Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
WS-92-1
J me ary o/ ADMINISTRATIVE PROCESS APPLICATION Wheat Rid a Department of Planning and Development g 7500 West 29th Ave.., Wheat Ridge, CO 80033 Phone (303) 237-6944 Applicant - a Address ) o ~7 0 / Ul u`s ~-n<~~1~.Phone ,~,'~, 3 j ~~ j Owner ~ /~ yr/ Address S/~ m ~ Phone S,S~hr e. Location of request p tr/ 30~~ ~ ve ~ a 33 Type of action requested (check one or more of the actions listed helow which pertain to your request.) Change o£ zone or zone conditions Variance/Waiver Site development plan approval 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 Subdi ision Street vacation Preliminary Miscellaneous plat Final Solid waste landfill/ [~ ** See attached procedural guide mineral extraction permit for specific requirements. ^ Other Detailed Description of request List. all persons-and companies who hold an interest in-the described real property, as owner, mortgagee, lessee, optionee, etc: NAME ADDRESS PHONE ~c1 n-, e.,s ~ ~i~ o W Yt „~.~ 3 -~ 7~-~y . 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 action cannot lawfully be accomplished. Applicants other than owners must submit power-of-attorney from the owner which approved o£ this action on his behalf. Signs ~ e ~ _, ica ;-~ Su~sseri't3e~','„and s o n to me 's ~ day o 19 -`~ o~~~~ ,'~~r Notary Public ' 'SEAli'°. ~~ ~,~ fJ. c;,eA`,:,* My commission expires ~~'~~'~'~ ,. Date Received ~- ("~-~JZ Receipt No. °1 ~GY~ Case No. ECORDED IN RecoNed as __o'ch___nn.,. ~--nOUNTY OF JEFFERSON Rereption Na: _.. _ _ STATE OF COLORADO _ RECEPTION NO. 89016837 I ~ ~ 02/27/89 1502 3.00 SPECIAL WARRANTY DEED THIS DEED, bfade rhis dar or February . IB 89 beswecn Martin W. Brown, of the ' County of Jef ferSOn ,Smm or Colorado, gmnmrtsl, and James H. Brown, .I whose legal address is 10701 West 32nd Ave., L~iheat Ridge, Colorado 80033, nnbe coanty nr Jefferson .same nr adnmdn, grantecor. )i WITNESSETIi, Thal the grunturlsL Rrt anJ in mnsidcrminn of the sum of Ten Dollars and other goon®s ~d I valuable consideration - - - - - - - thereceipandsu(ficiencyofuhicM1 ishemby ackmxeledpeJ,M1a S granted,bargained. soW andcnnveycJ, and by the>e pmscntsdoe5 Sranr, I bargain selh enmey and conlims, unto she Smnrcelsl, h15 heirs anJ assigns fomver, all the seal pmpeny. together wish improvemems, ~ cvamr nr Jefferson .stain orcolomeo, i( any, simme, lying and bcinE in the I described as rallows: I ~i The West one-half of the West one-half of the Southwest one-quarter I of the Northeast one-quarter (W1/2 W1/2 SW1/4 tdEl/4) of Section 28, Township 3 South, Range 69 West of the 6th P.M., EXCEPT the East 'I 16.5 feet thereof,__AND EXCEPT the North 150 feet thereof, AIdD ALSO EXCEPT the West 113.5 feet o£ the East 130 feet of 'the South 300 j feet of the North 450 feet thereof, AND FURTHER EXCEPT the West 1148.5 feet of the East 165 feet of the South 525 feet of the North 975 feet thereof. AND The East one-half (El/2) of Tract 17, BROOKSIDE SUBDIVISION, as filed in the records of Jefferson County, Colorado, EXCEPT the North 145 feet thereof, AND ALSO EXCEPT the South 5 feet of the North 150 feet of the East 54.7 feet of said Tract 17, AND FURTHER .~ EXCEPT the West 100 feet of the South 130 feet of the East one- I .'l half (E1/2) of said Tract 17. I I I (Consideration less than 5500.00; no Colorado documentary fee due.) i also known by strcH and number a: 10701 West 32nd Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80 f TOGETHER wills all and singular the hercditaments anJ appurtenances ~hercto belonging. or in anywise appertaining, and the reversion and i reversions, rcmaindcr and rcmainMr>, renu, ivucs anJ pmfils thereof anJ all the esmrc, right. aide, imercsl, claim and demand whatsoever of the f granmrls7, either in law or equity, ar. in and m the above bargained premises. wish ~hc hercJimmenn and nppunenances: M1cirs and TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the said premises above bargained anJ dcuribed with the nppunenances, umothe gmntre(sR ]115 assigns forever The gnntarlsl. for hlms<I f his hcinanJ perumul repmemasivesor wcceaors.do e5ewenam and aFrrerhat he shall andxill WARRANT ANDFOREVER DEFENDIM1e abose.bmgaineJ prcmi>n imhe yuiet unJ peaceable pmxssion of the Fransee(sk his heirsandassigns. against all andevery person or persons claiming the xhole or any pan shereo6 by. shmugh or under the gmnmr(s). IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the grantortsl ha 5 earevled sM1is deed on she da¢ set forth above. I (1 .1 ~. STATE OF COLORADO ' conntyof Jefferson The foregoing insWmem wu acknowledged before me this hr Martin W. Brown. ss. ' ~~aayorFebruary, u~r9u89~ . ., ELI Witness my hunt amt nflicial seal. _ My commissioryexpircs ,f',,?/~ 3' / ,1 ~ ~/., :,~~ ' ~ WbI)~ _ ! `.~ ... •Rin Dena'er. m!m °city and/• Nv. 16. R[¢355. SPECpLIanRRA\TV DEED ErdroW PUalidlna.!tle5 u'da Ae, L,m.waJ. roau!Ii-UUA:J!_avaa Ltl3 .t) ~/%/~~ Recorded `at.: \•. D.....N... 15.. y~'~II T~ DEED, Mile Oris 21St day of AilgOSt . , 3p70 O s~ !h N O r- m 00 ~-- c..l 0 Q• V' ~~ = `T: KENNETH E. STANNARD of the of Jefferson and 8tete of Calarndo, of the first part, and JAMES H. BROWN Comfy of Jefferson and 9fste of es~50 ~-". : 05 U~.OON» : 051 ,I a Ik 6A t$lgp7< 25 o~0b,'S :(L CA o o z m ~ ~ T~ v ' ! c c> n 1 , rn c' tJ i K 6 • N ~ ~ i. n- n < j~ t ~ n M1V ~ ~ . I a CS y~"',: tJ w W ^ n. b ; v ~i+ _. n ii%i C> Colorado, of the second part: '° ' WiTNE99E1$ That the acid party of the first pert, for and is coneid¢rstim of the sum of ' One Dollars and other good and valuable considerations DWitfsg to the said part Y . of the fimE pert in Land paid by said perk y of the aeeond part, the receipt whereof V hereby rnnfeaeed and acknowledged, Lao granted, bnrgained, Bold and conveyed, and by these presents do eS grant, bargain, sell, convey and confirm, unto the enid party oL We eecond pnrt, hi5heim and assigns for- ever, nll the following descrlbedQlft ffi pnmel of land. situate, lying end being in the County of Je££ersori and State of Colorado, 4a wit: Parcel A. The W'~ W~ SW'3 NEa of Section 28, Township 3 South, Range 69 West of the 6th P.M.; EXCEPT the East 16.5 feet thereof, AND ',EXCEPT the North 150 feet thereof, AND ALSO EXCEPT the West 113.5 feet of the East 130 feet of the South 300 feet of the North 450 feet thereof, AND FURTHER EXCEPT the VTest 148.5 feet of the East ;165 feet o£ the~SOUth 525 feet of the North 975 feet thereof. iPSYCel B. The North 792 feet of the E~ of Tract 17, BROOKSIDE;EXCEP the North-145 feet thereof, AND EXCEPT the South 5 feet of the Nort 150 feet o.~ the~ast 54.7 feet of said Tract 17. PdrCe1 C. ;Lots ~, ~, 11 and Tracts "A" and "B", KEN-MAR SUBDIVISION ~ O - I TOGETHER',lefth all iAnd eineaiaa the hereditammta and aDPnrtenancen thetem 6elmging, or 1a anywise i appertaining, and tLe revernicn and revenivae, remainder and remainderre, torte, issues end profits thereof, and ell the estate, sighk ti0e, interest, clnim and demmd whataeever of the ea[d party o! tba first park either in law or equity, of, N and to We above bargained premises, wish the hereditammts and nppurtemncee. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the acid premises above bargained and described vntb the appurtenances, onto the n[d pnrt y of the neeond part. his hefts ami assigns forever. And the said part~y~~ tad agieaato for him Welt, his heirs, esecntom, and ndmiaistmkars, do es covenank ermk v!°. with the said party of the second pnrt, his heim avd meigm, Ehat nt the time of the emealfng and delivery o, of theao presents, he i9 weH asked of Ore premises above conveyed, m of good, ears, perfeck aWolste and C indefeasible estate of inheritance, in law, k fee ahnple, and has good ri8hk full paver and lawful authority ~ to grenk bargain, sell and convey We same in manner and form u aforesaid, and that the same era free and clea¢ m from all former and other grm}a, bargafne, raise, liens, fazes, seseaementa and encumbrmcee of whatever triad or mtnre eoevep except general real estate taxes for the year 1970 and subsequent years, easements and rights of way of record 6 O'}~-. N G r G_ r" -ti+ v. ~ r3: C and the above bnrgaked premises br the quiet and Deacenffie possession of the snid party of the second part, o a 1 h15 Leks and asdgns sgataet all and every person or persons Inwfully rlaLning or to dnim tLe whole -~ t r ar my part thereof, the aa[d party of the tixaY pnrt shall and will WABRANT AND FOREVEB DEFEND. ~~ ~ as 1N WiTNES9 WHEREOF, the enid Dart y of the first part ba 5 hereunto set his hmd a and seal the day and year first above written- ~y-~ f/~/.. ~~ f 4 t~l_'_._:.."", rR~„~r~?E:?'r21IBEAL) Kenneth E. Stannard ____-__.__-~_.-...__._._-...__--___ _ _....._..._._-..__._.....___.___...~__--(SEAL) STATE OF COLORADO, sass,: n,.na, ~.~ ,! ~i Comfy of Jefferson sT c ; .... % ' '!'9e l~egokg imtrwamt wu acimowladged before me tbk ~~ day of AUguSt • ~p. ~,7p ,'by ~:; Kenneth E. Stannard ~~ ~ • ~al coro>s~lion erytres ~...E% e'y-/i 1p ~ . Wi ees my ~d and offkhd sail. ,~ // HI^ NO. p$Z WARYANIT nESDtPar Plator,aphk Pa. REHe 61ooE Htwe4 Dmwr. nolwado -ISSa 2',Ll:i 1'7'7 X233 '79~ P.O. BOX 638 ~ TELEPHONE: 3D3/237-6944 ~ Tl1@ Clly 0{ 7500 WEST 29TH AVENUE • WHEAT RIDGE. COLORA00 80034 G(~xpTL~. ed+ March 24, 1992 _~-l~ijjdgel. The Wheat Ridge Department of Community Development has received a request for a royal of a reliminar lot at the property described below. Your response to the following questions and any comments on this proposal would be appreciated by April 8, 1992 No response from you by this date will constitute no objections or concerns regarding this proposal. CASE N0: WS-91-2/Brown LOCATION: 10701 West 32nd Avenue REQUESTED ACTION: Approval of a preliminary plat. Final plat will be sent under separate cover. PURPOSE: 28-lot subdivision APPROXIMATE AREA: 10.7 acres - 1. Are public facilities or services provided by your agency adequate to serve this develop t? YES NO If "NO", please explain below. 2. Are service lines available to the development? yES ~ NO Zf "NO", please explain below. 3. Do you have adequate capacities to service the development? yE$ ~ NO If 'NO', please explain below. 4. Can and will your agency service this proposed development subject to your rules and regulations? y~ / NO IE "NO", please explain below. 5. Are there any concerns or problems your agency has identified which would or should affect approval of this request? Y.>oT A i -rk~~ ~~•+..e.. - _ ~ `~~ Please reply to:~ l~~ ~~`" M Reckert Department of Communi y Development Current Planning Division DISTRIBUTION: XX Water District (Con. Mutual XX Sanitation District ~estridge XX FreTDistrict (wheat Ridge XX Adjacent City (Lakewoodl XX Public Service Co. XX Mountain Bell State Land Use Commission State Geological Survey Colo. Division of Highways XX American Cable Vision Jefferson Co. Health Dept. XX Jefferson Co. Schools Jefferson Co. Commissioners Wheat Ridge Post Office XX Wheat Ridge Police Dept. XX Wheat Ridge Public Works Dept. XX Wheat Ridge Parks ~ Recreation Wheat Ridge Building Division sb/C.6.1./Rev. 10/21/86 ~~~ ,~~~~ it _--____._.__.1_ ~~. p.O.BOX638 ~ TELEPHONE: 303/237-6944 7500 WEST 29TH AVENUE • WHEAT RIDGE. COLORADO 80034 -March 24, 1992 The City of Ridge The Wheat Ridge Departzent of Community Development has received a request for a royal of a reliminar lat at the property described below. Your response to the following questions and any con¢nents on this proposal would be appreciated by April 8 1992 No response from you by this date will constitute no objections or concerns regarding this proposal. CASE N0: WS-91-2/Brown LOCATION: 10701 West 32nd Avenue REQUESTED ACTION: Approval of a preliminary plat. Final plat will be sent under separate cover. PURP05E: 28-lot subdivision APPROXIMATE AREA: 10.7 acres •-. Are publ~ c facilities or services provided by your agency adequate to serve this develop~hent? YES V/ Np If "NO", please explain below. 2, Are service lines available to the development? YES / NO If "NO", please explain below. ~~nt? ciNi quate ca e Do you have a es P 3 ase exp O I~ N O , YES ~ -- lain below e 4. Can and will your agency service this proposed development subject to your rules acid regulations? NO I'? "NO" please explain below. YES ,/ , 5. Are there any concerns or problems your agency has identified which would or uest? ( J re f thi ~ _ ~ ~vo f~,~ • q s should affect approval o ~~ ~ L~' n/ ,,~a~ , '- ~,.~~/'~.~~ Rec r ~ ~ Please reply to:/ Department of ~ ity Deve opment-- ' ,.7 s~_ ~~ ~~~ Current Planning Division XX DISTRIBUTION: Water District (Con. Mutual XX American Cable Vision lth Dept H xx Sanitation District fWestricJge ~ d i t ( . ea Jefferson Co. XX Jefferson Co. Schools XX XX ge . c wheat R Fire Distr Adjacent City (Lakewoodt Jefferson Co. Canmissioners i XX Public Service CO. ce Wheat Ridge Post Off Wheat Ridge Police Dept. xX Mountain Bell State Land Use Commission XX c&WRecreation State Geological Survey XX Wheat Ridge Parks Colo. Division of Highways Wheat R1dge Building Division sb/C.6.1./Rev. 10/21/86 Westridge Sanitation District 3705 Kipliag Sttccc - Suite 101 Wheat Ridgc, Colorado 80033 (303) 424.9467 T;TTY OF WHEAT RIDGE D APR 01 9992 April 1, 1992 Ms. Meredith Reckert PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT Department of Community Development CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE 7500 West 29th Avenue Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80034 Dear Ms. Reckert: Reference is made to the inquiry recently received by the District regarding possible sanitary sewer service to a tract of land between West 32nd and West 35th Avenues, west of Nelson Street (WS-91-2/Brown). Existing District facilities downstream from the site have adequate remaining capacity to serve this tract under the proposed single family residential land use. An extension of sewer lines, at the flevelopers sole expense, will be required to serve a large portion of the tract. Because the tract is generally lower in elevation than Nelson Street, an extension of facilities south from the sewer fn West 35th Avenue will probably be the most practical (or even the only possible) way to provide service. The existing sewer in West 35th Avenue is only approximately five feet deep. Careful site planning will be necessary to assure gravity sewer service to building sites. Basement sewer service to lots in the north portion of the tract may not be possible without considerable earth filling. Under the Preliminary Concept Map provided, an easement will be needed across parcels designated as Lots 16, 17 and 18. Experience has shown that sewers within easements across private residential properties are highly undesirable. In this case, a manhole at each end of the easement line will be located within public right of way and the line will therefore be reasonably accessible for routine maintenance. An easement width of 30-feet will allow necessary working width if repairs to the line should be required in later years. The easement will not need to be exclusive or centered over the actual sewer, however, the nature of permanent improvements and landscaping allowed within the easement will be strictly limited by language of easement documents recorded separately from the plat. Page 2, April 1, 92 Applewood Castles Thank you for the opportunity to comment upon this proposed residential development. Very truly yours, ~GC42 ~ ~Ei-r Richard M. Romberg, P.E. Engineer for the Distract cc: District Offfce tile: W54-O ' 111.91VE5T' COMMUNICATIONS City of Wheat Ridge P.O. Box 638 7500 West 29th Avenue Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80034 Attention: M. Reckert, RE:Case No: WS-91-2/Brown, 10701 West 32nd Avenue US WEST will require a 8' easement on all rear lot lines for telephone cable facilities. This is in addition to the space required for the proposed pipe for irrigation. Also US WEST will need to do a Land Development Agreement (LDA) and a Trench Agreement before facilities will be placed fcr this Development. US WEST contact to work out the details on the agreements is: James A. Breuch 451-2.669 9351 grant Street Thornton, Colorado 80229 Thank You, ~~~ ~~',z.~.~.- James A. Breuch Manager ~-a - 9~ THE CONSOLIDATED MUTUAL WATER COMPANY 12700 West 27th Aeenue • P.O. Box 15068 LAKEWOOD, COLORADO 80215 Telephone 238-0451 April 3, 1992 CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE ~.a~~;a•r; ~ssz ;~_GIING ;& Ms. Meredith Reckert City of Wheat Ridge Department of Community Development Current Planning Division P.O. Box 638 Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80034 Re: Wheat Ridge Case Number WS-91-2/Brown, proposed preliminary plat of 28-lot subdivision, 10701 West 32nd Avenue Dear Ms. Reckert: _~_ - _ _ This will acknowledge receipt of -your correspondence dated March 24, 1992 regarding the above-referenced property. Please be advised that the above referenced property is in an area served by_The Consolidated-MuEual_Water Company by virtue of a Distl<libutor's Contract with the Denver water Board. Domestic mater service may be provided to this property subject to._-compliance with _the Company's rules, regulations and requirements for such service, as well as the water tap policies as -established by the Denver Water Board. Our records indiga~te that we-arc currently serving a property addressed as -_1oZOT~ West 32nd Avenue through a 5/8-inch meter (CMWCO Tap Number 328/Account Number B-8673). We are not certain that this tap is included in a portion of the proposed subdivision. If this tap should be included in part of the proposed subdivision, the owner should contact us to determine how this tap will be utilized. Fire protection requirements should be obtained from the Wheat Ridge Fire Protection District and those requirements forwarded to this office at the earliest possible time. The water pipeline location and size, as shown on the preliminary plat-for .the above referenced project, is subject to change as a result of further discussion with the owners, their engineers, and any requirements as determined by the Wheat Ridge Fire Protection District. Meredith Reckert/City of Wheat Ridge Page 2 April 3, 1992 If you have any questions or comments regarding this correspondence, please do not hesitate to contact us. Sincerely, Robert J. Rivera Vice President Engineering and Operations RJR:jl cc: Lt. Dave Roberts, Wheat Ridge Fire Protection District Lynn Newman, CMWCo Chief Engineer Mike Queen, CMWCo Superintendent of Distribution Donna Strong, CMWCo Engineering/Distribution Clerk PLANNING COMMENTS JEFFERSON COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT NO PLANNING SERVICES DIVISION EDUCATIONAL SERVICES CENTER 1829 DENVER WEST DRIVE GOLDEN, COLORADO 80401 SUBDIVISION NAME: Applewood Castles LOCATION: 10701 W. 32nd Avenue DATE: April 28, 1992 AREA: 0394 STATUS: PP Number and Type of Dwelling Units: 28 SFD Total R-1 Dwelling Units Elementary Yields Junior Yields Senior Yields Total Yields 28 SFD .80 .26 .26 1.32 TOTAL FROM THIS PROPOSAL: 22 Elementary 7 Middle School 7 Senior High 36 Total It is estimated that costs to provide classroom facilities for the students anticipated from this proposed development will be $341,676. Currently students from this proposed development will attend: Prospect Valley Elementary - 3400 Pierson St., Wheat Ridge 80033 Everitt Middle School - 3900 Kipling St., Wheat Ridge 80033 Wheat Ridge Senior High - 9505 W. 32nd Ave., Wheat Ridge 80033 The present capacities and enrollments for these schools are: CAPACITY DESIGN PROGRAM TEMP. TOTAL Prospect Valley 432 351 0 432 Everitt 875 753 0 875 Wheat Ridge 1458 1409 4 1555 ENROLLMENT As of Projected 10/1/91 1993 1994 Prospect Valley 434 450 455 Everitt 704 787 797 Wheat Ridge 1394 1421 1444 .. ~ Page 2 Comments Applewood Castles NOTE: These are estimates from School District computations. They are subject to change and are for planning purposes only. SCHOOL DISTRICT PLANNING COHMENTS: Wheat Ridge Senior is currently using four temporary classrooms. Based upon projections from this development and subdivisions in this area which have been approved or are pending approval, school capacities are inadequate to serve the anticipated student population from this proposal. An adequate pedestrian walkway system should be incorporated into the subdivision to provide safe pedestrian access to Prospect Valley Elementary School. ~~~9~~~ Kathy A. Tully, Property Management/Planning Services /~P xc: Wayne Carle Bob Sparks Linda Glandt Dick Ransom Dave Hendrickson April 16, 1992 Meredith Reckert Department of Community Development City of Wheat Ridge P.O. Box 638 Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80034 Re: 10701 West 32nd AVenue Wheat Ridge Case No. WS-91-2 Lakewood Case No. OR-92-3 City of Lakewood Planning, Permits & Public Works 445 South Allison Parkway Lakewood, Colorado 80226-3105 303/987-7500 FAX - 303/987-7979 RCITY OF WHEAT RIDGE r .~[~ ~ D APR 1 71992 ~~QLANNIN6 $ DEVELOPMENT Dear Ms. Reckert: We appreciate the opportunity to review and comment on this case. We have no problems with approval of the preliminary plat. We have a few suggestions that might be incorporated into a site plan. If a fence or a wall is planned to enclose the site, some type of landscape buffer between the wall and the street, on the south side of this project, would help compatibility with existing development across the street. Also, we would encourage saving as many mature trees as possible. The Engineering Division would like to see a copy of the Drainage Plan for their information. They have no concerns at this time. If you have any questions, please call me at 987-7525. Sincerely, ~~ %„~- Holly Paver Planner II HP:jw cc: OR-92-3 Gary Kranse, Development Assistance Coordinator File 154 (Holly Paver) 0625D MEi"t~RANDUM 1-U : 5'l. I've iI-I~:c;r~. ,.::rat-t,: i:: r r ~- ~~ r-n-~, . i!~,~i,.,rl,,;! i-ir r-!_::'nl!~iJ;^. CHS 'i LC-'o -. .i .; .,;~ ~~ ~... .,.-~ tilh~? 'ii it .~i:,4i 'i 1`I i? ': CAl~=i2 Y'r}?°. ,. ,: i ,. I'•a i; r~. ~... v.. i:; iii _' _ :_ ;l'" :i '.-u :.::. .... ,1 C.i ::....:Si'I: t2f`~ l li i.:'t" ~-t bJ :. r1'~ ) .-.. '~'! h_ : <d t: .C!li i i~:'rl' 'l'':i .;.Ut' ij %n'k±t(i~ •k, L'i .... ... .~. :i r: c:i .. .: .: ... ,,.. ~^ .~=i_: .~ :L ,: ~''t; ': i i'ri r~,. Loa:, 1cf .,:. ..r ~nq i. '' ..~~; ::: ' 6 i7 ferf~7.Q'!] CI iLn?f-i=..=.~ ~.r-i fii ':J1' .i-.i: ~~r, ~-'I-: 1; `1~ ~'i'L?. 4J 1rY'± I .. t Il• n :.. I\!;:! u '.t': L ~" :':A : L - ., ;. ..' ~ . I.! cl i :''~ 1 . E? `7 ~ .. { Y' . r i, _. _ ~=t ' . ~ , _ _ .... -1..- „ I_Ei?I"'I: i_,. ]. 11'?4:~ n~GTnJ.:n!:r.lY~. :: ',Q 7.11 li e'r..'_, L.ri Gk_ •_4' +•• !r Zu'x .... ,. `.: ~: •ulirii iity ;{a„~. •.a ~_d-~"': ..:v._aY ~?i:'- ,.. .~ ~„c!?; i? ~2i~CiiOi=. ,.... 4~ ;. .,..~r. ': rt ~i,iir_^ ii'hF~:.II ... :!i.l I'l ;:itb b... <3n, is i.i'~:'t liJ l"i':. j:J .i.Lrr.1=;C dir.. i `. l.i C: l; . s ~~ ~ ,~~ _ .! 1 __. m. G r ~ cr ~ ~ ~ _ .. _... .Soil Soh U~~ r s ,~ e~~.vrf~-~-~- -~~~~~-~ __. _ ~1Sv r v ~j' ~ (--~ ~ ~s ~1~ ~ ~ /t'- »-~ Jet ~ , ~r ;; ~ ~_ t4 v G- /~ S o i 1 S ~ Y +~ ~-7 fj-r~ ~ '1 ~S h o tr`~ ~ / ~~ A ~j (r C ~^ aJ (w G-v-~ (emu Y l ~i ~ S~ ~Z_ b`~-- ,, G t9~Gp c ~_7 ~`- 5 ~.i tJ... ___ _ _ ~... _ .. ;~ -- - __ _ ~, __..___ - - _ __ ~~ . .. _.._ _. __. i; _ ._ _ _. ......~ ~~ ._. _ _ ._. _ .~ ~• n ,~ __ i _ _~.. ~~ _I, r/ _ 1~ ,__ -- --~_ u ___ .... . _ii..-. .. _... i _._ _ - _.. __ -- - ~~ _. - ii - 1 - __ _. ~~ _ __ _ NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ~a(-9a Notice is hereby given that a Public Hearing is to be held before the City of Wheat Ridge Planning Commission on ,Zone 4 ig92, at 7:30 p.m. at 7500 West 29th Avenue, Wheat Ridge,' Colorado. All interested citizens are invited to speak at the Public Hearing or submit written comments. The following petitions shall be heard: 1. Case No. WZ-92-5: An application by Drake Contractors, Inc., for Edward Eid for approval of a combined outline and final development and plat for property located at 5190 Parfet Street. Said property is legally described as follows: THAT PART OF THE NE 1/4 SW 1/4 OF SECTION 16, TOWNSHIP 3 SOUTH, RANGE 69 WEST OF THE 6TH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN; LOCATED IN THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COUNTY OF JEFFERSON, STATE OF COLORADO, AND DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE SOUTH 1/4 CORNER OF SECTION 16, TOWNSHIP 3 SOUTH, RANGE 69 WEST OF THE 6TH P.M., THENCE NORTH 000 00' 00" EAST, ALONG THE NORTH-SOUTH CENTERLINE OF SAID SECTION 16, A DISTANCE OF 2542.75' TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF THE BURLINGTON-NORTHERN RAILROAD R.O.W.; THENCE S 740 48' 48" W, ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY, A DISTANCE OF 20.72 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUING S 740 48' 40" W, ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY, A DISTANCE OF 526.73 FEET TO THE EASTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF PARFET STREET; AND PARALLEL TO THE SAID NORTH-SOUTH CENTERLINE OF SECTION 16, A DISTANCE OF 170.50 FEET; THENCE N 740 48' 40" E, PARALLEL TO SAID SOUTHERLY RAILROAD R.O.W., A DISTANCE OF 526.73 FEET, THENCE N 00° 00' 00" E PARALLEL TO SAID NORTH-SOUTH CENTERLINE OF SECTION 16, A DISTANCE OF 170.50 FEET TO SAID TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. ~~ No 'WS 92_ ]::- -~An application by James H. Brown for -~~prova'~ $'~ a-~oinb~ned preliminary and final plat with variances for Residential-One zoned property located at 10701 West 32nd Avenue. Said property is legally described as follows: A PARCEL OF LAND LOCATED IN THE SOUTHWEST ONE-QUARTER, NORTHEAST ONE-QUARTER AND SOUTHEAST ONE-QUARTER, NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SECTION 28, TOWNSHIP 3 SOUTH, RANGE 69 WEST OF THE 6TH P.M., CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COUNTY OF JEFFERSON, STATE OF COLORADO, MORE FULLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE SOUTHEAST ONE-QUARTER, NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 28. THENCE N 000 19' 09" W ALONG THE EAST LINE OF ;SAID SOUTHEAST ONE-QUARTER, NORTHWEST ONE- QUARTER, A DISTANCE. OF '21.00 FEET TO THE "TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING"; THENCE N 00° 19' 09" W CONTINUING ALONG THE SAID EAST LINE, A DISTANCE OF 9.00 FEET TO A POINT, SAID POINT BEING THE SOUTHEAST CORNER.OF THE EAST ONE-HALF OF TRACT 17, BROOKSIDE SUBDIVISION; THENCE S 89~ 19' 56" W PARALLEL TO THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SOUTHEAST ONE-QUARTER, NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER, A DISTANCE OF 64.15 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE N 00~ 20' 16" W A DISTANCE OF 130.00 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE S 89~ 19' 56" W, A DISTANCE OF 100.00 FEET TO A POINT, SAID POINT BEING ON THE WEST LINE OF THE SAID EAST ONE-HALF OF TRACT 17; THENCE N 00~ 20' 16" W ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID EAST ONE-HALF OF TRACT 17, A DISTANCE OF 1143.56 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF W. 35TH AVENUE, SAID POINT ALSO BEING THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 1, KEN-MAR SUBDIVISION; THENCE N 89~ 16' 19" E PARALLEL TO THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST ONE-QUARTER, NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 28 AND ALONG THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF SAID W. 35TH AVENUE, A DISTANCE OF 159.57 FEET TO A POINT, SAID POINT BEING THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF TRACT 'A' AND NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 2, OF SAID KEN-MAR SUBDIVISION; THENCE S 00~ 18' 22" E ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID LOT 2, A DISTANCE OF 125.00 FEET TO A POINT, SAID POINT BEING THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 2; THENCE N 89~ 16' 19" E ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF LOTS 2 AND 3 OF SAID KEN-MAR SUBDIVISION, A DISTANCE OF 204.95 FEET TO A POINT, SAID POINT BEING THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 3; THENCE S 00~ 18' 22" E ALONG THE WEST LINE OF LOT 5 OF SAID KEN-MAR SUBDIVISION, A DISTANCE OF 125.00 FEET TO A POINT, SAID POINT BEING THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 5; THENCE N 89~ 16' 19" E ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LOT 5 AND THE NORTH LINE OF TRACT 'B' OF SAID KEN-MAR SUBDIVISION, A DISTANCE OF 105.00 FEET TO A POINT ON THE WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF NELSON STREET; THENCE S 00~ 18' 22" E ALONG THE WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF SAID NELSON STREET, A DISTANCE OF 50.00 FEET TO A POINT, SAID POINT BEING THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 6 OF SAID KEN-MAR SUBDIVISION; THENCE S 89~ 16' 19" W ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID TRACT 'B' AND NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT 6, A DISTANCE OF 105.00 FEET TO A POINT, SAID POINT BEING THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 6; THENCE S 00~ 18' 22" E ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID LOT 6, A DISTANCE OF 125.00 FEET TO A POINT, SAID POINT BEING THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 6 AND ALSO BEING ON THE NORTH LINE OF LOT 7 OF SAID SUBDIVISION; THENCE S 89~ 16' 19" W ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT 7, A DISTANCE OF 35.00 FEET TO A POINT, SAID POINT BEING THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 7; THENCE S 00~ 18' 22" E ALONG THE WEST LINE OF LOTS 7, 8, 9, AND 10 OF SAID KEN-MAR SUBDIVISION, A DISTANCE OF 420.00 FEET TO A POINT, SAID POINT BEING THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 10 AND NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 11 OF SAID KEN-MAR SUBDIVISION; THENCE N 89~ 16' 19" E ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LOT 10 AND NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT 11, A DISTANCE OF 140.00 FEET TO A POINT ON THE WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF SAID NELSON STREET; THENCE S 00~ 18' 22" E, A DISTANCE OF 105.00 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE N 89~ 19' 56" E, A DISTANCE OF 8.50 FEET TO A POINT, SAID POINT BEING ON THE WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF SAID NELSON STREET; THENCE S 00~ 18' 22" E ALONG THE SAID WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE, A DISTANCE OF 333.05 FEET TO A POINT SAID POINT BEING ON THE NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF W. 32ND AVENUE AND ALSO BEING 21.00 FEET NORTH OF THE SOUTH LINE OF SOUTHWEST ONE-QUARTER, NORTHEAST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 28; THENCE S `J 890 19' 56" W ALONG THE SAID NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE, A DISTANCE OF 313.16 FEET TO THE "TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING." CONTAINING 10.70 ACRES (466.270 SQUARE FEET) MORE OR LESS. ATTEST: Wanda Sang, City Clerk Sandra Wiggins, Secretary To be Published: May 21, 1992 Wheat Ridge Sentinel <pc>pnwz925/ws921 P.O. BOX 638- TELEPHONE: 303/237-6944 The Cify Of 7500 WEST 29TH AVENUE • WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO 80034 cWheat May 20, 1992 Ridge This is to inform you that Case No. WS-92-1 which is a request for approval of a combined preliminary and -final plat with variances for property located at -10701 West 32nd Avenue will be heard by the Wheat Ridge Plannina Commission in the Council Chambers of the Municipal Complex, 7500 West 29th Avenue at 7:30 p.m., on June 4. 1992 All owners and/or their legal counsel of the parcel under consideration must be present at this hearing before the Planning ('[~mmieGion 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 `The Carnation City" i f ~ ' i. ' __. .f ,.' t~ -6' C F' ~~. Fk ~; ~ ~ ~., ~~~~ ~~~ V, ~ ~ ~ e ' ~ rn °- t r ~ ~ .a ~ ~ d °' F~ o W /a ~~ ~,, ~ ._J `- _ yr+ ~~ ,~ -~'~ vj 1. ! L7 ~ ~ O ~ o=J :LI U ~ ~ V -7 Z Z Z U D ~ ch M W .{J O ~r ~O '' co 0 H w~ ~ ..~ ''Cy ~~ m 0 cn O Q O J O W ~' ~~ mm°a o= a3 ti ~~ i .~~ 00 fizz 4 ... a .,= _~~ b ~ [.u C ~~ j „` S ~ ~ M ele0la „IeW]sad seaj g a6eysq~~yyQl l~aiu~ap yo sswppy g ~eyep 'woy/y~ o{ bu!MOyS Idleaay wn{eb paiwiep e{ep g woyM q 6uimoyS ]tlleaay emled aad Nen6ap palau{say aaj /aen6a0 leuadg aaJ pa6rye~ Q W e6e{sod ££008 00 abP?2I ~~auM apop arz g a{eis °oa •~g uosZaN S£££ 'oN 8laailS oy Weg ~ (as~anaa aag) ,gym,:„ ~~eW ~euoi;ewaiu~ ~o; asn you op papinad a6e~anop aouemsu~ oN }d~aoaa ~~ew pad}iNa~ EOS hZ~ z~6 d V) a 3 W O O m 0 F 407 114 514 Certified Mail Receipt No Insurance Coverage Provided Do no[ use for International Mail Sant 10 Linda S. Smith Street S No. 10745 W. 35th Ave: p~ to Whom 8 Data Delivered m ~ Return Receipt Showing to Whom, ~ Date, & Address of Delivery ~ TOTAI Postage O 8 Pees m Postmark or Data E t° a ye _~ ~~_ h..+ m D tD I'a ' / c~ ~~ a~ o~~~,a m m ~ l~ b H O 0 r O D O O 0 w A O W n I _ E r `f~ a ~ a am "~ ~' °i c~ d ~ m na r• h O ~ w ~ rr ~ ~ :a ~ o ~ ;~ c ra a ~ ~ .o ~ 0 l w ,o ~ c) ~ _~ -1 ~ z ~ Q ~ c :~ ~ s:o z o i'~ o _ .. ~7tv,...Z t~ cp ~ ny o c~ ~ 3 N 1 'O CJ L-~ t-~ r rs, r O A m O O M LL a P 9C7 114 513 Certified Mail Receipt No Insurance Coverage Provided ~ Do not use for International Mail ~v;„: (See Reverse) sent to i Charles Younc( Street 8 No. 10740 W. 35th Ave. P.O., state 8 ZIP Cotle - Wheat Ridge CO 80033 Postage Certified Fee spaelal Delivery Fee Restdtt¢tl Oalivary Fee Return Receipt Showing to Whom 8 Date Dalivaretl Retum Rec¢ipt Showing to Whom, Date, b Pddress of Delivery TOTAL Postage 8 Fees ~P Postmark or Date ~..: _. , - . e ~c k',am,,,,-'~.,. ~~ ~ Y-. (D :n 3 ~ fe m-~ z» td -+ D ..a P+UIi'C~,.m a3mac333$ - ~ °~' I _d ~m ~ _ _ a. ~o N Nny °~ o,~. „,,. ~ . c = m w ~ o ' m < o : d } r m N w .u.t r., t ~ m m :'m ~ . ..' m m »~-.¢.~m ;p{ CO J ^ ~ w ~P - - m~'S ~-~~~ - . x m 3 0 --m ~ g ~A~ ~ ~ - m y . O O. J-N __ m ~ C ~ m to < u -r- v ~~ 3 S •-~ } q: - m '" ^ ^ o . ~ •. as ~ rp-_~ ,_-m ~ 1 M S w :. C ~ O m c. ~_ C W m m °: m o. m ~ Z -. ,~ _ . m -., o n m~ m o m D ~,-. m~ n ~ m ~._. - m m n 3~ c a m m ^ p.: -- - m.. _: ~- Y r ' - m m ~ 'w ~ ~ T .~,~.,r~ ar - t fib .. - ;., >. P 9D7 114 51D Certified Mail Receipt No Insurance Coverage Provided Do nonuse for International Mail (See Reverse) 0 ~~.~ aem to Streel 8 No. 10600 W. 35th Ave. P.O., Stale 8 ZIP Cotle Wheat Rid e CO 80033 Postage Cenifietl F¢e Spedal Delivery Fee Restrictetl Delivery Fee , Return Receipt Showing to Whom 8 Date Deliveretl Return Receipt ahowin to Whom, P °,C7 114 515 Certified Mail Receipt 'No Insurance Coverage Provided Do not use for International Mail to vid J. Sowa 1 8 No. 765 W. 35th Ave. P 9'07 114 511 Certified Mail Receipt No Insurance Coverage Provided ~ Do not use for Internation I Mail y,^~,m (See Reverse) rn m m C O O a Sant to Robert Tell atreet8 No. 10620 W. 35th Ave. P.O., State 8 ZIP Cotle Wheat Rid e CO 80033 Postage Certified Pee Special Delivery Fee Restrictetl Delivery Fee Return Receip[ Showing ro Whom 8 Daze Deliveretl Return Receip[ Showing to Whom, Date, 8 Atltlress of Delivery 'NTAL Postage 8 Fees Postmark or Date 0 0 O y~y 8 N T '3 a 0 n ii m m 0 v z c N v 0 m fn ~_ n 37 C Z m n m_ -•I D m n m m N n .. '~T.o•.m ...y rv m ~ o o-- o,~F~..~ooz N ~, n m m n m,~aa m - C~'f O ri m m -d 5mommJJ ~ ~n roc, m m.. $d F. a c^ oo ce1mm N• (D ~' m o m ~ 333 t R+ N m~9m 3-ommm ~ N ~ Cf] n m. °. ° y ii m °f ~ W ~ ° °»m~mn°~°' f W o ~ r., m.. ,. m o . ~ Cj m C 3 m o.; c W N =:m m °" G d.; < ml m m a m ~ -- f ~ s H :..0 O y m :o ~l E]c ~ m x m '3 ",.S' O pl J C ~ In SZ ~ E U N. W CCm m CFD ~~00 .. m n m ° ~ m .. m o ~ m 3 ~ n ~ ~ ~ m m .mi m 4j ~ ~. c~ooc 33 ~ym33mmw m 3.r^m W~ n _ z N rn G. rt O Fi C'f ~ ~ (D ~ wr m ~r o ~ m N O O w w ^~oP O1 m (l a ° ~• m ro m 'w r ;- , m r, ~ m < tD O ~°, - r m a ~ ~ a J 't0 ~ ~ ~ .A ^~ ~ O m c c I--' zo m m a ~a nm y n mm a G..._ .~ , .c. ...V m v~ F D .m. v o o z oapmnm Da R. a• m~ y o m m S m y ~ _. _. 3 c o. ~,nmmm a3mo2333 • D]m3 ~mmm ~~.. mw~ m o~o» yp_y~ mT.nmac ~ m m 0 6 Ol m 3 "aacAi' a -•'o ~ N c t'»OySN ~. y o'~oQ° S go Q ii • m ' s a m - 3 ~; o d. < a m 3 n ~ ~ m m O• ~ v o m ry ~ S m n o H m ~ 3 O' .xi m w 0 m O J ~ ~ . ~ N - O " f m ^ ^ ~ o 9 n y a ~ f, 3 °" <. ~ a n w a y o. ~ m a m __ m ~ ~ m m. v m a ~ m •~ 'm m m x m 'O S d m ~ `~ • Y p 9~7 114 5L~6 Certified Mail Receipt ' No Insurance Coverage Provided ~ ~• Do not use for International M "I ~'~LL~ (See Reverse) Sent to • Bill J. Neal " alma[ & Np. 3395 Nelson St. p 9rJ7 114 521 Certified Mail Receipt 'No Insurance Coverage Provided ~~ Do not use for International Mai (See Reverse) ~ Leonard H. O`Hayre treat 8 No. 3163 O';;iayre Court P ;i77 114 52~ Certified Mai! Receipt No Insurance Coverage Provided Do not use for International Mail, Wil liam J. Osheroff 31[61 Oak Street P 907 114 501 Certifiied Mail Receipt No Insurance Coverage Provided ~~ Do not use for International Mail *ecc fSee Reversal Sen[ to Andrew's Plumbin Street 8 No, 3270 Nelson St. PD., Staze & ZIP Coda Wheat. Rid e CO 80D3 Postage Certilietl Fee Special Delivery Fae Reslrictetl Delivery Fea Return Re<eipl Showing to whom 8 Dale Delivered Return Recelp[ Showing to Whom, Date, & Pdtlress at Delivery TDTAI Posrage a Fees Q `P PosMark or Date 0 m m 0 c G 0 E 101 a i ~ wb7"" oaMvnnr" p' W W m ~ x lD to t/ a »-~:dfP»330 »~~ c~ ~ raj- NI'C n 1-p •a''namm9 Z' 0 ~ ~ nS~~ mm•' I N. F-r a~ 3 ~o c333 I P~ m y H w oz ~'~~~'dw-• m ~ m a n,oo~=-.,, ~ mamo rWr W"~xDm~~~'"w (D W ',S o ? ~a ~ncmm~N E N m n z~~ I m m •• /~~ C P •' • ~ Su x N~ JJ N 3 J W N N N l7 K a m,~o ?'~w~ ~~ o m O(D O o a.n ~'nm~¢ ____.,. ---- .-~m~daa~ ~~a _... ~ N N~ w m • m• T .. • y ~~'Ol h-' w~.nTDm vnr]R' re c E N• ~ O O W ~ 20 mom, •<aaT f m t° •~ m o SU ~ n~•~~mm' ' DC»0 N~ 4 S~~~oo c333" rp /~ ~• rt N~ 3J fe 3 J N N N N 0 N m 1 J O• O 7 d rJ -~ a moo ~~' _.~ . ~__~`"m,_ m ~ a.L^ w as ,_.._ a "' ~' W~' w~. c. ~....y m ' y., (D J~ m~F~»vooZ D c ~r ~ m~ n ~ '~syp ~ zE ~° ~~ms~,reW•• ~ v ~ S 'y ~F'N ~n3c a..~o imm _ ' m~ mo c3mm i t` ii R+N w oro m m~ 9 m 3 7 m I y (D '~ m ~,,,smW~ 0 ~ ~ n ry~ry ~ a 0» mnv3 ~ IINN 6~ n a a C] rt• b' O f ' a 3 S a °' m° n O W a -• o ,., n ro V m p KOO'~ OD • m C 3 m i3 O n rs ..J ,,-a n o m w ~ d < iu m io a . m m m i 3 '.< d m ~ 2 D p o m ~ rn n O N • n ^ - ^c m x m 3 m ~ '.c ~ m y c c m ° mm y m o Ho ~O ~ G~ mn mo- 2~ N J N O_ °m m < ~ a 3 = - f mm GD N m y 6 "• ^ ^___tfl O < ^~^ w m H a m ~ . O m .fD. O m O~ ~ C m_ y ~ n y m_ H ' yam:- a _ N O °: a n . o m -„ rs~ __ __ a m __ a n m `° m• - . '° m a . ^ me ~ . ~ •'G p- N ^ S • LL ~~ ~ ~~ ~... . _. .~ y m d A >t 3 y 0 G I' I 5 y ", ~ n ~ 1 t .• .., ~ W T y o m 3 d W~ c m -+ D o ~. 0 c m P 9nZ 114 sn9 - .: _ • ~, - Certified Mail Recei t m p No Insurance Coverage Provid ~~~ ' ~ ~ m N ~ ~ ~ - ~, ~ m ~xD»~~~ m F ~ ~'' O ed ~~ Do no[ use for International Mail 3 - .. w ~ ~ m ~ ~ ff' ~ x ,: ~ 3 3 n m n m (See Reverse) ---- ---- ". -"' c m - m' 7d - Z _ ~ m ' m » m c m m ~ ~ ~ .»».. ~. 3 ~ Sent to -~ . r ~ n W (D N [?7 A, _ m m ~ y c m m m ,. a~2 a mm^ Frank_ Edlin o ~ w o N f .,, m =~y ` Hy Street 8 No. ... m m ~ ~ .~ y 3, -m N 3485 Nelson St Q ° m a m~^~="~ I ' . m I P 907 114 499 ~ m+ g•d•g...y Certified Mail Receipt ~ v, ~ ~ w N H- ~ w D d~FD»vnnt^ » »' =d F ~ 3 3 0 No Insurance Coverage Provided 3 m 'm (D W N O m v o m m~ mS m~ m ~ ~ Do not use for International Mail pwD ~ ~ fi N . . ~ ~ n s ~ ; m m " u~^~,•~ (See Reverse) r ~ r "Zi U1 ' D a 3 m y, __ c ° m m m m t Sent to m a ~ N °- _ ~, . » m'mo-$333 Thomas Evans ° m n S N• sZ N m LTJ C m H 3 '~ m ' m m m ~ mw~ I Street & No, o y t4 O W a m»~ w a m °' - - m m - N ".1' r7 c as smmya ~_.~__ ..... [n _, , amm mn ° s.o.~` ~_ P 907 114 518 Certified Mail Receipt No Insurance Coverage Provided Do not use for International Mail ,~ ^s;~ (See Reverse) Sent m Jerr V. Gatlin Street 8 No. 10875 W. 32nd Ave. P 9D7 114 512 Certified Mail Receipt No Insurance Coverage Provided Do nct use for International Mail IRPP RP.VefSel m G O rn M E a Sent to Kenneth Hoehner Street 8 No. - 10705 W. 35th Ave. P.O., State 8 21P Cotle Wheat Ridge CO 8003 Postage Q P Certifietl Fee Spenal Delivery Fee Resttlctetl Delivery Fee Return Receipt Showing to W horn b Date Deliveretl Return Receipt Showing to Whom, Date, & Atltlress of Delivery TOTAL Postage 8 Fees Q` ~P FOSlmark or Date y a m 0 S N ml~ C Z SI m c'> m "'I N ~ ~ C $U J t$ 3 ~ ~ ~ '~~ $ C 2 ¢ o ~ w ~ m (D _ _ N jll m n .Q! I"( n o w ~oN rt can m a~ x (p (11 ([) p' '.S' ~ C ly m N O O W W w 0 . ~ ^A ` AI roP ii. n ~ '° ~ ram ~ D m m n' ~ m m m o, y m a m o m J .gym m ~ . ~ 2 '~a m m N c ~ ^ ~ ^ ~ m q m \ ~ (] O N m e c F -' ~ ,~ s3 '^ m a N - ~ 9 nm m mt°^ N ~ • U • S • • ~; a»v~n •~ ^~ ~»33 ~~d~domm mmT~~mm m m' , ~ a.,,»m' mm»m» c ~~33mw% ~~» mw-+ m .°a ° g 6 m 3 °a znm?a m e Fa m vcic>~ m m m ° ~ m ~ n > 3 ~ m m ' ° m ' J c a+ m m m m •~m~c333 7)m 3 3mmm ~~ mW~ m ~ ° m 6 m -mj as smmaa ~ m m m a a a ~.o aim, N G'~» py(ze~ y M ,~ ° Q O ~ c°J ~ m a m ~ z a_ o ro ° 3 ~ o O1 ~ v ~ ,o m _ m 3 n m m m m o a ° ° m ~ m ~ o H ~ o m s 3 » m N O ° ro ~ - N ~ ~ d ^ ^ ~ O ~ D m F. a 2 m . s n m a ~ m o m ~ m O m m m m n ~ < R N m m » N ~ m m P 9D7 11u so? Certified Mail Receipi No Insurance Coverage Provided ~~ Do not use for International Mai ~o .wu rsoo me„e..,r rn Sent to ~- ~ -- Thomas L. Hutton Street & No. 3310 Nelson St. P.O., Stale 8 21P Coda Wheat Ridge CO 80033 - _ Postage Certilietl Fee Specal Delivery Fee Restricted Delivery Fea Return Receipt Shpwing to Whom 8 Date Deliveretl Return Receipt Showing to Whom, P 907 114 see Certified Mail Receipt ' No Insurance Coverage Provided Do not use for International Mail _m m O O M of LL a Sent 3250 Nelson St. P 9C7 114 sG4 _ Certified Maii Receipt No Insurance Coverage Provided ~~ Oo not use for International Mail mm•~: (See Reversel Sent to Robert L. McLean Street & No. 3355 Nelson St. P.O., Stale 8 ZIP Code Wheat Ridge CO 80033 Postage Ceriifietl Fee Special Delivery fee Restricted Delivery Fee Return Receipt Showing to Whom 8 Date Delivered Return Racaipt Showing to Whom Date. 8 Address of Delivery , 70fAL PoShga & Fees Postmark ar Data 1 t F i t ~~ c ~>•' ~ • ~.• •.y ~ n' p' 3 "V - o ~ m ~>id Tic^m~ 1 _. .a -y 1 r D N D m m m y m m b N O 'a ¢ "~' N O iiQ$a mmmm L~ ~ m~3 m ¢ N ~ m m a ~ ° m t° ~ Cn ymm ma.n°. to G f1' m Q A p ~ rt 3' y m ~°~ ~ o ~ m N LU m C 3 m C S ' 6 D 8 O ° m ~ 6 ~ 3 : + 0 W 0 s m ~ ~ g W m a m m f 3 n ~ m 2 c ° ri ' ffi r ~ m m m m ? N _ .-~., A .. c A ° y s o V ws•g•g...y o ro $ W m 2`n°-Dm VnOm m ~ ^ W c N Cn O ~m~n ~»33~ w ~ ~ ~ o as = - SW ° ' D ~ ¢ s~cmm m° Dcm O+ ~oo~ ~ m m F+.N m y ~ 31m3 ~ma3 m F + • ~ ~ ~ ca T • m ~ ... y 3 ~ E w ~ . . D^~ ^m f.~»330 W c m Fy W O ~~°9 z~,~aam ~ m ~ W U9 (D m m ~ n~~cmm.. ~ y. D rt Fi D c m y 1 m.3ca- mmmm m3 ~ o ~ fD ft , w 3 3 m y y m~ m _ m 1"''N N ~ 1 m m ~ mW~ ~ 1 N '~" '~ o » ma dean to (] m 3 t a °~ A m f° Cn N a ~:O .+m N C m ~ ~ T' ~ 2 ° m m D o ~ 3 m o O w c- 'o `; _ m g w m m w 3 m m m ' I °' m o < , ~ a a ~ I ' w m O N ~ ' ~A A o p ~ a a m m .x. m m m m to b ~ ~ °~ D ' ~' y. m m m 0 0 - ~ m m " m m . LD n m m m m m H o ~ a am O m ~ O. .-I ~ c w N :~ O L _ < C m ^ ^ ~ m. m N < ^ ~^ iA ~ w m mD ~ f ,` , Q m s O ' m e O~ m r' u n. ~ S3 m m a m m O ~\~ V 3x a am m o~ m o m ~ m N 3 ~ ~ D 6 m w m ~ ~ » . _ _ _ _.. p. ., ._.. » N - --I c . m w p .r Rf'. ~ . M1 ~: Y-.. V ~ Y ti e P 907 17,4 498 Certified Mail Receipt " No Insurance Coverage Provided Do not use for International Mail (See Reverse) / Paul Brown 3 P 907 114 519 Certified Maii Receipt No Insurance Coverage Provided Do not use for International Mail _St. m P 907 114 5p5 Certified Mail Receipt ~No Insurance Coverage Provided Do not use for International Mail , P 407 114 5~8 Certified Mai! Receipt NO Insurance Coverage Provided Oo not use for International Mail 3440 Nelson St. 0.O., staze a Zia code Wheat Ridge CC Fee C ReNrn Reeeipt Showing p~ to Whom a Dale Delivered T Relurn Receipt Showing to Wham, ~ Date, & Pddress of Delivery 3 -> iDTAL Postage - - ~ 8 FdBS fl Postmark or Da[a ti a 8003 rn T - ~ ~whi w'''a •3....y D f° m ~~~»v 3 ~ °' t rc Sll N ~ D» 33G ~ ~ " °' F .ten 2 -~ ° fF f° zi bJ m • a ~ m'< D[~m ~~c.m.»77 to m m m D ro 'D 'lJ (D FY o. m Q c a ::mmm ~ O F+. I-r O ^, -« m ~ n "' m r4 O ."3 m H ~m m3 mmm ~ f.+ W ~ m - N (9 ~ fT o W H G m 3 m Yr tnJ m ~FD''~oo2 c y ~ m.t $ ~ ~. O O W . . ~ m~ aam m ~aa "»37 _ D _ j .~ N G z~c Dc mui we..o ~ w, m_m ^._ n. yI . . . -' D o ~ n i m o t c J ~ - 4- _~_. c in m ~~, w 4 O r~r N ~ ~ ~ ro N• I-r ~ ~ b fD p ~ '~ o :* m K W ~~ _, E w b7 w ,7 rP N• rP N D Nor ~ t+ z b] r ~+ N u ~ O N m (~ ~ t't 4 ~ o O~ m O O W W .._ ^ ~ ^$ ~ % m m fh a ~ m m m m ~: w '< y m m n a' rx o m m 3 a~ m < a ~ ^^^m ~ ~ O y 3 1 p _c S7 m- a.. ~ 9 - a m .,.. _~ .' rte'-- m m g~D»vnn D^='~:m~~=oo -. n m y n m» 3 3 ~ m m T~~ m m n a.~ a-.::mmm m ~ m m c m~w33nwm m n~» mw-. m »o ~~• .p N Q m j o a~nmoa 9mm mo-a~ m 3.,aa.p,o d.Tp m mN' m w mNr~r, m °, o `; P» • V • S • • • CCm m m <FDn~00 Z n m ytmi m 99m ~ o'~ -- mmy~ -~` I tea.,»iu mm 3aoc333 9y~3mmm m » .. m W m»o miim~ m m m a. m-p a 3o o~mN t c ^3 oq4•-. y mw<prS~ m » c o . m a a S' ~ 6 m m - ~ 3 m m, ~ m s a m m 3 m ~ m m n o < n m' ~' S N ' m C m m ~' O m' 3 y m m m o ~ N ~. o _ %1 ~ m_ n ~ ~ ~ ~ y ro 0 m F y m m. m y d ~ y 3 m .s N m y m m m ~ m m a m- ... c O m o m ~. a m m I~..m a ' .o m ~ m m m m 'S P 9Q7 114 516 ~T Certified Mail Receipt ' No Insurance Coverage Provided Do not use for International Mail ent to Thomas Abott V ireet & Na. 10780 W. 35th Ave. p 907 114 5iJ7 Certified Mail Rec ' No Insurance Coverage Pry Do not use for International Fran Bellio Street 8 No. 3415 Nelson St.. to p 9~7 114 517 Certified Mail Receipt 'NO Insurance Coverage Provided Do not use for International Mail Bristol V W, 32nd Ave. 14 497 Certified Mail Receipt No Insurance Coveage Provided ~~ Do not use for International Mail (See Reverse) sem ro James H. Brown etreet & Nc. 10701 W. 32nd Ave. 'P. D., StaIe821P Cotle G.O 8003 wheat Ridge Posage Cerlifietl Fea Fee ~ to Wham 6 Dale Delivered Return Receipt Showing to Whom. m Date, 8 Adtlress of Delivery c ~ 'fC7rAL Postage $j C d Fees ~ Postmark or Date E_ tQ a " .. v N ~ m -_ ~. . , o. ~, ~ ••.•m ram •m. ano _: _" rn -N- D m~ 1 c v O-- ' D ~~£333G V1 3 - w W ~- ~ n m m S n~ ga m l . . - W m . m .. c (t'- O w to m a 'm mommy m o ~ nT3~mm" N mw - O ~ o. ~ ~. W O-. N ~ m.3.o m. _ ~ ... y N Ul t* ma m»oin iim_m-. IJ c m - C'F r'F a'a ~'mmoii. V[ ~ ~ H w ~ ~ r+ z ra ~• N f- m m ~FD.mrvnf)m -•xf~ ~•~~,5~,~9amU m •a mommy I ~~~z=,~m••,~ ~~~o c333 I -~am33mmm F m m"^.m w~ mow w N ~c rt to z~~ ¢ N W W ~ (D '3 N C] ¢ ~- ~m~FD.m.vooZ m ,a mOmmy~' m,~~T~~~~••tn a3c ay, ;:vmm a~3~oc333 N m~ a m 3 3 m m m I m n o ~°'w~' i-' o. m » o m ii m ~. _ c qa a.mman 7lm ~ma ~ N m 3 0.~ d r~/l ~ ~i O" ~ wNGF~n~DOQZ T ' _ - O' Da='~ mf»330 3 a = m .N w J ~ O lD , a pmmm m aam •a mammy n W i o ~ c fi F' N tp m'~°w ~~mm.. W m m b E x m a3~a..,»mmm ~ n D r. N a c~ o o c m ,3yH - m a ¢ N ~y3 H ~m O o m W ri' Cd m»~~ o m m v '" m (D Fi W O n . m ~ g 9a Tnm o a ~ . ".1 m m N ~ ~ ¢ ~ O m~ l0 o m O m ~o?~ 'y » m c ~ m a CO d a. ~ . m o. » y o O N ~ m ~ 3 m ~ w , G °-'. d W N m m m m 3• m m m P o S I8 , n a o ~ ~ y O O m Y' m J ~ + J .P A ~ O Via m to D c ~ . m ~ ~ •y a ^. t 1' ~ ~ ~ `~ ~' m m ~ m mn NO N J m , ,y m o. ~ £ o~ C m m a a D m . 6 m A m y 3a t~, i m m ~.s C m m m c O m p m m u m w o O n m i s m ^ y Z '~ 3 a C o 0 m O m - ~: re ~ nm m D y m -. _. ~- m m -' m^ m m w o _ f° m m 0 . .. _ , CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE D JUN 0 41992 June 3, 1992 PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT WHEATRIDGE PLANNING COMMISSION By this letter I would like to register my opposition to the proposed development on Nelson Street between 32nd and 35th Avenues for the following reasons: 1. Nelson is a very short street and proposed extra dwellings will impact the noise level as well as wear and tear on the street itself. The construction vehicles alone will cause a lot of noise and damage to the pavement. 2. Wheatridge already assessed its residents to enlarge the sewer system along West 38th a couple of years ago. What impact will this new building have on the current system that would serve this proposed new area? 3. Water seems to be on the endangered list - what impact will this development have on our supply not to mention the rates. 4. Over the last couple of years, developers certainly have not done this country any favors. They have built on every blade of grass they could find which, in many cases, has contributed to the savings and loan debacle. 5. What about the wild life that lives in that meadow and long the ditch. .After all, the environment is very much to the forefront these days, and I am sure you will all want be acknowledged for your part in its protection. Why is it necessary to turn every natural and green area into brick and mortar? It was because of the open green areas that I chose to move to Wheatridge many years ago. Please take the above into account as you weigh your decision. Thank you. Very truly yours, Y. M. Linthwaite Rooney 10505 West 34th Ave. Wheatridge, Colorado 80033 i CITY-OF WHEAT RIDGE STAFF REPORT TO: Planning Commission Date Prepared• May 27, 1992 Date of Meeting: June 4, 1992 Case Manager:~eredith Reckert Case No. & Name: WS-92-1/Brown Action Requested: Approval of a preliminary plat Location of Request: 10701 West 32nd Avenue Name & Address of Applicant(s): James H. Brown 10701 W. 32nd Avenue, Wheat Ridge & Owner: Same as above Approximate Area: 10.7 acres Present Zoning: Present Land Use Residential-One single family/vacant Surrounding Zoning: N: R-2; E, W: R-1,; S: City of Lakewood Surrounding Land Use: N, ~, E & W: low density residential Comprehensive Plan Designation: low density residential -- ----------------- ---y---'-------------------------------- Date Published: Ma 21 1992 Date to be Posted: May 21, 1992 Date Legal Notices Sent: May 19, 1992 Agency Check List (XX) Attached ( ) Not Required Related Correspondence ( ) Attached (XX) None --------------------------- ------------------------------------- ENTER INTO RECORD: (XX) Comprehensive Plan (XX) Case File- & Packet Materials (XX) Zoning Ordinance (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. s ~- Planning Commission Staff Report Page 2 Case No. WS-92-1/Brown I. REQUEST This applicant requests approval of a preliminary plat for Residential-One zoned property at 10701 West 32nd Avenue. Although the posting and publication indicates this is a combined preliminary and final plat, the submittal requirements for a final plat have not been met. Therefore, Planning Commission will be reviewing only the preliminary plat at this time. Typically, City Council does not review a preliminary plat. The next step in the process will be Planning Commission review of the final plat. II. SUBDIVISION DESIGN The purpose of a preliminary plat is to reflect the general layout of lots in a subdivision and to provide preliminary information concerning utility service, drainage-and traffic impacts: The applicant proposes a 28-lot plat with lot areas which meet or exceed the standards for R-1 lots. Overall, the average lot size contains 14,000 square feet. The one exception is Lot 14 which will require variances for lot size and lot width. See Section III. Staff would note that the existing house and garage at the southeast corner of the site straddle the common lot line between lots 3 and 4. A note will be added to the final plat indicating that these structures will be removed upon issuance of a building permit for either lot. There are many mature trees existing on the property. Staf£ would like to see these trees saved and recommends that their locations be noted on the final plat document. A note will also be required on the final plat requiring these trees remain unless in direct conflict with the footprint of a proposed home. Access to and through the subdivision is by way of full-width public streets intersecting with Nelson Street. All of the lots will have access to this internal roadway_except Lot 17 which will have access from West 35th Avenue. A note-will be added to the final plat restricting access to West 32nd Avenue from Lots 4, 5 and 28. On the final plat, full dedications for Oak Street, West 34th Place and West 32nd Place will occur. There will also be a nine-foot right-of-way vacation for West 32nd Avenue west of the section line. Staff concludes that the layout of the preliminary plat is. in conformance with the low density residential designation in the Comprehensive Plan and that the requirements of a preliminary plat have been met. Planning Commission Staff Report Page 3 Case No. WS-92-1/Brown III. VARIANCES As indicated in Section II,_LOt 14 as shown on the drawing will require a variance to the R-1 standards for lot area and lot width. The lot in question is 12,098 square feet in size where the minimum lot area for an R-1 lot is 12,500 (a 402 square foot variance). In addition, the lot width is shown as 89.5 feet where the minimum lot width in an R-1 zone is 100 feet (a 10.5 foot variance). If this variance is not approved, the final plat must be redesigned to either meet the R-1 standards for this lot or reduce the number of lots to 27 by absorbing Lot 14 into the design. Staff-has the following comments regarding the criteria used to evaluate a variance request: 1. 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? The subdivision could be developed with only 27 lots. Approval of the variance to allow a substandard lot is proposed to maximize the owner's economic gain. 2. Is the plight of the owner due to unique circumstances? Circumstances are not unique. 3. If the variation was granted, would it alter the essential character of the locality? Approval of the variance would not alter the character of the area. The lots north of West 35th Avenue are 10,500 square feet in size with 84 foot lot widths. Lots to the east of this subdivision vary in size from 12,500 square feet to 14,700 square feet. 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? Staff concludes this variance request constitutes convenience. 5. Would the conditions upon which the petition for a variance is based be applicable, generally, to the other property within the same zoning classification? A precedent could be established for similar requests. -_ Planning Commission Staff Report Page 4 Case No. WS-92-1/Brown 6. Is the purpose of the variation based exclusively upon a desire to make money out of the property? Staff concludes this request is economically motivated. 7. Has the alleged difficulty or hardship been created by any person presently having an interest in the property? Yes. 8. 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 will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other properties 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? The requested variances should not impair the supply of light and air to adjacent properties, increase congestion on the street or increase the danger of fire. It is not clear whether a substandard lot .size and width will affect property values. Although granting of the variance should not affect the character of the area or endanger the public welfare, it is clear that this request is solely economically motivated. Staff concludes that the criteria used to evaluate variance requests does not support the request and a recommendation of Denial is given. IV. AGENCY REFERRALS The preliminary lot and utility plan has been reviewed by all agencies. The final plat will be re-referred prior to Planning Commission public hearing. Westridge Sanitation District has sufficient capacity to ,serve. Sewer line extensions will be needed at developer's expense. U.S. West Communications will require an eight-foot easement along all rear lot lines on final plat. City of Lakewood would like to see landscaping along West 32nd Avenue and encourages that the existing mature trees on-site be saved. Public Works has reviewed the off-site drainage plan. They are reviewing the on-site drainage plan and street construction plans. Planning Commission Staff Report Page 5 Case No. WS-92-1/Brown V. STAFF CONChUSION Staff concludes that all agencies can serve the property and that, in general, the proposed density and layout of the preliminary plat meet the R-1 standards-and future land use designation of the Comprehensive Plan. Since-the requirements for a preliminary plat have been met, a recommendation of Approval is given for Case No. WS-92-1 with the following conditions: 1. Minor adjustments be made to the design so that all lots meet the minimum R-1 standards (i.e., some lots be reduced and Lot 14 be made larger or the area of Lot 14 be absorbed by the rest of the lots, thus reducing this to a 27-lot subdivision. 2. The existing mature trees be located on the final plat document. A note be added to the final plat indicating that these trees cannot be removed unless approved by Staff. VI. SUGGESTED MOTIONS' VARIANCE OPTION A: "I move that a request for approval of a 402 square foot lot size variance and a 10.5 foot lot width variance for Lot 14 of Applewood Castles Subdivision, be Denied for the following reasons: 1. The request is purely economically motivated; and 2. The criteria used to evaluate a variance does not support approval of this request." OPTION B: "I move that a request for approval of a 402 square foot lot size variance and a 10.5 foot lot width variance for Lot 14 of Applewood Castles Subdivision, be Approved for the following reasons: 1. 2. 3. " PRELIMINARY PLAT OPTION A: "I move that Case No. WS-92-1, a request for Approval of a preliminary plat for property located at 10701 West 32nd Avenue, be Approved for the following reasons: 1. All R-1 standards have been met; 2. All agencies can provide service to the subdivision; and 3. Staff recommends Approval. • ! Planning Commission Staff Report Page 6 Case No. WS-92-1/Brown With the following condition: 1. The existing mature trees be located on the final plat document. A note be added to the. final plat indicating that these trees cannot be removed unless approved by Staff." OPTION: B: I move that Case No. WS-92-1, a request-for Approval of a preliminary plat for property located at 10701 West 32nd Avenue, be Denied for the following reasons: 1. 2. 3. " <pc>srws921 •~ CASE NO.ws-92-1 AGENCY REFERRALS SUMMARY Fire: (Wheat Ridge) Can serve. Schools: Can serve. Water: (Consolidated Mutual) Can serve. Sewer: (westridgel Can serve with improvements. Mountain Bell: Will require an 8 foot easement along all rear lot li_nPS and ;n add;tion to dit h easement. Public Service Co: No response. State Land Use Comm.(over 5 acres) State Geologist: State Highway: Jefferson County:(HEALTH,COMMISSIONERS, PLANNING) AdJacent City:~Lakewoodl Would like to see landscaping along W. 32nd Ave. and encourage tree preservation. h~~ American Cablevision: Can serve. CITY DEPARTMENTS Public Works: Has reviewed off-site-drainage. Is reviewing on- Site drainage. Parks & Recreation: w;~~ rPrn,;rP S~ /nn;t. Police: Nn ra~nnnGa_ Building Inspection: Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 June 4, 1992 _- With the following conditions: 1. A unified control statement be added to the plan face; 2. A note regarding cross access and ingress/egress be added to the plat; 3. The legal description and survey information be amended to meet Public Works Department requirements; and 4. Other miscellaneous drafting items be corrected prior to City Council hearing. Motion seconded by 'Commissioner RASPLICKA. Commissioner ECKHARDT stated-that it was his hope that the developer would preserve landscaping whenever possible. Motion carried 6-0. B. Case No. WS-92-1: An application by James H. Brown for approval of a combined preliminary and final plat with variances for Residential-One zoned property located at 10701 West 32nd Avenue. Acting Chairman CERVENY asked those speaking to make their comments brief and try not to repeat the same comments made by others. This would allow time for anyone wishing to speak to have that opportunity. Meredith Reckert entered a letter into the record a letter of opposition from Y. M. Linthwaite Rooney, 10505 West 34th Ave. Copies of this letter were provided to Commission. She then presented the staff report, which included a number of slides. Entered and accepted into the record by Acting Chairman CERVENY was the Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Ordinance, Subdivision Regulations, exhibits, case file, packet materials and slides. Ms. Reckert stated that though the property had been posted for preliminary and final plat approval, the final plat submittal requirements had not been met, therefore only preliminary plat approval would be considered by Planning Commission at this time. Ms. Reckert noted that two motions would be required on this case and variance approval would require five of six commissioners -- present voting yes. Commissioner QUALTERI noted that Lots 13 .and 14 had substandard widths. Commissioner QUALTERI asked for further explanation regarding number 7 of the criteria. In response to number 7, Ms. Reckert stated that she had meant Planning Commission Minutes Page 4 June 4, 1992 that the applicant, who is the owner, had created his own hardship. There were no further questions. James H. Brown, 10701 West 32nd Avenue was sworn in. Mr. Brown stated he-melt- staff had done a good job on the staff report. He was hoping to get approval of his preliminary plan and the variance requested. Mr. Brown stated he did not want to alter lot lines.- Commissioner QUALTERI-asked Mr. Brown if he had an interest 3n the KenMar Subdivision. Mr. Brown stated he ,did not. He added that two lots in KenMar subdivision would be resubdivided, Lots 1 and 11. Commissioner QUALTERI asked of Lot 7 would be..involved. He was concerned that Lot 7 of the KenMar Subdivision contains a public utility easement, adjacent_-to Lot 14. Mr. Brown stated he had nothing to do with Lot 7. Commissioner QUALTERI suggested that the owner of Lot 7, KenMar Subdivision, might be willing to sell Mr. Brown 20 feet o£ land that Lot 14 is lacking. Mr. Brown acknowledged that was a possibility. Tom Nielsen, 10901 West 32nd Avenue was sworn in. Mr. Nielsen owns water rights in the ditch running diagonally across Mr. Brown's property. He was concerned that the proposed development might impede the water flow or if care was being taken to provide for clean-out areas. Ms. Reckert stated that Mr. Nielsen's-concerns would be addressed at the time of final plat approval. A11 ditch users will be notified and additionally there can be no disruption o£ service to ditch users. Commissioner QUALTERI asked Mr. Nielsen if a ditch easement -- exists. Mr. Nielsen stated there is a ditch easement. Commissioner QUALTERI asked if Mr. Nielsen if he had been asked to vacate the easement. Mr. Nielsen stated he had not been requested to vacate the easement. Planning Commission Minutes Page 5 June 4, 1992 Tom Abbott, 10780 West_35th Avenue was sworn in. Mr. Abbott stated he concurs with the Staff's recommendation of denial regarding the variance. Additionally, he agrees that every effort should be made to preserve the mature trees on the property. Mr. Abbott had concerns that landfill on the property in the recent past had not been properly done. Joe Eafanti did not wish to speak. Pat Andrews, 3270 Nelson Street was sworn in. Ms. Andrews had three concerns. They were: increased traffic on Nelson Street; doesn't want the view from her front yard toward the side yards of the proposed lots; and the location of the proposed street (32nd Place) as it would be located across Nelson from her driveway. Commissioner ECKHARDT stated that in order to accomplish Ms. Andrews' suggested modification of eliminating West 32nd Place as it intersects Nelson Street, an 800 foot cul-de-sac would be created, which is far above the 500 foot standard. Ms. Andrews, suggested the proposed street go between properties. Commissioner ECKHARDT asked if her concern was that car lights would shine into her bedrooms. Ms. Andrews answered she was__concerned_about noise, lights and congestion. Jim Veraldi, 3285 Moore Court was sworn in. Mr. Veraldi stated he was opposed to the requested variance and he concurred with Mr. Abbott's comments. Jeanette Veraldi declined to speak. Frank W. Zlogar, 3300 Moore Court was sworn in. Mr. Zlogar asked how Staff had made-the conclusion that there would be no increased traffic on Nelson Street. Ms. Reckert stated she did not state there would be no increased traffic. What she said was that approval of the variance would not increase traffic flow more than a standard-sized lot, providing standards were met. Mr. Zlogar stated his concern was how greatly this development would increase traffic in the neighborhood. Susan Easter, 3440 Nelson Street was sworn in. Ms. Easter was concerned about the alignment of the proposed street. She stated that many vehicles currently exceed the speed limit. Biil Easter declined to speak. Planning Commission Minutes Page 6 June 4, 1992 Eugene Archer declined to speak. Robert Smith declined to speak. Richard amb, 3250 Nelson Street was sworn in. Mr. Lamb stated he objected to the proposed location of streets coming into Nelson Street. Mr. Lamb stated it made more sense to enter and exit the subdivision onto West 32nd Avenue, which is constructed to handle heavy traffic. Commissioner ECKHARDT stated that as Mr. Lamb proposed, school children going to Prospect Valley Elementary would have to cross two streets, not one. He added that the developer would be required to install sidewalk along the west side of Nelson Street. Ms. Reckert pointed out where sidewalk was installed only along a portion of Nelson Street. Discussion followed. Ann Neal declined to make comment, however deferred to her husband. Billie J eat, 3395 Nelson Street was sworn in. Mr. Neal stated he was opposed to granting the variance. He stated his home is on Lot 7, KenMar Subdivision-and if the variance was granted, he would be subject to increased density. He stated he supported Mr. Abbott's objection concerning drainage at the northwest end of the property. Tony Rodrigues, 10762 West'35th Place was sworn in. Mr. Rodrigues stated he supported Mr. Abbott's as well as Mr. Lamb's comments. He thought the main access to the proposed development should be off West 32nd Avenue. In this way, property values and neighborhood ambience could be protected. Mr. Gidley explained standards for street design and why these standards are so important. The Public Works department strongly recommends that traffic from the development access Nelson Street, since it functions as a local collector street. Discussion followed regarding alternatives. Commissioner QUALTERI asked who makes such decisions in the Public Works. Mr. Gidley answered several individuals participate, but primarily the City traffic engineer. Commissioner QUALTERI had some confusion why West 32nd Avenue could not be accessed by traffic from this proposed development, since it had been recently widened to accommodate-more traffic. Planning-Commission Minutes Page 7 June 4, 1992 Mr. Gidley stated West 32nd Avenue could handle additional traffic, however, additional access would not be advisable, following established standard street design criteria. Commissioner QUALTERI stated that if access were allowed to West 32nd Avenue, all lots could then front Nelson Street. Mr. Gidley drew on the site map an alternate street design accessing West 32nd Avenue. However, he reiterated the potential safety problems with such a plan. Several alternate street configurations were discussed. Acting Chairman CERVENY asked those present not to cheer or clap. Mr. Brown stated his engineer was present and that soil tests had been performed on the property. He added that only two fill permits had been obtained. Tom Abbott reiterated concerns about increased traffic and the existing problems with Nelson Street. He supported the idea of accessing the development directly off-West 32nd Avenue. He felt the owner made no effort to consider the existing neighborhood in this proposed preliminary development. Mr. Abbott could see no need to approve the variance to allow the substandard lot size, and that if the small lot was allowed, it would decrease the property values in-the area. Acting Chairman CERVENY called a ten-minute recess at 9:04 p.m. Meeting reconvened at 9:29 p.m. Acting Chairman CERVENY apologized for the delay. Commissioner ECKHARDT moved that the request for approval of a 402 square foot lot size variance, and a 10.5 foot lot width variance for Lot 14 of the proposed Applewood Castles Subdivision (Case No. WS-92-2) be Denied for the following reasons: 1. The request is economically motivated and not justified; and 2. The criteria used to evaluate a variance does not support approval of this request;-and 3. The subdivision can be redesigned slightly to eliminate the need for this variance. Commissioner QUALTERI seconded the motion. Motion carried 4-2, with Commissioners JOHNSON and OWENS voting against. Commissioner ECKHARDT moved that Case No. WS-92-1, a request for approval of a preliminary plat £or property located at 10701 West 32nd Avenue, be forwarded to City Council with a recommendation for APPROVAL for the following reasons: Planning Commission Minutes Page 8 June 4, 1992 1. All R-1 standards have been met; 2. All agencies can provide service to the subdivision; and 3. Staff recommends Approval. With the following conditions: 1. That Oak Street be redesigned so that it is extended in a southeasterly manner to tie in with Oak Street at West 32nd Avenue; 2. West 32nd Place (first street between Oak Street and Nelson Street) between Lots 1 and 2 and 7 and 8 be eliminated and that the northerly portion of Oak Street be swung westerly between Lots 13 and 20 to eliminate the need for a variance to Lot 14; 3. An easement for the irrigation ditch be provided; and 4. The subdivision should be designed so that the mature trees on the property can be preserved. Mr. Gidley drew on the map being projected the suggested street. configuration for clarification purposes. Commissioner OWENS seconded the motion. Commissioner ECKHARDT explained the portion of his motion regarding the irrigation ditch easement for Mr. Nelson. Motion carried 6-0. Mr. Brown stated it looked as though the suggested street configuration might run through his existing. house.. He explained. Commissioner ECKHARDT asked if the building weren't going to be relocated. He added that the street would be constructed when the homes are .built. Mr. Gidley stated the street-would be constructed when the first building permit was issued requiring access. - Commissioner ECKHARDT asked when Mr. Brown would be moving or removing his existing structures that straddle a lot line. Mr. Brown stated the possibility exists. Commissioner QUALTERI asked Mr. Brown if Oak Street is 150 feet west o£ Nelson Street. Mr. Brown stated he wasn't certain. Planning Commission Minutes Page 9 June 4, 1992 Commissioner QUALTERI stated that it appeared that only Mr. Brown's garage would be in the path of the suggested street configuration. Discussion followed. Mr. Gidley suggestion an optional access to the property. Commissioner ECKHARDT felt the better option was to tie in with Oak Street to the west. Acting Chairman CERVENY reminded those present that the Planning Commission was making a recommendation-only at this time. Mr. Gidley explained the process hereafter. 8. CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING 9. OLD BUSINESS A. Continued Review of Quarter-Section Zoning Maps Mr. Moberg was present to present another group of quarter- section zoning maps. He stated that as per Commission's request, a border delineation had been added to NW 16. If Commission likes this type of border, it will be added to the remaining maps. On Section NE 16, a PID was omitted, which will be corrected. As per request, the neighboring city was added. On Section Sw 16, the Arvada city designation was added; A-1 zoning was added twice to correct a previous error. A case had been inadvertently left off and a request that Robb Street was be drawn in to Ridge Road. Commissioner ECKHARDT asked about including the PSC transmission line. Mr. Moberg stated that these are. not normally shown on the quarter-section maps. Commissioner ECKHARDT noted it is a large easement. Mr. Gidley agreed with Commissioner ECKHARDT. Commissioner ECKHARDT felt that ditches should be shown, as well. Mr. Moberg stated that the only ditch that had been delineated was Rocky Mountaih ditch. Discussion followed. PUBLIC HEARING SPEAKER~LIST CASE NO: wG-a.-i: DATE: T,nP a. 1992 REQUEST: An application by James H. Brown for approval of a combined preliminary and final plat with variances for Residential-One zoned property located at 10701 West 32nd Avenue. Position O.n i SPEAKER'S NA E 6 ADDRESS (PLEASE PRINT) >c~ p~ ~~tt-'r~ a1 %f V~ ~ -'~v~ R~r~ v.J~ ~, , . ~_ _F ~~ ~ i ~I /G-t-Cr ~„-~ ;~ IH FAVOR Request; Check) OPPOSED X .~'~. v 0 ,- : { --, ? •-. ._ ~ _ - ter, -_.- t ~ , i s : i : -- , s ; -, - ~ , CERTIFICATION OF RESOLUTION CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE PLANNING COMMISSION CASE N0: WS-92-1 LOCATION: 10701 West 32nd Avenue APPLICANT(S) NAME: James H. Brown OWNER(S) NAME: James H. Brown 10701 W. 32nd Ave., Wheat Ridge REQUEST: Approval of a preliminary plat w/variance APPROXIMATE AREA: 10.7 acres 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 heard 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 OWENS, that the request for a 402 square foot lot. size -- variance foi' Lot 14 of_the,proposed Applewood Castles Subdivision (Case No. WS-92-1) be forwarded_to City Council with a recommendation. for DENIAL for the following reasons: 1. The request is economically motivated and not justified; and 2. The criteria used to evaluate a variance does not support approval of this request; and 3. The subdivision can be redesigned slightly to eliminate the need for this variance. VOTE: YES: Eckhardt, Qualteri, Rasplicka and Cerveny NO: Johnson, Owens 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 4-2 vote of the members present at their regular meeting held in the Council Chambers of the Municipal Building, Wheat Ridge, Colorado, oncth~ 4th day of Jja3ne, 1992. i , ,?3 Cail Cerveny, Acting hairman Sandra Wiggins, Se~t/ ary WHEAT RIDGE PLANNING COMMISSION WHEAT RIDGE PLANNING COMMISSION <pc>resovarws921 • • CERTIFICATION OF RESOLUTION CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE PLANNING COMMISSION CASE NO: WS-92-1 LOCATION: 10701 West 32nd Avenue APPLICANT(S) NAME: James H. Brown OWNER(S) NAME: James H. Brown 10701 W. 32nd Ave., Wheat Ridge REQUEST: Approval of a preliminary plat w/variance APPROXIMATE AREA: 10.7 acres 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 heard 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 OWENS, that the request for approval of a preliminary plat for Applewood Castles Subdivision (Case No. WS-92-1) be forwarded to City Council with a recommendation for APPROVAL for the following reasons.:. 1. All R-1 standards have been met; 2. All agencies can provide service-to the subdivision; and 3. Staff recommends approval. With the following conditions: 1. That Oak Street be redesigned so that it is extended in a southeasterly manner to tie in with Oak Street at West 32nd Avenue; 2. West 32nd Place (first street between Oak Street and Nelson Street) between Lots 1 and 2 and 7 and 8 be eliminated and that the northerly portion of Oak Street be swung westerly between Lots 13 and 20 to eliminate the need for a variance to Lot 14; 3. An easement for the irrigation ditch be provided; and 4. The subdivision should be designed so that the mature trees on the property can be. preserved. • • Planning Commission Resolution Case No. WS-92-1/Brown Page 2 VOTE: YES: Eckhardt, Qualteri, Owens, Rasplicka, Cerveny and Johnson 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 6-0 vote of the members present at their regular meeting held in the Council Chambers of the Municipal Building, Wheat Ridge, Colorado, on 4th day of Ju 1992. i ~~ ~ ~ Carl Cerveny, Acti .Chairman Sandra Wiggins, Sec ry WHEAT RIDGE PLANN NG COMMISSION WHEAT RIDGE PLANNIN OMMISSInN <pc>resows92l • . i 7500 WEST 29TH AVENUE P.o. BoX 63a The City of WHEAT RIDGE, CO 80034-0638 (303) 234-5900 -- -heat City Admin. Fax # 234-@924 Police Dep;. Fax # 235-2949 - ~Rldge June 9, 1992 Mr. Chuck Howard, Postmaster Wheat Ridge Post Office 4210 Wadsworth Blvd. Wheat Ridge CO 80033 Dear Chuck: Please let this letter serve as a followup to our conversation of last week when 1 indicated that I had received reports concerning a postal employee. I am currently serving as case manager for a request for subdivision approval west of Nelson Street between West 32nd and West 35th Avenues. The applicant would like to build a 28-lot, single-family development with an average lot size at roughly 14,000 square feet. I received two reports that a postal carrier on his mail route was telling residents in this neighborhood that the proposal was for duplex and apartment buildings and they had better attend the June 4, 1992 Planning Commission public hearing for this case to protect their interests and property values. I feel spreading inaccurate rumors is inappropriate behavior for a governmental employee and would encourage you to take appropriate action. If you have any questions or would like to discuss this further, feel free to contact me at 235-2848. Sincerely, Meredith Reckert Planner MR:slw tJ RerpOrd Prtlre~~ •28LOfs -500 WEST 29TH AVENUE - -- - - - T172 clryOf P.O. BOX 638 WHEAT RIDGE. CO 80034-0636 (303a 234-5900 ~[ ~ ~L eaL City Admin. Fax # 234-5924 Police Dept. Fax ;. 235.2949 ~ midge June 26, 1992 ~' (Cu1 The Wheat Ridge Department of Community Development has received a request for approval of a final subdivision plat at the property described below. Your response to the following questions and any comments on this proposal would be appreciated by July 10 1992 No response from you by this date will constitute no objections or concerns regarding this proposal. CASE NO: WS-92-1/Brown CITY OF ~f~'-?T RIDGE R LOCATION: 10701 West 32nd Avenue D - JUL 0 91992 ~ '~ REQUESTED ACTION: Approval of a final subdivision plat , PURPOSE: 28-lot subdivision ~PLAN,~IN~ ~,Q,~ELOP}y't<;.,e APPROXIMATE AREA: 10.7 acres 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 shoul/d/f//~a~ " Act~~-a-ppro/"v//a~,l of thU/-is request?- Please reply to:/Uwt~.l~,~,~~~LJr-C~G~[~ Department of Planning & Development -- DISTRIBUTION: X Water District (Con. Mutijtal X Sanitation District (Westridg~ X Fire District (Wheat Ri~1ge X Adjacent City (Lakewood) X Public Service Co. X US West Communications X State Land Use Commission State_Geological Survey Colorado Dept. of Transportation <pc>referralform 06-26-92 X American Cable Vision Jefferson Co. Health Dept. Jefferson Co. Schools Jefferson Co. Commissioners Wheat Ridge Post Office Wheat Ridge Police Dept. X Wheat Ridge Public Works Dept. Wheat Ridge Parks & Recreation X Colorado Div. of Wildlife Wheat Ridge Bldg. Division in r . , r.,..,, ~,~j f 01 9 COMMUNICATIONS City of Wheat Ridge P.O. Box 638 7500 West 29th Avenue Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80034 Attention: M. Reckert, RE:Case No: WS-91-2/Brown, 10701 West 32nd Avenue US WEST will need to .do a Land Development Agreement (LDA) and a Trench Agreement before facilities will be placed for this Development. US WEST contact to work out the details on the agreements is: James A. Breuch 451-2669 9351 grant Street Thornton, Colorado 80229 Thank You, ~~~-- 7-7-9z- James A. Breuch Manager Y e . • -500 WEST 29TH AVENUE ThB C11}/ Of P.O. BOX 638 WHEAT RIDGE. C0 80034-0638 - (3031234-5900 GWheat City Aamm. Fax » 234-5924 Police Dept. Fax » 235-2949 Ridge June 26, 1992 The Wheat Ridge Department of Community Development has received a request for a royal of a final subdivision lat - at the property described below. Your-response to the following questions and any comments on this proposal would be appreciated by July 10 1992 - No response from you by this date will constitute no objections or concerns regarding this proposal. CASE NO: WS-92-1/Brown LOCATION: 10701 West 32nd Avenue REQUESTED ACTION; Approval of a final subdivision plat PURPOSE: 28-lot subdivision APPROXIMATE AREA: 10.7 acres 1. Are public facilities or services provided by your agency adequate to serve t s development? YES ~ NO If "NO", please explain below. SvlsZS ~XTE+vs<aw o'ff' ~iv-cie.~ ri A's --.sEgar.~.p~ _- _ 2. Are service lines available to the development? YES // NO If "NO", please explain below. $.rmg £C/6r N9 F.i~/c/ii65 /lIC4Y i~ifvF s~ BE .e(.,GU N76~ A/ r/fE eufto+inE.ES ~X.p€NSE 3. Do you have adequate capacities to service the development? YES / NJO If "NO" , please /expGla-gin 'be`low. /UP'~Q,y!(.I (/nL/.Le PA .fl..n U~O/~i~~l4.Y '"'W ~i~l~~'~'~ ~~'~-st/dl. 4. Can and will your gency service this proposed development subject to your rules and regulations? YES ~ NO If "NO", please explain below. Aso~~E ~€s</'r/+~4 ~•~ t NFa.¢ 7NE 4lrss S~.{r.f yy(,s ~,eaAatAi .n AY ,°sAOt rd 5. Are there any concerns or problems your agency has identified which would or shoulder///Ja~ffect appro~v//a~,l of this request? Please reply to:/~~%~.~/1~~~~~C-~=-t~~ Department of Planning & Development DISTRIBUTION: X Water District (Con. Mutual X Sanitation District (Westridg~ X Fire District (Wheat Ridge X Adjacent City (Lakewood) X Public Service Co. X US West Communications X State Land Use Commission State Geological Survey Colorado Dept. of Transportation <pc>referralform 06-26-92 X American Cable Vision Jefferson Co. Health Dept. Jefferson Co. Schools Jefferson Co. Commissioners Wheat Ridge Post Office Wheat Ridge Police Dept. X Wheat Ridge Public Works Dept. Wheat Ridge Parks & Recreation X Colorado Div. of Wildlife Wheat Ridge Bldg. Division m Public Service° Laic se.NCe company of caoaao In• roffice Memo DAT_ E:~7~~_ng 3q. 199 TD'_ Ms Marodith Reck;r _--~~~~#~Y of Wage FROM:_ Rov R I'rafton no;neer' n o ry;ten N_MR SU$J: Gao;tat Improvement Prooo -~ R A' ~ t r gineer no PROPOSAL NAME: Applewood Castles ADDRESS: 10701 West 32nd Avenue Case #: WS-92-i/frown GOVERNING AUTHORITY: City o~ IrJheatridge DATE RECEIVED IN ENGINEERING: June 29, 1992 We received and have reviewed the plans for the proposed subdivision. We have electric and gas distribution facilities along Nelson St., W. 32nd Ave and W. 35th Ave that may be used to extend service to this development. At this paint it appears that na reinforcement will be required, however, further study may indicate reinforcement at the expense of the customer. We have an existing single phase electric line near the west side of this proposal that may be used to serve the area and it does not appear to be a conflict, at this point in time. Thanks ~~ R+oY R. Cra#t n Supervisor ^f Engineerinu FORM fC) 850-224076 IU~~RT ~IDG~ ~I~~ ~~O1~C110~ DISI~IC1 P.O. Box 507 3880 Upham Street Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80034 (303) 424-7323 July 1, 1992 Ms. Meredith Reckert City of Wheat Ridge Department of Planning and Development 7500 West 29th Avenue P.O. Box 638 Wheat Ridge, CO 800334-0638 ~ClTY'Or jIVH~.4?'RfI3Zix .JU.L ~p s 1992 ~?~tt~kRk~ & RE: Subdivision Plat Review for 10701 West 32nd Avenue Wheat Ridge Case No. WS-92-I/Brown Dear Meredith: This will acknowledge receipt of your correspondence dated June 26, 1992. The fire district has reviewed the plat plan for the above-captioned project and feel we can adequately provide emergency services and the necessary fire hydrant requirements. To that end we have contacted Consolidated Mutual Water Company and have expressed our concerns with respect to their plans for placement and number of fire hydrants. The water company has assured us that the water service mains and the fire hydrants will be installed simultaneously. Based upon these circumstances, the fire district has no objection to the planned development. '":;::, Please feel free to contact me if you have a question. Sincerely, ~~~~~~ Daniel E. Ladd District Manager THE CONSOLIDATED MUTUAL WATER COMPANY 12700 West 27th Avenue • P.O. Box 15068 LAKEWOOD, COLORADO 80215 Telephone 235-0451 Ms. Meredith Reckert City of Wheat Ridge Department of Planning and Development P.O. Box 638 Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80034-0638 July 1, 1992 CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE .lUL 0 6 1992 PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT Re: City of Wheat Ridge Case Number WS-92-1/Brown, proposed final plat of Applewood Castles Subdivision, 10701 West 32nd Avenue Dear Ms. Reckert: This will acknowledge receipt of your correspondence dated June 26, 1992 regarding the above referenced property. Please be advised that the above referenced property is in an area served by The Consolidated Mutual Water Company by virtue of a Distributor's Contract with the Denver Water Board. -- -- Our records indicate that we are currently serving a property addressed as 10701 West 32nd Avenue through a 5/8-inch meter (CMWCo Tap Number 328/Account Number B-8673). This tap is_included in a portion of -the proposed subdivision. The owners should contact us to-determine how this tap can best be utilized. Fire- protection requirements should_be obtained. from the Wheat Ridge Fire Protection District and _those_xequirements__fQrwarded to this office at the earliest possible time. Please be advised that the water pipeline location and size, as shown on the proposed plat, is subject to change_ as a result of further discussion between the Company, the owners, their engineers and any requirements as determined by the Wheat Ridge Fire Protection District. If you have any questions or comments regarding this correspondence, please do not hesitate to contact us. _ - Sincerely, ae ueen Superintendent of Distribution MEQ:j1 cc: James H. Brown, Applicant Dave Roberts, Wheat Ridge Fire Protection District Robert J. Rivera, CMWCo Vice President, E&0 Lynn Newman, CMWCo Chief Engineer Donna Strong, CMWCo Engineering/Distribution Clerk ~ . MEMi]F:ANDUM T0: FF:~M: STEVE %;HUCt DATE: July 6, 19'3 ,,II '' SULJEiT: AF'F'LEWUUD CASTLES Svbwi~lVPd G/Zf. ~Z On fLlYtheY review, I find the following problems with AF'FLE- WOOD CASTLES Subdivision: ~~`1, there appears tr_. be a 4' error sr_,mewhere in l~~~ts 8 Y. through i4. there is an irn_orrect dimension in l~~t 27 CSo. line>. ,/ ~ ~~ ~ °~ 0 ^- r ~. V ~~ \\,~ " " (~ .~, ~. , STATE OF COLORADO Roy Romer, Governor DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES DIVISION OF WILDLIFE AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER Perry D. Olson. Director 6060 Broadway Denver, Colorado 8027 8 Telephone: (303) 297-1192 July 9, 1992 Meredith Reikirt Department of Planning and Development The City of Wheat Ridge 7500 West 29th Avenue P.O. Box 638 Wheat Ridge, CO 80034-0638 Re: Case number WS-92-1/Brown Dear Ms. Reikirt: REFER TO For Wildlife- For People CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE JUL 13 1992 PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT The above proposed development should not have any significant negative impacts on wildlife if the existing mature trees are not needlessly removed. The mature trees found on the property are the most important wildlife habitat. If these trees can be saved, the impact to wildlife c~ill.be minimal. Thank you for this opportunity to comment on land use in the city of Wheat Ridge. If you have any questions, feel free to contact myself or Dave Weber. Sincerel ~~ John Hood. District Wildlife Manager DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES, Kenneth Salazar. Executive Director WILDLIFE COMou s POSwift ill~embe H Geo ge VanDenBerg, MemberopLarry M rWrigh4 MemberVeThomasbM. EvehMembe Frank, Member July 9, 1992 Merideth Reckert Planning Department City of Wheat Ridge 7500 West 29th Avenue Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80034 Re: OR-92-08 Applewood Castles Plat Dear Merideth: City of Lakewood Planning, Permits & Pu61ie Works 445 South Allison Parkway Lakewood, Colorado 80226-3105 Phone - (303) 987-7900 Fax - (303) 987-7979 ~~?TY OF WH~A7~ RIDGE ' D -~- JUL 14 1992 `~~A~NNING ~ DEVELOPMENT Thank you for referring this final plat for our review. We have no objections to this subdivision. Our Engineering Division has asked for a copy of the Final Drainage report for our information. Sincerely, _.~.~Jlly+ ~~' Holly Paver Project Planner HP:jw cc: 0 R-92-08 File 154 (Paver) or9208.paver 'S00 WEST =9TH AVENUE _ ThB City Of P.O. 80X 638 WHEAT RIDGE. CO 8003»•C63S X3031 234.5900 ~7Vheat C~tv Aamin. Fax z 234-592» Police Dept. Fax ~ 2352949 Ridge July 17, 1992 The Wheat Ridge Department of Community Development has received a request for a royal of a final subdivision _ lot - at the property described below. Your response to the following questions and anNocSe ponse from1yourby this would be appreciated by July 29 1992 ' date will constitute no objections or concerns regarding this proposal. CASE NO: WS-92-1/Brown LOCATION: 10701 West 32nd Avenue REQUESTED ACTION• Approval of a final subdivision plat PURPOSE: 28-lot subdivision APPROXIMATE AREA: 10.7 acres- 1. Are public facilities or services provided by your agency adequate to serve this developmei~'-"NO", please explain below. YES NO - 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: ~~~-~~~~t-~~-~"~ Department of Planning & uevelopme~~t DISTRIBUTION: X Water District (Con. Mutual X Sanitation District (Westridg~ X Fire District (Wheat Ridge X Adjacent City (Lakewood) X Public Service Co. X US West Communications X State Land Use Commission State Geological Survey Colorado Dept. of Transportation <pc>referralform 06-26-92 io v, ..; r„~,., X American Cable Vision Jefferson Co. Health Dept. Jefferson Co. Schools Jefferson Co. Commissioners Wheat Ridge Post Office Wheat Ridge Police Dept. X Wheat Ridge Public Works Dept. Wheat Ridge Parks & Recreation X Colorado Div. of Wildlife Wheat. Ridge Bldg. Division ~ STATE OF COLORADO EXECUTIVE CHAMBERS 736 State Capitol Denver, Colorado 80203-1792 Phone (303) 666-2477 July 31, 1992 City of Wheat Ridge Department of Planning and Development 7500 W. 29th Ave. P.O. Box 638 Wheat Ridge, CO 80034-0638 Ladies and Gentlemen: CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE D 2 pUG 0 ~ 1992 PLANNING & DEVELDPNIENT This letter acknowledges receipt of information regarding the application of .the City of Wheat Ridge, which relates to approval of a final subdivision plan -- Case No. W5-92-1/Brown. The Colorado Land Use Commission does not have any specific comments regarding same at this time. Thank you for the submittal. If .you have any questions, please contact me at 866-2155. Sincerely, ~~. Cole Finegan Chief Leqal Counsel 04 ~o~ , e y O I +~,t ~O~ K rs76 z: Roy Romer Governor CF : 1a.-. .J »!t, THL RJt61C RLCGIlC C04~ATIOM ~ paw 35 Pane 38 SUBDIVISION SUMMARY FORM I r'f T! G[-~ County J ~ - Type of Submis sion: tion E ~ Fequest £oz xemp U 1 ~" (~R~ Preliminary Plan ~ Date: • ~l)l- Final Plat ,~_ k~C~P ~~~{~ S A~OI ~V . Subdivision Nama: Filing .•'' Location of Subdivision: TOWNSHIP ~ s RANGE ~~ Vy SEC 1/4 P ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~ / l v- I~ Owner(s) Name ~~~~ ~~ 32`"~ ~`~ n ~~' ) ~` - Address Subdivider(s) Name C~(,L')~Q Address Number of Type of Subdivision Dwelling Units Area .(Acres) ~ °f i Total Area I b . ~- OC~ o (~(\ Single Family (1 Apartments ( ) Condominiums ( ) Mobile Homes - { ) Commercial N.A. ( ) Industrial N.A. { ) Other (specify) Street Walkways Dedicated School Sites Reserved School Sites Dedicated Park Sites Deserved Park Sites Private Open Areas Easements Other (specify) •H Map Measure Total y ~~ . ~ ~ Ga ° 8 CCR 15Q1 • 1 THE CODE OF COLORADO REGULAT)ONS 1 r ' ~~ _.,. , ~~~ ~ nn, The Pusuc R[eowo Cow~wnox . Paga 37 Au Riu,n R:s[av[o Estimated water Requirements gallons/day• Proposed Water Source(s) ('~7P~~11~f L~"1~-~ ~f>"~~~ w~-~-~~ ~~• Estimated Sewage Disposal Requirement gallons/day. 9 c/ Proposed Mesas of Sewage Disposal {~Uh ~ I <- - (N~S~1rf ~~ ~~~iT v S ] /r~" ACTION: Planning Commission Recommendation Approval ( ) Disapproval ( ) Remarks ~ ~ Y'PV t P vt) (fl^ ~ - ~ ~ Z Date ~ 19_ Haard of County Cammissione rs Approval ( ) Disapproval ( ) Exemption under C.R.S. 106-2-33(3} (d) Remarks (if exemption, state reason) Date 19_ Note: This form is required by C.R.S. 1((~~06-3-37(n4) but is not a part of the regulations of `.I~ 0-C ~~- `~ - ~~~'' r Y~ . TF!E CODE OF COLORADO REGULATIONS 8 CCR 15U1 • 1 ~~ MAJOR ACTIVITY NOTZCE City/Town of ~~~~'~' ~1`~~7'C gDate: 11J~~ ~~ . 19 lZ I. Hama and Address of Applicant ~ ~ 1/itiQ 3 ~ I-~~~~'' 1(11 u~. 324. ~~, ~ lN~~ 2. Location of parcel 6y legal de:cription to include as a minimums-7 p Township ~ ~ Range ~Oa (~ , Seotion Lb 1/4 Section ~, Bloek• _ ~ fit' 7. Charaetasiatiea of Parcel: Arne (to nearnat acre) IC~•~~ /Ci C-V'p S Current Current 8. Purpose o! Application ( ) Commercial or Industrial Building Permit (~) subdivision ( ) Commercial or Industrial Rezoning - COMPLETE ITEFSS IN 5 nrrnW. - COMPLETE IT~15 IN 6 BELOW. - CCMPLETE 2TEM5 IN 7 BELCW. 3. If Commere'_al or Industrial building permit application, completn the following: Specify principal use(s) of building being constructed or other changes proposed: Indicate number of dwelling units, i! any, on lot: Current'NUmber Number to bn added Number Zo be demolished Tata1 Square !ant non-residential floor space: Current Proposed •If assigned YtG ' 8 CCR 1501 -1 THE CODE OF COLORADO REGULATIONS ©t~lf. TN[ PV\LtC RaCORa COR rowATION Au Rtswrs Rsssw via Indicate tyoe of change: [ ) New building of structure. ( ) Addition, ( ) Alteration, ( ) Moving of building. ( ) Demolition of building, ( ) Other (describe) ~~ 6. If subdivision application, complete the followings Specify principal use(s) proposed within the subdivision: ~l I~ rrC, ~ T~!-'l I l,'`'1 Q F S1 3~ Q~~ L }'F ~- Issdieau the total area to be dnvoted to each: indieatn the total area Co be devoted to each: Single family: ~il, ~- Aorns (or) Sq. Ft. ~ _r 2~ lots; ~Dwalling Units Apartment: Acres (or) Sq. Ft. ~ ~t lour swelling Vnits Condominium: Arras (or) Sq. Ft. _ _r lour Dwellfnq Units Mobile Homes Arras (or) Sq. Ft. _ lots; __r Duelling Units Coroserc ial: Acres Ioz) Sq. Ft. ~ _7 lotss pvelling Dnits Indust: ial: Acres (or) Sq. Ft. _ _r _:lotsr Dwelling Units Sotal: ~O~~-ACSes (oz) Sq, Ft. ~_ ~lotsvZg Dwelling Onits Proposed if any) :, system, 7. If rezoning (i.e.,. change of distzict) application, complete t.*.e following: Zoning designation desired: Specify prine Lpal use(s) proposed for the parcel: Proposed use~and areas (indicate as appropriate) Single family: _ _ Acres for) Sq. Pt. _ _r lotsr Dweiliaq Units Apartments ~_ Acres (or) Sq. Ft. _ _r Iotst Dwelling Units Condominium: _ _ Acres (or) Sq. Ft. __~ lots; Dwellinq'Units Mobile Home: _ _ Acres (or) Sq. Ft. __r ~_ ots% Dwelling Units C_~sereial: ~_ Arses (ot) Sq. Ft. __s Locsr Dwnllinq Units Indusu ial: __ Acres (or) Sq• Ft. __r lots; YiC , THE CODE OF COLORADO REGULATIONS 8 CCR 1541 ' ~ 7500 WEST 29TH AVENUE The City of P.O. BOX 638 WHEAT RIDGE. CO 80034-0638 (303) 234-5900 cWheat City Admin. Fax # 234-5924 Police Dept. Fax # 235-2949 Ridge July 17, 1992 Sun Engineering 16645 East 11th Place Aurora CO 80011 Dear Ash: Please find attached a copy of the address and fee schedule for the Colorado Geological Survey. According to state statutes, any subdivision over five acres in size must be reviewed by this agency. I would recommend that you send a copy of the Applewood Castles final subdivision plat to them for their review. The fee is a cost that Mr. Brown will have to absorb. If you have any questions, please contact me at 235-2848. Sincerely, . /~~~ Meredith Reckert Planner MR:slw cc: Case No. WS-92-1 P.O. BOX 638 TELEPHONE: 303/237-6944 The City Of 7500 WEST 29TH AVENUE • WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO 80033 ~V6lheat Ridge M E M O R A N D II M T0: BOB GASPAR, CODE ENFORCEMENT ~p FROM: JOHN OSS, SENIOR PROJECT ENGINEERU RE: FILLING IN AN IRRIGATION/DRAINAGE DITCH NEAR 32ND AVENUE AND PARFET STREET DATE:- JULY 30, 1992 This ditch carries irrigation tail water and storm water from upstream of West 32nd Avenue. A drainage report prepared for Applewood Brookside Subdivision on the west side of Parfet Street identified approximately 300 acres upstream of the ditch and Parfet Street. Construction of the storm sewer in West 32nd and curb and gutter along West 32nd will .certainly improve the storm water situation but only for lower intensity storms. Per your request, I visited the affected ditch. My observations indicate that-fhe homeowners along both sides of the ditch have changed the condition and carrying capacity of the ditch. The homeowner on the north east corner of 32nd And Parfet has filled his back yard 2 to 4 feet The fill extends to approximately the edge of the ditch proper and ends in a steep slope that does not affect the flow channel of the ditch. The homeowner just to the east, along West 32nd Avenue, has placed loose fill along the west side of his ,property. This fill has spilled over the bank of the ditch into the flow channel and is causing water to pond. The fill to the east of the ditch is definitely unsatisfactory and the ditch needs to be restored to original condition. The fill on the west side of the ditch is not as severe and the capacity of the ditch may restored through minor regrading of the back yards. I have had previous conversations with several of the homeowners about filling, regrading or piping the ditch. I have told all of these people that an engineering design, including drainage analysis, would need to be performed for any changes to be made in the historic capacity and condition of the ditch. I would suggest the homeowners who have filled the ditch be required to either remove the offending fill material and restore the ditch to its original capacity or hire a consultant to exam- ine the current condition of the ditch, the improvements to West 32nd Avenue and their affect on the required flow capacity of the ditch. Please do not hesitate to contact me as required on this matter. "The Carnation City" City of Wheatridge Planning Division P. O. Box 638 7500 West 29th Ave. Y'heat Ridge, Colorado 8003= TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: ''"T'Y ©F~ WHEAT RIDGE AUG Q 3 1992 E PLANNfNG & QEVEI.OPMEN~ July 30, 1992 Re: Case No. WS-91-1_ My objections remain unchanged as stated in my letter to the Planning Commission dated June 3, 1992. See copy attached. In fact, my objections are stronger now that I have viewed houses being squished together in a development on the north side of West 32nd between Youngfield and the golf links in what was once open greenery, as well as on the north side of 38th about Simms which used to pasture horses - a nice pastoral scene; however, not any longer. Surely both these developments have also placed an added burden on the city's resources; now you are contemplating adding another one! Very truly yours, ` ~ M ~ ~r~ v~.M~ ~ T-O~2 y Y. M. Linthwaite Rooney 10505 West 34th Ave. Wheatridge, Colorado 80033 Attach. ~~ LEAVENWORTH & LOCHHEAD, P.C. ATTORNEYS AT LAW LOYAL E. LEAVENWORTH JAMES S. LOCHHEAD SHERRY A. CALOIA THOMAS L. ADKISON HAYDN WINSTON Mr. Glen Gidley Director of Planning and Development City of Wheatridge P. O. Box 638 7500 West 29th Avenue Wheatridge, CO 80034 Re: Applewood Castle Subdivision: Case No. WS-92-1 Dear Mr. Gidley: CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN RECEIPT We represent Thomas H. Nielsen. Mr. Nielsen owns the property located at 10901 West 32nd Avenue, Wheatridge, Colorado. Mr. Nielsen is also the owner of four inches of water represented by shares in the Rocky Mountain Water Company. Mr. Nielsen obtains his water from the Water Company at Headgate No. 10 which is located adjacent to 32nd Avenue in Lakewood, Colorado, west of the proposed Applewood Castle Subdivision. This subdivision is proposed by Mr. Herb Brown for his property at 10701 West 32nd Avenue, Wheatridge, Colorado. On behalf of Mr. Nielsen, we have reviewed the Applewood Castle's Preliminary Plat and aze very disturbed to see that the plat does not include an easement for Mr. Nielsen's benefit for his existing IRRIGATION ditch which services his property. This ditch runs through the southern portion of Mr. Brown's property in a northwesterly direction. This ditch lateral has existed for many, many yeazs. Mr. Nielsen is an owner of this ditch and, as such, has a vested property right which must be preserved. Mr. Nielsen has not, at this time, agreed to a relocatior. of his ditch easemen± :»ith !l:e property a~vre,*. Therefore, in the absence of a written agreement between the property owner and Mr. Nielsen, I am writing to advise you that we will object to the approval by the City of Wheatridge of a Final Plat for the Applewood Castle Subdivision which does not clearly reflect the location of Mr. Nielsen's ditch easement. We believe this ditch easement traverses numerous lots located within the subdivision and renders many of them unbuildable. The approval of a Final Plat by the City which does not reflect Mr. Nielsen's ditch easement would constitute an interference by the City of Wheatridge with Mr. Nielsen's vested property rights. We are advised by the Rocky Mountain Water Company that the lateral from Headgate 10 to Mr. Nielsen's property is not owned by the Company. In fact, it is owned by those parties 1011 GRAND AVENUE P.O. DRAWER 2030 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 81602 TELEPHONE: (303) 945-2261 7uly 31, 1992 FAX: (303) 945-7336 C:\FII.FS\GIDLEY.I LT LEAVENWORTH & LOCHHEAD, P:C. Mr. Glen Gidley Page 2 July 31, 1992 who utilize the ditch as co-owners. The fact that Mr. Brown's title may not reflect the existence of this easement for the benefit of Mr. Nielsen is irrelevant. See, e.g., Upper Eagle Valley Sanitation District v. Carnie, 634 P.2d 1008 (Colo. App. 1981); Rogers v. Lower Cleaz Creek Ditch Co., 165 P. 248 (Colo.. 1917); and De Graffenried v. Savage, 47 P. 902 (Colo. App. 1897). Moreover„ it is our understanding that a condition of approval of the Final Plat required Mr. Brown, as the proponent of the Applewood Castle Subdivision, to resolve Mr. Nielsen's concerns. We aze writing to advise you that those concerns have not been resolved. Please ensure that this letter is placed in the official record at the Planning Commission and City Council's review of any Final Plat submittal for the Applewood Castle Subdivision. If you have any questions or wish to discuss this matter, feel free to contact me. Very truly yours, LEAVENWORTH & LOCHHEAD, P.C. LEL:rIn cc: John Hayes, Esq. Thomas R. Nielsen Herb Brown ~ %_ y .Lea nworth C:~FII.ES\GIDLEY.iLT August 3, 1992 TO: City of WheatRidge Planning Commission PO Box 638 WheatRidge, CO 80034 FROM: Warren and Janet Ruby 10745 W. 35th Avenue WheatRidge, CO 80033 To whom it may concern: _.cr-n~.o~ wNeA-r ~re~~ AUG 05 1992°,., 'F~ K~ ~ uZ;'~l ° , ;~~?ANNING & AE'JELOPMENT As i am u:.able to attend the Planning Commission hearing for the Final Plat of the proposed subdivision at 35th Avenue and Nelson, I would like to state my opposition in writing. The owner of the property has made no effort to address the concerns of the local neighborhood, regarding traffic flow, preservation of trees, drainage patterns, and quality of construction. From this, I conclude that his only concern is in his own financial reward. It then follows that Mr. Brown cannot be counted on to deliver a quality, fully developed subdivision to the neighborhood and that his own bottom line will dictate his actions once his development is approved. My understanding is that the City only requires financial commitments from a developer for public improvements and does not have any. financial leverage on private development. I worry specifically about the many large trees on the site which will become unprotected once development begins. A promise may be given to preserve them, but the City has no way to enforce adherence to that promise. I have been around enough construction sites to know that if a tree is in the way, something will happen to eliminate it. Mr. Brown has the right to develop his land within the guidelines that govern it. Strictly meeting the letter of these guidelines doesn't necessarily provide the local neighborhood nor the City of WheatRidge with anything desirable. It is the Planning Commission's responsibility the City and to discourage projects. The subdivision at category. Sincerely, Warren L. Ruby to promote long term enhancements to short sighted, selfishly motivated 35th and Nelson falls into the latter AuTust 4, 1992 _~ .. C9'd'Y dF EAT RIDGE AUG 0 5 1992 PLANNING & DEYEI.ur.mt~ro. City of idheat Ridge PO Box S38 ?540 W. 29tH Avenue wheat ??ide, CO. 30033 Attention: Flapping Division & €'lannin Commission Re: Case No. wS-91-1, hearin; scheduled for 5./6/92 Please accept t?;is as our request to DI$API'I?OV?aJ the Plat-far Sub-Division of property located at 10701 1t~. 32nd :'!venue, ',heat Rid:_;e, CO., presented as "Applewood Castles". According to the Jefferson County ssessor/ Treasurer Office this property consists of tGao parts. Part 1. 5.860 Acres-at 10701 W. 32d Avenue Part 2. 3.883 Acres at it?82S t+£. 32d Avenue Both properties being owned by Nir. James I~. Brown. Attacl~,ed are Exhioits A. and B. tax schedules for both ?~raperties. Our oojections to this proposed Plat are two-fold. First is the Two street outlets onto Nelson Street from this project. we feel after the June 4, 1992 hearing I~efore the Plan?zin,~ Commission that alternate street proposals would be considered to eliminate the great increase of traffic on Nelson Street. The Second objection is to the present and future drainage problems that exist on the P:rorth end of tYae proposed Plat. Consider these facts regarding the First objection. 1. Of the twenty family units that are located on Nelson Street k~etween 32d and 35th .,.venues and those on 35th !venue that adjoin the Suh-Division.-property, there are over 56 vehicles. 2. Add twenty seven mare family units and assume only 2 ve'c~icles per unit will add 54 more vehicles dum?red onto Nelson Street which now avera,es a traffic count of about 2 vehicles per minute according to a sample count made last taeek durin-; tI?e hour between SPrI and 6P~i over three days. 3. Children from t'7e Ap .lewoad Castles area will F§ave.to cane onto Nelson Street to het to an,}' of Prospect Valley ~leme~~t:ry, Everitt ~;+iiddle School or ?4f:eat ridge F~i;~h Schools. Nelson Street already is the main throu;hfare for studecs-ts -from the .1ppl~ewood Knolls area goin,, to Everitt. More vehicles and more pedestrians on an already over used street should NOT pe permitted. 4. The logical solution is to take ou_t the two Cul-de-Sacs and extend.:one.~street'thru:'fr:om 32d to 35th .!venues, eiir~~inating further con- gestion on Nelson Street. As to the Seeond Objection cae say that instead of a satisfactory drainage system;- the poor fill-in and drain as put in place thru the slou;;h `.lest of Nelson at about 34th .?venue Iaas created a dam not a system doing on into Lena Culch which is a part of a-Flood Control Program. A review of the revised Plat at the Planning Division off ice sh-ow the only chane made is to increase the front property line of Lot X14 to .;et the increase in square footage necessary to co~tply with R-1 zoning requirements. TI3is review indicated that no changes, proposals or consideration for street redesign and to drainage i*rprovements as requested at the June 4th hear- ing have been made. ldhy not We wouidalso..point out what looks as treatment this property has received whie loss of revenue to-the. City of ?~Iheat Rid, office was unatsle to explain why tb@ 9.743 Plat .are assessed for a total of $1&20.00 adjoing and across Nelson Street, of about assessed at ~445fl.00 each. favorable tax h results in a e. The Assessor's Acres in this while each lot 1/3 Acre is Thank you for your consideration. we :gill attend the Au;;ust 6, 1992 mu Ling if yoiz have any questions. Sincerely yours, Richard J.~Lanb Hetty Lamb 3250 Nelson Street Wheat Ridge, CO. 8U033 237-2952 ~ A c ~ 0 ~~ 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 August 6, 1992 at 7:30 p.m, at 7500 West 29th Avenue, W ea ge, o orado. Al interested citizens are invited to speak at the Public Hearing or submit written comments. The following petitions shall be heard: 1. Case No. WS-92-1:_ An application by James H. Brown for approval of a final plat for Residential-One zoned property located at 10701 West 32nd Avenue. Said property is legally described as follows: A PARCEL OF LAND LOCATED IN THE SOUTHWEST ONE-QUARTER, NORTHEAST ONE-QUARTER AND SOUTHEAST ONE-QUARTER, NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF - SECTION 28, TOWNSHIP 3 SOUTH, RANGE 69 WEST OF THE 6TH P.M., CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COUNTY OF JEFFERSON, STATE OF COLORADO, MORE FULLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOAS: COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE SOUTHEAST ONE-QUARTER, NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 28. THENCE N 000 19' 09"-W ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID SOUTHEAST ONE-QUARTER, NORTHWEST ONE- QUARTER, A DISTANCE OF 21.00 FEET TO THE "TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING"; THENCE N 00° 19' 09" W CONTINUING ALONG THE SAID EAST LINE, A DISTANCE OF 9.00 FEET TO A POINT, SAID POINT BEING THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE EAST ONE-HALF OF TRACT 17, BROOKSIDE SUBDIVISION; THENCE S 890 19' 56" W PARALLEL TO THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SOUTHEAST ONE-QUARTER, NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER, A DISTANCE OF 64.15 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE N 000 20' 16" W A DISTANCE OF 130.00 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE S 890 19' 56" W, A DISTANCE OF 100.00 FEET TO A POINT, SAID POINT BEING ON THE WEST LINE OF THE SAID EAST ONE-HALF OF TRACT 17; THENCE N 000 20' 16" W ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID EAST ONE-HALF OF TRACT 17, A DISTANCE OF 1143.56 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF W. 35TH AVENUE, SAID POINT ALSO BEING THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 1, KEN-MAR SUBDIVISION; THENCE N 890 16' 19" E PARALLEL TO THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST ONE-QUARTER, NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 28 AND ALONG THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF SAID W. 35TH AVENUE, A DISTANCE OF 159.57 FEET TO A POINT, SAID POINT BEING THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF TRACT 'A' AND NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 2, OF SAID KEN-MAR SUBDIVISION; THENCE S 000 18' 22" E ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID LOT 2, A DISTANCE OF 125.00 FEET TO A POINT, SAID POINT BEING THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 2; THENCE N 890 16' 19" E ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF LOTS 2 AND 3 OF SAID KEN-MAR SUBDIVISION, A DISTANCE OF 204.95 FEET TO A POINT, SAID POINT BEING THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 3; THENCE S 00° 18' 22" E ALONG THE WEST LINE OF LOT 5 OF SAID KEN-MAR SUBDIVISION, A DISTANCE OF 125.00 FEET TO A POINT, SAID POINT BEING THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 5; THENCE N 890 16' 19" E ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LOT 5 AND THE NORTH LINE OF TRACT 'B' OF SAID KEN-MAR SUBDIVISION, A DISTANCE OF 105.00 FEET TO A POINT ON THE WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF NELSON STREET; THENCE S 000 18' 22" E ALONG THE WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF SAID NELSON STREET, A DISTANCE OF 50.00 FEET TO A POINT, SAID POINT x.., ! ~ BEING THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 6 OF SAID REN-MAR SUBDIVISION; THENCE S 890 16' 19" W ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID TRACT 'B' AND NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT 6, A DISTANCE OF 105.00 FEET TO A POINT, SAID POINT BEING THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 6; THENCE S 000 18' 22" E ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID LOT 6, A DISTANCE OF 125.00 FEET TO A POINT, SAID POINT BEING THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 6 AND ALSO BEING ON THE NORTH LINE OF LOT 7 OF SAID SUBDIVISION; THENCE S 890 16' 19" W ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT 7, A DISTANCE OF 3.5.00 FEET TO A POINT, SAID POINT BEING THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 7; THENCE S 000 18' 22" E ALONG THE WEST LINE OF LOTS 7, 8, 9, AND 10 OF SAID KEN-MAR SUBDIVISION, A DISTANCE OF 420.00 FEET TO A POINT, SAID POINT BEING THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 10 AND NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 11 OF SAID KEN-MAR SUBDIVISION; THENCE N 890 16' 19" E ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LOT 10 AND NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT 11, A DISTANCE OF 140.00 FEET TO A POINT ON THE WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF SAID NELSON STREET; THENCE S 00° 18' 22" E, A DISTANCE OF 105.00 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE N 890 19' 56" E, A DISTANCE OF 8.50 FEET TO A POINT, SAID POINT BEING ON THE WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF SAID NELSON STREET; THENCE S 00° 18' 22" E ALONG THE SAID WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE, A DISTANCE OF 333.05 FEET TO A POINT SAID POINT BEING ON THE NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF W. 32ND AVENUE AND ALSO BEING 21.00 FEET NORTH OF THE SOUTH LINE OF SOUTHWEST ONE-QUARTER, NORTHEAST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 28; THENCE S 89° 19' 56" W ALONG THE SAID NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE, A DISTANCE OF 313.16 FEET TO THE "TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING." CONTAINING 10.70 ACRES (466.270 SQUARE FEET) MORE OR LESS. 2. ~'=se No WS-92-2: An application by Jeff Clupf for Asbury Development Corporation for approval of a combined preliminary and final plat for Residential-Three zoned property located at 5965 West 33rd Avenue. Said property is legally described as follows: A PARCEL OF LAND LOCATED IN THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 25, TOWNSHIP 3 SOUTH, RANGE 69 WEST OF THE 6TH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN AND BEING PART OF BLOCK 6 OF HIGHLAND GARDENS, A PLAT ON FILE AND RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 2 AT PAGE 56 IN THE OFFICE OF THE JEFFERSON COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER, CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COUNTY OF JEFFERSON, STATE OF COLORADO MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID BLOCK 6; THENCE NORTH 00018'28" WEST ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID BLOCK 6, A DISTANCE OF 140.04 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF MEADOW HEIGHTS, A PLAT ON FILE IN PLAT BOOK 10 AT PAGE 40 IN THE OFFICE OF THE JEFFERSON COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER; THENCE ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID MEADOWS HEIGHTS THE FOLLOWING 6 COURSES: 1. SOUTH 89045`48" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 175.02 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, 2. SOUTH 89045'48" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 82.01 FEET, 3. NORTH 00018'28" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 46.10 FEET, 4. SOUTH 89048'05" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 181.14 FEET, ... 5. SOUTH 00019'08" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 6. SOUTH 89045'48" WEST, A DISTANCE OF THENCE SOUTH 00019'08" EAST, A DISTANCE ON THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID BLOCK 6; THEM ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID BLOCK 6, A THENCE NORTH 00018'13" WEST, A DISTANCE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING 1.58 ACRES MORE OR LESS. ATTEST: Wanda Sang, City Clerk To be Published: July 16, 1992 Wheat Ridge Sentinel 46.22 FEET, 168.44 FEET, OF 140.00 FEET TO A POINT :E NORTH 89045'48" EAST, DISTANCE OF 431.55 FEET; OF 140.04 FEET TO THE // < L' San ra Wiggins, Se ~ ary <pc>pnws921/ws922 P.O. BOX 638 _ _. _ TELEPHONE: 303/237-6944 The_Cr;y of 7500:WEST 29TH AVENUE • WHEAT RIDGE. COLORADO 80034 cWheat Ridge July 23, 1992 This is to inform you that Case No. WS-9Z-1 which is a request for approval of,'a final plat for property located at 10701. West 32nd Avenue will be heard by r the Wheat Ridge Planning Commission in the .Council Chambers of the Municipal Complex, 7500 West 29th Avenue at 7:30 Q, m. , on August 6, 1992 All owners and/or their legal counsel of the parcel under consideration must be present at this hearing before the Planning CommissiOn- 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 y "The Carnation City" L~ x w 3 ' '~ ~. ~~$ 1 .a~~..ti y `~ V M y ~ ~~~ ~ \ A v ti~ r'~ O ~ 1 y `.~ n3 `c ,r,~-fir ~'`~„ ~ ~ } co h f ;,y x~r `s,~,: ~,:, s . h ~ Ck ~aji kY' ,;+ '~ +~'~~V i ~~ %.~a ". F 907 11y ~1b Certified Mail Receipt No Insurance Coverage Provided Do not use for International Masi. lRoe o_..__ a-h 5 ¢W~yest 35th ~~Pnrd- g 3 '.J" ro w rr m rn rt O • •o~mn neceipt Sharing g ro Whom 8 Date Deliveretl gemm gacei Date, @ Atltlress of Oeli9¢tyW hom, ~ TU7AL Poshage C i<geas O ~ gastrnark or Date E a ~ C O tp wJG (a ~ Tr C >T 'c ~'i 0 m .y J .. 20 ~ ~ ~ x ((~~~r^l~`Y` f ~ W w"S !•~~ O` m ~' ~ ~ ro ~ H C] r O D O] o° A (J p 470 649 133 RECEIPT FOR CERTIFIED MAIL NO INSURANCE COVERAGE PflOVlOEO NOT FOR INTERNATIONAL MAIL (See Reverse) b ~fibtQnas Abbott m ~f~f82~"hest 35th Ave. p 9[I7 114 914 Certified Mail Receipt No Insurance Coverage Provi - Do not use for International ail ~~ ._. W V X °) ~O OmC• r ~ ~ ~ a_ m = 'O .Fy. ~. A '3 w as i'0 M ~ ^ o ~ - ~ - ~ m a ~ ~ O o m, m m®nA9 ~ p . m Cho W - ii - oO m~m.,... ; m I ~ D D N /`b ~i~ " m Sn m~u,: n n _ pis j,Y _~m ~5. 3 I' 9 ~ in.reos*4E~ fSee Reverse) / I Street a No. 3270 Nelson Street ~ ~ - [ P 470 649 134 ~ ~' pECEIPT FOR CERTIFIED MAIL O ND INSURANCE COVERAGE PROVIDED AIL .~ O t NOT FDR INTERNATIONAL M ~ (See Reverse) - __ _ ro -~ I .. __ .. - _. _. ~~~~ m _.-~+ Sent to an Be1110 F r N m m _ gg $ ~tgy~dNH1SOn Street - N o ' _._ a W 3 P 47(7 649 135 J m m3 (D J ~ O ¢. ~ m sm mo n ni m m ~ ~ a Fm»9°'~. $ m I I I 'z $ n m' mw .roam; v n ~ N N m n s noon R+N - 3o<o a. m m W O 1 N ro N m^ ammn oz.. ~ mm . . r m I I~: ?~ W ~o omc~ D pm ~ ~< o+m d °' m, ~ ~ hi ~ y~ s° ° cZ ~ ~ _ N N W m iia 3 o QO.pm o n._ 'm ..d _... .~.., pl L7t '.Y D ..._,~ _.+ n _,_.. ...... f ,.m ~.~ • m=n• A ..m ~.. .. m.._.. .+ p X rn Vs X m m rv $ ' N 47 y ~oom~c ~m a^a • m ~ o y "~.. O N ~ ym~°c~2 - µ m m m fp O hi m `~ o m Q ~ . m ~. ~ . a £°mm RECEIPT FOR CERTIFIED MAIL NO INSURANCE COVERAGE PROVIDED N NDT FOfl INTERNATIONAL MAIL ~ (See Reverse) o N 3 w a ~ E)ent to Gar Bristol ~ a ~`~~~n~"W. 32nd Ave. - ;' II ~ P 47Q 649 136 RECEIPT FOR CERTIFIED MAIL NO INSURANCE COVERAGE PROVIDED ~ NOT FDR INTERNATIONAL MAIL (See Reverse) y C Sent to a s H. Brown Street and No. 10701 West 32nd Ave. P[~heatan0l~i~ge CO 8003 Postage S Cenitied Fee Special Delivery Fee Resvsted Delivery Fee Return Receipt Showing to whom antl Date Delivered Return Receipt showing to whom, Date. and Address of Delivery TOTAL Postage and Fees S Postmark or Date iu fl v 0 J W ~ mi ~+ ~ y ~ ;~0 00C • p m M m m 7' o Pl (D v ~ D pm m~ =°'<toN n ~ o N O (D } ° m yO1 oemm ~ ~ 2 o °1 ~ ct F' to . m a i m Panm a f °s ' m 7J $ x . ° .o m < I ~' N .m °~ Em° o •2 a ~G ('t DJ m o m ~w v m _ m N m mm m o. -, s ~o m ~ o a ~,ma . -n•c o~~ y 1 ~ no m • y m C g$'m~ »m-i ~ O .`S `mm m~y . N w G Tim m:®~ f w N m3 n w~m g . nn .+ m o ~ m'm m»~ m m' °m~ m s mm rn~ m Ffd °~ am a m m r ~ nm m a m W ~ D ^®~i ro? mn m <m 2 aD m F m ~ x nom D ~ 2 m o:m. ma m ~p C a O. m a i m O 'A.Z w O ;n m n . o :: m '~' m J~ N m Cm m ' ". w ~ Q m m -' m rL '" a O m m T m yw ~ n ° y m m ~ n 5 O1 Z ~ ~ ~ m d mm io n m ~ w m -Im ~ m iA O. ~ m > m .a 3.° 'm n6 O.m. lOm _ m m6 m, ~ 'm ~ m n O1 m m °.. omn ~ W Ol c n ~ m f o O m n O a ~°~ ~ m3 n 0 ~ m . o 3 r a® c m o a ~m a m "C m mn o '~ .m+ mm m 4 ro m .... 3 -m <» 0 0 q a m » m? 3 o.m m m m m t N N W W a O O 3 H l7 a 1 C a 2 9 n m '9 H n I D,_ o.p S-. ii~9 ~ m I n ~ 13 ~ i a ~. 0 ~m gfmw n'. m.~i ~kJ jam 1~N i? ~ m m ~.n n ~ o ~.m m 'm i P 470 649 137 RECEIPT FOR CERTIFIED MAI~ ND INSURANCE COVERAGE PflOVIOEO NOi FOR INTERNATIONAL M0.1L _ (See Reverse) Sent to own m Street antl No. 3212 Nelson Street P 47p 649 138 RECEIPT FOR CERTIFIED MAIL NO INSURANCE COVERAGE PflCV10EO YOT FOR fNTERNATIONAL MAIL (See Reverse) 7 Sent to n SJune Buckley Sr17UtlNgak Street P 47p 649 139 RECEIPT FOR CERTIFIED MAIL / NO INSURANCE COVERAGE PgOVIOED `/// N07 FOR INTERNATIONAL MAIL ° (See Reverse) ~Jo`~in P. Dougherty ~~`~~~elson Street P 470 649 14p RECEIPT FOR CERTIFIED MAIL NO INSURANCE COVERAGE Pfl0VI0ED NOT FOfl INTERNATIONAL MAIL (See Reverse) Sent to r Bill Easter m s~re~40 NNelson Street P 47^ 649 141 RECEIPT FOR CERTIFIED MAIL ', ~ .i n v. me a~mm f 3®np a••°a I om .. m °° O ~ ~ J m~~ I .c. w0 Wm m °~~2 a ~aa~ ~ Cn ~a ~ .I e @... l0 9 • oW~ S~a~ m a,0 o Amy a-xI r ~ ~W b7 to ' ~o om~ 3 m ~ - a~ r. ~ N a> N' ? Dm m .... a~a mm ° m m A7 O N n WW ~mm~i 9 ~ ~ m c l f+ m ~ D o~ °3map Qa m ° m .~ m ~ ',tlN PI n om m n .~ mmm .. ~ m D • D r•I~ Tn m ~N m o .m.,'w Q ...~ _. -A ...... ... .. __.w .~. ac S. 3. •~I~ y ° ~ W ro D 2 ~ a rd m ~~ c Sll N 1-+ m . ~ ~ ~I fi" z ~ y E -~ .< m a ~I-'O w F ~' ~kOik~ w o - m ~~ L~ W C-7 D 3 io ~ a' N ~ 3 ~ OwD °. c, c (D O N o ~ `` m ~ O-O bJ a F rn m ~wU y L m m (p v~ ~ u 'm m ~ ~ ~ D fi f I i z ro a p D zm m ~ N. F1 y s A a .. G0+ to d m .._._ _ ...? o ._3 ,. _. NO INSURANCE COVERAGE PROVIDED t NOT fOfl INTERNATIONAL MAIL (See Reverse) ~ c 6 a m N m C 0 E O LL N a ~°F~~nk Edlin s1`$FSa3°~elson Street ~e^gt~an~~r~~r CO 80033 Postage ~ ~ --5 Cendied Fee Spenal Delivery Fee Restncted Delivery Fee Return Receipt showing to whom and Oate Delrveretl Return Receipt showing to whom, Date, and Address of Delivery TOTAL Postage and Fees g Ppstmark or Date N O f ~ I/~J 0 m m m ~I N ml W N ii ~ 9 C 9 2 9 n m 9 7 ~ n rat to D x z m ~ ~• N ai of m r m ~ ~ F$ N m for O 0 w w m ° D ~~ m E ''~ a m< x n m < x m m q i7 a m m °~ m [ ~ m ° D m u m' m n e q ~ 0 _ C. 4 ~y m ~ ° a n O ~ c ~ 'm ^~~ ° ~ m y 2 O n 3c0 m3 v ' . m m~ ® ,o,m -^ _~ s N mmp m m'T- 'm ^ m°= a ~~m s mm„ w m mm° a m ~ m ^p a m amv~ m i m• w `2 n p Cm~ O S m O 1 r A a ra m m J ~_~ ' P 9S7 114 911 Certified Mail Receipt No Insurance Coverage Provided ~~ Do not use for International Mail q;,~ (See Reverse) ent to Thomas EvBins - '~ Nelson Street P 9Q7 114 912 Certified Mail Receipt No Insurance Coverage Provided ~~ Do not use for International Mail „~ (See Reverse) , Sent to Jerry V. Gatlin ~`~~~~ West 32nd Avenue P 470 648 369 RECEIPT FOR CERTIFIED MAIL ; NO INSORANCE COVERAGE PROVIOEO / NOT FOR INTERNATIONAL MAIL ~ (See Reverse) , enneth Hoehner S~~`a~ N~7, 35th Ave. €~'~~i~~€°e CO 80033 Postage 5 cmai.,tt Fee . _`°- - n ., 3 Ei '^, PS Form 3800, June 7990 (Reverse) i~ 0 m m O O M E tQ a Street No. 33.0 Nelson Street P.O., State & 21P Cotle Wheat Ridge CO 8003 Postage Certifietl r-ae Spedsi Delivery Fee Restritletl Delivery Fae Return Receipt Showing to Whom 8 Dale Delivaretl Re[urn Receipt Showing to Whom, Daie, S Atltlress of Delivery TOTAL Postage & Pees Qi .P Pospnark or Dale - ~ - - U ~ ,o S• °s ~ m ' -gym D Om m,,s =.,<irm 9WD „I °., C O W O' m ii~ z ao•QAO ~ o m m w tv g- a . F. m _o.. s 1, 9 ._ W ~ V ~(W ~( fll w ~°Oev v 'rn y m m E N 4 D~ ma» k Dm= <mm W m° m m ~ ~~ N n K Nyn°~~a m3 N . ~, o ~'m m iv vK~y dnp a~ P °m F .~ m rr cn ~ ii ® m m.n• a m I I ° m ~ ~ m a ~•O m n N o mc3 3 e y ~ r t O 3xzmm ~ o mn m tD fD W ° mq. o y ~~ !a moo omc m n ra ~ .7~" p N D . Dm =m a«w W . m m ~ fD V `.Y n >L 0 m~ ~° $ ~ 3 pp ~ c c .7 m mn e~m ~ . . m t4 rt p a 3° <a a m °n m N (D c ammnm m m ~ W ,,]" 0m. Oy (] ~} ~ moom-mi 3 n . F O D" K ~ am 1Z j - ~ 3- mm~^m't ~ m ~ W 13y' ~ 3 m-» ~mn^o ~m m m N F' O n rnm T°$ ~2 C C ~ ~ ~ m o~ Ib -. ~ ap•a f Am, ~ m _ m I m ~ ,~. to a a nm~.o. o mmy ~ 9i _ m a !~+ U1 m a m~ ..°. a o- 3 io i4 O ° 3°cm~ m 0 x ~+ - - 31 -i ~ C1 ~ (+ ry' I'fi, m -. ~r< m ~lmoocyG m : m F \ O K O am m' y ~ -_ ° fD ' 4d ann ~Z m i ~ ~ ft. vo'm=~m0. ` mmEN n N D CJ o m amm~a F mm ~ m tW n ` ° » °n _,m m» 6 D yq mmp m ° » 0 i < mm5 m i n»m s nmmiim m ^ O n a D m F m K {Si D n A m ro D w S m ii n m ~• m ~n q .'. 'm 3m m o 3 n mo' o m y m m e ~ .. r°. '" ~ n N l0 p io N m r io ~- m m 7 0.m n m m m ~ ~ m~ ~< m ~ gio Ou m n ? 3° 6m D ^' ' c n ° ~' 3 5 mmo ~ m m m i n D ~ m m n a r 'g a v ~ ii , m o,o ~ .am m'°. om p Ei lp ~a ?mm n 1 m n E O ~ F-+ `p ~mF, e C l h ~ m 'n S n m 'm j Di a_ "e mo .z wn< m I l ~ ® mm ~• mm 3 =~~ m ' m mm~ m I mm'? 3 nm N 1 1 1 r t f f C C 7 7 n I a J I J a tl < ~ I P 47~ 648 37f] RECEIPT FOR CERTIFIED MAIL NO INSURANCE COVERAGE PRGVIGEO / NOT FOP INTERNATIONAL MAIL N '" 5 nt to Ken Inglee m sv~e3t~~dNR7elson Street P 47^ 648 371 RECEIPT FOR CERTIFIED MAIL NO INSURANCE COVERAGE PflGV1UEU _ NOT FUfl INTERNATIONAL MAIL - (See AeverseJ _ ~ se~~chard Lamb m scr~,~~NONelson Street P 470 648 372 RECEIPT FOR CERTIFIED MAIL] NO INSURANCE COVERAGE PRUVIOEU NOT FOR INTEflNAT10NAL MAIL ( Sent to Robert L_.-McLean a s.~~~~d Nelson Street I ~ .' I P 47^ 648 373 RECEIPT FOR CERTIFIED MAIL _ i-- NUINSURANCE COVERAGE PflGVICEU NUT FUfl INTERNATIONAL MAIL - (See Reverse) w - - -- - _- - ::~ a Bi~l J, Neal _. m 3SS~e§t~anaNelson Street I P 907 114 921 E Certified Mail Receipt No Insurance Coverage Provided ~ Do not use for International Mail ^~•*r= (See Reverse) ~ c Sent to Tom Nielsen Ireet 5 N ~1090~ W, 32nd Ave. P.O. State 8 ZIP Coee Wheat Ridge CO 80033 Postage Certilietl Fee Special Delivery Fee Restrictatl Delivery Fee Return Receipt Showing to Whom & Date DelivereE Return flealpt Showing to Wham. Date, 8 Atltlress of Delivery TOTAL Postage & Fees - Postmark or Date 0 m m O 0 E y !L i '': ~ i+ C a Q Q I 1 6 s i s 0 0 3 n 9 H C a z a n 9 N 0 Il v X A x m ~ ~ ~monm . O to - m E f-' H ' y ~a^ ~ t i m ^ , m > m .Y o 0 ,1 m n, o m n m m m > m (D 1p ~ n mw..oc m 10 ~• . . c W o _m 'a~mQm nm a m - v P I N• 4 n»» •• m D ~ N F' m ~ F mo., m c' p ~ m a R.I C N m ii m~"~ v o ~ ~ ft fD " - n 3xc'mm m (D . J w o n mn • m m' g .m N . ,9 ~•,.~mc m _ n .` 1 .. yy ~m°O°cC 3 • ~ Q Q.I am m= ~ ~ a ~Z m J t ~ ,` m~i O C n _ ~m ~:..m~ ~ .~ ~n I N i cam»» ~ O ~ ~.?wmCy N I 1 I ~ f.J ~ (p m2m[mi° n _, m m » m N an _.o m'mm„~ ~ m 1 wm m-om~ n a ' mm 0 m~Ff'm. ~ mmj-m m nwm nm^w OIN m m ° D ~ ~-1 ~ A mnm<m w' m gD w f ® m m a°m ro D =mow •" mm~ < n ~9 a 5 , ~ i m a i m ~ c1 mom 'II umi 1ca m O' m ~~ ~ n N m C m m m 4w ] n0 N wlmm O m m ~.~ m 0 ~ ~ a E 3 ~ D m ' ~H ~® ~ m I-+ .9 mm». {{x~l o O1m m n D m m •• I-r m 4m a. n n a a 'qg m o m ~ ^^^ ,p » c m ~s a m ~ . `m < m:. omn~ oc lD N _ m qn omw £.. y '^O mn O ¢ 3c 3 'w F-' `O cm m - o n m m ~m n ..a m ° ~ ~ m ~ ,~ o m 0 wm» mm'? m 3 nw w 7 D ~.. ~I ... _. __ °° c C a r u u 0 P 9~7 114 915 Certified Mail Receipt. No Insurance Coverage Provid Do not use for International M II ,~ o~,KK (See Reverse) Sen[ to obert A. Smith Svee[ 8 No. 0600 West 35th Avenue P 907 114 917 Certified Mail Recei No Insurance Coverage Provi ed Do not use for International pail u«e (See Reverse) Sent to David J. Sowa S[reet 8 No. 10765 West 35th Avenu P 9~7 114 925 Certified Mail Receipt No Insurance Coveage Provided Do not use for International Mail ~~ fSee Reverse) ~ f Sent m~ Sun En ineerin Str¢et 8 No. 16645 East llth_Place P.O.. Stale 8 ZIP Cotle Aurora- CO 80011 Postage 7 Cetlilied Fee ~ ~~ Special Delivery Fee Restrittetl Delivery Fee- Return Receipt Showing to whom 8 Dafe Deliveretl Return Rereipt Showing fo Whom, Date. 8 Atltlress of Delivery 7i7rAL Postage 8 Fees Q , ~P Postmark or Date N W ~ W ,° Onmy• ° ~ b ~ ~, ~ D pm m a» m~ <ww m , m m m N rn CT S w > 60¢ 3 o ~ ~ ~ (ll O fD m sm o~ np m Qm ° a ~ m' m f'f O K D F 'm n° .s m !t y ' ° m~m \ ~ F °" ~ 3 ° < m w r x m ~ '3 W W a N 0 '3 W W b 1 c N V b w Q) m I N N I N N 0 Q 3 H n a H C 9 Z a m v n 9 V t. X w ..° Onv• m~ u{ ~ O ~ D Om a°'<wm ~ o (D ~1 C n Mm o°c~2 m m - m , A7 tT N• m ~m m3mnp n D F n• x m I 1 `b ~ 4 a om omn p l D D N m Fm ~m °i o ,~ ~ ¢ c m 1~~ ~V » m tR tt Cf] c 3 o 3 T a m a 1 (D W£ o ym ,m m I71 Su ;.gym ., M ~. m O N N ~ '~~~ D Om °a<WN ~°, c c O da' m ii3 mvm nom N .K. a m »» m D ' D P/ N. m i.° ..m o ~~ m a n N~ m o m~ ,°,,. ' a o m O f1' N °' 3x cmm m W m o mm 06 m F-' Fj .m . o~. - -- 6 ANN. m° „< c ~ o rt• ~ ~ °i? (~ O '~, tR ~ ro v-°n ~m a m -fZ -; -~ . m m0 n r F-' q » Al mm mCN N n ~ ii~ m°°m £ m ~~ m a3 6m m "^m. 3 ° m~~ mm m- omT- 6 o omm ° m m 6m ~ m nm m om m N ' o D ^~~ ro A da m <m < ® f u 2 a_ D G 2 o w ~ x n a m 9 m ~ D '1 ° N mm O m m . . o ~ .Z m g m O n N, m T °m m n m 3~ a m o N J m m ~ 'm dm °'~ 3n® m Z ~ m mm n p 0 O m O. <• ~ C m . m m 0. m? m F' 3Q, m m _ m . 3o m C 'o n ° ~ is ^^^ Q~ a m m n ~ <o art _~ N sp• o H ~ ~ Ul 00 ~ mf o ' O v n ~~ m - ''° - 3 h g 'ny °' S m c ~° v ~' m tmt ,z N 6 ~ m ``" m 7m 3 Nm <» 0 ®^ q m» m m m~ 3 am m f N t I"t w c.. LL P 470 648 374 ~ yr x RECEIPT FOR CERTIFIED MAIL NO INSURANCE COVEPACE PROVIOEO ~ o 3 p m NOT FOR IN7EPNATIONAL MAIL m (See Reverse) p~''Ip ~j°. y --- - - - Sent to L onard H _'Ha r .__ .. _ _~ ;' ~ I o m < m °' Street and No 3163 O'Ha re Court _ ... ~ -. - __- = ~ H D P 470 648 375 ° 3 RECEIPT FOR CERTIFIED MAIL ~ ~ NO INSUPANCE COVERAGE PROVIOEO ~ NOT FOA INTEflNAnUNAL MAIL ~ O (See Reverse) ~~ ~ SWlliam J. Oshero££ c ~ ~ N w 5°3i~NDOak Street ~ c_,m _.._. C W 0 V m m o m N m ~ N ~ I R C a p O E 3 c a ~ C C 'a 7 C P 907 114 924 Certified Mall Receigt i w No Insurance Coverage Pro ided _ ' ~ Do no[ use for Internationa Mail -• ~~ (See Reverse) ~ Sent tp - ~+ Ton Rodri ues Stree[ b No. 10762 W. 35th Place P 907 114.920 _~' Certified Mail Rec pt No Insurance Coverage Pr vided ~ y Do not use for Internatlo I Mail ° ,~ (See Reverse) w Sent to W Y. M. Linthwaite Roone ~ Strew[ b No. 10505 .West 34th Avenue ~. ~ P.O.. State b LP Code m Wheat Ridge CO 80033 Postage Q CertNietl feefee Special Delivery Fee Restricted Delivery Fea Reurn flecelp[ Showing to Wham b Date Deliveretl Return Receipt Showing to Whom. Date, b Atldress of Dellvery TOTAL Postage 8 Fees Q• W Postmark or Date i m x m _. .. ~ Yo oio=• y y r Wt-I D pm ~°<rim °o ~ ~ NO n ym ^~°$~Z m m X'._~O m :' sm mo m3mm.p c ^m c m ~ N Wp £' W a ~ am aym ~a' s m I .I ~ m m o . . ~° o O ¢ a °.m )(rn W ~ooo~ ~3 m C W $ D ,tl~ Dm m w r w ~. Nwa^o c' ' rn r m ' am s3 m~ m N F (~ D '< m®n m J I O O W oa. ommmm ` ~° mm O N ~ e . a ti a 3Km ° m Tn ~ ~ ~ n .•0 m .-.~.. .._ _ O ri.. O.__. m 9 _5_^..r_m Fa n I v I ~ ~o o~~• t7 ,~• O O D ~m o ^o rn N v " ~' n . m Z ~3' ° m . Ai rn k m ~m ~ n m m m° > , ~ o r+N D f m n ~ m, m mmm ~ I ~ E'i O m ~ mmm e m D D • ¢ f m m• ¢ ~ a m$K a ~ ^ N (~ In ~ " m ax mam m ~ m ' ' ' m $ a fD n N m ^, 0 ~m^ m 00-1 3 ^cC y ro a aa ~lZ ~ r m» ~ -°~ ~ .. ~~ __.., .__.... ~r,n.~.__ _ _ -.. .J ( ~ ~._ W .'OOm~ . V) ' ' D . ^m ~ a<fJN m ~ _ m ~ E ' 7' F O 14 ._7, n ma,omm Nm T3,62 F ~ lJ1 m Q ml Cia ~. E c pl O ;~ D A o £ m _.a• a O .m I .m I ff N • a m ~^ m m I m a ~ 7y ~ t'' m ~n:.mm c ' ,2 m a F,. fp F,. m o m ` o n lf2 Ct' C1' c m m m a . °' ~ . O y io W rP E ~ < y mooo-m/ 3 ~m^^cC m (7 t-t' - N• ~amm~9 6 O ~ ~Z im 1 ~ - ~•m s mc O Ci ~ y N .^..mm ~ - O (D O amm,m £ W ~ O m2wn$ .m w G '3 c-•» m ~ ~ ~ N ~ m m m» 01= a m °m~ m^ mmm m c fm 7 NC` Z mm~-m m m.~m^^ y N o D ^ ~ A mnm~m m y ~ am '< m ° m a m .D ~$m a m N m m a na m® m D .'I y m w o' m - T 6 a o ~ •7_ o O N mCm m p y ~ P °p _ m m rA m 0 pTC Sy a m ~ ~ a m m Z .mm^ n m ~ m em A Q Dm m a < ~ c a ca m s mmb. m r lei m c m ~r gm- mma m o a na o.: d: mo t c O 0 c ~m Cwf P O i] °a m3 ^ I ~ m ~m .2 m t ~ ® ~ ~ m<? 1 qw m _ mmrr m i I b 6m v i ~ ' 1 y i 7 • . L P 907 114 918 ~~ Certified Mail Receipt ~ No Insurance Coverage Provided Do not use for International Mail ~~ (See Reverse) sent to - Robert Te11 Street 8 No. 10620 West 35th Ave. P 907 17,4 922 Certified Mail Receipt No Insurance Coverage Provided Do not use for International Mail ~~ (See Reverse) soma sever Sent to Jim Veraldi Str t 8 No. ~3~285 Moore Court P 907 114 919 Certified Mail Receipt No Insurance Coverage Provid d ~ Do not use for International it ~~~ (See Reverse) sent to Charles Y_oun street 8 No. 10740 West 35th Ave. P 907 114 923 Certified Maif Receipt No Insurance Coverage Provided ~~ Do not use for International Mail I,I vmm mrt See Reverse Sen[ to Frank W. Zlogar Street 8 No. 3300 Moore Court P.O., State 8 ZIP Cotle Wheat Ridge CO 80033 Postage Certifietl Fee Special Delivery Fee RestricteC Delivery Fee Retum Receipt Showing to Whom 8 Dale Delivered Retum Rec¢ipt Showing to Whom, Dale. 8 Pgdress of Delivery SAL Postage 8 Fees Postmark or pate rn c 7 0 O a -- i-- 1 I X .. fJ o n z o ~ m m; ~ - n m N°- m ~ ~ '~ m ~ ~ EF•' 7J m sma ° 1r - p 'm m G• O O y a g n a 'm .I ~ 'N rn b' ° ''ma m D D W N N I' m f°- m a ft O i m o < m ° ~ n 3x' -11~ . . ~. J - 7 a f m . • F y N .F. ~ e m~• °;<<.,r~ mmm °S~z 3 _.nn W :'O n~• OmC T m ' ~ N N D ~0 ' N 3 ° m m ~ m ~ e. ~ Ni n~ o m s°,°,z pwp -°., c c ~ ~ ° ~ iii °canm ? ~ ~ O m m m .~ (D a . En S 9 m~.n ° '~ m I I C $tl O H °' N. O Sll m s° mv o ^ 3 ' ~ m a a m a ° a S m 3 p ~ w ~ ~ N CL ~ r. . 3 0 ~ . ~ m m6m 0 i p 6 ~ ~ $ W h7 ~'' " ome° ~ , D m ~ N O:3 n N°^O$~2 m .~ a f v~nA73 D ~ 7d °' ° m ° I W O mo~u°i° 4 n O n< ~ ii kQ (~ N m a m 3 1 s a ~ fD N o. 3o'c'm m w n 0 ii memo.°. m O kQ -°. 011 (J G N ~ n n moo ~ ~m'~~cC 3 m tt 3?a° ~~ -' O z ~'°~'^°•j ~ O w'm»»° a W gmmmCy N (^1 am m ~ m , mmmn. _ f T m nn ^-.o . mmm»~ = m m om~ m, mm a ~ .. ° °cff . o .< mmm-m - nmm nn° m m <° AD m < : ~ a°m D y° n-• °m° m m ea }~.. 0 ~ ° m v v z'm ~ q- m ' 1U ~, O m N m oT C m ° 0 ¢, n m p'm n .. 6 m ~ m N N 6 m ~ a< tp m Z m ~ < 5~ m i m m p m ~ m O c m 1 m . m D D m mei ~ - m J m ~~ m . . ama • y w ma o° ~ 3 m 'e o.o . ~% <o ^^^ ~ ~+ a mH n 6 a m m n c0 ~ ~ ~m c m£' m ^O O n 3 m3 'm ~ °- 3 ~ ~ H ~m n N ° o ~'m m ~ `; m. W ,Z m a< m m m m n °» s m w m om ~ - b: ^ J J I a" J ~' d CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE STAFF REPORT TO: Planning Commission Date Prepared• July 30, 1992 Date of Meeting: August 6, 1992 Case Manager:P'Meredith Reckert Case No. & Name: WS-92-1/Brown Action Requested: Approval of a final plat Location of Request: 10701 West 32nd Avenue- Name & Address of Applicant(s): James H. Brown 10701 W. 32nd Avenue, Wheat Ridge & Owner: Same as above --------------- Approximate Area: 10.7 acres ---------------- -------- Present Zoning: Residential-One Present Land Use: single famil y/vacant Surrounding Zoning: N: R-2; E, 7d: R-1; S: City of Lakewood Surrounding Land Use: N, S, E & W: low density residential Comprehensive Plan Designation: ------------------------ low density res idential ------- Date Published: July ---------------- 16, 1992 ------------------ Date to be Posted: July 23, 1992 Date Legal Notices Sent: July 22, 1992 Agency Check List (XX ) Attached ( ) Not Required Related Correspondence ( ) Attached (XX) None ENTER INTO RECORD: ( ) Comprehensive Plan (XX) Case File & Packet Materials (XX) Zoning Ordinance (XX) Subdivision Regulations (XX) Exhibits ------------------------------- ( ) Other ---------------- ------------------ 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 Commission Staff Report Page 2 Case No. WS-92-1/Brown I. REQUEST The applicant requests approval of a final plat for Residential- One zoned property at 10701 West 32nd Avenue. II. SUBD VISION DESI N The applicant proposes a 28-lot plat with lot areas which meet or exceed the standards for R-1 development. Overall, the average lot size is 13,900 square feet. Staff would note that the existing house and garage at the southeast corner of the site straddle the common lot line between Lots 3 and 4. These structures must be removed upon issuance of a building permit for either lot. There are many mature trees existing on the property. Staff would like to see these trees saved. A note has been added to the final plat requiring these trees remain unless in direct conflict with the footprint of a proposed home. This is consistent with Planning Commission's recommendation. Access to and through the subdivision is .by way of full-width public streets intersecting with Nelson Street. All of the lots will have access to this internal roadway except Lot 17 which will have access from West 35th Avenue. Full dedications for Oak Street, West 34th Place and West 32nd Avenue will occur by this plat. There will also be an 8.5-foot-wide dedication for Nelson Street. Responsibilities of the developer will include full- width street construction in the subdivision's interior and where the subdivision abuts Nelson Street and West 35th Avenue, undergrounding bf all utilities and street light installation. Staff concludes that the layout and design of-the final plat is in conformance with the low density residential designation in the Comprehensive Plan and that the requirements of a final plat have been met. I22. PREVIOUS PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION Planning Commission reviewed a preliminary plat for this property on June 4, 1992. In regard to the request for a 402-square foot area variance and a 10.5-foot width variance on Lot 14, a recommendation of Denial was made for the Following reasons: 1. The request is economically motivated and not justified; and 2. The criteria used to evaluate a variance does not support approval of this request; and 3. The subdivision can be redesigned slightly to eliminate the need for this variance. Planning Commission Staff Report Page 3 Case No. WS-92-1/Brown Lots 14 and 13 have been redesigned so that no lot width or lot size variances are required. Regarding the preliminary plat, Planning Commission made a recommendation of Approval for the following reasons: 1. All R-1 standards have been met; 2. Ali agencies can provide ..service to the subdivision; and 3. Staff recommends approval. With the following conditions: 1. That Oak Street be redesigned so that it is extended in a southeasterly manner to tie in with Oak Street at West 32nd Avenue; 2. West 32nd Place (-first street between Oak Street and Nelson Street) between Lots 1 and 2 and 7 and 8 be eliminated and that the northerly portion of Oak Street be swung westerly between Lots 13 and 20 to eliminate the need for a variance to Lot 14; 3. An easement for the irrigation ditch be provided; and 4. The subdivision should be designed so that the mature trees on the property can be preserved. Relative to the conditions given above, Staff has the following comments: 1. The .applicant has opted not to extend Oak Street to West 32nd Avenue to eliminate the southern Nelson Street access. (See discussion under Section V regarding optional designs). 2. Oak Street was not shifted in a westerly direction to void the need for a variance to Lot 14. Rather, the lot line between Lots 13 and 14 was adjusted so no variances are required. 3. A sign-off block for the irrigation ditch user has been provided. Staff requested a written statement of concurrence by Tom Nielsen, ditch user, be provided at the Planning Commission hearing. This case should not be scheduled .for City Council until this has been provided. 4. Existing trees with a ten inch or greater diameter have been located on the document. A note has been added requiring Planning Department approval before any can be removed. 5. Staff has additionally requested that a meeting for discussion with neighborhood be held and that soils testing be done at the northwest corner of the property where fill Planning Commission Staff Report Page 4 Case No. WS-92-1/Brown has been placed. An erosion and slope control plan with implementation strategies has been requested as well. IV. AGENCY REFERRALS The preliminary plat and utility plan was originally reviewed by all outside agencies. The final plat was re-referred when the submission was complete. Westridge Sanitation District has sufficient capacity to serve. Colorado Division of Wildlife believes the existing mature trees are the most important wildlife habitat on the property. Public Works has reviewed the off-site drainage plan. They have reviewed the on-site drainage plan and construction plans. They strongly recommend that the subdivision design be approved as submitted (See Exhibit A). V. ALTERNATE SUBDIVISION DESIGNS Attached under Exhibits 'B', 'C' and 'D' are three alternate subdivision designs. Design concept #2 reflects Planning Commission's recommendation where Oak Street aligns with Oak Street south of West 32nd Avenue. Design concept #1 allows subdivision access to West 32nd Avenue, but the street aligns with O'Hare Court, which is farther west than Oak Street.: Design Concept #3 shows two separate cul-de-sacs; one accessing Nelson Street and the other accessing West 32nd Avenue. The following is a list of pros and cons for each of the three design concepts: Design Concert #1 - 27 lots - all meet R-1 standards - no access to Nelson St. on south side - O'Hare Court is 300' from Nelson St.. - who maintains 30' buffer strip west of O'Hare? - more desirable for fire access because two ways in - alternate for southern lots to exit onto Nelson St. at north end & vice versa - Lots 1-4 face Nelson St. Desicrn Concept #2 (Planninc Commission recommendation) - 27 lots - all meet R-1 standards - no access to Nelson St. on south side - Oak St. and Nelson St. are too close (only 120' separation) which could cause confusion and conflicting turning movements Planning Commission Staff Report Case No. WS-92-1/Brown - Lots 1 & 2 face Nelson St. - Lot 27 faces W. 32nd Ave. - Lots 3, 5, 24 & 25 are unbuildable - existing garage must be removed to build street Design Concept - 28 lots - all meet R-1 standards - no access to Nelson St. on south side - who maintains 30' buffer strip-west of O'Hare? - less pavement - fragments subdivision "unity" - people like to live on cul-de-sacs - only .one way in & out of -each subdivision portion - Lots 1-4 face Nelson St. VI. CONCLUSION & RECOMMENDA ION Page 5 Staff concludes that all agencies can serve the property and that all requirements of the Subdivision Regulations have been met. Staff believes the developer's submittal is the best design based on current traffic engineering practice and therefore, recommends that the subdivision be approved as submitted. If this is not acceptable to Planning Commission, Staff would support Design Concept #1 or 3. In any event, there are still outstanding issues that have not been addressed by the developer, namely that of the irrigation ditch. Staff would condition any approval that this case not be scheduled for public hearing by City Council until a written agreement has been provided between the owner and the ditch user regarding design and location of the irrigation ditch. <pc>srws921 AGENCY REFERRALS SUMMARY CASE N0. Ms-92-1 X Fire: (Wheat Ridae) Can serve. X Schools: C'an 4 YVP X Water: (Consolidated Mutual) Can serve. g Sewer: (westridae) Has sufficient capacity to serve_ S. West X X~~4XX~~1{,~: can serve X P::blic Ser vice Co: No response. X State Land Use Comm.(over 5 acres): No comment. X State Geologist: Applicant is responsible for submitting. State Highway: X Jefferson County:(HEALTH,COMMISSIONERS, PLANNING) No comment. g Adjacent City: (rakewood)Rec ds the trees on-site be saved Co orado Division of Wildlife: X ~ mha ax;cting mature trees provide some wildlife habitat. CITY DEPARTMENTS X Public Works: Has reviewed preliminary drainage and construction plan X Parks ~ Recreation: Will require $75 per lot. Police: ... Building Inspection: CASE NO. WS-92-1 EXHIBIT 'D' 6 9 I i la ~ W Z ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ _ .~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 4 a I; ~- CASE NO. WS-92-1 EXHIBIT 'E' i ~~ N ~ W O Z ~ w o ~ ~ z ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ v o 3 Planning Commission Minutes August 6, 1992 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 4. APPROVE THE ORDER OF THE AGENDA C. E A10. WS-92-1 XH[SIT 'A' Page 2 Commissioner CERVENY moved to approve the agenda for the meeting of August 6, 1992 as printed. Commissioner JOHNSON seconded the motion. Motion carried 6-0. 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Commissioner CERVENY moved to approve the minutes of the Study Session July 16, 1992 as printed. Commissioner QUALTERI seconded the motion. Motion carried 4-0, with Commissioners JOHNSON and RASPLICKA abstaining. 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 signed the roster or came forward to speak. 7. PUBLIC HEARING A. Case No WS-9 -1• An application by James H. Brown for approval of a final plat for Residential-One zoned- property located at 10701 West 32nd Avenue. Meredith Reckert began her presentation of the staff report, noting a correction to a letter dated August 4, 1992 from Mr. and Mrs. Lamb. Mr. Lamb had corrected the vehicular count mentioned in his letter from two vehicles per minute to one vehicle per two minutes. Ms. Reckert noted a problem with Lots 5 and 28, which were somewhat substandard in size and indicated several ways to rectify this problem. Following presentation of the staff report, Ms. Reckert answered questions. Commissioner CERVENY noted that one of the conditions imposed at the June 4, 1992 Planning Commission meeting was for the applicant to provide an easement for the irrigation ditch running through the subject property. He has not done that and Commissioner CERVENY questioned why Commission was hearing the case without the fulfillment of the condition. Ms. Reckert stated that would be Commission's decision. Commissioner CERVENY moved that until the easement for the irrigation ditch is provided, Commission continue case number WS- 92-1. - Commissioner QUALTERI seconded the motion. Commissioner JOHNSON asked the number of individuals on the ditch. ~.. Planning Commission Minutes August 6, 1992 Page 3 Ms. Reckert stated to her knowledge that Mr. Nielsen was the only ditch user. Mr. Gidley stated that the applicant had expressed hesitation to expend monies for engineering fees necessary to provide an irrigation easement prior to knowing what the configuration of the subdivision will be. That information.he won't have until City Council makes the final decision. Mr. Gidley elaborated on potential problems and suggested that the motion be modified to state a "reasonable effort be made". Commissioner QUALTERI read aloud the the proposed draft Subdivision Regulations, Section 5, Subsection 14(c) regarding irrigation ditch easement requirements. He reiterated that the plat submitted was incomplete due to the lack of a maintenance easement for the irrigation ditch. He thought the motion should stand as is. Commissioner QUALTERI was concerned that the lots surrounding the cul-de-sac bulb on Design concept #1 might have substandard widths. Ms. Reckert stated that the lots were the required size; 12,500 square feet, however, the plans were computer-generated and lots may require some "fine-tuning" to comply with average width regulations. Commissioner CERVENY wanted clarification of staff's recommendation regarding this ditch maintenance easement. He understood that staff recommended an agreement be reached between the ditch user and the applicant prior to this case going before. City Council. Commissioner CERVENY asked for Mr. Gidley's thoughts regarding this matter. Mr. Gidley stated that Commissioner QUALTERI read from proposed Subdivision Regulations, not existing Subdivision Regulations. He added that perhaps the two parties involved should be allowed to work the agreement out. However, some good faith effort should be forced. If Planning Commission wishes to review the subdivision configuration, it would be appropriate to consider the case. On the other hand, if you desire knowing where the irrigation ditch will be located, how it will be designed and where clean-outs will be located, then the case could be continued, requiring that information be furnished at that time. If Commission merely wishes to make certain that the requirement is fulfilled, then it could be reviewed and make a final determination and listing the requirement of_the ditch maintenance easement as a condition. Commissioner RASPLICKA had a comment regarding a letter written by Leavenworth & Lochhead,' P. C. He felt a portion of the letter was misleading. Planning Commission Minutes Page 4 August 6, 1992 Mr. Gidley explained that no permanent easement of record exists. He added that it is not unusual for irrigation laterals to lack formal easements. Commissioner JOHNSON asked if it had been moved or used. Mr. Gidley stated it had been used. Commissioner JOHNSON asked if'it had been moved. Mr. Gidley stated he did not know if it had been moved. He added that it was his understanding that ditch users have 7.5' either side from center line of the ditch by State law. Ms. Reckert stated she believed attempts had been made to negotiate with the ditch owner. Regarding the letter from the attorney, Mr. Leavenworth, he had not received a copy of the staff report at the time the letter was written. Mr. Leavenworth stated he was comfortable with staff recommendation so long as it didn't go before City Council without his input. Commissioner QUALTERI informed Mr. Gidley that he was quoting from State law, and that Mr. Nielsen has vested rights. Commissioner CERVENY amended his motion to read "The applicant will provide a plan indicating the location of the easement, how the easement will be granted, plus a good faith effort will be made between the applicant and Mr. Nielsen to reach an agreement. If that agreement cannot be reached between the applicant and Mr. Nielsen, Commissioner CERVENY would like a statement from the City Attorney delineating the City's position in this matter." Mr. Gidley stated that the case must be continued to a specific date in order to avoid the need of republishing and re-posting. Commissioner CERVENY wished to continue the case until the second meeting in September, September 17, 1992. Commissioner JOHNSON asked how the applicant could reach an agreement regarding the ditch maintenance easement when he did not know the configuration of the subdivision. Commissioner QUALTERI stated that was the applicant's problem. Commissioner CERVENY thought the easement matter-needed to be handled first. Commissioner QUALTERI approved the modification Commissioner CERVENY made to his original motion. Motion carried 4-2, with Commissioners JOHNSON and LANGDON voting no. - Planning Commission Minutes Page 5 Au t 6 gus 1992 Commissioner CERVENY noted that it would be possible to phase the subdivision. Mr. Gidley agreed with Commissioner CERVENY. Asbury Development Corporation for approval o~~f a~ combined preliminary and final plat for Residential- Three zoned property located at 5965 West 33rd Avenu Ms. Reckert had a handout for Commission's perusal. She presented the staff report, which included slides of the to and surrounding area. Entered into the record were the Comp ehensive Plan, Zoning Ordinance, exhibits, case file and packet aterials. Commissioner QUALTERI asked about a line which pass through Lots 2, 3 and 4. Ms. Reckert answered the line was a contour lin~ Commissioner QUALTERI asked about the notat' n of a park on the plat called Ponderosa Park and asked if it houldn't be Panorama Park. Commissioner QUALTERI asked if the st et marked 38th Avenue to the north of the subject property sh id be 34th Avenue instead. Ms. Reckert stated that' 38th mark. should be at the section Commissioner CERVENY asked i held. neighborhood input meeting was Ms. Reckert stated not t her knowledge. She added the property had been posted the ful 15 days and she had received but one phone call. The call was concerned the property was being rezoned rather than bdivided. Jeff Cl~nf, 541.5 th Zuni Street, Denver was sworn in. Mr. Clupf stated he as president of JLC Development Corporation. He had several s des showing sample homes to be built on the site. Commission CERVENY asked what the approximate cost of a home would be. stated the cost of the homes would be in the $120,000 sinner QUALTERI asked if the homes would be constructed and then sold, or would the lot be sold and the home ~,~.a . PUBLIC HEARING SPEAKERS' LIST ,~ CASE N0: WS-92-1: DATE: Auaust 6, 1992 REQUEST:_An application by James H. Brown for approval of a final plat for Residential-One zoned property located at 10701 West 32nd Avenue. i PEAKER'S NAME & ADDRESS (PLEASE PRINT ,~- ~ t e ~ t t~~ b I~; a; l~~ /U7~d 1~~ ~s ~~~ Position On Request; (Please Cheek) ; IN FAVOR ~ OPPOSED i i i i ; I ~ Nielsen - Brown Irrigation System August 25, 1992 1. Plans and specifications for the irrigation system to be reviewed and signed off by a water engineer that Tom Nielsen selects and is paid for by Brown. 2. Irrigation system construction reviewed and signed ,off by engineer that Nielsen selects and is paid for by Brown. 3. System proof tested upon completion to deliver a minimum of 200 gallons of water per minute at the Brown/ Abbott/Gatlin property line with all other out take gates operating. Proof test and system correction to meet 200 gal/min at Brown's expense. 4. .Brown to provide a bonded construction warranty for 10 years. 5. Lot deeds and plot plan to clearly state and show the 15 foot irrigation easment and access showing restrictions to planting, fencittg, construction, digging in irrigation right-a-way. Title insurance clearly states irrigation system right-a-way and restrictions stated above. 6. Indemnification from damages caused by failure of the system caused by construction failures or by other users at Brown's expense. 7. A $10,000.00 consideration to Nielsen in form of note secured by a Deed of Trust on the property. O.LTY OF WHEAT D R1DGE~ .n Ir fly l7rr' SEP 2 1 1992 L5~(~U_ J PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT • September 10, 1992 City of Wheat Ridge P4 t3ox 638 7540 W. 29th !tvenue Wheat Ride, CO. 84435 CITY OF WHAT RIDGE ~ .n SEP 1 11992 ¢.P,!-ANNING & DEVELOPMENT Attention: P1an~lin,g Division & Planning Co:n~;fission. Re: Case No. WS-92-1, Hearing continued to Oct. 1, 1992. lie will not be aple_to attend on Qctooer 1,_1992, therefore we request that this letter be noted as our objection and recommendation to DISAI'PRtYE the ?lat as presented at the two previous hearings. If no ch:.mge is made'ao provide a street- outlet onto. 4~. 32d Avenue instead of two ~sutlets Qrito Nelson-Street, we find the plan very unacceptaole from a safety and practical view- point. Please_refer to~our let=ter of A-usust 4, 1992 for more details in this retard. _ The First alternate flan as presented on August 6, is a solution to the street proolem and if adopted with one street outlet onto Sy est_32d Avenue and only one onto Nelson Steet on the-North encl of the plat, then we would back the developer and would recommend your approval. Thank you; if ther-e are any questions we are available. Sincerely, ~ j/ ~ ~~~-r <~~~ ~ ~c li Richard t~ Lamb iiett~ L~~mb 325 Nelson Street - Wheat Ridge, Co. 80433 237-2952 ') M E M O RAND U M TO: Planning Commission FROM: rMeredith Reckert, Planner RE: Case No. WS-92-1 DATE: September 25, 1992 Please find attached a request for continuance from the applicant for Case No. WS-92-1. Mr. Brown is still negotiating with the downstream ditch user. Staff would recommend a public hearing date of November 5, 1992. MR:slw attachment • Sept.22, 1992 City of Wheat Ridge Planning Dept. Meredith Reckert Dear MS;Reckert Regarding Case #~WS-42, hearing date October 1,1992. I, James H.Brown hereby request a ecntinuation of said case until Ncvember- 5,1992, Reason being I havenTt reached an agreement with Theanas ~v'ielaen on rer©uting the irrigation ditch. ,_...~ Tank You, ~' ~9n!es H.Brown ~~0701 W. 32nd Ave. W eatRidge, Co. 80033 '~ TY Z?F'trj~e~ ; . ~n~ ~~ ~~ . SEA2 2 ~9g2 i~~ P(gNNI ~ U NG & Q~fiOPM~F • i r 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 October 1, 1992 at 7:30 p.m. at 7500 West 29th Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado. All interested citizens are invited to speak at the Public Hearing or submit written comments. The following petitions shall be heard: 1. Case No. Wz-92-6• An application by US NewVector Group for Notestine and Company for approval of a rezoning from Agricultural-One to Commercial-One and for approval of a site plan within the Kipling Activity Center. Said property is located behind 4590 Kipling and is legally described as follows: A PARCEL OF LAND SITUATED IN A PORTION OF A PARCEL OF LAND AS DESCRIBED IN DEED RECORDED AT RECEPTION NUMBER 86153163, BEING A PORTION OF THE NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SECTION 22, TOWNSHIP 3 SOUTH, RANGE 69 WEST OF THE SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, COUNTY OF JEFFERSON, STATE OF COLORADO, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 22; THENCE SOUTH 00009'23" EAST ALONG THE WEST LINE OF THE NORTHWEST ONE- QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 22 A DISTANCE OF 1254.46 FEET; THENCE NORTH 89028`25" EAST A DISTANCE OF 45.00 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF A PARCEL OF LAND CONVEYED TO THE COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS BY DEED RECORDED IN BOOK 2130 AT PAGE 522, JEFFERSON COUNTY RECORDS; THENCE CONTINUING NORTH 89028'25" EAST ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID RECEPTION NUMBER 86153163 A DISTANCE OF 285.36 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF A PARCEL OF LAND AS DESCRIBED IN DEED RECORDED IN BOOK 1175 AT PAGE 522, JEFFERSON COUNTY RECORDS; THENCE SOUTH 89028'25" WEST ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID RECEPTION NUMBER 86153163 A DISTANCE OF 5.00 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE SOUTH 00009'08" EAST 5.00 FEET WEST OF AND PARALLEL WITH THE WEST LINE OF SAID BOOK 1175 PAGE 522 A DISTANCE OF 60.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 89028'25" WEST A DISTANCE OF 60.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 00009'00" WEST A DISTANCE OF 60.00 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF SAID RECEPTION NUMBER 86153163; THENCE NORTH 89028'25" EAST ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID RECEPTION NUMBER 86153163 A DISTANCE OF 60.00 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING, CONTAINING 3,600 SQUARE FEET OR 0.0826 ACRES MORE OR LESS. 2. Case No WS-92-1• An application by James H. Brown for approval of a final plat for Residential-One zoned property located at 10701 West 32nd Avenue. Said property is legally described as follows: A PARCEL OF LAND LOCATED IN THE SOUTHWEST ONE-QUARTER, NORTHEAST ONE-QUARTER AND SOUTHEAST ONE-QUARTER, NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SECTION 28, TOWNSHIP 3 SOUTH, RANGE 69 WEST OF. THE 6TH P.M., CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COUNTY OF JEFFERSON, STATE OF COLORADO, MORE FULLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: i ~ COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE SOUTHEAST ONE-QUARTER, NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 28. THENCE N 00~ 19' 09" W ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID SOUTHEAST ONE-QUARTER, NORTHWEST ONE- QUARTER, A DISTANCE OF 21.00 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING"; THENCE N 00~ 19' 09" W CONTINUING ALONG THE SAID EAST LINE, A DISTANCE OF 9,00 FEET TO A POINT, SAID POINT BEING THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE EAST ONE-HALF OF TRACT 17, BROOKSIDE SUBDIVISION; THENCE S 89~ 19' 56" W PARALLEL TO THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SOUTHEAST ONE-QUARTER, NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER, A DISTANCE OF 64.15 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE N 00~ 20' 16" W A DISTANCE OF 130.00 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE S 89~ 19' 56" W, A DISTANCE OF 100.00 FEET TO A POINT, SAID POINT BEING ON THE WEST LINE OF THE SAID EAST ONE-HALF OF TRACT 17; THENCE N 00~ 20' 16" W ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID EAST ONE-HALF OF TRACT 17, A DISTANCE OF 1143.56 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF W. 35TH AVENUE, SAID POINT ALSO BEING THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 1, KEN-MAR SUBDIVISION; THENCE N 89~ 16' 19" E PARALLEL TO THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST ONE-QUARTER, NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 28 AND ALONG THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF SAID W. 35TH AVENUE, A DISTANCE OF 159.57 FEET TO A POINT, SAID POINT BEING THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF TRACT 'A' AND NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 2, OF SAID KEN-MAR SUBDIVISION; THENCE S 00~ 18' 22" E ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID LOT 2, A DISTANCE OF 125.00 FEET TO A POINT, SAID POINT BEING THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 2; THENCE N 89~ 16' 19" E ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF LOTS 2 AND 3 OF SAID KEN-MAR SUBDIVISION, A DISTANCE OF 204.95 FEET TO A POINT, SAID POINT BEING THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 3; THENCE S 00~ 18' 22" E ALONG THE WEST LINE OF LOT 5 OF SAID KEN-MAR SUBDIVISION, A DISTANCE OF 125.00 FEET TO A POINT, SAID POINT BEING THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 5; THENCE N 89~ 16' 19" E ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LOT 5 AND THE NORTH LINE OF TRACT 'B' OF SAID KEN-MAR SUBDIVISION, A DISTANCE OF 105.00 FEET TO A POINT ON THE WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF NELSON STREET; THENCE S 00~ 18' 22" E ALONG THE WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF SAID NELSON STREET, A DISTANCE OF 50.00 FEET TO A POINT, SAID POINT BEING THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 6 OF SAID KEN-MAR SUBDIVISION; THENCE S 89~ 16' 19" W ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID TRACT 'B' AND NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT 6, A DISTANCE OF 105.00 FEET TO A POINT, SAID POINT BEING THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 6; THENCE S 00~ 18' 22" E ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID LOT 6, A DISTANCE OF 125.00 FEET TO A POINT, SAID POINT HEING THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 6 AND ALSO BEING ON THE NORTH LINE OF LOT 7 OF SAID SUBDIVISION; THENCE S 89~ 16' 19" W ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT 7, A DISTANCE OF 35.00 FEET TO A POINT, SAID POINT BEING THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 7; THENCE S 00~ 18' 22" E ALONG THE WEST LINE OF LOTS 7, 8, 9, AND 10 OF SAID KEN-MAR SUBDIVISION, A DISTANCE OF 420.00 FEET TO A POINT, SAID POINT BEING THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 10 AND NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 11 OF SAID KEN-MAR SUBDIVISION; THENCE N 89~ 16' 19" E ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LOT 10 AND NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT. 11, A DISTANCE OF 140.00 FEET TO A POINT ON THE WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF SAID NELSON STREET; THENCE S 00~ 18' 22" E, A DISTANCE OF 105.00 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE N 89~ 19' 56" E, A DISTANCE OF 8.50 FEET TO A POINT, SAID POINT BEING ON THE WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF SAID NELSON STREET; THENCE S 00° 18' 22" E ALONG THE SAID WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE, A DISTANCE OF 333.05 FEET TO A POINT SAID POINT BEING ON THE NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF W. 32ND AVENUE AND ALSO BEING 21.00 FEET NORTH OF THE SOUTH LINE OF SOUTHWEST ONE-QUARTER, NORTHEAST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 28; THENCE S 890 19' 56" W ALONG THE SAID NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE, A DISTANCE OF 313.16 FEET TO THE "TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING." CONTAINING 10.70 ACRES (466.270 SQUARE FEET) MORE OR LESS. Sandra Wiggins, Se t~~ ATTEST: Wanda Sang, City Clerk To be Published: September 17, 1992 Wheat Ridge Sentinel <pc>pnwz926/ws921 7500 WEST 29TH AVENUE P.O. BOX 638 WHEAT RIDGE. CO 80034-0638 City Admin. Fax # 234-5924 September 17, 1992 (303) 234-5900 Police Dept. Fax # 235-2949 t ~.' The City of ~V6~heat Ridge This is to inform you that Case No. ws-92-1 which is a request for approval of a final g,~at for property located at _ 10701 West 32nd AnPnnp will be heard by the Wheat Ridge Plannin Commission in the Council Chambers of the Municipal Complex, 7500 West 29th Avenue at 7:30 p.m. , on October 1, 1992 All owners and/or their legal counsel of the parcel under consideration must be present at this hearing before the Planning Commission 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 % /^^ • LEAVENWORTH & LOCHHEAD, ~. LOYAL E. LEAVENWORTH JAMES S. LOCHHEAD SHEAFlY A. CALOIA THOMAS L ADKISON HAYDN WINSTON Robert H. 5onheim, Esq. 3onheim, Helm & Less 7910 Ralston Road Arvada, CO 80002 ATTORNEYS AT LAW December 29, 1992 7011 GRAND AVENUE P.O. DRAWER 2030 GI.ENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 81602 TELEPHONE: (303) 945.2261 PAX: (303) 945.7336 Re: Herb Brown Annlewood Castle 4nh ivi io /Tom Nel n Dear Bob: Herb Brown provided plans and specifications for a proposed irrigation pipeline to replace Mr. Nielson's ditch directly to Mr. Nielson. Mr. Nielson then forwazded them to me for my review. We have had an engineer review the plans and made the comments indicated in the enclosed letter. Prior to our eazIier meeting with you, we had provided you with a list of specific concerns which we all agreed could not be addressed until more specific plans were provided. With these plans, I believe we are prepazed to go forwazd with an agreement. However, to date, Mr. Nielson has incurred approximately $1,100 in legal fees and $250 in engineering fees. If your client desires to pursue an agreement in the ultimate construction of an alternative pipeline system for Mr. Nielson, before we meet again we will need Mr. Brown to provide Mr. Nielson with reimbursement for the fees he has incurred to date. Mr. Nielson simply cannot continue to pursue accommodating Mr. Btown's development plans without reimbursement of his actual costs before an agreement is signed. Our engineer also advises me that the costs of installing the system designed by Mr. Brown's engineers is approximately $20,000. As I recall, we had offered to convey any and all interest we may have in the pipeline for $25,000. Perhaps we should again look at that alternative before we incur additional legal and engineering fees. I look forwazd to hearing from you. Very truly yours, LEAVENWORTH & LOCHHEAD, P.C. Lo E. venworth LEL:rIn Enclosure cc: Thomas Nielson C:IFILESLSONHIIM.ILT .-- -__ ___.. _.-- -- .__ . ...... .. __-- __~a ~. ? 8~t 9 9 3 . r-~ ~. __ ._ . _ - - ~ -~ d w~.A~.~..1...l_oc-~ ~ (Q Yy~~..Q ~~i~ ....~ ~-C~c~c. .... ~~v.i d..~ ,,~ ,~ 6?~. Gt.o~.v ..... _. t,~i1 tr r ~ t l ..~ lecc __.. ~~ c -_._..... . ~.-w~_~~ ~ --- _. ~~ rev ..fin ~ ~ ...d ~ m~.~r- ~ I _. . ~__ ~---.try. ~ d~~ tea,,, -~i.u~,~,,,~, . ••-- ~~- ~~ 2 L t~ --~' ~ ...-~ro_~._ - -- --• - -..:~1 ~~ 2. - i~~ -- _.__ - -.~. ** TOTRL PRGE.003 ~* LEAVENWORTH & LOCHHEAD~C. ATTORNEYS AT I.Aw LOYAL E. LEAVENWORTH JAMES 5. LOCHHEAD SHEflRY A. CALOIA THOMAS L ADKISON HAYDN WINSTON February 2, 1993 CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE CASE ~O. WS-92-1 EXHIBIT 'B' f 7011 GRAND AVENUE P.O. DRAWER 2030 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 81602 TELEPHONE: (303) 945-2261 FA%: (303) 945.7336 - Robert H. Sonheim,~ ~ ~-~ Sonheim, Helm & Less ~< pq;, (; 6 4 1993 7910 Ralston Road Arvada, CO 80002 ~ .~ ~~ U _ PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT Re: Herb Brown Apnlewood Castles Subdivision/Tom Nielson Deaz Bob: Following your phone call, I discussed Mr. Brown's offer of $6500 to acquire Mr. Nielson's easement interests for his irrigation ditch in the proposed Applewood Castles Subdivision. Mr. Nielson has rejected that offer. Following the phone call with my client, he addressed the enclosed letter to me outlining the three different alternatives that he is willing to consider. The first alternative would be to build the piped irrigation system proposed by Mr. Brown's engineers with the additions indicated on his letter to me. My client is also not interested in proceeding further with this alternative unless his expenses to date aze reimbursed by Mr. Brown. The second alternative would be to allow Mr. Brown to purchase Mr. Nielson's easement interest for a price of $20,000. Although Mr. Nielson's letter indicates the price of $25,000, I discussed the matter with Mr. Nielson and rather than engage in negotiations back and forth, the $20,000, which I have been authorized to offer, represents the lowest price Mr. Nielson is willing to sell his easement interest for. Finally, the third alternative is for Mr. Brown to replat the proposed subdivision to provide for a fifteen foot easement along the current aLgnment of the irrigation ditch. As always, I would be willing to discuss this matter with you further. However, you should be awaze that these three alternatives represent my client's decision concerning the alternatives which he is willing to accept. Although we can discuss the language of the requirements concerning the fast alternative (the new pipe system), the major points in Mr. Nielson's letter must be met in concept by your client. Apparently Mr. Brown, as indicated by his offer, does not understand that my client has a vested property right with which Mr. Brown cannot unilaterally interfere. He is free, of course, to redesign his subdivision to allow a fifteen foot irrigation ditch easement for the C:IFILFSl50NHIIM1.1 LT '~~ ~ (~ LEAVENWORTI-I~LOCHHEAD, P.C. Robert H. Sonheim, Esq. Page 2 February 2, 1993 existing irrigation ditch. If he believes the additional lots he obtains by eliminating the ditch or realigning the ditch are worthwhile, you can pursue either abuy-out or the irrigation system alternative as outlined in this letter. I look forward to hearing from you. Very truly yours, LEAVENWORTH & LOCHHEAD, P.C. LEL:mhs Enclosure cc: Thomas Nielson, w/enc. Lo al E. Leavenworth C:IFIIFSlSO NFQ311f I .l LT t March 19, 1993 Planning Division The City of Wheat Ridge 7500 West 29th Ave. P.O. Box 638 Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80034-0638 TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: Re: WS-92-1 In response to your notice of the above docket, I have not changed my opinion regarding my opposition to this project. As mentioned in my previous letter, I question the need for such development when so many other such projects are under construction in the Wheat Ridge area. Not to mention the strain on sewers and water, and roads needed to support such a proposal. Most people moved to Wheatridge because of the open green spaces interspersed throughout the city. Why do you find it necessary to replace the green areas with concrete and bricks. Very truly yours; Yvonne M. Linthwaite Rooney 10505 West 34th Ave. Wheatridge, Colorado 80033 t~ITY OF WHEAT RIDGE Q ~~.~ MAR 3 p 1993 'PLANNING & DEV€L(3PMENT _~ LEAVENWORTH & LOCHHEAD, P.C. ATTORNEYS AT LAW LOYAL E. LEAVENWORTH JAMES S. LOCHHEAD SHERRY A. CALOIA THOMAS L. ADKISON HAYDN WINSTON Ms. Meredith Reckert City of Wheatridge P. O. Box 638 Wheatridge, CO 80034-0638 Re: WS-92-1/Brown Deaz Ms. Reckert: March 29, 1993 7011 GRAND AVENUE P.O. DRAWER 2030 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 8160E TELEPHONE: (3D3) 945-2261 FAX: (303) 945-7336 VIA k'AX - 234-5924 I am writing on behalf of Tom Nielsen, concerning the above-referenced final plat that will be considered by the Planning Commission on April 1, 1993. I reviewed your staff report dated Mazch 25, 1993. I am writing to advise you that, although we have been negotiating with Mr. Brown concerning Mr. Nielsen's imgation ditch and easement which crosses the subject property, we have not, to date, reached an agreement with Mr. Brown in that regazd. Therefore, any final plat approval by the City should be on the condition that, prior to recordation of the final plat, a written agreement between Mr. Brown and my client be entered into, and a copy provided to the City. Obviously, we cannot let Mr. Brown record a final plat that has not been the subject of a written agreement or, in the alternative, does not show the existing irrigation ditch easement in its current location. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me. I believe my client will be present at the Planning Commission meeting. Very truly yours, j Lo LEL:lln cc: Tom Nielsen Robert H. Sonheim LEAVENWORTH & LOCHHEAD, P.C. C:Sm.ESSRECKIIiT.2LT CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE ~ r~2.nn_rrp Ai~R 0 11993 PLANNaNG & DEVELOPMENT, ., NOTICE OF.PUBLIC HEARING ~-(- t3 Notice is hereby given that a Public Hearing is to be held before the City of Wheat Ridge Planning Commission on April 1, 1993 at 7:30 p.m. at 7500 West 29th Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado. All interested citizens are invited to speak at the Public Hearing or submit written comments. The following petition shall be heard: 1. Case No WS-92-1• An application by James H. Brown for approval of a final plat for Residential-One zoned property located at 10701 West 32nd Avenue. Said property is legally described as follows: A PARCEL OF LAND LOCATED IN THE SOUTHWEST ONE-QUARTER, NORTHEAST ONE-QUARTER AND SOUTHEAST ONE-QUARTER, NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SECTION 28, TOWNSHIP 3 SOUTH, RANGE 69 WEST OF THE 6TH P.M., CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COUNTY OF JEFFERSON, STATE OF COLORADO, MORE FULLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE SOUTHEAST ONE-QUARTER, NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 28. THENCE N 00° 19' 09" W ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID SOUTHEAST ONE-QUARTER, NORTHWEST ONE- QUARTER, A DISTANCE OF 21.00 FEET TO THE "TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING"; THENCE N 00° 19' 09" W CONTINUING ALONG THE SAID EAST LINE, A DISTANCE OF 9.00 FEET TO A POINT, SAID POINT BEING THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE EAST ONE-HALF OF TRACT 17, BROOKSIDE SUBDIVISION; THENCE S 89° 19' 56" W PARALLEL TO THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SOUTHEAST ONE-QUARTER, NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER, A DISTANCE OF 64.15 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE N 00° 20' 16" W A DISTANCE OF 130.00 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE S 89° 19' 56" W, A DISTANCE OF 100.00 FEET TO A POINT, SAID POINT BEING ON THE WEST LINE OF THE SAID EAST ONE-HALF OF TRACT 17; THENCE N 00° 20' 16" W ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID EAST ONE-HALF OF TRACT 17, A DISTANCE OF 1143.56 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF W. 35TH AVENUE, SAID POINT ALSO BEING THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 1, KEN-MAR SUBDIVISION; THENCE N 89° 16' 19" E PARALLEL TO THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST ONE-QUARTER, NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 28 AND ALONG THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF SAID W. 35TH AVENUE, A DISTANCE OF 159.57 FEET TO A POINT, SAID POINT BEING THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF TRACT 'A' AND NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOT. 2, OF SAID KEN-MAR SUBDIVISION; THENCE S 00° 18' 22" E ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID LOT 2, A DISTANCE OF 125.00 FEET TO A POINT, SAID POINT BEING THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 2; THENCE N 89° 16' 19" E ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF LOTS 2 AND 3 OF SAID KEN-MAR SUBDIVISION, A DISTANCE OF 204.95 FEET TO A POINT, SAID POINT BEING THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 3; THENCE S 00° 18' 22" E ALONG THE WEST LINE OF LOT 5 OF SAID KEN-MAR SUBDIVISION, A DISTANCE OF 125.00 FEET TO A POINT, SAID POINT BEING THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 5; THENCE N 89° 16' 19" E ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LOT 5 AND THE NORTH LINE OF TRACT 'B' OF SAID KEN-MAR SUBDIVISION, A DISTANCE OF 105.00 FEET TO A POINT-ON THE WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF NELSON STREET; THENCE S 00° 18' 22" E ALONG THE WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF SAID NELSON STREET, A DISTANCE OF 50.00 FEET TO A POINT, SAID POINT s ~,~" BEING THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 6 OF SAID KEN-MAR SUBDIVISION; THENCE S 890 16' 19" W ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID TRACT 'B' AND NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT 6, A DISTANCE OF 105.00 FEET TO A POINT, SAID POINT BEING THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 6; THENCE S OOc 18' 22" E ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID LOT 6, A DISTANCE OF 125.00 FEET TO A POINT, SAID POINT BEING THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 6 AND ALSO BEING ON THE NORTH LINE OF LOT 7 OF SAID SUBDIVISION; THENCE S 890 16' 19" W ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID. LOT-7, A DISTANCE OF 35.00 FEET TO A POINT, SAID POINT BEING THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 7; THENCE S 000 18' 22" E ALONG THE WEST LINE OF LOTS 7, 8, 9, AND 10 OF SAID KEN-MAR SUBDIVISION, A DISTANCE OF 420.00 FEET TO A POINT, SAID POINT BEING THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT-10 AND NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 11 OF SAID KEN-MAR SUBDIVISION; THENCE N 890 16' 19" E ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LOT 10 AND NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT 11, A DISTANCE OF 140.00 FEET TO A POINT ON THE WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF SAID NELSON STREET; THENCE S 00° 18' 22" E, A DISTANCE OF 105.00 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE N 890 19' 56" E, A DISTANCE OF 8.50 FEET TO A POINT, SAID POINT BEING ON THE WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF SAID NELSON STREET; THENCE S 000 18' 22" E ALONG THE SAID WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE, A DISTANCE OF 333.05 FEET TO A POINT SAID POINT BEING ON THE NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF W. 32ND AVENUE AND ALSO BEING 21.00 FEET NORTH OF THE SOUTH LINE OF SOUTHWEST ONE-QUARTER, NORTHEAST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 28; THENCE S 890 19' 56" W ALONG THE SAID NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE, A DISTANCE OF 313.16 FEET TO THE "TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING." CONTAINING 10.70 ACRES (466.270 SQUARE FEET) MORE OR LESS. ATTEST: San a Wiggins, S r tary Wanda Sang, City Clerk To be Published: March 16, 1993 Wheat Ridge Sentinel <pc>pnws921 "500 WEST29TH AVENUE P.o. eox s3s The City of WHEAT RIDGE..CO.80034-0638 - . _ (303) 234-5900 T r eat City Admin. Fax # 234-5924 Police Dept. Fax # 235-2949 •+~~ idge March 16, 1993 This is to inform you that Case No. WS-92-1 which is a request for approval ~f a final plat for property located at 10701 West 32nd Avenue r~ will_be heard by the Wheat Ridge Planning Commission in the Council Chambers of the Municipal Complex, 7500 West 29th Avenue at 7~p p_m_, on nnril l lcaaz All owners and/or their legal counsel of the parcel under consideration ~~ be present at this hearing before the Plannina Commission 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 G , r:... CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE STAFF REPORT TO: Planning Commission Date Prepared: March 25, 1993 Date of Meeting: April 1, 1993 Case Manager: Meredith Reckert Case No. & Name: WS-92-1/Brown Action Requested: Approval of a final plat Location of Request: 10701 West 32nd Avenue Name & Address of Applicant(s): James H. Brown 10701 W. 32nd Ave., Wheat Ridge F & Owner: Same as above. Approximate Area: 10.7 acres Present Zoning: Residential-One Present Land Use: Single-family/vacant Surrounding Zoning: N: R-2; E:, W: R-1; ~ City of Lakewood Surrounding Land Use: N, ~, E, & ~V: low density residential Comprehensive Plan Designation: low-density residential March 16, 1993 March 18, 1993 March 16, 1993 (XX) Attached ( ) Not Required ( ) Attached (XX) None Date Published: Date to be Posted: Date Legal Notices Sent: Agency Check List Related Correspondence (XX) Case File & Packet Materials (XX) Subdivision Regulations ( ) Other ENTER INTO RECORD: ( ) Comprehensive Plan (XX) Zoning Ordinance (XX) Exhibits JURI DICTION• The property is within the City of_Wheat Ridge, and ail notification and posting requirements have been met, therefore there is jurisdiction to hear this case. -~ Planning Commission Staff Report Page 2 Case No. WS-92-1/Brown I. REQUEST The applicant requests approval of a final plat for Residential- One zoned property at 10701 West 32nd Avenue. II. -SUBDIVISION DESIGN The applicant proposes a 28-lot plat with lot areas which meet or exceed the standards for R-1 development. Overall, the average lot size is 13,900 square feet. In the last version of 'the plat distributed to Planning .Commission, there were lot width problems with Lots 5 and 28. These problems have been corrected on the plat copy distributed with this report. Staff would note that the existing house and garage at the- southeast corner of the site straddle the common lot line between Lots 3 and 4. These structures must be removed upon issuance of a building permit for either lot. There are many mature trees existing on-the property. Staff would like to see-these trees saved. A note has been added to the final plat requiring these trees remain unless in direct conflict with the footprint of a proposed home. This is consistent with Planning Commission's recommendation. Access to and through the subdivision is by way of full-width public streets intersecting with Nelson Street. All o£ the lots will have access to this internal roadway except Lot 17 which will have access-from West 35th Avenue. Full dedications for Oak Street, west 34th Place and West 32nd Avenue will occur by this plat. There will also be an 8.5-foot-wide dedication for Nelson Street. Responsibilities of the developer will include .full- width street construction in the subdivision's interior and where the subdivision abuts Nelson Street and West 35th Avenue. Undergrounding of all utilities and street light installation is also. required. Staff concludes that the layout and design of the final plat is in conformance with the low density residential designation in the Comprehensive Plan and that the Subdivision Regulation requirements for a final plat have been met. III. PREVIOUS PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION Planning Commission reviewed a preliminary plat for this property on June 4, 1992. In regard to the request for a 402-square foot area variance and a 10.5-foot width variance on Lot 14, a recommendation of Denial was made for the following reasons: 1. The request is economically-motivated and not justified; and 2. The criteria used to evaluate a variance does=not support Planning Commission Staff Report Page 3 Case No. WS-92-1/Brown approval of this request; and 3. The subdivision can be redesigned slightly to eliminate the need for this variance. Lots 14 and 13 have been redesigned so that no lot width or lot size variances are required. Regarding the preliminary plat, Planning Commission made a recommendation of Approval for the following reasons: 1. All R-1 standards have been met; 2. All agencies can provide service to the subdivision; and 3. Staff recommends approval. With the following conditions: 1. That Oak Street be redesigned so that it is extended in a southeasterly manner to tie in with Oak Street at West 32nd Avenue; 2. West 32nd Place (first street between Oak Street and Nelson Street.) between Lots 1 and 2 and 7 and 8 be eliminated and that the northerly portion of Oak Street be swung westerly between Lots 13 and 20 to eliminate the need for a variance to Lot 14; 3. An easement for the irrigation ditch be provided; and 4. The subdivision should be designed so that the mature trees on the property can be preserved. Relative to the conditions given above, Staff has the following comments: 1. The applicant has opted not to extend Oak Street to West 32nd Avenue to eliminate the southern Nelson Street access. (See discussion under Section V regarding optional designs.) 2. Oak Street was not shifted in a westerly direction to-void the need for a variance to Lot 14. Rather, the lot line between Lots 13 and 14 was adjusted so no variances are required. 3. A sign-off block for the irrigation ditch user has been provided. At their August 6,.1992 meeting, Planning Commission continued this case so that an agreement could be reached with the ditch user. See minutes under Exhibit 'A'. Attached under Exhibit 'B' is an agreement between the subdivider and the ditch user. There are three options given that will satisfy the ditch user. However, the subdivider feels he cannot choose one of the ditch scenarios until a subdivision design is chosen by Planning Commission and City Planning Commission Staff Report Page 4 Case No. WS-92-1/Brown Council. Staff concludes that the subdivider has fulfilled Planning Commission directive to accommodate the ditch user. 4. Existing trees with a ten-inch or greater diameter have been located on the document. A note has been added requiring Planning Department approval before any can be removed. 5. Staff has additionally requested that a meeting for discussion with the neighborhood be held and that soils testing be done at the northwest corner of the property where fill has been placed. An erosion and slope control-plan with implementation strategies has been requested as well. IV. AGENCX REFERRALS _ The preliminary plat and utility plan was originally reviewed by all outside agencies. The final plat was re-referred when the submission was complete. Westridge Sanitation District has sufficient capacity to serve. Colorado Division of Wildlife believes the existing mature trees are the most important wildlife habitat on the property. Public Works has reviewed the off-site drainage plan. They have reviewed the on-site drainage plan and construction plans. They strongly recommend that the subdivision design be approved as submitted (See Exhibit 'C'). V. ALTERNATE SUBDIVISION DESIGNS Attached under Exhibits `D', 'E' and 'F' are three alternate' subdivision designs. Design concept #2 reflects Planning Commission's recommendation where Oak Street aligns with Oak Street south of West 32nd Avenue. Design concept #1 allows subdivision access to West 32nd Avenue, but the street aligns with O'Hare Court, which is farther west than Oak Street. Design Concept #3 shows two separate cui-de-sacs; one accessing Nelson Street and the other_accessing West 32nd Avenue. The following is a list of pros and cons-for each of the three design concepts: Design Concept #1 , - 27 lots - all meet R-1_standards - no access to Nelson St. on south side - O'Hare Court is 300' from Nelson St. - who maintains 30' buffer strip west of O'Hare? - more desirable for_fire access because two ways in Planning Commission Staff Report Page 5 Case No. WS-92-1/Brown - alternate for southern lots to exit onto Nelson St. at north end & vice versa - Lots 1-4 face Nelson St. Design Conceot #2 (Planning Commission recommendation) - 27 lots - all meet R-1 standards - no access to Nelson St. on south side - Oak St. and Nelson St. are too close .(only 120'- separation) which could cause confusion and conflicting turning movements - Lots .1 & 2 face Nelson St. - Lot 27 faces W. 32nd Ave. - Lots 3, 5, 24 & 25 are buildable but irregular - existing garage-must be removed to build street Design Concept #3- - 28 lots - all meet R-1 standards - no access to Nelson St. on south side - who maintains 30' buffer strip west of O'Hare? - less pavement - fragments subdivision "unity" - people like to live on cul-de-sacs - only one way in & out of each subdivision portion - Lots 1-4 face Nelson St. VI. ~O~tCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATION Staff concludes that all agencies-can serve the property and that all requirements of the Subdivision Regulations have been met. Staff believes the developer's submittal is the best design based on current traffic engineering practice and therefore, recommends that the subdivision be approved as submitted. If this is not acceptable to Planning Commission, Staff-would support Design Concept #1 or 3. Staff concludes that the developer has made a "good faith" effort in trying to appease the irrigation ditch user zthd would urge Planning Commission-forward a design reoommend~icsn to City Council. - VII. RECOMMENDED MOTION OPTION A: I move that Case No. WS-92-1, a request for approval of a final plat for property located at 10701 West 32nd Avenue, be Approved for the .following reasons: 1. All- agencies can serve the property; and 2. All requirements of the Subdivision Regulations have been met. i ~- Planning Commission Staff Report Page 6 Case No. WS-92-1/Brown With the following conditions: 1. A recommendation for Design Scenario be forwarded to City Council; and 2. An agreement reached between the subdivider and the ditch user and that the design be accommodated for on the plat before recording." OPTION B: "I move that Case No. WS-92-1, a request for approval of a final plat for .property located at 10701 West 32nd Avenue, be Denied for the following reasons: 1. 2. 3. " <pc>srws921 '~ CASE N0. MS-92-1- AGENCY REFERRALS SUMMARY X Fire: (Wheat Ridae) Can serve X Schools: roan CP Y~ P X Water: (Consolidated M„t„al) Can serve. X Sewer: (Westridael Has suffici~ X ~~~: Can serve. ' X P::blic Service Co: No response. - _ X State Land Use Comm.(over 5 acres): No comment. X State Geologist: Applicant is responsible for submitting State Highway: X Jefferson County:(HEALTH,COMMISSIONERS. PLANNING) No comment. X Adjacent City:_(r.akewood).RPenmmA„a~ ~~, Colorado Division of Wildlife.- trees on c;+ t, X ~~~~ mt,P P,r;ct;na mature trees provide some wildlife habitat CITY DEPARTMENTS X Public Works: Has reviewed reliminary drainage and construction nlan~. X Parks & Recreation: Will require $75 per lot Police: ... Building Inspection: -^ ~ 1 :_ ~' ~ ..._ . ~~r gym, _~ J 'I ~' /'!~ • I W 36TH OVE J '~ ~! (~ ~ ~ J ~J JI ~ ~ I W 35TH PL 1 W 35TH PL ~ ~-_ ~ W _.. ~ Z ,- ~,; I , ~ H 1 __ ~~~ _- 1... I W N v W Q g O S~ y J O 2 I r U _ W (~'~ 8 ~J f U W 8 f - ~ W 34TH PL CCC Y T W 34TH 4y f ~ ~ V __ \ O ~ W \! ' ~ I W 32ND PL r H H ~I~ V O ~~ ~ Planning Commission Minutes Page 6 April 1, 1993 Mr. Gidley answered it is possible, but the situation could become tenuous with changing City Council attitudes. The motion made by Commissioner QUALTERI passed 3-2, with Commissioners ECKHARDT and CERVENY voting against. Commissioner ECKHARDT moved that Planning Commission recommend to City Council that vehicular traffic be prohibited from using the existing right-of-way, except vehicles necessary to maintain Lena Gulch improvements and further, that the right-of-way be utilized instead £or pedestrian traffic and utility maintenance. Commissioner CERVENY seconded the motion. Mr. Goebel stated the 25-foot right-of-way is not wide enough for a public road as it now stands. He would have no objection to City Council, by ordinance, closing this right-of-way to public _ vehicular traffic. - Commissioner ECKHARDT's motion carried 3-2, with Commissioners QUALTERI and OWENS voting against. 3. Case No. WS-92-1: An application by James H. Brown for approval of a final plat for Residential-One zoned -- property located at 10701. West 32nd Avenue. Ms. Reckert presented the staff report, which included slides. Accepted into the record by the Vice Chairperson was the Zoning Ordinance, Subdivision Regulations, case file and packet materials, slides and exhibits. Commissioner ECKHARDT asked the approximate length of the cul-de- sacs (Design Concept #3 ). Ms. Reckert stated that the cul-de-sacs measure 500+ feet each. Herb Brown, 10701 West 32nd Avenue, was sworn in. Mr. Brown read to those.present prepared notes about the project. He stated he had concern about a storm drain installed on his property by the City. He stated the drain was not functioning properly. Mr. Goebel explained the situation, and added that he felt the situation could be resolved. Mr. Brown read comments into the record made by Karl Buchholz, Traffic Engineer, in his memo of July 31, 1992.. Commissioner QUALTERI asked Mr. Brown if he would be happy with the recommendation for approval of any of the design concepts being considered this evening. <~ c Planning Commission Minutes Page 7 April I, 1993 Mr. Brown stated that design concept #3 would work, but due to the irrigation ditch, the shorter of the two cul-de-sacs would have to be on the south end of the property. Commissioner QUALTERI asked if he would accept design concept #1? Mr. Brown stated he objected to the "dead" piece of ground on West 32nd Avenue (39'X130'). He felt the design did nothing to enhance the area as it has no appeal. Commissioner QUALTERI asked if Mr. Brown had considered a "right turn lane" to utilize the excess land on West 32nd Avenue. Mr. Brown stated he thought a "left turn lane" would be more beneficial. He had concern about the bus stop at Oak Street creating a blind spot. Commissioner CERVENY asked the approximate price range of the homes to be built in the development. Commissioner ECKHARDT disagreed with Commissioner CERVENY that the cost of the homes had a bearing on the case before-- Commission. Commissioner CERVENY thought it-did. Mr. Brown answered the price range would be from 5225,000 to 5400,000. Commissioner CERVENY suggested perhaps an island could be installed at the entrance off West 32nd Avenue utilizing the excess strip of land. Mr. Brown thought the lots facing West 32nd Avenue were too crowded for that plan to be considered. Commissioner CERVENY explained his reason for asking the price range. Mr. Brown stated the design must be right for the development to be appealing to buyers. Commissioner QUALTERI asked if Mr. Brown was committed to a particular design out of obligation. Mr. Brown stated potential buyers had shown interest, but without approval of the design the lots could not be promised. Paul Koentges, 52 West Irvington Place, was sworn in. He stated he is Vice President of Distinctive Addresses, Ltd., a company that builds custom homes. His company has been advising Mr. Brown with regard to design of homes for his proposed Planning Commission Minutes Page 8 April 1, 1993 development. Mr. Koentges stated he would like to build his family a home in the development. He is impressed with the extra effort Mr. Brown's planned for the privacy of the residents. He spoke in favor of design concept #3, if Mr. Brown's proposed plan is not acceptable. Commissioner QUALTERI pointed out that other people were waiting to speak and Mr. Koentges was being repetitious. Gary Bria+ol, 10825 West 32nd Avenue was sworn in. He stated he was concerned about the possible traffic hazard if the subdivision empties out at 0`Hayre Court. He prefers the developer's plan. Frank Edlin, 3485 Nelson Street was sworn in. He identified himself as the individual who collected 30 signatures last Fall on the petition included in the staff report. This petition requested that only one street of the proposed development empty onto Nelson Street. Pat Andrews, 3270 Nelson Street was sworn in. She stated she opposed the developer's plan and supports an access onto West 32nd Avenue. She stated the plan is not consistent with the existing neighborhood. Bruce AndrewG_, who had signed the roster, declined to speak. R J Lamb, 3250 Nelson Street was sworn in. Mr. Lamb opposes the developer's plan for the site. Mr. Lamb was concerned about increased traffic in the neighborhood. He thought the proposed sound barrier on West 32nd Avenue was not much good. Mr. Lamb pointed out that even though the City prefers that streets line up rather than offset, many streets in Wheat Ridge are not in alignment. Mr. Lamb felt that Mr. Brown's concern regarding the bus stop sign was really of no consequence, since those stops are moved regularly. He recommends approval of design concept #1 (Exhibit 'D'). Vice Chairperson RASPLICKA asked if that was an RTD sign. Mr. Lamb stated it was. Vice Chairperson RASPLICKA asked if the City tries to limit the number of feeder streets emptying onto collector streets such as West 32nd Avenue? Mr. Gidley stated the concept has not changed for many years. The idea has been to try to reduce the number of direct access points onto collector and arterial streets and encourage the collection of traffic onto local streets that have access to collector streets. Planning Commission Minutes Page 9 April 1, 1993 Tom Abbott, 10780 West 35th Avenue was sworn in. He has an .objection to the developer's plan to use Nelson Street exclusively for ingress and egress into the proposed development. He feels the objections of the many should outweigh the objection of one resident on West 32nd Avenue. Mr. Abbott prefers design concept #3, since only a portion of the development would enter/exit onto Nelson Street. He thought that Commissioner QUALTERI's idea for the right turn lane onto West 32nd Avenue was a good one. Mr. Abbott went on to suggest that the site plan could be altered to save the mature trees on the site. Additionally, he suggested the area on the site that had been filled be tested to protect potential buyers. Commissioner QUALTERI asked Ms. Reckert if lots 10 and 12 (design concept #3) meet Subdivision Regulations. Ms. Reckert stated the lots meet Subdivision Regulations generally, however, she was uncertain if they meet lot width requirements. She stated the lot lines may require some adjustment, or the plan may have to be reduced by one lot. -- Priscilla Tell, 10620 West 35th Avenue was sworn in. Ms. Tell stated she was concerned about a drainage ditch behind her home. She wondered if the developer plans to bring fill dirt in. Mr. Goebel stated that the storm drain Ms. Tell is referring to is the low area for the entire basin. Allowance was made for times of overflow. No one would be allowed to £ill in that area. Ms. Te 1 asked for clarification. Mr. Goebel stated the property owners would be ~~.~quired to maintain the low area in their yards. A fence could possibly be erected at the top of the drainage basin. , Vice Chairman RASPLICKA asked if anyone else wanted to speak. No one came forward, therefore the public hearing was closed. Commissioner QUALTERI moved that Case No. WS-92-1, a request for approval of a final plat for Residential-One zoned property located at 10701 West 32nd Avenue be Approved for the following reasons: 1. All agencies can serve the property; and 2. Subdivision Regulations have been met. With the following conditions: 1. Only concept design #1, (Exhibit 'D') be forwarded to~the City Council; and Planning Commission Minutes Page 10 April 1, 1993 2. An agreement must be reached between the subdivider and the ditch user and the design be accommodated on the plat prior to recording. Commissioner ECKHARDT seconded the motion. Commissioner OWENS made a frierdly amendment to include both design concepts 1 & 3. Commissioner ECKHARDT agreed to this friendly amendment, however, Commissioner QUALTERI did not. Vice Chairperson asked if the motion at hand could be put aside momentarily so that the applicant could have an opportunity for rebuttal. Commissioner QUALTERI stated that would be improper. Mr. Gidley stated if Commissioner QUALTERI would withdraw his motion,-then the applicant could come forward. Commissioner QUALTERI refused. Vice Chairperson RASPLICKA apologized for his oversight. Mr. Gidley informed those present that the applicant is allowed time for rebuttal. He suggested that the motion maker and individual seconding the motion withdraw the motion to allow for Commission's rules to be effective. Commissioner QUALTERI reminded Vice Chairperson RASPLICKA that the public hearing had been closed. Mr. Gidley stated another approach could be taken. In taking a vote on-the motion, the applicant can be requested to come forward to be questioned regarding conditions being imposed by the motion under consideration. Commissioner QUALTERI stated the applicant has ample opportunity when before City Council to make suggestions/recommendations pertaining to the motion made and voted on by this Commission. Mr. Gidley stated it is incumbent upon the Planning Commission to hear the appropriate testimony in order to make a decision.-.Part of the testimony that Commission needs to hear is the applicant's concerns relative to the motion made. This should be heard prior to taking a vote. Commissioner QUALTERI stated that is not following Robert's Rules of Order. Mr. Gidley stated it is contained in the Planning Commission Bylaws. Planning Commission Minutes Page 11 April 1, 1993 Vice Chairperson RASPLICKA asked Commissioner QUALTERI to restate his motion. Commissioner QUALTERI stated that he had made a motion that had been seconded and he wanted it to stand. If the Commission so desired, it could vote against the motion. He reiterated the public hearing had been closed and stated-that Mr. Brown had more than ample time to present his case on the podium and Commissioner QUALTERI did not feel that he was justified to come forward for further questioning. Commission QUALTERI thought any complaints the applicant had with decision of Planning Commission could be addressed to City Council. Vice Chairperson RASPLICXA asked Commissioner QUALTERI to restate his motion. Commissioner QUALTERI restated his motion as requested. Commissioner ECKHARDT stated his second of the motion stands. Mr. Gidley noted to Vice Chairperson RASPLICKA that the maker of the motion indicates that only design concept #1 be forwarded to City Council. Obviously, more information than that would need to be provided to City Council. Perhaps what Commission QUALTERI intends is that only design concept #1 be recommended for Approved. Commissioner QUALTERI stated that is not what he said. He reiterated that only design concept #1 be forwarded to City Council. Mr. Gidley stated that staff has obligations under. law relative to packet, information supplied by applicant, the application. that is made to the City, etc. If the applicant desires his original plan go to City Council, the plan must go to City Council. Vice Chairperson RASPLICKA stated he regretted his oversight, but ruled that the applicant come forward for an opportunity to rebut and speak to the conditions recommended. Herb Brown stated he had neglected to mention previously that the ditch owner, Mr. Nielson, wanted the pipe along the fronts of the lots for accessibility. For this reason he prefers the_plan submitted. If the development exits onto West 32nd Avenue, 100 foot of sound barrier (brick wall) will be lost. He added that the installation of sewer line would make design concept #3 impossible. He was hopeful that fill could be added to the Swale, so that it wouldn't require such a large area. Commissioner ECKHARDT asked if Commissioner QUALTERI preferred design concept #1 over the developer's subdivision plan. t • • Planning Commission Minutes Page 12 April 1, 1993 Commissioner QUALTERI answered yes, he does, but it was .additionally the preference of 30 individuals living along Nelson Street. He added that the decision of the Planning Commission is not final. Commissioner ECKHARDT said he understood better Commissioner QUALTERI'S concerns and subsequent motion. His second stands. Commissioner CERVENY had several friendly amendments: 1. Add design concept #3 Commissioner QUALTERI stated he did not consider design concept #3 because of the easement required through lot il; he was doubtful that lots #10 and 12 would meet minimum lot width requirements; and there was only one emergency equipment access per area. Commissioner QUALTERI stated he could not accept design concept #3. Commissioner CERVENY moved the motion be amended to include both design concept #1 and design concept #3, utilizing the number of lots indicated or fewer if necessary. Commissioner OWENS seconded the motion. Motion carried 4-1,-with Commissioner QUALTERI voting no. Commissioner CERVENY offered a friendly amendment that Public Works Department make certain that adequate compaction has occurred on the site where fill has been added (Northwest portion) and, permission be required of the Planning Department to remove any large trees from the site. Commissioner QUALTERI thought the soils testing was required. He added that he has no problem with the stipulation regarding trees. Mr. Gidley stated that Staff suggested soils testing prior to the sale of lots to protect buyers from subsurface problems prior to closing on the property. A soils test is required at the time of building permit, however, that could be some time after lot purchase-._ - Commissioner QUALTERI stated under those conditions, he had no objection. Commissioner OWENS had no objection to the friendly amendment. Motion carried 5-0. 8. CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING 9. OLD BUSINESS A. A study session is scheduled for Thursday, April 8, 1993 Planning Commission Minutes Page 13 April 1, 1993 at 6:00 p.m. in the glass conference room. The meeting will be preceded by a dinner. Subdivision Regulations revisions will be discussed. 10. NEW BUSINESS A. Commissioner ECKHARDT brought an article from the Sentinel regarding how hazardous streets are for handicapped persons. He was hopeful that the City would do more in this area. Mr. Gidley apologized for the confusion this evening regarding the order of the meeting. He noted that the applicant has the right of rebuttal after opponents have spoken. This occurs prior to closure of the public hearing. Discussion was heard. 11. DISCUSSION AND DECISION ITEMS 12. COMMITTEE & DEPARTMENT REPORTS 13. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Commissioner ECKHARDT moved for adjournment. Commissioner CERVENY seconded the motion. Motion carried 5-0. Meeting adjourned at 10:23 p.m. ~ 2 Sandra Wiggins;" e retary PUBLIC HEARING SPEAKERS' LIST CASE N0: WS-92-1 DATE: April 1, 1993 REQUEST: An application by James H. Brown for approval of a final plat for Residential-One zoned property located at 10701 West 32nd Avenue Position On Request; ~ i (Please Check) SPEAKER'S MAME & ADDRESS (PLEASE P TNT) ; IN FAVOR ; OPPOSED ; RI~~ ,'f ~ ~"i/~~Y C)(~'1 6 ~ 1 t ~~~~~y 1 I ~ I I I _ _-!_ • I~ `(1 .! V! l Its 1 1 I I I 1 A TT~.i ~ /~ Y auL ~o~N,Y P ~s ~ ~t' > I I 1 I I I I 1 I I I I I 1 CERTIFICATION OF RESOLUTION CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE PLANNING COMMISSION CASE NO: WS-92-1 LOCATION: 10701 West 32nd Avenue APPLICANT(S) NAME: James H. Brown OWNER(S) NAME; James H. Brown 10701 W. 32nd Ave., Wheat Ridge REQUEST: Anproval.of a final plat APPROXIMATE AREA: 10.7 acres 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 heard 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 QUALTERi, seconded by Commissioner ECKHARDT that Case No. WS-92-1, be forwarded to City Council with a recommendation of APPROVAL for the following reasons: 1. All agencies can serve the property; and 2. Subdivision Regulations have been met. With the following conditions: 1. That only concept design #1, (Exhibit 'D' be forwarded to the City Council; and 2. An agreement must be reached between the subdivider and the .ditch user and the design be accommodated on the plat prior to recording. Commissioner CERVENY moved and Commissioner OWENS seconded motion be amended to include both design concept #1 and design concept #3, utilizing the number of lots indicated or fewer if necessary. VOTE: ---YES: Eckhardt, Owens, Rasplicka and Cerveny NO: Qualteri Commissioner CERVENY suggested a friendly amendment to Commissioner QUALTERI's original motion that Public Works Department make certain that adequate compaction has occurred on the site where fill has been added (Northwest portion) and, permission be required of the Planning Department to remove any large trees from the site. This friendly amendment was accepted by the motion maker and the second. Certificate of Resolution Case No. WS-92-1/Brown Page 2 VOTE: YES: Eckhardt, Qualteri, Owens, Rasplicka and Cerveny 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,~{////WJ~~{,heat//Ridge, Colorado, on the 1st day of A il, 1993. Gam' /L~ V~~ 1 Jai Rasplicka, Vice Chairperson San ra Wiggins, S c e ary WHEAT RIDGE PLANNING COMMISSION WHEAT RIDGE PLANNI` COMMISSION <pc>resows921 hWY 18 '93 02~01PM LEAVENWORTH & LOCHHERD LEAVENWOR'i"S & LOCHFJEAD, P.C. erroax>~xs ~x zJtw LOYAL E. LEAVENWOR7H JAMES 3. LOCHHEAD 9HEHRY A. CAI.OIA THOMASLADKI90N HAYDN wiN9TON May 18, 1993 Ms. Meredith Reelect[ City of Wheatridge P. O. Box 638 Wheatridge, CO 80034-0638 Re: WS-92-i/Brown Dear Ms. Recker[: P.1i1 1011 OFANO AVENUE P.D. gHAWER 2090 CiLENW00D 9PRfN0(6~COIANAD~ 61E02 ~ PNC (909) Y4>F7906 ~ I am writing to follow up on our telephone conversation today in which I advised you that Tom Nielsen has not yet entered inw an agreement with Mr. Brown concerning Mr. Nialsen's irrigation ditch and easement which crosses the subject property. Therefore, any Final Plat approval by the City should be on the condition that, prior to recordation of the Final Plat, a written agreement between Mr. Brown and my Client be entered into, a copy provided to the City, and the Final Plat conform to any terms and conditions contained in the agreement, t?bviausly, we cannot let the City approve or Mr. Brown record a Final Plat that has not been the subject of a written agreement or, in the alternative, does not show the existing irrigation ditch easement in its current location. Mr. Nielsen will be out of town on the evening of May 24, which is the scheduled data of the Council's review of the Final Plat. Moreover, pursuant to our telephone conversation, I will not be there other. Please advise me of the results of that meeting. Very truly yours, LEl;;rln cc: Tom Nielsen Robert H. Sonheim LEAVENWORTH & Lo al . Le P,C. Ci1FnJ3NAEC~ICP.iLT :, 500 WEST 29TH AVENUE P.O. BOX 638 WHEAT RIDGE_CO 800340638 (3031234-5900 City Admin. Fax n 234-5924 May 10, 1993 Police Dept. Fax ik 235-2949 The City of Wheat Ridge This is to inform you that Case No. ws-92-1 which is a request for approval of a final plat for property located at 10701 West 32nd Avenue will be heard by the Wheat Ridge Citv Council in the Council Chambers of the Municipal Complex, 7500 West 29th Avenue at 7:30 p.m. , on Mav 24. 1993 All owners and/or their legal counsel of the parcel under consideration must be present at this hearing before the 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' Ca r,,. ,, ,, ~~+~,,,,~, LEAVENWORTH & LOCHHEAD, P.C. ATTORNEYS AT LAW LOYAL E. LEAVENWORTH JAMES S. LOCHHEAD _ _ SHERRY A. CALOIA THOMAS L. ADKISON HAYDN WINSTON May 18, 1993 Ms. Meredith Reckert City of Wheatridge P. O. Box 638 Wheatridge, CO 80034-0638 Re: DVS-92-1/Brown Dear Ms. Reckert: 1011 GRAND AVENUE P.O. DRAWER 2030 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 81602 TELEPHONE: (303) 945-2261 FAX (303) 945-7336 I am writing to follow up on our telephone conversation today in which I advised you that Tom Nielsen has not yet entered into an agreement with Mr. Brown concerning Mr. Nielsen's irrigation ditch and easement which crosses the subject property. Therefore, any Final Plat approval by the City should be on the condition that, prior to recordation of the Final Plat, a written agreement between Mr. Brown and my client be entered into, a copy provided to the City, and the Final Plat conform to any terms and conditions contained in the agreement. Obviously, we cannot let the City approve or Mr. Brown record a Final Plat that has not been the subject of a written agreement or, in the alternative, does not show the existing irrigation ditch easement in its current location. Mr. Nielsen will be out of town on the evening of May 24, which is the scheduled date of the Council's review of the Final Plat. Moreover, pursuant to our telephone conversation, I will not be there either. Please advise me of the results of that meeting. Very truly yours, LEL:rIn cc: Tom Nielsen Robert H. Sonheim LEA`JENti'JORTH oc LCCII'dE:4D, P.C. Lo al . Leav nworth CfTY OF WHEAT RIDGE D r~~_nn_n.~ MAY 2 01993 ~u1a1~3~1c & ~€vE~flPMEr~r CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Robert C. Middaugh, City Administrator SUBJ: APPROVAL OF SUBDIVISION FINAL PLAT DATE: May 19, 1993 Attached please find materials from the Planning and Development Department regarding the approval of a subdivision final plat. The applicant in this case is James H. Brown, who resides on the subject property at 10701 W. 32nd Avenue. As indicated in the attached materials, both the staff and the Planning Commission have recommended approval of the final subdivision plat. There are, however, some differences in the two recommendations for approval which need to be brought to the attention of the City Council. In the Planning Commission's review, two alternate street designs were discussed and recommended for approval by the City Council. In each case, the changes suggested by the Planning Commission were to provide only one access on to Nelson Street from the subdivision and a second access on to 32nd Avenue. The applicant's original design and request was to have two access points on to Nelson and no access on to .32nd Avenue. The Public Works Department has analyzed a number of different design options and feels very strongly that the original design submitted by the applicant is the most appropriate design for the subdivision. As the attached materials indicate, both the Planning and Development Department and the Public Works Department recommend to approve the applicant's original submission. Members of Council will also note that there is a letter submitted by an adjoining property owner regarding a ditch which crosses the area proposed to be subdivided. The City has no obligation or interest to enter into the discussions between the two adjoining property owners. Mr. Brown as a subdivider of the property, can choose to leave the irrigation in place or can choose to negotiate a change directly with the adjoining property owner. This is an issue which is clearly between the private parties and not one into which the City should become a party. A motion to approve the subdivision plat is foun Planning materials on page 5 0£ the staff report. recommended option is to approve the applicant's as recommended by the Public Works Department an and Development Department. Respectfully submitted, ~~ Robert C. Middaugh City Administrator RCM:ly Att. 5/19-4 d in the attached The original design d the Planning City of Lakewood May 21, 1993 Meredith Reckert, Project Manager City of Wheat Ridge Planning Department 7500 W. 29th Avenue Wheatridge, CO 80033 Planning, Permits & Po61ic Works Traffic Engineering Division 445 South Allison Parkway Lakewood, Colorado 80226-3105 (303) 987-7900 Voice/TDD Fax - {303) 987-7979 Re: Case WS-92-VBrown: Subdivision at 10701 W. 32nd Avenue Dear Meredith: I have recently been in contact with several Lakewood citizens who reside on Oak Street south of W. 32nd Avenue. They have raised some safety, concerns that may relate to the above referenced project. There is a traffic conflict with the short left turn storage distance, between Oak Street to the south and Nelson Street to the north, and an increasing number of vehicles wanting to use this lane. A suggestion has been made to re-align Nelson Street north of 32nd Avenue with Oak Street to the south. The property most affected by this proposal, all within Wheat Ridge, is currently being subdivided into residential lots. I respectfully ask you to consider this realignment as you discuss traffic flow and safety issues relating to this case. Sincerely, Laura Anderson, PE Principal Traffic Engineer cc: Fred Lantz Dick Plastino Dennis Mateski Vince Harris Bob Poole (3002 Oak Street) Dr. Krichbaum (3011 Oak Street) CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE ~ -r.~r~~n.nr MAY 2.h 1993 !s ~ .,,, PLANNIsu ~ O~VELOPMEN,f Alternative formats of this document available upon request. r:lwest\reckert.la CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE STAFF REPORT TO: City Council Date Prepared: May 13, 1993 Date of Meeting: Case No. & Name: Action Requested: Location of Reque; Name & Address of May 24, 1993 WS-92-1/Brown Approval of a >t: 10701 West Applicant(s): Case Manager:f" Meredith Reckert subdivision final plat 32nd Avenue James H. Brown 10701 W. 32nd Ave., Wheat Ridge & Owner: Same as above Approximate Area: 10.7 acres Present Zoning: Residential-One Present Land Use: Single-family/vacant Surrounding Zoning: ,N~ R-2; E:, W: R-1; ~ City of Lakewood Surrounding Land Use: N~ Su_E & ~ Low-density residential Comprehensive Plan: Low-density residential --------------------------------- Date Published: May 10, 1993 Date to be Posted: May 10, 1993 Date Legal Notices Sent: May 4, 1993 Agency Check List (XX) Attached ( ) Not Required Related Correspondence ( ) Attached (XY.i None ENTER INTO RECORD: ( ) Comprehensive Plan (XX) Case File & Packet Materials (XX) Zoning Ordinance (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. City Council Staff Report Page 2 Case No. WS-92-1/Brown I. REQUEST The applicant requests approval of a final plat for subdivision of Residential-One zoned property at 10701 West 32nd Avenue. YI. The applicant proposes a 28-lot plat with lot areas which meet or exceed the standards -for R-1 development. Overall, the average lot size is 13,900 square feet. Staff would note that the existing house and garage at the southeast corner of the site straddle the common lot line between Lots 3 and 4. These structures must be removed upon issuance of a building permit for either lot. There are many mature trees existing on the property. Staff would like to see these trees saved. A note has been added to the final plat requiring these trees remain unless in direct conflict with the footprint of a proposed home. This is consistent with Planning Commission's recommendation. Access to-and through the subdivision is by way of full-width public streets intersecting with Nelson Street. All of the lots will have access to this internal roadway except Lot 17 which will have access from West 35th Avenue. Full dedications for Oak Street, West 34th Place and West 32nd Avenue. will occur by this plat. There will also be an 8.5-foot-wide dedication for Nelson Street. Responsibilities of .the developer will include full- width street construction in the subdivision's interior and where the subdivision abuts Nelson Street and West 35th Avenue. Undergrounding of all utilities and street light installation is also required. Staff concludes that the layout and design of the final plat is in conformance with the R-1 zoning district standards-and that the Subdivision Regulation requirements for a final plat have been met. III. AGENCY REFERRALS The preliminary plat and utility plan was originally reviewed by all outside agencies. The final plat was re-referred when the submission-.was complete. Westridge Sanitation District has sufficient capacity to serve.. Colorado Division of Wildlife believes the existing mature trees are-the most important wildlife habitat on the property. Public Works has reviewed the off-site drainage plan. They have reviewed the on-site drainage plan and construction plans. They City Council Staff Report Case No. WS-92-1/Brown Page 3 strongly recommend that the subdivision design be approved as submitted (See Exhibit 'C'). The Parks and Recreation Commission have recommended a cash contribution of S75 per unit in lieu of land dedication. IV. PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL- The Planning Commission reviewed a preliminary plat for this property on June 4, 1992. Attached under Exhibit 'A' is a reduction of the plat approved by Planning Commission. There were several issues raised during the preliminary plat review as follows: 1. Two lots were substandard; 2. The Nelson Street neighbors didn't want two access onto Nelson Street; 3. An irrigation ditch traversed the property and needed more detail as to alterations proposed and approval of ditch rights owner. 4. The large trees should be saved. These issues were to be resolved by the applicant when he submitted for approval of-the final plat. All of the issues have been addressed by the applicant as follows: 1. The substandard lots have been redesigned to conform. 2. No change was made to the street layout and access. (See discussion under Section V.) 3. The applicant and ditch owner have agreed to one of three options based on the subdivision design ultimately approved. (See Exhibit 'B'). 4. A note was added to the plat regarding removal of the large trees. V. ALTERNATE SUBDIVISION DESIGNS Based upon Planning Commission's concern with the two access points onto Nelson, Staff generated three design options. Attached under Exhibits 'D', 'E' and 'F' are three alternate subdivision designs. Design concept #2 reflects Planning Commission's recommendation where Oak Street aligns with Oak Street south of West 32nd Avenue. Design concept #1 allows subdivision access to West 32nd Avenue, but the street aligns with O'Hare Court, which is farther west than Oak Street. Design concept #3 shows two separate cul-de-sacs; one accessing Nelson Street and the other accessing West 32nd Avenue. The following is a list of pros and cons for each of the three design concepts: City Council Staff Report Case No. WS-92-1/Brown sign Concept #1 ____ Page 4 - 27 lots - all meet R-1 standards - no access to Nelson St. on-south side - O'Hare Court is 300' from Nelson St. - who maintains 30' buffer strip west of O'Hare? - more desirable for fire access because two ways in - alternate for southern lots to exit onto Nelson St. at north end & vice versa - Lots 1-4 face Nelson St. Desicn Concept #2 (Plan_ning Commission Recommendation - 27 lots - all meet R-1 standards - no access to Nelson St. on south side - Oak St. and Nelson St. are too close (only 120' separation) which could cause confusion and conflicting turning movements - Lots 1 and 2 face Nelson St. - Lot 27 faces W. 32nd Ave. - Lots 3, 4, 24, & 25 are buildable but irregular - existing garage must be removed to build street Design Conceit - 28 lots - all meet R-1 standards - no access to Nelson St. on south side - who maintains 30' buffer strip west of O'Hare? - less pavement - fragments subdivision "unity" - people like to live on oul-de-sacs - only one way in & out of each subdivision portion - Lots 1-4 face Nelson St. VI. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION ON FINAL PLAT Planning Commission had a final public hearing for this case on April 1, 1993. A recommendation of Approval was made for the following reasons: 1. All agencies can serve the property; and 2. Subdivision Regulations have been met. With the following conditions: 1. That design concept #1 or #3 be utilized by the developer; 2. That the Public Works Department make certain-that adequate compaction has occurred on site where-the fill was placed on the northwest portion of the site; City Council Staff Report Page 5 Case No. WS-92-1/Brown 3. That permission be required of the Planning Department to remove any large trees.- In regard to condition #2, the developer acknowledges that the fill has not been adequately compacted since it was placed as "storage" fill. Once a design is chosen, the fill will be permanent placed and properly compacted. See Exhibit 'G' which is a copy of the fill permit and support documents. VII. NEIGHBORHOOD INPUT Included under Exhibit 'H' are responses received from the neighborhood regarding this request. VIII. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Staff concludes that all agencies can serve the all requirements of the Subdivision Regulations Staff believes the developer's submittal is the on current traffic engineering practice and the that the subdivision be approved as submitted. acceptable to City Council, Staff would support or #3. IX. RECOMMENDED MOTIONS property and that have been met. best design based ^efore, recommends If this is not design concept #1 OPTION A (APPLICANT'S DESIGN): "I move that Case No. WS-92-1, a request for approval of a final plat for property located at 10701 West 32nd Avenue, be Approved for the following reasons: 1. All agencies can serve the property; and 2. All requirements of the Subdivision Regulations have been met. With the following conditions: 1. The property be developed in accordance with the applicant's submitted design; and 2. An agreement be reached between the subdivider and the ditch user and that the design be accommodated for on the plat before recording." OPTION B (OTHER DESIGN): "I move that Case No. WS-92-1, a request for approval of a final plat for property located at 10701 West 32nd Avenue, be Approved for the following reasons: 1. All agencies can serve the property; and 2. All requirements of the Subdivision Regulations have been met. With the following conditions: City Council Staff Report Case No. WS-92-1/Brown Page 6 1. The property be developed in accordance with design scenario 2. An agreement be reached between the subdivider and the ditch user and that the design be accommodated for on the plat before recording. 3. The applicant reappear before City Council with the redesigned subdivision as a continued case." OPTION C (OTHER DESIGN) "I move that Case No. WS-92-1, a request for approval of a final plat for property located at 10701 West 32nd Avenue, be Approved for the following reasons: 1. All agencies can serve the property; and 2. All requirements of the Subdivision Regulations have been met. With the following conditions: 1. The property be developed in accordance with design scenario 2. An agreement be reached between the subdivider and the ditch user and that the design be accommodated for on the plat before recording. 3. Staff be allowed to administratively approve the redesigned subdivision." <pc>srws921 CASE N0. WS-92-1 AGENCY REFERRALS SUMMARY X Fire: (Wheat Ridae) Can serve X SCh0019: ran aprvp. X Water:' Consolidated Mutual) Can serve X Sewer: (Westridae) Has sufficient capacity to rvp X Ki3 W~xB:~SI@t: ran serve. X Public Ser•rice C~: No response. - X State Land Use Comm.(over 5 acres): No comment. X State Geologist: -Applicant is responsible for submitting State Highway: X Jefferson County:(HEALTH,COMMISSIONERS, PLAN.NING). No comment. X Adjacent' City:_ (Lakewood) Re~~mm n~ +-h rape on s;t t,P ,a X C»o~lo~raao Division of Wildlife: mt,p psr;ctina mature trees provide some wildlife habitat CITY DEPARTMENTS X Public Works: Has reviewed preliminary drainage and construction Mans. X Parks ~ Recreation: Wi11 require $75 per lot. Police: ,.. Building Inspection: W 36TH AVE ~ 1 ` ~ i J ~, ~ . ~ i ......_ ~ d ~ ~ J W 35TH PL ~ W 35TH PL ' ~ 3 L.- i W ~ I'. i } ~ i ~ ` ,_: W~35TH AVE '~~ n 6 Z 2 ~ y J W Z rn~ ~' 1 4 ~ ' • i = S 5 t h 3~ °=5 £~ £ ~ ; i ~ 1 I s 4 x ~3' s ~~4 ~' r ~ % 3.F 3.' n ~ ~ s ~ s i s3~ _ S ~ Y ~ { 53 ' { 3 5 ¢ x s f ~£ < S y ; S y + ~ it• s y ~ j ~ o i ; ' 4& <i i? i BROO~(SI~E s~~.. c • 3 ix 5 ti~ss ( t ~~`{ 5 fT i; D i s T 3 i - s~ ~ 3 3~VS t,~' I F U ~- - v \ W 34TH PL W 34TH 4yE 1 ~. __. _ __ ~ ` Cv~r^T\l _ ~ I O FF U W Q y ~. Q .. 0 ~ ~. m R2 " J F- U W s [~'~ J W y w O ~' t r W 32ND PL ~__ N W { /~ ` `\`f` O _\v~r- N \O f^V~VI V CASE NO. WS-92-1 EXHIBIT 'A' -usv~•c~ ~ 'JSM ~ M i Y'~~.. ~i :~~i. ~ ._.., ~ ~; ~ •~ ~i'fi r:i i x'zi: Fi ~ «. ~j ix h _ :1 i _ ~i i, ~ ., 1 =:. ~'~ II~ t ~. ~ _~~': . 1.•' t _ •3 I I ~ ii i~ gs •• k ~ ~ °s ~ •'s rx i • ix ~: = I ~ raa 1 ! ~ .1 .4 I_ _ y, r~l .. t 4 a y rxa ~xL~ !j~` '' ~'' c if a , t~ 4 •~t# x' 9 '- ~ - t ~ K 1 ~ N ~[ [i YY ~ .... "fig ,,,a ~ d--°-----' ~ 1 " ~ .. a11~ x •LI •~ , s3 i • _ _____~ ~' ~ I I 5 tl ~ T' a ;! ' It ' F: 1 F 1;~ 1 ~~ "c iic ~ iii ~ i ~ i I _,=~.:...~lt~_ x-rri I.w.rt w .: «_ ~i~ I ,.~ a ~s yy ~i' gg _fsG I ii :~" 1 I 1 i E 1 ° 1 's iS 1~ a ~ ~x ,ice 1 r ~' ~~_ ', ~ ~ s ". -~ ~ F.~ •• ~ ~:- ~ i 1 ~4 i ;~. R its ~~... ~cs ~ ~~~~ ~• # I i ~` 1 ~l±9~:~ ,~~. 1~ltf ~i~i ;tip f ~~~lE ~~~f a >a Abe e D ~v~ b ~ ~.v a r ~~ ~ m ~s~ ~ O ~ i~i ~ a Q Q 4°a iii ~i D i s~ N ~~~ ~ ~ r ~~ ~ ~ dl CASE' ~O. WS-92-1 EXHIBIT 'B' LEAVENWORTH & LOCHHEAD, P.C. , ATTORNEYS AT LAW LOYAL E. LEAVENWpRTH 1011 GRAND AVENUE JAMES S. LOCHHEAD P.O. DRAWER 2030 SHERRY A. CALOIA GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 81602 THOMAS L ADKISON TELEPHONE: (303) 965-2261 HAYDN WINSTON February 2, 1993 FAx: (303)945-7336 CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE Robert H. Sonheim, ~ -1-nr~'.~1C1~. Sonheim, Helm & Less `'< hl~,af~ 0 4 1993 7910 Ralston Road Arvada, CO 80002 V . PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT Re: 13erb Brown AgDlewood a tl c Suh ivision/Tom Niel on Dear Bob: Following your phone call, I discussed Mr. Brown's offer of $6500 to acquire Mr. Nielson's easement interests for his imgation ditch in the proposed Applewood Castles Subdivision. h1r. Nielson has rejected that offer. Following the phone call with my client, he addressed the enclosed letter to me outlining the three different alternatives that he is willing to consider. The first alternative would be to build the piped irrigation system proposed by Mr. Brown's engineers with the additions indicated on his letter to me. My client is also not interested in proceeding further with this alternative unless his expenses to date are reimbursed by Mr. Brown. The second alternative would be to allow Mr. Brown to purchase Mr. Nielson's easement interest for a price of $20,000. Although Mr. Nielson's letter indicates the price of $25,000, I discussed the matter with Mr. Nielson and rather than engage in negotiations back and forth, the $20,000, which I have been authorized to offer, represents the lowest price Mr. Nielson is willing to sell his easement interest for. Finally, the third alternative is for Mr. Brown to replat the proposed subdivision to provide for a fifteen foot easement along the current alignment of the irrigation ditch. As always, I would be willing to discuss this matter with you further. However, you should be aware that these three alternatives represent my client's decision concerning the alternatives which he is willing to accept. Although we can discuss the language of the requirements concerning the first alternative (the new pipe system), the major points in Mt. Nielson's letter must be met in concept by your client. Apparently Mr. Brown, as indicated by his offer, does not understand that my client has a vested property right with which Mr. Brown cannot unilaterally interfere. He is free, of course, to redesign his subdivision to allow a fifteen foot irrigation ditch easement for the c:~tTtFSUOxx~ti. r LT ~'< LEAVENWORTH & LOCHHEAD, P.C. Robert H. Sonheim, Esq. Page 2 February 2, 1993 existing imgation ditch. If he believes the additional lots he obtains by eliminating the ditch or realigning the ditch are worthwhile, you can pursue either abuy-out or the irrigation system alternative as outlined in this letter. I Iook forward to hearing from you. Very truly yours, LEAVENWORTH & LOCHHEAD, P.C. ,, Lo al E. Leavenworth LEL: mhs Enclosure cc: Thomas Nielson, w/enc. C:IFIIFSl50NFlE~.i1.1 LT __.~- 2gt, ~~3 . -. -~?~ . ~;av ~ dsz 15 ~ ~~-n~a.~-F- -4-o~~LSa ~ ~ ~ e .- ••- L~'l-~.L-.~-.. -_~"~ - ~ ~ t reu(~ ew _. ... ~ r~_c~ Yy~cc.`l-~~f`~ c~ .-~:~.. inn .,.. - _. .v - ~ ~..... _-. ... _... _.._. ~-{..~ _. -.. i - a~-- ~ a ..... -- ~- ~ ~.i"Otii ~ ~ ~_ ` ~, 0.00 _.. ~ ~ts~ ~~ r- ._.._. _...._®._ ~~~t~- 1 e ---._ . _..___ -~~~~~~' cwt' `~ ~ ~rS i _~~..- ----_ ... _.---- I ~~ ~~ :~T ..,"R a~GE,a_~~ max: LEAVENWORTH & LOCHHEAD, P.C. ATTORNEYS AT LAW LOYAL E. LEAVENWORTH JAMES S. LOCHHEAD SHERRY A. CALOIA THOMAS L. ADKISON HAYDN WINSTON Robert H. Sonheim, Esq. Sonheim, Helm & Less 7910 Ralston Road Arvada, CO 80002 _ 1011 GRAND AVENUE P.O. DRAWER 203D December 29, 1992 GLENWOOD SPRINGS. COLORAD081602 TELEPHONE: (303) 945-2261 FAX: (303) 945.7336 Re: Herb Brown ADplewoad cr1PC Sn ivi io /Tnm Niel n Dear Bob: Herb Brown provided plans and specifications for a proposed irrigation pipeline to replace Mr. Nielson's ditch directly to Mr. Nielson. Mr. Nielson then forwarded them to me for my review. We have had an engineer review the plans and made the comments indicated in the enclosed letter. Prior to our earlier meeting with you, we had provided you with a list of specific concerns which we all agreed could not be addressed until more specific plans were provided. With these plans, I believe we are prepazed to go forward with an agreement. However, to date, Mr. Nielson has incurred approximately $1,100 in legal fees and $250 in engineering fees. If your client desires to pursue an agreement in the ultimate construction of an alternative pipeline system for Mr. Nielson, before we meet again we will need Mr. Brawn to provide Mr. Nielson with reimbursement for the fees he has incurred to date. Mr. Nielson simply cannot continue to pursue accommodating Mr. Brown's development plans without reimbursement of his actual costs before an agreement is signed. Our engineer also advises me that the costs of installing the system designed by Mr. Brown's engineers is approximately $20,000. As I recall, we had offered to convey any and all interest we may have in the pipeline for $25,000. Perhaps we should again look at that alternative before we incur additional legal and engineering fees. I look forward to hearing from you. Very truly yours, LEAVENWORTH & LOCHHEAD, P.C. Lo E. venworth LEL:rIn Enclosure cc: Thomas Nielson C:1F(LESLSONHIIM.ILT ~~. ia~ v. - _.~.:~ .. .. .... .. ... ... __ _. fNCINERT SVRY[YQM' ~3~19d`~ rtp~' ,~ ~ 70t]1 Grand Avenue, Suite 2 FAX (303J 945-F.948 C.fErtt+road Spc¢ig~ CO 8160 -- December t t, 1992 Loyal E Leavenworth. Esq. Leavenworth & Lochhead, P.C. P.O. Drawer 2030 Glenwood Springs, CO 816G2 RE: t~Gelson Irrigation System Dear Lee: At your request, I have reviewed the proposed irrigation system deT-rvery modifications prepared by Sun Engineering Company. The proposal is for the construction of a siphon, using 4' diameter PVC pressure pipe. Conceptually, the design is acceptable. Mr. Nielson is correct in that oonstructiorr{eve[ detailing !s not provided. The issue, however, is whether asiphon/pressure system is acceptable in Geu of a gravity system. If a gravity system is provided, then the pipe would need to be Iarger and would also need to be laid on a positive grade. The property is being regraded such that a gravity system is not possible to constrtrct_ There are certainly positive and negative arguments for either a pressure system or a gravity system. Generally, unless a si0nificant head can he developed, t favor a gravity system for simplicity of operation and maintenance, l3oth systems, property designed, operated and maintained, will perform adequately. Items of this design which are acceptable are as follows: 1. The ir~et chamber provides for a settling basin. This Chamber should settle out arty sedimerr~ Geariy, this basin needs to be cleaned out when any appreciable amounts of sediment accumulate. Z. The box is baffled and it is proposed to screen the 4' outlet pipe. This sheutd prevent any fioatable debris, leaves, sticl~, etc_, from errterinq the pipe. This screen will also have to be maintained as often as required. 3. Access manholes and cieanout fittings are proposed at each of the Bends. 4. A drain sine is proposed at manhole C. !t wilt be necessary to drain this system each winter to prevent freeze damage. 5. Cover of two feet is satisfactory, provided the pipe is properly bedded. 1./11J `JL - lv: as Y~~~ • C, J December 11, 1992 Lee Leavenworth. Esq. Page 2 Those items which need to be addressed more fully are as follows: 1 _ The inlet box should 6e made of concrete. 1 would prefer to see the inside dimensions at 3' x 5' instead of the outside dimensions. There bas to be a removable, lockable cover for access. but to prevent vandalism. 2 'T'he drain pipe wit[ need to bo rtm underground to the northerly half cul-de-sac and bs discharged irso the' inlet at that location. That is 'not clear from the drawing. - 3. A 10-foot easement is wide enough to set up a backhoe with outriggers, but allows tittle fle~doility if someone held you strictly accnuntable to the 10-foot width for disturbance. [would prefer to see at (east a 15 foot easement far repair and access purposes. It is likely mat the easement v~n71 be part of people`s front yard and have driveways, fences, eta, crossing ar following the easement Needless to say, there waufd be soma very unhappy homeowners if you ever had to dig up this pipe for any reason. In summary, the only way to run irrigation water across the proposed development is by a siphon. canceptuaity, the siphon has baert adequately designed; constnsction details would still need to be provided_ because t generally waufd favor a gravity solution if possible, the suggested extension of the pipeline along 32nd Avenue and then northerly to the Nielson property, providing adequate grades are awailabte. would be my preference. Please call me discuss the above. Sincerely, SCtIMUESER GORDCN N~YEA, INC: GCAQON MEYER, CASE NO. WS-92-1 EXHIBIT 'C' P.O. BOX 638 TELEPHONE: 303/237.6944 The City of 7500 WEST 29TH AVENUE . WHEAT RIDGE, COLORAD080033 cWheat Ridge M E M O R A N D U M TO: Meredith Reckert, Planner II FROM: Karl Buchholz, Traffic Engineer ~~' DATE: July 31, 1992 SUBJECT: Street alignment for Applewood Castles Subdivision (Herb Brown Property) The street system for the above subdivision has been proposed. to provide access at two new intersections on Nelson Street between 32nd and 35th Avenues. The Engineering Division has learned that the residents on Nelson Street have some concerns about increased traffic on Nelson Street caused by the proposed accesses. Addi- tionally, we understand the Planning Commission has asked the developer to eliminate the southern intersection on Nelson Street (W. 32nd Place) and create a new access on W. 32nd Avenue at O'Hayre Court or Oak Street. The Engineering Division has some concerns- with. creating an additional access onto 32nd Avenue and we feel that allowing the access to Nelson Street would be in the best interest of the traveling public. West 32nd Avenue is a Collector class street which carries approximately 8000 vehicles per day. Many studies have shown that a street's accident rate is directly proportional to the number of access points on that street. For proper con- trol of access on 32nd Avenue, new subdivisions or other develop- ments should utilize existing access points where feasible. It should be noted that the volume of traffic on Nelson Street would not increase significantly if access. is restricted to Nelson. The Trip Generation Manual states that a single family home generates approximately 10 trip ends per day. This trans- lates into 280 additional trips per day for the new subdivision. Approximately 10 percent of these trips will occur in the peak traffic hour. This means that during the busiest time of the day the traffic on Nelson Street will only increase by about one vehicle every two minutes. This increase is not considered substantial and still falls well within the Comprehensive Plan's traffic criteria of 2000 trips per day for local streets. Another point of concern that has been brought to our attention is the Nelson Street approach width at 32nd Avenue. The existing street width at this intersection is 24 feet without sidewalk. The City's standard for local streets calls for a 30 foot section with sidewalk, curb and gutter. We feel that the narrow street approach does not present a significant safety or traffic flow problem considering the low volume of traffic and minimal amount of trucks. However, the City may be able to bring the approach up to standards as part of a local streets project if approved by the Public Works Advisory Committee. "The Carnation City" CASE N0. WS-42-1 . ~ EXHIBIT 'D' i le a a Q W O Z 3 u ~ w ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ v o CASE NO. WS-92-1 EXHIBIT 'E' e s a N ~ W Z d ~ ~ o ~ ~ z ~ ~ u7 . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o CASE NO. WS-92-1 EXHIBIT 'F' 0 I I I A ~~ i I ~ i ~ rl i ~ N 01 I r N N ----------- ----- I ---------=-- ~ .-1 I . N C'1 ~7 I IL i r-I O~ : ~ i n ~ v1 ~ ~ i i ~ . ~ __ i ~ 1 ~ 1 ~ _ ~ d ~ '_- N N t+1 d ~/1 ~O rl rl rl ri ri 1~ ~N ~ N I N ~ N m D w O z ~ W ~ W ~ z ~ ~ v ~ o Planning Commission Minutes June 4, 1992 With the 1. A 2. A note the pla 3. The leg meet Pu', 4. Other m Council Motion owing conditions: control statement be added to the plan A 1 t Page 3 f face; cross access and ingress/egress:°be added to description and survey information=be amended to c Works Department requirements; and drafting items be corrected prior to City by Commissioner RASPLICKA. °-, ~" Commissioner ECICHARDT stated that-it was his hope that the developer would°~reserve landscaping whenever possible. Motion carried 6-b. B. Case No. W -92-1• ..An application by James H. Brown for approval of.a combined preliminary and final plat with variances for Residential-One zoned property located at 10701 West 3~nd Avenue. Acting Chairman CERVENY"^asked those speaking to make their comments brief and_try not to repeat the same comments made by others. This would allow"time for anyone wishing to speak to have that opportunity. -' Meredith Reckert entered a letter into the record a letter of opposition from Y. M. Linthwaite Rooney, 10505 West 34th Ave. Copies of this letter were provided to Commission. She then presented the staff report, which included a number of slides. Entered and accepted into the reword by Acting Chairman CERVENY was the Comprehensive Plan, Zoning'Ordinance, Subdivision Regulations, exhibits, case file, packet materials and slides. Ms. Reckert stated that though the property had been posted for. preliminary and final plat approval, "the final plat submittal requirements had not been met, therefore only preliminary plat approval would be considered. by Planning Commission at this time. Ms. Reckert noted that two motions would~.be required on this case and variance approval would require five~of six commissioners present voting yes. Commissioner QUALTERI noted that Lots 13 and',,14 had substandard widths. ',~ Co~missioner QUALTERI asked for further explanation regarding number 7 of the criteria. In response to number 7, Ms. Reckert stated that she had meant CASE NO. WS-92-1 -- EXHIBIT 'G' P.O. BOX 838 TELEPHONE: 3031237.8844 7500 WEST 29TH AVENUE • WHEAT RIDGE; COLORA0060033 ~@ Ciry o/ APPLICATION `Wpheat MINOR DUMPING $ LANDFU.L PERMIT _l~ag'e All permits shall be applied for through the Community Development Department. An approved permit is effective for one (1•) year from the date of approval and may be renewed. All fees shall be in accordance with those fees established by the Uniform Building Code. Minor Excavation and Fill Permits 1. 1-50 Cubic Yards: No permit is required for dumping or excava- however,ethat anyefillsdepositedois~onenaturalOterrianyofdlessrthatedy three (3) to one (1) slope, or such fill is less than three(3) feet in depth and is not intended to support permanent structures, and in addition, such fill or excavation does not obstruct or otherwise adversely affect any drainageway. Should any of the above standards be exceeded, ar a drainageway ba affected, a permit shall be required under the guidelines for No.~2. 2. 51-500 Cubic Yards: Dumping or excavation of earth materials not exceeding 500 cubic yards, may be allowed with a permit approved by the City Engineer. All applications are to be submitted on the appropriate completed application form and be accompanied by the appropriate fee. A sketch plan indicating the following information must also be submitted before the permit will be issued. a. Location and dimensions of all property boundaries and structures on the site. b. Location and extent of areas to be filled or excavated c. Location of existing and proposed drainageways, irriga- tion ditches, etc., and indication ofi how and where historic runoff will be maintained•on site. d. Cross-section of area to be filled or excavated .indicat- ing original slope, new slope and dep#h of fill. e. Statement which indicates the proposed use or purpose for said fill or excavation. 3. 501-201000 Cubic Yards: Operations in which earth material fill or excavation exceeds 500 cubic yards but does not exceed 20,000 cubic yards shaall be allowed by a permit issued by the City Engineer after informationnahalllbetaubmitteduwithtthe requiredlan~ The following pplication form: a. A site plan, prepared and signed by a registered pro- fessional engineer, at a scale of no less than one (1) inch to twenty (20) feet (1":20') which illustrates the following; (1) Location and dimensions of all property boundaries and structures on the site. (2) Location and extent of areas; to. be filled, or• excava---, #ed. .. (3) Location of existing waterways and drainage courses indicating any change. (For any site containing an establish irrigation ditch, a letter of approval from the appropriate ditch company or agency is required.) (4) Location of existing and proposed points of ingress/ egress. (5) Location and extent of existing vegetation, proposed changes in such vegetation and including plethods to' rehabilitate the veoo+~+;.... _~.._.. _. MIkOR DUMPING AND LANDFILL PERMIT APPLICATION pAQE p 4. Performance Standards: The following provisions shall apply to all Minor Excavation and Fill Permits: a. Rehabilitation. Within thirty (30) days after the cessation of Filling or excavation, rehabilitation for the site shall have been completed in accordance with the approved plans. Rehabili- tation shall consist of acceptable leveling, grading, landscaping, or any combination thereaf.to minimize potential erosion and approval indicated by the Public Works Department (below). b. Debris. Debris and/or contaminants shall not be used except when endorsed by the City Engineer. "For the purpose,of this section, the term debris shall have the same meaning as the terms garbage, trash or lun'k as defined in the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws, Section 14-34."• 5. 'Permit Feea* 50 cubic yards or less .....................$.10.00 61 to 100 cubic yards .....:................ 15.00 101 to 1,000 cubic yards, for the first 100 cubic yards ...........:..... .... 15.00 plus, for each additional 100 cubic yards or fraction thereof ...............:...... 5.00 2,001 to 10,000 cubic yards, for the first 1,000 cubic yards ........................ 60.00 ~_ plus, for each additional 1,000 cubic yards or fraction thereof ................ 4.45 10,000 cubic yards and over ................ 100.00 *Wheat Rids[e Code of Laws, Section 5-32. All permits shall be applied for prior to fill deposited on site. Any permit applied for after fill is deposited on the site shall be subject to a double fee and other penalties as prescribed by Wheat Ridge Code of Laws, Appendix A., Section 24. B. 6. Any fill requested within the 100 year floodzone moat have a+special_exception permit From. the Board of Adjustment prior to I hereby acknowledge that this application is correct and understand that I cannot start this project. until this appli- cation is approved. I shall comply with the laws of the State of Colorado and to the Zoning Regulations and Build- ing Code of the City of Wheat Ridge. Any violation of the above terms will cause immedi- ate revocation of this permit. Approved permit will be kept in my possession, or permanently on job site. Ap licant s Signs ore COMMUNITY DEVE PMENT DE APPROVED BY: ~. DATE: ` /~ ~~ JlJ PUBLIC WORKS DEPT., APPROVED BY: ~a,a,,,~. ,`.~ C1'r ! ER DATE: ~ ~p, ~ ~ 3 3.~i 3 Receipt No. Owners ignature if dif Brent than above) 1 W- l i .. ~~:;_ ,1~}t -~~~~ f59.~~~~ ~ 3S1~1 ~~/ ~` , z. Av' y~ ~ ~ ~-~ ~9> ~ 96 ~ i~ -9S _ < 1 f _ 34 ~ ~ j ~~ - 93 ~~ // \1 % N - =~~ --_ ,,~ ~- t~ w ` ~~ ~ ~ 2os•95~ BaLU 0 F } HRY -- 90 ~~ 1 - ~ ~ i ~ g~ ~ ,~ ~ ~ / tib"~ ~ ~K ~ ~ ~os.ov~ \ - - --~ ,. ,. ~ J ~' \ / / / y / ~ ~ ~ / `~ 9L ~ .~- `- _~ i ~~ ~~ ~~ _ i -+ ~ -fi' % ^'-- ~ '~- ~~ •~^ DP~RINA~C ~EP~~~" DESG21pT1O-.1 DF TiiE ikt7_EP A-LID O1'~JtLtiVEs _ _ . TitE SLTE IS A ~.SFS ACf7i= PR:Q.CEL CF LAh[D LO CATED 1N Ti\E DW I/4aFTNl ~t t/ 4 Ai.1~ T -4\ti= 5E V4 OF Tkis= L]VJ I/d._ OG SECTIC7N 2B ~ T35., RG9W ~ QF TtiL= GTt1 P M J C1T`t OF WL1tA1 21DC.E ~ ~EFFE2gON C~UNT'1 iLY~LO. ` IT IS '~~OUIJDE D ON TiiE 'UDt2TN fi`t' \tJ~ 35 Tii AVM s ON 1Ni SOUTH b`i W. 321JD Rv5 ~ tJ TN E EAST PiY i~SELSG 15 .n.T ~ ON T1iC WEST 6`i PRIVATE FiDUSc • "~1.1C-R-E 1~2E RISo PW UAT t WOtf°_.t . C~t`l 'f t\E [.AST Sl1~E OF Ttia t PROPaQT`f Z1i15 C~EI~>=R.AL DI..)Cl1J,l1UN G>= TiIC DRtalUi-1GC NAS C'~EEh) NIADc AS 1T 13 PR.~PosED To STOG~PtIC- FILL oU A~.MI~~L PaRTlonl c~F 'f1iE PRO('E2TY• a111S FILL \p ILL P..C U~L7 Wii>=t~1 T4Lt= 51TE IS DEIJE'LO'PED RT A• LA"~.f2 STRGE lU THb ~UTU>?E COMPLETC- DQAl1.1RGB 2.6'P!)>?T R'UD GQIaDl1JG PLf-tl 11,1LLL 13E R Q.tC~ AT iHAT ST A6t 'RLE Gf~O UtJ~ IS C9U6RED MO~~Tt-Y VJ tT~\ C•~.R'.~ , Tit glTc 1S I'..EtIJ 6 USE D ~'Of+- bc~A4.DING Lko-~S , e~~-aFF THE GROUIJD DLDPE~ ARE NDT Uti11FOlLr\. l1aE C,R•OU1.lD lads MDDEti?ATE TO ST'C-EP SLOPES. Ill GEr1ESZAL TIaE GYDUIJD ~LD4ES T9 TIaE 1\10211-t• •TNE4~ l5 A NATU'Q.AL. DQAIl.1G>= NEAR Tilt NLDE141 EtJ>; 6F'1!\i_ PRO~QZ't AND A..L1AlS WEST' •LHE NRTUQRL DRAINAGE PATTE'<NS WILL CSt: MWtIJ-iA1tJtD. EROSION CoNTtzOL LT IS PROPOSED Tq `_,TOCK flLE FILL ACCDMPAiJY tNG DQlal n1AG,~ PLRE,1- 1T RWAY OF TIaE F1LL C3~ etfcJS~UCTING ~FiE I.IDZYN SLC~ AND FR12TL~i UN TAE 'T'F1.6 GSLAUND CoUL-12 AZ T1a't !ZEST \1J ITS n1RTl)QAL Cu~\D1Tlut~1 AT TFiE LDC'AT10N SAOW N DN TLiG 1S PKDP6S£.D TD Co1,1T4~L A-lY WA>IiW~ A ~.IALL __,\rJ\Tll gRIES OF E1A''(- ON Eli°_T S121=- 01= TFiE STOek l~lLe OF Tlac SITE ~tJ1LL 13E 1"1`AINTAtlJ6 L1 TL>rE MAXIMUM 1-161GNT (~F FILL tS B~tE'C w~~ 1T ira CSLCiJD FA12LY LOE~L wtTN THE SITE ri}~ VOLUMt OF STOn~_~iLE l_ ACOUT l2Soc.VDs P'ckja^^ p - ~~ Q' ~~ O ='~ 17299 ~~_ '~'iF ~F CO OQP`` CASE NO. WS-92-1 "fTY ©F VVFIEAT RIDGE EXHIBIT 'H' ~ ~[~(~~ n~ RUG 03 T992 ~S PLANNIfdG & DEVELOPMENj July 30, 1992 City of Wheatridge Planning Division P. O. Box 638 7500 West 29th Ave. P.heat Ridge, Colorado 80034 TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: Re: Case No. WS-91-1 My objections remain unchanged as stated in my letter to the Planning Commission dated June 3, 1992. See copy attached. In fact, my objections are stronger now that I have viewed houses being squished together in a development on the north side of West 32nd between Yourigfield and the golf links in what was once open greenery, as well as on the north side of 38th about Simms which used to pasture horses - a nice pastoral scene; however, not any longer. Surely both these developments have also placed an added burden on the city's resources; now you are contemplating adding another one! Very truly yours, Y. M. Linthwaite Rooney 10505 West 34th Ave. Wheatridge, Colorado 80033- Attach. June 3, 1992 WHEATRIDGE PLANNING COMMISSION By this letter I would like to register my opposition to the proposed development on Nelson Street between 32nd and 35th Avenues for the following reasons: 1. Nelson is a very short street and proposed extra dwellings will impact the noise level as well a.s wear and tear on the street itself. The construction vehicles alone will cause a lot of noise and damage to the pavement. 2. Wheatridge already assessed its residents to enlarge the sewer system along West 38th a couple of years ago. What impact will this new building have on the current system that would serve this proposed new area? 3. Water seems to be on the endangered list - what impact will this development have on our supply not to mention the rates. 4. Over the last couple of years, developers certainly have not done this country any favors. They have built on every blade of grass they could find which, in many cases, has contributed to the savings and loan debacle. 5. What about the wild life that lives in that meadow and long the ditch. After all, the environment is very much to the forefront these days, and I am sure you will all want be acknowledged for your part in its protection. Why is it necessary to turn every natural and green area into brick and mortar? It was because cf the open green areas that I chose to move to Wheatridge many years ago. Please take the above into account as you weigh your decision. Thank you. Very truly yours, /s/ Y. M. Linthwaite Rooney 10505 West 34th Ave. Wheatridge, Colorado 80033 August 3, 1992 To: City of WheatRidge Planning Commission PO Box 638. WheatRidge, CO 80034 FROM: Warren and Janet Ruby 10745 W. 35th Avenue WheatRidge, CO 80033 To whom it may concern: • CITY OF WHEAT RIDE ~2n±~nr~n~.:.~ .~1 AllG D51992_~•, I~ ,,F:~?,aturairic & REVEt0?MEN1' As I am unable to attend the Planning Commission hearing for the Final Plat of the proposed subdivision at ..35th Avenue and Nelson, I would like to state my opposition in writing. The owner of the property has made no effort to address the concerns of the local neighborhood, regarding traffic flow, preservation of trees, drainage patterns, and quality of construction. From this, I conclude that his only concern is in his own financial reward. It then follows that Mr. Brown cannot be counted on to deliver a quality, fully developed subdivision to the neighborhood and that his own bottom line will dictate his actions once_his development is approved. My understanding is that the City only requires financial commitments from a developer for public improvements and does not have any financial leverage on private development. I worry specifically about the many large trees on the site which will become unprotected once .development begins. A promise may be given to preserve them, but the City has no way to enforce adherence to that promise. I have been around enough construction sites to know that if a tree is in the way, something will happen to eliminate it. Mr. Brown has the right to develop his land within the guidelines that govern it. Strictly meeting the letter of these guidelines doesn't necessarily provide the local neighborhood nor the City of WheatRidge with anything desirable. It is the Planning Commission's responsibility to promote long term enhancements to the City and to discourage short sighted, selfishly motivated projects. The subdivision at 35th and Nelson falls into the latter category. Sincerely, LJ~ z. ~'~ Warren L. Ruby ;.uTust 4, 7.~,~'2 ~ity of ; '?e.t 7;ide ~o ?3ox >~s 75:4 `J. 2~t~: ';venue i;'heat ':id;e, CC. 3GC;33 CITY dF WNi"AT RIDGE D n2 AUG 0 5 1992 PLANNfNG & DEVEIOPMEN~ Attention: i'lannin~ i)ivision & '=lanain Co;':?mission i2e: Cnse PVo. IdS-91-1, laeariag sct?eduled for x/6/92 Please zcve-:t tiais as our x•equest tb DIa ?t',2C~'s'E t.ze ?~lv.t for Sub-Oivis ion o£ arc;~ert,y located at 1~~701 ~•I. 3?nd :;venue, ?-,':neat F:id;e, CO., prese~aed as "A~:nleiy~vod Cashes". .iiccordi n~ to the Jef':erson ^ou_~ty 'ssessor/. Treasurer 'af;'.ice tP;is nrvnert,y consists of two carts. ~zrt 1. S.P,uO cx^es at 111701 a~1. 32d avenue Part 2. 3.>~t~,3 ?cres at i..,S25 a~i. 32d 9venue 3oth r.ro-~erties being owned oy i~;r. James H. ]frown. ;t~acl~sed a?^e :x'~i~its ~. and B. tax scizedules for Moth ~~r:~nerties. Cur oajection.s to this proposed Plat are two-fold. First is t:^e TSk'0 str•set outlets onto tVelson ;street from ti?is project. tie feel after t:ie June •=i:, 19°32 iaearin~ nefore the 'lant?in,; Com;:~ission that alternate street -~roovsais would tie co:~sidered to eiimiaate the mreat incraase of traffic on ,velson Strae*. T:e Second objection is to the present and future drainage r_roble,ns that exist on the t~:orth end of the pror~osed i~lat. Consider tF.ese facts re~,s•ding the Hirst objection. 1. Of the te•:enty fa"nily units that are located on r:elson Street [;et;4een 32d and 3:;th -s.venues and tS?ose on 35th ;avenue that ad.,oin the Sub-4ivision prvperty, there are over 56 vehicles. 2. ::+dd twenty seven more far:?fly units and assume only 2 ve=iicles a?er a?Zit will add 54 more vei~icles dumred onto 'ti~elson Street arhich no?+r averaes a traffic count of about 2 vehicles Tier ;;zinute according to a sam;ale count made last week durin:; tite hour between 5~'iti and 6PSi over three days. 3. Children from tine A~.lewood Castles area will have to come onto Belson Street to yet to an,}' of ~rosnect Valley ~le;e~~t;,ry, Lveritt <<iddle Sc;yool or ".~Iifeat ^idge I-li;•h Schools. Nelson Street already is the main tlzrou;;•fzfare for students from the .:pnlewood ~<,"polls a:•ea ;oink to Everitt. Aore ve?~icles and ~~or•e pedestrians on an already= over used. street should I10T ae permitted. 4. The logical solution is to take out the two Cul-de-Sacs and extend one street thru from 32d to 35th avenues, eli;:iinatino further con- Testion on S~eison Street. As to the Second Objection ice say that instead of a satisfactory draina~~e system, t;ie poor fill-in and drain as nut in -dace thrn the slough `pest of nelson at about 34th Avenue has created a dam not a system ;,oink on into Lena Culch tvliic.a is a cart of a Flood Control ''roram. review o£ the revised ^lat <at tl,e Plannin;; division office show the only cha~i;e jade is to i,~crease the front property line of Lot X14 to :;et the increase in s~u~?re footage necessary to ca:r,~l,y with ?'_1 zoning recluiremea~ts. T:;is review indicated that no changes, ~ronosals or consideration for street radesirn and to drainage i~prove;~ents as reauAsted at the dune 4ti~ hear- in~ have been ?rade. '3'hy not? ?fie wc~.tidalso. point out iv?iat looks as favoraale tax treatment tl.is pro,oert,y has received which results in a loss of revenue to the City of ",cheat ':id;e. The Assessor's office i,*as anaP;le to explain ;vhy tn@ x:,743 Ilcres in this Plat are assessed for a total of ~~1020.00 while each lot adjoing and across ?;elson street, of ai3out 1/3 :acre is assessed at 544r>0.00 each. T:~ank you for ,your consideration. ;see ~,=ill attend the Au-;•ust G, 1:?:;2 rneetin,S if you I:ave any nuestions. Sincerely years, 2ic';ard v. Iamb Setty Lamb 3250 Belson Street cheat icidge, CO. a:i0~3 237-2952 /r , J.TV u~Lr L l~ ~C.1,r7 Lilll 11Li~IJ"}",- • .~Z~r7 ~}`I 4 TL!-I ~r•~V~y`~_ VVVI~ 1~ P~ IJ-, h.,.l^1 (~II ( l/ JL ~~J--G ~'.a "iJ'u { J .- y~ i.JPM1u. _I. _ _ /~ Y'. ,71.Jr ,a ., ..d'•J: ~.. ~.. „- _ .` C.r,_ L ~C 1'?'^~i1B: , . _ ~="-. Ct_}v ". nLt_:o~ L LL -. --_ 1 , iJ ". ~'7-=c_-G~-.,_.. ` -ili~i': ~_-i _ .,=c.SGR: ~.-.-`L..~ ~}-!b - --. ..-.... ':c:. _.vc`G ._-1?GLiiv1 . .-...-_. ~?l:jUi .'ii. N iii cl:4c7 _'Ch'Jli __ 1'j =li a? !:". ~_'-'p : :vr:-`~- Ft _T L`7~- i._ Cu ~i~ G~::i.a - i=;uu - .~rcN: iC}74;. I7i r . W iV~rtt2: 32~iD ;y h~ 5=: ~~';: ~_~f: TT -a! ~(~~ NI~~^T }'~~i J4~~ ~. v.. L''.' ~iN .eGGC: _']4..tl.J `~~ .. _tD^le i.~_ I~IL ".. LI C.i P~SCS~=~C~ _ Il'~^3 L. •~~~'~ 1. JC1 iC Ll C4 i. C. 11Q L~ LCZI ~iJ: J.JJI} Q•j l_i ~.ata: ~~cc_, i;sscs-.ac IR}ps: 5cc^^C; _i i4yC` ~,Rt ~:: ~~_~ : =+-2U-'! 991 ; o ce.~ : 5oa~ _% BTb~i jG1V fi E'i_2~'vi 1F5 ill _ -~I i. i'~.QV ~ZC iWil fii15 ~:ccC _ nr ri -~ i0- y~3-_a°_~ G - - + - G~:JI~~~~ .. C1 f]l~ bL:-UC _ -- L-a.i ri~fi ~~ ifR1C. t.0i:5 L~57 ~. L`~iv° it-S F- i1V iii°c. F%S:' 1='Et c: i~-=-_-~.-_ .i IL=iSC f~=ii~:vV i%•iGioai ~IccS L•@1- li1TJ _dST~ i~`range 11a vB: ~~.~~ ~1, _ ----..~ t _ r __ .._-_ _ - _ r ::.rYVi"IL.~. -- _ G:'..: u:~( vs_:t+u~Yi rl __.iSV`^rvFi~1. t ~s. l~i'\ ~:6i,_~ W:ril~1: .. t;"-'31-92 _ ~.;~,-.2: - :.,....--~-~ - - ~,_-_ _ _ I':.,~~~ ii1 ~r'.i~~ - ~:f~ir3.r'i_t1u .1 G.'O'y^v~J _ rl-il~v ~ - '~ _ ~~Y.!i:ci'~i. L`3=lrLii~i Jn~"itS f-! -wn~; ~. _ il~s _ :ICtl r.: #~_ .1a . w i'i cutlF: ~~ffii 6~ L•~C iCJOGJ ~il ~ti IVCB~c': .^C.IVL L.I 4V: itil'iCn :i~_- i_.~.. htiC::n '. ct t~~' -. Sale i~n i•- r1__.- uc4 t.c i'a~_= %-2r'.-j.9':8 G'_=. it - =i55EE.52~ till fii: Z'~'_3.~-}t}{% ~=mod,", '=1'-L~[I--1~7Y1 ' Su ice; 2C Ew %.2 !7n :'i LLB- i'.r}`d ~.?C -1•iTr S-.t i~C V9E Uiil? is Llil_ ~. i=07'~ '~iSiTi' i-~i:S P-_i-5 L I r"=~rdd`i~~a= 'rias~ci- i'Y;n _ ~.. _- :-„- :~~.; ~. SC'c-tci:: 41.i 1. +J r-_ ~~: i__v ~ ant . rv_ - -. - __ ~- _ Land: c^23~? b~•Cl iRY~,S: 4_1 _ i V Lc r-G6 :1 EJJV r._: _~ Li`~• Arae. tar: -:~ e~. -.Lai 'and i b9i43 L~.st. C;-.anger uRf.z: ~--c;il-rr= i'!n.; ~~"~~ B. Sentemuer 10, 1992 City of +dheat piid~e F'^, tsox 638 7500 SJ. 29th Avenue Idheat ?:id;e, CO. 80033 CITY OF WN~AT RIDGE '~ `l l' SEP 1 ~ i992 Q,1HNNING & DEVELDPMENT ,lttention: Planning Division ik Planning,; Cora+eission. Re: Case No. ?dS-92-1, Hearing continued to Oct. 1, 1992. !de iaill not ;~e aole to attend on Octoner 1, 1992, therefore we raryuest that this letter be noted as our objection and reco~amendation to DJSr`i?FI3:;V~ the ?lat as nresented.at the two L~revious ~earin,s. If no ctv..n,~e is made to provide a street outlet onto !J. 32d Avenue instead of two outlets onto ^delson Street, we find the plan very unaccentaole from a safety and practical view- point. "lease refer to our letter of .lusust 4, 1992 for ,core details in this regard. The First :'.iternate ?lap as presented on August 6, is a solution to the street uroolem and if adopted with one street outlet onto ?vest 32d '.venue and only one onto nelson Steet on the north end of the plat, then we would back the developer and would recomg?iend year approval. Thank you, if there are any ~{uestions we are avaiia~le. Sincerely, Richard ~ La;nb nett L~ma 325v 'delson Street ?JPieat :$idge, ~~o. B~O:i3 ?37-2952 Petition to Wheat Ridge Planning Commission and City Council We the undersigned residents of Wheat Ridge who live in close proximity to the proposed WS-92-1 plat request that the Planning Commission and City Council require one of the roads to exit the plat on 32nd Avenue and allow only one road to exit on Nelson Street. Signature Street Address Date ~' :'~ ~U~Ci.....__ 3Z~i N~sd~ s~ 16rr~-~Z ~ ~Aii~/f~[A/11 - ~[~iA~ .~~l.A'/Y~Tp'~'C.- ~ / ~~ HIV ~! O~~ D OCT 2 81992 PUINNING & DEVELOPMENT (/XJr~ ljb> >~1! . • S~f1'~ /~-eoe-., ~T /a lit /a z Petition to Wheat Ridge Planning Commission and City Council We the undersigned residents of Wheat Ridge who live in close proximity to the proposed WS-92-1 plat request that the Planning Commission and City Council require one of the roads to exit the plat on 32nd Avenue and allow only one road to exit on Nelson Street. Signature Street Address Date ~.~' L~,1 , ~ ~ 7 r/ /t/~lros~ /a J -~07 /~ ~.~, ~< !/; ~h e r.r ~~ l~ a 1- ~/~c' S l~ k.. lio~S o h ir, ~""~'", i• V11,~ ~c°i6?tl'YGI~55COt~1 ~S ~~~ COt /C ~03 • ~f .. _ V ~C. 1 ` ~.5~~ ~7.Sb0 ~~s-~ .1~fiLeN ID~j / ~47 March 19, 1993 Planning Division The City of Wheat Ridge 7500 West 29th Ave. P.O. BoX 638 Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80034=0638. TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: Re: WS-92-1 In response to your notice of the above docket, I have not changed my opinion regarding my opposition to this project. As mentioned in my previous letter, I question the need for such development when so many other such projects are under construction in the Wheat Ridge area. Not to mention the strain on sewers and water, and roads needed to support such a proposal. Most people moved to Wheatridge because of the open green spaces interspersed throughout the city. Why do you find it necessary to replace the green areas with concrete and bricks. Very truly yours; Yvonne M. Linthwaite Rooney 10505 West 34th Ave. Wheatridge, Colorado 80033 ~ITY OF WHEAT RIDGE ~ _2n~ MAR 3 01993 :~~~ pLANNtNG & DEVELOPMENT `\ Petition to Wheat Ridge City Council We the undersigned residents of Wheat Ridge who live in close proximity to the pro osed WS-92 1 lat request that the City Council approve the road outlets for APPLEWpOOD CASTLES SUBDIVISION as currently designed which provide for both outlets to exit to Nelson Street. We request that the City Council not approve an exit to 32nd Avenue as this would potentially create a hazardous intersection and further impede the traffic flow on 32nd Avenue. c;v„at„ra __ Street AddreRS Date a'!-/D- Wit my hard d ~ icial This foregoing instrument was se ~t,,c ~~ acknowledged before me this ota_ry a t. ~y_ day of /fj~¢ 3. y D,4~i/ A U ~ ~.~' Petition to Wheat Ridge City Council We the undersigned residents of Wheat Ridge who live in close proximity to the roposed WS-92 1 lat request that the City Council approve the road outlets for APPL~WOOD CASTLES SUBDIVISION as currently designed which provide for both outlets to exit to Nelson Street. We request that the City Council not approve an exit to 32nd Avenue as this would potentially create a hazardous intersection and further impede the traffic flow on 32nd Avenue. Signature Street Address Date ~7 1. J i ~ ~ ~, _.~ /oG ~e -1C~11~3~8~ -~~ - ~~~_ , , . ~~~ -~„- - a s ~ z Nay ,. _~,k=PAP„'' °~' ~' 3.j',v Garner W't ~ _p~~ S- z3 9 3, o~ ~ ' ~~ -Z,~ •ei; ~3 . ~'~ ~` ~~ 3 - 1 y nd and a~ This foregoing instmment was se ,v ackp~wledged before me this otary u ie , ~y~'~ bday of ,¢ y ~» U ~ My comtmssi n ex tres l _. CITY COUP7CIL MINUTES: play c4, 1993 Page -5- Item 8. Application by James H. Brown for approval of a final plat for Residential-Gne zoned property located at 10701 West 32nd Avenue. (Case iio. WS-92-1) Item 8 was introduced by Mr. Flasco; title read by the Clerk. Mr. Gidley and h1r. Goebel presented the staff report and answered questions. James H. Brown, 10701 W. 32nd Avenue, applicant, was sworn in by the Mayor and asked for approval. Lucille Krager, 3530 Miller Court, was sworn in by the Mayor and spoke in favor of the development. Pat Andrews, 3270 Nelson Street, was sworn in by the Mayor; favors the Planning Commission recommendation, not the plan as submitted. Tom Abbott, 10780 W. 35th Avenue, was sworn in by the Mayor; was concerned about the landfill, ditch & storm sewer; they work, now that the City has corrected them; M,r. Brown has created a problem with the landfill; put in some stronger language to save some of the trees. Frank Edlin, 3485 Nelson, was sworn in by the Mayor; read petition which he circulated last Fall, requesting that one of the roads exit onto W. 32nd Avenue and allow only 1 road onto Nelson. 30 People have signed this petition. He would prefer Option 1. Connie Bristol, 10825 W. 32nd Avenue, was sworn in by the Mayor; she was concerned about street access onto 32nd interfering with her property. Patrick Koentges, 14350 Braun Road, was sworn in by the Mayor; he is planning on building a house in that development; he entered a petition into the record which asks not to access W. 32nd Avenue; recommended 2 accesses to Nelson. Dave Brewer, 3565 Moore Ct., was sworn in by the Mayor; he submitted a petition with 50 signatures, which requests that both accesses go onto Nelson Street. Paul Koentges, 52 West Irvington Place, was sworn in; plans to build a home in this subdivision and also be a builder in this area; does not want access to W. 32nd Avenue. Danna Inglee, 3550 Nelson, was sworn in; is concerned about the foxes, racoons, skunks and other wildlife living on this land; asked that they not be killed, but relocated, perhaps to the Williams property; is in favor of the development, but not this plan; liked the original plan. Motion by Mr. Flasco that Case No. WS-92-1, a request for approval of a final plat for property located at 10701 West 32nd Avenue, be approved for the following reasons: 1. All agencies can serve the property; and 2. All requirements of the Subdivision Regulations have been met. With the following conditions: 1. The property be developed in accordance with the applicant's submitted design; 2. An agreement be reached between the subdivider and the ditch user and that .the design be accommodated fur on the plant before recording; 3• That the erosion and fill problem be properly discussed and reached an accord with the Public Works Department of the City of Wheat Ridge; and CITY COUNCIL NlINUTES: May 24, 1993 Page -o- 4. That a reasonable effort be made to relocate the wildlife to the Williams property; seconded by Mr. Davis. Mrs. Brougham asked for a friendly amendment to delete the reference to the Williams property; this is currently a working farm; relocate animals to an appropriate area; this was accepted by motion-maker and second. Motion carried 8-0. ORDINANCES ON FIRST READING Item 9. Council Bill 13 - authorizing the issuance and sale of Industrial Development Revenue Bonds for Adolph Cuors Company Project. Council 6i11 13 was introduced by Mr. Davis on first reading; title read by the Clerk. Motion by Mr. Davis that Council Bill 13 be. approved on first reading, ordered published, public hearing be set for Monday, June 14, 1993 at 7:30 p.m, in City Council Chambers, Municipal Bldg., and if approved on second reading, take effect 15 days after final publication; seconded by Mr. Shanley; carried $-0. Item 10. Council Bill 14 - An Ordinance amending the Code of Laws of the City of Wheat Ridge, Colorado, regarding Mail Ballot Elections. Council Bill 14 was introduced by Vance Edwards on first reading; title read by the Clerk. Motion by Uance Edwards that Council Bill 14 be approved on first reading, ordered published, public hearing be set for Monday, June 14, 1993 at 7:30 p.m. in City Council Chambers, Municipal Bldg., and if approved on second reading, take effect 1 day after final publication; seconded by Mr. Flasco; carried 8-0. DEC_ISIONS, RESOLUTIONS, AND MOTIONS Mr. Middaugh stated that it is his intention to ask the City Council to hold a Special Meeting next week for the purpose of at least considering a questionnaire and some decisions that are part of the CAP process.. Timing on the Community Development Block Grant is very important for the community. We might derive several hundred thousand dollars through this program. If Council decides to hold a Special meeting, we could hear Item 14. at that time. Mr. Flasco has also asked for a Special Meeting regarding EDARC questions that need to be answered and asked to invite Lee Ambrose to attend that meeting. LEAVENWORTH & LOCHHEAD, P.C. ATTORNEYS AT LAW LOYAL E. LEAVENWORTH 1011 GRAND AVENUE JAMES S. LOCHHEAD P.O. DRAWER 2030 SHERRY A. CALOIA GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 87602 ON O 261 1993 TEL l 20 J DN WINS ON HA FAX: (303) 945-7336 y , u SAMUEL J. LIGHT Ms. Meredith Reckert 7500 West 29th Avenue P. O. Box 638 Wheatridge, CO 80034 Re: Your Case No WS-92-i• Herb Brown Develo~m~nt Dear Meredith: At your request, I am writing on behalf of Tom Nielsen. I am writing to advise you that Mr. Nielsen has conveyed to Mr. Brown any interest he may have in his irrigation ditch easement to the extent located upon property owned by Herb Brown. Therefore, my client no longer has any objection to the recordation of a fmal plat for the property, nor does the final plat need to reflect in any manner the existence of an irrigation easement. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. Very truly yours, LEL:rIn cc: Tom Nielsen C:1FII.FSIRECIDZYI'.1LT LEAVENWORTH & LOCHHEAD, P.C. Y #. CITY OF WHEAT" RfDGE $€, ~ -_,.J!!L 2 3 1993 ~~~ .PL'/1~1NING &-DfVELO~futE1V~ v ~, , ~ DISTRICT COURT, COUNTY OF Civil Action No. ~~ ~~ ~ NOTICE STATE OF COLORADO ' "f ~_T _c~^~ q 2:33 ~: .::;~ ~ IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF JAMES H. BROWN F~FR'AN ORDER AUTHORIZING THE PUBLIC TRUSTEE OF THE COUNTY OF JEFFERSON, STATE OF. COLORADO TO SELL CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY UNDER A POWER OF SALE CONTAINED IN A DEED OF TRUST TAKE NOTICE THAT YOU MAY BE AFFECTED BY THE FORECLOSURE OF A BEED OF TP.TJST ON THE REAL PROPERTY DESCRIBED BELOW. James H. Brown has filed a Motion with this Court, claiming to be the owner of a promissory note executed by ADA Distinctive, Ltd., a Colorado Limited Partnership, Patrick Koentges and Paul Koentges dated July 30, 1993 in the original principal sum of $1,250,000.00 which is secured by a deed of trust dated July 30, 1993 recorded on September 15, 1993 at Reception No. 93143829, of the records of Jefferson County, Colorado. The motion claims that James H. Brown has the right to foreclose the deed of trust because said note. is-in_default, the terms of the deed of trust have been violated as follows: the payment due on July 30, 1994 of $50,000.00 plus interest plus late fees has not been made plus Grantor-has not paid ;real estates taxes due for 1993. The motion requests a court order. authorizing the Public Trustee to sell the following real property in Jefferson County, Colorado described in the attached legal description also known as 10701 W. 32nd Ave., Wheat Ridge, Colorado. If you dispute the default or other facts claimed by James H. Brown to justify this foreclosure, or if you are entitled to protection against this foreclosure under the Soldiers' and Sailors's Civil Relief Act of 1940, as amended, you must make a written response to the motion, stating under oath the facts upon which you rely and attaching copies of all documents which support your position. This response must be filed with the Clerk of this Court, at Golden, Colorado, in Jefferson County, Colorado, not later than November 28 , 1994, and a copy of the response must also be mailed to delivered by the same date to Robert G. Frie, attorney for James H. Brown, 7400 Wadsworth Blvd., Arvada, Colorado: 80003'.. If you file a response you may be required to pay a docket fee of $40.00 at the time of the hearing. - 1 - C/ ~ / 1 8:30 .M„ on A hearing on the motion is scheduled for of this Court at De~nber 1 , 1994, in Division 3 100 Jefferson County Parkway, in Golden, Colorado. You may attend this hearing, with or without an attorney. If this proceeding is filed in a county other than the county in which the encumbered property or a substantial part thereof is situated, any interested person has the right to request.a change of venue to such appropriate county. Such request may be made as part of the response by any other writing filed with the court. IF NO RESPONSE IS FILED BY November 28 , 1994, THE COURT MAY WITHOUT ANY HEARING AUTHORIZE FORECLOSURE SALE WITHOUT FURTHER NOTICE. Dated at Arvada, Colorado, October 25, 1994. Address of Moving Party: 10701 W. 32nd Ave. Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80033 FRIE & by ~ ~~ , ROBER G. FRIE 1796) Attorney for James H. Brown 7400 Wadsworth Blvd. Arvada, Colorado 80.003 420-1234 - 2 - -~ A PARCEL OF LAtlD LOCATED Zt1 THE SOUTHWEST 1/9 NORTkiEAST, ' - 1/9 AE1D SOUTHEAST RANGEN69TWESTTOF/THEF6THC PION,LCITY OF TOWNSHIP 3 SOUTH, • WfiEAT FIPGE, COUIITY OF JEFFERSON, STATE OF COLORADO,• FiORE FULLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS, COl4MEI1CI17G AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF TEES SOUTHEAST 1/4 NORTHWEST 1/4 OF SAID SECTIOt1 281 THEt1CE 2i0RTEi 00°19'09" • WEST ALONC THE EAST LIt1E OF SAID SOUTHEAST 1/9 t10RTIIWEST • •• 1/4 ,'A DISTANCE OF 21.00 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF REGZNIIINGI THENCE NORTH 0019'09" WEST CONTINUIt1G ALOIIG THE • SAID EAST LINE, A DISTANCE OF 9.00 FEET TO A POINT, SAID P0211T BEIt1G THE SOUTHEAST COR2IER OF THE EAST 1/2 OF TRACT , 17, BROOKSIDE SUBDIVISI0111 THENCE SOUTH 89°19'56" WEST • 1~9RLflELDISPANCE OFU64.1911FEET TOZA POINTEflTHEICE NOATHfiWBST 00°20'16" WEST, A DISTRIICE OF 130.00 FEET TOR POIt1T~ • THENCE SOUTH 89°19'56" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 99.41 FEET TO' • A POINT, SAID POINT BEING THE WEST LINE OF THE SAID ER $T • 112 OF TRACT 171 THENCE t10RTEi 00°20'16" WEST ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID EAST 1/2.Or^ TRACT 17. A DISTAt1CE OF • r ~ .. ~'.1j93,56 FEET TO A. POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY .. LINE OF WEST 35TH AVENUE, SAID POINT P.LSO BEING THE NORTHWEST CORt1ER OF LOT• 1, ICEt1-19AR SUBDZVISIONI •THENCE •• • t10ftTH B9°1619" EAST PARALLEL TO TIES NORTH LZNE OF TFEE. SOUTHEFtST•1/4 NORTHWEST 1'/4 OF SAID SECTION 28 •7121D• ALONG'. THE SOUTHERLY RZGHT OF WAY LINE OF SAID f1EST 35TEi AVEt1UE, A DISTANCE OF 1.59.57 FEET TO A POZNT, SAID POINT BEING• THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF TRACT A AND NORTEil1EST CORNER OF ERST2ALONGATHEE`WESTALZNEBOFVSAIDNLOTH2NCR DIISTANCE OF 22 ' 125.00.FEET TO A POINT, SAID POINT BEING THE SOUTEEWEST ' CORNER OF SAID LOT 21 T1iE11CE NORTIi 89°16'19" EAST ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF LOTS 2 At1D 3 OF SAID KEt1-IdRR SUBDIVISIONi, ~:.A DISTA2CE OF 209.95 FEET TO A FOI11T, SAID POINT BEING 'THE.SDUTHEAST:CORNER OF SAID LOT 31 THENCE SOUTH 00°16'22" ' ~•~EAST ALONG THE WEST LINE OF•LOT~S~OF SAID Y.Et1-MAR ' .~_ SUBDIVZSIOt1, A DISTANCE OF 125.00 FEET TO A POINT, SAID .~~ NORTH 89°i6'19F~' EASTHALONGCOTHEE OUTHSLINELOF SflIDTLO$CS ~.'~AND THE NORTfi LINE OF TRACT B OF SKID itEN-MAR SUBDIVISION, ••A•DISTANCfi OF 105.00 FEET TO A POIt1T ON THE IESTERLY •: RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF NELS0t1 STREET i' THENCE SOUTfi 00°18'22" ' '; EAST ALONG THE WESTERLY RIGHT OF WRY LINE OF SAID POINTN '•~=STREET, A DISTANCE OF 50.00 FEET TO A FOI11T, `•~~~:)4EZNG THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 6 OF. SAID KEN-IdAR• SUBDIVISIOt11 TIEENCE SOUTH 89° 16' 19" HEST ALONG TFEE ' ' ' SOUTH•LINE OF SAID TRACT 8 At1D NORTIi LINE OF SATD LOT 6, ' A DISTANCE OF .105,00 FEET TO A POINT, SAID POINT.SEING THE;t10RTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 61 TFEEIICE SOUTH~00"18'22". • ~ EAST AL011G THE WEST LINE OF SAZD LOT 6, A DISTANCE OF ' .~125•.00•FEET TO;A POINT, SAID POINT BEING THE SOUTHWEST ' CORNER OF•SAID LOT 6•AND ALSO BEING ON THE NORTH LINE OF • LOT .7 OF SAID SUBDIVISIONI THENCE SOUTH 89°16'19" WEST. ALOt1G THE NORTfi LINE OF SAID LOT 7, A DISTANCE OF 35.00 ' FEET TO A POINT, SAID POI11T BEING THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF-SAID LOT 71 THENCE SOUTH 00°18'22" EAST ALONG TItE WEST LINE OF LOTS 7, B, 9 RND 10 OF SAID KEN-MAR SllBDIVISI0t1, A DISTANCE OF 920.00 FEET TO R POINT, SAID POI11T BEIt1G TFEE SOUTHWEST CORIIER OF SflID LOT 10 At1D , NORTEiE1EST CORNER OF LOT• 11 OF SAID I:EN-MAR SUBDIVISION! . THENCE NORTEi•89°16'19" EAST ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF • ' SAID LOT 10 AND NORTfi LINE OF SKID LOT 11, A DISTANCE OF 14fl .00 FEET TO A POINT ON THE lESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY ' LINE OF~SAID NELSON STREETt T1EEt1CE SOUTH 00°18'22" EAST, ' A.DISTANCE Or^ 105.00 F^c ET TO R POINT] THEBA O1IPOINTBBEING56" • EAST A DISTANCE OF 8.50 FEET TO R P0I11T, • ON THE WESTERLY RIGHT OF. t1AY LINE OF SAID NELSON STREET! THENCE SOUTH. 00°18'.22" EAST ALONG THE SAID WESTERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE,. A DISTANCE OF 333.05 FEET TO A POINT, •~. SAID POIt1T BEING 011 THE NORTHERLY RIGfiT OF WAYS LINE OF WEST 32ND AVENUE AN[) ALSO BEING 21.00 FEET NORTH OF THE SOUTH LINE OF SOUTIi{1E ST 1/9 NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SAID SECTIOtI • 281 THENCE SOUTH 89°19'56" WEST ALONG THE SAID t10RTHERLY , RIGHT OF WAY LINE, A DISTANCE OF 313.16 FEET TO TflE TRUE POIIyT OF BEGINNING, • ' COUNTY OP JEFFERSON, STATE OF COLORADO t~: c' r• r'a~ 's. . `• 1--... ~'~'w~, " r~arraa n. --. PUBLIC TRUSTEE'S NOTICE OF RIGHTS TO CURE OR REDEEM ° °~ne~~ Sale No. `J `~ 9 ~'' 0 To Whom It May Concern: This Notice is given with regard to the following described Deed of Trust: APA Distrinctive, Ltd., a Colorado Limited PartnershiA Patrick Koent4es and Original Grantor (Borrower) P~Il Koentges Jattes H Bravn Original Beneficiary ames H. Frown _ Current Owner of the Evidence of Debt Secured by the Deed of Trust 7~U~Y 30 . 1993 - _ _ Date of Deed of Trust ~gptember 15 1993 - Recording Date of Deed of Trust Jefferson County of Recording 93143829 Reception and/or Film Nos. Reception No. Film Na of Recorded Deed of Trust Book and Page of Deed of Trust Book Na - - - - - 75g<Pb. This is to advise ypu that a foreclosure proceeding was commenced in the office of the undersigned Public Trustee on NovetN~er 1 S ~"' •' , 19 ~, to foreclose the lien of the above-described Deed of Trust. The following described property situate in the , County of Jefferson ,State of Colorado, is ~aB ^ a portion of the property encumbered by said Deed of Trust: See attad~ted legal descxiptiat. also known by as street and number as: 10701 W. 32nd Ave.• , Wheat Rid3e , Colorado YOU MAY HAVE AN INTEREST IN THE REAL PROPERTY BE[NG FORECLOSED, OR HAVE CERTAIN RIGf~ITS OR SUFFER CERTAIN LIABILITIES PURSUANT TO COLORADO STATUTES AS A RESULT OF SAID FORECLOSURE. YOU MAY f PAVE THE RIGHT TO REDEEM SA1D REAL PROPERTY OR YOU MAY F[AVE THE RIGf IT TO CURE A DEFAULT UNDER THE DLED OF TRUST BEING FORECLOSED. A COPY OF SAID STAT- UTES, AS SUCH STATUTES ARE PRESENTLY CONSTITUTED, WHICH MAY AFFECT YOUR RIGHTS, IS ON TFIE BACK OF THIS NOTICE. HOWEVER, YOUR RIGFITS MAY BE DETERMINED BY PREVIOUS STATUTES. TIIE LIEN OF THE DEED OF TRUST BEING FORECLOSED MAY NOT IIE A FIRST LIEN. Name, address and telephone number of R~7-a~'~' r_ >,'ri P the attorney(s) representing the owner of vann r.T~.a~.,.,w-r n7vA the indebtedness: T.-..-.a, r.,i,,,-~.a., aOpD~ 3(L3/a~n-i ~~a DATED at ~~li~n Colorado , this J ~L_ day of November ~ 19 94 ,- HELEN PHILLIPS Public Tmstee of Jeffersrn Counly State of Colorado JAN1~11995 ~~~~ ~~ ~v Sale Date: BY~ Dc uty Public Trustee For use only in connection with Deeds of Trust dated after July I, 1965. This form is to be mailed to those persons and in accordance with those statutes set Corth on the reverse of this form. No. 2$9. Rev. 6-94. 1'UIl1AC'I'RUS'Pta:'S NO'1'ICN: OF ItlCll'fS'CD CORN:OIt RLDtaiBl Copyright I99U -~~~ ~ii7 brnAfoiJ PuM1li~hing, 1743 Waree St, Denver. CQ ge?02 -null, r92-?500 ~_ 6.94 ' A PAFCEL OF LAhlD LOCATED IN THE SOUTHWEST 1/9 1JORTIiEAST, TOWNSHIPS3USOUT IT RANGEN69TWESTTOF/THEF6THC pIOH'2CITY OF WHEAT FZDCE, COUNTY Of JEFFERSON. STATE OF COLbFADO,• MOFE FULLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS, COiJMEIJCING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/9 NORTHWEST 1/4 OF SAID SECTIOIJ 281 THENCE NGRTIi 00°19'09" • • WEST ALONG THE EAST LIIJE OF SAID SOUTHEAST 1/9 tJORTI3WEST 1/4,'fl DISTANCE OF 21.00 FEET TO TF3E TRUE POINT OF PEGINWINGt THENCE NORTH 00^19'09" tJEST CONTINUING ALONG THE ' SAID EAST LINE, A DISTANCE OF 9.00 FEET TO A POItJT, SAID POINT BEING THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE EAST 1/Z OF TRACT 17, BROO3CSIDE SUBDIVISIONt TH EtJCE SOUTH 89"19'56" WEST • PARALLEL TO THE SOUTI{ LIIJE OF SAID SOUTHEAST 1/4 NORTI3WCS'1' 00"20n16ISWESTE OFDISTANCECOF 1030~000FEET TOCRCp IOTTH • THENCE SOUTIi 89°19'56" WEST, A DISTAIJCE OF 99.41 FEET T0~ • A POINT, SAID POINT BEING THE WEST LIIJE OF TE3E SAID EAST WEST LINEAOF SAIDTEASTEI/OBOE TRACT 17. AEOISTANCE OFE '~'~1193~56 FEET TO fl. POINT ON TF3E SOUTIiERLY RIGfiT OF WAY .. .. LINE OF WEST 35T[i AVENUE, SAID PbIN'P ALSO BEING Tk3E NOATfiWEST CORiJER OF LOT, 1, ICEN-t4flR SUBDIVISIONI •THENCE •• NORTH• t39°1619" EAST PARALLEL TO THE NORTH LINE OF THE . SOUTHEFI6T~ 1/+1 NORTHWEST 1'/4 OF SAID SECTION 28 AN D• ALOIJG•• AIJDISTANCEROF 1'S91i570FEETYTOIAEPOINT~ISAIDSPOINTEiB1;INGUE, THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF TRACT A AND NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOT Z OF SAID ICEN-MAR SUBDIVISIONI THENCE SOUTH 00°18'.22" EAST ALONG THE.WEST LINE OF SAID LOT 2, A DISTANCE OF 125.00.FEET TO A POINT, SAID POINT BEINC TE1E SOUTHWEST COgh{Eg OF SAID LOT 21 THEIJCE NORTIi 89° 16' 19" EAST ALONG THE SOUTH LTNE OF LOTS 2 AND 3 OF SAID Y.EN-IdAR SUBDIVISZOhl, A DISTAIJCE OF 204.95 FEET TO A FOIIJT, SAID POINT BEING TE3E.SOUTHEAST; COL4NER OF SAID LOT 31 TIlENCE SOUTH 00"18'22" EAST ALONG THE WEST LINO OF LOT'5'~OF SAID Y.EN-MAR SUBDIVISION, A DISTAIJCE OF 125.00 FEET TO A POINT, SKID POINT BEING THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 5t ;THENCE NORTFI 89°16'19" EAST ALONG THE SOUTH LIIJE OF SAID LO'J' S AND TE3E NORTIi LINE OF TRACT HOF SAID ILEN-MAR SUBDIVISION, • A DISTANCE OF 105.00 f'EET TO A POIIJT ON THE IESTERLY + EASTTRLONGATHEI WESTEftLYLRIGF3TTOFEWAYT LINEEOFO SAID NELS0132 ::`STREET, A DISTANCE OF 50.00 FEET TO A FOIIJT, SAID POINT ~`f3EING THE NORTHEEST CORNER OF LOT 6 OF. SAID ICEN-MAR• SUBDIVISIONI T[iENCE SOUTEI 89°16'19" IJEST ALONG T13E ' • SOUTH'LINE OF SAID TRACT 8 AND NORTH LSAIDOPOINTDBEONG61 A DISTANCE OF .105.00 FEET TO A POINT, "• THE :tJORTfiWEST CORNER OP' SAID LOT 61 TIiEIJCE SOOT}{ 00"18.22" ' ~ EAST ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID LOT 6, A DISTANCE OF ' 125•.00 FEET T0; A POINT, SAID POINT BEIIJG ThiE SOUTHWEST LOT~.7ROFFSAID SUBDIVISIONnLTHENCENSOUTIIT89°16F19"LWESTOF F'EETGTOf3A POINT,LSAIDOP INTD BEOING7 THE NORTHWESTOCORNERO OF-SAID LOT 7t THEtJCE8SO9T AtJD 1080F2SAIDS (ENLMRR T13E WEST LINE OF LOTS 7, SAID SUBDIVISIOlJ, A DISTANCE OF 920.00 FEET TO A POINT, POIIJT BEINC TfiE SOOT}1WEST CORiJER OF SAID LOT 10 At1D TBENCEENORTOR89R16E'19oTEAST ALONG TIiENSOUTIiSLINEVOFIO}J~ • SAID LOT ~10 AND NORTH LINE OI' SAID LOT 11, A DISTANCE •• , OF 140.00 FEET TO A POINT ON THE WESTERLY RIG13T OF WAY ' LIIJE OF .SAID NELSON STREETt TIiEtJCE SOUTfi 00^18'22" EAST, ERSTSAADISTANCE00F 8.50EFEET TOPAIPOI1JTi, ESRIDtJPOINTBBEING56" ON THE IESTERLY RIGk3T OF. IJAY LINE OF SAID NELSON STREETI THENCE SOUTfi, 00^16'.22" EAST ALONG TtiE SAID WESTERLY RIGFIT OF WAY LINE,• A DISTANCE OF 333.05 FEET TO A POINT, '..SAID POINT BEING ON THE NORTI3ERLY RIGHT OF tJAY LINE OF~ WEST 32ND AVEIIUE AND ALSO BEING 21.00•FEET NOATH OF TE3E SOUTH LINE OF SOUTHWEST 1/9 NORTHEAST 1/9 OF SAID SECTIOI.1 281 TI3ENCE SOUTfi 89°19'56" WEST ALONC THE RAID tJORT}3ERLY - RIGSST OF h:flY LINE; A DISTANCE OG 313.16 FEET TO THE TRUE POIIJ.T OF BEGINNING, COUNTY OF JEFFERSON, STATE OF COLORADO .j, . .s; i. ' • ~ •~ i .;,, __ _ _ _i -_- __ _ COLORADO REVISED STAtt'TES 38-38-IOJ. Combined notice of right to cure and right to redeem. fll Within ten days after the recording of the nonce of election and demand for sale by the public trustee pursuant to section 38-38.101, or oat less than sizttea nor more thaw twenty-five days after the entry of a decree of forecosure or the issuance of a w rat vi execution directing the shenfl to sell real properly. [he public trustee or Sheri (f shall marl a notice to the grantors of the deed of trust or mortgage being foreclosed, to any subsequent owners of the property' being foreclosed, to the cursent owner of the properly being sold. and to any other person having a nght to cure a default under xction 38-38-104 or a right ro redeem the propem sublet to foreclosure under section 38.38-30Z. 38-38-303. 38-38•JOS or 38-38-306. Such notice shall state the names of the grantors o(ihe deed of trust or mortgage and the ongtnal beneficiaries or grantees thereof, the names of the cunent owner o(an evidence of debt secured by the deed of trust or mortgage being forecloud or the owner of the lien being foreclosed. and the names, addresses, and telephone numbers of the attorneys. i(any, representing the foreclosing lieaor. A Iegrble copy oC this xction and actions 38-37-108. 38-38.104 and 38.38.301 to 38.38.306 shall be tint with such notice. (ZI The combined votive rcquired by subsection fl) o(this xction shall be mailed to thou persons who have a right [o cure or redeem pursuant to as instrument evidencing such right which was recorded with the county clerk and recorder of the county in which recording of the notice of election aotdtdemand fo rsale of aotiaeof omtmeocemoeot other other Tien being foreclosed and prior to the combined notice shall be mailed to such persons at their respective addresxs shown is theaaecoe ded instruments nhrou~nwensi Such rights to cure or redeem are derived. Posmge costs under this section shall be pan of the foreclosure costs. ~ Inch their 38-J8-101. Right to core when defaalt 1a ooopaymear, (I1 Whenever the default is the terms of the evidence of debt and deed of tntst or morgage being forecloud is nonpayment of anv sums due thmeundet. the owners of the property being foreclosed. nay person liable thereon. any guarantor of the evidence of debt. and. if the dttd of trust or mortgage befog forecloud wu recorded on or after October I. 1990. any holder oC an interest Junior to the Tien being foreclosed by virtue of being a lieaor. lessee- or vendee of, or holder of an easement or a certificate of purchase oo. [he prcnertv. wader a recorded instrument. shall be entitled to cure said default if. at least avers days prior to the date the foreclosure sale is held. such penoos give wnaen notice, atachiag true copies of instruments evidencing their right to cure. to the public trustee or shmff conducting the sale of their iaten[ioa to cure said default. On or before 12 noon oo the day before the date upon which said sale is xt. u it may have been continued or postponed, such persons desiring to cure the default shall pry to the odcer mvducting the sale all of the Collowtng: (a) A71 expenses actrally inetured by the odor rnnducing [he sale: (b) The amount authorized is stttion 38-37104 (I) (b) plus an additional (tt of thing-five dollars; data of u« and which aze allowable by section 38 38- 07 orhallowable by the evidence of debthedeed of trust, orrme~e of debt u oCthe fd) All ocher sums which aze due under the evidence of deb[ or deed of trust or coon Sage: and principal which would not have 6eeo due is the abunce o(accelention of the debt shah note be included in such sums.due.ept that any (2) Upoa receipt by the odcer conducing the sale of said notice, of iateatioo to cure the default, such odcer shall obtain in wnnng from the owner of [he evidence of debt, deed of trust, or mortgage a statement of all sums accessary to cure said default. If. at (east (orlv odcer conducing thehsalelsettiog fn h the amoum necnsaryb o be pad to cure s uh default' heosale shall ben wnt[ea statement to the for oo longer than two weeks and thercaher from wttk to week, but not to exceed one month or the postponed by such odcer section 38.38.109 fl), whichever is longer, until such statement hu been provided. If a cure is made oo ernt for the period of such postponement shall be allowed oiily at the regular rate and not at the default rate specified in the evidence of debt. deed of trust, or mortgage, If a cure is not made, intetrn at the default nee, if specified in the evidence of debt, deed of trust, or mortgage. for the period o(such postponement shall be allowed. Upoe receipt of the cure amount, the odtxr rnnducing the sale shall deliver said sum to the owner of the evtdeace of debt, deed of taut, or mortgage or to the agent or attorney forsuch owner. We foreclosure shall be withdrawn or dismisud u provided by law, and the evidence of debt shall tx returned uncaace8ed to the owner thereof by the public tnutee or coup. (Z.5) Where the defaWt in [he terms of the evidence of debt cad deed of taut or mongitge on which the owner claims the right to foreclou is the failure of a borrower to furnish balance sheen or to returns, the borsower inry cure such default in the moaner Drescrihed in [his section by providing to the owner of the evidence of debt, deed of !nut, or mortgage the rcquired balance sheets, tax returns, or other adequate evideatt oC the borrower's 6oancial condition so long u all sums curremly due under the evidence of debt have been paid and all amounts due under paragraphs (a) through (c) of subsection (p of this section. where applicable, have been paid. (3J Nothing in this section shall constitute a waiver oCaay right accruing oo account of the violation o(any covenant of said evidence of debt, deed of !nut, or mortgage tscctsrring after the Payment desrnbed iv subsection (I) of this secioo. 78-38-301. l'vrchaaar gaping ehargp - «desptloa. (t) The purchaser at nay sale of property under foreclosure of dttds of trust or mortgages or wader execution or order of nay court of competent jurisdiction which hss rettived from the public [nuttt or shend conducting said sale a certificate of purchau evidencing such sale may pay at any time after receiving such certificate of purchau and during the penod of redemption described is section 38.38.302: (a) Aoy genera! or special razes or ditch or water assessments levied or accruing against said properly: (b) The prcmiutns on wy insurantt necessary to protec any improvemeau comprising a part of such ptnperty; Icl Sums due on any prior lien or encumbrance oa suth property; (d) If the property is a Ieaxtiold or is subject to a lease, all sums due undtt such leue: (el The reasonable costs and expenses of defending, protecting, and maintaining such property cad the holder's interest in such properly, including repair cad mainteawce cosu cad expenses, costs cad expenses of protecing cad sttunng the property, receiver's fees and tzpeases, instyecttoa fees, court costs, attorney fees, and fees and cosu oCan attorney to the employment rf the holder of the certificate of purchau; zad (~ Such other cosu and expenses which may be authorized by a court of competent jurisdiction. (2) Aay waiver oC the righu oC redemption or righu to cure default provided in this article, made prior to the dare of any default under nay mortgage, deed of trust, or other iastrumeat evidencing a lien, or as evideace.of debt secured thereby, snail be deemed u against public policy and sha0 be void. 38•J8-302. Redemption within specified period -Procedure. (q Except as provided in this section with respec to agricultural real estate, within seventy-five days after the da^e o(the sale of the property by virtue of any foreclosure oCa mortgage, deed of trust. or other lien or by virtue of as eaecvtiea cad le+~. the owner of the properly, or any other person liable aher the foreclosure sale for the deficiency, may redeem the property sold by r "ying to [he public trustee or sheriff the sum for which the property wu sold with interest Crom the date oC sale, toge[her with any razes paid or other proper charges u now provided by law, with interest from the date such ezpeau was paid. Such taterest shall be charged g[ the default rate if specified in the original instrument or. if not so specified, at the regular rate specified in the original instrument. For'he purposes of ih~s secioo. "other proper charges" includes thou costs and ezpeous paid by the holder of a certificate of purchax u prnnuted be section 38.38.301 f I1 for which said holder has filed with the public trustee or sheriff conducting the sale recepu evidencine such paymcnis. (2) The public trustee or sheriff shall execute and deliver a certificate of redemption to the person redeeming cad shall «cord a duplicate centfiute rn the county clerk and recorder's odce o(the county where the property is located. The publ~~ trustee or shend shall retata the recorded copy of the certificate o(redemptton. The public trustee or shenff shaft forthwith pay said looney to the holder of the certificate oC purchase. If the owner of the properly fails to redttm under this section, nay other person who redeems under this secioo shall be issued a certificate o(redemptioa only after [he expiration of the proper redemption penod. 13) fa the eau of any mortgage or deed of trust upon one or more parcels o(real estate. all of which were agricultural real estate.both upon the date of recording of such mortgage or deed of trust and oa the date of the foreclosure sale. the redemption resod dexnbed is subsecwh (I1 of this section is six months. (al The Term `'agricultural real estate" means. for the purpose of this section. any parcel o(real esta«, none oC winch. on the dace of recording of the mortgage or deed of tryst or at the nine of the foreclosure sale wader such mortgage or deed of trust. r other platted as a subdivision or is both located within an incorpora[ed [own. city, or city cad county cad is not valued and assessed ~~s agriculmral land pursuant to sections 39•!•102 (1.61 fal and 39.1.103 151. C.R.S., by the assessor of the counn~ in which the land is ~,xated. If it is not evident Crom the Iegai desctpuon contained in the mortgage or deed of tryst that the real estate described therein is ~•~ a not agricultural real estate. the pubhe [rustee or shenff shall accept as evidence that the parcel a not agricultural real estate either a -ruffed copy o(the subdivision plat containing all or a part of slit parcel of teal estate or both a certificate of the clerk of the city, town, or city and count. certifyrng that all or a pan oRhe parcel is located within the incorporated limns of the city. town. or city and county on the date of recording of the mortgage or deed of trust or ai the ume of the (oreclozure sate and a certificate from slit assessor of the count} m which the propem is located certifying that all or a pan of the parcel is not valued and usesxd as agncultural land. Such plat or certificues shall be obtained and furnished and the certificates recorded, all of which shall be paid for by the person xeking the determrnauor. [hat the property is not agncultural real estate. If at the time of recording of the mortgage or deed of trust. or at the unit of the foreclosure sale. the progeny rs, in whole or m part. either platted u a subdrvrsron or is both located wnhm the incorporated limns of a town, city, or errs and county and rs not valued and assessed u agricuhural land. it shall be deemed for all purpoxs under thts section. and against all persons. that such parcel is not agncultural rcil cause. (5) If the last day of slit uventy-five-day redemption period, the six-month redemption period provided for in this xsion, or the licnor redemption periods provided for in section 38.36.303 (I) is a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday or a day the county courthouse is closed. the period is extended to include the scut business da_v. 38.38.303- Time of redemption br Iknor. t I1 IC no redemption is made within the redemption period provided for in section 38.38.302, the Iknor having the xnior lien. according to the records oCthe county- clerk and rccofder's office of the county where slit property is located, on [he add property or some pan [hereof subxquent to the lien upon which such sale was held may redeem within ten days alter the expintroo of the rMemption period provided for in xetion 38-38-302 by paying to the public trusrce or sheri0 the redemption amount required by section 38-38-302. and each subsequent licnor in succession shall have and be allowed afive-day period to redeem, according to the priority of his lien, and may redeem within the five-day period allotted to hem by paying to the public trustee dr aheriH [he redemption amount paid by the nett prior redeeming licnor. with interest, plus the amount claimed in the affidavit of the prior rcdeemiag licnor as provided for in subsection t ~ i of this settion, including the per diem amount through the date payment is made or. if no licnor prior to himself has redeemed. by paying to the public trustee or sheriff the redemption amount required by xetion 38.38.302. ' (_'1 No licnor is entitled to redeem unless his lien appears by instruments duly recorded or filed u permitted by law and unless. within the redemption period provided far in union 38.36.302, he files a notice with the public tntstee or shen0 making the salt attaching a true and correct copy of such recorded instruments evidencing his lien with evidence of recording afFzed by the clerk and recorder's office and advising of his intention to redeem. No licnor shall be entitled to redeem under this xenon unless his lien appear by an instrument so recorded or filed prior to the expiration of the period of redemption provided for is section 38-38.302. (3) The calendar dates of the period of redemption allowed the rcspesive Ikoors shall be considered u Doing frzed at the time of the expiration of the period of redemption provided for io section 38-38-302, and such periods than not be advanced according to the calendar by the fan that any prior Iknor redeemed before his full period o(rcdemptioa expired. (41 A lieoor redeeming shall pry to the public trustee or sheriff the amoun[ rcquircd to redeem and shall deliver to such oficial an affidavit of himxlf or his agent showing the amount owing tin such lies u of the last day of the owner's redemption penod with the per diem amount that shall accrue thereafter, 36-JB-3W. Ellen of redenetion. f t) If redemption is made by the owner of the property, it shall annul the sale and leave the property subject to all fleas which would have existed if oo sale had beta made, except the lien forccloxd which shall bt dixharyM by the silt f 21 If the owner fails to redeem sad redemption is made by any other person Liable after the forccloturc sale for a deficiency, it shall annul the sale. the property shall remain subject to al) lkns which would have existed i! no sale had been made, and the certificate of redemp[ion issued to the person so redeeming shill, when recorded, operate u an auignmem to him of the lien w redeemed from. to the lull extent thereof including ill aura costs and expcnxs paid by such rcdemptioner, who shall oeverthelas still be liable for such deficiency. (3) 1f redemption is made by a lieoor, his certificate of redemption, duly recorded, operates u an auignmeat to him of the elute and interest acquired by the purchaser at the sale, subject, hrrweven to the righu of pttsons who cosy !A eadt!-~ subxgs:ntly ;p r-dter... 36-36.305. Lessee, easeneni Yddar, W iotall~ent Wd contract rector eossNerel a Iknen - iutalleent iud contract madee -J - considered u an owner. (1) For the purposes of this trtticle, a lessee of, or the holder of an eaxment rncumbering, property shall be considered u a licnor, but without any lien amount, and shall be subjes toad requirements in this article with respect to lienors. ]Ca subxquent licnor redeems from the redemption of a lessee or axment holder, such subxquent licnor in acquiring said property takes the ume subject to such lease ar easement. (L5) (a) The notice to the lessee or lessees who have unrecorded possessory interests io the property being foreclosed as provided for by this article and article 37 of this title by virtue of any foreclosure of a mortgage, trust deed, or other lien or by virtue o(an execution and levy shall bt mailed to the lessee or lessees of a single family rnidentt or tmultiple-unit residentiil dwelling. Stroh aotitt shill be in writing and shall be xnt by regular mail. Notice is complete upon mailing to the Iesxe at the address of the premises or by addrcuing such notice to'•Occupant" fdlowed by the address. Ibl Nothing in this section shall affect any rights under this article of a tesxe whoa residential least is recorded. (21 For the purpous of this article, an installment load contras vendor oC property shall be considered u a licnor for the unpaid portion of the purchase grin, interest, and other amounts provided under the installment taM rnntras sad shall be subject to all requirements in this article with respect eo lienors; but such installment land contras vendor shall not be considered u an owner u to any portion o(such properly. (3) For the purposes of this article. as installment 4od contras vendee of property shall be considered u an owns exttpt as to any portion of such property tha[ such vendee may thereafter have transferred, u evidenced by a recorded instrument. and such vendee shall be subject to all requircmenu in this article with respes to owners. (41 The teen ••licnor", u used io this article, shall iaelude the holder of a ttrtifitate of purchax (or the Droptrty iuued upon the foreclosure of a Tien thereon. and the priority of the tier. reprexnted by such certificate of purchax shall be the same as the priority of the Iron foreclosed by such certificate of purchax holder 38.36.306, Rights of other Ikeon to redeem, f I t A 3udgment seditor whoa judgment hu been made a lien of record and who hu complied with the other conditions of a litnor required by this article mn• redeem u a licnor. f21 A mechanic's lien claimant or any other person claiming the right to a sututory lien on real progeny shall have the right to redeem as a licnor despi[e the Cas that such claim has not been reduced to judgment, if such Iten or lien claim has bttn recorded as required or permitted by statute and the holder thereof has complied with the other conditions rcquircd of a licnor by this article. 1( another licnor redeems after such lien claimant, that portion of the redemption amount attribu[able to the claim of such lien claimant, as evidenced by such claimant's recorded lien, shall be held in exrow by the public trustee or sheriff until a final judgment has been entered m favor of such claimant confirming his right to a lien and all periods for appeal have expired, whereupon there shall be paid to such clarmam from the escrow the amount of his lien claim a established by such judgment, with any interest earned thereon, and the balance. rf any. shall be refunded to the last redtemmg litnor. !f such clarmani releaxs his hen or fails to establish has right to such hen. the entire escrow shall be paid to the lut redeeming lienoc Lien claimants of equal priority, for the purposes of this subuction (21. may act m conccn and be deemed to reprexa[ one claim m which they share pro nw. 38.3-106. Form of paymeoh to public trustee. All moneys payable to a public trustee at any foreclosure sale under the provisions o(this ankle or upon redemption or cure under the provisions of article 38 of this title shall be in the form of cash or by electronic transfer to an account of the public trustee available for such purpose or in she form of a certified check. cashier's check, or teller's check. made payable to such public trustee. certified or issued M a federally chartered or state-chartered financial rnstituuon. as defined in secton 15-15.201 (4). C.R.S., licensed to do business m the start of Colorado. .. , - .: •. __ _ _ _ 6». ,_ .,, _ ,~ ~.. SUN ENGINEERI~ CO. 727 DILLON WAY,'~208 AURORA, CO. 80011 (303) 344-5384 s PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS & LAND SURVEYORS PREISMINARY SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION OF J ~ ~U ~ Wes " /V City of Yrheat Ridge, Jefferson County, Colorado. TABLE OF CONTENTS: Introduction Field and Laboratory Investigation Conclusions and Recommendations Building Foundations Design of Floor Slab Drainage Subsurface Drainage :' Reinforcing Limitations Tpcation of test holes Ing of test holes Sxell Consolidation Results Foundation Drain Detail Sieve Analysis and Atterberg Limits i'a ;e 1. 3~age ] . Pave 2. Page 2. & 3, Page 3. Page 3. & 4. Page ~F. Page '1F. Page , 4. Fig. 1. Fig. 2.& 3. Fig. 4, thru. 12 Fig. 13 Table 1, ~ 2 INTRODUCTION: This preliminary soil investigation report was made to determine the suitability of subsoils fox building single family homes with basements and attached garages. The property is located in Wheat Ridge City, Jefferson County, Colorado. The .site is bounded by 32nd on the South, 35th Ave. on the North, Nelson Street on the East and private property on the West side, There are two existing houses and some sheds on the property. Thirty more single family residential homes are proposed to be built. Other than that the site is mostly covered with grass and some trees and is being used for raising horses. An irrigation ditch runs through the property. The topography at the site is not uniform. The ground slopes vary from about 2,~ to 10~. FIEISI AND:LABORATORY INVESTIGATION: Four test :holes were drilled with a 3" diameter power auger at locations shown in figure 1. Samples of soil were taken at various depths using a 2" O.D. split spoon sampler driven by a 140 pound drop weight falling 30 inches. The number of drops .. required to drive the sampler certain number of inches were noted. The soils were classified during the drilling operations based on cuttings deliver- ed from auger and laboratory testing of samples. Sieve analysis, natural moisture content, dry density, Atterberg limits, and swell-consolidation tests were performed in the laboratory. The subsoil conditions are shown in logs of test holes,. figures 1 and 2. In test holes 1 and 4 which were drilled close to the South side of the property, the subsoils are mostly clayey and show moderate to high swell-potential. No free water was encountered in test hole one. In test hole four, though free water exists at about lb feet, it!rose to 12 feet 6 inches soon after drilling. Test holes 2 and 3 are located in the low area near the North side of the property. ,_ In test hole two, the subsoils are mostly clayey sands with no swell potential( Except for a thin lens of clay at about 8 feet depth). The subsoils axe wet with free (1 ) water at only 3 feet depth. In test hole 3, the upper about 8 feet of subsoils are sandy clay with clayey sand below. The sandy clay possesses low to medium swell- potentail on air-dried_,samples and no swell potentail on natural samples. Though free water exists at about 8,feet depth it rose to 4 feet soon after drilling was completed. OONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: Building Foundations; The site is suitable for construction of single family houses. .In the vicinity of test hole two, where_free water exists_ at_2 feet..depth, the site will have_to be raised=:for basement construction.__ The scope of this investigation is limited. More testing will be required before actual construction of the houses. In those locations where the subsoils are clayey in nature like those for test holes '1 and 4, the foundation system should consist of grade beams supported by straight shaft piers (caissons) drilled into bedrock. The piers should be minimum of 15 feet in length for the basement section and a m;n;mnm of 18 feet iA length for tfie garage portion. In addition the piers should penetrate the bed rock by at least 5 feet. The above minimum lengths of piers should satisfy the $ feet penetration requirement in most of the cases. The caissons should be designed fora maximum end bearing pressure of-15,000 pounds per square foot and a side shear of 1,5000 pounds per square foot for the portion of the caissons in bed rock. Dead load plus one-half the live load is to be used to calculate the size of caissons. The caissons should be designed for a minimum dead Load. pressure of 10,000 pound per square foot. All caisson. holes should be properly cleaned and there should not be more than 4 inches of water in the holes. If there is more water, the tremie method or casing of the caisson holes be used. Provide 4• inches of verticle to form an air space below grade beams. Partitions bearing on concrete floor slab should have slip-joints at the top or bottom. In the low area where free water exists at very shallow depths, investigation should be done for each individual house. As indicated by tests done on test holes (2 ) 2 and 3, the subsoils are mostly sandy clays and clayey sands. The sandy clays in their natural state show no swell-potential and only low to moderate swell- potential in air-dried condition. For basement construction, the grade will have to be raised with a structural fill of 3 to 4 feet. If subsoils are not allowed to get dried during and after construction especially during construction, the found- ation system may consist of conventional spread footings placed on natural soil or well-compacted backfill. The footings shall be designed for a maximum soil bearing pressure of 2,000 pounds per square foot. Alternative to this, will be friction piers. DESIGN OF FUJOR SLAB: Due. to the nature of the subsoils encountered especially xhere expansive soils are. .encountered like those i.n test holes 1 and 4, a structural floor system would be more suitable. Zhis sytem, of course, involves extra expense. Rowever, if a slab-on-grade system is desired ins#fad of the structural floor system, the owner builder should be aware that if the the subsoils are allowed to dry and are rewet- ted, heaving of the floor slab can occur. If the owner builder are willing to take this risk, follor:ing recommendations are made to minimise the risk. i. A floating type of slab shall be constructed. Separate the slab from load bearing members and utility line to allow independent movement of slab. Pro- vide Z" expansion joints between slab and load bearing members. 2. The slab should be reinforced with suitable wire-mesh. 3. The slab should be placed on undisturbed soil or well-compacted backfill. 4. Provide control joints frequently to allow approximately 200 square feet slab areas. 5. Keep the so31 on which floor slab is to be placed moist by sprinkling water, or other suitable means. DRAINAGE• It is important that pxnper drainage is maintained around the structure so that the water drains away from the structure. Following recommendations are made in this regard. (3) 1. Provide a proper slope (10~) around the structure so that the finished grade slopes away from the structure around the perimeter for a distance of ten feet. 2. Roof down spouts should discharge on concrete splash blocks. 3. Do nto install any sprinkling systems within ten feet of the structure. 4. Do not plant any trees or shrubs within five feet of the structure. 5• All backfill should be compacted properly. The future owner should be advised to fill any settled area. SUBSURFACE DRAINAGE: The subsoils consist mostly of clayey soils. These soils, being impervious tend to hold water if surface rater does get into the foundation system.atOther locations, free water exists at very shallow depths. Therefore a subsurface drainage system consisting of 4" perforated plastic pipe covered with minimum of 12 inches. of clean gravel and sloped to daylight or suitable outlet, per- ferably to a sump pump in the basement is recommended. REINF~RCING• The caissons should be reinforced with two, # 5 rebars for the full length of the caissons. The grade beams should be reinforced with two, # 5 rebars at top and bottom. ~e grade beams (foundation walls) should also be reinforced with vertical steel to withstand horizontal pressure. The footings should be reinforced with at least two, # 5 horizontal rebars. ZYte foundation wall should be reinforced with two, # 5 rebars at top sad bottom. 7~IMTTATIGNS It is possible that the soil conditions can differ at loacations other the test holes from those reported in this soils report. If vacations are significant, this office. be notified. ( ~+) t r rl M r 1 i TFl3 ! 21, • -- ~q TH 2 (05.0 - a ~N 35.0' i q `~ a --! LJ 140.0 ~ T H [( TH 1 ~~, i zo2 ~ !d ~a r ' 4G8.5' _ W. 32lUD AVE. L~C1~T1~~i GF TEST N(~LE~ G~ 7 0 I 2 . 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 w p w w _ 11 z 12 13 2 ~' 14 a w o I5 16 17 . 18 , 19 " 20 o j I %, FREE WATER z `y _ iiJET CLAti'EY 3AND GREYl311 l0. ~!-~~ ItJ TOP 3~ - '~ :~ 5 .~ _ _ F .i ~~ 7 ~:;~ t2/t2" 8 ST. UERY STIFF LENS Ot= SAUnYCI.AY ~AR~ CLAY 9 ~- X: W W 10 ~- i. II z _ 9! 12" 12 '~• r a 13 MOLST TO WET a ~ CLAYEY 3Al,1D , 14 ;; 15 16 •~ 17 ~~ 18/l2" ,' 18 •,' nwLST to utcr sawn SL(6FtTl:Y QLAVEY ;.;: 19 20 TEST HOLE I TEST HOLE 2 ~~ I. 24~12'INDICATES THAT 24 BLOW° OF A 140 POLNC HAMMEF< FALLING ?C? INCHES ARE REQUIREC TO DRIVE A 2~~O.D. SAMPLER 121NCHES. 2. NO FREE WATER WAS FCIUND IN TEST HOLE 1. FREE WATER WAS FOUND AT 3 FEET DEPTH IN TEST HOLE 2. J nGS (7F TFST Hnl FS 3 0 I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 w b w a II z 12 13 x a 14 w ° 15 16. 17 f8 19 20 9112" ~ FREC WATER ~.llET SANbY CLAY GR6`l13F1 LN C~LbR '•; WET CLAYEY SAIJD :' GETTING SAN!]IEIL WtTFL DEPTH . ~ l9/12" Z ~~ ~~. '•' 20/t2" .~ TEST HOLE 3 MDIST TD WET VERY STIFF TD HARD CLAY 19JIZ" FREE WATE2 9'/2 MD1ST~ FtARD SAILLllN CLAY 3017 ~/2 MOIST lii1Q-D CLAEY SAIUD TEST HOLE 4 n I z 4 15 Fi 7 8 9 ~ w w 10 ~- II z 12 H 13 w o 14 15 i6 17 IS 19 20 f10TES I. g~12" INDICATES THAT g BLilW° OF A 140 POI,NG HAMIAEh FADING ~C` INCHES ARE REQUIRED TO GRIVE A 2~~ 0. D. SAMPLER 12 INCHES , 2, THOUGH FREE WATER EXISTS AT ABOUT 8 FEET DEFTH, IT ROSE 217 4 FEET DEPTfi IN TEST HOLE 3~ IN TEST HOLE 4, FREE WATER EXLSTS AT ABOUT 16 FEET, BUT IT ROSE 20 12 FEET 6 INCHES DEPTfi SOON AFTER DRILLING WAS COMPLETED. LOGS OF TEST HOLES z 0 rn 'z a a x W Z C O N H W 0: a 0 V 4 5 6 0.1 I.0 10.0 APPLIED PRESSURE - K SF Somple of Soil from TEST HOLE One at 7'-0" depth. Natural Moisture Content 11.1 Nstnral Ihy Denafty 112.8 P.C.F. -CONSOLIDATION RESUL' Due 1b n Load. ~,~ ~ Z 0 z a a x W \° Z L O N W 3 O v 4 5 6 d.l L0 10.0 APPLIED PRESSURE - K SF Sample of Soil from TE ST HOLE One at 16'-0" depth. Natural Moisture Content 1,5.0 Natural Dry Density 120.6 P.C.F. NOTE: ?he s~.mple was air-dried. LL-CONSOLIn,4Tl(~ty Ri=ci1- Due To n Load. 1=I G. S Z 0 N z a a. x - ~ W ~ ~. t I Z 2 0 V7 N W ~ 3 o_ O v 4 5 6 0.1 L0 10.0 APPLIED PRESSURE - K SF Sample of Soil; from TEST HOLE Two at >3•-•d' depth. Natural Moisture Content 23.5 ~ Yattual D2y Deasity 200.9 P.C.F. NOTE: T<te sample was air-dried. Due To a Load. SWELL-CONSOLIDATION RESULTS tom. ~ Z 0 z a a x W \° 2 ~ O N N W a 0 U , 5 ai Lo io.o APPLIED PRESSURE - K SF Sample ~of Soil from TEST HOLE Two at 18'-D" depth. Natural Mloisture Content 24.1 Renalded Dry Density 97.5 P.C.F. ~~° The sample was remolded at natu~a.l moisture content. SWELL-CONSOLIDATION RESULTS kt~..7 5 4 z 3 0 z a 2 a x w Expans on e t At Con tan In 0 t o c e e a I z 2 0 ~ - w a 3 0 U 4 5 6 0.1 I.0 10.0 APPLIED PRESSURE - K SF Sample of Soif from TEST HOLE three at 3'-6" depth. Natural Moisture Content 20.0°0 ftatural Dry Density 105.9 P.C.F. ;~ _ ~ S1NEL L -CONSOLIDATION RESULTS Z . 0 y z 2 a x W I I z 2 O N N- W nom. 3 ' o v 4 5 6 0.1 I.0 10.0 APPLIED PRESSURE - K SF Sample of Soil from TEST HOLE Three at 3'-6" depth. Natural Moisture Content 20.0,E Hatura2 Dry-Density ZO$.9 P.C.F. NOTE: The sample was air-dried. Due To n Load. SWELL -CONSOLIDATION RESULTS ~t~. 9 z 0 z a a X .w I I z 2 0 N W :a 3 0 U 4 5 6 b 5 - 3 I Sett At emea as t e W Na r Se Ia Ilea as at Du I q 2 0 0.1 L0 10.0 APPLIED PRESSURE - K SF Sample of Soil° from TE6T HOLE Three at 12'-0" depth. ' Notural Moisture Content 21.0% Natural Dry Density 108.,$ P.C.F. SWELL -CONSOLIDATION RESULTS 'a/ i v''10 Z 0 rn z a a x W I z 2 0 rn W a 3 0 v 4 5 6 0.1 I.0 10.0 APPLIED PRESSURE - K SF Somple of Soil from TEST HOLE Four at 6'-0" depth. Natural Moisture Content 20.0% Natural Dry Density 105:05 P.C.F. ~~' The sample was air-dried. Due To i Load. SWELL -CONSOLIDATION RESULTS ~-1 v .1z a Z , 0 z a ~ a x w I 0 I z 2 0 w a 3 0 v 4 5 6 O. I L0 10.0 APPLIED PRESSURE - K SF Sample of Soil from TEST HOLE Four at 18'-0" depth. Natural Moisture Content ts.o:~ Remolded Dry Density 111.7/ Dua To n Load. ~~' The sample was remolded at natural moisture content. SWELL-CONSOLIDATION RESULTS I'ulyclhylrnr• :br•PI ylutA to wall Floating }leer sle6 Remfor ced .. i~ .concrete /1. Dearing wall / , ~~ ' ,- , • . r .. ti '; 1 i t . .A E? i; .; '~~. f.: .~ . cep ~~ ,i f 's _ .. T~ s n _ a, ev J Coorse gravel (to just below top of foollnq) it. i ~t Coarse gravel ~y ti,~ .` ' ' :. , fii~, ° ,~ 'ti _~.~._l~ 4' ti ~ a 644\~ ..~y ~ "'~~-\ 4S ~ l .r r •6 ~ :; ~~ 4~ • ny ~ ~ , y ~ . ~ ~r; ~' ~ o ~~ It '~~, ;. ' am ~c~,~ y v ~' . •~,' Comported' ~ backhll , ~v OJ ~ ` V ~~~ G; Jc /~ ~ o . crs ~~(1 ,o "off '1 _' ~ 7 , a- 3Q .: ~ , •r Y ~,- J ` L 4~ ' ' , ~' °~ ~' . G~ ~~ - " Roofing ..;~` .. h' 4= • Pa Per 1 ~ i;,~ r J iF i,• -'r, ;; Jam ..~ . ', l ' •'~ l~ Perforated plasllc -^ drmn pipe :Polyethylene sheet glued to wall FOUNDATION DRAIN DETAIL Asphalt Impregnated FIG. t3 W I W F' 4 tov a I ~ I N 0 w ~ V ~ ~ V 3 8 ~ I rn N I N O O~ n cn ~ w k ~ n ~ ~ + p ~ w cA+ r' m N N F-+ N l z O O m i b ~ a m = o °" ° o ~ - ' z .~ o0 w ~ ~ 33 i-+ m ~ 1<3 z ~ ~m N D ~ ~ ~ ~ O (n ~"' m ~. ~z < z < m mo D ' Z D ~ r (n 1 D ~ ~ w ~ ~ ~Q - ~ m r ~ - m o D - '-- -I m -m v m N N 3 D ~ O O~ N N W ~ ~ r C1 _ _~ --~ y C1 ~ ~ ~ ~ o ' ~ D r { vi ~ n v r^ ~'' r a ~ < ~ O Z • i U r m ~ ~ W z 0 0 m ago °-~ F'' m -~°i ~ o ~_ ' ° - ~ o Z . • ~~ ~ ~' z l n o ~ in 3~ ~ -i -a z ~ 3 S ~ -i m ~ ~ i-+ O ~ :° z ~ ~ ~ < z mo i r~ ~ o ~ 34 -1 - 0 r ~° _ r N ~ 3 D } ,, i 1 N 1 N e ~ ° ~ ~ ~ ~ ' «' m o m w ~, ~ .i 0 z - ^ N m m D Z D to y m A~ ~ m D --I m ~ , m r