The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutWZ-02-107500 West 29th Avenue The City of Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80033 Wheat Telephone 303/235-2846 Ridge FAX 303/235-2857 November 6, 2002 Anne Bork Old Chicago 248 Centennial Pky., Suite 100 Louisville, CO 80027 Dear Ms. Bork: At its meeting of October 28, 2002, City Council DENIED your request for approval of an amendment to the Applewood Village Shopping Center PCD final development plan to allow erection of a fifty foot high freestanding sign south of the structure located at 3250 Youngfield Street for the following reasons: 1. The proposed sign is not compatible with the low density residential neighborhood to the northeast, to the south and to the west. 2. The proposed sign is inconsistent with the intent of the sign code. 3. Signage for individual businesses within the shopping center is better addressed with a comprehensive program rather than individual requests. 4. There are several alternatives to this sign which would direct potential customers to the restaurant that would be less intrusive to the neighborhood. c The applicant was unable to generate sign options that were agreed to by the neighboring residents. Please feel free to contact me at 303-235-2846 if you have any questions. Sincerely, Kathy Field Administrative Asst. Enclosure: Draft of Minutes cc: WZ-02-10 (case file) GA._Ny Documents\Kathy\PCRPTS\PLANGCOM\CORRESP\2002\WZ0210 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: October 28, 2002 Page -6- Item 3. Council Bill 34-2002 - An Ordinance amending Section 16-110 of the Code of Laws of the City of Wheat Ridge concerning the criminal offense of Domestic Violence to. correct references to State Domestic Violence Laws. Council Bill 34-2002 was introduced on second reading by Mr. Gokey; summary and background were read by the Clerk; Ordinance No. 1269 assigned. Motion by Mr. Gokey to adopt Council Bill 34-2002 (Ordinance 1269); seconded by Mr. Edwards; carried 8-0. Item 4. Council. Bill 33-2002 - An Ordinance amending Article IV of Chapter 21 of the Code of Laws of the City of Wheat Ridge concerning Courtesy and Bus Stop Shelters. (Case No. WCA-02-01) Council Bill 33-2002 was introduced on second reading by Mr. Edwards; Clerk assigned Ordinance No. 1270. Motion by Mr. Edwards to approve Council Bill 33-2002 (Ordinance 1270), Case No. WCA-02-01; seconded by Ms. Figlus; carried 8-0. Item 5. Request for an amendment to the Applewood Village Shopping Center final development plan to allow a 50-foot. high freestanding sign at 3250 Youngfield Street. (Case No. WZ-02-10) (Old Chicago) Mayor Cerveny explained that the public hearing for this case was held at the last Council Meeting on October 14. Councilmember DiTullio made the motion that this item be continued to today, October 28, to allow applicant time to work with staff and the neighborhood to work on, options for the sign. Meredith Reckert reported that they held a meeting on October 21, there were 2 staff persons, 11 residents from the neighborhood and 4 representatives from Old Chicago. 10 of those residents opposed the new pole sign. :d CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: October 28, 2002 Page -7- Motion by Mr. Schneider to deny this request for the following reasons: 1. The proposed sign is not compatible with the low density residential neighborhood to the northeast, to the south and to the west. 2. The proposed sign is inconsistent with the intent of the sign code. 3. Signage for individual businesses within the shopping center is better addressed with a comprehensive program rather than individual requests. 4. There are several alternatives to this sign that would direct potential customers to the restaurant that would be less intrusive to the neighborhood. 5. the applicant was unable to generate sign options that were agreed to by the neighboring residents;, seconded by Ms. Figlus; carried 8-0. 01 z DECISIONS, RESOLUTIONS, AND MOTIONS V ° Item 6. "Project Safe Neighborhoods" Reimbursable Funds Grant. Motion by Mrs. Rotola to approve acceptance of the US Attorney's "Project Safe Neighborhoods" reimbursable funds in the amount of $14,949.45. 1 further move that purchases approved and selected by the police department, in accordance with the requirements of the "Project Safe Neighborhoods" program and all City purchasing policies, be spent from Fund 17-Police Investigation Fund. I further move that all reimbursable funds received as part of the "Project Safe Neighborhoods" program be returned to Fund 17-Police Investigation Fund to cover all City expenses; seconded by Mr. Schneider; carried 8-0. Item 7. Motion by Mr. Edwards to name the property currently referred to as the Davis Property, located at 3705 Jay Street, per the Parks and Recreation Commission recommendation, "Founders Park"; seconded by Mr. Schneider; carried 8-0. Item 8. Motion by Mr. Gokey to name the property currently referred to as Manwaring Field, located at 49th & Marshall Street, per the Parks and Recreation Commission recommendation, "Creekside Park"; seconded by Mr. Mancinelli; carried 8-0. Item 9. Resolution 27-2002 - amending Resolution 02-2002, Purchasing Policy. Resolution 27-2002 was introduced by Mr. DiTullio; title, summary and background read by the Clerk. of WHEAL Po AGENDA ITEM cREQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION October 28, 2002 got aR Aoo X PUBLIC HEARINGS _ ORDINANCES FOR IST READING _ BIDSIMOTIONS _ ORDINANCES FOR 2ND READING RESOLUTIONS Quasi-Judicial: X Yes No SUBJECT: Case No. WZ 02-10, Request for an amendment to the Applewood Village Shopping Center final development plan to allow a 50-foot high freestanding sign at 3250 Youngfield. SUMMARY AND BACKGROUND: This public hearing was continued from October 14, 2002 for action only. Council directed the applicant to meet with the neighborhood and staff to work out options for the proposed OLD Chicago sign. A meeting was held on October 21, 2002. Attached is a memo outlining the items discussed during the meeting. 1. Staff update memo with exhibits STAFF RECOMMENDATION: ORIGINATED BY: STAFF RESPONSIBLE: For Denial: BUDGETIMPACT: Original budgeted amount: $0 Actual contracted amount: $0 Impact of expenditure on line item: $0 Budeet Account No.: N/A Alan White, Planning and Development Director Meredith Reckert, Senior Planner "I move to DENY the request for an amendment to the Applewood Village Shopping Center final development plan to allow a 50-foot high freestanding sign at 3250 Youngfield, Case No. 02-10, for the following reasons: 1. The proposed sign is not compatible with the low density residential neighborhood to the northeast, to the south and to the west. 2. The proposed sign is inconsistent with the intent of the sign code. 3. Signage for individual businesses within the shopping center is better addressed with a comprehensive program rather than individual requests. 4. There are several alternatives to this sign that would direct potential customers to the restaurant that would be less intrusive to the neighborhood. 5. The applicant was unable to generate sign options that were agreed to by the neighboring residents." For Approval: "I move to APPROVE the request for an amendment to the Applewood Village Shopping Center final development plan to allow a 50-foot high freestanding sign at 3250 Youngfield, Case No. 02-10, for the following reasons: The business is located over 600 feet from Youngfield and is not visible from the Youngfield entrance to the shopping center. As a designated Community Commercial Center in the Comprehensive Plan, businesses in the shopping center need to take advantage of the location adjacent to I-70 to generate customer activity, which the freeway-oriented sign would accomplish. There may be economic benefits to the City in the form of increased sales and resultant sales tax revenue. 4. There are other 50-foot high signs in the vicinity." C:Oocurnents and Settings\kathyf\Local SettingsUemporary Internet Files\0LK54\old chicago cc.wpd City of Wheat Ridge Planning and Development Department Memorandum TO: City Council FROM: • Meredith Reckert, Senior Planner SUBJECT: Case No. WZ-02-10/Old Chicago DATE: October 22, 2002 On October 14, 2002, City Council continued Old Chicago's request for amendment to the Applewood Shopping Center PCD final development plan until October 28, 2002. The purpose for the continuance was so staff could meet with the applicant and the neighbors to "work on options" for the sign. See attached draft minutes labeled Exhibit `A'. A meeting was held on the Old Chicago premises on October 21, 2002. In attendance were eleven residents, two staff representatives (myself and Marilyn Force) and four representatives from Old Chicago. See attached sign-up sheet labeled Exhibit `B'. The following issues were discussed: • Alternate locations for the sign. It would be desirable to have the sign at the main entrance to the shopping center on Youngfield, especially after the 1-70 ramps are relocated to this vicinity. Old Chicago reminded everyone that the management supports the sign only if it's located on the Old Chicago pad site. Staff would encourage a comprehensive sign package addressing the needs of all of the tenants. The management company has been difficult to work with both Old Chicago and the city of Wheat Ridge. There is a lack of response to tenants voicing their concerns. Some of the smaller tenants are worried about retribution from the management company if they complain. • Has the erection of highway sign been investigated? There are no other billboards allowed in this vicinity. • Concern that approval of this sign will set a precedent for other requests within the shopping center. • Could area residents apply pressure to the management company to force submittal of a revised sign package? • The existing Old Chicago wall signage "hums". The sign company responded that if a sign hums, it typically requires maintenance. They will check into it. Old Chicago offered to keep the wall signage on the south side unlighted in exchange for the neighborhood supporting the new pole sign. One of the neighbors indicated that Old Chicago's past performance does not make them feel comfortable. It was reported that although the restaurant closes at 2 AM, the wall signs stay on all night. • Can the restaurant guarantee an additional 76 customers per day will come to the restaurant as a result of the new sign? No, this figure is not guaranteed. • Concerns were expressed regarding parking and circulation in the shopping center. Additional customers will exacerbate the existing parking problems. • General issues were discussed regarding trash in the alley behind King Soopers, etc. There was a consensus that the shopping center management company needed to respond to maintenance issues/concerns shopping center wide. • Concern was expressed for the potential negative affects if the new sign is erected - negative affect on property values and current standard of living. • There was an inquiry as to whether Old Chicago could threaten to abandon their current space in the shopping center if management doesn't respond to their concerns? This is not an option for the restaurant based on the existing lease and monetary investment in the space. • Legal protest provisions were explained by staff to the residents. • One of the residents inquired whether a photometric study had been done comparing the existing wall signs and the proposed pole sign. The applicant indicated they would be willing to conduct a study and may request a continuance so this can be pursued. • Alternate locations for a pole sign were discussed. The applicant indicated that even if a sign location was approved near Youngfield, they would also need directional signage in the shopping center. They weren't sure whether the company would invest $50,000 for anew sign that is not in close proximity to their tenant space. • A vote was taken among the residents in attendance as to whether they support the sign with concessions made by the applicant (IE, turn off existing wall sign on south side of the building). Ten.of the residents oppose the new sign, one of the residents abstained from voting. 4 .eAF4 fal T `Al CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: October 14, 2002 Page -2- DRAFT The following citizens were sworn in by the Mayor and spoke in favor of Ms. Aiello's rezoning proposal: Patrick Fink, 10344 W. 44th Ave.; Lisa Goddard, 6660 W. 28t" Ave.; Judy Acre, 6660 W. 28th Ave.; Frank Progar, 4314 Quail St.; Becky Taylor, 4435 Grove St.; Robert Laird, 4348 Moore; Pat Aiello, 1096 Aspen, Denver. Motion by Mr. Hanley for approval of Council Bill No 31-2002, an ordinance rezoning property located at 10590 W. 44th Ave., Case No. WZ-01-02, from Agricultural-One to Planned Commercial Development, and further moved to approve the preliminary and final development plan for the following reasons: 1. The rezoning is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan designation of transitional residential on the north side of W. 44th Ave. 2. The rezoning will not adversely impact the traffic congestion nor the amount of light and air to adjacent properties. 3. It is unlikely that the property will be developed under the existing zoning classification of Agricultural. . 4. The requirements of the City's Planned Development Regulations have been met. 5. The landscape requirements of the City's code have been exceeded. 6. The City's parking requirements have been exceeded. 7. The drainage report and plan have been approved by the Public Works Department; seconded by Mr. Edwards; carried 8-0. Item 2. Consideration of an amendment to the Applewood Village Shopping Center final development plan to allow a 50 foot high freestanding pole sign on property located at 3550 Youngfield. (WZ-02-10) Item 2, Case #WZ-02-10, was introduced by Mr. DiTullio. Meredith Reckert was sworn in by the Mayor and presented the staff report. Ms. Reckert distributed two letters that she recently received in opposition to the development plan. Ms. Reckert asked that the comprehensive plan, zoning ordinance, case file packet of materials be entered into record. Anne Bork, applicant for Rockbottom Restaurants, was sworn in by the Mayor. Ms. Bork stated that the restaurant isn't meeting income expectations and they believe that part of the problem is signage visibility especially from 1-70. Terry Jenson, designer of the pole sign, was sworn in by the Mayor. Mr. Jenson stated that the landlord for Old Chicago has approved this pole sign. The following citizens were sworn in by the Mayor and voiced their opposition to the pole sign for Old Chicago: Pearl Norgard, 3180 Xenon St.; Renee' Gearhart, 3155 Wright Ct.; Jan Coryell, 3175 Xenon St. and Beverly Tomlinson, 3185 Xenon St. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: October 1'4, 2002 Page -3- Alan White gave information about the proposed sign and stated that the Planning DRAFT Department would like to see a comprehensive plan for signage at the shopping center instead of signs for individual businesses. Marilynn Force, Economic Development Director, was sworn in and said that she is in favor of the sign and that if it could be seen from 1-70, more people would be drawn into the area. Motion by Mr. DiTullio to continue for action only, Case No. WZ-02-10, to the October 28, 2002 Council Meeting to allow the applicant time to work with staff and the neighborhood, and work on options for the sign; seconded by Mr. Schneider; carried 8-0. Item 3. Council Bill 32-2002 -amending Subsection 15-25(g) of the Code of Laws of the City of Wheat Ridge concerning the storage of junk. Council Bill 32-2002 was introduced by. Mr. Schneider, who also read the title, summary and background. Clerk assigned Ordinance No. 1268. Gerald Dahl gave the staff report, and stated that the storage of junk on property will have to be contained inside a permanent structure. He also gave the definitions forjunk and littering. Discussion followed. Motion by Mr. Schneider to adopt Council Bill 32-2002, and further moved that the ordinance take effect upon adoption; seconded by Mr. DiTullio; carried 8-0. ORDINANCES ON FIRST READING Item 4. Council Bill 33-2002 - amending Article IV of Chapter 21 of the Code of Laws of the City of Wheat Ridge concerning Courtesy Bus Benches and Bus Stop Shelters. Council Bill 33-2002 was introduced on first reading by Mr. Edwards, who also read the title, summary and background. Ms.'_F.iglus asked that the purpose of the ordinance be explained to the public, so Mr. Edwards gave the reasons for it. Motion by Mr. Edwards that Council Bill 33-2002 be approved on first reading, ordered published, public hearing be set for Monday, October 28, 2002 at 7:00 p.m. in City Council Chambers, Municipal Building, and if approved on second reading, take effect 15 days after final publication; seconded by Mr. Schneider; carried 8-0. Item 5. Council Bill 34-2002 - amending Section 16-110 of the Code of Laws of the City of Wheat Ridge concerning the Criminal Offense of Domestic Violence to correct references to State Domestic Violence Laws. Council Bill 34-2002 was introduced on first reading by Mr.Gokey. Clerk read the summary and background. 1 CO 00 v m U7 W N O c ~ w ~ IW s C ~ w ~ rJ^ A M\ U V ' s uJ S S Vi ~ ~ rt c N ' l U N lA Li Q~ n z 2) r m m a M Q ;a m z N N z m M s 0 m cn O O o Z ~ °a 2 Z 0 = CD N 0 cn m K ~ C) O N ~ m Legal Protest October 22, 2002 A Petition Against the Amendment to the Applewood Village Shopping Center final development plan to allow a 50 foot high freestanding pole sign on the property located at 3550 Younglield. (WZ-02-10) We the undersigned do protest against the proposed changes to the Applewood Village Shopping Center final development plan. We find the potential damage to our property values and lifestyle an unacceptable cost for Old Chicago's benefit. nd A Pro ert owners on 3 Printed Name 2 V~11" . gnature Address Phone Number t i7v~c`e ws,vI, ll}tuJt AYO- IOC -u D lS ~ to 2jJU Ct,S) AVM sr a c v, 3,) '-'/-fl ~ 1 ZS`60 W 32- PX'L 5J3 23z-G26c! 3s3 ~ ~3 ~D~43F SS °1~ ZO3-4z[7`7c(aj a wv~ ~Z w 2iL 37-5756 (:o v~V ¢fc i A~ 0 N Q C7 --a Nil CA A Cn n r ,T -i m~ .:7 r.; Legal Protest October 22, 2002 Petition Against the Amendment to the Applewood Village Shopping Center final d&elopment plan to allow a 50 foot high freestanding pole sign on the property locate at 3550 Youn field. Z-02-10 Wae undersigned do protest against the proposed changes to the Applewood Village Shopping Ce8er final development plan. We find the potential damage to our property values and lifestyle o r r an,91racceptable cost for Old Chicago's benefit. _ - N Street Pro ert owners on Printed Name enon Signature Address Phone Number 7 ~a-a6 U 2 -goal 3 / xr-A -I ST 2-3 3. 1 LI 3 Z r/a7YUciA 3/~f0 XENDa/ ST 33-/~/3; G~1NE G/1~=~ 31~Cez 5rr ✓.i S~ 3d3'~3 t~3Z 23 9 142 l ic1L> i~ GL '3125`15°► ~3 9-bZs ``JJ S di K~cw 5 5 UGC aui) C:Q ~(f✓NCN1 3c 3 3 2 - q~ an ~4 JT z3 967 70 963- S 1 ~gls we LS -50 9 - 10 Cl Legal Protest October 22, 2002 A Petition Against the Amendment to the Applewood Village Shopping Center final development plan to allow a 50 foot high freestanding pole sign on the property located at 3550 Youngfield. (WZ-02-10) We the undersigned do protest against the proposed changes to the Applewood Village Shopping Center final development plan. We find the potential damage to our property values and lifestyle an unacceptable cost for Old Chicago's benefit. rrU UIL Uwuc1J VII l Printed Name i~++vu 4 Signature Address Phone Number G~ n I (,(~v~~~ ~ ~2 9"5-0 allovv 5,7 3G~ Q 34/-T,?~Y I l~G_'Y Cpl ` - s V 1' C~(~ N~2~dh ~ `~i~2.~e'~cvt 'Jt' 2aL ~~c~~ JGtvHe~ J\Ic n 72 evicn J'~ 9 6 322 -~f Xc~G"~ 13 3- X12$ .5~-, 30 z37-~{Z~ jr1n A,~N iQeQ L\M AN P 1~x C5 3 c7 = co N N O tY Legal Protest October 22, 2002 A Petition Against the Amendment to the Applewood Village Shopping Center final development plan to allow a 50 foot high freestanding pole sign on the property located at 3550 Youngfield. (WZ-02-10) We the undersigned do protest against the proposed changes to the Applewood Village Shopping Center final development plan. We find the potential damage to our property values and lifestyle an unacceptable cost for Old Chicago's benefit. rr0 ell Uwuclb V31 Printed Name VV11 .b vv , Signature Address Phone Number LCIt-`c t4 175 hf Ci 303 " 7 70'71I J ~ 2 ; hr L4- 3d3-257 3b 11,zA ~ ecrne 2 W ~i~~~v~; rat o3 z37 +tivuvE Sc~ d]tz i 3 ~ v-x t Eh`T C t co cri N N U N O 1, ti C~' Legal Protest October 22, 2002 A Petition Against the Amendment to the Applewood Village Shopping Center final development plan to allow a 50 foot high freestanding pole sign on the property located at 3550 Youngfield. (WZ-02-10) We the undersigned do protest against the proposed changes to the Applewood Village Shopping Center final development plan. We find the potential damage to our property values and lifestyle an unacceptable cost for Old Chicago's benefit. r1U vit UW... Printed Name Signature Address Phone Number 797 y C 6eEi'4 6e0 , - . 6 11 S-0 a 33 33' SCC-1C,147-s1 J'0' oa~4~w//lp/ffI - 1 ✓A 3 iv Y~+ S03-13 -w S3 ~ M' sn.-- w 3353 lzY L „ --w- y z, M li. F 0 ~Y f- O `r October 23, 2002 Vince Austin and Roberta Rivera 12550 W. 32' Avenue 0 n' Wheat Ridge CO 80033 N 'S C*-) Honorable Jerry DiTullio Th N cn fl . z e Mayor pro tem of Wheat Ridge 7500 West 29th Ave m Wheat Ridge 80215 Dear Mayor pro tern DiTullio: City Council will meet on October 28, 2002 to make a decision on whether or not to allow the Old Chicago restaurant to erect a 50-foot illuminated sign on the south side of their tenancy next to their patio. Because our property is directly across the street from the proposed sign's location and we believe that the sign will have a negative impact on the neighborhood, we are not agreeable to the construction. The Planning Committee rejected the original proposal for the construction and although the plans for erecting the sign have not changed; the project appears to be moving forward. Several property owners voiced objections at the Planning Committee meeting and the City Council meeting and it appears to have had little effect. The adjacent neighborhood is bearing Applewood Village's development expense and receiving little of the benefit. Applewood Village intrudes into the surrounding neighborhood with lights and sounds from which there is no escape. The property values diminish and more importantly, the quality of living degrades. While the shopping center benefits the city's coffers and provides much needed services to the area, only the adjacent neighborhoods bear the noise and light-pollution. This proposed 50-foot sign is just too much. The sign is incongruent with a residential neighborhood. It is bad enough that a bar replaced the ice-cream parlor, but such ostentatious advertising is more akin to a truck stop than a neighborhood shopping center. Please do not allow Old Chicago to build an eyesore and incubator for urban blight. Once precedence for this type of advertising is set, every firm with fifty thousand dollars available to erect a sign will do so. Avoid this reviling vision of the tallest landmarks in Wheat Ridge being commercial obelisk. Do not let the "Tree City" become another commercial expansion for the Metro area, rather than the residential reserve it should be. Sincerely, Vince Austin and Roberta Rivera Vince Austin and Roberta Rivera 12550 W. 32nd Avenue Wheat Ridge CO 80033 The Honorable Harry J. Hanley 4190 Dover St. Wheat Ridge 80033 Dear Councilman Ilanley: October 23, 2002 o ~ -t r ~ ~ c+s m s~ City council will meet on October 28, 2002 to make a decision on whether or not to allow the Old Chicago restaurant to erect a 50-foot illuminated sign on the south side of their tenancy next to their patio. Because our property is directly across the street from the proposed sign's location and we believe that the sign will have a negative impact on the neighborhood, we are not agreeable to the construction. The Planning Committee rejected the original proposal for the construction and although the plans for erecting the sign have not changed; the project appears to be moving forward. Several property owners voiced objections at the Planning Committee meeting and the City Council meeting and it appears to have had little effect. The adjacent neighborhood is bearing Applewood Village's development expense and receiving little of the benefit. Applewood Village intrudes into the surrounding neighborhood with lights and sounds from which there is no escape. The property values diminish and more importantly, the quality of living degrades. While the shopping center benefits the city's coffers and provides much needed services to the area, only the adjacent neighborhoods bear the noise and light-pollution. This proposed 50-foot sign is just too much. The sign is incongruent with a residential neighborhood. It is bad enough that a bar replaced the ice-cream parlor, but such ostentatious advertising is more akin to a truck stop than a neighborhood shopping center. Please do not allow Old Chicago to build an eyesore and incubator for urban blight. Once precedence for this type of advertising is set, every firm with fifty thousand dollars available to erect a sign will do so. Avoid this reviling vision of the tallest landmarks in Wheat Ridge being commercial obelisk. Do not let the "Tree City" become another commercial expansion for the Metro area, rather than the residential reserve it should be. Sincerely, Vince Austin and Roberta Rivera , 2002 October 23, Vince Austin and Roberta Rivera 12550 W. 32"a Avenue z Wheat Ridge CO 80033 N _c 0 C-). C) r ~ Pry ~L The Honorable Lena Rotola T 7500 West 29th Ave Wheat Ridge 80215 co '%73 , Z3 z co Dear Councilwoman Rotola: City Council will meet on October 28, 2002 to make a decision on whether or not to allow the Old Chicago restaurant to erect a 50-foot illuminated sign on the south side of their tenancy next to their patio. Because our property is directly across the street from the proposed sign's location and we believe that the sign will have a negative impact on the neighborhood, we are not agreeable to the construction. The Planning Committee rejected the original proposal for the construction and although the plans for erecting the sign have not changed; the project appears to be moving forward. Several property owners voiced objections at the Planning Committee meeting and the City Council meeting and it appears to have had little effect. The adjacent neighborhood is bearing Applewood Village's development expense and receiving little of the benefit. Applewood Village intrudes into the surrounding neighborhood with lights and sounds from which there is no escape. The property values diminish and more importantly, the quality of living degrades. While the shopping center benefits the city's coffers and provides much needed services to the area, only the adjacent neighborhoods bear the noise and light-pollution. This proposed 50-foot sign is just too much. The sign is incongruent with a residential neighborhood. It is bad enough that a bar replaced the ice-cream parlor, but such ostentatious advertising is more akin to a truck stop than a neighborhood shopping center. Please do not allow Old Chicago to build an eyesore and incubator for urban blight. Once precedence for this type of advertising is set, every firm with fifty thousand dollars available to erect a sign will do so. Avoid this reviling vision of the tallest landmarks in Wheat Ridge being commercial obelisk. Do not let the "Tree City" become another commercial expansion for the Metro area, rather than the residential reserve it should be. Sincerely, Vince Austin and Roberta Rivera 2002 October 23 Vince Austin and Roberta Rivera , 12550 W. 32°' Avenue Wheat Ridge CO 80033 c'J = The Honorable David Schneider 7500 West 29th Ave rv ":t Wheat Ridge CO 80215 csr ~ L^.-'ice Dear Councilman Schneider: Z! City Council will meet on October 28, 2002 to make a decision on whether or not to allow the Old Chicago restaurant to erect a 50-foot illuminated sign on the south side of their tenancy next to their patio. Because our property is directly across the street from the proposed sign's location and we believe that the sign will have a negative impact on the neighborhood, we are not agreeable to the construction. The Planning Committee rejected the original proposal for the construction and although the plans for erecting the sign have not changed; the project appears to be moving forward. Several property owners voiced objections at the Planning Committee meeting and the City Council meeting and it appears to have had little effect. The adjacent neighborhood is bearing Applewood Village's development expense and receiving little of the benefit. Applewood Village intrudes into the surrounding neighborhood with lights and sounds from which there is no escape. The property values diminish and more importantly, the quality of living degrades. While the shopping center benefits the city's coffers and provides much needed services to the area, only the adjacent neighborhoods bear the noise and light-pollution. This proposed 50-foot sign is just too much. The sign is incongruent with a residential neighborhood. It is bad enough that a bar replaced the ice-cream parlor, but such ostentatious advertising is more akin to a truck stop than a neighborhood shopping center. Please do not allow Old Chicago to build an eyesore and incubator for urban blight. Once precedence for this type of advertising is set, every firm with fifty thousand dollars available to erect a sign will do so. Avoid this reviling vision of the tallest landmarks in Wheat Ridge being commercial obelisk. Do not let the "Tree City" become another commercial expansion for the Metro area, rather than the residential reserve it should be. Sincerely, Vince Austin and Roberta Rivera 2002 October 23 Vince Austin and Roberta Rivera , 12550 W. 32' Avenue Wheat Ridge CO 80033 N < The Honorable Odarka Figlus C:) ~c 9775 West 36th Ave. N l Wheat Ridge 80033 Cn 7- 7~ fPi tP w ~ 7 Dear Councilwoman Figlus: CO co City Council will meet on October 28, 2002 to make a decision on whether or not to allow the Old Chicago restaurant to erect a 50-foot illuminated sign on the south side of their tenancy next to their patio. Because our property is directly across the street from the proposed sign's location and we believe that the sign will have a negative impact on the neighborhood, we are not agreeable to the construction. The Planning Committee rejected the original proposal for the construction and although the plans for erecting the sign have not changed; the project appears to be moving forward. Several property owners voiced objections at the Planning Committee meeting and the City Council meeting and it appears to have had little effect. The adjacent neighborhood is bearing Applewood Village's development expense and receiving little of the benefit. Applewood Village intrudes into the surrounding neighborhood with lights and sounds from which there is no escape. The property values diminish and more importantly, the quality of living degrades. While the shopping center benefits the city's coffers and provides much needed services to the area, only the adjacent neighborhoods bear the noise and light-pollution. This proposed 50-foot sign is just too much. The sign is incongruent with a residential neighborhood. It is bad enough that a bar replaced the ice-cream parlor, but such ostentatious advertising is more akin to a truck stop than a neighborhood shopping center. Please do not allow Old Chicago to build an eyesore and incubator for urban blight. Once precedence for this type of advertising is set, every firm with fifty thousand dollars available to erect a sign will do so. Avoid this reviling vision of the tallest landmarks in Wheat Ridge being commercial obelisk. Do not let the "Tree City" become another commercial expansion for the Metro area, rather than the residential reserve it should be. Sincerely, Vince Austin and Roberta Rivera Vince Austin and Roberta Rivera 12550 W. 32"d Avenue Wheat Ridge CO 80033 The Honorable Ralph F. Mancinelli City Council President of Wheat Ridge 7500 West 29th Ave Wheat Ridge 80215 Dear Council President Mancinelli: October 23, 2002 O N 0 N w co .j.Y V '-c f~ ^ U~ City Council will meet on October 28, 2002 to make a decision on whether or not to allow the Old Chicago restaurant to erect a 50-foot illuminated sign on the south side of their tenancy next to their patio. Because our property is directly across the street from the proposed sign's location and we believe that the sign will have a negative impact on the neighborhood, we are not agreeable to the construction. The Planning Committee rejected the original proposal for the construction and although the plans for erecting the sign have not changed; the project appears to be moving forward. Several property owners voiced objections at the Planning Committee meeting and the City Council meeting and it appears to have had little effect. The adjacent neighborhood is bearing Applewood Village's development expense and receiving little of the benefit. Applewood Village intrudes into the surrounding neighborhood with lights and sounds from which there is no escape. The property values diminish and more importantly, the quality of living degrades. While the shopping center benefits the city's coffers and provides much needed services to the area, only the adjacent neighborhoods bear the noise and light-pollution. This proposed 50-foot sign is just too much. The sign is incongruent with a residential neighborhood. It is bad enough that a bar replaced the ice-cream parlor, but such ostentatious advertising is more akin to a truck stop than a neighborhood shopping center. Please do not allow Old Chicago to build an eyesore and incubator for urban blight. Once precedence for this type of advertising is set, every firm with fifty thousand dollars available to erect a sign will do so. Avoid this reviling vision of the tallest landmarks in Wheat Ridge being commercial obelisk. Do not let the "Tree City" become another commercial expansion for the Metro area, rather than the residential reserve it should be. Sincerely, Vince Austin and Roberta Rivera Vince Austin and Roberta Rivera 12550 W. 32"d Avenue Wheat Ridge CO 80033 The Honorable Dean Gokey 7500 West 29th Ave Wheat Ridge 80215 Dear Councilman Gokey: October 23, 2002 o - N O C-) ~ rT N n'~ W n m City Council will meet on October 28, 2002 to make a decision on whether or not to allow the Old Chicago restaurant to erect a 50-foot illuminated sign on the south side of their tenancy next to their patio. Because our property is directly across the street from the proposed sign's location and we believe that the sign will have a negative impact on the neighborhood, we are not agreeable to the construction. The Planning Committee rejected the original proposal for the construction and although the plans for erecting the sign have not changed; the project appears to be moving forward. Several property owners voiced objections at the Planning Committee meeting and the City Council meeting and it appears to have had little effect. The adjacent neighborhood is bearing Applewood Village's development expense and receiving little of the benefit. Applewood Village intrudes into the surrounding neighborhood with lights and sounds from which there is no escape. The property values diminish and more importantly, the quality of living degrades. While the shopping center benefits the city's coffers and provides much needed services to the area, only the adjacent neighborhoods bear the noise and light-pollution. This proposed 50-foot sign is just too much. The sign is incongruent with a residential neighborhood. It is bad enough that a bar replaced the ice-cream parlor, but such ostentatious advertising is more akin to a truck stop than a neighborhood shopping center. Please do not allow Old Chicago to build an eyesore and incubator for urban blight. Once precedence for this type of advertising is set, every firm with fifty thousand dollars available to erect a sign will do so. Avoid this reviling vision of the tallest landmarks in Wheat Ridge being commercial obelisk. Do not let the "Tree City" become another commercial expansion for the Metro area, rather than the residential reserve it should be. Sincerely, 4~1 L~Z_,Njz- uz-~~2, Vince Austin and Roberta Rivera Vince Austin and Roberta Rivera 12550 W. 32nd Avenue Wheat Ridge CO 80033 The Honorable Vance Edwards 3205 Jay St. Wheat Ridge 80033 Dear Councilman Edwards: October 23, 2002 CD N . , ry J C.n L .z m cg w n- City Council will meet on October 28, 2002 to make a decision on whether or not to allow the Old Chicago restaurant to erect a 50-foot illuminated sign on the south side of their tenancy next to their patio. Because our property is directly across the street from the proposed sign's location and we believe that the sign will have a negative impact on the neighborhood, we are not agreeable to the construction. The Planning Committee rejected the original proposal for the construction and although the plans for erecting the sign have not changed; the project appears to be moving forward. Several property owners voiced objections at the Planning Committee meeting and the City Council meeting and it appears to have had little effect. The adjacent neighborhood is bearing Applewood Village's development expense and receiving little of the benefit. Applewood Village intrudes into the surrounding neighborhood with lights and sounds from which there is no escape. The property values diminish and more importantly, the quality of living degrades. While the shopping center benefits the city's coffers and provides much needed services to the area, only the adjacent neighborhoods bear the noise and light-pollution. This proposed 50-foot sign is just too much. The sign is incongruent with a residential neighborhood. It is bad enough that a bar replaced the ice-cream parlor, but such ostentatious advertising is more akin to a truck stop than a neighborhood shopping center. Please do not allow Old Chicago to build an eyesore and incubator for urban blight. Once precedence for this type of advertising is set, every firm with fifty thousand dollars available to erect a sign will do so. Avoid this reviling vision of the tallest landmarks in Wheat Ridge being commercial obelisk. Do not let the "Tree City" become another commercial expansion for the Metro area, rather than the residential reserve it should be. Sincerely, Vince Austin and Roberta Rivera October 23, 2002 Vince Austin and Roberta Rivera 12550 W. 32°a Avenue Wheat Ridge CO 80033 CD N The Honorable Gretchen Cerveny O ~ 00 Mayor of Wheat Ridge N 7500 West 29th Ave cn . ; f =tn; Wheat Ridge CO 80215 a r,. co "i ~ l- Dear Mayor Cerveny: `J C) " City Council will meet on October 28, 2002 to make a decision on whether or not to allow the Old Chicago restaurant to erect a 50-foot illuminated sign on the south side of their tenancy next to their patio. Because our property is directly across the street from the proposed sign's location and we believe that the sign will have a negative impact on the neighborhood, we are not agreeable to the construction. The Planning Committee rejected the original proposal for the construction and although the plans for erecting the sign have not changed; the project appears to be moving forward. Several property owners voiced objections at the Planning Committee meeting and the City Council meeting and it appears to have had little effect. The adjacent neighborhood is bearing Applewood Village's development expense and receiving little of the benefit. Applewood Village intrudes into the surrounding neighborhood with lights and sounds from which there is no escape. The property values diminish and more importantly, the quality of living degrades. While the shopping center benefits the city's coffers and provides much needed services to the area, only the adjacent neighborhoods bear the noise and light-pollution. This proposed 50-foot sign is just too much. The sign is incongruent with a residential neighborhood. It is bad enough that a bar replaced the ice-cream parlor, but such ostentatious advertising is more akin to a truck stop than a neighborhood shopping center. Please do not allow Old Chicago to build an eyesore and incubator for urban blight. Once precedence for this type of advertising is set, every firm with fifty thousand dollars available to erect a sign will do so. Avoid this reviling vision of the tallest landmarks in Wheat Ridge being commercial obelisk. Do not let the "Tree City" become another commercial expansion for the Metro area, rather than the residential reserve it should be. Sincerely, Vince Austin and Roberta Rivera Of WHEgT ~c AGENDA ITEM 2 m REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION October 14, 2002 ~~C OR POO X PUBLIC HEARINGS ORDINANCES FOR 1ST READING BIDS/MOTIONS ORDINANCES FOR 2ND READING RESOLUTIONS Quasi-Judicial: XX Yes No 9 SUBJECT: Consideration of an amendment to the Applewood Village Shopping Center final development plan to allow a 50' high freestanding pole sign on property located at ;A@il ' - eA J A,e- IL SUMMARY AND BACKGROUND: At the August 1, 2002, Planning Commission meeting, a recommendation of denial was made. Reasons for denial have been incorporated into Option A of the recommended motions. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Recommendation form 2. City Council staff report 3. Planning Commission minutes from August j 1, 2002 4. Exhibits 5. Amended Final Development Plan STAFF RECOMMENDATION: ORIGINATED BY: STAFF RESPONSIBLE: SUGGESTED MOTIONS: MOTION FOR DENIAL None BUDGETIMPACT: 'Original budgeted amount: $0 Actual contracted amount: $0 iImpact of expenditure on line item: $0 Budget Account No.: N/A Alan White, Director of Planning and Development Meredith Reckert, Senior Planner "I move to DENY Case No. WZ-02-10, a request for amendment to the Applewood Village Shopping Center PCD final development to allow erection of a 50' freestanding sign south of 3250 Youngfield, for the following reasons: 1. The,proposed sign will be intrusive to the low density residential neighborhood to the northeast, to the south and to the west. 2. The proposed sign is inconsistent with the intent of the sign code. 3. Signage for individual businesses within the shopping center is better addressed with a comprehensive program rather than individual requests. 4. If approved, it would establish a precedent for other businesses to request fifty-foot signs. 5. There are several alternatives to this sign which would direct potential customers to the restaurant but which would be less intrusive to the neighborhood." MOTION FOR APPROVAL "I move to APPROVE Case No. WZ-02-10, a request for amendment to the Applewood Village Shopping Center PCD final development to allow erection of a 50' freestanding sign south of 3250 Youngfield, for the following reasons: 1. Although the building is addressed to Youngfield, it is over 600' away from the street and is not visible from the Youngfield entrance to the shopping center. 2. The Comprehensive Plan indicates that this is an area which should generate business activity from the freeway. 3. There may be economic benefits to the city as a result of increased exposure. 4. There are other 50' high signs in the vicinity. With the following conditions that should be noted on the final development plan: 1. The eastern face of the sign be unlighted. 2. The sign be unlighted after 10 PM. 3. A brick planter area be constructed around the sign base." October 11, 02 Gary McCulloch 3395 Wright St. Wheat Ridge, CO 80033 To Whom It May Concern: A , RECEIVED OCT `1 Inn.? In regards to your letter concerning Case No. WZ-02-10 dated September 30, 2002 for the Old Chicago Restaurant Sign to be put in our neighborhood, my family and I as well as our neighbors have a few items of concern for you: My family and I have been living on Wright Street for about 12 years and have seen numerous additions to the property (i.e. Old Chicago Restaurant and the addition to Wal-Mart, etc). Along with this, increased semi-truck traffic, the noise and trash along the alley has progressively become horrible. We have been woken up at 2:00 a.m. by trash trucks emptying the trash-bins, the semi-trucks leaving their trucks idling to keep them warm, etc. There have also been delivery trucks going through the alley before the 7:00a.m. law posted, AND ABOVE ALL, THERE ARE RATS ROAMING AROUND OUR BACK YARDS!!! It is one thing to deal with noise, but a whole different issue arises when the health of our families living in this neighborhood are at stake. I believe that a lot of these issues were created from the decisions made by the city planning division without any regard of how your changes would impact our neighborhood. We feel that the planning needs too consider the impact of the changes that have already been mandated to the neighborhood before they add a 50-foot high freestanding sign that will light up our backyards at night. In addition, it would be very much appreciated if someone could look into the issue of the rats and garbage and clean them up. My neighbors and I take pride in where we live, and are only looking out for the best interests of our families. Very Concerned Property Owners, Gary and Kathy McCulloch Q -1 1 October 13, 2002 City of Wheat Ridge City Council 7500 West 29th Avenue Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80033 Dear Members of the City Council: Thank you for notifying me of Case No. WZ-02-10 to be heard by you on October 14, 2002. 1 will be unable to attend the hearing and thus am forwarding my thoughts. My thoughts are the same as they were in my July 21st letter to the Planning Division "For nearly 30 years I have lived directly south of 3250 Youngfield (now Old Chicago). When the existing neon sign was placed on the south side of the Old Chicago building, I was floored because it's neon brightness shines directly into my bedrooms all night long, every single night. In addition, there has been a constant hum (from wiring or ballasts?), audible every single night when we are trying to sleep. Frankly, both continue to be offensive. I am proud of this City and Applewood Village; 1 have enjoyed Old Chicago. However, I am adamantly opposed to the proposed expansion and addition of yet another sign. The proposed 50 foot sign is aesthetically disturbing to this neighborhood and to my residence in particular. It's already like sleeping in "neon city with a nocturnal hum" all night, every night!" I oppose the addition of ANY more signs! 4nCord y, " ~ Y' Becker Heritage 12500 West 32nd Avenue Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80033 303-233-1376 To: Wheat Ridge City Council October 14, 2002 From: Richard G. Martin 3150 Xenon Street Wheat Ridge, Colorado Re: Comments on proposed sign addition at Old Chicago Restaurant Case No. WZ-02-10 This letter is to express my opposition to the proposed sign addition. The following are issues that would have a negative impact on the area: 1. visual litter, 2. dark-sky considerations, 3. property value impact. r A RECEIVED r,'~' 1426M ,Ek9IBrT cA i. July 3, 2002 ~ N VIA FACSIMILE ~~s CE IV8D (303) 235.2857 r r. ~oa2 Meredith Recker[, Senior Plartner . City of Wheatridge Planning Department 7500 West 29s` Avenue + Wheatridge, CO 80033 Re: Pole Sign for Old Chicago restaurant located at 3250 Yourigfield, Wheatridge, Colorado Dear Meredith: Per your discussions with our sign consultant, Terry Jenson, I would like to offer some justifications for our proposed 50 foot pole sign to be located within the boundary lines of the patio for the above- referenced Old Chicago restaurant. Sales at our Wheatridge Old Chicago have been significantly below average for the Old Chicago getup sales since the inception of our tenancy. In 2001, sales at Wheatridge were over 30% less than system average. We truly believe there is a direct correlation between our poor visibility and low sales. We often hear from the customer that they couldn't find us or that they come to the center often, but never even knew we were there. We still believe this is a good location; however, this is our last hope to bring the sales up to where they need to be. We have contemplated billboard signage on the highway, however, the problem seems to be in finding us once the customer enters the shopping center. Additionally, advertising our Youngfield address might be misleading because we are so far off of Youngfield. We have already been mindful of the nearby residences by designing our sign to be non-illuminated on the east elevation which faces.the neighborhood. Please do not hesitate to contact me with any questions or comments you may have in this regard. Old 'hicago i5 op'"luauc that L%e proposed pole sign will greatly increase our customer visits and overall long term customer base. Your consideration is greatly appreciated. Sincerely, Arne Bork Director of Leasing (303) 664-4109 cc: Terry Jenson (via fax - 719/667-0408) 248 Centennial Pkwy Suite 100 Louisville Colorado 80027 Phone 303.664.4000 Fax 303.664.4199 TOTAL P.01 34-0" 9-0 FAB & NSTALL M DIFACED DISPLAY AS SHOWN SIMETAL CONSTRUCTION WITH NEON LLl1MINA nON 48' OPEN PAN CHANNEL LETTERS PANT WHITE INSIDE & OUT 21T 8500 WHITE NEON COPY (PUMPED RED) PANT 18" DEEP CARNET OLD CHICAGO BLUE SPECIAL NOTE 1 colamlimm) 4W WHITE VINYL COPY ON BACKSIDE OF CABNET YOURCOST $ 3N IS TH8 044 Arm CUSTOMERAPPROVAL AS MUM Ste. waCAN- 1-31-02 NO SCALE {2AMMS DMMVAM-WO MATEMAL4 ArmBMM VM PROPEM O" N r z ~em or BE a~nontr® mT CLIENT OLD CHICAGO - WHEATRIDGE, COQ UT VIRMI f CONSM. STERN SIGN JENSON CO AVANY, INC. CXh i bi f ° July 2.1, 2002 City of Wheat Ridge Planning Division 7500 West 29h Avenue Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80033 Dear Members of the Planning Commission, J VO~ Thank you for notifying me of Case No. WZ-02-10 to be heard by you on August 1, 2002. Since I will be out of town and unable to attend, I am forwarding you my thoughts. For nearly 30 years I have lived directly so of 3250 Youngfield (now Old Chicago). When the existing neon sign was placed on the south side of the Old Chicago building, I was floored because it's neon brightness shines directly into my bedrooms all night long, every single night. In addition, there has been a "constant hum" (from wiring or ballasts?), audible every single night when we are trying to sleep. Frankly, both continue to be offensive. I am •proud of this City and Applewood Village; I have enjoyed Old Chicago. However, I am adamantly opposed to the proposed expansion and addition of yet another sign. The proposed 50 foot sign is aesthetically disturbing to this neighborhood and to my residence in particular. It's already like sleeping in "neon city with a nocturnal hum" all night, every night! Cordially, S 5 an Becker Heritage 12500 West 32na Avenue Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80033 303-233-1376 August 21, 2002 VIA FACSIMILE (303) 235-2857 Meredith Reckert, AICP, Senior Planner City of Wheat Ridge, Colorado 7500 West 29`x' Avenue Wheat Ridge, CO 80215 Re: Old Chicago located in Applewood Village Shopping Center-Amendment to Final Development Plan for Additional signage Dear Meredith thank you so much for taking time to meet with Terry Jenson from Western Sign Co. and me regarding the August 1, 2002 Planning Commission meeting and the steps Old Chicago needs to take prior to the City Council meeting scheduled for October 14, 2002. As you know, it is our hope that we can address the concerns :of the Planning Commission and the opposing neighbors. Rock Bottom Restaurants has been a committed community member in Colorado since the first Old Chicago opened in Boulder in 1976. Colorado is the home of our founder, Frank Day, and we have 18 Old Chicago restaurant in this state alone. The Rock Bottom Restaurants family is now 87 strong and growing, including 49 Old Chicago restaurants, 31 Rock Bottom Breweries, 4 Chop Houses and 3 Sing Sing Piano Bars. Frank's vision has created jobs and generated tax revenues for many years - Frank knows how to run restaurants. Procuring this pole sign is a project that has been near and dear to Frank since we opened our doors in Wheat Ridge - he truly believes that the presence the sign will offer will generate sales at this location - given his track record, I tend to believe him. Our Wheat Ridge Old Chicago opened in September of 1999.. We budgeted to do $2,050,000 in sales based on an Old Chicago system average annual sales of $2,200,000 per unit. The actual sales for our Wheat Ridge location were $1,600,000 in 2000 (28% below our budget and 37.5% below the Old Chicago system.average). This store has seen a steady increase somewhere in the neighborhood of 2.5-3% growth in sales per year (in keeping with the general cost of living rate increases). The system average for Old Chicago has continued to grow as well - the only explanation for lower sales at the Wheat Ridge store, given continuity in demographics, training, operations and food/beverage quality, is the poor.visibility. Our analysts have forecasted a one year return on the cost of the sign (approximately $35,000) that would require a 16.5% growth in sales ($215,000 in the first year after the sign is installed). Given an average check of $8 per person, this would amount to approximately 76 people per day or 0.07% of the total average traffic count on I-70 of 102,000 per day. Imagine the impact 76 new customers per day passing Old Chicago • Walnut Brewery • Rock Bottom Restaurant & Brewery • ChopHouse & Brewery • Sing Sing .4 through the entire Shopping Center to reach the Old Chicago (located at the back of the Center) will increase overall sales and tax revenues. I would like to address the concerns of the Planning Commission and the neighbors as follows: Integrated Plan Old Chicago has been requesting approval from the Landlord for this proposed pole sign for over 2 years. Initially, the Landlord requested that we wait while they pursued discussions with the City of Wheat Ridge to re-define the signage for the Applewood Village Shopping Center with an integrated plan that would apply to the entire Center. Unfortunately, the Landlord ownership group never did take the necessary. steps to commence those discussions. We have shared the frustration voiced by Jay Reed - owner of the Wild Bird Store - with regard to repeated attempts to have the Landlord take action. Old Chicago is in favor of an integrated plan that would improve visibility for all of the tenants at Applewood Village; however, we are powerless to make that happen. In light of the time that has passed since our initial contact with the Landlord and their failure to pursue an integrated sign plan, we were granted permission by our Landlord to proceed on our own at this point. Although Old Chicago would prefer to be part of a bigger plan, we are concerned that our business will continue to suffer until such time as an integrated plan takes shape. The location of our restaurant makes it tough for customers to find us - they simply do not know that we are there. Piece Meal Sign Application and Precedent I understand the Planning Commission is concerned about other tenants of the Applewood Village Shopping Center making similar applications. Our sign vendor researched the viability of our application per local codes before we ever went to the drawing board. His research turned up the availability of one 50 foot pole sign for the Center per the C-1 zoning. The Landlord is aware that they have granted Old Chicago the right to this one pole sign - my experience has always been that the Landlord determines the allocation of allowable signage for its property based on an income approach - we do have a percentage rent clause in our Lease that would make the sign beneficial to the Landlord as well as Old Chicago. I cannot.speak to-the other tenants and their needs; however, any application they make for signage would need to be accompanied by Landlord approval. The Landlord would not be able to approve any future applications because such applications would be outside allowable code restrictions. If Old Chicago is granted the right to this sign, future applications could be denied based on allowable signage pursuant to current zoning. Also, it is probable that potential future applicants would find out that no additional signage remains at Applewood Village based on the zoning of the Shopping Center before they even reach the application stage. Alternative Locations for Old Chicago Sign The regulation against.off-premise signage limits Old Chicago's ability to gain presence elsewhere. We have a marketing team that is constantly searching for new avenues to get the Old Chicago. name out there, but this does not help the fundamental problem we have in Wheat Ridge - people simply cannot find us, even when they know we are located in the Shopping Center. Impact on Neighbors Old Chicago is always concerned about the wellbeing if its neighbors. In the case of Wheat Ridge, our residential neighbors are our customers and we want them to be happy to have Old Chicago nearby. Our original application shows a sign that would not be illuminated to the east - this design was directly related to our attempt to mitigate negative impact on nearby residents. Given the existing light pollution in the neighborhood, we do not believe that the illumination from the west side of our sign will add to the impact the neighbors already feel. I know the residential neighbors who spoke at the meeting were concerned about the signage that was installed for Walgreen's. From what I understand, the signage that was initially installed by Walgreen's did not follow the guidelines promulgated by the City of Wheat Ridge and that Walgreen's has made the changes necessary to come into compliance. I hope that the changes requested by the City alleviated the negative impact the residential neighbors were feeling - I also hope that Old Chicago will not be made accountable for oversights made by Walgreen's. Our residential neighbors are important to us. Old Chicago would like the opportunity to construct the sign as proposed. Old Chicago would agree to turn the sign off at 10:00 p.m. I have written to all of the residential neighbors who appeared at the August 1 Planning Commission meeting in the hopes of addressing their concerns (I have attached copies of the letters to the neighbors for your files). Old Chicago welcomes any creative ideas the Planning Commission or the City Council might have to help us gain presence in the Shopping Center, but - after much internal discussion Old Chicago strongly feels that the pole sign is the only viable way for us to gain presence and generate sales. Once the customers know Old Chicago is there, we can keep them coming back for good food and friendly service. Thank you for taking the time to review this response. Please let me know the forum for communicating our thoughts to the City Council or if you feel that we need to produce any further information. I look forward to hearing back from you in this regard. Thanks, Meredith. Sincerely, \-Amre Bork Director of Leasing cxN I,ts f. . Tne 7500 7 WEST RIDGE 29TH. 0 . - Wheat VJHE:J . CO 502 50?:~-8-i 3 1303. 23..ro:^•": CIV Aom,:~, Fa;: = 23~-532= Ponce Dec:. Fax = 235-204c GRidge MEMORANDUM TO: Wheat Ridge City Council FROM: Marilynn Force, Director Wheat Ridge Economic Dev oopment Date: October 7, 2001 Re: Old Chicago located in Applewood Village Shopping Center - Amendment to Final Development Plan for Additional Signage. In the past thirty days I have been asked by the Planning Department to review the application, by Old Chicago Restaurants, to amend the Applewood Shopping Centers approved final development plan, in the addition of a fifty foot sign on to their portion of the property. I believe that Council should approve this amendment. The reasons are as follows: 1. Old Chicago is a Colorado owned, highly successful national chain of five concept restaurants. Old Chicago (49), Denver Chop House & Brewery (4), The Rock Bottom Brewery (3l). The Walnut Brewery (87). and Sing Sing piano bars (3).' Name recognition alone from the average number of travelers, 102,8002, driving through the I- 70 corridor- is forecasted, by restaurant management, to bring in an additional seventy-six people per day to eat at Old Chicago. 2. Given that Old Chicago is tucked into the east side of the shopping center customers w ill- have to pass by any number of merchants located in the immediate vicinity of the restaurant. The additional traffic could mean a substantial increase of sales tax revenues over time for the whole shopping center complex. 3. Old Chicago Restaurants were initially opened in Boulder Colorado in 1976 by Frank Dav. He is a community visionary and activist. Maintaining a chain of successful restaurants for this period of time is very rare. His vision has created jobs and generated tax revenues for man years. "Procuring this pole sign is a project that has been near [tnLI dear to Frank since opening the doors in Wheat Ridge - he truly believes that the presence the sign will offer will generate Sales at this location - given his track record, I is d beheve hint.' I also believe that he is right. I od the privilege of working with this corporation while I was SBDC Director in Boulder. Frank Days commitment to the community his restaurants are located in combined with his ability to create and run SncccSSful restaurants in unparallel. 4. The last. but not least reason for my support of this application, is in the Corporations dedication to work with the City and the residents of the neighborhood on the east side of the shopping center. Old Chicago has sent letters to each neighbor and has designed a sign that will have no light pollution off of the east side. Old Chicago will turn off the sign at 10:00 P.M. even night and has offered a direct informational hot line, to the residents for any complaints they mac have. For the above reasons- I support this application. O sianifiics number of restaurants located ttatiou icide under each brand Cin of Wheat Ridge 1996-2002 Traffic Count Map .Average Weekday Traffic 3 Letter from Ann Bork. director of leasing Old Chicago. October 3. 2002. APPLEWOOD VILLAGE SHOPPING CENTER - PLANNED COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT - AMENDED FINAL PLAN OFFICIAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN, AMENDMENT 87 OF THREE PARCELS OF LAND LOCATED IN THE EAST 1/2 OF THE N.W. 1/4 OF SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 3 SOUTH, RANGE 69 WEST OF THE 6TH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, IN THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COUNTY OF JEFFERSON, STATE OF COLORADO. COVER SHEET SHEET 1 OF 8 LEGAL DESCRIPTION PARCEL 1 A PORTION OF THE FAST ME-HALF OF ME NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF BECTON 29, TOWNSHIP 3 SOUTH. RANGE 69 NEST OF ME 6TH P.M., DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT 654.32 FEET NORTH OF TIE SOUTH LINE OF ME NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 29, ANN 60.00 FEET EAST OF TIE WEST ENE OF ME EAST ONE-HALF OF ME NORTHWEST ONE- WARIER OF SAID SUTTON 29; THENCE N CO'51.W W PARALLEL TD TIE WEST ENE OF ME EAST ONE-HALF OF WE NORTHWEST ONE-OUARTER OF SAID WENCH 29, A DISTANCE OF 667.02 FEET TO TIE SOUTH ENE OF RITE NORTHEAST ONE-OLATIM OF ME NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID BECTON 29; THENCE N 89'28.1' E ALONG ME SWRI LINE OF ME NORTHEAST ONE- WPRTER OF TIE NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID BECTON 29, A DISTANCE OF 150.00 FEET; THENCE N 0051.B' W PARAUEL TO THE WEST LURE OF ME EAST ONE-HALF OF ME NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTCN 29, A DISTANCE OF 200.00 FEET; THENCE S 8928.1' W PARALLEL TO ME SOUTH LINE OF TIE NORTHEAST ONE-QUARTER OF TIE NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTOR 29, A DISTANCE OF ISO.M FEET; THENCE N 00'51.6' W PARAIFL TO ME WEST THE OF THE EAST ONE-HALF OF ME NORTHWEST ONE- QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 29, A DISTANCE OF 135.19 FEET TO A PUNT OF CURVATURE; THENCE ON A CURVE TO ME RIGHT MOM RADIUS IS 182.00 FEET AND WHOSE CHONG BEARS N 3751.1' L A DISTANCE OF 227.66 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE N 7634.0' E KONG ME SOUTHERLY ONE OF WEST MEN AVENUE. A DIVANCE OF 701.69 FEET TO ME NORTHWEST CORNER OF RIDOENEW ACRES THIRD RUNG, A PLATTED SUBDIVISION IN ME OFFICIAL RECORDS OF JEFFERSON COUNTY, COLORADO; THENCE S OD'415 E KONG ME WEST LINE OF MO RIDGEMEW ACRES THIRD RUNG, A INSTANCE OF 870.33 FEET TO ME SOUTH UNE OF TIRE NORTHEAST ONE-QUARTER OF ME NORTHWEST ONE-GUARTER OF SAID SECTION 29: THENCE S JARIER OF STUD SECTION 29; THENCE EST ONE-WARIER OF SAID E PARALLEL TO ME WEST UNE OF SAID SECTION 29. A DISTANCE OF LINE OF ME NORTHWEST ONE- TO A POINT 3M.00 FEET EAST OF ME -QUARTER M SAID SECLON 29; FEET M ME TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING, CONTAINING AN COUNTY OF JEFFERSON STATE OF COLORADO PARCEL 2 LOTS 19 AND 20, BLOCK 1. APPLIEWOOD MILEAGE COUNTY OF JEFFERSON STATE OF COLORADO CONTAINING AN AREA OF 0.573 ACRES, MORE ON LESS. PARCEL 3 THAT PART TOWNSHIP WEST 60.00 FEET; RU N1M ME WEST LINE L RIGHT-OF-WAY ONE . TH ONCE CONTINUING THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF N 89 DEGREES 31 MINUTES 12 MINUTES 48 SECONDS WEST, NORTHWEST QUARTER ALONG TO ME TRUE POINT OF NE. NORTH M DEMME 51 OR I, GARY LEAK, DO HEREBY CERTIFY THAT ME SURVEY OF THE BOUNDARY OF APPLEW OD NLUGE SHOPPING CENTER PUNNED COMMEROAL DEVELOPMENT - AMENDED RNAL PUT, AMENDMENT NO. 7. WAS REMSED BY ME ON JUNE 16. 2002 AND THAT TO ME BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE. INFORMATION AND BELIEF, THE ACCOMPANYING PLAN ACCURATELY REPRESENTS SAID SURVEY. GARY LEAK, REOSRREO LAND SURVEYOR CODRADO REGISTRATON NO, 26600 FOR AND ON BEHALF OF COLORADO LAND CONSULTANTS. INC. LIMITATIONS OF ACTIONS AGAINST LAND SURVEYOR'S NOTICE: ACCORDING TO COLORADO LAW YOU MUST COMMENCE ANY LEGAL ACTON BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY WITHIN THREE YEARS AFTER YOU RRST DROCAAR SUCH DETECT. IN NO EVENT, MAY ANY ACTION BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY BE COMMENCED MORE MAN TEN YEARS FROM ME DATE OF ME CERTRCATON SHOWN HEREON. THIS ALTA SURVEY WAS PREPARED MR ME EKCLUSIVE USE OF ME PERSON, PERSONS OR ENVY NAMED IN ME CERTIFICATE HEREON. SAID CERTFlCATE DOES NOT E%TENO TO ANY UNNAMED REINDICT W,HOUT AN EIPREES RECERTFlCATCH BY ME SURMYOR NAMING SAID PERSON. SOUTHEAST CORNER OF WEST 38TH AVENUE AND YOUNGFIELD STREET NOTARY SEAL VICINITY MAP NOT TO SCALE SITE DEVELOPMENT STATISTICS METING • OVERALL A. SIM AREA - 1.436.304 SF = 3270 ACRES B. CROSS 9OMING AREA - J80,6N 5F = 2S.5% GROSS BUILDING AREA LESS STOCKROOM AREA 350,337 SF C. LANDSCAPE AREA - 135,1M SF = 9.4% SHRUBS 0001 TREES: 1171 + 31 NEW = 140 D. PARKING AREA - 920,472 5F = 64.1% (INCLUDES MRWCE DRIVES) E. PARKING SPACE SUMMARY SPACES REQUIRED SPACES PROVIDED 1522 1607 F. USED PERMITTED - ALL - C-1 CASE HISTORY M - 73-14: RC-1 TO RC WL - 75-15: C-1 TO PM WE - 77-19: 1ST AMENDMENT M - 62-6: 2ND AMENDMENT WC - 64-16: END AMENDMENT WE - 06-15: 4M AMENDMENT WE - 94-4: 5TH AMENDMENT M - 95-3: 6TH AMENDMENT WL - 02-10: 7TH AMENDMENT Colorado Land SHEET INDEX 8H! !T 1 OF S • COVER SHEET SHEET 2 OF S - OVERALL PLAN SHEET 3 OF S • ENLARGED PLAN SHEET GENERAL NOTES 1. SURVEY OF EASING SITE WAS SUPPLED BY OWNER, FROM SURVEY OCHE BY POWERS RE.. CO.. INC. DATED 9/16/69, UPDATES BY SAME AS RECENTLY AS 1/27/94. 2 SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM PROVIDER: NORTHWEST LAKEWOOD SANITATION DISTRICT. MET RIDGE SANITATION DISTRICT 3. WATEN SYRMH PROVIDER: CONSOLIDATED TRUNK WATER DISTRICT. A NO LOUDSPEAKERS SHALL BE ALLOWED IN OUTSIDE CAHOEN CENTER. PURPOSE FOR AMENDMENT THIS AMENDMENT iS FOR; 1. ME PLY OF MEAT RIDGE TO APPROVE ME INSTALLATION OF A POLE SIGN NOT SHOWN ON ME ORIGINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN LOCATED IN THE PATIO AREA SOUTH OF 32M YOUNG TEM. THE SIGN W,LL BE 50 IN XEKHT WH 170 SQUARE MET OF AREA PER SIDE. IT WILL BE UNLIGHTED ON ME EAST FACE. am C. omMN Reef SuI1W SW En 71t CoM~oGO 6]111 i~](m3)-S71e-1]NB ME BELOW-SIGNED OMEVR), OR LEGALLY DESIGNATED AGENT(S) THEREOF, 00 IMEBY AGREE THAT RITE PROPERTY LEGALLY DESCRIBED HEREON WILL BE DEVELOPED AS A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT IN ACCORDANCE WTH TIE USES, RESTRICTONS AND CONDITIONS CONTAINED IN VIS PLOP. AND AS MAY VVIASE BE REQUIRED BY LAW. I (WE) FURTHER RECOGNIZE THAT TIE APPROVAL OF FINAL DEVELOPMENT PEAK (AND PUT) DOES NOT CREATE A YESIED PROPERTY ROUT YFSID PROPERTY RIGHTS MAY ONLY MIKE ANN ACCRUE PURSUANT TO ME PROVISIONS OF SECTOR 26-6(G) CE ARTICLE I OF THE CODE OF LAWS OF THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE SIGNATURE OF OWNER NOTARY PUBLIC SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN R) BEFORE ME MIS WHERE MY HAND ANO OFFICIAL SEAL MY COMMISSION EXPIRES DAY OF , 200 SIGNATURE OF OWNER NOTARY PUBNC SUBSCRIB00 AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME THIS MMESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL. MY COMMISSION EXPIRES NOTARY SEAL DAY OF 200 NOTARY PUBUC SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME THIS WITNESS MY HAND AND OFECIK SEAL MY COMMDRON EXPIRES NOTARY REAL DAY OF . 200 PLANNING COMMISSION CERTIFICATION APPROVEO THIS DAY OF PUNNING COMMISSION. PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR CITY COUNCIL CERTRCATON APPROKO THIS DAY OF .1 COUNCIL /S/ c' SEAL ATTESt _ Gtt CLERK COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDERS CERTIFICATE MIS DOCUMENT ACCFP7ED ION FUND IN ME DYKE OF ME COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER OF JEFFERSON COUNTY AT GOLDEN. COLORADO, ON TIRE DAY OF A.D., 2002 . IN ME BOOK PAGE . RECEPTION JEFFERSON COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER BY: NIRITY MAYOR 2002 BY ME WHEAT RIDGE 2M2. BY ME WHEAT RIDGE APPLEWOOD VILLAGE SHOPPING CENTER - PLANNED COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT - AMENDED FINAL PLAN OFFICIAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN, AMENDMENT •7, PHASE 1 A= 188'37.1' R= 45.00 OF THREE PARCELS OF LAND LOCATED IN THE EAST 1/2 OF THE N.W. 1/4 3.j( L 1^813. I I W I3. 11- JKT TJ F"O'Y;. OF SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 3 SOUTH, RANGE 69 WEST OF THE 6TH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, 3951.BE 38.92• IN THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COUNTY OF JEFFERSON, STATE OF COLORADO. IT/ I L IT RD_E`,gL`A ACRES - THIRD =U•IG OVERALL PLAN SHUT 2 OF 3 ,PARCEL 2 I it _ 3...e .i X Pi-E r:rn ; DT ynr ~I n-.,i, c in x ~r:,:.. , _~T T .3.l/ t _ _ - 1. Kit SO'475 Es63.. IiS'se Hmw...•n.:.. xavi~t. - - _ r..~ t~__~__ 1` - _ a '14r..tArrn_^~rvzsr., f-"^'l _ .,8.3.1'£? aNrx-. t*crsa Tasvxc- a,~3-r~t 4s Ds a ae &4 - _ _ r / ' _ 1 3505 'S`fa5 93CH 1 SSDB B] SSCB Q'`a6 )Z 55a6.B 0) 3%{ ~ 95pfl g 14509.0B SSG842 T I f' J win $I { r•~. p _ ;AS I',T a P{ .•z_:. ~'j% T v, It t o<ca ~T' nv., l~ r{ IT - _ T I1 - I _ I I Y-1 } r'~` ' ' i-~I - :a.,e::... .,•..r.. - ~L__ _ o. .r 1 i i II F u t L t IT ]dp5 / c 3 0 r ! L, SIC111. -d III -101;I CLTLf7` Fit °I FLIT, 191, S, I -IT ~a u e, T a .aoG i S, III D. - 3.t 841, I I- 4 II w - _ IT is I5N , ~ ,4 11 1 ?rR;F H ,,T~,. D c+J: sot BE lwoo 1 37 r.) . . r Wt 't raPAa!ot+ ' { 1 3. r. sa n 1.._ l 1 " S u eye ~f J 1-s"-, -e s~-g T r v _ s _ 1 f 7 it, 7: i _ 1 t 7 a,.. L _.L J - i 3. I ~ _ r ~:l ( Ic - Im I e 4 it I 21 r. :.}l 3.~yxT q- .°+'C' s.wi•~., 'j„e-k^3.-j'~~"`.i _Lx e- Ty' , -i" 1 ,J, r gg. 1 I I ( CONG@1E DRNN PAN . a. ' a _ t., a - - - T- 3.-r: -~f- `y .T1 IT s~-' ,E,... 'r ,lil 3.l N "LLIL it T' IT qi I 1 rJv r B "C N Haas. vfr 36, P1 a3.,. I.i y fi_ *a ,n 1 It- ,,9 _ c{y';{/ 1x a.'I' f I tx AJ L150.00 t+rv %•j,. ,Ty-' > I } J , _ ! n3.'! I.r..._i F I r ) - I LET Ivu, la Ib:J lips ( fuP: n. ,foe \ i h,: 1 _ r,NV Y " , c n'k3=3. .M. i3.. ~ 1 , `-.:.J1\ J1 PARCEL 3 1 , rxc 53 v..~.rL YiJ a _ III I n1 - ,i"{ 1 ✓ ' .,.I I I 03. : ~I .J q - ~r ~..1~ Z - _ T; _._'7 1 ri ~ t 7 JI I ( i~? II ' e, 1.3.:<DC 5 3..`c fe.xeoA ;e 1 ELU10 ~ l~r: 1 1 T1 1 ,Z3. U LG J 1 C I l{ ( _w L+ N { r.. -1 NO51 B W 24.32' i ,bloq I' ._f 1 a- 1~ p' y 3.r z ~~IG 1 2 154, ( _ c;3. c3. _ Y S_Ir T < ~+r f1M t-~ I, r, 1 `a A. t x: L_ E o I ILL, ,I VItLIT, J'; / Nv I U 1111 ! 1 i! it ~ _>4 I f _ ~e_ {t .:,t3. 3. i 7 's a/ "p, to \ - I A T 1 i. } I t, P T I c now '2 "1 ITT ~ 7 i i c^l. ~1. II 13' `i3. ( 11 ( a 3.N s " u I n m E wrl T -,I H-~ y } - J_C ~P~Yvx -.:°.PP`~-~-._ ~.t`r -1 'xS~FL`•=~ f _ +1_.- r 1~c-.zr~ - _ _ F` ..v NO 51.81W 667.82' { 7`E• \ '4B'W :Afrm POINT t DEC: `V (Lt 'Y{1 l.a ✓a / I .t 0.., r It 2'~ n. n.rx NOD I'll 1111i 1:0.3 l G-I f R«-na "IT 27451 ^,t 3.l '..,R. ? . _~_t W _ss-tJN. me ,C•su: r.dY 3~,: ..,..t .57 I i-, IV 11" IL L,1 9 1. tl , ILI yf n t tnt f d ~f \ e* . x.. o. E. c. f..w+ L,1 1 2 of L, M o ,e 3.o Et I -r s}. R..9L1 LEGEND r_.,; n (1 'IT ea' w NOTE REFER TO SHEET 3 OF 3 FOR PHASE 1 WAL-MART SITE PLAN DETAILS. p ((gg (p~Q) PROPOSED BUILDING MEASURED IN FIEIJJ (Sg0'00'OD'W 100.00') EXISTNG FENCE Imp al Honejlo ust (21/2 ' Co.) pRDPOSED PARKING STALLS FLOWLN- EXISTING CONCRETE D EVERGREEN TREES !91 Au RGR Pine ll~B S NtJ PROPOSED CURB AND GUTTER POWER PONE PARKING SPACE RS. SHRUBS (185). PERENNIALS (40) d B .f a Juniper (5 Gall PROPOSED TRAFFIC ARROW "E LIGHT POLE HANDICAP PARKING H.C. / app 1ufn ng B sH 55~ea /(5 Ga(d~5}5 rtele I Gel.) PROPOSED CONCRETE FINE HYDRANT PIN AND CAP INSCRIBED H. K. UNN LS. 12840 Colorado Miss KT Use (6 Go.,) Land l.F~t T PROPOSED FENCE WATER VALVE < u PIN AND CAP INSCRIBED LANE ENGR. L5. 438 r " I DUSTING TREE Consultants, Inc. EfOSRNG TREES TO REMAIN 90) SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE Sec. WASHER SET IN CONCRETE INSCRIBED L.S. 43B 0 - PHASE 1 LIMITS ~'x^-~a~'!?=+ (1• 3P• 8p' pP' 130• etm c o:wn nem '.M.. Soeveo emu -eticeri IRRIGATED SOD (14,600 S.F.) WATER MANHOLE e.H. N SET PIN AND CAP INSCRIBED L.S. 24670 0 ® Li 2. APPLEWOOD VILLAGE SHOPPING GENT19K - PLANNMU UUNINICI DIAL Ur.V&LVrMr.N AmmnumL# rinAL rikAn OFFICIAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN, AMENDMENT *71 PHASE 1 OF THREE PARCELS OF LAND LOCATED IN THE FAST 1/2 OF THE N.W. 1/4 OF SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 3 SOUTH, RANGE 69 WEST OF THE 6TH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, IN THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COUNTY OF JEFFERSON, STATE OF COLORADO. ENLARGED PLAN SNORT S OF S 1::5.9 ..3C' 3 `ICm~ B EL' .90 Ft PROPOSED POLE SIGN (4' DIA, 50' TALL) LOCATION 5-b Imo, 1PF-O LP. .)J - C: 34'.0" FAB & NSTALL t'O DIWED DISPLAY AS SHOWN SIM I. CONSTRUCTION WITH NEON NOMINATION 40' OPEN PAN CHANNEL LETTERS PANT WHITE INSIDE & OUT 2!T 6500 WHITE PEON COPY (PUMPED RED) PANT 16' DEEP CABINET OLD CHICAGO BLUE SPECIAL NOTEI 48' WHITE VIJYL COPY ON BACI6NE OF CABIN s- a' NOTES 1. THIS SIGN MAY CHANGE AS THE PRIMARY TENANT IN THIS SPACE DOES. 2. NGHING IS RESTRICTED ON THE EASTERN FACE OF THE SIGN. LEGEND 0 ' DECIDUOUS iR 5 (~P) Polmore AsM1 2 1 2 Cal.) PROPOSED BUILDING MEASURED IN FIELD (S90'00'00'W 100.00) EXISTING FENCE ocust (2 1J2' Cal.) Im erial Hane EXISTING CONCRETE p PROPOSED PARKING STALLS ® FLOWUNE Eg AustGlan~P meR(6F'S 09% L) PROPOSED CURB AND GUTTER POWER POLE i,c PARKING SPACE P.S " IALS (40) SHRUBS (185) PERENN a Buffalo Junper//45 G l}}) PROPOSED TRAFFIC ARROW a UGHT POLE T HANDICAP PARKING 'H. C. I l I~~ p ,r, 23 90l@ Gal.) 6rmrbr s,w Y RANT 's 12840 'a PIN AND CAP INSCRIBED H K LINN L S (5 GO11lll 1l r M'33 KI PROPOSED CONCRETE FIRE H D . . . . . . T Gal Do,flly PROPOSED FENCE WATER VALVE 'x'6.0. PIN AND CAP INSCRIBED LANE NO. LS. 438 O ~ ' EXISTNG TREES TO REMAIN 90) SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE SE„ - - WASHER SET IN CONCRETE INSCRIBED L.S. 435 - PHASE 1 LIMITS A3 I rl L 4~? ERIC I, r ° Co (1,1 C~ O 0 r7 .Ifi' r N 04 t i)'+25 M 04 b) C3) 00 00 60 v . R~t_Iinina trahl nl 1;y SI P. f .fJT F.P. -METAL RAILING L I 1. 0.~: rd t SO"51 .8'E 130.00' r IA; '1 CH AtIL. I L) rtlrq +FOIi / ~ L 1. -r. m,nnt fI r L: ENLARGED PLAN °A° Colorado COIISYIOOtS, Inc. Land EIE 0 a' 15' 3a' 6 ' GBa E amm,a xeea^... - suiN ]OW POSTING CERTIFICATION CASE NO. k/0 -OL - / o PLANNING COMMISSION / CITY COUNCIL / BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT (Circle One) HEARING DATE: to /r{ 2-0e;-> (name) at a4/0 4u=zS &n a m e~a~ P4 z~o (address) as the applicant for Case No. A19 -Z -/,7 , hereby certify that I have posted the Notice of Public Hearing at 32 S U (location) on this day of 1jnR ~t 20 oZ , and do hereby certify that said sign has been posted and remained in place for fifteen (15) days prior to and including the scheduled day of public hearing of this case. The sign was posted in the position shown on the map below. Signature: NOTE: This form must be submitted at the public hearing on th> ca d will be placed in the applicant's case file at the Department of Planning and Development. MAP e:lpla nn i ng\forms\posti ng cert Rev. 616/01 5W20 - - - - - - - - - - I I I I UNINCORPORATED JEFFERSON COUNTY i I I I I 70 WEFLINE55CE I o APPLEWOOD E ' ~ WZ-97-13 -3Yo OFFICIAL ZONING MAP WHEAT RIDGE COLORADO k~ WZSe 19 A-7 - a PCD .x 7UNGFIELD PLAZA 9 m Q PHASEI x N R ~m a R-1 M R ~ ae9 p q m R -Z N ~w U` w N ~ N ~ ~ LL ~ LL g PCD <LL pp>W_ RTN nS waez-6 wz-944 W 35T H AVE 8 R APPLEWOOD VILLAGE SHOPPING CENTER AMENOMENT4 a C-1 PCD Psc-90.1 R-C 5W 29 PARCEL/LOT BOUNDARY (DESIGINATES OWNERSHIP) - WATER FEATURE * DENOTES MULTIPLE ADDRESSES 100-YEAR FLOOD PLAIN (APPROXIMATE LOCATION) NW 29 O 100 200 :00 900 Peat V Lu R R g Z R A E' DEPARTMENT OF MAP ADOPTED: June 15, 1994 ,o PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT Last Revision: September 10, 2001 O l-- T1 7500 West 29th Avenue FAX 303/235-2857 September 30, 2002 Dear Property Owner: The City of Wheat Ridge This is to inform you of Case No. WZ-02-10 which is a request for approval of an amendment to the Applewood Village Shopping Center Planned Commercial Development final development plan to allow a 50-foot high freestanding sign with 170 square feet of area south of the structure at 3250 Youngfield Street (Old Chicago Restaurant). This case will be heard by the Wheat Ridge City Council in the Council Chambers of the Municipal Complex at 7500 West 29th Avenue. The meeting will be held on October 14, 2002 at 7:00 p.m. As an area resident or interested parry, you have the right to attend this Public Hearing and/or submit written comments. If you are a property owner within 100 feet of this property, you may have the right to file a legal protest against the application which would require 3/4 majority vote of City Council to approve the request. A copy of the protest rights section of the code is enclosed. If you have any questions or desire to review any plans, please contact the Planning Division at 235-2846. Thank you. Planning Division. C9D000ments and Settingckathyf\My Ooc ments\Cathy\CC"TSTP NOTI0 002Nw 210wpd D d d A! d d c •d ` a D rc ~ ~ a Y d d H ~ Z ? • dl d d d D C y ~ W . . ° ~ a 0 ` y U 0 L ° t6 O E ry n = 4. it O O O O O O O O O ~ ~ O - d U N N N N N N N N N N N N N NyN Q m ° ~ > y y y > U _ _ • YI ~ 6. C M M ~ M M M 6 tM~I M d d C m >O d > c > d m (n jm Q tO °'00 m ca m >vU d.%m aw Dm m U Q m Na y dy y tO ~ UO ONm CEO JLO dsO 2 080 mm~ amo d (pp U 2N 200 7 , V LL Ol V U OI 0 m M N W a ° Ol a k M N ~ X U m m M M d 2 N N N v i 3 N ~ v « N ~ a C uj 6 v ~ Z d a a n ~ v c c m ° K i v m a L a ° c one ~ i°C i ~oK Y _ d d N ~ K ow m « off= Un SJ m« gym,., ` nm « L =e ^ ~u> O d'a-_ YN`I 4RM d d O N W m a'a_y' N R ~M d M N ( N N t N N ~ry l0 d Yj d f6 a 7 L L J L L L ~ L 3 d L ~ c y d d~ a a 3 3 ~ 3 Ede ` ~ ai0 d O U U LL W E ❑ ❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ d Z M m v m m m m m ^ m m m m o m m d ~ ( U m t 0 m t O m f 0 m l 0 m ~ m f ° m ( 0 m f O m W O ` a v a a O o a v v m rn rn Q co rn rn rn rn m m O 'E m ° m m m °rn m ° m m m {~J V m 0 M a M a M M M M N M ~ M ~ Z Q> 2 b N N W Q p n r n n n n n N O 3: Q Z a 0 O W z r t I 3: a V ~ d d N m a m < w : Q o: m G Z > vi j ~ , J C l I I ~ K it K ' ~sw N L q~ a : O E a E 0 a y o t o m 0 m o E _ 0 at o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 x M :a w a Na a 0 0 0 O N O ~N N ` Q £ 2 U y ~ j > j > m, > > > U _ 0 Q '{Q 0 IL U M d M ~O M M M O a 'O O A N >O Uw°m dJ~ N.: W D m a Q N W dQ ~j NN OUO ~ O N N 3 Q~ N ENO oNO c CO tzo N'Oo ~ '2a0 _Q'Ow V UI O d 67 O M C mU OIU O CU D ML) ryU =NU NO W N U fq o v- W N 0 N ~ O~ W M M m R E U a 4A d 9 10 O - X V TAO a 'O ;O N 'O 9 LL N W 0 (n O .4+ N N Q O N 3 N Y M R J K E G 0 O r T N O m 0 W c 0 M 0 d v 3 j o Y Y yji M 47 M o M N c~ rv v N N Y u1 0 U' N m t 9 m ' to m C y d c w y Q U c ~ ¢ y ~ 'o v... CU U~LLw E m O O m O N N 0 ~ ~ d ( p ( p ( 0 ( O f 0 t 0 Cl) ;E LLI O Q < < V V O V V O V O m m Vp m c0 aa0 co ~ rn m m rn m rn m m m w rn °m m° rn om °m rn °m rn w V o o o o ~ ° ° ° Z ~ o c c o o g g o < o m < o W Q W z0 n `r n n n n n N 0 Z a O W z 5 ti A 0 W en .S 0 FL 0 E z a 0. ro 7 N ~i N r Qr O m z U F O v T L N v~ y N O v z A H a m C m w m ~ y G u ~ i m a a a m N c Q 'd u d a ~ ° m C Z m ~ aN O ~ ~ C 7 0 , 8 J a E o m w ° L ° m o a c E 0 .0 m c= at o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N ~ ~ a y NN N N N N N N N N w~ U N ? 2 ~ Nl ~ NI NI ~ N1 ~ E NV Qmw$ 5 i i 5 5 5 5 5 u O • ~ O 1 M M M M M ~ M ° G M c G ° C E' O O C O O T O j O U O t0 N O j a mph O O a O O c m O LOaO N O '3 r0 O UOOD O 0 ~%W J ik .N N ~ V)O y w yQaD m V GO c N m O m N N'c0 JUO um0 To o(q°w co °O UomvO ° O a d d0 d ` tyJ M U OI U IL ~ X U 12 30 m 0 O N O U ca N > (/1 OI V E p) U O N a m co m L> m O. co rn ` Y m aaV Y mti c rn Q rn c _ m a Q .60:o i mNa C et} a O 06 am Q m °?(~o ° am ~'O a -ins ' ,4; m m -ma o= K a a t=vx muj v a co oK m mo°- cc 3 N m m m m 1' m m L a N m O - 2 o N o$ m O N r c i m O U RM m C N t O m J mm W ' ? m 0 O N J m . I 9 > > R C Q 0 LE m - o C O w o a 0-6 ~U u°.w E ❑ ❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ z ~ N M V v1 O 0 n o N a m o a o 0 0 0 W m rn 0 O rn rn m rn m °m rn rn °rn °rn rn orn °m rn ; U I- Q ` n n Q W 0 U5 n r n N 0 0 Z o O W z LO a U ~I r R Q d 0 E W nu c U O d A z N ~m N a N O FL ro a v CC N U N Q. w O m z U FO v v T .D 'O m N a ° 0.. O a z F D d I C d ` w W d ~ _ D C ` C d N N U d a ~ y O D a d 7 Z 3 > dl , Q D s d N O' d « y . _ : N o ~ a E8 d ,6 a L O d da c E d o d . as o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00' m a x ~oNJ ~0NV ~0NJ 0 ~0 NV ~0NJ ~.ONI ~0NJ 0 Q m _0 U 5 5 5 2i 5 5 5 5 2i v 0 0 • 0. M Z J M J O ~ D C R y 0 O N d N N O N U I~ O O J O L N O d O I N d w O R O f0 _ c. I O O QO Urn ~ W 0 ~ j L40N ~ W UDm D .p ~ `N~ J J ILNn d N E~ Nj Y CO U U C V I NOJ C y . NhU U LJ l0 ~p0 JLU dOa' E m 'O N d x U O m 00 m L ~U Qm d d m L Y J_ = O ~N d U m SQ U W Qj W d D a >V CmC O OmC O1 NIA W ` 0'2 } ?)MO ° _ vLm~ N K n Cm- C M d ° N i+ N~ U w n U$ 0 > d S df Om CU d .G C 'v - R 'o a a ~O d N ' o .0 . ~ d N d d pp 10 E m a L m ii m c S N U N~ D L O S J CL « O .Q L O O (/1 U C d m a N a d L c y d v E N D a v 3 d m 3 o U d co m a w No 1 `O O N O 0 ~U ~LLw E d O N th V Ul (O I~ o d ~ n m n Oo n m n w n m n m ° n m ° n ro ° r m ° M r °m °m °m °m °m m m m m W p a R V O a T C R p e v ro v m a m v m v m a m e ao v m a m 0 p m m m m rn rn ` rn rn m O 0 m 0 m 0 rn 0 m 0 rn 0 rn 0 rn 0 rn 0 m ~ V z F- Q Z n Q W O n is n n n n ~ ~ rn N 0 Z a z g ~ LO ) I, 3: a O A Q N O W d 0 E N z Q 0 a v N U _d a CO F z U FO v a d CIO T P d y v U (3r 0 v E z H a N d d W •y d • N C V N y N N C Q > N U U ` ~ O C ~ z j - NI LL' C Z D a ' N N moo ~ N C ~ y ~ : . o E a o a N U t O C o a C 0.0 Nc.- # 0 0 N F U- X U N a y N N O N O N Q mw-$ U U _ Q N p a ci 5 C C ~ o J # O 0 O A U O LL N .N ao U) w N N 0 d o U- J d N O y N N O Q d a C ' G G Q N N U N ¢c ~ R N LL > C7 C ~ ~ K a0 o~ C N d N° N Q G fn O U °w E ❑ ❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ z D N N U ~ O O M O C Q V p O O Q N Q' 0 E o 0 I- 9 V z' Q Q W p n n uj Fn N F 0 K a W !-O z z Un~ a ~I Q N cO F W bA G .U ~i O ttl z a° O 0. J N m Qr 0 z U H v e T L a N y a N U C. O z Y F NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Notice is hereby given that a Public Hearing is to be held before the City of Wheat Ridge CITY COUNCIL on October 14, 2002, at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers of the Municipal Building 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: Case No. WZ-02-10: An application submitted by Wadsworth Old Chicago for approval of an amendment to the Applewood Village Shopping Center Planned Commercial Development final development plan to allow a 50' high freestanding sign with 170 square feet of area south of the structure at 3250 Youngfield Street (Old Chicago Restaurant). Said property is legally described as follows: PARCEL 1: A PORTION OF THE EAST ONE-HALF OF THE NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 3 SOUTH, RANGE 69 WEST OF THE 6TH P.M., DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT 654.32 FEET NORTH OF THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 29, AND 60.00 FEET EAST OF THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST ONE-HALF OF THE NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 29; THENCE N 00°51.8' W PARALLEL TO THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST ONE-HALF OF THE NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 29, A DISTANCE OF 667.82 FEET TO THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHEAST ONE-QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 29; THENCE N 89°28.1' E ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHEAST ONE-QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 29, A DISTANCE OF 150.00 FEET; THENCE N 00°51.8' W PARALLEL TO THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST ONE-HALF OF THE NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 29, A DISTANCE OF 200.00 FEET; THENCE S 89°28.1' W PARALLEL TO THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHEAST ONE-QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 29, A DISTANCE OF 150.00 FEET; THENCE N 00°51.8' W PARALLEL TO THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST ONE-HALF OF THE NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 29, A DISTANCE OF 135.19 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE ON A CURVE TO THE RIGHT WHOSE RADIUS IS 182.00 FEET AND WHOSE CHORD BEARS N 37°51.1' E, A DISTANCE OF 227.66 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY, THENCE N 76°34.0' E ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF WEST 38TH AVENUE, A DISTANCE OF 701.69 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF RIDGEVIEW ACRES THIRD FILING, A PLATTED SUBDIVISION IN THE OFFICIAL RECORDS OF JEFFERSON COUNTY, COLORADO; THENCE S 00°43.5' E ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID RIDGEVIEW ACRES THIRD FILING, A DISTANCE OF 670.33 FEET TO THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHEAST ONE-QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 29, THENCE S 89°28.1' W ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHEAST ONE-QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 29, A DISTANCE OF 0.67 FEET TO A POINT WHICH IS 885.00 FEET EAST OF THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST ONE-HALF OF THE NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 29; THENCE S 00°51.8' E PARALLEL TO THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST ONE-HALF OF THE NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 29, A DISTANCE OF 1162.99 FEET TO A POINT 160.00 FEET NORTH OF THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 29; THENCE S 89°31.7' W PARALLEL TO THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 29, A DISTANCE OF 192.34 FEET; THENCE S 00°51.8' E PARALLEL TO THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST ONE-HALF OF THE NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 29, A DISTANCE OF 130.00 FEET; THENCE S 89°31.7' W PARALLEL TO THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHWEST ONE- QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 29, A DISTANCE OF 342.66 FEET TO A POINT 350.00 FEET EAST OF THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST ONE-HALF OF THE NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 29; THENCE N 00°51.8' W PARALLEL TO THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST ONE-HALF OF THE NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 29, A DISTANCE OF 600.00 FEET, THENCE S 89°31.7 W PARALLEL TO THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 29, A DISTANCE OF 150.00 FEET; THENCE N 00°51.8' W PARALLEL TO THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST ONE-HALF OF THE NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 29, A DISTANCE OF 24.32 FEET; THENCE S 89°31.7' W PARALLEL TO THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SECTION 29, A DISTANCE OF 140.00 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING, CONTAINING AN AREA 29.969 ACRES MORE OR LESS. COUNTY OF JEFFERSON, STATE OF COLORADO PARCEL 2: LOTS 19 AND 20, BLOCK 1, APPLEWOOD VILLAGE. COUNTY OF JEFFERSON, STATE OF COLORADO CONTAINING AN AREA OF 0.573 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. PARCEL 3: THAT PART OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 3 SOUTH, RANGE 69 WEST OF THE 6TH PRINCIPAL MERDIAN, IN THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COUNTY OF JEFFERSON, STATE OF COLORADO, DESCRIBED AS: COMMENCING AT THE POINT OF INTERSECTION OF THE EAST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF YOUNGFIELD STREET AND THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 29, THENCE THE WEST QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 29 BEARS SOUTH 89 DEGREES 31 MINUTES 12 SECONDS WEST 1382.42 FEET AND THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID NORTHWEST QUARTER BEARS SOUTH 89 DEGREES 31 MINUTES 12 SECONDS WEST 60.00 FEET; RUNNING THENCE NORTH 00 DEGREES 51 MINUTES 48 SECONDS WEST, PARALLEL WITH THE WEST LINE OF SAID SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER ALONG SAID EAST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF YOUNGFIELD STREET, 180.00 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID EAST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE, NORTH 00 DEGREES 51 MINUTES 48 SECONDS WEST 274.32 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID EAST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE, NORTH 89 DEGREES 31 MINUTES 12 SECONDS EAST, PARALLEL WITH THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID NORTHWEST QUARTER 140.00 FEET, THENCE NORTH 00 DEGREES 51 MINUTES 48 SECONDS WEST, PARALLEL WITH SAID EAST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE 175.68 FEET; THENCE NORTH 89 DEGREES 31 MINUTES 12 SECONDS EAST 150.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 00 DEGREES 51 MINUTES 48 SECONDS EAST, PARALLEL WITH SAID EAST OF RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE 450.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 89 DEGREES 31 MINUTES 12 SECONDS WEST, PARALLEL WITH THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID NORTHWEST QUARTER 290.00 FEET, MORE OR LESS, TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING, CONTAINING AN AREA OF 2.431 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. Kathy Field, Administrative Assistant ATTEST: Wanda Sang, City Clerk To be Published: September 26, 2002 Wheat Ridge Transcript In To: Meredith Reckert <meredith@ci.wheatridge.co.us> Subject: Re: Applewood Shopping Center Thank you so much for your reply. Isn't it wonderful ...someone hears gasoline canopy at King Soopers and they think only of their King Soopers. Re: Old Chicago. I know several ABA members will probably attend the hearing. Will the results be on your website or could you let me know. With your permission, I would like to have almost a monthly report from the City to help dispel all the rumors. I am working on the November issue now and will probably wrap everything up on Oct. 18. Thanks for all your help. Helen Masterson. Meredith Reckert wrote: > Hi, Helen- > I was forwarded an email from you regarding the Applewood shopping center. > We currently have only one development proposal within the Applewood > Shopping Center which involves a request for construction of a 50' high > pole sign for the Old Chicago restaurant on the south end of the shopping > center. This request will be reviewed at a public hearing in front of City > Council on October 14 at 7 PM. You are invited to attend and comment, if > interested. > I have not heard the rumor about the installation of gas for the King > Soopers located in the center. It doesn't seem to me like there would be > room to accommodate one. On September 25, 2002 , City Council approved > the installation of a gasoline canopy at the King Soopers at Sheridan and > W. 38th Avenue. > If you have further questions, feel free to email me back or call me at > 303-235-2848. > Meredith Reckert > Senior Planner Printed for Meredith Reckert <meredith@ci.wheatridge.co.us> Page 1 of 1 10/9/2002 Old Chicago Walnut Brewery Rock Bottom Restaurant& Brewery Ch'opHouse & Sing Sing August 21, 2002. VIA FACSIMILE of ~ECEI li (303) 235-2857 ' Meredith Reckert, AICP, Senior Planner City of Wheat Ridge, Colorado 7500 West 29th Avenue Wheat Ridge, CO 80215 Re: Old Chicago located in Applewood Village Shopping Center - Amendment to Final Development Plan for Additional signage Dear Meredith: , Thank you so much for taking time to meet with Terry Jenson from Western Sign Co. and me regarding the August 1, 2002 Planning Commission meeting and the steps Old Chicago needs to " take prior to the City Council meeting scheduled for October 14, 2002. As you know, it is our , hope that we can address the concerns of the Planning Commission and the opposing neighbors. Old Chicago strongly believes that the proposed pole sign will draw more customers and increase our sales. An increase in Old Chicago sales will benefit the City of Wheat Ridge from an income standpoint as well. I would like to address the concerns of the Planning Commission and the neighbors as follows: Integrated Plan Old Chicago has been requesting approval from the Landlord for this proposed pole sign for over 2 years. Initially, the Landlord requested that we wait while they pursued discussions with the City of Wheat Ridge to re-define the signage for the ApplewoodsVillage'Shopping Center with an integrated plan that would apply to the entire Center. Unfortunately, the Landlord ownership group never did take the necessary steps to commence those discussions. We have shared the frustration voiced by Jay Reed- owner of the Wild Bird Store- with regard to repeated attempts to have the Landlord take action. Old Chicago is in favor of an integrated plan that would - improve visibility for all of the tenants at Applewood Village; however, we are powerless to _ make that happen. In light of the time that has passed since our initial contact with the Landlord and their failure to pursue an-integrated sign plan, we were granted permission by our Landlord to proceed on our own at this point.. Although Old Chicago would prefer to be part of a bigger plan, we are concerned that our . business will continue to suffer until such time as an-integrated plan takes shape. The location of our restaurant makes it tough for customers to find us - they simply do not know that we are there. Piece Meal Sign Application and Precedent I understand the Planning Commission is concerned about other tenants of the Applewood Village Shopping Center, making similar applications. Our sign vendor researched the viability of our application pet. local codes before we ever went to the drawing board. His research turned up the availability of one 50 foot pole sign for the Center per the C-1 zoning. The Landlord is aware that they have granted Old Chicago the right to this one pole sign -my experience has always been that the Landlord determines the allocation of allowable signage for its property based on an income approach - we do'have apercentage rent clause in our Lease thatwould make the sign beneficial to the Landlord as well as Old Chicago. I cannot speak to the other tenants and their needs; however, any application they make for signage would need to be accompanied by Landlord approval. The Landlord would not be able to approve any future applications because such applications would be outside' allowable code restrictions. If Old Chicago is granted the right to this sign, future applications could be denied based on allowable signage pursuant to current zoning. Also, it is probable that potential future applicants would find out that no additional signage remains at Applewood Village based on the zoning of the Shopping Center --before they even reach the application stage. Alternative Locations for Old Chicago Sign F The regulation against off-premise signage limits Old Chicago's ability to gain presence elsewhere. We have a marketing team that is constantly searching for new avenues to get the Old Chicago name out there, but this does not help the fundamental problem we have in Wheat` Ridge -people simply cannot find us, even when they know we are 1oLted in the Shopping Center: Impact on Neighbors Old Chicago is always concerned about the wellbeing if its neighbors. In the case of Wheat Ridge, our residential neighbors are our customers and we want them to be happy to have Old Chicago nearby. Our original application shows a sign that would not be illuminated to the east - this design was directly related to our attempt to mitigate negative impact on nearby yresidents. , Given the existing light pollution in the neighborhood, we do not believe that the illumination from the west side of our, sign will, add to the impact the neighbors already feel. I know the residential neighbors who spoke at the meeting were concerned about the signage that was installed for Walgreen's. From what I understand, the signage that was initially installed by Walgreen's did not follow the guidelines promulgated by the City of Wheat Ridge and that Walgreen's has made the changes necessary to come into compliance. I hope that the changes requested by the City alleviated the negative impact the residential neighbors were feeling - I also hope that Old Chicago will not be made accountable for oversights made by Walgreen's. Our residential neighbors are important to us. Old Chicago would like the opportunity to construct the sign as proposed. In the event thafthe neighbors are, in fact experiencing light 2 j- pollution from our sign, Old Chicago would agree to turn the,sign off at 10:00 p.m. I have written to all of the residential neighbors who appeared at the August 1 Planning Commission meeting in the hopes of addressing their concerns - I have made the same offer to them to turn i the sign off at 10:00 p.m. if they are truly experiencing a negative impact from Old Chicago's 1 sign (I have attached copies of the letters to the neighbors for your files). I am earnest when I state that our neighbors are important to us - if even one neighbor comes to the Planning Commission or the City Council and states that they are negatively impacted by our sign, we will agree to ;turn off the pole sign by 10:00 p.m. ` Old Chicago welcomes any creative, ideas the Planning Commission or the City Council might j have to help us gain presence in the Shopping, Center, but - after much internal discussion Old Chicago strongly feel's that the pole sign is the only viable way for us to gain presence and generate sales. Once the customers know Old Chicago is there, we can keep them coming back for good food and friendly service. , Thank you for taking the time to review this response. Please let me know the forum for communicating our thoughts to the City Council or if you feel that we need to produce any further information. I look forward to hearing back from you in this regard. Thanks, Meredith. Sincerely, F ` Anne BDTR Director of Leasing cc: Doug Besant. Terry Jenson / j August 21, 2002 Beverly Tomlinson 3185 Xenon Wheat Ridge, CO 80033 Re: Old Chicago - Application for Pole Sign Dear Ms. Tomlinson: I understand that you were present for the August 1, 2002 Planning Commission meeting where Old Chicago applied for the right to place a pole sign in our patio area. We applied for this right because we have found that people simply cannot find us in the Shopping Center. In an effort to lessen the impact on nearby residents, we had the east side of the sign non-illuminated - I understand that you are concerned about the illumination on the west side toward Xenon. I do not believe that the addition of our pole sign would dramatically add to the light pollution you are already experiencing. In our response to the City, we have again asked for the right to have this pole sign; however, we have stated that we are willing to turn the sign off at 10:00 p.m. if you or any other neighbor report an inconvenience due to light pollution caused by our sign. That being said, I am writing this letter not ask for your support for our sign, but to ask you to come and eat at Old Chicago. I have enclosed a $50 gift certificate for your use. You are our customer, as well as our neighbor, and it is important to Old Chicago that our customers feel taken care of. I am simply asking that you come eat in our restaurant and see what Old Chicago is all about. Please do not hesitate to contact me with any questions or comments you may have. Sincerely, i Anne Bor Director of Leasing (303) 664-4109 Old Chicago • Walnut Brewery • Rock Bottom Restaurant & Brewery • ChopHouse & Brewery • Sing Sing .Old Chicago • Walnut Brewery • Rock Bottom Restaurant & Brewery • ChopHouse & Brewery • Sing Sing August 21, 2002 Jan Coryell 3175 Xenon Wheat Ridge, CO 80033 Re: Old Chicago - Application for Pole Sign Dear Ms. Coryell in reading the notes from the August 1, 2002 Planning Commission meeting, I saw that you were present to speak in opposition to Old Chicago receiving the right to place a pole sign on our property. It sounds like the experience you have had with Walgreen's has left a bad taste for present and future sign applications. It also sounds like your frustration is well warranted. It is my understanding that Walgreen's added signage that was not within the parameters defined for them by the City of Wheat Ridge. I also understand that the'City of Wheat Ridge has requested that Walgreen's come into compliance and that Walgreen's has taken the necessary steps to do so. I hope that the changes made help alleviate the light pollution you were experiencing. While I do not believe our proposed sign would worsen the light pollution you already have to live with, Old Chicago is willing to turn the lights of the sign off no later than 10:00 p.m. if you find that you are adversely affected. I am enclosing a $50 gift certificate to Old Chicago in the hope that you will come over and see what we are all about. We value our neighbors just as we value all of our other customers. Please do not hesitate to contact me with any questions or comments you may have. Sincerely, Anne B3o Director of Leasing (303) 664-4109 August 21, 2002 Vince Austin 12550 West 32nd Avenue Wheat Ridge, CO 80033 Re: Old Chicago - Application for Pole Sign Dear Mr. Austin: I understand that you were present at the August 1, 2002 Planning Commission meeting where you spoke in opposition to Old Chicago's request for a pole sign at the Applewood Village Shopping Center. Old Chicago did take into account the negative impact our sign might have on our residential neighbors. The sign has been designed so that the entire east side is non- illuminated. It does not appear that the illumination on the west side would greatly impact the already existing light pollution in the area. Because we hope that our neighbors are also our customers, Old Chicago does not want to be a negative force in the neighborhood. In response to your concerns, we have responded to the City of Wheat Ridge by stating that we would be willing to turn the sign off at 10:00 p.m. if it turns out to be a nuisance to the neighbors. Please use the enclosed $50 gift certificate to go eat at Old Chicago. Old Chicago has great food and friendly service, but we are hard to find in the Applewood Village Shopping Center. We truly believe that the pole sign will help our customers find us. With more customers, we increase our sales, thereby increasing the tax revenue to.,t}te City of Wheat Ridge. A well run business can be a win-win for everyone. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions or comments. Sincerely, Anne Bo Director of Leasing (303) 664-4109 Old Chicago • Walnut Brewery • Rock Bottom Restaurant & Brewery • ChopHouse & Brewery • Sing Sing August 21, 2002 Jay Reed 3244 Youngfield Wheat Ridge, CO 80033 Re: Old Chicago - Application for Pole Sign Dear Mr. Reed: I am writing this letter to respond to your concerns voiced at the August 1, 2002 Planning Commission meeting. Old Chicago agrees with you that an integrated sign package for the entire center would be the best case scenario. In fact, we have been waiting for two years for the Landlord to take the steps necessary to accomplish an integrated plan. Unfortunately, that has not happened - despite our continual requests since the beginning of our tenancy in 1999. It sounds like you have been making requests of your own. As you know, we are tucked in the back of the Center with very poor visibility. Even people who know we are located in the Shopping Center have a hard time finding us once they enter the parking lot. I have enclosed a $50 gift certificate so that you will come visit Old Chicago and see what we are all about. We are just like you - a small business trying to stay afloat. Please do not hesitate to contact me with any questions or comments you may have. Sincerely, _ v Anne Bork Director of Leasing (303) 664-4109, is Old Chicago • Walnut Brewery • Rock Bottom Restaurant & Brewery • ChopHouse & Brewery Sing Sing Old Chicago • Walnut Brewery August 21, 2002 Roberta Ribera 11250 West 32"d Avenue Wheat Ridge, CO 80033 Rock Bottom Restaurant & Brewery • ChopHouse & Brewery • Sing Sing Re: Old Chicago - Application for Pole Sign Dear Ms, Ribera: I understand that you were present at the August 1, 2002 Planning Commission meeting where Old Chicago made an application for a pole sign. I know that part of your opposition stems from a bad experience with Walgreen's. Please know that it is important to Old Chicago that our neighbors are not adversely impacted by our business operations. Although we do not believe that our proposed sign - which will only be illuminated on the west side - will add to the already existing light pollution, we have stated to the City of Wheat Ridge that we would turn the sign off at 10:00 p.m. if even one neighbor reports a negative impact caused by our, sign. I also understand that you had concerns about our current operations with regard to trash disposal outside of Old Chicago. I contacted our general manager at the Wheat Ridge restaurant who informed me that they have made changes to lessen any negative impact our neighbors may have experienced in the early morning hours. Please let me know if you are still experiencing the same problems and I will make sure that our general manager is alerted. I have enclosed a $50 gift certificate. Please use this to visit Old Chicago and see what we are about. Our neighbors are our customers - we want to deliver the same service to you as we do our other customers. Please do not hesitate to contact me with any questions or comments you may have. Sincerely, ii Anne Bork Director of Leasing (303) 664-4109 CHOPHOUSE &BREWERY • / • - • • 9¢ FAX COVER SHEET DATE: August 21, 2002 NUMBER OF PAGES (including cover sheet): A- pages TO: Meredith Reckert ANNE BORK (303) 235-2857 DIRECTOR OF LEASING ROCK BOTTOM RESTAURANTS INC 248 CENTENNIAL PARKWAY, SUITE 100 LOUISVILLE, CO 80027-1265 TEL: (303) 664-4109 FAX: (303) 664-4195 Please see attached. 7500 West 29th Avenue The City of Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80033 Whelp Telephone 303/235-2846 Ridge FAX 303/235-2857 August 12, 2002 Anne Bork Old Chicago 248 Centennial Pky., Suite 100 Louisville, CO 80027 Dear Ms. Bork: At its meeting of August 1, 2002, the Planning Commission has recommended denial of Case No. WZ-02-10, a request for approval of an amendment to the Applewood Village Shopping Center PCD final development plan to allow erection of a fifty foot high freestanding sign south of the structure located at 3250 Youngfield Street for the following reasons: 1. The proposed sign will be intrusive to the low density residential neighborhood to the northeast, to the south and to the west. 2. The proposed sign is inconsistent with the intent of the sign code. 3. Signage for individual businesses within the shopping center is better addressed with a comprehensive program rather than individual requests. 4. If approved, it would establish a precedent for other businesses to request fifty-foot signs. 5. There are several alternatives to this sign which would direct potential customers to the restaurant but which would be less intrusive to the neighborhood. Your request is tentatively scheduled for aapublic hearing before City Council at 7:00 p.m. on October 14, 2002. Please feel free to contact me at 303-235-2846 if you have any questions. Sincerely, _ Kathy Administrative Asst. Enclosure: Draft of Minutes cc: WZ-02-10 (case file) .iY ~rN✓ cA...\My Documents\Cathy\PCRPTS\PLAN000M\CORRESP\2002\WZ0210 FYI!" 7500 West 29th Avenue Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80033 Telephone 303/235-2846 FAX 303/235-2857 August 12, 2002 Anne Bork Old Chicago 248 Centennial Pky., Suite 100 Louisville, CO 80027 Dear Ms. Bork: Ridge At its meeting of August 1, 2002, the Planning Commission has recommended denial of Case No. WZ-02-10, a request for approval of an amendment to the Applewood Village Shopping Center PCD final development plan to allow erection of a fifty foot high freestanding sign south of the structure located at 3250 Youngfield Street for the following reasons: 1. The proposed sign will be intrusive to the low density residential neighborhood to the northeast, to the south and to the west. 2. The proposed sign is inconsistent with the intent of the sign code. 3. Signage for individual businesses within the shopping center is better addressed with a comprehensive program rather than individual requests. 4. If approved, it would establish a precedent for other businesses to request fifty-foot signs. 5. There are several alternatives to this sign which would direct potential customers to the restaurant but which would be less intrusive to the neighborhood. Your request is tentatively scheduled for a public hearing before City Council at 7:00 p.m. on October 7, 2002. Please feel free to contact me at 303-235-2846 if you have any questions. Sincerely, Kathy eld Administrative Asst. Enclosure: Draft of Minutes cc: WZ-02-10 (case file) The City of Wheat cA...\My Doc=ents\Kathy\PCRPTS\PLANGCOM\CORRESP\2002\WZ0210 6. PUBLIC FORUM There was no one to appear before the Commission at this time. 7. - PUBLIC HEARING DRAFT A. Case No. WZ-02-10: An application submitted by Wadsworth Old Chicago for approval of an amendment to the Applewood Village Shopping Center Planned Commercial Development final development plan to allow a 50' high freestanding sign with 170 square feet of area south of the structure at 3250 Youngfield Street (Old Chicago Restaurant) The case was presented by Meredith Reckert. She reviewed the staff report and presented photos and site layout of the area. She entered all pertinent documents into the record, stated that all proper publication and noticing requirements had been met and advised the Commission they had jurisdiction to hear the case. In response to a question from Commissioner McMILLIN, Ms. Reckert stated that proposed sign would have an east-west face. Commissioner SNOW referred to the letter from a neighbor to the south who objected to an existing sign that causes light pollution to her residence and expressed concern as to how neighbors to the south would be protected from the proposed sign. In response to a question regarding a sign plan for the entire shopping center to prevent piecemeal sign applications, Ms. Reckert explained that an ideal situation would be if the shopping center applied a plan amendment to pursue an integrated sign plan. Staff did encourage the applicant to consider piggybacking their sign request with a possible amendment request by the shopping center regarding King Soopers. Old Chicago representatives chose to proceed at this time rather than wait for the shopping center's future application for an amendment. Commissioner McMillin asked whether there were any unique circumstances associated with this application. Ms. Reckert stated that Old Chicago was aware of sign limitations when they remodeled the building. She commented that while staff was concerned for the applicant's sign visibility, there was also concern for the impact on the surrounding residential area. Terry Jensen Representative for Old Chicago Mr. Jensen was sworn in by Chair WEISZ. He stated that the east elevation of the sign that faces residential neighborhoods would not be illuminated. The applicant prefers to have the sign close to the restaurant rather than being placed on Youngfield. The shopping center management is requiring it to be on the Old Chicago property. He stated that the sign is not intended to be visible from the interstate but to inform local traffic of Old Chicago's location. Mr. Jensen stated that it was his understanding that if this request were granted, no other pole signs could be allowed in the area. Ms. Reckert explained that this would be the case if straight C-1 zoning were involved; however, this is a planned development and it is possible that there could be other pole sign requests. Planning Commission Page 2 August 1, 2002 Commissioner McMILLIN asked the applicant if the proposed sign would provide visibility from 32°d Avenue. Mr. Jensen stated it would be more visible in the winter when there -are no leaves on the trees. He also stated the shopping center owner would not give permission for a monument sign at the 32°d Avenue entrance. The owner did submit a letter giving approval for the proposed sign. Commissioner COOPER asked about the sign on the south side of the building referred to in the letter from the resident to the south and asked if the applicant would remove the neon sign if the request is granted for a pole sign. Mr. Jensen stated that they would not remove the sign but would turn it off at the close of business Beverly Tomlinson pRAFT 3185 Xenon Ms. Tomlinson was sworn in by Chair WEISZ. She spoke in opposition to the application. She stated there is already too much light pollution in her neighborhood. The west face of the proposed sign would shine directly onto Xenon Street. She also noted that the proposed 50- foot sign would be on a 25-foot embankment, which would result in a 75-foot high sign. Jan Coryell 3175 Xenon Ms. Coryell was sworn in by Chair WEISZ. She spoke in opposition to the application. She stated that the recently constructed Walgreen's is adjacent to her back yard and. Walgreen's promised that there would be zero percent illumination into the neighbor's yard, but they have not lived up to that and the neighbors are experiencing light pollution. This has reduced her trust in statements made by applicants. She stated her opinion that when the City of Wheat Ridge won't allow garage sale signs on telephone poles, a 50-foot high sign near a residential area should not be allowed. She suggested alternative locations for the sign such as 32°d Avenue or Youngfield. Vince Austin 12550 West 32nd Avenue Mr. Austin was sworn in by Chair WEISZ. He spoke in opposition to the application. His residence is across the street from Old Chicago. He expressed concern that the granting of this application would set a precedent for other large signs. Commercial encroachment into the residential neighborhood is causing more and more light and noise pollution and the neighborhoods are bearing the commercial burden without the financial benefits. Jay Reed 3244 Youngfield Mr. Reed was sworn in by Chair WEISZ. He is owner of the Wild Bird Store in the Applewood Shopping Center. There are several other restaurants in the center that do not have tall signs and he expressed concern that granting of this application could set a precedent. He also stated that lessees of the shopping center are. in favor of better signage for the center. They have made many requests to the owners for improved signage without success. August 1, 2002 Page 3 Roberta Ribera 11250 West 32"d Avenue Ms. Ribera was sworn in by Chair WEISZ. She spoke in opposition to the application. She believed the large bright light on the south of Old Chicago was adequate advertising. She fiuther stated that employees of Old Chicago empty bottles and other trash at closing time which is very disruptive to the neighborhood in early morning hours. She also mentioned the lack of trust caused by Walgreen's not living up to its promises. Commissioner COOPER asked for elaboration on the city's discussion with the shopping center regarding circulation and signage improvements. Mr. White stated that he has had no response from the owners for over a year. He stated that staff would contact the owners of the center to discuss concerns expressed this evening. He stated staff's concern about the impact of Old Chicago on the adjacent neighborhoods. He also shared the neighbor's concern about Walgreen's and stated that if the lighting is not changed, the city will not allow them to open. Chair WEISZ asked if there were others who wished to address this tte g no response, Chair WEISZ closed the public bearing. It was moved by Commissioner SNOW and seconded by Commissioner COLLINS to deny Case No. WZ-02-10, a request for approval of an amendment to the Applewood Village Shopping Center PCD final development plan to allow erection of a fifty foot high freestanding sign south of the structure at 3250 Youngfield Street for the following reasons: 1. The proposed sign will be intrusive to the low density residential neighborhood to the northeast, to the south and to the west. 2. The proposed sign is inconsistent with the intent of the sign code. 3. Signage for individual businesses within the shopping center is better addressed with a comprehensive program rather than individual requests. 4. If approved, it would establish a precedent for other businesses to request fifty- foot signs. 5. There are several alternatives to this sign which would direct potential customers to the restaurant but which would be less intrusive to the neighborhood. Chair WEISZ stated she would vote to deny the application because she didn't believe the city wasnot prepared to begin approving a forest full of tall signs. The motion passed 6-0 with Commissioners McNAMEE and WITT absent. B. Case No. ZOA-02-04: An ordinance amending Section 26-621 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws pertaining to parking in residential areas. Before presentation of this case, Commissioner McMILLIN declared that he has written several freelance articles in recreational vehicle magazines over the past ten years and asked the Commission if this would be considered a conflict of interest since this case involves recreational vehicles. Chair WEISZ asked if this would affect Commissioner MCMILLIN's Planning Commission Page 4 August 1, 2002 U ~l V V PUBLIC HEARING ROSTER CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 1, 2002 Case No. WZ-02-10: An application submitted by Wadsworth Old Chicago for approval of an amendment to the Applewood Village Shopping Center Planned Commercial Development final development plan to allow a 50' high freestanding sign with 170 square feet of area south of the structure at 3250 Youngfield Street (Old Chicago Restaurant). (Please Print) Name Address In Favor/Opposed r t 317f i b n (ti 9 re,5~u ~e- pv~ CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE PLANNING DIVISION STAFF REPORT TO: Planning Commission DATE OF MEETING: August 1, 2002 DATE PREPARED: July 19, 2002 CASE NO. & NAME: WZ-02-10/Old Chicago CASE MANAGER: M. Reckert ACTION REQUESTED: Amendment to PCD final development plan LOCATION OF REQUEST: 3250 Youngfield NAME & ADDRESS OF APPLICANT(S): Wadsworth Old Chicago, Inc 248 Centennial Parkway, Suite 100 Louisville, CO 80027 NAME & ADDRESS OF OWNER(S): AMB Retail Income Fund Inc Pier 1 #1 San Francisco, CA 94111 APPROXIMATE AREA: 32.70 acres PRESENT ZONING: Planned Commercial Development PRESENT LAND USE: Commercial/retail SURROUNDING ZONING: N: R-1, R-IA; S: R-2, NC, PCD; E: NC, R-IA, R-2; W: C-1, A-1 SURROUNDING LAND USE: N: church, low density residential; S: low density residential, office, retail; E: low density residential, office; W: retail, office, I-70 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR THE AREA: Community Commercial Center DATE PUBLISHED: July 18, 2002 DATE POSTED: July 18, 2002 DATED LEGAL NOTICES SENT: July 18, 2002 ENTER INTO RECORD: (X) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN (X) ZONING ORDINANCE 0 SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS Q OTHER (X) CASE FILE & PACKET MATERIALS 0 SLIDES (X) EXHIBITS 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. I. REQUEST The applicant requests approval of an amendment to the Applewood Shopping Center final development plan to allow erection of a 50' high freestanding sign on the south side of the building located at 3250 Youngfield. Attached as Exhibit `A' is the applicant's justification for the sign. H. CASE HISTORY Construction within the Applewood Village shopping center commenced in the early 1960's prior to the incorporation of the city. In 1975 the shopping center was rezoned to Planned Commercial Development with approval of a final development plan dictating development in the center. Since that time, the shopping center has undergone a series of changes and expansions with appropriate plan amendments, the most recent being in 1995. Amendment No. 6 (Case No. WZ-95-03) allowed for construction of a greenhouse structure on the north side of Walmart, approval of a drive-through fast food pad in place of the existing RTD terminus/turn-around and improvements in the northern parking lot to enhance circulation and add landscaping through the construction of landscaped endcaps. It also provided for construction of a 10,000 square foot retail building on the south (Chipotle, Noodles & Cc) with parking lot and drive aisle improvements. See attached Exhibit `B' which is a reduction of the existing development plan. Gross building area within the shopping center exceeds 375,000 square feet. The existing development plan allows one 25' high freestanding sign at the northwest corner of the development (Walmart sign). Although technically there are no other freestanding signs shown on the development plan, there are other existing pole signs in the shopping center. This includes freestanding signs in front of First World Travel, A Book Place and Applejack Liquors. Primary access into the shopping center is from a lighted entrance on Youngfield located midway between 32nd and 38`h Avenue. An existing tenant i.d. sign is located adjacent to the entrance. This sign is less than 25' high. There are no 50' high signs in the portion of the shopping center zoned PCD. In adjacent, straight-zoned C-1 property directly fronting Youngfield, the Chili's Restaurant and Conoco fueling operation have 50' high freeway-oriented signs with 150 square feet and 115 square feet per face, respectively. III. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDMENT Old Chicago remodeled and occupied the south half of the existing structure at 3250 Youngfield in 1999. Although the property is addressed to Youngfield, the structure is over 600' east of the Youngfield frontage within the southeast portion of the development. The restaurant structure is not visible from Youngfield but the restaurant has a small sign on the existing tenant i.d. sign at the Youngfield entrance to the center. On the structure itself, Old Chicago has wall signage on the west and south facades. Secondary access to the shopping center is from West 32n' Avenue. There is no tenant i.d. sign at this entrance, however, Old Chicago's southern wall sign is visible from 32"' Avenue. The applicant proposes construction of the sign within the concrete patio area on the south side of the restaurant space. Old Chicago was informed of the signage restrictions in the shopping center prior to occupancy of the building. There are several other tenants within the same structure including Radio Shack and other retail and service establishments. Attached as Exhibit `C' are photo simulations of what the proposed sign would look like at locations in the shopping center. In February 2002, the city adopted a new sign code which resulted in reductions to the allowances for wall signs and freestanding signs. With the rewrite, it was staff s intention to move away from large freestanding pole signs to more tasteful freestanding monument signs. Section 26-701 of the sign code indicates that the intent of the regulations is "to provide a balance between legitimate identification and advertising needs and the visual discord which signs sometimes cause, and to provide a sense of balance or proportion between a sign and the building or property it serves". Further, "to encourage the erection of signs which are legible in their surroundings, compatible with the visual character of the surrounding area, appropriate to the activities identified." No changes were made to the provisions for freeway-oriented signs which can be 50' in height within one-quarter mile of the interstate. If the Old Chicago Restaurant were located in a straight, C-1 zone district, the freeway-oriented sign proposed (50' high with 170 square feet of signage) would be allowed. The City has received one letter of opposition which is attached and labeled as Exhibit `D'. IV. ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE Low density residential development surrounds the periphery of the shopping center on all sides but the west. There is a low density, single family neighborhood directly to the northeast of the Old Chicago structure and rear parking area. Generally, freeway oriented signs are located in areas where there is not residential land use abutting the business in question. If the sign is approved, staff recommends that the eastern face should be unlighted and that the sign be shut off when the restaurant is closed. V. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The Comprehensive Plan designates this property as Community Commercial Center. Uses within this designation are intended to serve the regional needs of the city and the surrounding community. Pursuant to Section 2 of the Comprehensive Plan document, "Businesses in these areas serve the traveling public and are dependent on highway access and/or visibility These activities generate a substantial amount of revenue for the city and it is important that the viability and attractiveness of these sites be maintained." VI. RECOMMENDED MOTIONS Option A: "I move to recommend APPROVAL of Case No. WZ-02-10, a request for approval of an amendment to the Applewood Village Shopping Center PCD final development to allow erection of a 50' freestanding sign south of 3250 Youngfield, for the following reasons: 1. Although the building is addressed to Youngfield, it is over 600' away from the street and is not visible from the Youngfield entrance to the shopping center. 2. The Comprehensive Plan indicates that this is an area which should generate business activity from the freeway. 3. There are other 50' high signs in the vicinity. With the following conditions: I. The eastern face of the sign be unlighted. 2. The sign be unlighted when the restaurant is closed. 3. A brick planter area be constructed around the sign base." Option B: "I move to DENY Case No. WZ-02-10, a request for approval of an amendment to the Applewood Village Shopping Center PCD final development to allow erection of a 50' freestanding sign south of 3250 Youngfield, the following reasons: 1. The proposed sign will be intrusive to the low density residential neighborhood to the northeast. 2. The proposed sign is inconsistent with the intent of the sign code. 3. Signage for individual businesses within the shopping center is better addressed with a comprehensive program rather than individual, piecemeal requests." TUL-03-2002 14:41 FROM ROCK, BOTTOM DESIGN TO 3032352857 P.01r01 Z XLglgfr SA 1 July 3, 2002 VIA FACSIMILE (303) 239-2557 Meredith Reckert, Senior Planner City of Wheatridge Planning Department 7500 West 29"' Avenue Wheatridge, CO 800033 AM REUVW Re: Pole Sign for Old Chicago restaurant located at 3250 Youngfield, Wheatridge, Colorado Dear Meredith: Per your discussions with our sign consultant, Terry Jenson, I would like to offer some justifications for our proposed 50 foot pole sign to be located within the boundary lines of the patio for the above- referenced Old Chicago restaurant. Sales at our Wheatridge Old Chicago have been significantly below average for the Old Chicago group sales since the inception of our tenancy. In 2001, sales at Wheatridge were over 30% less than system average. We truly believe there is a direct correlation between our poor visibility and low sales. We often hear from the customer that they couldn't find us or that they come to the center often, but never even knew we were there. We still believe this is a good location; however, this is our last hope to bring the sales up to where they need to be. We have contemplated billboard signage on the highway; however, the problem seems to be in fending us once the customer enters the shopping center. Additionally, advertising our Youngfield address might be misleading because we are so far off' of Youngfield. We have already been mindful of the nearby residences by designing our sign to be non-illuminated on the east elevation which faces the neighborhood. Please do not hesitate to contact me with any questions or comments you may have in this regard. Old Chicago is optimistic that the proposed pole sign will greatly increase our customer visits and overall long term customer base. Your consideration is greatly appreciated. Sincerely, Anne Bork Director of Leasing (303) 664-4109 cc: Terry Jenson (via fax - 7191667-0408) 248 Centennial Pkwy Suite 100 Louisville Colorado 80027 Phone 303.664.4000 fax 303.664.4199 TOTAL P.01 APPLEWOOD VILLAGE SHOPPING CENTER - PLANNED COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT - AMENDED FINAL PLAN ~xk~B r 8 m5' p OFFICIAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN, AMENDMENT 86 (y PA(6 - 188'37.V g°` zg a y - OF THREE PARCETS OF LNID LOCATED W THE EAST 1/2 OF THE N.W. 1/4 .a a OF SECTION 29. TOWNSHIP S SOUTH, RANGE 69 NEST OF THE 6TH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, WRIGHT COURT 50' R.O.W. S IN THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COUNTY OF JEFFERSON. STATE OF COLORADO. 38.92' I - 1 _ RIDGEVIEW ACRES - THIRD FILING ;R'r o Q M`~• ~ APPLEWOOD VILLAGE waa.r psry9/ S'a' a PARCEL 2. - n Ey~ps Mvaww~- / LOT 19?~\jL LOT 20 gyn. om_ aap6 ptp MV[ 3 58928.1W 0.6]'`- / h /p156' •5 P.~S.0' ~On rw,..".uv.. vv o. .e -4 673 ' SO'51.SE 89 43' - - - - - - - GAS I'1 I , ~pp n nn ti 8 " - - y muxCtO_ ~1 mx l.a . qua - .a w v ae.. P,FC. It L- \ It It 0 3zEC - mp zpn.,, u.., s • sraRr 6wcK ewc B II w .99o sa.:E s >sm WAL * MART i SO- 51.8'E 130 0O j ~ " 13!.869 Sr. WTH FJPiW9CN I .„w g ~ W 4E ssv sw ? i ELS[ WL 'NTY- tub - 9fi0 S. 9LY1MC Q a n / _ I _ _ ~T l - Ir' yl'3 y \ \ 52 " ~ I AP P ' aR o.. - w.T [„_s _ 111111 II II71 r-l --6n rI TIII 1 -1 an. - m - _ _ _ _ - • _ ' - SEE DETAL C N- Ar_ a Iz' MR, eEOON awc. SWEET 3 OF 4 e y _ -roR- BmcK R 60 i f 0 1 y~ n 150.00' wwu GO t, m~ t ' - - I ~~.I ef5 Qia0A:." _ o I'I WiONE ENLERS IBIPS AT 11115 F01NT PARC ^T~ ALSO clc o +}'!Aa4} P(Q1lO F(/O/!O VIOIIO 99a ~ Gn,Dn. } 9 If }.%G✓G~ 4'~✓~a } 41 aX SL, QA.NIROt OL.r Iri 4 m - ~!0.54,.. NO31.' 3 W 199.94') o. APp z . -awp,.~ -.!_9 .c rt to NO51,8'W 24.32' o t q-ynH ~I --zr~ N3 V ~a,mr woa:ex.W 99 _4°~ r- y^3 F A M^' \ *~O f_ N'eb w~J I1 Z % 7 [ nY` - ---myt -J✓I'~' - ~3 _--oI°~' 1x1 mm m I> - 1.e.rooe t- n L VJ~ Imo-'- p zzw> Z- _ s LLL- •(NO51'17 Wt 33532) W =_p YM ROw III P.OPr.- 667.82' sEE DETAL 7 ASCe OF BEGINNNG \ `v M F SE SWEET 3 OF 4 t .T,~Fpo YOUNGFIELD STREEF (1322.23') I I-OF BEGINNING- ° r°'~ rw sw. c.. LE r•f ?'lR PM[c; hu• r'. e..e I ~ iSC PROPOYD BURIMrIG ~ YEA4e8D M Fm (590OJ'COti 1a0.a0) EYI91Mf FENCE 2' - _ PRWOYD PMKNG $fHLS ® ilAIINE EABrMG CPM2lE Z F` - PRMHD QAB N0 GUT E PL14R PqE C4.> P1gNMf. sPY£8 caa) P5. 9. EJ ; ~ PRS'ISFII 111IFFK NIROM Wti Wli POIE" OI..P MVIpCM PNMNC Y..C Z _ Giredo 3 F *a - 3 PBCPCSEO CMCIEIE FXE N,p1M'T AF- . PM MW CM M5+]!!FD It K. 41.1 Li 1Y8W • IOW Q 6 4 e PRLppBEL FENCE - M1ER ViV.9f 4wv. RH .Wp CM MBQIRD 4NE ENOt Li lM C GAAOdi ; / PMNIED ISANO - P - SWRMT SiSFIf YNf1IXE M W. 9c. YgFER SET M MW18:lE MSMNIIED Li n CURBED ISVMD ("mil Y.EIEIF YMM14E • M.n W Q' SS W' EV IA' i ~Otl~N Ir b® Juts R 1- TY meOI15 SET PM M1D CM M9L1ED l5 'N670 • ~ py~D pw•Fr tpt~ o® F- art mra tFFUPU Wla/u I 3~ ~ 'n Y/IEt y0 ~ Jttl6yo-lltE a,/,FR ' E tt~.~~emY-a®s,to~~wgY ~wrtt[-~a~r~sa ~~s at~v,le 7260-FO!/ 9,S6 0 yy~~o APPLEWOOD VILLAGE SHOPPING CENTER - PLANNED COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT - AMENDED FINAL PLAN OFFICIAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN, AMENDMENT 86 OF THREE PARCELS OF LAND LOCATED IN THE EAST 1/2 OF THE N.W. 1/4 OF SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 3 SOUTH, RANGE 69 WEST OF THE 6TH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN. IN THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COUNTY OF JEFFERSON, STATE OF COLORADO. COUR SMT 4f 1w4 LEGAL DESCRS+T70M PI 1 1\MTY 6 aFWSG.' 3L4R 6 C4YI,Y0 PARfF1 2 1ll15 iB .M0 $ 0.GIX I..VA.ERW gVIF. CPNTV ff mpEd STA,E S CMIIDO WITAYN4 Xt MFA 69373 MAS W.T£ W Ibi E PNtm 3 9 a s9 E SIRIVEVGAS t2IITF1CATE aYNq 0. MY. W 16E91v CWtl,v TNT TE 911,1EY (i nC Nx0.V,1' 6' APFlEl1LY0 AI 9W'fill' 6Mtp q/iYlm M.ESLIN. L114),Wpli - NF]16I1 FMK ML MEIiiE T tq. 3. R1A9 Yes YA9E ume II 91rse15at a a xz69r .tA,1YAZi u. ,vN. No TNT ro TE Osr s YT 19,oWm¢ xEO4Niv {NJO ee+2 PL .6~M,me rtw ALUUt¢r lvlemlrs sAO 4N9EY. fY: :.IN~j 1111E]10. PIBY. 1Y03TRW101 ) LOa1xW OiSIRATW 1 II rve Ate a 93tYr 6 xm~ita" rANrz Ne x9n2 ,camx9 ro 19109WC u. x61 Wsr LONEMS AxT tux Acm1 usn uF6n Mrc OSELi N 1X3 SN1fY NiMI T!E vEVS ,F,ET YN FISi b J4A 9Wt CEFECT. M t0 EYflii. WT Yi xCTfN BA4D 1Pd MR OVER N 115 9MEY E 0.O9iD Y6E Nxrt lw 3EAZS FLa 11E w>E v x ®9mwn9x 4pN9 X3E6. n5 KrA 4x[KY w3 eNrAFE9 FB nc 86U512 usE r 11c ev®a F9ns9ra ae vmm xWEn N 1K mnE,cAa 1vEaN. sA6 mT1E1cAN 96S N9r E[I00 ro .wr tNx,Ym ea9at NnwuT .W 9>mlcs 1Emmviw, er ,tE sn1Ex69 xxNC m eexsa. /Y: d 7 COUA(TY of J EFFERS41W STATE OF SOUTHEAST CORNER OF NEST 38TH AVENUE AND YOUNGFIELD STREET AIErlJILL ROTEA s2TEr 6 E4snc 66 z s s.w4n m a.4n . a sm9rv ooNE zr fM66 M"Td LO. NG OAIFD 9/,!/29, Jp111Fp Bi SNE K tEGJIRi K t/9/9h 2 Bf,9E 91E .flE XOf ~ 9Y BCY3 OIUIIE M199e(M 410y.WIG 6 eAVD NM K11N$ Nx>6lE 1 SNRNR 4IIR A^IFII PIIO,l9! XOfIxESi IMFAS ENITATd T6'110CE 6f InGf SYd1921 miIAC! h W Wt MYII fl1G4®G COtRIDA4D MINK 1MhR F6MLi. 1 IO 9tNl ~ NLGxfL Y W,m£ GYAp cplIX. 1R ~3cN~som 9~1. a tELxOr OSxxIAIfD x63189 N066. v91E1®r A6EE 11MT TE PNPV913'tILW.Y OFSCI~D ISEO11Y1 $ FEWLRO K A N.~NOI OEYGIP9FlIT N ,000.WS iTl TC I)$ gSTllCnyS .yp mgTp6 LPIi,NFD IN T6 TMI. .YN b WY ONR9x£ £ f£Ul~ BY LAV I (E) 0.R11FA ~ TYL TE ..FIIO.K ff Rw. OX31FSpR MY <NU Mn YWS xGT CRUR , VSTD egRli n69r. aslm Fx9rvm Nws YAx Ozr ,teg Ago N961E Futslxxr m TE ex9Y.Tws .F SLIIOI 3b5(6) 6 Y[TY I Q' TE 6fE Cf 4Y5 Ce'xE CM1 6 NEAT It2 lGIA1~EA Vxwm .A. WTMs SxEET RonL tIHT 1 M { - COSl1 ~T a@T f Of { - OYa1{ti PYY i6T ~ i { . ATAL PLY isf fIRRT { OF { - {JiffJ!{ RY SITE SEVEIGPfR3fT STATSTiC3 miw - e9ts{ES A a+e xxu - +.Nx3w s -Sam AmEs a Otoss autnx,9 n1e1 - 3meN s . mz C IMNA'1FE .V E\ - i1,ASO 4. R c9s6c 96,1 SV2 Ens1NL ltms n FNeac xnFA - w9.+m 9 - 9e (9 S11CE5 ¢19118 ORIY£5) E au9tN9 m,II 9EYWfv 4,BS IEWIIED 9,p5 w0\lFD t501 119x i. 1195 FFidYiIEO - KL C-t f~6~ TR41 ~W Y~O!!• w 96 atEA - 1.N0.XM s . 2ro ,ONs a ang N.NONC xlrw - 3n®s . 3L•S 6~ YOx9 xtrA tt$ s1m69a ASw - man s G I.W4IPE MEA-,SS1N Y.9..2 9Y05'. 9012 TE91 TF a 31 Ril - tb 6 PNE.MO NFA - 9ffi{T3 4. M.ii (WI185 4RA2 P91E5) E eue6c 3A6 91XtA9r 1.185 RIIOm 9.165 N,p\® 1(I]3 NO> f. 1@S RAxIFp - yy - C-t Ix'RM1'PIM1C y-yT scat®9090Y 14FY£1E wr ~I 'W ~ ~y. N,IE4 YVXWMVTF]K ¢K }'~-IxAyV`'''"'-/" ~ / Yx mYNm61 Ew55 3(- 9? =AxnEnwt.G9.N5oX V(:TAFV WBA: sAreF;P,,,:,;aono .1. AOtoNT n5 - 'a-' wr 6 > 3L . tw1 n ttc Nur Noa RnIrIL 0~ ' dAwYx ' NKYNC xtn oeemur 9FELTOe I I CF fA11,S BEO1G1lgX MNxrm 1N5 wv 6 ~ . I18 xT TE PEAT A92 QIY fIIN9. Y.i61 CASE HISTORY It L/'1~j (y f R - >3-t< ze-t m xL ms xBW,EAT Is F6e II - LS-14 L-1 1 Fm 6At R - T1-14 Sf NFl[,EtR 1 x061161 6 A t Sf. FKL FCm OFYE T!J IESTYRNIi. Mp IEYB.]6 R - 93-6: 9{I .WFMOFNL T) eNq,01Di. IMO4JF£ NFAS NO (bK 19E K 910WI W RTK a R - M-14 1AD YEMlYO1i R -90-14 .M xpaWi 2 ONOIMI 6 2 Elb'IK ONLM6 T Sf>9 SF. IIO NTAIC069 OF IEY II - w-.: 31x A'Elanli tn999 sF. MAO Mac N,x xE901mt3 m eME3c tm. tnoxNE Mvs II -93-3 GM MCLYFxr Ox'L 19E5 YL 330 A1EME BIOxNB K 91l Y RTAE C Cd6etl9 Jam- - l~ - CNVdknb, htG , e..~+yE..p..YFAm9 s~nrv mx6 M~~ ZOUKTT CILM AM I111MID S CIRTIMATE l6 OOYb1T xL@¢D M qM N AE OT[£ OF TE mMtY OaYI NO ~ 6 .esr6361 m9N6 AT w2al max99. a TE 11 us wr 6 SEPTEM 8£JZ xn. ,.e . Y nN m6 rA9E Hi[ 9] PC 39-Y/ .x,161 rc 119 560 .sFe®t mWn aver xm 1Emmue Toxin FsYj-~J[xLGlCC .o- _ : _ _ . bN -r-2L, GE L o c~ VJA v Z c 1 0 N G c-3G N0 ~G . M 2 a 0 Eo c z I o2 ~ 4t F,/111 i f- '.b , July 21, 2002 City of Wheat Ridge Planning Division 7500 West 29th Avenue Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80033 Dear Members of the Planning Commission, c~ Thank you for notifying me of Case No. WZ-02-10 to be heard by you on August 1, 2002. Since I will be out of town and unable to attend, I am forwarding you my thoughts. For nearly 30 years I have lived directly south of 3250 Youngfield (now Old Chicago). When the existing neon sign was placed on the south side of the Old Chicago building, I was floored because it's neon brightness shines directly into my bedrooms all night long, every single night. In addition, there has been a "constant hum" (from wiring or ballasts?), audible every single night when we are trying to sleep. Frankly, both continue to be offensive. I am proud of this City and Applewood Village; I have enjoyed Old Chicago. However, I am adamantly opposed to the proposed expansion and addition of yet another sign. The proposed 50 foot sign is aesthetically disturbing to this neighborhood and to my residence in particular. It's already like sleeping in "neon city with a nocturnal hum" all night, every night! Cordially, Su an Becker Heritage 12500 West 32nd Avenue Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80033 303-233-1376 LAN USE CASE PROCESSING ?PLICATION oFn„E, Pc Planning and Development Department 7500 West 29` Avenue, Wheat Ridge, CO 80033 1 Phone (303) 235-2846 co 0 Cat pR>~ n zc (Please print or type all information) -o&A Ccb C41CAGo Applicant WIm5f✓oe71f Ao c.a6 E4C Address 32,5 0/o wG<rECA, Phone 3D3-237-?yrY 76 g City 14e14? ,et/~p44 State 0 Zip 80033 Fax 303-237- 3 Owner /MI6 P120 EV.1`-!!, L. P, Address 50 S- MONTGo text 577 Phone 303-220-Cloo City SAfJ k'kC,(SLo State CA- Zip 9y f Fax -303-(o9S-44, nn ~ /vo Contact 41lWE RDRK - Cc9 Ci-H4/+G,Address 2qg COV7L`r/N1*,- PARiuWA Phone 3o3-(4y- y/oq City Z.puisVct.c-C State CD Zip ?6o2-7 Fax 303-lefo 10 (The person listed as contact will be contacted to answer questions regarding this application, provide additional information when necessay, post public hearing signs, and will receive a copy of the staff report prior to Public Hearing.) Location of request (address): 3HS D e6: Type of action requested (check one or more of the actions listed below which pertain to your request.) Application submiual requirements on reverse side ❑ Change of zone or zone conditions ❑ Special Use Permit ❑ Consolidation Plat ❑ Subdivision: Minor (5 lots or less) ❑ Flood Plain Special Exception ❑ Subdivision: Major (More than 5 lots) ❑ Interpretation of Code ❑ Preliminary ❑ Final ❑ Lot Line Adjustment ❑ Right of Way Vacation ❑ Planned Building Group ❑ Temporary Use, Building, Sign Site Development Plan approval ❑ Variance/Waiver (from Section ) ❑ Zoning Ordinance Amendment ❑ Other: Detailed description of request: `)eV&2-vPMe~r fOLA-v 4n-,&-A-0vt4eaL-'7 7a ALLeu) Fog 71•Fs /N sTw Lutno . O F A FYt~~ S 174tvar vto Po S+G. f 17J O r iS Pez Cc ge Coal: , t.a~4 uz~ APP/zoYert $u.[' NDT BN 7IkE 02[GiNAt ~CVEGOP~` ~ Pu4fi/• - Required information: Assessors Parcel Number: Size of Lot (acres or square footage): 3 2.7 4cArs Current Zoning: PCB Proposed Zoning: CVO C4y4w6ir Current Use: S~jopiN6 PeN7 Proposed Use: No / sh4,✓GE 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-attomey from the owner which approved of this action on his behalf. Signature of Applicant cribed and sworn tome this N day of w 20~ ~~yz,2y L' A/ ELSA VERA-JACOBO NOTARY PUBLIC Notary Public STATE OF COLORADO t 0 My commission expires i u- i a.- 0 s- Date received ! X d.0 Fee S Receipt No. Case No. U/z -Oa 0 Comp Plan Desig. Zoning 4?L-p Quarter Section Map Alk)dl99 lWated Case No. Pre-App Nltg. Date Case. Manager poi ~Pr APPLEWOOD VILLAGE SHOPPING CENTER - PLANNED COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT - AMENDED FINAL PLAN OFFICIAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN, AMENDMENT 87 OF THREE PARCELS OF LAND LOCATED IN THE EAST 1/2 OF THE N.W. 1/4 OF SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 3 SOUTH, RANGE 69 WEST OF THE 6TH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, IN THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COUNTY OF JEFFERSON, STATE OF COLORADO. COVER SHEET SHEET 9 OF S LEGAL DESCRIPTION PARCEL 1 A PORTION OF THE EAST ONE-HAIF OF NE NORTHWEST ONE-WARTEt OF SECTOR 29, TOWNSHIP 3 SOUTH, RANGE 69 WEST OF NE 6TH PM.. DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGNNING AT A PUNT 654,32 FEET NORTH CF NE SOUTH UNE OF WE NORTHWEST ONE-WARTER OF SAID SECTION 29, AND 60.00 FEET EAST OF WE WEST MINE OF THE EAST ONE-HPTF OF THE NORTHWEST ONE- GUARDER OF SAID SECTION 29: THENCE N RODIN' W PARALLEL TO NE WEST ENE OF NE EAST .-HALF OF NE NORTHWEST ONE-WARTER OF SAID SEWON 29. A DISTANCE OF 667.132 FEET TO THE SOUTH UNE OF THE HURTLE ST ONE-OUARIER OF THE NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTOR 29: THENCE N RNFNLI E ALONG THE SOUTH FINE OF TIE NORTHEAST ONE- Go WIMP OF NE NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 29, A DISTANCE OF ISD.00 FEET; THENCE N 00'51 e W PARALLEL TO NE WEST MINE OF NE EAST ONE-HALF OF NE NORTHWEST CNE WARIER OF SAID SECTOR 29, A OSTANCE OF 200.00 FEET: THENCE S ,91&1'W R SOUTH FINE OF NE NORTHEAST ONE-WARFEN OF NE s tw neTOCR nF AN 4CTICN R9. A CSTANCE OF 150.00 FEET: THENCE N NE TWEE AREA 29SU ACRES M COUNTY OF JEFFERSON STATE OF COLORADO PARCEL 2 A DISTANCE OF 34260 FEET M A POINT 350.00 FEET EAST GF THE HALF OF ME NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF END BECTON 29; TO NE WEST LINE OF NE EAST ONE-HAU" OF ME SAID SECTION 29, A DISTANCE OF 600.00 FEET THENCE S UM LINE OF NE NORTHWEST WE-WARIER OF SAID SECTION T; THENCE N W'51.0 W PARALLEL TO NE WEST FINE OF NE WEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID BECTON 29, A DISTANCE OF 23732 RAVEL TO ME SOUTH UNE OF NE NORTHWEST ONE-WARIER I40.00 FEET TO ME TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING, CONTAINING AN FOR 19 AND 20, BLOCK 1. APPLEWOOD NWGE COUNT! OF JEFFERSON STATE OF COLORADO CGMTANINC AN AREA OF 0.573 ACRE. MORE ON RESS. SOUTHEAST CORNER OF WEST 38TH AVENUE AND YOUNGFIELD STREET S TE ib I F ~q~✓9(.~ C rr. P}4~g0 ~j~'~' $1 }iii„ A A~EI II (I"1 r ~ `7~11p W.: B [ 4 ~ /J 'LJ~ F i~ eu.~ I r 1 i I~~ eb ~y + , A c, / AAA OWNER'S CERTIFICATION ME BELOW-STtNEO OMNER(SL OR LEGALLY DESIGNATED AGENT(S) THEREOF, 00 HEREBY AGREE THAT WE PROPERTY LEGALLY DESCRIBED HEREIXI WILL BE DEYFLWED AS A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT IN ACCORDANCE WN NE USES. RESTRICTONS AND CONDITIONS CONTAINED IN THIS PUN. AND AS MAY DWERWSE BE REQUIRED BY LAW. I (WE) FURTHER RECOGNRE THAT NE APPROVAL OF TNAL DEVELOPMENT FILAR (AND PUT) DOES NOT CREATE A VESTED PROPERTY MOTET, KSTEO PROPERTY RIGHTS MAY ONLY ARISE AND ACCRUE PURSUANT TO NE PROASIONS OF BECTON 26-6(G) OF ARTICLE I OF NE CODE OF LAMS OF NE CITY OF WHEAT tfl.oL SGNANRE OF OWNER NOTARY PUBNC SUBSCRIBED AND SHORN TO BEFORE ME NIS WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL MY COMMISSION EXPIRES NOrAMY PUBLIC GLBSCNBEO AND MAIN TO BEFORE ME THIS WITNESS MY HAND AND OMCIAL SEAL. MY COMMISSION EXPIRES NOTARY SEAL VICINITY MAP NOT TO SCALE SHEET INDEX BM T 1 O: 3 - COVER SHEET BHEET 2 OF 3 - OVERALL PLAN SHEET 3 OF 3 - ENLARGED PLAN SNEST PARCEL 3 THAT PART OF THE SOUTHEAST WARTER OF NE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP J SOUTH, RANGE 69 WEST OF NE 6TH PRINCIPPL MMOLAR. IN NE CITY OF MEAT RDGE, COUNTY SITE DEVELOPMENT STATISTICS GENERAL NOTES OF XFFERSGN, STATE OF COLORA00. D6CRIBEO AS. COMMENGNG AT THE POINT OF INIERSECTON OF THE EAST RIGHT -OF-WAY UNE OF YOUNOFlEW STREET AND NE SOUTH FINE CF NE NORTHWEST EM811001 • OVERALL 1. SURVEY OF EMSTNG SITE WAS SUPPLIED BY OWNER, FROM SURVEY DONE BY WAIVER OF SAID SECTION 29, THENCE THE WEST QUARTET CORNER OF SAD SECTION 29 BEARS POWERS EIENATON CO., INC. DATED 9/18/89. UPDATED BY SAME AS RECENTLY AN 1/27/94. SOUTH 89 DEGREE 31 MINUTES 12 BECOMES WEST 118242 FEET AND ME SOUTHWEST OWNER OF THE SOUTHEAST WANTED OF SAID NORTHWEST WARNER BEARS S.. BSI DECREE 31 MINUTES 12 A. SITE AREA - 1,436,304 SF = 3270 ACRE 2 SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM PROMDER: NORTHWEST LAKEWOOD SANITANON DISTRICT. WEST SECONDS NEST DOW FEET RUNNING THENCE NORTH W DECREES 51 MINUTES 48 SECONDS WEST, fi09 SF a 26 Sf. B CROSS BUDDING AREA - JW RIO£ GANITATON DISTRICT PARALLEL WTH THE NEST UNE OF SAID BWTHEAST QUARTER OF NE NORTHWEST WARIER ALONG . . , CROSS SUILOING AREA LESS KMCNROOM AREA - 350,337 SF SAID FIST RIOR-0F-WAY UNE OF YLUMMEU) STREET. 180.00 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF 3 WATER SYSTEM PROVIDER: CONSOU%kMC MUTUAL WATER DISTRICT. BEGNNING: THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID EAST RIGHT-OF -WAY MINE, NORTH W DEGREE 51 144 SF = 9.45 LANDSCAPE AREA - 115 C MINUTES 48 SECONDS WEST 274.32 FEET: THENCE LEAVING SAID EAST MOIT-OF-WAT UNE, NORTH 89 DEGREE 31 MINUTES 12 SECONDS FAST, PARALLEL WITH NE SOUTH UNE OF SAID NORTHWEST , . SHRUBS 8005 A NO LOUDSPEAKERS SHALL BE ALLOWED IN OUTSIDE GARDEN CENTER. WARTER 140.00 FEET, THENCE NORTH W DEGREES M MINUTES 40 SECONDS WEST, PARALLET TREES: 117S + 31 NEW = 1413 WITH SAID EAST RIOIT-OF-WAY UNE 175.68 FEET; THENCE NORTH 89 DEGREES 31 MINUTES 12 SECONDS EAST 1W.00 FEET. THENCE SOUTH W DEGREES 51 MINUTES 40 SECONDS EAST, PARALLEL 472 SF = 64.15 D. PARKING AREA - 920 WIN SAID UST OF RIGHT-OF-WAY UNE 450.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 89 DEGREES 31 MINUTES 12 , SECONDS WEST, PARALLEL WITH THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID NORTHWEST WARIER 290.W FEET, (INCWDES SERVICE DRIVES) MORE OR LEES, TO NE TRUE POINT OF BEGNNING. CONTAINING AN AREA OF 2411 ACRES, MORE OR E. PARKING SPACE SUMMARY LESS SPACES REWIRED SPACES PROVIDED 1522 QM F. USES PERMITEO - ALL - C-1 SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE W HEREBY COMFY NAT NE SURVEY OF WE BOUNDARY OF OPPLEWOOD MLUGE SHOPPING 1 GARY LEAH , . CENTER PLANNED COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT - AMENDED FINAL PUT, AMENDMENT NO. WAS REMSW BY CASE HISTORY PURPOSE FOR AMENDMENT ME ON LANE 16, 2002. AND THAT TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE, INFORMATION AND BNEF, NE ACCOMPANNNG PLAN ACCURATELY REPRESENTS SAID GURNEY. WC - ]1-14: RC-1 TO RC THIS AMENDMENT IS FOR: WE - ]5-15: C-1 TO PCD WE - n-19: IST PMENDMENT 1. NE GTY OF WHEAT RIDGE TO APPROVE NE INSTALLATION OF A POLE SIGN WL - 82-6: END AMENDMENT NOT BROWN ON NE ORIGNAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN LOCATED IN NE PATIO WL - Bq-I0: 1RD AMENDMENT AREA SOUTH OF 32W YOUNGFlELD. NE SON WILL BE 50 IN HEIGHT WIN 1]0 SWARE FEET OF AREA PER SIDE. IT ALL BE UNUOITED ON NE EAST GARY TEAK, REGISTERED CORD SUR.. WL - 86-I5: 4TH AMENOMENT FACE. COLORADO REGISTRATON NO. 26650 WL - 9f4: ON PAHENOMINT FOR AND ON BEHALF OF COLORADO LAND CONSULTANTS. INC. M - 95-J: ON AMENDMENT - WL - 02-10: ]N AMENDMENT LIMITATIONS OF ACTIONS AGAINST LAND SURVEYOR'S NOTICE ACCORDING TO COLORADO LAW YOU MUST COMMENCE MY LEGAL ACTON BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY WITHIN THREE YEARS AFTER YOU FIRST DISCOVER SUCH DEFECT. F[Q IN ND ENENT, MAY ANY ACTION BARD UPON ANY DEFECT IN MIS GURNEY BE COMMENCED MORE THAN Fro YEARS ROM ME DATE ON NE CERTIFICATION SHOWN HEREON. - E .-H`- Rea E USE OF E PERSON, PERSONS OR ENTITY EK THIS ALTA W RNEY WAS PREPARED Colorado ul ;.020°04, Ixl.,Am milt (,18}j Pp.Sem FMCAT O . SID ommul THE,,CEM T ..T M WPFCC HERRFNURTP ATUR RYNF SO ES NO T RNEYOR N MNG SAID MY UNPERSON. LORd FBI p])~2 2N9 NOTARY SEAL DAY OF PLANNING COMMISSION CERTIFICATION APPROVED THIS DAY OF PLANNING COMMISSION. 11 CHAIRMAN PUNNING AND DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR CITY CWNOL CERTRCATON APPROVED THIS DAY OF CITY COUNCIL. MAYOR SIGNATURE OF OWNER Um SEAL ATTEST: 200 2002 BY THE WHEAT RIDGE NOTARY WBUC SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME THIS WTHESS MY HAND AND OMFMI SEAL. MY COMMISSION URINES 2002, BY NE WHEAT RIDGE COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDERS CERTIFICATE HIM DOCUMENT ACCEPTED FOR LUNG IN NE OMCE OF NE COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER OF JEFFERSON COUNTY AT GOLDEN, COLORADO, ON NE DAY W A.D., 2002 , IN NE BOOK PAGE RECEPTOR JEFFERSON COUNTY GLENN AND RECORDER BY. DEPUTY DAY OF DAY OF 200 200 APPLEWOOD VILLAGE SHOPPING CENTER - PLANNED COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT - AMENDED FINAL PLAN OFFICIAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN, AMENDMENT •7, PHASE 1 " A- 166'3).1' R 4500' OF THREE PARCELS OF LAND LOCATED IN THE EAST 1/2 OF THE N.W. 1/4 T~ µ :;1 L 146.10' OF SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 3 SOUTH, RANGE 69 WEST OF THE 6TH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, r'` SO'S1.fiE 38.92' IN THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COUNTY OF JEFFERSON, STATE OF COLORADO. IN, IL,'v :k~s - yiR~ PIG OVERALL PLAN : InTLAI-F SKEET 2 OF S - a~ PARCEL 2 lr' [I - v.. r..,.. 67033 s .-ter .::u.m.'x '.;cza~^...:.ei{r..xt1x`:' ..SVt~., -..;5,~r sy'.; _ ___..ua-,.~.- 3 _R -a Ss 3 S50' a.'n Sp6.lY S'K` 6TH 96.66 dsnq>Y S .B> n8 p>99 9 ~T598.95 a99Y y I r _ L r_ YV a'I93 SDI: 0505 "AL It t ✓ r ^ `T IL/'i + i~ II h r ',aE L Elill- m e,<Y I° ;~i t y,-1 KK;AVi I l - .+m c 1 1 - 3 Iw I p~ 4 9 i1F r' ~ ~ I ~ I 111 I. ,Ma ~ji I I rl r \ Je Np ,fl fi 1 Ae_~ 50'51 BE 130.00' 4 l 1 4 M1 k 1 II 1f"L s Iy , V' 0:0 X~T~y t0 i ` rv 3PpI, C;W i I I -:~~L 1' > I I I '~I a = i~ I~' _ 111 N L ~ _ w L I 3," 1 $amQ 9..~ Irr ~jl~ 4° d a W. r, ar. H.. 1 All.: Imo. r- y,;P 3" rl _t• >R 1 rid T"Y E -1__ . ysy ~ ~ :'_-._x vl In v i-T 59.9s-i PA,~ZCEL I1l, nl ( y I M1 r I` D6111M DRAIN 1. P t< r ~ 1 I I I- r ~N F IT, I'll, I I "I' IT 14 1 \ 4 I IT V 1 yy , - 1, 9 is'_ -°)1 n A~../n @ /I:"A.: l PEI L~_'_ ...~~7 i. r„'yJ_......__......: I-y _ I._.._ i_ _ _i F Hl MILE +I. 'r' L~ J, i _ 1 : {y _ I c I'll i.T. c P Is_ •rra. l': N IER,- \ Sri .i:; ,i 1 i I l $J ,NR n 3 ~ .4 Hl LHl FINN, IS, . rr Ir~ ~ - c ll In _ -It _ PARCEL 3su i CB 1 r A-r ~1 _ - I 9 H ..~5 'i A d J~'.i / nn, x, V\ NO 51.6'W 24.32' ' Li C~'tl '•-J If.. i - 7 ai "I d ~~111 I, td)~l oG~~. ~ 4 mr_N L' S A IN a- G4, 1 - ~ ~-o IK / :,T ' ~ + ~ N rtU , • / _ _ - - NO 513'W 667.62' _ - FAR`rvT r aCC-i x f 1 s?)Tq "Ti" N00 51'46 W 274 32' rri !CF _ .r. - LE L CC ,s„n..t - ~m I. N' b. Ni-3 11 111 A~ t that 1 , A •.,,a _ _ d P• FOR YCE: tn. +a r 1. _ ~r t,e r IF Y, o+ NOTE REFER 70 SHEET 3 OF 3 FOR PHASE 1 4D' 1v WAL-MART SITE PLAN DETAILS. DECIDUOUS TR ES o2 20) PROPOSED ONLDING MEASURED IN FIELD (59000'00"W 100.00') EXISTING FENCE Patmore Ash 2 " Cal.)) Imperial Hon cast (2 1/2° Col.) PROPOSED PARKING STALLS FLOWIME EXISTING CONCRETE EVERGREEN TRESS f91 Nx~m Austrian Pine l6- HNtJ PROPOSED CURB AND GUTTER POWER POLE PARKING SPACE (.S. SHRUBS / 5 R Gal )IALS (40) BB PROPOSED TRAFFIC ARROW 4 LIGHT POLE nl P, HANDICAP PARKING Ii D TissKi, l Ll g B slGia Gal) PROPOSED CONCRETE FIRE HYDRANT PIN AND CAP INSCRIBED H. K. LINK LS. 12640 La 9FOda M ss K a (5 Ca - Land f Dayq GI ~r ~ 1 PROPOSED FENCE WATER VALVE PIN AND CAP INSCRIBED LANE ENGR LS 4 B I Consultants, Inc. `W'^~ J E)JSIING TREES TO REMAIN 90) SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE M.',L Sin. WASHER SET IN CONCRETE INSCRIBED L.S. 436 F, ( PHASE 1 UMI15 vecam. ...xxa:sx p' 3A' BJl pP' 1y7 fiaeo c .,a n.d IRRIGATED SOD (14,600 SE) WATER MANHOLE ,1 N. fl SET PIN AND CAP INSCRIBED LS. 24670 O r~~ so'b xwa 9abmEO w , 1 ii Tio- 5a 5600 APPL19W000 VILLAGE 6HUMRMG 1;mmim - PLAIIIIIICIB WI N ICKWAL UCTCLVrmc I AM&NUMU r1nAL rLAn OFFICIAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN, AMENDMENT N7, PHASE 1 OF THREE PARCELS OF LAND LOCATED IN THE EAST 1/2 OF THE N.W. 1/4 OF SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 3 SOUTH, RANGE 69 WEST OF THE 6TH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, IN THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COUNTY OF JEFFERSON, STATE OF COLORADO. ENLARGED PLAN $MET 8 OF 8 _ ~ Lr ✓i JUVd~:F1~I_i.' - o? l 3j "I ~;90 a Ft- PROPOSED POLE SIGN (4' DIA, 50' TALL) LOCATION i 38 00 _O CO ~_OrJE E(aE'r.5 F)( THIS PQ{i`IT O O n. P. ~ 943.0 o 00 cc I V) cn ~ c.F>s1 ur ,Nall U~l j Peu. D. ~j rli E uT r; - o I'.P_ 42 y METAL RAILING SO-51.8'E 130.00' 1g'MOII J r .chreeiTt 1 r, 1 Y T,)R'• ~ P4 e rI F 10 p grq, .I- p S. m ENLARGED PLAN "A° 3C-0" FAB & INSTALL M DIFACED DISPLAY AS SHOWN Sfl&7AL CONSTRUCTION WITH NEON ILLUMINATION 48' OPEN PAN CHANN&LETTERS PANT WHITE INSIDE & OUT 217 6500 WHITE PEON COPY (PUKED RED) PANT 16' DEEP CABW OLD CHICAGO BLUE SPECIAL NOTE I to] I OEM 11 1 . • 46' WHITE VINYL COPT ON BACI69DE OF CARNET NOTES 1. THIS SIGN MAY CHANGE AS THE PRIMARY TENANT IN THIS SPACE DOES. 2. UGHTNG IS RESTRICTED ON THE EASTERN FACE OF THE SIGN. PotmoreUAsn ([251 Imperial HoneylEEomsl )()2 1/2- Cal.) AustriianE Pine `6~58(9HI.) " SHRUBS (185), PERENNIALS (40) Bu Hato JaODer/ 5 Glol{) FOroarbi%"; BuslGN Gal ) Miss KrmT. Lilo (5 Ga.) Da,fIY KIT Gala - EXISTNG TREES TO REMAIN 90) PROPOSED BUILDING PROPOSED PARKING STALLS PROPOSED CURB AND GUTTER PROPOSED TRAFFIC ARROW PROPOSED CONCRETE PROPOSED FENCE PHASE I OMITS LEGEND MEASURED IN HELD (S90'00'00'W 100.00') ® ELOWJNE POWER POLE f.. LIGHT POLE P. FIRE HYDRANT N. WATER VALVE n""RN. SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE "V H. S.a. EXISTING FENCE - EXISTNG CONCRETE PARKING SPACE P.S. HANDICAP PARKING PIN AND CAP INSCRIBED H. K. UNN L.S. 12890 Po PIN AND CAP INSCRIBED LANE ENGR. L.S. 438 O WASHER SET IN CONCRETE INSCRIBED L.S. 430 a Colorado Land Consultants, Inc. P.o 4aCartMN PwE D 15' JO' 0.5 60 sun 7500 WEST 29TH AVENUE P.O. BOX 638 WHEAT RIDGE. CO 8003-0838 City Admin. Fax » 234-592~ CASE NO. W2--OZ-01 The City of .303)23~-5900 heat Police Debt. Fax 23529»9 'Ridge POSTING CERTIFICATION PLANNING COMMISSION - CITY COUNCIL - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT (Circle One) HEARING DATE: fI/tGuS>` 6 ZOO 2- I, n a m e residing at a d d r e s s as the applicant for Case No. k/-2-0Z-D( hereby certify r that I have posted the Notice of Public Hearing at ,SG5U VOC+~G~/moo (Sl!or Amt, Wia (1 o c a t i o n) on this 1 day of ~IULy 1 Zp02-, and do hereby certify that said sign has been posted and remained in place for fifteen (15) days prior to and including the scheduled day of public hearing of this case. The sign was posted in the position shown on the map below. Signature: / NOTE: This form must be submitted at the pub is h ing on this case and will be placed in the applicant's cas file at the Department of Planning and Development. M A P <pc>postingcert rev. 05-19-94 SW 20 - - - - - - - - - UNINCORPORATED JEFFER50N COUNTY m ^ F` 'O WESTB INESS CENTER a N LU Z A g~ 8 t p OFFICIAL ZONING MAP WHEAT RIDGE COLORADO DEPARTMENTOF PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT OW29 PARCEULOT BOUNDARY (DESIGNATES OWNERSHIP) WATER FEATURE * DENOTES MULTIPLE ADDRESSES 100-YEAR FLOOD PLAIN (APPROXIMATE LOCATION) NW 29 0 100 200 i00 500 Pea MAP ADOPTED: June 15, 1994 7500 West 29th Avenue The City of Ridge FAX 303/235-2857 July 18, 2002 Dear Property Owner: This is to inform you that Case No. WZ-02-10 which is a request for approval of an amendment to the Applewood Village Shopping Center Planned Commercial Development final development plan to allow a 50-foot high freestanding sign with 170 square feet of area south of the structure at 3250 Youngfield Street (Old Chicago Restaurant) will be heard by the Wheat Ridge Planning Commission in the Council Chambers of the Municipal Complex at 7500 West 29th Avenue. The meeting will be held on August 1, 2002 at 7:00 p.m. As an area resident or interested party, you have the right to attend this Public Hearing and/or submit written comments. If you have any questions or desire to review any plans, please contact the Planning Division at 235-2846. Thank you. Planning Division. Cd acuments and SettmgsUathyAMyDcuments thyTC"TSWLA GCOMWcnotim@002\wzO210"d v A! v 2 a ~ °v 'v u y s C ° 10 E Z ? ' NI J K C 7 9 9 R' >I R' a ° J O N ~ N N N ' . E a 0 0 W 1 U t ° N aoc E ° at o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O o 0 o a ~ 0 0 0 0 ~Nj ~Nj N u 0 O • 0 R 1 M M M M M M L M M W C j VI W N W W Q m ' C A ~ N 1 c « >o w Q V N N «O O z0 m~°D N =0 ~-0 -o U VSO U ~t0 N DU QUO U ~ N V~~ SNU M ~t 00 ~mU mM OtU LL: LLm M N a N y 'O dZi m m ~ m KO V F m D Ol 23: m j~D CZia N d W Q °~K fi c oa C m , of r N as -a O- N r.. N3M l0 _ m.. ~O N 00 m K ay;, N N ^~M N m`M N N N t N N 0 ~N N _ U l0 N V J 0 W' L J L L L L ° t ~ c ~ a a" ~ 3 3 3 3 3 3 N~ d aNi ` o. N ~w O ~U owLLw N E R M r a r m r m r r r m r rn r o m m m m r m r m r m r m r m r m r m r m r co .2 ° W O Q a a e v a a a v v e v m e v m v rn m c rn co d m rn rn rn 0 E °m °m °m °m rn rn m rn M ° rn M W 0 J M ° M ° M ° M ° M M M I- > z m o m m Q Q W ZO n n n n n n n n n N 0 Q z LL Z ~ I ~ V 1~ ~ a ~ D m C d ~ m N V = ' m d C d U a a ~ o m y ` a a: ~ go o N 1~ w ~ ~ : . N O E a m a m U 0 ~ m m E _w c m r0 . u o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 " m a ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . ` ~ a ~ - w ~n in in O cn O m 0 ~ N ~ m > Q r y « C O m c N N Qj !3 y d 0 W 0 m t Qm p NCO « m 9fn « m Ccn « m `0 Q m > Q m m m N J >O m y Y «m N N O W m O mL ❑ E o❑ U m.c0 p co m c~ ?`c 0'C0 ` _ (D M U m N N 0 > m V m v O "d a D7 W N c7 6 N M 6 m O. 'O ° U 0) J X m1 ~ 3v m pia IL , .m 0 N 0 d m ami N Q o c >mm 'o v J M K E m K o K = m K m m o i2 'C W> m 0 c; w _ O ~"m- N 3 0 OY y m Ot°m Z W t+J l0 0Cl i0 N[7 ~N CO W Y W m ~NY V N ~ c ~ ` ~ m J 3 Q 5 s F s r r ~ ~ ~ 0 0 m J c ~ a a m 3 3 3 3 ~ d ~ ~ n N0 ci~ C i E K W m ❑ ❑ ❑ ® O ❑ Z m m m m m m ~ m r m n a o n ro n m r n r r r M Y N uNi tO w O `o m ° m m rn m a a ~ 00 ~ rn m m rn m m rn rn O m o M 0 M 0 0, 0 M 0 O `0 M 0 M 0 M 0 M uJ V ° m ° ~ m ~ H~ 2 m m < m m a m Q Q W ZO n r n n n n `n n cy) N 0 Q Z a z IoW Z ~ Q a c I U I, ~ 9 d `I ~rU W C . a C .L d N u d y a ~ v N U ~ d ~ z ? ai ~ c 7 9 d y I d C' > m a Z5 ~ o N 1~ W C ~ N d E ° a y r U C O A apc E .O.0 u o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 K n m N°oNI ~oN cN NoN NoN NoN NoONV ~0NI ~0I m 2 0 U S 5 5 5 S 5 5 5 $ U _ 0 O N ~ C d M M d < C M T U~ N M O O M d O M 'O O G O O t6 O O N O O O O j O J ik p N `a O > C O c N O V~ O d LOm <n m yU U m mum m 2 _N ° m (00 °cm Y m d.-~m cV ~ m m L ~ ~rn0 s ~K0 O - drnU om 00 - "a ~°n0 .,o mNU 0 in rnU dv0 ErnU in .p m N ~ rn a m° ti m Y ai rn 2 d N OU o a Y m U v K M d rn Q' ti 2irn 0 0 m. cprn a 9 Q ot t.~ 5 O a N N a y y+ a i A! p a ' . _ a d Q O° ~ a ' O a p m ' r d N N - m of dm... O d' d p 0: ' C m d d,.. d> mo c a c N; a a C as O A' S m m N~ A _ U N ' 3N d p d M N Y d d a U am d T a D O N N m d U N L LM d Q L d' m 0 C ~ L D: O a C y N ° H Q Q - d N w o U U 2 LL W E 0 a ❑ ❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ Z m N m M rn O m m m m m r m m rn m m d - m r m r m r m r m r m r m r m r m r M Y uNi N uNi N N O Q ° a a v v v v O `o v m m a m m m m m m m ~ OD d rn m m m m rn rn m rn 0 E m °m rn rn °m rn °m M °m M °m M W ~ M M M M M M I- Q Q W `r r n `r n n 2 Fp p N 0 Z o Z O W V ti~ a ~I d Q d 0 E W on C 0 U E a z N y ❑d N a N d 7 U Ki v U P+ 0 v 7 za R U W F- O b C d T L d N_ a v U n p, 0 E z F C P~l d N .O d N C ~ .U d O ~ L ~ N 9 Q ~ ~ C r 7 ' ' y v $ u a ~ z N ` m K c 7 D I a ~ ~ K >I R' N j O w N N ~ O N~ ~Eo 0 a U d 0 L O N as c N w«0 at o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ra- X ~ n y m ~oNI 0 ~0NV 0 0 ~0NI ~0I 0 0 Q m ~ ~ V 5 2i 5 ~ 2i 5 $ ~ 2i v E: O •R N d M Q J J L M d C U C C C a M ~ O O O Z_ N yy O N m M m J M N N N W V W W O C A C aaOD <N W N N W ~ 1 n 0 SON L N O W O ~ V .0 jNfD J.%m _ ILMr N d y N N a O r r - Q r W N d W (/I : N N O w N W J H W W J U L N« 6W N d U N U O X C 10 X O u. d fn O U 10 r N W _ O J - N O N E O N a D N M ' a § o m m co U o A L U n m rn ° L YO M _ X o o co . N m y _ W y te m Q : O tea. c 00 H ~O N W c > a w oK o m ~ m c0 a . o w r N ~ N d Or Va $ dN N OC . d.- 0 N a CL R y M O O 6'O N O N Z N N N d W E N j U ED LL C N N a ~L = J K~O .aML O O U) m N t h D d N O m C N N y i N Q N O Q _ O 'C 3 O D a~ W O m o. WE 0 0~LLW y E m O ° ° N ° M ° V rn ~O ° W rn n rn W m v ~ rn r rn n rn n m r n m r r r n N N N N N N N W M C Q v u i a v u i v u i v u i a v i v u i v u i a O c!) a ~ m co i a m rn rn m rn rn rn O E m °m rn rn °m rn °m °m M °m M W ~ M o M ° M ° M ° M o M ° M ° m ° V H S. Z c o < o m c O c o m m W W Q W ZO n n n r` `r n n p 1 N 0 Q Z a } O W z ~2 5 V I~ a ~I a m N 'I J C m d ~ U N C ~ p N U d a ° c Z ' K c 7 a I a I K >I K ~ N O O) C ~ . N ° ~ a E o a y u L U m E 1 .0 # 0 0 Ny~a % u N L N N N O N O Q m ° £ U 2 ~ NV 5 i u O N ti o J * * 1 H A ~ W U a J N ro U) d d H m# E ° c q1 d p - 0 3 u 0.0 3 m~ U r m w y a a c~ !n a= n a ¢m> _ a a. ~ v ~y m C7 m V p~ w U1 L ~ a m ~ C N K U N m Q < N Q ~ p c c .r2 N 0 d a' U U w d E m ❑ ❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ z o ° m ~ m n m r Cl) W O f Q N v a O `0 00 `a rn rn 0 ~ a E W > U ~ Z o co 0 ~0 Q Q W Z n `n O w = 0 Fo 0~~ C7 z o. W Z } o Una a ~I 2- W -o,), -/0 . MetroScan Jefferson (c: owner :Differding Paul C/Rebecca A - Parcel :030671 Site :3773 Wright St Wheat Ridge 80033 Xfered :09/06/2001 Mail :3773 Wright St Wheat Ridge Co 80033. Price :$217,000 Full Use :1112 Res,Improved Land Phone Bedrm: Bath:1.75 TotRm: YB:1962 Pool: BldgSF :1,744Ac* * : MetroScan / Jefferson (CO) Owner :Huffman Elaine M Parcel :030685 Site :3623 Wright St Wheat Ridge 80033 Xfered :01/23/1998 Mail :9080 W 35Th Ave Wheat Ridge Cc 80033 Price :$185,000 Use :1112 Res,Improved Land Phone :303-234-1058 Bedrm: Bath:3.00 TotRm: YB:1965 Pool: B1dgSF :2,464 Ac: ; MetroScan / Jefferson (CO) • Owner :Maupin Roger B Parcel :030686 Site :3543 Wright St Wheat Ridge 80033 Xfered :10/02/1998 Mail :PO Box 621061 Littleton Co 80162 Price :$240,000 Use :1112 Res,Improved Land Phone :303-470-0230 Bedrm: Bath:2.00 TotRm: YB:1965 Pool: B1dgSF :2,566 Ac: * • MetroScan / Jefferson (CO) Owner :Buntin C R Parcel :030697 Site :3523 Wright St Wheat Ridge 80033 Xfered :04/21/1981 Mail :12531 W 35Th Ave Wheat Ridge Co 80033 Price Use :1112 Res,Improved Land Phone :303-421-4660 Bedrm: Bath:1.00 TotRm: YB:1965 Pool: B1dgSF 2,320 * • MetroScan / Jefferson (CO) _ Owner Owner :Lewis Michael F Parcel :030738 Site :3812 Wright Ct Wheat Ridge 80033 Xfered :03/28/1985 Mail :3812 Wright Ct Wheat Ridge Co 80033 Price :$91,000 Use :1112 Res,Improved Land Phone :303-989-4763 Bedrm: Bath:1.75 TotRm: YB:1961 Pool: B1dgSF Ac* 1,626 * • MetroScan / Jefferson (CO) _ Owner :Mcfadden Bruce W O Parcel :030800 Site :3813 Wright St Wheat Ridge 80033 Xfered :02/07/1989 Mail :3813 Wright St Wheat Ridge Cc 80033 Price :$115,000 Use :1112 Res,Imprcved Land Phone :303-431-2317 Bedrm: 4 Bath:2.50 TotRm: YB:1961 Pool: B1dgSF :1,717 Ac: MetroScan / Jefferson (CO) • Owner :Croy John W Parcel :030815 Site :12674 W 38Th Dr Wheat Ridge 80033 Xfered :05/23/1977 Mail :12674 W 38Th Dr Wheat Ridge Co 80033 Price :$13,500 Use :1112 Res,Imprcved Land Phone :303-423-1651 Bedrm: Bath:1.75 TotRm: YB:1977 Pool: B1dgSF :1,362 Ac: MetroScan / Jefferson (CO) • Owner :Colip John D/Waltraud M Parcel :030852 Site :12475 W 38Th Ave Wheat Ridge 80033 Xfered :07/22/1999 Mail :12475 W 38Th Ave Wheat Ridge Cc 80033 Price :$170,000 Full Use :1112 Res,Improved Land Phone :303-456-2983 Bedrm: 4 Bath:2.25 TotRm: YB:1964 Pool: B1dgSF :1,845 Ac: * • MetroScan / Jefferson (CO) • Owner :Austin Vincent E Parcel :032152 Site :12550 W 32Nd Ave Wheat Ridge 80033 Xfered :06/06/1989 Mail :12550 W 32Nd Ave Wheat Ridge Co 80033 Price :$65,000 Use :1112 Res,Improved Land Phone Bedrm: 3 Bath:2.25 TotRm: YB:1979 Pool: B1dgSF :1,254 Ac: MetroScan / Jefferson (CO) ; Owner :Bushell Victoria J Parcel :032205 Site :12515 W 32Nd Ave Wheat Ridge 80033 Xfered :12/11/1987 Mail :10527 W 31St Ave Lakewood Co 80215 Price Use :2112 Com,Improved Land Phone :303-239-1484 Bedrm: Bath: TotRm:l YB:1970 Pool: BidgSF :1,767 Ac:.20 * • MetroScan / Jefferson (CO) • Owner :Applewood Village Estates Inc Parcel :032206 Site :3385 Wright St Wheat Ridge 80033 Xfered :04/07/1992 Mail :6043 Pierson St Arvada Co 80004 Price :$155,000 Use :1112 Res,Improved Land Phone Bedrm: 3 Bath:1.75 TotRm: YB:1973 Pool: B1dgSF :2,089 Ac: ~l Y J" Information compiled from various sources. Real Estate Solutions makes no representations MetroScan / Jefferson .(C. owner :Applewood Village Estates Inc Parcel :032208 Site :3395 Wright St Wheat Ridge 80033 Xfered :04/07/1992 Mail :6043 Pierson S Arvada Co 80004 Price :$155,000 Use :1112 Res, I i3pr oved Land Phone Bedrm:3 Bat .1.75 TotRm: YB:1961 Pool: B1dgSF:1,446 Ac* MetroScan / Jefferson (CO) - owner :Vandelinder Brett L/Leticia Parcel :032264 Site :3341 Wright St Wheat Ridge 80033 Xfered :08/02/2000 Mail :3341 Wright St Wheat Ridge Cc 80033 Price :$194,900 Full Use :1112 Res,Improved Land Phone Bedrm:3 Bath:1.75 TotRm: YB:1961 Pool: B1dgSF:1,323 Ac: MetroScan / Jefferson (CO) • Owner :Applewood Village Estates Inc Parcel :032326 Site :3405 Wright St eat Ridge 80033 Xfered :04/07/1992 Mail :6043 Pierso St Arvada Co 80004 IA(!~1!''L Price :$155,000 Use :1112 Res mproved Land Phone : Bedrm: Bate 1.75 TotRm: YB:1961 Pool: B1dgSF:1,320 Ac: • MetroScan / Jefferson (CO) • Owner :Tomlinson Tommy L Parcel :032334 Site :3185 Xenon St Wheat Ridge 80215 Xfered :09/01/1977 Mail :3185 Xenon St Wheat Ridge Cc 80215 Price :$52,900 Use :1112 Res,Improved Land Phone :303-234-1560 Bedrm:3 Bath:1.75 TotRm: YB:1958 Pool: B1dgSF:1,215 Ac: MetroScan / Jefferson (CO) • Owner :Eberhard Scott P Parcel :032416 Site :3475 Wright St Wheat Ridge 80033 Xfered :08/19/1998 Mail :3475 Wright St Wheat Ridge Co 80033 Price :$148,000 Use :1112 Res,Improved Land Phone :303-202-1949 Bedrm:4 Bath:2.25 TotRm: YB:1961 Pool: B1dgSF:1,319 Ac: * MetroScan / Jefferson (CO) • Owner :Davis William J Parcel :032463 Site :12590 W 32Nd Ave Wheat Ridge 80033 Xfered :10/27/2000 Mail :12590 W 32Nd Ave Wheat Ridge Co 80033 Price Use :1112 Res,Improved Land Phone :303-421-7041 Bedrm:4 Bath:2.25 TotRm: YB:1962 Pool: B1dgSF:1,604 Ac: * • MetroScan / Jefferson (CO) owner :Applewood Village Es tes Inc Parcel :032485 Site :3375 Wright St Wh Ridge 80033 Xfered :04/07/1992 Mail :6043 Pierson S rvada Co 80004 I Price :$155,000 Use :1112 Res, Imp ved Land Phone Bedrm:4 Bath: .25 TotRm: YB:19 4 Pool: B1dgSF:1,289 Ac: - MetroScan / Jefferson (CO) Owner :Hardesty Willard B Parcel :032499 Site :12600 W 32Nd Ave Wheat Ridge 80033 Xfered :05/22/1998 Mail :12600 W 32Nd Ave Wheat Ridge Cc 80033 Price Use :2112 Com,Improved Land Phone Bedrm: Bath: TotRm:l YB:1963 Pool: B1dgSF:1,783 Ac:.26 * : MetroScan / Jefferson (CO) • Owner :Kortz Family Lllp Et Al Parcel :049889 Site :12755 W 32Nd Ave Wheat Ridge 80033 Xfered :12/21/2000 Mail :7600 E Eastman Ave #410 Denver Co 80231 Price Use :2112 Com,Improved Land Phone :303-337-8148 Bedrm: Bath: TotRm:l YB:1972 Pool: B1dgSF:5,124 Ac:.51 • MetroScan / Jefferson (CO) ; Owner :Erickson Gene 0 Parcel :065327 Site :3653 Wright St Wheat Ridge 80033 Xfered :01/30/1997 Mail :2143 S Parfet Dr Lakewood Co 80227 Price :$172,000 Use :1112 Res,Improved Land Phone :303-985-0095 Bedrm: Bath:3.00 TotRm: YB:1966 Pool: B1dgSF:2,633 Ac:.33 * • MetroScan / Jefferson (CO) • Owner :Sharp Lowell R/Becki L Parcel :066676 Site :12680 W 38Th Dr Wheat Ridge 80033 Xfered :08/01/1994 Mail :12680 W 38Th Or Wheat Ridge Co 80033 Price :$135,000 Use :1112 Res,Improved Land Phone :303-456-6852 Bedrm:4 Bath:2.50 TotRm: YB:1969 Pool: B1dgSF:2,402 Ac: Information compiled from various sources. Real Estate Solutions makes no representations MetroScan / Jefferson (C. Owner :Lewis Kenneth E Parcel :066677 Site :3802 Wright Ct Wheat Ridge 80033 Xfered :02/13/2002 Mail :3802 Wright Ct Wheat Ridge Co 80033 Price :$227,500 Full Use :1112 Res,Improved Land Phone Bedrm:5 Bath:2.50 TotRm: YB:1971 Pool: B1dgSF:1,605 Ac: • MetroScan / Jefferson (CO) • Owner :Culna Richard S/Patricia R Parcel :066678 Site :3803 Wright St Wheat Ridge 80033 Xfered :06/23/1995 Mail :PO Box 653 Wheat Ridge Co 80034 Price :$129,900 Use :1112 Res,Improved Land Phone Bedrm: Bath:1.75 TotRm: YB:1967 Pool: B1dgSF:1,427 Ac: * • MetroScan / Jefferson (CO) ' Owner :Applewood Village Estates Inc Parcel :068212 Site :12498 W 35Th Av heat Ridge 80033 Xfered :04/07/1992 Mail :6043 Pierson Arvada Co 80004 Price :$155,000 Use :1112 Res, proved Land Phone :1Bedrm: B .75 TotRm: YB:1968 Pool: B1dgSF:2,106 Ac: • MetroScan / Jefferson (CO) Owner Owner :Applewood Village Estates Inc Parcel :068213 Site :3435 Wright St eat Ridge 80033 Xfered :04/07/1992 Mail :6043 Pierson t Arvada Co 80004 /'/A``1''J,Price :$155,000 Use :1112 Res, proved Land 6 Phone Bedrm: Be 1.00 TotRm: YB:196 Pool: B1dgSF:1,064 Ac: * • MetroScan / Jefferson (CO) ' Owner :Applewood Village states Inc Parcel :068214 Site :3365 Wright St eat Ridge 80033 Xfered :04/07/1992 Mail :6093 Pierso t Arvada Co 80009 Price :$155,000 Use :1112 Res mproved Land Phone Bedrm: Ba h:1.75 TotRm: YB:19 Pool: B1dgSF:2,052 Ac: * • MetroScan / Jefferson (CO) • Owner :Applewood Village Estates Inc Parcel :068215 Site :3355 Wright St eat Ridge 80033 Xfered :04/07/1992 Mail :6043 Pierso t Arvada Co 80004 Price :$155,000 Use :1112 Res, proved Land Phone Bedrm: Ba 1.75 TotRm: YB:1968 Pool: B1dgSF:1,960 Ac: • MetroScan / Jefferson (CO) Owner :Duby Robert Alan/Karen L Parcel :068216 Site :3349 Wright St Wheat Ridge 80033 Xfered :11/10/1993 Mail :3349 Wright St Wheat Ridge Cc 80033 Price Use :1112 Res,Improved Land Phone Bedrm:4 Bath:1.75 TotRm: YB:1968 Pool: B1dgSF:2,052 Ac: * : MetroScan / Jefferson (CO) Owner :Gmb Applewood Llc Parcel :068217 Site :3200 Wright Ct Lakewood 80033 Xfered :02/29/1996 Mail :1201 Galapago St #101 Denver Cc 80204 Price Use :2177 Vacant,Commercial,Limited Size Phone Bedrm: Bath: TotRm: YB: Pool: B1dgSF,: Ac:.57 * • MetroScan / Jefferson (CO) ' Owner :Kopiloff Peter Parcel :069457 Site :3723 Wright St Wheat Ridge 80033 Xfered :11/30/1995 Mail :20 S Garrison St Lakewood Cc 80226 Price :$182,000 Use :1112 Res,Improved Land Phone :303-233-7194 Bedrm:6 Bath:3.00 TotRm: YB:1967 Pool: B1dgSF:2,628 Ac: MetroScan / Jefferson (CO) • Owner :Becker Conrad R Parcel :070784 Site :3150 Youngfield St Wheat Ridge 80215 Xfered :04/19/1999 Mail :12500 W 32Nd Ave Wheat Ridge Co 80033 Price Use :2112 Com,Improved Land Phone Bedrm: Bath: TotRm:l YB:1971 Pool: B1dgSF:4,320 Ac:.48 • MetroScan / Jefferson (CO) • Owner :Santangelo Ralph P/J A Parcel :071533 Site :3801 Wright Ct Wheat Ridge 80033 Xfered :09/03/1993 Mail :3801.Wright Ct Wheat Ridge Cc 80033 Price Use :1112 Res,Improved Land Phone :303-467-1320 Bed= Bath:1.75 TotRm: YB:1968 Pool: B1dgSF:1,593 Ac: Information compiled from various sources. Real Estate Solutions makes no representations MetroScan / Jefferson (G. - owner :Applewood Village Estates Inc Parcel :071778 Site :3335 Wright St Wheat Ridge 80033 Xfered :04/07/1992 Mail :6043 Pier n St Arvada Co 80004 Price :$155,000 Use :1112 R Improved Land Phone Bedrm: 00 TotRm: YB:1968 Pool: ath:l B1dgSF 1,131 Ac* * _ _ MetroScan / Jefferson (CO) _ Owner :Amb Retail Income Fund Inc Parcel :073632 Site :3240 Youngfield St Wheat Ridge 80033 Xfered :02/29/1996 Mail :3240 Youngfield St Wheat Ridge Co 80033 Price :$31,388,000 Use :2112 Com,Improved Land Phone Bedrm: Bath: TotRm:2 YB:1990 Pool: BldgSF :21,491 Ac: 2.42 * MetroScan / Jefferson (CO) • Owner :Jackson Robert D Jr - Parcel :084756 Site :12505 W 32Nd Ave Wheat Ridge 80033 Xfered :11/05/1986 Mail :12505 W 32Nd Ave Wheat Ridge Co 80033 Price :$400,000 Use :2112 Com,Improved Land Phone :303-238-8438 Bedrm: Bath: TotRm:l YB:1970 Pool: B1dgSF :1,500 Ac: .22 : MetroScan / Jefferson (CO) ' Owner :Conoco Inc Parcel :109898 Site :3210 Youngfield St Wheat Ridge 80033 Xfered :06/02/1989 Mail :PO Box 4784 Houston Tx 77210 Price Use :2112 Com,Improved Land Phone Bedrm: Bath: TotRm:l YB:1990 Pool: B1dgSF :1,876 Ac: .43 • MetroScan / Jefferson (CO) • Owner :Wells Fargo Bank West Na Parcel :109900 Site :3298 Youngfield St Wheat Ridge 80033 Xfered :09/06/2000 Mail :PO Box 2798 Littleton Co 80161 Price Use :2112 Com,Improved Land Phone Bedrm: Bath: TotRm:l YB:1986 Pool: B1dgSF :1,167 Ac: .66 * ; MetroScan / Jefferson (CO) • Owner :Drake Real Estate Services Llc Parcel :109901 Site :12700 W 32Nd Ave Wheat Ridge 80033 Xfered :12/04/2001 Mail :1200 17Th St #570 Denver Co 80202 Price :$320,000 Full Use :2112 Com,Improved Land Phone Bedrm: Bath: TotRm:l Y3:1966 Pool: B1dgSF :1,920 Ac: .51 MetroScan / Jefferson (CO) Owner :Wells Fargo Bank W Na Parcel. :109904 Site :12525 W 32Nd Av heat Ridge 80033 Xfered :09/06/2000 Mail :PO Box 2798 t1eton Cc 80161 Price Use :2111 Vacan ,Comm ercial Phone Bedrm: ol: Ba TotRm: YB: v BldgSF Ac* : .40 er MetroScan /Je s on (CO) Owner :Ridgeview Baptist Church Parcel :188065 Site :3810Youngfield St Wheat Ridge 80033 Xfered :05/25/1965 Mail :3810 Youngfield St Wheat Ridge Cc 80033 Price Use :9159 Exempt,Church,Land Phone Bedrm: Bath: TotRm: YB: Pool: BldgSF : Ac: 2.22 * • MetroScan / Jefferson (CO) Owner :Columbia Wheatridge Limited Partnership Parcel :189701 Site :3500 Youngfield St Wheat Ridge 80033 Xfered :01/14/1993 Mail :1603 16Th St Oak Brook Il 60523 Price Use :2112 Com,Improved Land Phone Bedrm: Bath: TOtRm:1 YB:1993 Pool: B1dgSF :6,500 Ac: .68 * • MetroScan / Jefferson (CO) Owner :Miller Susan Cc Trustee Parcel :194261 Site :3190 Youngfield St Wheat Ridge 80215 Xfered :03/20/1991 Mail :PO Box 06529 Chicago Il 60606 Price Use :2112 Com,Improved Land Phone Bedrm: Bath: TotRm:l YB:1968 Pool: B1dgSF :2,298 Ac: .91 MetroScan / Jefferson (CO) : Owner :Bpp Retail Llc Parcel :202590 Site :12601 W 32Nd Ave Wheat Ridge 80033 Xfered :08/05/1999 Mail :100 Bush St San Francisco Ca 94104 Price :$35,677,000 Use :2112 Com,Improved Land Phone Bedrm: Bath: TotRm:l YB:1975 Pool: B1dgSF :15,005 Ac: .91 Information compiled from various sources. Real Estate Solutions makes no representations - AetroScan / Jefferson Owner :Amb Retail Income rund Inc Site :3600 Youngfield St Wheat Ridge 80033 Mail :1301 SE 10Th St Bentonville Ar 72716 Use :2112 Com,Improved Land Bedrm: Bath: TotRm:l YB:1970 Pool: MetroScan / Jefferson Owner :Amb Retail Income Fund Inc Site :3400 Youngfield St Wheat Ridge 80033 Mail :Pier 1 #1 San Francisco Ca 94111 Use :2112 Com,Improved Land Bedrm: Bath: TotRm:8 YB:1966 Pool: : MetroScan / Jefferson Owner :Gmb Applewood Llc Site :3294 Youngfield St Wheat Ridge 80033 Mail :1201.Galapago St #101 Denver Co 80204 Use :2112 Com,Improved Land Bedrm: Bath: TotRm:l Y3:1996 Pool: (CO) Parcel :422294 Xfered :02/29/1996 Price :$31,388,000 Phone B1dgSF:142,974 Ac:10.07 CO Parcel :422295 Xfered :02/29/1996 Price :$31,388,000 Phone B1dgSF:196,840 Ac:17.80 (CO) : Parcel :422296 Xfered :02/29/1996 Price Phone B1dgSF:10,800 Ac:1.17 Information compiled from various sources. Real Estate Solutions makes no representations 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 1, 2002, at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers of the Municipal Building 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: Case No. WZ-02-10: An application submitted by Wadsworth Old Chicago for approval of an amendment to the Applewood Village Shopping Center Planned Commercial Development final development plan to allow a 50' high freestanding sign with 170 square feet of area south of the structure at 3250 Youngfield Street (Old Chicago Restaurant). Said property is legally described as follows: PARCEL 1: A PORTION OF THE EAST ONE-HALF OF THE NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 3 SOUTH, RANGE 69 WEST OF THE 6TH P.M., DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT 654.32 FEET NORTH OF THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 29, AND 60.00 FEET EAST OF THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST ONE-HALF OF THE NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 29; THENCE N 00°51.8' W PARALLEL TO THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST ONE-HALF OF THE NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 29, A DISTANCE OF 667.82 FEET TO THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHEAST ONE-QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 29; THENCE N 89°28.F E ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHEAST ONE-QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 29, A DISTANCE OF 150.00 FEET; THENCE N 00°51.8' W PARALLEL TO THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST ONE-HALF OF THE NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 29, A DISTANCE OF 200.00 FEET; THENCE S 89°28.P W PARALLEL TO THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHEAST ONE-QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 29, A DISTANCE OF 150.00 FEET; THENCE N 00°51.8' W PARALLEL TO THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST ONE-HALF OF THE NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 29, A DISTANCE OF 135.19 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVATURE; THENCE ON A CURVE TO THE RIGHT WHOSE RADIUS IS 182.00 FEET AND WHOSE CHORD BEARS N 37-51.1'E, A DISTANCE OF 227.66 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENCY, THENCE N 76-34.0'E ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF WEST 38TH AVENUE, A DISTANCE OF 701.69 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF RIDGEVIEW ACRES THIRD FILING, A PLATTED SUBDIVISION IN THE OFFICIAL RECORDS OF JEFFERSON COUNTY, COLORADO; THENCE S 00°43.5' E ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID RIDGEVIEW ACRES THIRD FILING, A DISTANCE OF 670.33 FEET TO THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHEAST ONE-QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 29, THENCE S 89°28.P W ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHEAST ONE-QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 29, A DISTANCE OF 0.67 FEET TO A POINT WHICH IS 885.00 FEET EAST OF THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST ONE-HALF OF THE NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 29; THENCE S 00°51.8' E PARALLEL TO THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST ONE-HALF OF THE NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 29, A DISTANCE OF 1162.99 FEET TO A POINT 160.00 FEET NORTH OF THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 29; THENCE S 89°31.7' W PARALLEL TO THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 29, A DISTANCE OF 192.34 FEET; THENCE S 00°51.8' E PARALLEL TO THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST ONE-HALF OF THE NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 29, A DISTANCE OF 130.00 FEET; THENCE S 89°31.7' W PARALLEL TO THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHWEST ONE- QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 29, A DISTANCE OF 342.66 FEET TO A POINT 350.00 FEET EAST OF THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST ONE-HALF OF THE NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 29; THENCE N 00°51.8' W PARALLEL TO THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST ONE-HALF OF THE NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 29, A DISTANCE OF 600.00 FEET, THENCE S 89°31.7 W PARALLEL TO THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 29, A DISTANCE OF 150.00 FEET; THENCE N 00°51.8' W PARALLEL TO THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST ONE-HALF OF THE NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 29, A DISTANCE OF 24.32 FEET; THENCE S 89°31.7' W PARALLEL TO THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER OF SECTION 29, A DISTANCE OF 140.00 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING, CONTAINING AN AREA 29.969 ACRES MORE OR LESS. COUNTY OF JEFFERSON, STATE OF COLORADO PARCEL 2: LOTS 19 AND 20, BLOCK 1, APPLEWOOD VILLAGE. COUNTY OF JEFFERSON, STATE OF COLORADO CONTAINING AN AREA OF 0.573 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. PARCEL 3: THAT PART OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 3 SOUTH, RANGE 69 WEST OF THE 6TH PRINCIPAL MERDIAN, IN THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COUNTY OF JEFFERSON, STATE OF COLORADO, DESCRIBED AS: COMMENCING AT THE POINT OF INTERSECTION OF THE EAST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF YOUNGFIELD STREET AND THE SOUTH LINE OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 29, THENCE THE WEST QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 29 BEARS SOUTH 89 DEGREES 31 MINUTES 12 SECONDS WEST 1382.42 FEET AND THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID NORTHWEST QUARTER BEARS SOUTH 89 DEGREES 31 MINUTES 12 SECONDS WEST 60.00 FEET; RUNNING THENCE NORTH 00 DEGREES 51 MINUTES 48 SECONDS WEST, PARALLEL WITH THE WEST LINE OF SAID SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER ALONG SAID EAST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF YOUNGFIELD STREET, 180.00 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID EAST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE, NORTH 00 DEGREES 51 MINUTES 48 SECONDS WEST 274.32 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID EAST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE, NORTH 89 DEGREES 31 MINUTES 12 SECONDS EAST, PARALLEL WITH THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID NORTHWEST QUARTER 140.00 FEET, THENCE NORTH 00 DEGREES 51 MINUTES 48 SECONDS WEST, PARALLEL WITH SAID EAST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE 175.68 FEET; THENCE NORTH 89 DEGREES 31 MINUTES 12 SECONDS EAST 150.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 00 DEGREES 51 MINUTES 48 SECONDS EAST, PARALLEL WITH SAID EAST OF RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE 450.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 89 DEGREES 31 MINUTES 12 SECONDS WEST, PARALLEL WITH THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID NORTHWEST QUARTER 290.00 FEET, MORE OR LESS, TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING, CONTAINING AN AREA OF 2.431 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. Kathy Field, Administrative Assistant ATTEST: Wanda Sang, City Clerk To be Published: July 18, 2002 Wheat Ridge Transcript C:Mocuments and Settings\kathyMy Documents\Kathy\PCRPTS\PLANGCOM\PUBHRG\2002\020801.wpd 7500 West 29th Avenue The City of Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80033 Wheat Ridge Telephone 303/235-2846 FAX 303/235-2857 July 11, 2002 Terry L. Jensen Western Sign Company, Inc. 2010 Hills Court Colorado Springs, Colorado 80906 Dear Terry: Please consider this letter a supplement to the comments for the proposed amendment to the Applewood Shopping Center final development plan. dated July 10, 2002, Since the last amendment, ownership within the shopping center has changed. Therefore, on page 1 of the development plan, please modify the owners' certification to add the three owners of record with their addresses. Pursuant to Section 26-308 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws, all owners of record within a planned development must acknowledge the proposed amendment and must sign the development plan prior to recording. All three of the signatures must be notarized. Feel free to call me if you have any questions at 303-235-2848. Sincerely, Meredith Reckert, AICP Senior Planner c: WZ-02-10 Anne Bork Marilynn Force 7500 West 29th Avenue The City of Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80033 Wheat Ridge Telephone 303/235-2846 FAX 303/235-2857 July 9, 2002 Terry L. Jensen Western Sign Company, Inc. 2010 Hills Court Colorado Springs, Colorado 80906 Dear Terry: This letter is in regard to your application for approval of an amendment to the Applewood Shopping Center final development plan to allow an additional freestanding sign on the patio of 3250 Youngfield (Old Chicago Restaurant). The following are my comments regarding the final development plan: 1. On page 1 under "Purpose for Amendment", revise language to read "1. The City of Wheat Ridge to approve the installation of a pole sign not shown on the original development plan located in the patio area south of 3250 Youngfield. The sign will be 50' in height with 170 square feet of area per side. It will be unlighted on the east face." 2. Under "case history", add the following case number: "WZ-02-10 - 7t' amendment" 3. On page 3, add the sign design. Show "sign copy" or add a note that this sign may change as the primary tenant in this space does. 4. On page 3, add a note restricting lighting on the eastern face. This case is scheduled for public hearing in front of Planning Commission on August 1, 2002. Please submit. 15 copies of the revised development plan and 15 sets of the photo simulations no later than July 24, 2002, - for packet distribution. We would also like an 11" x 17" reduction of the plan set for preparation of public hearing exhibits. As a reminder, we still have not received power of attorney from the land owner(s) allowing you and/or Trammel Crow to represent their interests in this land use case. This is a required document that we must have in order to hold the public hearing. It must be submitted to this office no later than the Planning Commission hearing date. Attached is copy of the ownership information from the Jefferson County; Assessor's records. If you have questions concerning any of the above, do not hesitate to contact me at 303-235-2848. For your information, I will be out of the office from July 22 through July 31. 1 will be representing staff at the August 1, 2002, Planning Commission meeting. Sincerely, wvJ Meredith Reckert, AICP Senior Planner c: WZ-02-10 Anne Bork Marilynn Force ' A o O6 ° 125' - o ®0 'x 120' ~ 14 I 09- RACT 0 23' x$ 0 125' S _ 8~ O L.J 3 125' e 01 m O 17, t 1 ^ T 8 - - ' 5 3 o T HWY. 55425 I L O 2 o 125' 125 b lxaaa 4 o °m Q 126}7. 1 5 D • ~ W ° m 3 • 128.92 2 $ 2 5' 1 © w ml W a 02 Ti MO 04 0 04 V 1ze.yi 125®I 5 °n °u ' aN Is p Va. 01 - YI >8 n th 38 120' 89. 7M.6 W. TOT-71 002 2 2 1 -A RIDGEVIEW RIDGEVIEW R ' 3R 3 . IR I ' ®0 8T. HWY. 1 - 03 38 m 855-425 I A•D 07 ' _ I ay. a 1 4 m >o D4 n 05 g 3 3rd FIG. 2nA FLG. 3: I-A H r r o 00 m _ 007 ~ HOC} 8 ~ S"' ~ eA 7 1 r 0 TA qq T 1 'FA °m 00 iT HWY 1855.425 1 U LL I ZZ w O6 7E 8 . 120' 150 60, 25 25' 120 523 50' I 150' 12 11 ~ I O I APPLEWOOD VILLAGE SHOPPING , ° ° ° 013 CENTER SUB. ^ ~2 . DI4 2 16 120-29 ' 5T HWY 1952-286 - I 3 0 A P EW00 lJJ 1 Izo.os 1- _ 4 4 ® e Q 1199' i3{.I' 1 C~ 5 1 n~ 5 f ^ I 05 119.7" ~ 15 1 I.9 ® IB T. HWY. i34-49D 09.55' LAGE.. OOe 7 7 ~ p j n OT : 019 0 :90~-- M 1 e L: 8 ii 15 HWY ° 119 21' 70-758 U LL LL -I 1 I ~ 9 09 ~ 021 n 14 W 1 1 - _ 119.04 a 120' 269.2x-- - 11 j I Ii 150 IS° ID ~ 10 - `1J n 10 I • - y I n 0 L 4i ® - 121.09• 14 40 HWY. 5T I OS i D I 'v . 954-399 1 2 J,a \ , ll `14 s 1♦ w - 009 _ ` •JB 12 >J ~ 1 . 1 $ 0 13 1 I 758 1 14 ST. HWY. 1954-399 13 T. HWY 0 LL W 7 I I i -CM Adjoining 39- 40 a 0 fj~ 1V' 18 CEO 8 r Bay 52 i ot0 uo m 10 05 2 009 9 09 ~ ° 021 m 119.04' ~ 120' 10 10 - 3` . to 00 121.09' N m ou 1 \ gip. ~B 0 13 3J 3 i 19 . 1 1B ~ ~e 0 1 a 2 .45•?. w OIB IB 13 . 90 222 ' 21 s 1zl.a238 ' (go 09 ea' 1a1 W. 32 nd Ave. In Page 1 of 1 To: "Meredith Reckert" <meredith@ci.wheatridge.co.us> Subject: Re: Old Chicago Hi Meredith. I'd like to think about this over the 4th if I could. Is the building that old chicago in owned by another person other than the person who owns the majority that Trammell Crow manages? If it is, how do we coordinate the redevelopment of the shopping center with the majority owners so the plan has consistant design? I understand Old Chicago needs, and agree that we need to help find ways to have better signage to attrack the 100,000 plus potential customers off of the highway. Let us get together when I return after the 4th. Have a happy and safe 4th of July. You are a great American! Marilynn Force Original Message From: "Meredith Reckert" <meredith@ci.wheatridge.co.us> To: <marilynn39@attbi.com> Sent: Monday, July 01, 2002 12:59 PM Subject: Old Chicago > Marilynn- > We've received an application to the Applewood SHopping Center final > development plan to allow an additional freestanding sign in the > center. Old Chicago, who is located on the eastern portion close to 32nd > Avenue, indicates that their patrons have a hard time finding them since > they're so far from Youngfield. They are requesting a 50' high pole sign > with 170 square feet of sign area (per side). Staff generally does not > support the request. all other signs within the immediate shopping center > are no high than 25'. However, the Chili's sign and the adjacent gas > station (Conoco?) have 50' signs. Both of those businesses are zoned C-1 > so we had no control. Also, we rewrote the sign code to move away from > interstate-oriented pole signs favoring tasteful monument signs > instead. Any thoughts or suggestions on this issue? let's talk. > Meredith Printed for Meredith Reckert <meredith@ci.wheatridge.co.us> 7/2/2002 Out To: marilynn39@attbi.com Subject: Old Chicago Marilynn- Page 1 of 1 We've received an application to the Applewood SHopping Center final development plan to allow an additional freestanding sign in the center. Old Chicago, who is located on the eastern portion close to 32nd Avenue, indicates that their patrons have a hard time finding them since they're so far from Youngfield. They are requesting a 50' high pole sign with 170 square feet of sign area (per side). Staff generally does not support the request. all other signs within the immediate shopping center are no high than 25'. However, the Chili's sign and the adjacent gas station (Conoco?) have 50' signs. Both of those businesses are zoned C-1 so we had no control. Also, we rewrote the sign code to move away from interstate-oriented pole signs favoring tasteful monument signs instead. Any thoughts or suggestions on this issue? let's talk. Meredith Printed for Meredith Reckert <meredith@ci.wheatridge.co.us> 7/1/2002 Page 1 of 1 To: <meredith@city.ci.wheatridge.co.us> Subject: Old Chicago Pole Sign Hi Meredith, Thank you for speaking with me yesterday. Per our conversation, you requested that I write an email so that you could begin the sign permit process. Old Chicago has landlord approval for a pole sign that is 50' over all height and 150 sq.ft. Attached is the design. The pole sign will face east and west and the east face will be non- illuminated. If we are allowed to illuminate the east face please let me know. I can fax the approval letter when you request. When you and I talked about this pole sign back in the spring of 1999, the landlord was allowed a 50' tall pole sign but was considering redoing all the sign criteria. The new landlord has reviewed this project and approved the pole sign for Old Chicago. Please call me and let me know when we may proceed with the sign permit. If I haven't heard from you by Monday morning I will try to give you a call. Again, thank you for your help. Terry L. Jenson Western Sign Company, Inc. (719) 667-0410 ®OC WHEATRIDGE.jpg file://C:\DOCUME-l\reckert\LOCALS-l\Temp\eud34.htm 6/27/2002 • MetroScan / Jefferson - ) • Owner :Amb Retail Income Fund Inc Parcel :422294 Site :3600 Youngfield St Wheat Ridge 80033 Xfered :02/29/1996 Mail :1301 BE 10Th St Bentonville Ar 72716 Price :$31,388,000 Use :2112 Ccm,Improved Land Phone Bedrm: Bath: TotRm:l YB:1970 Pool: B1dgSF :142,974 Ac:10.07 * • MetroScan / Jefferson (CO) • Owner :Amb Retail Income Fund Inc Parcel :422295 Site :3400 Youngfield St Wheat Ridge 80033 Xfered :02/29/1996 Mail :Pier 1 #1 San Francisco Ca 94111 Price :$31,388,000 Use :2112 Com,Improved Land Phone Bedrm: Bath: TotRm:8 YB:1966 Pool: B1dgSF :196,840 Ac:17.80 MetroScan / Jefferson (CO) • Owner :Gmb Applewood Llc Parcel :422296 Site :3294 Youngfield St Wheat Ridge 80033 Xfered :02/29/1996 Mail :1201 Galapago St #101 Denver Co 80204 Price Use :2112 Com,Improved Land Phone Bedrm: Bath: TotRm:l YB:1996 Pool: B1dgSF :10,800 Ac:1.17 Information compiled from various sources. Real Estate Solutions makes no representations 7 4-q7 ga x 0 I UNINCORPORATED JEFFER50N COUNTY I os~a~ 37 Qe mil- 1,75 I 'f~o ]O WE5T8 INE55 CENTER F r° WZ-]418 _ WZ-8410 U WZ-9610 F I ~ s CD G g ~ ~ I s z Q N p I o APPLE OD BREAKPLACE WZ-9]-13 W3=DAVE PARCEULOT BOUNDARY (DESIGINATES OWNERSHIP) OFFICIAL ZONING MAP WHEAT RIDGE COLORADO 5W 20 WZ-8619 G R-1 PCD e w~ WZ42-6 C-1 -944 ~ a 8 a r APPLEWOOD VILLAGE k 5HOPPING CENTER g AMENDMENT4 N PCD - N- R-C r v m 11- WATER FEATURE * DENOTES MULTIPLE ADDRESSES 100-YEAR FLOOD PLAIN (APPROXIMATE LOCATION) g N ~ Z N w N W 3 Li NW 29 Feh 0 100 200 :00 400 lmmmnm~ W~91ga L DEPARTMENT OF MAP ADOPTED: June 15, 1994 g<oa.g PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT Last Revision: September 10, 2001 19 T HWY. . 16 17 iT HWY 0 I NI a w ° sE 0 m of >LL }I r Gg9. 1 I 1 a jY O6 $ 125' ' J09 z5'z5' n 5 TRACT C 12S °0 00 2 125 13 4 L ,>5 ° N 3 m 00 M -a m 02 c o4 04 , ~Qj °m 00 3 006 iz5 5 125' 4 I-A 007 ~~n~r~~ 120 5 ao OI I ,25 1 © aol _ 001 _ _ Ito' 002 2 ® 2 21DGEVIEW RIDGEVIEW 002 3A 3 ®o 'A 03 ° + N 003 04 L 3rd Fl. 00 3 2nd FLG. 005 6-e °m 006 6-A 7A 7i m 00 i C6 Z g . 9 N r r m - r r ' O 00 I U 122 LL ~ ° 003 16 HWY 19 1952-266 1 1 ' I del 1 1 I 1 Q I I I 336.1' ' I ~ V / I 1 i 15 9T. HWY. 934-49. 1 I I 1 P I O 1 290 M 1 m I O 5 _ O T MWY - i 770-759 O U LL 14_. 4 9T. HWY. 1954-399 ,~~I 14 (qg) °11 01 01 APPLEWOOD VILLAGE SHOPPING ° ° DI3 CENTER SUB. P ~2 DI4 2 120.22' 003 3 ~ ® 3 Iz0.0r AP E W00 4 4 p® n o16 u 9 92' 5 5 _ ® I ~ 017 OS n9.x l' 6 1 9 O6 6 ~ 019 LAGE., 009 7 7 07 M1 019 \ v\V / 6 1. 8 ~ ~ 08 1N n 119 21' 9 09 ~ ° 021 L ° 15=0^ 119.09' O1 120' 150 10 - 3. 10 If ® t21.N' N OD 40 It 09 O ° OS S 011 ~ +UX r / •c ~ `en 12 W W _ e 12 a 13 O ' U LL 1 LL ® /12~ 18 UU OI 8 F- e5-8 :I 52 eo X01 I 1-0 ' 10 OS 2 009 09 ~ 021 m 119.04 L @ 120 10 10 - ; .r 10 I 00 12409' ~ 10 II oa 1\ b• a ' Y\ o u ~ Joy 12 0 13>J'JO 9s ''dam as . 13 14 5T. HWY. 1954-399 13 It HWY 49 40 . an or Adjoining 39-2 u 19 a u 1 > 9 $0 0 ~R n' la n, u' 20 a 01e m IB o i I a U ~ 01 2 239 e! 22 21 Z I21.14 23e 019 BO !6 W. 32 n0. Ave. N£of NW 170 JEFFCO - 1079-126 , i CIT OF WHEAT RIDGE 1 7463 BBO 1938E 28 C m W. 32 f1C1• A Ve. °y 36' 50 105 136 06 25 25' 112' 112 25 26 ' ; . 30 150 . 3 ~ 1 1 125' 5' -LEY 3 43 I` ® m ® l O - _ I m 014 to N 14 O, 1 1 I 001 m m 001 m a 1j ® Z1 m ST HWY 124 001 2 „ 2 - 13 I- 2127-160 i ' , I 1 002 ° 'm ' 002 o 013 m ~ 002 °m zY 1 150 " 5-A 003 5 ° o1z ooa ° HWY. ' 41* 178. 55' „ 43 „ 0 4' 38 0 011 m m -274 3 n „ 4 4 i II .n I 1 00 O 154.54' ~ 004 „ 011 ° 004 °m 1 m 44 a N f° 012 TRACT •m 5.A 005 5 d 010 010 „ 005 0 042 A-A " m - m D.RT. PUBLIC A 006 136.90' 319 D.BT. UBLIC SE v SERVICE 48i • M 6 006 n 5 $ 009 9 006 0 Ds PT. OF 05• ns • _ 0 HWY. 10 RESU OF 11 12 1 1' 112 - 232 ° m 011 e OIO ® 7 007 -m _ 7 m 008 007 _ tJ MAPLEGROVE VILLAGE O04 ~ El 319' I z6.so' 03 112• 2 11' ' W. 31 sT. Ave. _ HWY „ BLOCK ONE N ' -n 3- 1 6 2 M 115 I I 9 115' 6 7 126.50 l O r 112 0 N 1 4 11Z 12 36 . „ 001 002 003 3 ~ m 004 m m 035 n 034 m t 19' N n 5' n 5' 115, N 2 1 2 c 12 033 35 m' S0 2D3'IniL 005 00 m' A P L E G R n n 11907 ,x m I HWY 59 3 34 n 3 - 3 18 ai 006 3-A : m 002 032 0 N 013 m LL LL a 4 B L K 007 m 003 •O 031 33 v N ® 11 ' 5 s' 32 25' 2 0 P-2 „ >r 008 - ^ m 004 1 030 n a 0 014 _ 6 6 n 54 ~ Q „ 009 „ m 005 ti 31 q9 D ° Q ' • 029 95.8 O 10 10 1 I N _3 0~ O 7 7 n m 12 „ n 010 0 006 158' 63 0 EXMPT. am w m _p UU)OZ 1. 9 10 m SURVEY ,1 W ~O O e e _ 006 009 : 1 150• Y o2a "m o07 - Y. E44-5-86 ®62 oac i Q O 11 m 5 25 12 112' 0 79' 79' 275 • n LT m 2 1 24 39 a O 015 197• ou TR.B B 7500 West 29th Avenue Wheat Ridge, Colorado Telephone 303/235-2846 FAX 303/235-2857 June 21, 2002 The City of 80215 Wheat Ridge Anne Bork Old Chicago 248 Centennial Pky., Suite 100 Louisville, CO 80027 Dear Ms. Bork: This letter is to inform you that your application for a development plan amendment has been received in our office. The fees for this land use application total $960. Please see breakdown of the fees below: Development Plan Amendment Application Fee $250/acre (1 acre) $ 250 Publication/Public Notice Fee $ 300 Plus additional cost of postage* 410 Amount due $ 960 *Additional postage costs are based on a mailing list (totaling 47 properties) in a 100 foot radius around the perimeter of Applewood Shopping Center which is over and above the average mailing plus an increase in postage rates. Payment is due upon receipt. Enclosed is a copy of our fee schedule. Please feel free to contact me at 303-235-2846 if you have any questions. Sincerely, Kathy Field Administrative Asst. Enclosure: fee schedule CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE 08/02/02 8;58 AM rdb ROCK BOTTOM REST RECEIPT NO:CO13512 AMOUNT FNSD ZONING APPLICATION F 250.00 FMSD ZONING REIMBURSEMENT 710.00 PAYMENT RECEIVED AMOUNT CK 368354 960.00 TOTAL 460.00 Case No.: App: Last Name: App: First Name: Owner: Last Name: Owner: First Name: App Address: City, State Zip: App:Phone: Owner Address: City/State/Zip: Owner Phone: Project Address: Street Name: City/State, Zip: Case Disposition: Project Planner: File Location: Notes: Follow-Up: 20210 Quarter Semon Map No.: adsworth Old Chicago Related Cases: /o Anne Bork Case History: MB Property, L.P. 3250 Youngfield Review Body: heat Ridge, CO 80033 03-237-7414 APN' 505 Montgomery St. 2nd Review Body: Pan Francisco, CA 94171 2nd Review Date: 303.220-0900 ! Decision-making Body: 3250 . 1 Approval/Denial Date: oungfield Street heat Ridge, CO 80033 : Reso/Ordinance No.: NW29 Development Plan mendment PC 39-292-05-008 CC C Conditions of Approval: Reckert District: III ctive Date Received: 6/1812002 Pre-App Date: I Western Sign Company, Inc. Terry L. Jenson President 2010 Hillis Court Colorado Springs CO 80906 (719) 667-0410 Fax (719) 667-0408 email: terry@westernsignco.com Date: June 3, 2002 To: Meredith Reckert From: Terry L. Jenson Subject: Site Development Plan - Reason For Request Old Chicago 3250 Youngfield, Wheat Ridge, CO 80033 The freestanding pole sign is per city code and has owner approval. The reason for the development plan amendment is this sign was not documented on the original development plan. Old Chicago is located on the southeast corner of the Applewood Shopping Center. Their address is 3250 Youngfield and the restaurant is located one block off of the intersection of Youngfield and 32nd. The clientele are having trouble finding the establishment. The sign would be visible from the intersection of Youngfield and 32nd and the shopping center parking area. March 18, 2002 Ms. Anne Bork Rock Bottom Restaurants Inc. 248 Centennial Parkway, Suite 100 Louisville, Colorado 80027 RE: Old Chicago -Applewood Village Shopping Center -Wheatridge, C.0 Dear Anne: This letter will serve as the required landlord approval for the proposed pole sign per your letter of February 1, 2002. It is understood that the sign will be installed in the patio area of the tenant. Tenant assumes all responsibility for obtaining the approval from the local jurisdiction, installation cost and the ongoing maintenance cost of the sign. If you have any additional questions please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, TRAMMELL CROW COMPANY, INC. As Agent for NRP, LLC ~~Don Jacksen, RPA Property Manager Tamarac Plaza Two 7535 E. Hampden Avenue Suite 650 Denver, Colorado 80231-4845 Main 303-220-0900 Fax 303-843.1866