ulrich, Ptarmigan Condos, #8-206 The majority of the concerns voiced was in regard to the amount of traffic generated and the fear that it would create an impact on the condos by people using their parking and cut-through traffic. There is no parking for Fruitdale Park and no turn-around where Lee Street dead-ends. It was also indicated that it would be nice to have the property developed because it has been unmaintained in the past. 1V. REZONING If the following request is denied, the subdivision plat cannot be acted upon. CRITERIA FOR REZONING REQUESTS i In accordance with Wheat Ridge Code of Laws, Sec. 26-6(C.), before a change of zone is approved, the applican4 shall show and City Council shall find: • Planning Division Staff Report Case fVo. WZ-96-y/Bandimere Page 3 7. 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 Ilse plan and other related policies or plans for the area. The Comprehensive Plan designates this property as Commercial Activity Center within the Kipling Activity Center. Commercial Activity Center is defined in the plan as "a planned activity center for all oommercizl uses but primarily for shopping goods and medium to high residential development in or on the fringes of the center." The ~pling Activity Center designates the entire northwest quadrant of Kipling and West 44th Avenue as retaiUoffice. See attached Exhibit''A'. When the Kipling Activity Center master plan was created, it envisioned this quadrant, including some of the church property, being amassed and redeveloped into a unified commercial center. Staff questions whether this concept is still viable. Because Lee Street is substandard in width and dead-ends to the north, Staff would not support any type of commercial zoning with Lee Street for its° only frontage and access. The proposed development with two duplex sites would result in a density of 9.7 units per acre. A scenario showing one duplex and one single-family lot would result in a density of 7.3 units per acre. The Comprehensive Plan defines medium density residential as having seven to 13 units per acre. Therefore, Staff concludes that the proposed mid-density zoning (R-2A) is consistent with the Commercial Activity Center designation. The Kipling Activity Center master plan requires a site plan accompany rezoning request. Staff concludes that the proposed plat document, if building footprints are shown and building elevations included under Exhibit 'B' fulfill this requirement. Building envelopes will have to be added to the plat. 2. 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. Zoning and adjacent land use surrounding the area include a planned residential development known as the Ptarmigan Condominiums to the west. Vacant, A-1 zoned property is to the southeast and low-density residential development is to the north with A-1 and C-1 zoning. Staff concludes that he proposal would not be inconsistent with surrounding land use and zoning. 3. That there will be social, recreational, physical and/or economic benefits to the community derived by the change off zone. This land has historically been a "nuisance" property for the City and adjacent property owners due to tall weeds and junk. Therefore, development of this property would constitute a social benefit. Increased property taxes would ben an economic benefit. 4. 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. There is adequate infrastructure to serve the property with certain improvements. 5. That the proposed rezoning will not adversely affect public health, safety or welfare by creating excessive traffic congestion, create drainage problems, or seriously reduce light and air to adjacent properties. Planning Division Staff Report Case No. WZ-96-1Bandimere Page 4 Developmen4 on this property should not reduce the amount of light and air due to restrictions in the R-2A zone regulations. (e.g., 35 feet height limitation) A drainage plan will be required with construction. There has been concern addressed by adjacent residents in regard to traffic generated and lack of parking. Lee Street is currently substandard in width except where the current owner dedicated right-of-way to the City across his frontage. No on-stree4 parking is allowed due to the narrow width. Staff recommends the applicant build typical public improvements including additional pavement width and curb, gutter and sidewalk to serve as over-flow parking for the new residences created. 6. That the property cannot reasonably be developed under the existing zoning conditions. The property is currently a substandard A-1 lot. With the cunent zoning, asingle-family dwelling could be built upon it. The owner was issued a building permit for asingle-family residence in early 1995. Work was started but not completed in hopes of rezoning to allow additional unfts. 7. Shat the rezoning will not create an isolated or spot zone district unrelated to adjacent or nearby areas. Spot zoning is not an issue as there are other residentially-zoned properties in the area. 8. That there is a void in an area or community need tha4 the change of zone will fill by providing for necessary services, products or facilities especially appropriate a4 the location, considering available alternatives. It is impossible for Staff to ascertain whether this rezoning and subsequent development will fill a void in the housing market. Based on conformance with-the Comprehensive Plan and compatibility with adjacent zoning and land use, Staff concludes that the criteria support approval of this request. V. SUBDIVISION DESIGNNARIANCES The applicant has proposed a subdivision showing two lots with the intention of building a duplex on each lot. Lot 1 has an area of 8606.95 square feet with 21 feet of lot width. Lot 2 coniains 8370.85 square feet with 103 feet of lot width. The R-2A zone district regulations require 9000 square feet of area with 75 feet of lot frontage for duplex construction- For asingle-family residence only 7500 square feet of lot area with 60 fee4 of lot width is required. Based on the information provided, Lot 1 is substandard both in area and width for a duplex. Lot 2 is substandard in area for a duplex. Variances are required for both lots. Variances must be considered separately from the other cases and requires agreater-than-majority vote based upon Wheat Ridge Code of Laws Section 253(s). and Section 266(D)(2). Staff has the following comments regarding the criteria used to evaluate a variance: Can the property in question yield a reasonable return in use, service or income if permitted to be used only under the conditions allowed by regulation for the district in which it is located? Planning Division Staff Report Case No. WZ-96-1/Bandimere Page 5 Staff cancludes that the property could still be developed as. R-2A land 'rf the variances aren't granted. By adjusting the common property to the south, asingle-family residence could be built on Lot 1 and a duplex on Lot 2. 2. Is the plight of the owner due to unique circumstances? The variances are requested for speculation purposes. Although the property is irregularly shaped, it does not constitute a hardship. 3. If the variation was granted, would it alter the essential character of the locality? If the variances are granted, it would not alter the character of the area. 4. Would the particular physical surrounding, shape or topographical condition of the specific property involved result in a particular hardship (upon the owner) as distinguished from a mere inconvenience, if the strict letter of the regulation§ were carried out? The property is irregularly shaped but it has no bearing on the nature of the variances being requested. 5. Would the conditions upon which the petition for a variation is based be applicable, generally, to the other property within the same coning classification? A precedent could be established for speculative variance requests. 6. Is the purpose of the variation based exclusively upon a desire to make money out of the property? These requests are purely economically motivated_ 7. Has the alleged difficulty or hardship been created by any person presently having an interest in 4he property? The hardship is self-imposed. $. Would the granting of the variations be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other property or improvements in the neighborhood in which the property is located? Granting of the variances would not be detrimental io the public welfare'or injurious to other properties or improvements in the neighborhood. 9- Would the proposed variation impair the adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property or substantially increase the congestion in the public streets or increase the danger of fire or endanger the public safety or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood? Approval of the variances would result in an increase in the traffic generated by the new development. If three units are built, roughly 30 vehicle trips per day would be generated. This figure increases to 40 trips per day with the additional unit. • . Planning Division Staff Report Case No. WZ-96-1/Bandimere Page 6 Staff concludes that the variance criteria does not support approval of this request and gives a recommendation of Denial. We would recommend approval if the plat is redesigned to accommodate one single-family and one duplex. Aside from 4he variance issue, all requirements of the Subdivision Regulations have been met. VI. STAFF CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Staff concludes that the criteria used to evaluate a zone change support approval of the rezoning to R-2A. However, the variance criteria do not support approval of the variances as there is no hardship or unique circumstances and since they are economic in nature. For these reasons, we recommend the variances be denied and the plat be redesigned to have one R-2A single-family lot and one R-2A duplex lot. RECOMMENDED MOTIONS• REZONING OPTION A: "I move that the request for rezoning from C-1 and A-1 to R-2A for property located at 4470 Lee Street, be approved for the following reasons: 1. The request is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. 2. In general, the evaluation criteria support of the request." OPTION B: "I move that the request for rezoning from C-1 and A-1 to R-2A for property located at 4470 Lee Street, be denied for the following reasons: 1. 2. 3. - - VARIANCE OPTION A: "I move that the request for lot area and lot width variances associated with a proposed minor subdivision be denied for the following reason: 1. The variance evaluation criteria do not support approval." OPTION B: "I move Yhat the request for lot area and lot width variances associated with a proposed minor subdivision be approved for the following reasons: t. z. 3. " SUBDIVISION OPTION A: "I move that the request for approval of a 2-lot minor subdivision for property located at_4470 Lee Street be approved for the following reason: ~ ! Planning Division Staff Report Page 7 Case No. WZ-96-1/Bandimere All requirements of the Subdivision Regulations have been met. With the following condition: The plat be redesigned to allow for one R-2A single-family lot and one R-2A duplex lot." OPTION B: "I move that the reques4 for approval of a 2-lot minor subdivision with variances for property located at 4470 Lee Street be approved for the following reasons: 7. 2. 3. " Case No. WZ-96-1/MS-96-1 AGENCY REFERRALS SUMMARY Fire: (Arvada) Can serve. Schools: Water: (Valley) Water taps and service lines need to be installed. Sewer: (Clear Creek) No response. U S West: No response. Public Service Company: Can serve. State Land Use Commission (over 5 acres): State Geologist: State Highway: Jefferson County: (Health, Commissioners, Planning) Adjacent City: TCI: No response. CITY DEPARTMENTS Public Works: Will require a drainage report. Will require either a development agreement or construction of public improvements. Parks and Recreation: Will require $75 per unit. Police: Building Inspection: No problems. agrefsum.frm __ RECEPTION NO. FOO10"" 5.00 0001-001 742 P.ECORDED IN RSON COUNTY, COLORADO ~ 1/30/95 11:45 i V/ /r' o1=Fici~l~ ZONING M~i~ WHE,~T Izl DGE GOLOR~°cD0 MAP ADOPTED: June IS, 1994 Last Revisim: Dezember ?2, 1994 ®AREA REQUIRING SITE PLAN APPROVAL ~- ., r,•.- i 100-YEAR FLOOD PLAIN i__i (APPROXIMATE LOCATION) ZONE DISTRICT SOUNDRY --- PARGEL/LOT BCJNDRY !DESIGNATES OWNERSHIP) _._._._ WATER FEATURE DENOTES MLLTIPLE ,4DDRESSES N~ 21 ,~ ~~ o e m®+w suLe P.400 DEPhRTt87T OF R.AMtlNS NO ~EYH.ORBtf - 85-2652 _ f AL /~ :~ w i ~~s~ 5 t y4a ~ U~S_~~ li ~ _-~_ • NEWGATE IN 'WHEAT RIDGE .. FIGURE 3 WHE ~ ~ ---_ s- Clty of Whaat Rid4e, Color¢do ~X-Z~ NORTH Dopartm¢nt of Community Development NU t~'KCJ.1Ct~ r ~KCH ~''~" FUTURE LAUD ~ MAP C .'r.~..l.~ :y': _ MASTER PLAN ASE NO. WZ-96-1 EXHIBIT 'A' CASE NO. WZ-96-1 EXHIBIT 'B' of - For a Fifty Foot Wide Lot No. 91324 This 3S foot wide contemporary two-story duplex will fit aS0-foot wide lot, and with [he broken roof lines, not appear crowded. With a little aver 900 square feet in cach unit, this t>$ECTf e bedroom plan packs a great amount of living in such a small foot prin. The entry boasts atwo- story ceiling, cmadng a spacious open feeling. Oft the entry is a larger than usual storage room. Note the stacked and back-to-back plumbing, a cost-saving feature for the builder. No materials list available for this plan. First floor - 432 s fr ,' / ~'. h , ~. BEORM 10/0x70/B ' UPPER FL0.. /\ __ ~.:"PATIO:':': I __ taos/o;': _^- ~~ FiflEV GINING RM 810:810 ' w~ LIVING RM '~ .~Z® r-.~ 11/0x16/0 ' MAIN flR. q~ ~ BEORM GARAGE Second floor-494 sq. ft. - ~ twe><tve ~ toa.uve _ __ Total living area - 926 sq. ft. No. 97324 ~~''~ No materials iist available na - RECEPTION NO. 94046061 ~, RECORDED IN COUNTY OF 6.41 JEFFERSON STATE OF COLORADO ~4ARRP.NTY DEED ~0 ~OI u o- t Y c' c, THIS DEED, Made Chia day of Match 9, 1994, between TERARD L. FREE AND PATTI L. FREE of Ch¢ County of JEFFERSON and State of COLORADO, q ra nto r, antl BENJAMIN C. BANDIMERE whose legal adtlccas is 13831 W. 54TH AVENVf., ARVADA, COL^: J,D0E0002 of [he Cou n[y of JEFFERSON and State of COLORADO , grantee: 3/]0/94 11:30 XIINESSETN, [ha; ;he grantor, for and in consideration of [he svv of 514,100 OOLIAAS, the receipt and sufficiency a[ which is hereby acknowledged, has granted, borgain¢d, sold and corvey<d, and by these p: ese.^.a does gray.:, bargain, sell, convey and confirm un:a the grantee, their heirr and assigns forever, al] [he real property, together vi;h improvements, if any, situate, lying and being in the Couniy of JEFFERSON and Stave of Colorado, described as :OIlaVS: A TRACT OF LAND IN THE NORTHEAST QDARTER OP SECTION TWENTY-ONE, TOHNSHIP THR86 SOUTH, RAttCE SIXTI-NZRE WEST OF THE 6TH P, M. IN JEFFERSON COUNTY, STATE OF COLORADO, MORB PARTICOLARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT THAT IS 1529.75 PEST SOUTH AND 457 FEET HEST FROM THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION TWENTY-ONEr THENCE WEST 215 FEET] THENCE SOVTH 193 FEEis THENCE NORTHEASTERLY 299 FEET, MU.^L OR LEBS TO POINT OP BEOINNINO, COVNTy OF JEFFERSON, STAT3 OP COLORADO. C T also known as street and number VAr;AtfT LAND 84TH c LF,E, WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO 80033 TO„^r.7FGR vi;b ail and si rqu lar the heredita:er-s and appurtenancaa therecn[o h¢IOngi nq, ex Sn anyvi se apper;a ining sad the r¢ve: xiaa antl revea fors, re+a finder and re eindcrs, rents, issues and prof [ts Lhereo f, and all the estate, rlgh;, ;(;:e, in:ere Y., :Ia in and le-a-d what saver o! ;he said gran: o:, either in Iav at equ i; y, o!, in antl to ;he aMvc bar ga;ced pt c:i:es, v !; ;.`.e .he: ed i:a:er.:z sad appu;enanc¢s. :0 PAYE Ai: ;0 R01;, ;he said pr ea ses shove Wrgained and dem:ibed, v:;h the apµ rteranas, unto :he said 9r,nt va, ;heir heir; and assigns !a rover. Ara :Ae said granter, far hivse l!, his Eei rs, antl persowl represent a:ives, ~"= =° s:pan:, qra~.:, Wrga to and agree co and with the gran:ee, ;heir h¢i rs antl assigns, char ai the tirx of :he ':q and de:ivery o! these p: esent s, is well seized at the prenises above conveyed, has good, sure, Pe; Eec:, usu:c;s acd indefeasible eswta of iMeritana, in law, in tee simple, and has good righ:, full power and lavNl .;h.:i:y ;o grant, ba rqa i n, sell aM convey the Game In manner and form aforesaid, and that the save are free and ea: from all forner and other grants, bnrgaim, roles, lieu, taxes, assessments, entvvbranas and restrictions aF vhataar kind or nature aoevet, E%CEPI FOR 1A%E9 FOR if6 COAPENT YEAR, A LIEN BUS NM YES q0E CR PAYABLE, EASE+EMFS, PES:P:CTIONS, COYc'NARiS AND PIGHIS-OF-RAY OF RECCAO, IF ANY, the gractot shell and will RAPAALT AND FOREVER RRENp the above-bargainetl prnlses in :he qa let and peaceable possession of [he grantee his heirs and assigns, against all and ev¢ry Person or persons lawfully cla lminq the Vhale or any par: thereof, the singular number shall include the plural, the plural the singular, and the cse of any gender shall 6e aFplicable to ail genders. IN RI TSE55 WP2REOF, the grans-ar has exewted this deed an the da• set forth show TERMN L. FREE ... ...... ____ PA~ REE _ 'S~ ELATE Ci COLORADO !ss. COq`,TY G- .cFfT_REON , the foregoing !rsvuven; vas ackccv:edgctl te!ore rw! ;h L• day of :ar-~ 9, :99{ *_y T'eRATp L. FREE ANO PAT:: _. FRm EY Co.:rissian expir±s: try :<, :99< 4:,cecs my hantl and o!!icial aw:. •\ . tto;ary Public: L:XJA :. N° EY 932A Rev. 7-B{ bU (Pho;ograFhic Record) Casef P-168{1 ~ ~' OOC FEE 51.{1 - - PUBLIC HEARING SPEAKERS' LIST CASE NO: WZ-96-1. GATE: January 78, 1996 REQUEST: An application by Benjamin Bandimere for approval of a rezoning from A-7 to R-2A for property located at 4470 Lee Street. PUBLIC HEARING SPEAKERS' LIST CASE NO: MS-96-1 DATE: January 18, 1996 REQUEST: An applicatiori by Benjamin Bandirnere for approval of a two-lot minor subdivision with variances for property located at 4470 Lee Street. ~ ~ Planning Commission Minutes Page 2 January 18, 1996 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 4. APPROVE THE ORDER OF THE AGENDA Commissioner ECRHARDT moved to approve the agenda for the meeting of January 18, 1996 as printed. Commissioner WILLIAMS seconded the motion. Motion carried 5-0. 5. APPROVAL OF MIN[TTES The minutes for the meeting of January 11, 1996 will be available at the February 1, 1996 meeting. 6. PUBLIC FORUM (This is the time for anyone to speak on any subject not appearing under Item 7 of -the Public Hearing section of the agenda.) No one had signed the roster, nor came forward at that time to speak. 7. PIIBLIC HEARING 1. base No WZ 6 1 ...An application_by Benjamin Bandimere for approval of a rezoning from A-1 to R-2A for property located at 4470 Lee Street. 2. Case No. MS-96-1•__ An application by Benjamin Bandimere for approval of a two-lot minor subdivision with variances for property located at 4470 Lee Street. Mr. Gidley presented the staff report, which included both Case No. WZ-96-1 and MS-96-1. Entered into the record and accepted by the Chairperson were the Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Ordinance, Subdivision Regulations, case file, packet materials and exhibits. Commissioner RASPLICKA asked if the parcel was large enough to accommodate a triplex. Mr. Gidley stated that if the parcel was not subdivided, 12,500 square feet would be needed and the parcel is large enough. Commissioner RASPLICItA asked if it was necessary that the utility easement be located through the center of the parcel- Mr. Gidley stated that the Subdivision Regulations require that there are five-foot side and rear lot easements. -If the parcel was not subdivided, the easement through the middle of the property would not be necessary. Planning Commission Minutes January 18, 1996 Page 3 Mr. Gidley reminded Commission that'three separate motions were required. The motion regarding the variance requires a greater- than-majority vote, or .four out of five members. Chairperson LANGDON asked if the variance should be voted on first. What happens if the variance is denied? Mr. Gidley explained that approval of the variance. to put a duplex on Lot 2, to 9,000 square feet a sip 1. If the parcel was not triplex on the property. the rezoning to R-2A could pass without The applicant would still be allowed and upon increasing the 'square footage igle-family home could be placed on Lot subdivided, the owner could put a Ben Bandimer 138.31 West 54th Avenue, Arvada, was sworn in. Mr. Bandimere stated he originally had planned to build two houses on the property, however, the appraisal done did not support his plan. He had also considered a four-plex, but decided two duplexes would work better.. Commissioner CERVENY asked if the property was large enough to support a four-plex. Mr. Gidley stated that a minimum of 4,000 square feet of land area is required for_each dwelling unit in multi-family buildings. The applicant has more than the 16,000 square feet required. Commissioner CERVENY asked if a four-plea would have advantages- over two duplexes, other than one meeting Subdivision Requirements and the other does not? Mr. Gidley stated that he felt that the four-plea structure would have a better relationship on the whole parcel, than two duplexes on two smaller lots. He explained that this was true because you have individual side lot requirements and also individual private property associated with the smaller lots. Commissioner CERVENY mentioned possible pros and cons of owner- occupied versus renter-occupied units. Mr. Gidley reminded Commissioner CERVENY that the same argument could be made for any R-2A zone district having a substandard lot situation. He reiterated that the variance criteria asked."How is this parcel different from any other R-2-zone district in the City?" He elaborated. Commissioner CERVENY asked if approving the variance might set a precedent for further actions? C Planning Commission Minutes January 18, 1996 Page 4 Mr. Gidley stated that when a subdivision is under deliberation, unless unusual/unique circumstances exist, staff will recommend compliance with recommendations, In this case, no unique/unusual circumstances were found. Commissioner CERVENY asked if the fact that a duplex would be allowed on the whole parcel, but that two duplexes would not be allowed on the subdivided lot, would be considered unique or -- unusual circumstances. He thought that the two duplexes might actually enhance the neighborhood. He elaborated. Ms. Reckert answered that there was quite a bit of vacant land left, especially in that area. reminded.-Commission that most variance requests are for individual lots and are referred to the Board of Adjustment. He elaborated. Mr. Gidley noted that because of numerous small, in-fill lots within the City, this type of request will not be unusual. He Commissioner CERVENY asked what Board of Adjustment would do, for example, if the parcel was already subdivided and requested such a variance. Mr. Gidley answered that they had denied and approved some such cases.- He-added that he did not know nor could he predict what the Board would do in the incidence Commissioner CERVENY mentioned. Ms. Reckert informed Commission that should the subdivision be approved, denial of the variance request would not preclude an applicant from applying for variance again in the future. Commissioner ECRHARDT suggested the possibility of attaching the units only at the corners. He explained. Mr. Gidley noted to Commission that the greatest possibility for ownership would exist if the variance request was denied. Commissioner ECKHARDT stated he was not concerned about ownership. Mr. Bandimere stated he had concerns about a four-plex being maintained. He noted that should duplexes be allowed, an owner could live in half, renting the other half and make sure that the units were maintained. Commissioner ECRHARDT suggested condominium ownership could be done. Planning Commission Minutes January 18, 1996 Page S Mr Bandimere noted that it was costly to set up condominium. ownership. Commissioner RASPLICKA asked if a four-plex was constructed, would the units have to be attached? Mr. Gidley answered yes. Chairperson LANGDON asked that Mr. Gidley further explain Mr. Bandimere's options should the variance not be granted, Mr. Gidley answered-that if the subdivision was approved but the variance denied, Mr. Bandimere or another applicant/owner would have the option of doing a consolidation plat and after one year has passed any owner can reapply for variance request. Chairperson LANGDON asked if that was only if the. lots were still unimproved. Mr. Gidley stated yes, that was correct. Commissioner ECKHARDT moved that the request for rezoning from C- 1 and A-1 to R-2A for-property located at 4470 Lee Street be Approved for the following reasons: 1. The request is compatible with the surrounding use; 2. It is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan; and 3. The evaluation criteria presented support the request. Commissioner RASPLICKA seconded the motion. Motion carried 5-0, Commissioner ECKHARDT moved that the request for lot area and lot width variances associated with a proposed minor subdivision be Denied for the following reason: 1. The variance evaluation criteria do not support approval. Commissioner RASPLICKA seconded the motion. Motion carried 4-1, with Commissioner CERVENY voting no. Commissioner ECKHARDT moved that the request for approval-of a two-lot minor subdivision for property located at 4470 Lee Street be approved for the following reason: 1. All requirements of the Subdivision Regulations have been met, With-.the following condition: 1. The plat be redesigned to allow for .one R-2A single-family lot and one R-2A duplex lot. Planning Commission Minutes Page 6 C January 18, 1996 Commissioner CERVENY seconded the motion. Commissioner CERVENY suggested that since the request for variance had been denied, perhaps the applicant would not care to subdivide the lot. Mr. Bandimese considered his options. Commissioner ECKHARDT asked if there was a possibility of purchasing additional land. Mr. Bandimerg answered that he had tried to purchase additional land, but had no success. He explained. Commissioner CERVENY stated that Commission was awaiting Mr. Bandimere's decision whether he wished to proceed with his subdivision request. Discussion followed. Commissioner ECRHARDT thought that if the subdivision was approved, but not recorded, it would make no difference. Mr. Gidley reminded those present that the case would go next to ~ City Council, who will make a decision on the zoning request. The applicant can appeal Planning Commission's decision on the subdivision and variance to City Council.. Discussion followed regarding various bptions for the applicant and procedures for same. Mr. Gidley went through the pros and cons for-the various options the applicant has, explaining them to the applicant. Mr. Bandimere decided to leave his request as is. Commissioner ECKHARDT's motion regarding the subdivision request carried, 5-0. 3. Case No. WZ-96-2• An application by Terry Runz for HJH; L.L.C., for approval of a final development plan and plat for PCD zoned property within the Town Center Master Plan area. Said property is located at 4010 Wadsworth Boulevard. Meredith Reckert presented the staff report. Entered and _ accepted intb the record by the Chairperson were the Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Ordinance, Subdivision Regulations, - case file, packet materials and slides. { CERTIFICATION OF RESOLUTION CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE PLANNING COMMISSION CASE N0: WZ-96-1 LOCATION: 4470 Lee Street APPLICANT(S) NAME: Benjamin Bandimere OWNER(S) NAME: Same as above. REQUEST: Approval of rezoning from C-1 and A-1 to R-2A APPROXIMATE AREA: .4 acre WHEREAS, the City of Wheat Ridge Planning Division has submitted a list of factors to be considered with the above request, and said list of factors is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, and made a part hereof; and WHEREAS, there was testimony received at a public hearing by the Planning Commission and such testimony provided additional facts. NOW, THEREFORE, based upon the facts presented and conclusions reached, it was moved by Commissioner ECKHARDT, seconded by Commissioner RASPLICRA, that Case No. WZ-96-1, an application by Benjamin Bandimere fox approval of a rezoning from C-1 and A-1 to R-2A for property located at 4470 Lee Street be Approved for the following reasons: 1. The request is 2. It is consiste 3. The evaluation VOTE: YES: N0: compatible with the surrounding use; Zt with the Comprehensive Plan; and criteria presented support the request. Eckhardt, Williams, Rasplicka, Cerveny and Langdon None. I, Sandia Wiggins, Secretary to the City of Wheat Ridge Planning Commission, do hereby and herewith certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by a 5 - 0 vote of the members present at their regular meeting held in the Council Chambers of the Municipal Building, Wheat Ridge, Colorado, on the 18th day of January, 1996. eorg an on, hai erson Sandra Wiggins, etary WHEAT RIDGE PLANNIN COMMISSION WHEAT RIDGE P G COMMISSION b:\wz961.res 1 CERTIFICATION OF RESOLUTION CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE PLANNING COMMISSION CASE NO: MS-96-1 LOCATION: 4470 Lee Street APPLICANT(S).NAME: Benjamin Bandimexe - OWNER(S) NAME: Same as above. REQUEST: Two-lot minor subdivision with variances APPROXIMATE AREA: .4 acre WHEREAS, the City of Wheat Ridge Planning Division has submitted a list of factors to be considered with the above request, and said list of factors_~ attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, and made a part hereof; and DECISION A - VARIANCES WHEREAS, there was testimony received at a public hearing by the Planning Commission-and such testimony provided additional facts. NOW, THEREFORE, based upon the facts presented and conclusions reached, it was moved by Commissioner ECKHARDT, seconded by Commissioner RASPLICKA, that the request for-lot area and lot width variances associated with a proposed minor subdivision for property located at 4470 Lee Street_be Denied for the-following reason: 1. The variance evaluation criteria do not support approval. VOTE: YES: Eckhardt, Williams, Rasplicka and Langdon N0: Cexveny I, Sandia Wiggins, Secretary to the City of Wheat Ridge Planning Commission, do hereby and herewith certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by a 4 - 1 vote of the members present at their xegular_meeting held in the Council Chambers of the Municipal Building, Wheat Ridge, Colorado, on the 18th day of January, 1996. DECISION B - SUBDIVISION NOW, THEREFORE, based upon the facts presented and conclusions reached, it.-was moved by Commissioner ECKHARDT, seconded by Commissioner CERVENY, that the request for a two-lot minor subdivision for property located at 4470 Lee Street be Approved for-the following reason: - -- 1. All requirements of the-Subdivision Regulations have been met. With the following condition: 1. The plat be redesigned to allow fox one R-2A single-family lot and one R-2A duplex lot.- Certificate of Resolution Page 2 Case No. MS-96-1/Bandimere 1 VOTE: YES: Eckhardt, Williams, Rasplicka, Langdon and Cexveny NO: None I, Sandra Wiggins, Secretary to~the City of Wheat Ridge Planning Commission, do hereby and herewith certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by a 5 - 0 vote of the members present at their regular meeting held in the Council Chambers of the Municipal Building, Wheat Ridge, Colorado, on the 18th day of January, 1996. ~_ orge ng n, air son Sandra Wiggins, c tary WHEAT RIDGE PLANNING COMMISSION WHEAT RIDGE PLANK COMMISSION b:\ms961.res NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING __. _ _ Notice is hereby given that a Public Hearing-is to be held before. the City of Wheat Ridge City Council on March 11, 1996 at 7:00 p.m. at 7500 West 29th Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado. All-interested citizens ar-e invited to speak at the Public Hearing or submit written comments. The following petition _ -- shall be heard: 1. Case No. MS-96-1: An application by Benjamin Bandimere for approval of a two-lot minor subdivision with variances for property located at 4470 Lee Street. Said property is legally described as follows: A tract of land in the Northeast quarter of Section 21, Township 3 south, Range 69 West of the 6th P.M. in Jefferson County,-State of Colorado, more particularly described as-follows: _ Beginning at a point that is 1529.75 feet-south and 447 feet West from the Northeast corner of said Section 21; thence .West 215 feet; thence South 193 feet; thence northeasterly 289 feet more or less to a Point o£ Beginning, County of Jefferson, State of Colorado, :as described in Reception Number 94046061 of the _ __ records of-Jefferson County, Colorado.^ Sandra Wiggins, S~ etary ATTEST: _ - ~/ Wanda Sang, City Clerk - To be-Published: February 22, 1996 _ Jefferson Sentinel c:\wp60Miles\31196.phn -500 WEST 29TH AVENUE -- - - - _ - - - - R.o.sox s3s The City of WHEAT RIDGE. CO 80034.Oc38 1303; 234-590^u wheat Clay Admin. Fax ~ 234-5924 °dlice Dept Fax ~ 235-2949 Ridge February 23, 1996 This is to inform you that Case No. W7.-96-1/MS-96-1 which is a request for approval of a rezoning from A-1 and C-1 to R-2A and -approval of a two-lot minor subdivision with variances for the construction of a duplex on property located at 4470 Lee Street will be heard by the Wheat Ridge City Council in the Council Chambers of the Municipal Complex, 7500 West 29th Avenue at T 00 p.m. , on nna,-pr i i ~ i aa~ All owners and/or their legal counsel of the parcel under consideration must be present at this hearing before the Council -- As an area resident or interested party, you have the right to attend this Public Hearing and/or submit written comments. It shall be the applicant's responsibility to notify any other persons whose presence is desired at this meeting. I£ you have any questions or desire to review any plans, please contact the Planning Division. Thank you. PLANNING DIVISION <pc>phnoticeform'' C, r,. ..r,..,. ,I Dear Adjacent Property Owner: If you have received this notice, you reside or own property adjacent to a property involved in a land use case being processed by the City of Wheat Ridge. This notice is intended to inform you of the process involved in land use development applications. Prior to application for rezoning or special use permit, the developer is responsible for holding an informal neighborhood meeting. The purpose of the meeting is to provide the opportunity for citizens to become .aware of a proposed development in their neighborhood and to allow the developer to respond to citizen concerns in the design of their project. All residents within 600 feet are required to be notified of the meeting. A staff planner will attend the meeting to discuss City policy and regulations and the process involved, however, the planner will remain impartial regarding viability of the project. Keep in mind that this is not a public hearing. Although a synopsis of the meeting will be entered as testimony, it is the public hearings in front of_Planning Commission and City Council where decisions are- rendered. If you want input in the decision- making process, it is imperative that you attend the public hearings. The public hearings you will be attending are quasi-judicial in nature. Please do not contact your Planning Commissioners or Council people to discuss the merits of a case prior to the public hearing. It could jeopardize your representatives' ability to hear the case. If you are an adjacent property, you may have the right to file a "legal protest" against the application. The result of this filing is that it requires a 3/4 majority of City Council to approve a request. If you have questions regarding any of the information given above, do not hesitate to contact a planner at the City offices by calling 235-2846. The Planning & Development Department is open Monday through Friday 8:30 a.m. through 5:00 p.m. <pc>adjpropowrier ,, .~ f ~.f~i 3; 2~~~ B a, tj ri i f ~ _ ,~ -_ >, WS rva l Z ~ \4 '~ ~i CA W PJ~ ~^ ~: J V _ m ~G ~ '~ ~6T ,) 0- m ~_ 2 N e ~~ )1J~ C ' - A .~:~ w c ,!^ =. ~. ~ ~, a ~ ~ ~ o F Q ' a w .--r . c li" ~~ u. O ~ ~ ~~ c~ ? yy~~ , 11~ ., ~ssaaaav Nai . _ i Ol 3dOl3AN3 d0 d01 L `_.~ ! f s o s t E w q O ~ W x~ ~ ~ S G 050 ~ ~ v ty ~~' '~ ~' ;S 4%3 ~ k" aB 0,£ .•4 b ~ ~l .~ C.) wr 5: +"J 4S ~ 2 +.N !St y1 ~~~ ~ Y .t i ~ :At~ ~f L*3 T~ ~ Y ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ yy !` (( f~ ~ q?3 ~~ ~ ^ ~ i+V SH f~! yR W 'ISE `C~h 2'C6 d •.cr~~ P' y ~ . bD ~: y~ .~ U xy rl ti t N N { +s... K m a ~ a m > ~ a _> o m w ~ 4 ~ ~ S oN °N'd~ ,..~ ~w Na my m ~ y O LL dA roa .3 Z~ y n S 'r- uv a d O N Q Q- 2l d ~ ~~ Q N c°i [) ^ ~ Z a F U "~ ~JJ '~ m ~ 0" (0 ~ ~ O~ N U > 3 _ O I ~ ~- J a°- ~ ~ o~ v ~ Qo E E ~ v ~ ~ s E o ~ age ~ ~E$ ~ yv~ r `= ~ ~°, 3£_'~ o ~sd L og_ ~ "~ y -a~~ $t G' M ... E 2~ ffi 4 C t ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ z: F9 0-1 ~~~ _`e~3 ~ +~ V ~ N tk ~~`° -Omv ~ ~ ri ~ Q F ~ €¢~ N I mm' t3~ D eRg. C3 y 1 .S'4~. 2`m~m V ~Vjji p~ m ~ wC4 cga ~Q tiF m¢ W vi... _°••~~oj iti o f ~ .,. ' l ~~ o~ ~ ~ - ~ of ~ K u e~ d a~ L€ ~ :u .., ~a ~ C} ~ C w ~¢ ~ ~ ~ ~% .e ~ LL ~_ ~ ~_ ~ ~ ~ ri ~w . ~ LL ~~ ~ ~ ~ . , w ~' ~" o - 8 ~ __ o o G i ~ r I ~ o ~ r y.{ w Al E 1 °4 !a} 0 ~ ~_ W W W W N , <n 66h 'C~h 2`C6 d CL r ~i W~ LL!!~ ~f W E U ~C a LL~ a W~ U ~{ ~ ---- - a w U °J W ~ m m ~ ~ Z ~` mN~ ~ ~ M1 m CC ~ ul '~ m ~ ' o S ~ : rl ~ a~Ni o ~" pN m ~T7 ~ I O ~- P~6m i E A W ~iU` N m ~-= U" y ~~. N o LL N~ a U i, N ¢ W a`~i _ 3 ~ a m °o- `m S 1- `~1l -a °.,! ^p 1a ~ ~ ~ o t~ ~i ~ .y ~ , ~ d J v ~ ~t¢`fa ~n '~ a2 ' ^ Ul .E ~ V ~ O ~ O ~ g A i .C ~( `g ° «~ ~ $~$ C ~ ~ ~ `~ .-t ~ °m` i I~ M .+i ~tiC ~ '_' c (~ _ " ~ ~~ ii" yy ' ~ aU a.~.~ ~ ~ ~ f i ~ i iJ C t«' =as o ~ e~ ~ ~ ~ ? ~ o~ '1 W pp I C = m m o m ° ~ ~ C .. a ~, U at i ~ p :.i ,.,r .. z ;k ~ q 7'°~~ ~ ~ ~ r ~ E ;,. ~ ~ ~ _ ~ a ~ `os" ~ ` ' ° G G H ` ~ ~~ r4 ~ o o ~ sa„ ~ 'sP ~ t9 ~ ..._ T ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ sb$ ~aLL O F ~f ~ ~ ~ a ~ CO .. o~ma h .~. a °' Q E ~ Ctj ~ Qi v~~ °~~ . E ° _ 8t9 ~ -. I o ~ ~ « ~ - 5 ~ o mmT fV O ~ ~' °4Y : m ~ ~ N t¢¢c`~ m O -_ ~. _ - _. _ _ _ _ m ... 9. • •~S vi ._.._ - I -__-1 - ~i-°i-s-...-__ _ _. _. .~ r r"-'1 ~{ =n ~~k !Tr n & ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ +a ~ xo i rd ~ tii f t V W `!~~ ~ ~ '«4 .~°i 'sf. ~ ~ G~t N ~ *+ A ~~ s - a~ ~ s e w a ; ~LL 0o ~~ w a ~ a w ~ a N 2 a0 E a O O ~ ~ _ ~ ~ W ~ ~ O LL ~ ¢ 6 U a w ~ ~ w e ¢ N 2L5 2Oh 2'I6 d p~ ¢ = w LL ~ - ~ a ~ ~w . 0o o a ~ ~ O ~ m ~ o W m f O ~ tt - U a www .! e w i --1~ -~<ri ~, SO K.° :d? 4 ,. .. ~ ~ ~ w ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ W .t} ` mO '• m ~! ~ ~ SX1 r-E cg O a a U 0 T E LP a 0 W LL w U 0 a_ W U w LhE `COh 2`C6 d E Ol 3d~ 0 0 i ig h~ ~> y~ p xo i Z\ V W ¢ N ¢ ¢ ~ i o= i s; w < 3o LL w 1 ~ ON F r I °a ~ O i ' ~ ~ 6 U j W >p W W W Q 6 N ~` Ntlfll3tl d0 f01 ltl U3H; l a 3 1 ' J: ~ i I ; C ~ 01 wl d ~~ N x ~. ~ ~ ~ a > ~~ j o S 1 4 ~~No Y m ~ o ~ ~ a vl y m ~ E .-a ~ W w m ti G`Ni ~ m O LL , ~ N D '3 ~ a `w °a .7 ~ .o m m~ c ~ N U .2 ~^ Z -~ w0 U > Y-V ~ ~ ~ J ~ ~n m a p ~ ~ ~ e ~ ~ Q .. o c ~ g F _ $~$~ ~ &~~ _~ ~~ ~ -~8 rn B~~ ~ o t~ 8~= Bi m s L~~ S ..a h 4° ® St .-. {+ .~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ > { V ~ .l t Vi ~ p O Soo y ~ ~~ r{ M ' Y ~ Q ~ N y e ag.3 -L&$- d Qj O W .. ~ N ip ~ ~~ a ~ r`I ~.~1 ".1.~ CS ~ a a _ y ¢$ n a ~ ~ m m v1 ~^9 AI I ~~C .~3=y ~L ®~ 4~ a Q ~t~Ji{ w+ ~ h 'G ' $ fw .. ~ ~ 3 ~ L s ~m¢$ _ ~ ~ ~. c z c4a ~~}S~m Q i m ll m.... o... a _..~. ~i _. ~ ~ ' LL~ i ^ V ' ~ ~~ O ~ \ l rt;s a r; wl c w ~ ~ m ~~ w Y ~~ G' +. Q~ ~ 3 re ~C ° w ~ ...,. x w ,~ ~-{ u ¢ ~ ~ o ?s ~1 d: d I z? : ~ r } ~ `s~ t1~ l+• Lr r ~ ~ ~ OD W U' I ~ O~ ~ O y y rN Zo w VI W ~ ! C a o p ~ ~ M Q tV ~ a~ I F ~ O t ~ d 7 U K ~ ~ W Q U W 2 W Vl hh( 9hE 40h 2'C6 d 1 --T•~^^"~. ~. 6hE W LL H W ~ U o O Q a (~ , m D e ~I m ¢ ~ w .~ N ~ a 2 "~ O a; rs C L"„ C `$, ~ ~ M ~ ~__ Cn so r c ~ ~ '?~ C. u Q :: ^ '- ~{ ~ Z ~ / l r ~ ~ ~ ` I M ~ w a m Q o £ in .' ~ o id a m` .~_ 3 ~ u ~~ -~~- vi 0~ W ~.~ WI v ~I O F~ rn a rn w ~ ~ a.1 w( w G! .,, ~ ~ F W ¢a Yf \i x P ~ per} U 3= G7 LJ "" ~ " ~ a j u 4 f, t v " ; ~ ~> . { ~~~ y y~ ~' 00 w ' ~ W U ~[V 4'I ~ QN W O ~ ~c a •^1 .Y~ ~ O o w '~'! .^4 43 ~CO7 « ~i '~ .{y ~ ~ ~ ~ O F W a I w w w . tt Q N . ~Oh 2'C6 d ff I a rd r• rv a ~: ~' `,7 t:tt ~' ~\ 1~ ~ w &i ... ~aM1f m J"{ 1' ]J vS fF !a 'J~ e~ ~ i~ ,l V N ian 05E `LOh 2'C6 d N 4 U CO M a ~C 0 w LL W U O LL H a w U W O ('7 0 a r' Y N ~~ ~ " ~~~~ l o ` T `p~~ ~ d y o w t ~ r~ z~n.~ y O 3'`~ y . ~ a S m K I o~.¢¢ ~ a L ~~'~^ o ~~ s..T'N~ `s off' I O ¢ .J ~ Q GGI~ 4 Y E ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 0 N ~ a Q ~ ~ a _W m W ~a w a m T ~ m U > m ~ ~ m U o ~ O y ~ J U ~ ~ ~ ¢ O =.8g~ a ~ m~~ ~ . ~ ~ ~, ~ M A ~~~ 82 i f ~Q'o ~ f r °ar ~ ~ ~ d ~ ~ ~ d gig #! ~ a .+ E~Q R ~ v ~~~ ~an .~: _`e ~~3 aS Ch .yE ^W l0 Ci i i ty~~ ~~&~ ~3g osa ° ~ ~ '~ N S c . m ~y p~ ~~C ,2¢c ' :~ 4S 'n ~ w ~z ~ffi~ = °a < ~ N k C m # a - ~ ry W °~ u ~D U ~ ~ t7e ~ w~~a ~,a~;~_~ Q v 41~~~P~~~B CJ IL ;, Q Or ~.. ~~ m `^~ s E U ~ ~ ~~ C '~' ri Q v i .-i ~ ~ Y v p m ~ y y i ~ ~ ¢ ~I i ~ I I ~ H Q w G~ ~ m ~ c - _- -_ in ~ E c6 a G 6 - ~ _~. f~q o ,ri - \ W ~ \ H ~ ~ a I +iir eet _ o i c+f G~ ° ~~ 4 ~ .J" C • OwC~ c Ga ~ .~ " A ~~ a a ~? ~ I Z~ ~ a 2 ~F N 2 ffi ~ (~} '^ ~ ~ ~ O ~ e g ¢ o oz '~i ~ e... ~ i u o t =LL ~ a o goo ~~o ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~. ~ ~w =~ ~ LL ~ ~ ~ ow w rya . f+. O °a u ~ ~ ~ o =~' 7 w ~ ^ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ U n W ~ a p W > f ~_ _=- 25E 'COh 2'C6 d C $i et ~+ y /' 4 r-F .-.. ~ i'l Y ~ 1 ~ '*4 "J+ N ~~ ~ x rtA W i a ° W ~ ~ ~ w t y ~ ~ m ~ ~ '2 7 i~ ~~ a ESE 'IOh 2'C6 d m rn Wr Li. U O LL a w U w r f: ~ ~ N tJ, ~ ~- ~ ~ ~'.NNL "' S > ~ 2F~> 0 U7 m m Q m i ~ M~ .~. o- ~°~ m a h w _.- E N °; ileac ~, o '3 i 'oCA~ n S p N ,_ N ~ w ~ m ~ flJ -'3 ~ ~ o- O ~a N ~ 2 Q 6 ~ F ~ 2 f ° . ~ jai E ~~ o m Y'y h ~~~ E a3 o _m H~a~ ~ a~~' ~~4 E~' ~~ Q Umu _C p~~~ ~q h a S E~D U 44 O Fi~6 ~(, Ya~ ~- ^ bS8 ~~~ ~~8j O ~rv~ 0'~.4 ~" W c¢ ~' m ~ A z`~~a o~p? :Si~~¢ 66~~ u~2gg ~_U 4 r i~~a`~aSFF~¢ m...3~..8 of ary_ NOD ~ i ~ a ~ >N a o ~~ ~ h O ~ > d J 02 D Q ~ r ~ !"r} ~ i*i c :a ° ~•,~ CS ~ W a N 'v q=, .Jr ~ ~ ~ « ~ .G ro l# YY ~ g N r ~ t ~~ ~ r T c+r .« ra an ° . C e~ °< ~ o ~ ~ "< :~ ~~ z ~ s= . , 00 ~ ~LL ~ r.+ ~ a ~a o ~ ~~ ~ ~ w ° ~ ~o ~ O z ° ''~ ~' i 1 D a v.°a ~ r ~ 'HX O y 3 f CO i r _t ~ j 0 ~ ~ ~ ~i ~ ~ U~ W ~ a ~~ 0 rn~ m N d m U N Q ^ T I r E m cd a ~'- W LL F W U O LL a w U w _ _ CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE PLANNING DIVISION STAFF REPORT TO: City Council DATE OF MEETING: March 11, 1996 DATE PREPARED: February 27, 1996 CASE NO. & NAME: WZ-96-1 & MS-96-1/Bandimere CASE MANAGER: Meredith Reckert ACTION REQUESTED: Rezoning from C-1 & A-1 to R-2A & 2-lot minor subdivision with variances LOCATION OF REQUEST: 4470 Lee Street NAME & ADDRESS OF APPLICANT(S): Benjamin Bandimere, 13831 West 54th Ave., Arvada 80002 NAME & ADDRESS OF OWNER(S): Same ----- APPROXIMATE AREA: .4 acre PRESENT ZONING: C-1 and A-1 PRESENT LAND USE: Vacant SURROUNDING ZONING: N: A-1, C-1; S E: A-1; W: PRD SURROUNDING LAND USE: N: low density res.; ~E_ vacant; W: multi-family COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR THE AREA: Commercial Activity Center DATE PUBLISHED: February 22, 1996 DATE POSTED: February 26, 1996 DATED LEGAL NOTICES SENT: February 23, 1996 AGENCY CHECKLIST: (XX) ATTACHED ()NOT REQUIRED RELATED CORRESPONDENCE: () (XX) NONE ENTER INTO RECORD: ~ , _ , . (XX) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN (XX) CASE FILE & PACKET MATERIALS ( XX) ZONING ORDINANCE ()SLIDES (XX) SUBDIVISION'REGULATIONS (XX) EXHIBITS ()OTHER JURISDICTION: _ ,.., _ _. ., The property is within the City of Wheat Ridge, and all notification and posting requirements have been met, therefore, there is jurisdiction to hear this case. Planning Division Staff Report Case No. WZ-96-1/Bandimere I. REQUEST Page 2 This application is a three-fgld request for property located at 4470 Lee Street. All three requests are included in this report, however separate motions are required. The requests are: 1. A rezoning from Agricultural-One and Commercial-One to Residential-Two A; 2. A two-lot minor subdivision plat ;and 3. Lot area and lot width variances. If the rezoning is not approved, then no action can be taken.on the subdivision. The plat cannot be approved. as presented if the variances are not approved. II. AGENCY REFERRALS Valley Water will require water taps and service line extensions. Public Works will require a drainage report. If the developer constructs curb, gutter and sidewalk, construction drawings will be required. Adequate right-of-way is in place. Arvada Fire District may require hydrant installation. All agencies can serve the property with certain improvements. III. NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING A meeting for neighborhood input was held on February 7, 1995. The following persons were in attendance: Benjamin Bandimere (applicant) Meredith Reckert (Staff) Opal Keeney, Ptarmigan Condos, #3-105 Elaine Pepper, Ptarmigan Condos, #7-101 Erma Reckard, Ptarmigan Condos, #8-105 Richard Jennings, Ptarmigan Condos, #8-102 John W. Frost, Ptarmigan Condos, #2-104 Robert Ulrich, Ptarmigan Condos, #8-206 The majority of the concerns voiced was in regard to the amount of traffic generated and the fear that it would create an impact on the condos by people using their parking and cut-through traffic. There is no parking for Fruitdale Park and no turn-around where Lee Street dead-ends. It was also indicated that it would be nice to have the property developed because it has been unmaintained in the past. IV. REZONING If the following request is denied, the subdivision plat cannot be acted upon CRITERIA FOR REZONING REQUESTS In accordance with Wheat Ridge Code of Laws, Sec. 26-6(C.), before a change of zone is approved, the applicant shall show and City Council shall find: 1. 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. Planning Division Staff Report Case No.,WZ-96-1/Bandimere Page 3 The Comprehensive Plan designates this property as Commercial Activity Center within the Kipling Activity Center. Commercial Activity Center is defined in the plan as "a planned activity center for all commercial uses but primarily for shopping goods and medium to high residential development in or on the fringes of the center." The Kipling Activity Center designates the entire northwest quadrant of Kipling and West 44th Avenue as retaiVoffice. See attached Exhibit 'A'. When the Kipling Activity Center master plan was created, it envisioned this quadrant, including some of the church property, being amassed and redeveloped into a unified commercial center. Because Lee Street is substandard in width and dead-ends to the north, Staff would not support any type of commercial zoning with Lee Street for its' only frontage and access. The proposed development with two duplex sites would result in a density of 9.7 units per acre. A scenario showing one duplex and one single-family lot would result in a density of 7.3 units per acre. The Comprehensive Plan defines medium density residential as having 7 to 13 units per acre. Therefore, Staff concludes that the proposed mid-density zoning (R-2A) is consistent with the Commercial Activity Center designation. The Kipling Activity Center master plan requires a site plan accompany rezoning request. Staff concludes that the proposed plat document and building elevations included under F~chibit'B' fulfill this requirement. 2. 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. Zoning and adjacent land use surrounding the area include a planned residential development known as the Ptarmigan Condominiums to the west. Vacant, A-1 zoned property is to the southeast and low-density residential development is to the north with A-1 and C-1 zoning. Staff concludes that the proposal would not be inconsistent with surrounding land use and zoning. 3. That there will be social, recreational, physical and/or economic benefits to the community derived by the change off zone. This land has historically been a "nuisance" property for the City and adjacent property owners due to tall weeds and junk. Therefore, development of this property would constitute a social benefit. Increased property taxes would be an economic benefit. 4. 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. There is adequate infrastructure to serve the property with certain improvements. 5. That the proposed rezoning will not adversely affect public health, safety or welfare by creating excessive traffic congestion, create drainage problems, or seriously reduce light and air to adjacent properties. Development on this property should not reduce the amount of light and air due to restrictions in the R-2A zone regulations. (e.g., 35 feet height limitation) A drainage plan will be required with construction. There has been concern addressed by adjacent residents in regard to traffic generated and lack of parking. Lee Street is currently substandard in width except where the current owner dedicated right-of-way to the City across his frontage. No on-street parking is allowed due to the narrow width. Staff recommends the applicant Planning Division Staff Report Page 4 Case No. WZ-96-1/Bandimere build typical public improvements including additional pavement width and curb, gutter and sidewalk to serve as over-flow parking for the new residences created. 6. That the property cannot reasonably be developed under the existing zoning conditions. The property is currently a substandard A-1 lot. With the current zoning, asingle-family dwelling could be built upon it. The owner was issued a building permit for asingle-family residence in early 1995. Work was started _ _ but not completed in hopes of rezoning to allow additional units. That the rezoning will not create an isolated or spot zone district unrelated to adjacent or nearby areas. Spot zoning is not an issue as there are other mid to high-density residentially-zoned properties in the area. 8. 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 this rezoning and subsequent development will fill a void in the housing market. Based on conformance with the Comprehensive Plan and compatibility with adjacent zoning and land use, Staff concludes that the criteria support approval of this rezoning request. V. SUBDIVISION DESIGNIVARIANCES _ __ _ ___ - _ The applicant has proposed a subdivision showing two lots with the intention of building a duplex on each lot. Lot 1 has an area of 8606.95 square feet with 71 feet of lot width. Lot 2 contains 8370.85 square feet with 103 feet of lot width. The R-2A zone district regulations require 9000 square feet of area with 75 feet of lot frontage for duplex construction. For asingle-family residence only 7500 square feet of lot area with 60 feet of lot width is required. Based on the information provided, Lot 1 is substandard both in area and width for a duplex. Lot 2 is substandard in area for a duplex. Variances are required for both lots. If the property were rezoned to R-2A, but not subdivided, it could accommodate afour-plex. Variances must be considered separately from the other cases and requires agreater-than-majority vote based upon Wheat Ridge Code of Laws Section 2-53(s). and Section 26-6(D)(2). Staff has the following comments regarding the criteria used to evaluate a variance: Can the property in question yield a reasonable return in use, service or income if permitted to be used only under the conditions allowed by regulation for the district in which R is located? Staff concludes that the property could still be developed as R-2A land if the variances aren't granted. By adjusting the common property to the south, asingle-family residence could be built on Lot 1 and a duplex on Lot 2. If the property is not subdivided, afour-plex could be constructed. 2. Is the plight of the owner due to unique circumstances? Planning Division Staff Report Case No. WZ-96-1/Bandimere Page 5 The variances are requested for speculation purposes. Although the property is irregularly shaped, it does not constitute a hardship. 3. If the variation was granted, would it alter the essential character of the locality? If the variances are granted, it would not alter the character of the area, as there is a variety of zoning, land use and lot sizes in this vicinity. 4• Would the particular physical surrounding, shape or topographical condition of the specific property involved result in a particular hardship (upon the owner) as distinguished from a mere inconvenience, if the strict letter of the regulations were carried out? The property is irregularly shaped but it has no bearing on the nature of the variances being requested. 5• Would the conditions upon which the petition for a variation is based be applicable, generally, to the other property within the same zoning classification? A precedent could be established for speculative variance requests. 6. Is the purpose of the variation based exclusively upon a desire to make money out of the property? These requests are purely economically motivated. 7. Has the alleged difficulty or hardship been created by any person presently having an interest in the property? The hardship is self-imposed. The owner has indicated that 'rf the property is approved for less than four units, it is not economically feasible to develop, based on the purchase price and cost of improvements (utilities) required. $• Would the granting of the variations be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other property or improvements in the neighborhood in which the property is located? Granting of the variances would not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other properties or improvements in the neighborhood. 9. Would the proposed variation impair the adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property or substantially increase the congestion in the public streets or increase the danger of fire or endanger the public safety or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood? Approval of the variances would result in an increase in the traffic generated by the new development. If three units are built, roughly 30 vehicle trips per day would be generated. This figure increases to 40 trips per day with the addtional unit. Construction of an additional unit would result in more building mass, but it should not significantly reduce the amount of light and air. As there is a mix of land uses in the area, (high density residential, single-family residential, quasi-public, commercial) three units versus four units should not affect property values. Planning Division Staff Report Case No. WZ-96-1/Bandimere Page 6 Staff concludes that the variance criteria does not support approval of this request and gives a recommendation of Denial. We would recommend approval if the plat is redesigned to accommodate one single-family and one duplex. Aside from the variance issue, all requirements of the Subdivision Regulations have been met. VI. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION Planning Commission held a public hearing on this case on January 11, 1996. In regard to the rezoning, a recommendation of Approval was given for the following reasons: 1. the request is compatible with the surrounding use; 2. It is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan; and 3. The evaluation criteria presented support the request. In regard to the variance, a recommendation of Denial was made for the following reason: 1. The variance evaluation criteria do not support approval. In regard 4o the subdivision, a recommendation of Approval was made for the following reason: 1. All requirements of the Subdivision Regulations have been met. With the following condition: 1. The plat be redesigned to allow for one R-2A single-family lot and one R-2A duplex lot. The applicant has not complied with the Planning Commission recommendation. VII. STAFF CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Staff concludes that the criteria used to evaluate a zone change support approval of the rezoning to R-2A. However, the variance criteria do not support approval of the variances as there is no hardship or unique circumstances and since they are economic in nature. For these reasons, we recommend the variances be denied and the plat be denied or be redesigned to have one R-2A single-family lot and one R-2A duplex lot. VIII. RECOMMENDED MOTIONS: REZONING OPTION A: "I move that Council Bill No. a request for rezoning from C-1 and A-1 to R-2A for property located at 4470 Lee Street, be approved for the following reasons: 1. The request is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. 2. In general, the evaluation criteria support of the request. 3. There have been no overriding protests registered by surrounding property owners." ~_ _ _ _ Planning Division Staff Report ~ Page 7 Case No. WZ-96-7/Bandimere OPTION B: "I move that Council Bill No. _ a request for rezoning from C-7 and A-1 to R-2A for property located at 4470 Lee Street, be denied for the following reasons: 1. 2. 3. " VARIANCE OPTION A: "I move that the request for lot area and lot width variances associated with a proposed minor subdivision be denied for the following reason: 1. The variance evaluation criteria do not support approval." OPTION B: "I move that the request for lot area and lot width variances associated with a proposed minor subdivision be approved for the following reasons: t. 2. 3. " SUBDIVISION OPTION A: "I move that the request for approval of a 2-lot minor subdivision with variances for property located at 4470 Lee Street be denied for the following reasons: 1. 2. -- 3. " OPTION B: "I move that the request for approval of a 2-lot minor subdivision for property located at 4470 Lee Street be approved for the following reason: 1. All requirements of the Subdivision Regulations have been met. With the following condition: 1. The plat be redesigned to allow for one R-2A single-family lot and one R-2A duplex lof." b:\wz961.sr nc~.cr i iwv IVU. #-UUl U//'~ ~~ ~-VU - ~~ UVV 1-VV1 742 P.ECORDED IN 1.~ :RSON COUNTY, COLORADO 1/30/95 11:45 i V/ § •~ 8 _ 8 - -: s ~ s - - - e - - ~_ s ~, G I I s a a a °s ~~ N Y OFFI GI f~L ZONING Mf~cP WH~P~T ~?I DGE GOLOR~DO MAP ADOPTED .wns I5, 1994 Last Revisim: Deumbrr 22, 1494 ® AREh REQUIRING SITE PLAN hPPROVAL -, t.-. ~ 100-YEAR FLOOD PLAIN i__~ (APPROXIMATE LOCATION) -- zorrE DlsrRlcr eouNDRr - PARGEL/LOT 80LNDRY mE51GNATES OWNERSHIP) -~-~-~- WATER FEhTURE • DENOTES MU..TIPLE hDDRESSEs N~ 21 e ,° °,$-a SALE r-a00 17BMTT8If OF PVJJiINS /JO DE4H1X'181T - Zfr]B52 _ _~ AL T-r~-~~'" CASE NO. WZ-96-1 ~^.'^~-:_"= FUTURE LAND~c MAP MASTER PLAN EXHIB-T'A' t;rtrn ~ ~ _ ~ -- _ • ! NEIYGATE IN WHEAT RIDGE 3 z J Q IX-21 Clly of Wheet Ridye, Colprpdo FIGURE 3 t__.~ NORTH Doperiment of Community DevetopmenC WHE' y ~`^'.J, .-.._~c For a Fifty Foot Wide Lot No. 91324 This 38-foot wide contemporary two-story duplex will tit a 50-foot tviazecloo a d~tt'With a broken roof lines, no[ uppe little over 900 square feel in each unit, this t~'f!<• bedroom plan packs a grca[ amount of living in such a smolt foot print- The entry boasts atwo- s[ory ceiling, crca[ing a spacious open feeling. '; Off the entry is a lazger than usual sromge room. Note the stacked and back-to-back plumbing, a cos[-saving feature far the builder, No materials list available Car this plan. Fast floor - 432 sq. ft. Second floor - 494 sq. ft. Total living area - 926 sq. ft. - ~ CASE NO. WZ-96-1 EXHIBIT '8' .F %' 7 ~ .' r-I , ? FJ 100x,0/6 ~ ~ '' UPPER BEDRM 10/8x71/6 ~- i = ~. ~' PATIO: ~„ 70!0x8/0 ~.: " FM DB toxBIOM ~o WING RM So 11fOx tafG 1 pro I Y® I MAIN fLR. _ ~ roa . ~y '_. No. 91324 No materials Gst available ------- l lo -_----------. ~ -.~ _ .. ,. _ GARAGE 7074x1978 __ - '' I ~~~ ~ r 0 Planning Commission Minutes January 1996 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 4, APPROVE THE ORDER OF TEE AGENDA Page 2 Commissioner ECKHARDT moved to approve the agenda.for the meeting of January ls, 1996 as printed— Commissioner VMLIAMS s., ec the motion. Motion carried -5 -O. 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The minutes. for the meeting of January 11, 1996 will be available ._ at the February 1, 1996 meeting. 6, PUBLIC FORUM (This is the time for anyone to speak on any subject not appearing under Item 7 of-the Public section,of the.agenda.) No one had signed the roster, nor came forward at that time to speak. 7, PUBLIC HEARING 1, Ca No WZ- 96 -1:_ An application by Benjamin Bandimere. r -- for approval of a rezoning from'A -1 to R -2A for property located at 4470 Lee Street.. 2, Case No MS -96 -1: . An application by Benjamin Ban" mere for approval of_a two -lot minor eubdivision,with _ variances for property located at 4470 Lee Street. Mr. Gidley presented the staff report, which included . both Case No. WZ -96 -1 and MS- 96 -1.. Entered into the record and accepted.by the Chairperson were the Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Ordinance, Subdivision Regulations, case file, packet materials.and exhibits. Commissioner RASPLICKA asked-if the parcel was large enough to accommodate a triplex. _ Mr. Gidley stated that if the parcel was not.subdivided, 12,500 square feet would.be needed and the parcel is large enough. commissioner_RASPLICKA asked if. it was necessary that the utility easement be located through the venter of the parcel. Mr. Gidley stated that the Subdivision Regulations_requirehat there are -five- foot.side� and rear lot easements. If the parcel was not subdivided, the easemerrit through the middle of the . property would not be necessary. 0 Planning Commission Minutes _ Page 3 January 18, 1996 Mr. Gidley reminded Commission that' three separate motions were required. The motion regarding the variance requires'a greater - than- majority vote, or four out of five members.. Chairperson LANGDON asked if the variance should be voted on first. What happens if the variance is denied ?. Mr. Gidley explained -that the rezoning to R -2A could pass without approval of the variance..:. The. applicant would still be allowed to put a duplex on Lot 2, and upon increasing the square footage to 9,000 square feet a single - family home could be placed on Lot 1. I£ the parcel was not subdivided, the owner could put a triplex on the property. Ben Bandimere 13831 West 54th Avenue, Arvada,. was sworn An. Mr.. Bandimere stated he originally had planned to build two houses on the property, however, the appraisal done did not support his plan. He had also considered a four -plea, but decided two... duplexes would work better_...,_ Commissioner;.CERVENY asked if the._property was large enough to support a four -plex. • Mr. Gidley stated that a minimum of 4,000 square feet of land area is required for each dwelling unit in multi - family buildings. The applicant has more. than the 15, 000 square -feet required. Commissioner CERVENY asked if a four -plex would have advantages over.two duplexes, other than one meeting Subdivision Requirements and the other does not? Mr. Gidley stated that he felt that the four- plex.structure would have a better relationship on the whole parcel, than two duplexes on two smaller lots. He explained that this was true because you have individual side lot requirements and also individual private. property associated with the smaller lots.:.. Commissioner CERVENY. mentioned possible pros and cons of owner- occupied versus renter - occupied units. Mr. Gidley reminded y R 2ASzonerdistrict h that havinga substandard dot could be made for. any situation...., He reiterated that the variance criteria asked "How cm a ny other.R - 2 zone district in the is this parcel different fr City ?° He elaborated. Commissioner CERVENY asked if approving the variance might set a precedent for further actions? r1 U Planning Commission Minutes Page 4 January 18, 1996 Mr. Gidley stated that when .a subdivision -is under deliberation, unless unusual /unique circumstances exist, staff will recommend compliance with- recommendations. In this case, no .unique /unusual circumstances were found. Commissioner CERVENY asked if the fact that a duplex would be allowed on the whole parcel, but that two duplexes would not be allowed on -the subdivided lot, would -be- considered unique or unusual circumstances. He thought that the,two duplexes might actually enhance the neighborhood. He-elaborated. Ms. Reckert answered that there was quite a bit of vacant land left, especially in that area. Mr. Gidley that because of. numerous small, in -fill lots within the City, this type.of request will not be.unusual. He reminded Commission that most variance requests are for individual lots and are referred to the Board of Adjustment. He elaborated. Commissioner CERVENY asked what Board of Adjustment would do, for example, if the parcel vas already subdivided and reques.ted.such a variance. • Mr. Gidley answered that they had denied. and approved some such cases: He added that he did not know nor could he predict what the Board would do in the incidence Commissioner CERVENY mentioned. Ms. Reckert informed Commission that should the subdivision be approved, denial of the variance request would not preclude an applicant from applying for variance again in -the future. Commissioner ECKHARDT suggested the possibility of. attaching the . units only at the corners. He explained. Mr. Gidley noted to Commission that_ the.greatest possibility for ownership would exist if the'variance request was denied. Commissioner ECKHARDT stated he was not concerned. about _ - ownership. Mr. Bandimere stated he had concerns about a four -plex being. maintained. He noted that should duplexes be allowed; an owner could live in half, renting. the. other half and make sure that the - units were maintained. Commissioner ECKHARDT suggested condominium ownership could be.. done. _ ... r 1 U Planning Commission Minutes Page 5 • January 18, 1996 Mr. Bandimerg noted that it was costly to set-up condominium. ownership. Commissioner RASPLICKA asked - if _a four -plex was constructed, would the units have to 'be. attached?, Mr. Gidley answered yes. Chairperson LANGDON asked that Mr. Gidley further explain Mr. Bandimere'.s options. should the variance not be granted. Mr. Gidley answered that if the subdivision was approved but._the variance -denied, Mr. Bandimere or another applicant /owner would have -the option of doing a - . consolidation plat and after one year has passed any owner can reapply for variance request. Chairperson_LANGDON asked if that was only if the.. lots were _still unimproved. Mr. Gidley stated yes, that was correct.. Commissioner ECKHARDT moved that the request for rezoning from C- 1 and A -1 to R -2A for property located at 447.0 Lee Street be; • Approved for the following reasons: %; - 1. The request is compatible_ with the surrounding.use; _ 2. It.is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan; arid. 3. The evaluation criteria presented support - the request. Commissioner RASPLICKA seconded the - motion. Motion carried. 5-0. Commissioner ECKHARDT moved that the request for lot area and lot. width variances associated with a. proposed minor subdivision be Denied for the.following reason: 1. The variance evaluation criteria do not support approval. Commissioner.RASPLICKA seconded the.motion. .- Motion. carried, 4-1, with Commissioner CERVENY voting no. Commissioner ECKHARDT moved that the request for approval of a two -lot minor subdivision for property located -at 4470 Lie- Street be approved,.for.the following reason: 1. All requirements.of the Subdivision Regulations have been met. With the following condition,:. _ 1. The plat be redesigned to -allow for one-P.-2A single - family lot and one:R -2A duplex lot. - Planning Commission minutes.. Page 6 • January 18, 1996. _ Commissioner_CERVENY seconded the motion. Commissioner.CERVENY suggested that since the request for. variance had been denied, perhaps the applicant would not.care to subdivide the . lot . , Mr. Bandimere considered his options. Commissioner EC4HARDT asked if there was .a possibility of purchasing additional land. Mr. Bandimere answered that he had tried to purchase additional land, but had no success,. He explained: _ . Commissioner CERVENY stated that Commission was awaiting Mr. Bandimere's decision whether he wished to proceed with his subdivision request. Discussion followed. Commissioner.ECKHARDT thought that if.the subdivision was approved, but not recorded, it would make no difference. . Mr. Gidley reminded those present that the case would go next to City Council., who will make a decision on the zoning request. ` The applicant can appeal_ Planning Commission's decision on the subdivision and variance -to City Council: Discussion followed regarding various options for applicant and - procedures - for same. Mr. Gidley went through the pros and cons for the various options the applicant has, explaining them to the applicant. Mr. Bandimere decided to leave his request as is. Commissioner ECKHARDT's motion regarding the subdivision request carried, 5-0. . __ 3. Case No, WZ -96 -2- An application by.Terry Kunz for HJH, L.L.C., for approval of a final development p1m and plat for PCD zoned property within the Town Center Master Plan area.: Said property is located at 4010 Wadsworth Boulevard. Meredith,Reckert presented the staff..report. .Entered.and .. ... accepted.into.the..record by the Chairperson we're. the Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Ordinance, Subdivision Regulations,. _ case file, packet materials and slides. 9 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: March 11, 1996 Page -4-~ Motion by Mrs. Worth to add an Agenda Item 8. -Appointments to the Richards-Hart Estate Advisory Committee; seconded by Mrs. Fields; carried 7-0. PUBLIC HEARINGS AND ORDINANCES ON SECOND READING - Item 1. Council Bil! 10 - An Ordinance providing for the approval of Rezoning from Agricultural-One and Commercial-One to Residential-Two-A District on land located at 4470 Lee Street, City of Wheat Ridge, County of Jefferson, State of Colorado. (Case Nos. WZ-96-1 and MS-96-1) (Bandimere) Council Bill 10 was introduced on second reading by Mrs. Worth; title read by the Clerk; Ordinance No. 1021 assigned. Ben Bandimere, applicant, was sworn in by the Mayor and presented his case. Glen Gidley was sworn in and gave the staff report. Lucille Knowlton was sworn in and asked for approval of the rezoning and the variance. Motion by Mrs. Worth that Council Bill 10 (Ordinance 1021), a request for rezoning from C-1 and A-1 to R-2A for property located at 4470 Lee Street, be approved for the following reasons: 1. The request is cdnsistent with the Comprehensive Plan. 2. In general, the evaluation criteria support the request. 3. There have been no_overriding protests registered by surrounding property owners; seconded by Mr. DiTullio; carried 7-0. Motion by Mrs. Worth that the request for approval of a 2-lot minor subdivision with variances for property located at 4470 Lee Street be approved for the following reasons: There has been no objection at the public hearing: -The variances be as described in subsection V of the staff report; seconded by Mr. Siler; failed 3-4 with Councilmembers Siler, Worth, and Eafanti voting yes. Motion by Mrs. Worth that_t_he request for approval of a 2-1ot_minor subdivision for property located at 4470 Lee Street be approved for the following reasons: All requirements of the subdivision regulations have been met with the following condition: The plat be redesigned to allow for one R-2A Single Family lot and one R-2A Duplex lot; seconded by Mr. DiTullio; carried 6-1 with Mr. Siler voting no. __ Item 2. Re-adoption of Ordinance-1016- An.Ordinance providing for the permitting and regulation of Bus Stop Shelters and Advertising Signage thereon. Gerald Dahl explained the change in Section 3., paragraph (2) take out the word "that" and insert if located within a residential zone district. ~.~ C2TY COUNCIL MINUTES: March 11, 1996 Page -5- Motion by Mrs. Fields for re-adoption of Ordinance 1016, with the revision to Section 21-151 as recommended by staff; seconded by Mr. Siler; carried 6-1 with Mr. DiTullio voting no. Mr. DiTullio feels we will be creating billboards all over the City; they are a magnet for graffiti. Item 3. Council Bill 11 - An Ordinance concerning solicitation on or near a street or highway. Council Bill 11 was introduced on second reading by Mrs. Fields; title read by the Clerk; Ordinance No. 1022 assigned. Motion by Mrs. Fields for approval of Council Bill 11; seconded by Mr. Eafanti; failed 3-4 with Councilmembers Eafanti, Siler, and Fields voting yes. DECISIONS, RESOLUTIONS, AND MOTIONS Item 4. Motion to approve an Agreement between the City of Wheat Ridge and Outdoor Promotions, LLC regarding Bus Stop Shelters. City Attorney, Gerald Dahl, explained that re-adopted Ordinance 1016 allowed bus shelters in Wheat Ridge and this item is an agreement to place bus stop shelters in the City. He suggested various amendments to the agreement. Bill Robinson, President of Outdoor Promotions, LLC was present and answered Council's questions. Motion by Mr. Siler for approval of the agreement between the City of Wheat Ridge and Outdoor Promotions regarding Bus Stop Shelters with the following corrections: Page 1, this agreement is made as of the 31st day of March, 1996. On Page 3, paragraph 4. g., 300 feet be changed to 100 feet. Page 6, paragraph 12. b., the last sentence be scratched. Page 6, paragraph 13. a. delete the word all and add words to the effect said RTD Bus Stops shall not be removed until Outdoor Promotions is ready to install their shelters. Motion was seconded by Mr. Eafanti; carried 6-1 with Mr. DiTullio voting no. Item 5. Motion to approve 1996 Outside Contributions. Motion by Mr. DiTullio that the $200 earmarked for Regional Air Quality Council be split in $50.00 increments and given to Volunteers of America, Senior Resource Center, Child Advocacy League and Wheat Ridge Art League; seconded by Mrs. Fields; failed 3-4 with Councilmembers DiTullio, Shaver, and Fields voting yes. Frank Stites spoke on behalf of the Wheat Ridge Art League and thanked Council for their support. .QUASI-JUDICIAL -1Y _ Yes No PUBLI C. HEARINGS CITY ADM. MATTERS _ ELEC. O_FFICIAL_S MATTERS - PROC,/CEREMONIES - =-CITY ATTY. MATTERS' x _ORDINANCES FOR 1ST READING BIDS/MOTIONS -- _ _LIQUOR. HEARINGS ORDSNANCES FOR 2ND READING____ _ INFORMATION ONLY PUBLIC COMMENT RESOLUTIONS AGENDA-ITEM TITLE: Case No. WZ-96-1/Bandimere- - SUMMARY/RECOMMENDATION: Consider a rezoning from Agricultural-One and Commercial-One to Residential Two-A for property .located at 4470_-Lee Street. - ATTACHMENTS: 1) Council Bill No. 2) 3) BUDGETED ~ ~ -- ITEM Yes No Fund Dept/Acct # Budgeted Amount S Requested Expend.S Requires-Transfer/ ~ ~ - Supp. Appropriation Yes No SUGGESTED MOTION: I move that Council Bill -be=approved on first reading, ordered published, public hearing be set for~Monday, March 11, 1996 at 7:00 p.m. in City Council Chambers, Municipal Bldg., and if approved os second reading take effect 15-days after final publication.. AGENDA ITEM RECAP r INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER Council Bill No. ORDINANCE NO. Series of 1996 TITLE: AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE APPROVAL OF REZONING FROM AGRICULTURAL-ONE AND COMMERCIAL-ONE TO RESIDENTIAL-TWO A DISTRICT ON LAND LOCATED AT 4470 LEE STREET, CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COUNTY OF JEFFERSON, STATE OF COLORADO. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO, THAT: Section 1. Upon application by Benjamin Bandimere for approval of a rezoning, in Wheat Ridge, Colorado, Case No. WZ-96-1 and based on recommendation for approval from the Wheat Ridge Planning Commission, and pursuant to findings made based on testimony and evidence presented at public hearing before the Wheat Ridge City Council, Wheat Ridge maps are hereby amended to exclude from the A-1 and C-1 zone district, and to include in the R-2A the following described land: A tract of land in the Northeast quarter of Section 21, Township 3 south, Range 69 West of the 6th P.M. in Jefferson County, State of Colorado, more particularly described as follows: Beginning at a point that is 1529.75 feet south and 447 feet West from the Northeast corner of said Section 2i; thence West 215 feet; thence South 193 feet; thence northeasterly 289 feet more or less to a Point of Beginning, County of Jefferson, State of Colorado, as described in Reception Number 94046061 of the records of Jefferson County, Colorado. Section 2. Vested Proaerty Rights Approval of this rezoning does not create a vested property right. Vested property rights may only arise and accrue pursuant to the provisions of Section 26(c) of Appendix A of the Code of Laws of the City of Wheat Ridge. Section 3. Safet Clause. The City Council hereby finds, determines, and declares that this ordinance is promulgated under the general police power of the City of Wheat Ridge, that it is promulgated for the health, safety, and welfare of the public and that this ordinance is necessary for the preservation of health and safety and for the protection of public convenience and welfare. The City Council further determines that the ordinance bears a rational relation to the proper legislative object sought to be attained. ~. __ Ordinance No. __ Page 2 Case No. WZ-96-1JBandimere Section 4. This ordinance shall take effect days after final publication. INTRODUCED, READ, AND ADOPTED on first reading by a vote of to , . on this _ day of , 1996, ordered published in full in a newspaper of general circulation in the City of Wheat Ridge and Public Hearing and consideration on final passage set for , 1996, at 7:00 o'clock p.m., in the Council Chambers, 7500 West 29th Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado. READ, ADOPTED AND ORDERED PUBLISHED on second and final reading by a vote of _ to_ .this day of , 1996. SIGNED by the Mayor on this _ day of ,.1996. DAN WILDE, MAYOR Wanda Sang, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM BY CITY ATTORNEY GERALD DAHL, CITY ATTORNEY 1st Publication: 2nd Publication: Wheat Ridge Sentinel Effective Date: c:~wp60~ord`wz961.ord -~ AGENDA-ITEM RECAP AGENDA ITEM Meeting Date - ~- ~ -- ~ QUASI-JUDICIAL X _ - Yes No - X PUBLIC HEARINGS CITY ADM. MATTERS ELEC. OFFICIALS MAmm~RS PROC./CEREMONIES CITY ATTY... MATTERS ORDINANCES FOR 1ST READING BIDS/MOTIONS - LIQUOR HEARINGS X ORDINANCES FOR 2ND READIti~ _ :INFORMATION ONLY PUBLIC COMMENT RESOLUTIONS - AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Case Nos. WZ-96-1 and MS-96-1/Bandimere SUMMARY/RECOMMENDATION: Consider a rezoning from a-1 and C-1 to R-2A with approval of a two-lot minor subdivision with variances. The subject property is located at 4470 Lee Street. ATTACHMENTS: 1) staff report, 2) 3) SUGGESTED MOTION: REZONING BUDGETED ~ -~ - ITEM Yes No Fund Dept/Acct # Budgeted Amount ~ Requested Expend.$ Requires Transfer/ Supp. Appropriation - Yes No "I move that Couhci-1 Bill No. a request for rezoning from C-1 and A-1 to R-2A for .property located at 4470 Lee Street,. be approved for the following reasons:__ 1. The request is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. 2. In general, the evaluation criteria support of the request. 3. There have been no overriding protests registered by surrounding property owners." VARIANCE "I move-that the request for lot area and lot width variances associated with a proposed minor-subdivision be denied for the following reason: 1. The variance evaluation criteria do not support approval." SUBDIVISION "I move that the .request for. approval of a 2-lot minor subdivision with variances for property located at-4470 i,ee Street be denied for the following reasons:- 1. 2. 3. -_ ~; INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER Worth Council Bill No. .10 ORDINANCE NO. ,~„ Series of 1996 TITLE: AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE APPROVAL OF REZONING FROM AGRICULTURAL-ONE AND COMMERCIAL-ONE TO RESIDENTIAL-TWO A DISTRICT ON LAND LOCATED AT 4470 LEE STREET, CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COUNTY OF JEFFERSON, STATE OF COLORADO. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO, THAT: Section 1. ,Upon application by Benjamin Bandimere for approval of a rezoning, in Wheat Ridge, Colorado, Case No_ WZ-96-1 and based on recommendation for approval from the Wheat Ridge Planning Commission, and pursuant to findings made based on testimony and evidence presented at public hearing before the Wheat Ridge City Council, Wheat Ridge maps are hereby amended_to exclude - from the A-1 and C-1 zone district, and to include in the R-2A the following described land: A tract of land in the Northeast quarter of Section 21, Township 3 south, Range 69 West of the 6th P.M. in Jefferson County, State of Colorado, more particularly described as follows: Beginning at a point that is 1529.75 feet south and 447 feet West from the Northeast corner of said Section 21; thence West 215 feet; thence South 193 feet; thence northeasterly 289 feet more or less to a Point of Beginning, County of Jefferson, State of Colorado, as described in Reception Number 94046061 of the records of Jefferson County, Colorado. Section 2. ,Vested Prooerty'R~hts Approval of this rezoning does not create a vested property right. Vested property rights may only arise and accrue pursuant to the provisions of Section 26(c) of Appendix A of the Code of Laws of the City of Wheat Ridge_ Section 3. Safety Clause The City Council hereby finds, determines, and declares that this ordinance is promulgated under the general police power of the City of Wheat Ridge, that it is promulgated for the health, safety, and welfare of the public and that this ordinance is necessary for the preservation of health and safety and for the protection of public convenience and welfare. The City Council further determines that the ordinance bears a rational relation to the proper legislative object sought to be attained. Ordinance No. 1021 Case No. WZ-96-1/Bandimere Page 2 Section 4._This ordinance shall take effect _j~_ days after final publication. INTRODUCED, READ, AND ADOPTED on first reading by a vote of ? to o_ on this 12th day of February ~ 1996, ordered published in full in a newspaper of general circulation in the City of Wheat Ridge and Public Hearing and consideration on final passage set for March 11, , 1996, at 7:00 o'clock p.m., in the Council Chambers, 7500 West 29th Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado. READ, ADOPTED AND ORDERED PUBLISHED on second and final reading by a vote of ? to 0 . this llchday of March ~ 1996 SIGNED by the Mayor on this 12ch day of March ~ igg6, w. ____ Wanda Sang, City Cler ~1~V,.-os~J _- _ DAN WlLDE, MAYOR APPROVED~AS;~O~PORM BY'CiTY~ATTORNEY ,- i : j %. GERALD DAHL, CITY ATTORNEY 1st Publication: February 22, 1996 2nd Publication: March 2t, 1996 Wheat Ridge Sentinel Effective Date: April 5, 1996 c:~wp6 O~ord~wz961.ord 750 WE T 29TH AVENUE WH( HT; IDGE. CO 80215-6797 City Admin. Fax k 234-5924 Fhe City of (303)234-5900 cWheat Police Dept. Fax # 235-2949 Ridge AFFIDAVIT OF PLAT CORRECTION Clerk & Recorder .: Jefferson County 1000 Jefferson County Pkwy., Suite 2530 Golden CO 80419 Subject• Bandimere-Minor Subdivision Dear Madam Clerk: Please be advised that the subject plat was recorded on June 4, 1996, at Book 14 and page 45, of the records of Jefferson County, Colorado. It is the intent of this affidavit to correct the dedicatory. language on the plat to delete "Marvel Minor Subdivision" and replace it with "Bandimere Minor Subdivision". Dan Wilde, Mayor Wan a Sang, City C State of Colorado ) SS County of Jefferson ) The foregoing .instrument was. acknowledged before me his day of ~('~Fit~ , _ 1996_._ My commission expires s ~ummissianExa%res,yfarch20, 2004 Notary ublic ~Sa~ ~' ~~~ ~~ Address Ca