The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutWZ-96-10 (2)City of Wheat Ridge of WHEgTP Community Development Department U I't Memorandum C~GORP~~ TO: Case file WZ-96-10 FROM: tAeredith Reckert SUBJECT: Court settlement DATE: August 19, 2003 This file is the continuation of Case No. WZ-96-10. The subject case application was a request by Dwain Richter for approval of PCD final development plan at 12851 W. 32°d Avenue. The case was denied by City council on October 29, 1996. Richter subsequently filed suit against the City of Wheat Ridge. In July of 1998, the District entered its Judgment and Order remanding the matter back to the City for further proceedings. In November of 1998, the City agreed to review and consider for approval the final development plan and the subdivision replat which were approved on Marchl5, 1999. 1 40" CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE PLANNING DIVISION STAFF REPORT TO: City Council DATE OF MEETING: October 28, 1996 DATE PREPARED: October.22, 1996 CASE NO. & NAME: WZ-96-10 CASE MANAGER: Meredith Reckert ACTION REQUESTED: Approval of a PCD final development plan and plat LOCATION OF REQUEST: 12851 West 32nd Avenue NAME & ADDRESS OF APPLICANT(S): Dwaine Richter, 6565 S Syracuse Way, Englewood 80111 NAME & ADDRESS OF OWNER(S): Same and Virginia Richter, 11665 W 39th Place, Wheat Ridge APPROXIMATE AREA: 10 acres PRESENT ZONING: Planned Commercial Development PRESENT LAND USE: Restaurant, hotel, vacant SURROUNDING ZONING: N. S. W: Jefferson County; E: A-1 SURROUNDING LAND USE: N: low density residential, vacant; S: church, low density; E- 1-70; W. low density residential COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR THE AREA: Commercial Activity Center DATE PUBLISHED: October 10, 1996 DATE POSTED: October 14, 1996 DATED LEGAL NOTICES SENT: AGENCY CHECKLIST: (XX) ATTACHED RELATED CORRESPONDENCE: (XX) ATTACHED ENTER INTO RECORD: (XX) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN (XX) ZONING ORDINANCE (XX) SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS ( ) OTHER ( ) NOT REQUIRED ( ) NONE (XX) CASE FILE & PACKET MATERIALS ( ) SLIDES (XX ) 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. Planning Division Staff Report Case No. WZ-96-10 1. REQUEST Page 2 The applicant requests approval of a combined final development plan and plat. The property is known as the 70 West Business Center and has a restaurant and hotel on it which were approved in 1984. Attached is a reduced copy of the original outline development plan. A parcel of land directly to the east was rezoned pursuant to Case No. WZ-963 as part of the negotiations to relocate the frontage road. The road has been completed and this parcel has been incorporated into the request. Since this case is not a rezoning a neighborhood meeting is not required. However, the developer has held an "open house" at the LaQuinta and has invited the neighboring property owners to review the proposal and ask questions. It. REFERRALS Wheat Ridge Public Works has reviewed and approved a conceptual drainage plan and is in the process of reviewing the final plan. They have reviewed a traffic study which determined required public improvements and curb cut locations. Depending on traffic warrants, a signal at Zinnia may be required. All major concerns have been addressed. West Metro Fire District is working with the developer to resolve fire access issues. Hydrant installation will be required as shown on the utility plan. Parks and Recreation Commission has reviewed this submittal in regard to relocation of the ten-toot-wide bike path and who should be responsible for construction of the path. Consolidated Mutual Water District will require a partial water line relocation. Jefferson County has commented regarding the traffic impact and design issues. They have been working with our Public Works Department in regard to public improvements. III. DEVELOPMENT PLAN A. Land Uses The development plan proposes two different scenarios both of which include a 1700 square foot gas station /convenience store with car wash and 4400 square foot fast food restaurant along West 32nd Avenue. They also both show a 925 square foot retail/service facility on Lot 5 and a 28,000 square foot office/showroom facility on Lot 6. The developer has proposed the two development alternatives to remain flexible in regard to the development market. Alternative A provides for a 10,975 square foot "sit-down" restaurant. Alternate B allows for 19,200 square foot of retail in two structures. There are no changes to Lot 4 which is designated as a duplex. Staff concludes that all proposed uses shown on both aftematives are permitted pursuant to the approved Outline Development Plan. B. . Site Building Layout & Design Planning Division Staff Report Page 3 Case No. WZ-96-10 Generally, the overall site layout including building locations, setbacks, parking, landscape coverage, access, building materials and design are acceptable. All buildings will either use brick which matches the new brick wall along the west side, or will use materials, color and accents which match or blend with the west brick wall. A landscaped. berm with ten foot and six foot wall and fence surrounds the site along the west side, providing a buffer to the residential uses to the west. A short landscaped berm and elevation differential of four feet is shown along West 32nd Avenue. The berm has been extended further west to provide more visual buffer to residents to the south. The landscape plan for this area should be revised to increase the intensity of mid-height shrubs and trees to provide greater, year-round visual buffering. C. Signage Signage includes wall signs on buildings and freestanding signs. Generally, all signs conform to the City's sign code or were already approved pursuant to the 1984 prior approved plan, and subsequent court settlement between Mr. Richter and the City. Staff is pleased by the cooperation of the applicant regarding signage, however we do recommend the following revisions and/or requirements. 1. Regarding the two 50-foot-high signs, Staff recommends a V-shaped sign design with the two illuminated sign panels oriented toward 1-70. This design should mitigate visibility of these tall signs from the western neighborhood, especially at night when they are illuminated. 2. Regarding the Diamond Shamrock canopy signs, staff recommends that the sign upon the west elevation NOT be illuminated, so as not to disturb residents to the west and south. IV. SUBDIVISION PLAT Currently, the property exists as seven separate parcels measuring cumulative as 9.9 acres. The proposed subdivision will replat Lots #2, 3, 4, 6 and 7. Minor changes are proposed for Lot 1 (LaQuinta parcel). Lot 5 (single-family residence already built) and Lot 4 (vacant, duplex lot) remain the same. As the developer wants to maintain land ownership, Lot 3 will encompass the fast food restaurant and gas station along West 32nd Avenue and the retail or sit-down restaurant shown on development alternatives A & B. Tracts "C" and "D" are a part of Lots 5 and 6, respectively. All requirements of the Subdivision Regulations have been met. V, PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Planning Commission reviewed this request at public hearings held on August 15 and October 3, 1996. At the October 3rd meeting a recommendation of Approval was given with the following conditions: 1. The traffic light on West 32nd Avenue be installed at the earliest possible date; 2. Enclosed dumpsters be provided for all buildings; 3. The handicapped parking space for the retail development (Lot 5) be moved closer to the building; 4. That the opening in the sound barrier wall be closed, and the fire district decide whether a trap door needs to be installed for access to the fire hydrant; Planning Division Staff Report Page 4 Case No. WZ-96-10 5. Lighting for the canopy signs on the west side of the Diamond Shamrock building be turned off from 11:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m. daily; 6. That a six-foot-high wood fence be continued from the noise barrier to West 32nd Avenue behind retail building on Lot 5; 7. Whether or not the berm on Lot 4 is removed will be determined at the time of construction of the duplex by the property owner. At the discretion of the developer, a wall or fence is to be constructed between the two properties; 8. That the developer work with Public Works Department on the creation of a berm that will extend along West 32nd Avenue west as far as possible to 1-70 Service Road to aid in alleviating headlight glare into residential property. Evergreen trees be utilized when possible so long as the integrity of the sight distance triangle is maintained. In regard to the conditions of Approval, the following has been done: 1. The City's Public Works Department has budgeted the installation of the traffic signal in their 1997 capitol improvements budget. 2. Enclosed dumpsters have been provided for all buildings except for the small building on Lot 5 which will have garbage cans. 3. The handicapped space on Lot 5 has been moved closest to the building. 4. The opening in the fence along the western property line is shown as being closed with fire department access only. 5. On sheet 10, the western canopy sign is shown as being unlighted from 10 p.m. to 6 a.m. (Staff recommends this sign not be illuminated.) 6. The applicant has added a six-toot-sign on Lot 5 extending south towards West 32nd Avenue. 7. The applicant has opted not to include a note regarding removal of the berm and relocation of the fence once the duplex has been built on Lot 4. 8. Regarding extending the berm along West 32nd Avenue, pursuant to Sheets 6 and 7, the applicant has extended the berm to the west along West 32nd Avenue but has not added coniferous plant material to help block added glare. (Staff recommends that Council provide staff with authority to require more and different landscaping at the building permit stage in order to meet this objective.) VI. CONCLUSION Development Plan Staff concludes that all requirements for a final development plan have been met and that the proposal, in general, is consistent with the underlying outline development plan and C-1 zoning regulations. For these reasons, a recommendation of Approval is given, with the following conditions: Regarding landscape buffering along West 32nd Avenue: Staff recommends that Council require a detailed landscape plan for the area to be approved by staff with the first building permit requested. The intent is to provide for a year-round visual buffer and pleasant landscape feature which mitigates vehicle headlights from shining into residential properties to the southeast, and which screens visibility of the Diamond Shamrock monument sign from the same residences. 2. Regarding signage: Planning Division Staff Report Page 5 Case No. WZ-96-10 a. 50-foot-high signs are to be designed with V-shaped panels so as to mitigate visual impacts to residences to the west. b. The Diamond Shamrock canopy sign, west elevation, shall not be illuminated. Subdivision Plat Staff concludes that a subdivision replat is required to accommodate the new development. Staff further concludes that all requirements of the Subdivision Regulations have been met. For this reason, a recommendation of Approval is given. VII. RECOMMENDED MOTIONS: Development Plan OPTION A: "I move that Case No. WZ-96-10, a request for approval of a PCD final development plan for property located at 12851 West 32nd Avenue, be Approved for the following reasons: 1. All requirements for a final development plan have been met; and 2. The proposal is consistent with the underlying outline development plan and C-1 zoning regulations. With the following conditions: 1. Regarding landscape buffering along West 32nd Avenue: Staff recommends that Council require a detailed landscape plan for the area to be approved by staff with the first building permit requested. The intent is to provide for a year-round visual buffer and pleasant landscape feature which mitigates vehicle headlights from shining into residential properties to the southeast, and which screens visibility of the Diamond Shamrock monument sign from the same residences. 2. Regarding signage: a. 50-foot-high signs are to be designed with V-shaped panels so as to mitigate visual impacts to residences to the west. b. The Diamond Shamrock canopy sign, west elevation, shall not be illuminated. OPTION B: "I move that Case No. WZ-96-10, a request for approval of a PCD final development plan for property located at 12851 West 32nd Avenue, be Denied for the following reasons: 1. 2. 3. " Subdivision Plat Planning Division Staff Report Case No. WZ-96-10 Page 6 OPTION A: "I move that Case No. WZ-96-10, a request for approval of a subdivision replat for property located at 12851 West 32nd Avenue, be Approved for the following reasons: A subdivision replat is required to accommodate the new development; and 2. All requirements of the Subdivision Regulations have been met. b:\ccwz9610.sr CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: October 28, 1996 Page -3- Item 3. Approval of a PCD Final Development Plan and Plat for the 70 West Business Center, located at 12851 West 32nd Avenue. (Case No. WZ-96-10) (Dwaine Richter) Mrs. Worth introduced Case No. WZ-96-10 and read the title. Motion by Mrs. Worth to limit the applicant, public and staff to half an hour to speak on the subject; seconded by Mr. Solano; tied 4-4 with Councilmembers Eafanti, Fields, Worth, and DiTullio voting yes. Mayor Wilde broke tie by voting no. Motion failed 5-4. Ron Hoisington, 3281 Alkire Court, a Private Consultant for CRS Development Specialists, representing the 70 West Business Center, was sworn in by the Mayor. He gave background on the property in question and asked for approval of the final development plan and plat. He presented the applicant's case and answered questions. Glen Gidley was sworn in by the Mayor, presented the staff report, and answered questions. Speaking in opposition and sworn in by the Mayor were: Patricia Rubano, 13050 West 32nd Avenue, unincorporated Jefferson County, Don Phillipson, 14325 Braun Road, unincorporated Jefferson County, William Farrell, 14399 Garden Circle, unincorporated Jefferson County, Brad Brauer, 3238 Zinnia Court, unincorporated Jefferson County, Norm Ross, 3145 Zinnia Street, unincorporated Jefferson County, Emily Bennett, 13206 West 33rd Place, unincorporated Jefferson County. Their comments included no interest in being annexed to the City of Wheat Ridge; adverse impact on the neighborhood; times have changed since 1975 and businesses are conducted in a different manner today--longer hours, more traffic, etc.; bright light lighting on a 24 hour gas station; obnoxious aromas associated with fast food restaurants; added noise; increased hazards, such as gasoline tankers; neighbors have signed petitions in opposition to this proposed development; there are two schools nearby and it will only be a matter of time until somebody gets hurt; degradation of quality of life; additional trash; install traffic light at Zinnia. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: October 28, 1996 Page -4- Robert Kessler, Attorney for Mr. Richter, was sworn in by the Mayor and answered some of the neighbor's concerns. He also read an excerpt from the July 21, 1975 Wheat Ridge City Council Minutes into the record, in which a Mr. Arthur Brunton stated on his own behalf and that of other homeowners in Applewood Gardens area, that they support Mr. Richter's Outline Development Plan. Mr. Kessler also submitted a copy of the stipulation for settlement and dismissal regarding the lawsuit Mr. Richter had filed against the City of Wheat Ridge. Bob Lee, traffic engineer, was sworn in by the Mayor, stated he had prepared the traffic impact study that was presented to Council. He disputed the neighbor's claims that traffic had increased on 32nd Avenue. The City of Wheat Ridge conducted a 3-day study of traffic west of the interchange on 32nd Avenue last year; they counted between 13,000 and 15,000 vehicles per day; the Colorado Highway Department did a study in 1975, which showed 13,000 vehicles per day; his firm did a peak hour study in July, which also showed between 13,000 and 15,000 vehicles. Over the last 20 years there has been only modest growth on 32nd Avenue, compared to 150% growth on many other arterials and roadways in the metro area. Motion by Mrs. Worth to suspend the Rules, continue the meeting past 11:00 p.m. and finish the Agenda; seconded by Mrs. Shaver; failed 4-4 with Councilmembers Eafanti, Worth, Dalbec, and Shaver voting yes. (This needs 6 votes to pass). Motion by Mrs. Shaver to suspend the Rules and go past 11:00 p.m. to finish this item and the expenditure item; seconded by Mrs. Worth; carried 6-2 with Mr. Eafanti and Mr. Siler voting no. Mr. Hoisington cleared up a few items regarding the proposed office showroom, it could be called office warehouse. Motion by Mr. Solano to deny the application and to direct that a draft set of findings supporting the denial be prepared for Council consideration and be presented at the next meeting for action only; seconded by Mr. DiTullio; carried 8-0. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: November 25, 1996 Page -7- Item 9. Resolution 1564 - findings for Case No. WZ-96-10, 70 West Business Center Planned Commercial Development Final Plan at 12851 West 32nd Avenue. Mr. Dahl stated that the Charter provides that after this decision reapplication cannot be made for 12 months, if it is the same or substantially the same application. Motion by Mrs. Dalbec for approval of Resolution 1564; seconded by Mr. Solano; carried 8-0. Motion by Mrs. Dalbec to adjourn; seconded by Mr. Eafanti; carried 8-0. Meeting adjourned at 11:10 p.m. Christa Jones, Deput ity Clerk December 2, 1996 The continued City Council meeting from November 25, 1996 was called to order by Mayor Wilde at 7:00 p.m. Councilmembers present: Teri Dalbec, Jerry DiTullio, Don Eafanti, Jean Fields, Janelle Shaver, Ken Siler, Tony Solano, and Claudia Worth. Also present: City Clerk, Wanda Sang; City Treasurer, Jim Malone; City Administrator, Robert Middaugh, City Attorney, Gerald Dahl; Director of Planning, Glen Gidley; Director of Parks, Gary Wardle; Director of Public Works, Bob Gobel; staff and interested citizens. APPROVAL OF MINUTES of November 18, 1996 Motion by Mr. Eafanti for the approval of the Minutes of November 18, 1996, seconded by Mrs. Dalbec. Motion carried 8-0. PUBLIC HEARING AND ORDINANCES ON SECOND READING (CON'T FROM 11118196) Item 3. Application by James R. and Corrine Slotnick for approval of a Planned Commercial Development final development plan and plat on property located at 4549 Tabor Street. (Case No. WZ-96-11) Continued Business. Mr. Gidley continued his presentation and answered questions. Speaking in favor and sworn in by the Mayor were; Wilber W. Sieck and Jim ~ATEO .6>SRSCN @ TT L6 W TA - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - WEST 33rd. AVE. x A N a m ! O WEST_32nd AVE. 1➢~- VICINITY MAP N T S CERTIFICATION I, Joe Voh S a Profee6knd Lo dl 5.w. r"Istwed k, the State of cdvoda, {witty that m Ihb_day of 1996• Ohl. laao,r phk wN..y .a. Prepared under m) dbe<I a NN.kn. and to the beet of my profeeelend bno.ledge oed byiel b me ore. fo, omf m bdtdf of F,.,W and Nolbe En9HewHp cw.pmy 10])5 E. Hvwd Avmne 1320 0-1. Cdwodo 60231 SEVENTY WEST BUSINESS CENTER AN OFFICIAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN 'OF' THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE COMBINED PRELIMINARY-FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN SHEET 1 OF 16' '.O MSCI.yT. q• o-yC e1 ML 6MlA~ M !M ew.•n of tM 2 aM D.aYV R 6M:tr F IM xn'q.rl tn{ M 5•cllm 29. P ) SfSeW R bca1W wwm r•ma•a A Mel Bu•Y..a f Ir F q• rnv~~i oe A.fy . rant NFN Wt, MmDr aw>6.M6..Ala: Y pv1 el Hvy t eM I)xY a. Apd•.ooa Gvdma d We Of Lot. 1], 1{ d IS. Rnpvy fgD.y a Hay rn) a Mcl ltk 1 Ceuet) of J.N. Slot. a tdwaea, mw. Pwtnd.fy eeewb.e w raa-w Cenmmcl.p eI IM 1Y1 1/{ - a •dE S• - M, thence deep q• .w.q 1M of sb X. t/4, ay boy9 el the berFp H thle Oe.abtbn. XB9Z9't6T 559.66 Ml th etw I+DO b'H' w 11W to the ta1H rtpHt-a-.ay el Mrl 31M Awm•. Ow .wtlyv[ came of tM a of W 76 M..t ON •2 C tw eq the POO t a boo-eq b- aenp the t -d-Y a mk lnf . M h4u.6hp Iw` (a) worm. t. 6t, 'Wer 9ma I•a Pe-sw .at . M Mt r bvn .ck to Rr or xV to IM eortt•o.1 .tq P rel4• a 20.DO feel vM 1/t, to q b=w. -g, I 1 i n.ma. x019 cad a.w 31.24 Iwl 1 I 1 thence "Tl0•e6'. ".to feet, I I a. hMw xe9z9'16t (tiro feet 1e iM ..a lb_ of let > a .de >9 wet Bu.H.e I I Cwlw O qwa'. x01w66aU 9 q• 7;mlw a la ) W q• eat the of let S a ctl M w.l AuM+.w C t, MOIDYM- qr a a c: x• vq q bo. y Int 6 of eoAf 711 wet B eh-e O.ttw the folle.b, fa. aveq z ' ' 1. 59926 2{ . 301aa feet 1 t1 1 i o-ce Nro]S4Y. A .w leer; r1 I O I 1 thmd N99T524-E 390299 be, I 1 N 4,Spp.4XWE 293.50 few to the bxMHp of a roe-IVr9ent aw.• cmcow to the y e - elq P a MOO fell 0,0 a cwba vy Pt 3a'{0'3Y vM a awe 1 I b wyloh tbl beve 5631aeel a1 f; -1 -1 I I qwn avp the f61. thbl- (I)) cxe.t I 1, dwtp edd - 167.00 leer I 1 thmc. N69T3'2a'E 16012 feet, I 1 I I 1 tltmce Sl%yayJ62 Moo bet, I I a, b-ce S6G]{'2411 Jiro bet; to tM .eel egel-al-.ey Of I->q 1 ur:ee m61724T ).95 pet 6. -enc. N69'3C00•E 1SJ0 feet th-O& N00IyWer 215(1 feet, a. qmw X69]9'00'E 2100 pet 9. 1Mye $0611•C0. 199.N leer 10. tbem• Wlyw'w. 194.52 Mf, It. qmc 5aP13'31Y. 29.03 feet, It qwv S 9.16'% %S I 11 qw.v 5011Y1'501 100 Iwl to tM poHt a b"kmvq Pvcd O-ta - gY•wHgply 2967x9 q. A. v 6.960 eve v.e bee Ide si, eotl*Nbl o d Polled Nd 1ww ee D. the d.e.Hp Nweve cmlop.d ued. IM we. y clip el $e.mtY wet lldneee Ecar, a wA2bieYn Of the feoel the ag el eheet 6Np• Cdwoda, vy by than Pet-I. dose d.dlcel• 1. t,5 y e.n•d an n d/w Ql cop l tbo 0,. ~lm. Of df tvladnd u1NIM wd ew'4 N ,ee av o0 rW a -t n v . " I h, l.d a. m •Mp- eonew. ob'B 6e e~ ^«i e el blo M, d l {9-.x01, emv.ce. . d.Pbm. oml vM I•tlde IHee, " er, - V.d taYA pee PNH wlw caw Dbd c ev Wrwl hl* R yYmtR deeHepe llaln aM e vW al ppo Ib..et% t e. 11 ay m t Not - IMI 0 a e h uri Owe . e l Y d w 'te lee _ m ew e tF ON, h H,dM F tm eWC uo, H IHn. d•cxkd be M s IHee bl x - and droln, owtaH webe aM yll.e Iv 1S•It~..'~etvp p1..,1.H any No'eme"e 21.1995. 0, It col sm d h boo o9ywnwl Ibw by 1M .:Ddlddw or mapanwd by me .ed.br Itwefw. ebkt 1 Meo1wN by the My of meet RM9q vM -It ewae eha Mt be pall hi, q• aty Mp•. Wbe (egndllvn'w the The PIy of Wnal R". :-.W Sdn Tee Hamlin P-gNoo (ESOP)) :env IM BueH.n IyrMeymeal 2_. (0J2) Po.IXVn ehdl mK be deemed IP be . b b h 0 p y t e 1, of M•a Rbpe Cawedo) vq 9nl my Rea ee cvNlrvcled v Hetol.d bow WIM by the at, el .-t Rb p EYwaly y I, le,., Ih. M, aPw1) a qb dly nc91 R.n. Nw~ U.1 w.l Wwvnkotm• edby ' d keen M 11 e t a:ot Wl eemobt q. W or P.ap.ty of the d yta hot become the PmPwly a the MA xdaw of O-N-) a Srvel rlr nf.ai•. aom to vea• delyvly to Pub RC aw JEr)s!v'4 @91TT O-ERK MID RECUROER R. DEPUTY MERK ITY OF WHEAT RIDS X11 nin nfr' l: ~~n,~;;IlErar G W\1..\PI OVKN 9VAlK R RIMIER OVREIb VIRGINIA L RICHTER 6363 S SnR VAY No 12th" 11665 V. 39th Pl.. . ENXEV 11 CII 10 90111 V1C/J RICE{ OMMAD0 M33-Mil (X3) 694-7213 Iron 11 -601. OoN CTA)'3!wlOx 16. b.b-dv+e....n n: %Nh mww.a .-rlrlba u.e bn.r..pym..bwe. • ]Saud D•.Lysu M mv..• .w! rb a+alwM mlmWaemu.uti i• W. Ma mf r n4 yWr.b b ~b LI I•..1 O-Zl- tW W Ac Ee. ss are. .wt, w=v.rvyH. v...d x.pe-.y:ld,...n ~ ea. md.mee P.em.w a d. teem )•iQ •(M6f• 1 d sfm Ylar ds Gee Y46ma Iliep, SryWn rt.a~.-A4mee :USwEY rt1AlC S. b-f ud w • v Y( a• .t:• b d If_ wt,. q 6W asi fAe.1 .,.1 ammt:w ~w _ xorARY raYNwc W3 Ox ~:OTGTpM u- y ur ve6ee R1ef. w .a CSm a N P WIG AXO pEVODPIL )OInSC10H 0I'Y(=K=0u=. T1ON Ala....I ebb ....1 m-bur .bee: 924. C _t N x.N L ) SJI. 3L 1"N OvY CK92T e' ANO SECOD35 pgCff. GVL ib pmmw euFb h 9011 u s •m+Y 6 'iop L`.4rep®JC.liea~ Wary G~bm O.MMamW b.( AD. l9- ie -y yet Y.P. anew 34.e 0oy Owk.vC 9me. 029.-. SEPTEMBER ft, 1996 AUGUST 2. 1996 Q lJ6lf~9 f Np(d I Oya~ CRH a.t.h.uin W XaaIaGD ReaR aum n aefaln~eieCOLO ells PN(l1ECl: )R .OT 91AO4 mfR11 Iw:t rrwn w•teruw.eeu: w-..r u... - YO UNG Fi ELD SF,RVICE ROAD LA QUINTA MOTOR INN ).OY [ 1.;11 ttil ¢ N DO'JO'DO W 293.30 Y_Y HIaF~ I T 1 D P A C,'S E.CLOSOPF Lin I 1 O U - 50 -)lusa ~ p to - i S U n ~ O 1St AND Fal{,LC\ X.C. r.RNING - 1 I loo - l- 89.59' - T DF A' i+rt - I no[ nolm - NRN-ANOOND I R I _ MoNUNENT 9GN 1 FOR OFFICE SHOWROOM ,,1^ PROPOSED ENTRY / 1-70 SERVICE, ROAD WEST EuS11NG CURS A OPEN SPACE/GERM SEVENTY WEST BUSINESS CENTER LOTS 2 3, 4, 6 AND 7 ALTERNATE A AN OFFICIAL DEVELOPMENT FLAN OFD THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE COMBINED PRELIMINARY-FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN SHEET 2 OF 16 I-70 EXIT RAMP ,L I 359.86' I 1 x6111-OI -WqY IINI. IT.BU R i~yig9 14 ]Y L LL U; GRAPHIC SCALE n 1 L o V V u °d I j i w 70 0 .O PD a_C 23' pOUrsl[a Ix o-.upvD WAIN k 1 d - - "o qw 4 up1 s ENttow9[ 36.157 SF / " "CNOg s i i I scuE I :.<n - .a n a ~N a 0.83 ACRES n a, 1 y 1 1 w ] [nsullc ]Y \ e t0 ^ 1 1 1 a1 ° z5' 25' MENDYS 15 1 1 .r LEGEND I y ~ACfS E} lLv yytt ~ I .R 1 a.w0 50 fl -1 SO fi u' (I Cxi gal le ~ 1 I b 1 1 I EYISPNL g1po05GD ' V l1 6 o n I EV 1 I MNCN FENCE 8 o F ° - P I ~ 1 SCiDAC 1 I o-=-~ ,¢uSMH B,PMEN "a 3511 50 Ci Pqp 0 i jn n u,a 5 50 \ 1 5 wi lD 9a 1 I . y.tt5 MIUPCR OF PARNwG 9"tt5 i k \ '1 v CWMRYCASE RE)AIL/PESiAURANT ID W I ID a1RK w0[xnnC,nON Ei W ~ 1 E%ISnNG _ 10.975 30 ff b w.Doo $D FT S v ~ I NRB ,ND aliT(n - 0.92 Ac. s - 'c 1 I - Lure silnnxc SITE PLAN DATA - ALTERNATE A TOTAL AREA 8.5289 AC SUE-PIA -mm DIAMOND SHAMROCK 0.92 AC. BUILDING CIF A. 2.880 S.P. STORE 1.908 ST. - CAR KASN 1.072 SY. PARKING REQUIRED A SPACES PARKING PRU47DED 4 SPACES KENDY's OAS AC. BURDNG G.F.A. 4.100 S.F. PARRING REQUIRED 44 SPACES PARKING PROVIDED 44 SPACES MIN. B STA,EING SPACES MR DRIVE UP nNDON COUNTRY CAR: OM AC. BUILDING CTA. ].571 S.F. PARKING REQUIRED O SPACES PARKING PROVIDED 47 SPACES FUTURE RETAIL/RESTAURANT 1.73 AC. BUILDING G.F.A. m.,75 S.F. PARKING REQUIRED (RESTAURANT) 123 CARS PARKING PROYIDFD 123 CARS RETAIL BUILDING SITE 0.16 AC. BUDDING C.I A 1.125 S.F. PARKING REQUIRED 7 SPACES PARKING PROVIDED 7 SPACES OPRCE/SIID•RODM 1 97 AC. RUIUDING G F A. BOB 28,S.P. PARA]NG REQUIRED (OFFICE. • 505) 80 SPACES 25' OPEN STACE/RERM 088 AC • COMMERCIAU. X OF OPEN/IAITOSCAPED SPACE (1.S8 AC. OR 80,000 S.F.). I68% • AAAYIMUM BUDDING HEIGHT 50, • MAXDIUM LIGHT POLE HEIGHT 17' AIL EXTERIOR LIGHTING STANDARDS SHALL BE IN COMPLIANCE KR11 PIE CITY OF "FAT RIDGE ORDINANCE 1015. CHAPTER 26. ARTICID 1. SECTION 28-30(5) OF THE "EAT RIDGE CODE OF LANs. EXPRED EXTERIOR LIGHTING STANDARDS. • NAX10N S.F. ALL COMMERCIAL STRUCTURES- 02.000 S.F. OR 22.5% • ALL IOINT ACCESS AL5 INTERNAL TO COMMERCIAL AREAS SHALL BE SPECIFIED AS FIRE LANES. IF REQUIRED BY FINE DISTRICT. AIL OIFHERS. TENANTS AND GUESTS SHALL HAVE FREE MOVEMENT THROUGH. AND USE OF AIL PARING. DRIVE AISLES AND CURB CUTS. • CONTINUED Dl:' PMENT OF TIES PO 6 CONTEMPLATED TO START IN LATER 1988 OR IN AK7. COMPLETION OF ALL DEVEIDPMENT 0 CON TOWEATTI, MR1RN 15 MGRS. • PLATTED LOT 4 (RESIDENTIAL) OR OPEN SPACE. 0.24 AC. • ALL DUMFSPM WILL BE [INCLOSED AND ARCNrtECTURAMY SCREENED. APPROVED BY CITY OF MEAT RIDGE BY J 1 I I `A - 89 R-20. L-J1.M' I II II II II 1 II II II III I 1 ~ ~ I 1 ~ I I 1 I I I 7 I IA\ I ~ Zi NIA 'ST "A - I I: I I: I 1 I~ I: RIGHT-nF-WAY i LINE I: I; RETA BUILDING SHE 1 I: 1 I; I 9x3 j r, Blum. PAo I : 1 1: I ED LbT 4 19; 66 5Q FT .24 AC. j ]i6 1 I' $ F. I BUILD. PAp I I z9'lA' I I I ; I, 1, I' I; I I I 1' I: I 1 I; I' I; I I I - EBB PVR.P SEPTEMBER 13. 1997 r lF' "C coC [NC/N[C/!/ML Cn✓/LNY r s CI U )D wfSf PII's~M iS CINIIR - SAC IryAR YOUNGFIELD SERVICE ROAD 6o w W. LA QUINTA MOTOR INN 1 H 00.30•W 'H 293.50' SEVENTY WEST BUSINESS CENTER LOTS 2, 3, 4, 6, AND 7 LOPMENT AN OFFICOMBINEDCIAL NARY-FINAL DEVEL~OPMENTNPLHEAT AN RIDGE SHEET 3 OF 16 --7p - EXIT RAMP RIGHT-Or-WAY LINE I I 309.66' Ig6'JI']5'E 559.66' I ; I I \\\\\N\TJ- ~ 10 I I 1 I I I 6 m•QS \ \ ; A\ .25ppp x 'y\ ' rN\ 3 1 7 I I / 8 50 n ..A „ 5 \OO l\Vl \.I I I M.. grD y_AF 'R I a I WM sSTLrFnp ve 1 I I PEMAIN AQ5' -25_ RETAIL A EHR0.65URE y wCrvD 9 AREA- EJ ARIES L , I I e0D0 sr 36.157 SF d I 1 6 5 a I' I 1 l0 ~ I ~ I I YS o j1 i o.•lull I I yy I I ID ..2D] SO TI M CHI YO. .e o II 1 / i rENDrs .AA I 5O I1 W I ~E7 I LEGEND MM.Y 5'.S A' 5•ALE I ~I l~ I S 1 I EY5nNL PIICPOSEO S MOJf1EH fCIIQ - o I n CJ I D Norl I Aewsucu ..ER rtrvQ J5n sD Fl PAD l25•.C s sa¢o. 9a 1 } Y'ACC I ,v.as Huul(R OE vaxmc 4'.as ZO7A 5 OOTbO' C a u CGUInBY CAFE - t}'$PAC 5 40,000 so Er 11 E.. S Ewsnrvc 10 a 0.92 Ac. "y OIRB AHO alm. A ~ ' I} SPAC 5 1e DO' Now i ' S• I SPA E I l_ -2E'-1 , E _ ~a I Lot I~ 235• }L9i I L 15D Sf AXMAX F1 AE y (1NUY[Nl sl('.N R AIL ",ZI NIA ST FwR,P FDR aFICC s 0ARa M - - _ D NHL _ ''A 203rD' (271.39'1 ~j Syr 227. "8 vsm.cn - Snnc [oP } sPAQS A` 1 I I I l„ 1 „1-70 SERVICE ROAD WEST" 9 n AI ,.G CURB ..::tER `Jr' T Oct 1 T~ 1 PROPOSED - . OF-NAY - RIGHT- CNTRY - - 2}9A} LINE N O0.T12' M 66&aY W ^ I' I • fDRC I ,125 $.F, BUILD. PAO I RF' I.Q .R OPEN SPACE/GERM R e o aii xMC. All v-2. ww\ 8I SITE PLAN DATA - ALTERNATE B AwHPSFER [N0.05UPC 83269 AC. TMAL AREA 1 - yT} P .H USER 092 AC. -SO 19.59 75 p1AY0M0 SHAYHOCK 2,A00 5F. BDILI)ING G.F.A. F S . STORE I,BOB o O I CAP KABH 1.072 S.F. a SPACES Z - PARKING REQUIRED 4 SPACES _ PAPIDNG PROVIDED w 0.03 AC. V ry i •ENDYS "DO SF. F.A- Z" G P 4A SPACES O IAAHO FOR`.,\ NIT IRED EQU PAARING R H SPACES H.O. FARROW W PARKING PROVIDED 1EB, O STAVING SPACES PLR DRIVE UP nNDOII 0.6E AC. COUIRRT CAFE 3,571 S.P. 0 1 BUILDING OF A. 0 SPACES 3 PARING REQUIRED 47 SPACES I PARKING PROVIDED FUFURE CE MA, RETAIL In AC. 10.200 5F. " BURRING CXA. RKING REQUIRED (RESTAURANF) Bt CARS CARS B H. S,y,g IX w nPE _ - I PA PARKING PROVIDED I 0.1E AC. RETAIL BLINDING SITE 125S T. I RUR G.F.A. 7 SPACES . nAP.NG IHC. REQUIRED ~,.Cm O • 25 OPEN SPACE/PERM B6 AC. L • CON,,,,,, S OF OPENMNDSCAPED SPACE 159E (,.m AC, OR 50,000 S.F.)- SD • Y.4l0YUM BNIDDIG HEIGHT IY MAK MUM UN POLE HEIGHT ALL v,,, TOR LIGNIN. STANDARDS SHALL BE w COMPLIANCE IBM THE CRY OF n"T RIDGE ORDINANCE 1015. CHAPTER " ARTICLE 1. SECTION 26-00(5) OF ME WHEAT RIDGE CODE OF IA•S. ENFII F ICETENOR UGITIBIG STANDARDS. 90.700 SF. OR 2501: MAIpYUM 9.F. AM COMMERCIAL SDIUCNRES• • AU. 101NT ACCESS ATOLLS INFERNAL TO COMMERCIAL AREAS SHALL BE BY ME DISM1CT. AM O"E. T E FREE MOVEMCNF THROUGH, AND USA AND GUESTS SI DIM NAV TENANTS S TENA OF AU. PARKING, DRIVE MSIFS AND CURB CUTS. CONFINVED DEVELOPMENT OF MIS PD IS CONTLYPLATED TO START RI COtTER IM E'D or, IN ITN 1, 5 COMPLETION OF ALL DEVELOPMENT IS 0.24 AC. • PLATTED LOT 4 (RESIDENTIAL) OR OPEN SPACE. • AU. DUNPSTELS MM Be ENCLOSED AND ARCNT.C0IRAILT SCREENED - APPROVED BY CITY OF WEAT RIDGE F • 'I ''ID.}6 50 R 4 51. 6J2D vnD I li , I R - XLGti 3134 , I; I I; 1 I I I I 1: : 11 I : I II I ~I I I II i ' X11 I ; SEPTEMBER 13, 1996 (RA9CR A "Nor FAY•1NFlAYAG !,'OUMrvr I H. ESC POCUFCT ]0 MSI'BVSmRS CfvH n-- ALTERNATE B z-+- GRAPHIC SCALE a 20 O a AO scar, I rm - .0 n SEVENTY WEST BUSINESS CENTER LOTS 2, 3, 4, 6 AND 7 AN OFFICIAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN O?i THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE COMBINED PRELIMINARY-FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN II SHEET 4 OF 16 YOUNGFIELD 1-_7__0 EXIT RAMP YQUNCFIELD SE - - RVICE ROAD _ f ( of 1 e' NOFJT•15T 359.66' I R IT— 1 •x12. x \ tf ~w , n 1 , a ' W1 ~ OMB G D EI1, MPR,v 5'.5.9' LA Q U I N T A , I 1 li I 1 0 SPACE5 ~ N I ^ ' 5511 50 Ft P/•p MOTOR INN II rtt 1 w COUNTY CAFE Ef l10 EX SnNc S •.M}mow } EN ,NCT „ ' GMB m ~I e 1 Ii Easn"c n ~ I I f 1 I _ 1 I s ,E n 10 -5- HIGH MAX. i 150 5 f. ue . rAC .0. F.T SON ' n m. .N --FmT Otl~-~1~~ :I',; j A~ Lit x OPJOWb IBJ.b' I ~ _ y L - - - h ROPOSED - - I 1 r.. r.r R~ L l EN _ _ _ l •ti a E . IdrArr u«a [TU12 wu Y- pa 2' I I Flo I 'I--' I I I I I pl) P91 I tr ErCL05 R[ I ~ x I l- o O _ 1 m I " 8 f- I I ry o ISLAND r A;Y~~. .C P BAR, I L I I IW' 169.59 J ~ ,P 5',5'•9 w _ ` • qqq p B PM ti R E / - k_. - a 1 SMed IY RRI 1RNC' R (,H. n r RA A, P, 11 KTui, ESTAURANT 10.975 SO FT . T-v PAP 1-70 SERVICE ROAD WEST WALL ALTERNATE A UTILITY PLAN RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE Z-- r GRAPHIC SCALE a .o ID o w Bo I I 9c,a- 1 :,m - ,0 11 _ I I LEGEND c n X a_,s I UDSIRC PROPM0 X X B"IW(XII IEMCE U, AcwmcAL eARRUI rtra I I "LAS :r NU.KR CP PAIRMG 4"CLS 1 ` I ID "A INDEl1Te1GTP1 , 1 I cuPo AND ouTYrR I I : I ' I I wAl[R uNN 1 SARHARx SEWER I i 1 ♦ i ° uuwHgE FR MttXNIT I; C,s HIRE T I: I a 1 I \ I ` \ ~ sua ` AZI NIA 'S, WATER T I 1' I SEWER 1: I l L US WEST 1'. 1'• IGHT-or-WAY LINE PUBLIC SERVICE 1 . 1 L TGI I 1 RETAI BUILDING SITE 1 R -1~ 915 IF. BUILD P,0 [w ww I ~ I 1 w e ~T.,s IN Nue. OPEN SPACE/GERM So = 10, 1 1.6 I N DTdTY W E____________________________________________________ o ID.Ie' R - L 2000 .Ir A1 ~ - r1u--.---_------ H----- r APPROVED BY OTY OF WHEAT RIDGE BY tr (NpO611N1 36,157 SF 0.83 ACRES C OR WEHDYS . M1S SO fi `f ~.~'~$M~Y w wuc SnSe nuc All \ 40.000 SO FT ,_7. mrn.x 0.92 Ac. ~o _r ~sgx: -e e ' I~~t4cl I• ~e _d d ED LOT A NOTES: $1 ET .24 AD. ALL WJRX SHALL BE PERFORMED IH ACCORDANCE '.111 1 Sf. UILO An . •.URRENT CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE AND JRFERSDN COHN' I STANDARDS AND SPEOFICARONS. 2. Ott OF WHEAT RIDGE AND ,IErFERSOB COUNTY SIAU '"IF BE RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINFERANCE O ON-5111 UPL011 3. EXISTING UITLHY wrdWATION IS FROM FIELD SURVEYs AND AS BUILT INi ORMARDH GATHERED FRbI AVARARI I SOURCES. CONTRACTOR S HAIL UNCOVER AND VERIFY LOCAnp! AND ELEVATION OF ALL EXISTING URIInFS 86GRE ueemG UTIUIY CO•'IECnONS OR CROSSINGS AND PROTECT THE. DURING CONSTNCnON. A. IT IS ME RESPON9BIUFY OF ME CONSTRUCTION (ON FRACIOR 10 NOrlix IRE URIIIY HOIIFICAMIN (f. MR OF "ORADO (I-BDO-912-1987) PRIOR 10 ANY EXCAVATION, 5. THE COHSMUCnDN CONMACFOR SHALL BE RESPOHSIIIII FOR TEMPDHARY EROSION CUNMHI DURING THE COASTRUCMH PERIOD. 6. ME BENCRMARX USED WAS ME FINISH FLOOR ELEV. OF COUNTRY CAFE REV- 5511.00 7. A0. PIPE MATERIAL SHALL BE AS FOLLOWS UNLESS SPECIFICALLY STATED OMER.SE: 6• F H. LINES 91,11 BE DUCTILE IRON PIPE. WATER LINES 91ALL BE PVC SS 91AU BE PVC SOP 35. STS 914L BE RCP CLAS'• 1 SEPTEMBER 13, 1996 lR~L(R d /uEBC - /n CX Ur a/ Y O Inr5rN15S f.T PgUIFCI: /0 NiS l 9/]/Y5 }r UMrt. irN,L ULIUrv %NH SEVENTY WEST BUSINESS CENTER LOTS 2, 3, 4, 6, AND 7 AN OFFICIAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN OF THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE COMBINED PRELIMINARY-FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN ; SHEET 5 OF 16 YOUNCFIELD - IT 70 E SERVICE ROAD 1 " - AMP X ° ' nvc f (AS ) ND6'!I'25~ I I ~ IO ) !09.66' ) 339 366. 0'': ]SB. ~ ~ty_U_Reaw u 4M 6 SP•Q9 - ].or 1 I I 4r' o _ _ - ~ 6 SP, S Tn'sa n..[ • r"'a\ \ . .330 L RI ' 'a 5 \ V\ \ , rr>r ~ -Fep / ' R,9, RETAIL Hr-nr m. REU ~~'N'~' uR[ [ ] SOr \ \I I I • uovo suu T I ] _ss - = = - Boo - I Sr ~~(/Jt~ 11M1 9 AREA .83 ACRES - e: KRD 36,' ~ H LA QUINTA MOTOR INN 1'"x`TaA I COJNIRT G[E .110 FASTING = i I 1 _ _ ~1 M I 8 Y l,__ N 00'3O W 493.50 IS 9~(ZS IlT LnI I I'a Or 6 W 6 EME 0 s I 0 ~ IN p I S w U r I 0 ISLAND X.C. PII I I ➢ A E , PIP K A, APE FIRE RIUCR MINI-ARGIND u mTl 11 v M, N la- s'HIGH uFA y50 5F, uAC F•C 11, ONU•IENT SIGN FOR OFFICE li. 1 n e'w I- I~ I I- I i 3C O T IIS g 1 I A 40190 (271.39) „1-70 SERVICE ROAD WEST w EuSLNG CWB k WIIER W IIENDYS 4.200 SO FT 16 a PLUG \-~I 40.000 SO FT; - F 0.92 AR:. i \~r y~AA]~ . e 3 ' lei@~4~ ° I' ° • J v I v~>3': a WALL ALTERNATE 8 UTILITY PLAN Z Rr IGHi-OF-WAY LING ) ~ GRAPHIC SCALE Q / y .0 ]0 0 .0 60 ' I I WALE: I :.a _ .O 11'. E ry i I I LEGEND N I EarsnNC PaoPV6m I I e' womEx rcva . I v=o-- Y ' AGGrsnrx e•Rmw PENCE MIUDER (K PARKING WAGES fl OURS 'RD co"M I \ - ~ - wAIEA uul I I SAIATMY WKR ' I I c u4R1GE I f. I x. D RUH i GAS LNNC 1 1 ~ Y iZI NIA 'ST ® R.W P I WATER `ELL\111\I I ) : T I SEWER 4 9 1. I RI HT F I -O -WAY G US HEST LINE r 1 1 C ^ 1 l\ R[TA1 nlllpRr SINE 45 v nw !145 S.c WILD. PA D OPEN SPACE/BERN 1 I Tcl 7 R o E ' 1 1 q/ ) LOI I - 1 ° Y . HL? 50 FI INDIES 0 l.9 .9 c Sr. BI+ILO. •D t ALL WORK SHAM ED IN ACCORDANCE WP' 1 T CURRENT STY Or W RIDGE AND SEr [RSDN C:..~I, I 1 I FI A TI STANDARDS AND P EO I : ` JETTE A D ••'II z. CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE AND COUNTY v.•A : 1 r' I BE d 0 .N < DN-SEC U'I:INI'.. BE RESPONSIBLE FOR EN 1 L _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ TON IS P F MA UnURUTY IN IN E RW HELD wR.I." - An 1 I 1 - D - 6919"", TTO GAT RVA . AND AS BUILT INFCRUAnCN GATHERED IFpI Avul 0 i OURCE 0 O ♦ o L - 3 90 N ^ NO 0 C Ex, H E N G, L S _ 1c fli VL r - 1A W4 I CRO555 PUEO OR CONNECTORS R AND PROT CT IN N R _ _ _ _ _ E S BTY OCO A. IT IS Tl1E RE RCSPCNSI9 Or ME CONSTRUCTION U - _ - _ mon N FY mE UTILITY UnON CONTRACTOR TO , -1967) ER OF OF COULORADOADO ( -924-198]) PRIOR TIGN. PRIOR ANY - - U RESPWYIRI M ]OR CONTRACTOR 5. E CONSTRUCTION D GU FOR TEMPORARY EROSION R09(IN CMNtO_ L DURING ME CONSERUCnO4 CTIXI PERICO. 6. ME BENCHMARK USED WAS ME nNISN FLOOR CLCY OF COUNTRY CAFE EIEv_ 5521.0 ALL PIPE MATERIAL SHALL BE AS FOLLOWS UNLESS SPECIFICALLY STATED OMERWSC: fi FN. LINES 9141 • EE TACTILE IBM PIPE. WATER LINES SHALL RE PVC 1 111 I PUBLIC SERNCE SS SHALL BE Pv SUR 35. STS SHALL RE RCP CLASS I APPROVED BY CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE BY TITLE 6 IN. S I u c ~ .~Iy~ I` I i I I I I 1 6 ! X. 12 • 5 ' b .R 2 CS I iI ",^o ~I r I _ -x e_ss uRr Ta eL +el - - -s- 1- - -n lw so I FBASIER J Nff - EMi}NEER]M'. O PANY ",I.M Ex n9 u Paw[a: ]o .ESP mnmr :9 crvn- L/)/ae y Unn. rmAl U'Dol PLAN I: -a13. SEVENTY WEST BUSINESS CENTER ALTERNATE A LOTS 2, 3, 4, 6 AND 7 AN OFFICIAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN OFL THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE GRADING & COMBINED PRELIMINARY-FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN - DRAINAGE PLAN - - ` = - tPQ:~9>~ZfS_ SHEEP 6 OF 16 I 70 EXIT RAMP - - YOUNG' - - ----_-0 - _ YT FIELA SERVICE ROAD _ - - - .n i 1 1 \ - N-ps-r-~--~--•-- _ RIGHi-OF-WAY UHE GRAPHIC SCALE - 20 0 40 w \ • \\\777"' '~~4. I ly$I \ L 25' ' 1e ,e" Q Ld t ~Fk is \ I5 - ~4~PSTCR -~3b;1S SF `s I / Ls SCALE :1 -4011 T...cr+a L.srlr° 16 V F.: ELEV-5r 6.50 areyra. I u s _ ¢5 aI 1 LEGEND j L. a• AT e-sst).w 25' s.s v Y q1 \V i LL Li v a /35' i as op E) L G 0 1 C I "STING PNaPO m I N T A Y spA E5 ? l y N I XX IF WOODEN ff.a L A Q U R~ K 1 DD i R I / , n r L° 4 .cH Y. I I Ilcalsnc/.L 9ARn1ER Fo12 1r F.F. ELEV-044.00/• i I 5 A ' I i I G"-` S7 III!"RER OF PeRrtINC soA6s MOTOR INN FE"]t~ El£V-~521521. • ~ E - • ^ / / / )t / ' • I ID CVR\L mCENnIIGI1W F 1 I COUNTRY CAFE "STS fEF<C/FN[STALwANy I J 10 1 ElDSnnO _ 1 10,975 son - e /40.000 FT 3 /S. ••y I - NRe ANO wrTR I 1 0.9 k. N 1 I a- MAWAGC OAMPON / FF 5577 SO n o Y'J S/ 1 IS AS s . I70 SERVICE ROAD WEST IvSmK I [ns ~ / ~ )+ti ~ CCM fp11R5 L»c ..,r. ] °w•a. i ^ ; / y4• f P I~C~ /I - e e / I g I 41y{(~Te I''in I ~ I pElDlnax AREA 1~ ) 1 _ y~ q I I tl// 1~~411 tl~el : - ' 1 :1 ~ i a SIN I J° 1 ,'~e~ tl Y I 1 2 R[A ('41157 (ll ~ .1 1 1 / \ _35. F2 sP 5 „ K~i _ lW 3 P I i r \ 1 \ F I 'J I1` Q M9GN PONT ZI NIA 'ST _ ,1 P C SP4E5 . - - , _ _ • ; "1 \ - - BASIN UM S i 00 2 DETENTION VOLUME P c / 1 1. ~ Fwntn, >u~~ / ~ ~ ~ I SPACES ( AREA/ (CF I - 1 I 1 I 1 11 1 11 11\^I~I~LL~~_____ T 1 A 5," I °I I I I 0A 1 / . . Irn / / 1 \ TumNG W Jlp / / W Y I / ~ / 90 2.16 ) d T ~ FTI pVUPS R-yN ~ ! CndO~URE II- FCj z 0 I O 9i I / F 1 50' -1--~a~ yl ~ ry c I 1 ~ o\ O h n W/ n i u 0 / i p}1j~y~ 1. Y 0 ~L IR~Nq \ \ M.6 bAIN ( JrH'+~ A \ ` I • lb - _ s SPACES PROP05ED _i - rlli ENTRY I - SID _ =~••u -Jy 279.4>_--- \ I RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE 1 6.450 2 12.914 3 22.900 IOIAL 4a 264 \ b _ _-y`J___ 91.00' N OStT12" W eBe 3 RETAINING WALL 3 1 , RETAIL BUILDING SITE 925 E B PAO 0_5531.5 0 f~„ W f I NOtES: I/ OPEN SPACE/BERM R 6 1. ALL WORK SHALL BE PERFDRYCn IN ACCORDANCE "I" _ P ' fD IbT 4 CURRENT CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE AND JEFFERSON CO"' 1 10, 66 %FT .24 AC. STANDARDS AND SPEOFICAnONS. SE BUILD. PAD 2. OlY OF WHEAT RIDGE AND .CFFERSIW LQINIY 94AI I u01 I BE RESPONSIBLE FOR NAINFENANCE O M-SITE Un1,IIIS ill I 3, EKSTMG UTILITY INFORMATION Is FROM FIELD SURVEI'• j AND As BUILT MFMMAnON GATNrRCO FRW A.ItA^II X Op'tY12• W I SOURCES. CONELE""R $OF UNCOVER AND KRR t ]0.10 _ I L~ARDN AND ELEVATION OF ALL E•I$ UFRIRfS BEFORE f ..D • e9Z9'14' BEFORE MAKING DOR TI W059NG5 CONSM" 1 2p pp AND PROTECT MEW DURING ING CONSTRUCTION ,T S Q R O L - 31.2E i 4 It IS ME RESPONSIBILITY OF M nlE CONS]NUCnCN TOR 1 I CEENNTRCOt COWADD(1 BOD-9227-199])IGOM II 1 PRIM TO ANY E%CAVAnW. 1 I 5 FOR FEMPMARYERD OW CWTROL'DUnING MEPM.rnC VI 1 Y I CWSFRUCnON PERIOD. I II I 6. BENCHMARK USED: FINISH FLOOR COUNTRY CAFE RESTAURANT ELEV=5521 OD 11 I T. ALL FINISHED FLOOR ELEVATIONS STALL BE I 1 I AS PER GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN. 1 1 I 1 ~ r I INS SEPTEMBER 13. 199E I I _ R_ WA. a rR/s!cR a IuLRt Q 0(5yr.)=8.2 CFS FA$'/REFR+WY' --nARr 0(100yr)=16.2 CFS APPROVED BY CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE SEVENTY WEST BUSINESS CENTER ALTERNATE B LOTS 2 3, 4, 6 AND 7 AN OFFICIAL DEVELOPMENT FLAN OW THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE GRADING & DRAINAGE PLAN COMBINED PRELIMINARY-FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN - SHE 7 OF 16 1.4,9 C - = t~qr~=9_~sFS SERVICE ROAD EXIT - AMP1 oF-Wr LINE YOUNGFIELD r _ - _ = z RIC 12rw' 1 \ ` . US GRAPHIC SCALE AD 20 0 AT w RETAIL \ --AREA ACRE ; ScNf 1 :•a . A0" sooo sr 7 SF-__ I I 1 I 1 F.r\1917Il-5521.00 F • Iea mvmE y,sy.N cnN•c `nA!'VrNi ' r+`~F1FV-i5'{°~50,' -ssn.w 1 ,(j' y ( y I / +ts `I / 1 -O I LEGEND I _ $ = C MORN 5'•5'0' ,l •21\ I 11 SD/.Cf I I4IC? 1 I pl ~I 1 ISV/. f •Ty x00 YYoo FT • w+Dro%u I N T A I a I I I , N 1 I 1 LI r^ 1 1 LU I EXISTING L A Q U ' I I \ I o r r f 1 1 ; I C7 -3C~E e' .DCDIH 1ENa • I I ~1 / Ilr F f In Z I ArL]SnOy SNAPPER RMS 35]1 SO FT PAD II 5•. / I MOTOR INN 1 927 ]x~ ! 1 % r.r. ElC\'-SST. I / / L RST.>a' S E 1 I v¢s 1AA1B[a WE O OARXMC 9•A¢5 1 COlM1NY - I NA 5 i I 1 I✓ 1 40.000 • F[ [z H0 A E]OS]wG I ' / ~.1 x 0.9 Ac. ill . . 1 y o / ° r.f. F1L 55.50 F - ° H ! I^ • u 1 I aNHAC( OACCna 27 - 1 I I 1] 5N. ~ ~ / - -d g I -mac QIIe NO 61T][A 8 r 11611 • 1 1, I cwwrs ' T. 'J I I I Il I 1 I !1 . I OI I C I IF 1 w I \ cD,, S I. i 1 5P. ELI V r 1 Ej r: J 1 I CRFHM+ •RU z .NL• (.fD6) I I IA\ \~✓//,N 11111'1`_________.__ l \\:'`I 11 r yr u}ngD 50 rT 'r S. E3EV-SSYl00/ • , ,n A, F.F. )&-5522.50 R AIL o _ i. J ` - ---A •J~ ' Qi DC9a ObvT jZl IN TA 1 1~ L\ .t'1LD4;1P 44.. x93.50' .Ii _ ' ' •,••2 ` \ x0390' \ (t]F. - a' I wm LA .uc fcri r 0 2I IS-vr us I I~'x I I ~/~1I-: ' I I I I-70 S[ RVICE RO°AD WEST - I v¢m ` 51 c WNB l cL]•L[R yb9T v-55 1.w A2 829 ~ SPACES A r [¢450 1 I 1 1 ] 1 r PROPOSE 5 S I - I I Irl ENTRY . (D'= - t } 22.900 ! 11'ItP / Ir ~1- 2]91] 1 I RIGHT-OF-WAY I tOtaA as 26. nA / ~i_--_ --i-".wa"ys'-r LINE l _ KINNINC WALL qo0' 1 1 14k1'~ - N 00•anx• W WAS P - -T W _n e_L :7211s, WAD. In ' N2 • / H Ma '1 _ 1 8y OPEN SPACE/BERM _ I Norzs ALL - IN ACC'P' ° a 4 1 Ngq~KO 'Or 9~wE.• gIDLCp.ND .RrnaSCn I n CWN1Y r 0.)6 50 n Y SlmDF vHAnp SE NO' ID ,K / , ~ ' e IaV _ EASON 3. 5r. ByYD O.0 2' BEIn Or~i9BlF ~-Ofq~uNN]EN. Na Or a`S11E UnI11inE5 r _ 1 1' 1 lb i I 3. ENSTING UMITY AJWuana IS FR AA 1R0 •'-q`E1[ E)P Y ✓A 1 IES I L I WAYS rR 'II 1 I AND AS BUILT m:^p 1 ,9n 316 yA-pN C"'HERED 1 ! Cn0.D1 11 ' SOUgaS, L TRACIDq SHALL UHCO9EN AND A{R11v IDA AND Cl•aAna !K ALL ll PnznNO unpnE6 I o I E A THEM DU CavECnWS I.""' ~ D - 49-IE-: BFAnp PROW RCI M[u WMNL CaSTNUCT 0.. ? I O H b / ' ''~9 115 I O - Jo E9x~ I A IT AND P 15 THE RE71D W tt p: ME CONS"C'IW ° r O I CCmNTER OraCQOq>?W II lW 9]I-.9En' [Ana rl ~ L O vl , , - I' I i N ANY a PRIUR 70 C A. 5. THE MC CasTUU T,D, TBALL WMB[ TIRE 'NLL FOR 2 °°o $ 1 1 t 1 CDi t[uPGRARl RY ECa OSO'1 CON-0. NG THE ^e' ~ U W 1 /I rI ~I 1I I ~ I Ca51NUCDW PERIOD. y II M( 1-',IL 1 R 6. BENCHMARK USED: FINISH FLOOR 0' 10 y Isr/ylri FOR Y I CWNCNY CAFE RESTAURANT ELE`/-5571 DO \ N.c\WAdxw I ALL FINISHED FLOOR ELEVAnWS SHALL BE \ 1 1 II AS PER GRADING AND DRIHNAGL PLAN ` p; I r3 1 I 1 I 10 `\\\..4r •1114 I "m IL I SEPTEMBER 13. a yl MNL\\ t ~e 1 - 199 a 1018[ H, 11 „ e /RA4[R eL SUA• ,0(5yr.)=8.2 CFS ane. [Ar,~'¢rN.e couoArn \ w APPROWD BY CITY OF WEAT RIDGE • ~ e if! 'A A' w I 2-M4 LA QUINTA MOTOR INN R YOUNGFIELD SERVICE ROAD Z_ Pop 7-JI`U F N op'aeop . (.ROUND 9G FM Wna sL vlo^nooN ~ 4- SL., SEVENTY WEST BUSINirS5 GtN ILK LOTS 2 3 4, 6 AND 7 AN OFFICIAL DEVELOPMENT I'LJ1N OFD THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE COMBINED PRELIMINARY-FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN SHEET 8 OF 16 fr.0 Z` •P 6r cvor 1-70 EXIT RAMP 2.cr -a-az_ semis. 'r~nr I 1 1 Nos F -.C.AtA eo.oe ].do' EvsnNC sal ~ I ~ 1 ~ ~ • 1. I -3-M7 \\\111 ro PEyNN a I _ 16 y I " I I I _Zc Rli- Jc Nbl ` .vp _ I Ufblb iCX I. ' IX.MPSICP ~ V b r-J5P 6-SW I I I I i, i ~blb z-2c a J 11 m.¢ I Ibib I I t.ac a~ .,Nr sa rt ] s 4- 36,157 SF-3-JNu _ }s - It ACP. 1m rt PM RES IS-JAU ' 2'PI 1 s COUNMY C"FT Mtwa MES1.N.wN•t EnSnNG - qnP Sp n SJyf LAND S.'J-TI I GDM PL LTZ e ~ ~Q-PIP-_ 5_J4 R 9-age >e ~ _ i e $ f~16~~ $ 1-SL n e I I ]s' v Y lo-4 ~~C' 4-'Ap i us I I; ' i I I esP s I I 4- 2-m P Wu GSL + 40.000 SO FT 5L 7•J5FA G-.18f 1_5t._ I1-S> 0:9 FAc. I I v so.a I r ~Z Juu Ail' I ,r. L_ vc r Iti it rrn h~ atN R - I-70 SERVICE ROAD WEST 2 .J• PNOroeEO ~ 1.iL ` M W'l>Il M66G..J' ff-JBF I_ $L OPEN SPACE/BERM (51RIA LAr+D5cSpE FLAN CoA R -M) _I -$L Cf13L9 am..e. oNnl' UfT 4J9F d: U $ IL g 0 0 3 J J 3 0 t ~ I N U w V O Fl E t Not ~dII" NmPm ls•w.drmr)+•A e.rbm..(rls e t E.e ar v. avawv rrucn•r m eum Jedrv-TE•b.Er Vd•II'd P•ryrr•do.. Too .e.lra P~.•.dr.rmy e.•., re r..•. r.......r.. a . ws.•a. ZJLLJ. a v ,..-I~ rr.. rrrr.r . N medderddE]dE l+.d•FY ~m1°vd~l e•vaP~^~°Pdum E rs... L • Vrd] Pep•Su{.hL ~..vf. ^ ' ~ ml•. by =r a v p.-;g arr d .E .arF d a L r • T- .r.... ~ . , 1 . Plmld• ..v ] °I°b'P~EIb.aE d Ld~P ~Lm r~^ dr rdd dea odb.lr rri Ib1eb V d r r e~~rr •arrrr * r i !d .tl lo ~ ,yWV{ ~_JXO s •ru rr.r wcr rs= .,rrr pPwtl•NT rldd dNV r ._v n rN•v - . aq' JA••Im• P"r worry p4 I ~mi 1 NJ P •r brd'i P'S7 of Pl r.Nr °rr,r rpdr q.dbl iw _ c~~ C Ilydlrl d d dlw rreb q•Hfdy re.ra lP•'Jfrgr M ' w......~~ ^ ^ .r •~...r P Wd r.TNp'~r.sr]. • vmFm>or +ro r d vral• iE b PM•`•T/ °v°°.a d r.r PI•r ~ w ...~.r rr+ 7. M y.yFy .P° by P .mE1'.!•d I w i•Y •r~ v r~~~ PpPrtiF rp4 R d®CO • r ,•.a••,A Wrl g,•®rCrr. ALTERNATE A LANDSCAPE PLAN JULY u• 1196 AUGUST 19" SEPTEWIE IS. It" -JNV acA JHU- Z SL . ai K--I M - GRAPHIC SCALE F~ w m o "o n r JNV SCNL 1 PM ~ W n ~ cP (D Rte' ZINNIA ST e.JPD Aip RETAIL BUILDING SITE Rds I IY SI. &M1D >/D B ~ t-SL s R _ PLATTED LOT 4 10.266 SO FT 0.24 Ac. IM) S.F. R Pw 1-SL e W N MOJ' 1T . ' L 31 24 Q P7•l9[IF f IP4L i i YOUNGHELD SERVICE ROAD s Lf j -x- w LA QUINTA MOTOR INN R 2 YOP - MM.D vo+ Fo 0'Ta sx.owxoo.l 3-SL 7- J90 y MA N oo'ao'm" wl^xpA ~ r"fJRU SEVENTY WEST BUSINESS CENTER' LOTS 2 3 4, 6 AND 7 AN OFFICCOIMBINED PRELIMINARY-FINAL DEVELIOPMENTNPLAN RIDGE SHEET 9 OF 16 1-7 0 EXIT RAMP 9-~-xx I-41f' tp EC x '=-c I MLN ALTERNATE B LANDSCAPE.PLAN JULY 19, 1996 AUGUST S. 1996 SEPTEMBER 1], 1996 RETML 7. 1ANT" °eE G'JNU ~ _ . mm -.RCS I .t-JRU~ 4-"U_ _ JN I I I 9 1 wENOrs :~`6 -JRU n mA¢ -6L I s awe sa rt _t_SL w !-vld ~ 4-J4U Z L ACRES }-JN 1"5L f' > °b Jdf ^ ~5 AREA- .63 Jsn sa rt Pb ~ 36,157 SFZ ~ Plr F N 6 a ' I e \ RULE I.w N ' c.rE .4-JNU GRAPHIC SCALE r s EL91RL z-SL t "!-SL w x9 9 b eo f ~L ~ -Z-ao a ?-PIP b-JBF t y F -[-GH 11 I I I a 2.Pty J6P _ 5-Pi 'O Y G _f-SL _cv n i 1RE10 J Q 4J9F 7JRU G-MP b e'er Q f"i - re..s ~v x Y $ 1-SL ~~ww~~~ mj~ lM' 3 11,1m so rt 2-5t RETNL 40,000 50 FT -t-SL O 2 Ac. 2c Z NNIA ST 5-JNU 1 6F s-J Z-J Q 1-sL 6-JNU ~ AFP r,¢ ~s-JBF I 1 1 1 1 I'f~ t I I I I I LI I I I III `J ~L-SL L7.fj I-70 S VICE ROAD WEST x so-(XS apr R ,~A R c 3-2c, '3-RC- Z 8 -J90 FSL-~ fwLrox9 s AIZS ° 1 1-5L I-MA Z 5L °°OU' • M6u' am' Ib-J9U - ` f- SL y x ! - OPEN SPACE/GERM R s (6EY.xt LAl+TY~APIAY.1 GLrAfII ~TE~ . 1d 7-5L a L L.,,„DP,ev(,Aoav.evl r.9 u.rlom-. (.w.. am-~ra< >®eA 1_5L. e-e,79'le'. ' Y ` w.¢ m o..m o. m m..o..... sru-c $uEw-Tb.b-9v✓.lPn (1-ci Peyvm.l cdF .Ytx" w 9 -x9.09' L n.le' ~ u d-Mr.e I eei mrveP.^°° P^°' ° d m ITS q N'• v", Ede amti®~ mEl Lm~. Ar O II e PwvemR.nb ~.vt mm n U _ n ^ 1 = 2 -SL w_ tbrokd diV~fbp°'°ed~~°beuo+fir n+°~by wow .r wry ~ i ^ h = I~ r b , . n n a•Lub.p Afdia[ P'°° Duet ItII .Lnm :S D ~P~ Or ald . _ omv-d m.eA T1utm o l .lulA e9 b.6 wpb n# v m ~..r .r..wes4m +e 3-~NU m _.r. . r ° ...°R.. ld -ei.n e. wan. e'n 4. ~a>♦® S ° barP aYP`lur°f iii. ~ w r s. q'fn1LC bf roo.s T' nPUn 6edrw and n `.`!r .^~...r iw~ v+'.+ l A9 1sa' lww wr i 9 Y ^ ea>~aea dae...pINlw Rwd .sv,. ~vr ' G we+rd ' w1M n.~ nom .r A94eecV' mm aw ®~•uw ~eNUWd by rWT1 w'~ ' ° v rw9 1wK. , TIRN-N pr"" ~A a . Z-MA 2-SL ,v. ^.w.+^ e.:.A ws Bu®v.Cmw. r EweA. 1 1 1 ~5'JNU ' S-JBF E>+rtww rp [,r DCVBLOPYENT 'ETAIL BUILDING SITE in sr. ww. ve -PLATTED LOT 4 10,266 SO FT 0.24 Ac. J,,m sr. a Pr.) i f•LREP mum m 70 WEST BUSINESS SHCENTER EET o OFEATRIDGE, COLORADO - 16 P W ST LEVATION yK - r-O COMBINED PRELIMINARY DsHFRNAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN DI MOCK AT SOUTH ELEVATION VK - '-O uS~ M'Q .[Kfn - CIXM zurx .O p' RSI SOr Q Opx[xl E swo-rx u NORTH E_-_ LEVATION- ~/r - r-r CONVENIENCE STORExW& CANOPYEELEVATIONS crnq ELELATION ,l r St o.x[r p K VEMEC - C0. S .O RSr L Or SOLOS- EAST ELEVATION (Exr t) yr. -K WEST ELEVATION EDm ..o .~s voi uw rD I 4451 tLlv"Urv CANOPY/ISLAND E ELATION Ian : ./r --K Ft Car Wash ~ I CAR W65I1 CI •N ; v: s-r o Corner Store i. ~......u aim WING aGN -n i C" VA Diamond Shamrock neNnPY CION ~ FRFF TANDINO P81CF SIGN row SIGN PLAN nLL D.E.Sx .CMMR •»D -rtR S •+E 'r 1v_SS '.MED O vans[ •.ICN RICE dGN NOT ' o-~.a ~/»m oxae vwnoc• n .umE° muD sr...v:.ws sDS M M vxn or ~ sa _ Eo~i vx~"rssxn. Mw.x'EO+~s 10 ~D 5 f. MIKS V MS 5•Vt IOC .J'VxT'Y s~ O CWSIPVCMG M K'. T~ VOA-~+ 1 r'~ Diamond Shamrock E Enw. saw 1a 0. •DK.-5 ISM F. XTE RIg9 rLyc^QNS 1. L= L L~~ T t b 3 X .y j • w✓.ic r°...c.a...v~..c .en~`c.°`i vi'o°mv'.• K•a~e^^• • 6 1.Srt • l a/i!TY•/S S SHEET71 OF 16 a' 24'xZE; UG~~~- ~ M M~rAe NIW b •9~ b balW wM< wfZ S Ma aTY aV. 1 rw„bJ FaP,OO„aN pMK •"J+l }s-ET dunwa. 1 .n awE saob. Ean .m NJ`^`•'v'e p alp I r•er me. GaFi[i: ~~__r~wy~~~C~ E Ye' wbESe a4rw•sJ^ P•••e M 4•Tee .TV ircwwiSO •wNwmN..u Taw ~ Mp.ipel]/.P raEUrau envoi: .'OlE' S Va• NABS a+•r e.•'+~S •~pE POVEF fan! bw. SIdPITMO MTNCiNT!' N.le eWapVt. b Yq w Veu . 12. EOIMO~TgN SIlq~wIYENTE f,V•CgEiE MSE li'sIY.]6' r ..s 4G V.li~]' J =Liln E~T~. zcsf ~ r.P .as t.esw Scan W^ a.H!-sv SaTf R+ [isT tSM~ uC~C •Sr f !>•ea[] ru•wr wr. r! mrw•+•v~. syr✓•q ✓y [5 LLW+• ae wow +0• MM nWSOCi✓ S./S [O/RS - i ORV~ 4 4.2 SO A•Y V(4CL .K21~ PPN~ K~% r~C w Sv Y Q.~ IA.P Ki ✓•"!S M1 R••'m rain a.rt• xrt• .•v.vlo vunrtv ori.o-n...! +amai PMLI: rflR. nb b~ SS•••S rl CIM N• wAOSO. KsPP.O VR~i^[ Prb.d ~ e S•s~ RVV•O•f. A26 VRY^S TMJkJ nC V+(• fr'a'Tim•.~ "b w.R MCS-V M.O.1P. RMiSR• .T.YY~ ~ ~ a •d r P CM. b PnMI •Y+••Pr. 70 WEST BUSINESS CENTER HIGH HLSESIGN NOTE WutlT'. a Ybrtd Sb%ef r6e 2M 5. It high rv or f (no (ml b... m de ioWm vimv of WOWS vSa IV 9.4 1L'e up.Jl be OmO~ m! bbbimN b m8 fa YParY G^✓ btmOUSeG -F_fGI.IFI:/_-1AiS' 01-0 F/Hi VA LED W,"H 4L8P, A. {r_.E.u'Y ? K111'A• o rE~<:.- 11F~~ /_•.✓Y. ILTk~S F'f-'JC'_ /L[N H2.c4+c s; LJ y. Fr_.'_->u :CVI" C 4LE aLJ I- ~n mow' •JT L'n=.'o✓c. - ! _ . _ tc ! (Yay' :-Jac a~ui-~.: 0(TFSJIa'c. ~ i.v r/_.J -r3.c~ ' IJr PI'r ilt 1. T.ifrn•' /-(}ZP Pry I'C bS_~ ~[Y+~1n5 b•vGV'~.TD ~ T'~ RAJ::: ~ ~T' Pt.:ffJ .i:.~ ry,i'E1^L PLfI "CD Y'l pi/r[*CM ~iknE: Gq 4L'E'tL:*I~Ri PF. iVFl l~/b. - •_':Y'-1.:'•~ r k. ~ TL. 1 cw ✓r 1 ' Tf nE 1 c. I Q DWI E _ L -n PJ 7-12 -44 vAP]I ICflgivF Mme... Grv a,'°~= b VJESr 51DE B.EVATIGN r~d9 ~ pt W _ w ° Z as ~..,w,. ..r~. w f LL Cf) 4 n n ~ l b II _ I ~I I o.a< y 111 i F F _ _ _ , _ - - REAR ELEVATicw SOUTH a-LVATI(TI ,emu srweoo,. «~,w ro ftwc Y' «a ri.,. Y'.. a g Apr C T' vvG SHEET12 OF 16 n it _ = i - - - - - i - - - - _ ."...+"".y..r. Z io C9 = o W~._ 9 ~ Q as i 3erles .e... ce w vrrr w L5~~1 S EAST SIDE ELEVATION KEYNOTES- SHEET 13 OF 16 ALTERNATE----- FRONT-ELEVA-T ON~BESTAURANT_BUILDING OR RETAIL BUILDING ~J RESTAURANT n --a- Iz REAR ELEVATION _RESTAVRANT BUILDING OR RETAIL BUILDING .SIDE ELEVATION _RESTAURANI- BUILDING- OR RETAIL BUILDING J J J rwy rim Y~c.f 1 NEE: BVIL~IN() /AF.T6P-I bl-`~ "TC pjLGJlG wl„+ we5r f'k-7r EfLYY LINE W6YL. EACH SIGN FACE SHALL NOT EXCEED 250 S.F. - SIGN FACE COULD BE SMALLER THAN- SHOW N. BE SELECTED AT THE TIME OF INSTALLATIOII~ ---J~20 WEST CENTER I LA QUINTA MOTOR INN COUNTRY CAFE I WENDY'S CORNER STORE P-LillL L CENTER I.D. SIGN N. S. I I I ~ r L_ I L1_ 'i rPD Bt T fRH o~~«orM~ri IXiTl~clroor. cvG •ArnmclS i <f> SHEET 14 OF 16 ALTERNATE B REAR_ELEVATION_RETAIL_ BUILDINGS _SIDE ELEVATION RETAIL BUILDINGS e r O' tO. PY1 T .i -e' _ ♦O f1Ei4$'~j fD_~ i 1i 0.G by-D' ,A NOTE: EXTERIOR CON5TF31CTION MATERIAL TO MATCH OR BLEND WITW WE5T PROPERTY LINE WALL KEYNOTES- l IT w+-JC+E DLOOc (L tiEff~E (LLI'N De5E J i'D~Y'EiEw lEEL nP[ (/1V-[Y t llbp a MI IT R03 DR~'NT [eeC~e 1. CIEeR GLeS! ILIfMJi liDg~! e turiEw uo oone~-c]r ! .aaeEE~ DE.oo M I'iE~K V"Y<YW R YWfu [e(E COaCREtE KQ'lt D . L.ITI CYKR YD [4YF PREPARED BY: INTERGROUP, INC. ARCWITECT5 2696 S. COLORADO BLVD. DENVER. CO 80327 303-158-8611 DATE 8-29-1996 li ~ I li 4 I I FRONT ELEVATION=RETA_IL_BUILDINGS s'•1'-m- SHEET15OF 16 OFFICE SHOWROOIM TENMT 51G A&E IO .ueY£. '10'O' A L~ f LI I LJ I .,ram NOTE: EXTEWOR CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL SOUTH ELEVATION. - BUILDING LOT -6 TO HATCH OR BLEND WRTH WEST 11 II~ ,•.r-m- PFGJI'ERTT LME WALL IIu~ N- NORTH ELEVATION - BUILDING LOT 6 I _J I I I 1 I I KEYNOTES- - El El 0 i i e.YO.O KA`IT4 W - _ wm+r ..ear 1 wr uem ; z oar aiae. aces . an..... e.a1.w~~ WEST ELEVATION-- BUILDING LOT 6_ a1t°"1000'°°'" ..I. Ew T a EvATgR ara w , as N- R.aaN v¢ rooe+e e.w. YRF.>MED By C. a~ it J p RGROI ,PC.eM1CIIMI jI tl Sete s eoloanoo RcTO oFnvFA m svm SHEET160F 16 ~C • A A 3 a ~ Ni]u 0.ecx :ee A FRONT1ELEVATION - RETAIL -I'••. r-m• ,125 S.F. PAD NOTE: EXTERIOR CONSTRICTION MATERIAL TO MATCH OR BLEND WITH aEST PROPERTY LINE WALL 1 REAR ELEVATION - RETAIL "•'I "m•1,125 S.F. PAD x SIDE ELEVATION - RETAIL- 1.125 S.F. PAD E] m WEST ELEVATION - DUPLEX- . -r-m• _ EAST ELEVATION --DUPLEX- V. •.r-m" m m 3 mmm- SIDE ELEVATION - DUPLEX •N.y. 1K A KEYNOTES, _ 1 ukus x+Priee a+:oa.x.Eew > 6.v em.u .oc rcwro S •AlCi4 fllfllR YO DWtl:SMO PB "ED BY QI R-KO11P.MCAPCBR M 1696 S. COLOM BLYD, 9-13 ~i DEPYEB. CO tam F M75.6tn 6-21-7(o VFY- 84 -(e Mm?-ILIw6 all L LII 1III 1 I~j )1 U-ll ~I I- IITII )j U-A II •B SEVENTY WEST BUSINESS CENTER RE-SUBDIVISION A REPLAT OF LOTS 1,2,5,4,4 AND 7 OF 70 WEST SUSR1ESS CENTER AND A PART OF THE NW 1/4 OF SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 58, RANGE 69W OF THE Sth P.M. CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COUNTY OF JEFFERSON, STATE OF COLORADO STATE (K arrRADO ) Gas CDONtt a trrtnscx) 2 7 i Y - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - WEST 33rd. AVE. - WEST 32nd AVE. 1 D N N ti VICINITY MAP N.T.S. Moaning CanmNim Certlncat. Mi. Ie In tint!!, in. alMN plat a. been approeed by Me Ranh, Canmi-im of the City of aseat Rid,. Cooi Z a N I ~ D O MSCRPTICR Oealn< R. and K9Nb L Rkhle being Me dmo of La 2 and D.aNe R. Rkntl We omd of the blotto al We red wom,ty of 6-060 m- Ipsted N the Nptnee>t 1/4 of Seatlm N. To>n>nlp 3 Swlh. Rmge 69 Wnl of the 61h PrNclm I Yrbim roc>bd are JO leas Su++ Canter to the recyd> of Jeff nson County at R«y0m I 1 Numbs 64076366, sonde k poll of 9odn 1 and Bode 4, ApM..o" 3ardena, and pmts of Late I 1 I3. le ma 15. Ro<>✓y Oddene od In the City of steal Ridge, Cwn1Y of Jefferson. Stale of I 1 Cdpad4 mare m'tlwony deaaDW m Icl- I 1 CanmmcN9 of the Ml 1/4 <pner of wld 5«l1m 29: thence along Me swth INe of said NW 1 1 1/<. Me basis of Me bedi N .l. Me-lallm. X6919'16"E 559.66 1«C thence x00' 1 Q 1 b'4-i w 35.0 fro1 to the earth rhot-of-ivy Of west 3:Md Arlo ,the loath«st cane, of 1 C I I Lot a al aid III Wen 6adaas. Ceder and Me point a1 be Z I ~ tnance man, tnl ban,naarr of ma tqf 4 the following fine c.a.a: M 1 1- 1 1. S8979-16 "a 9538 ten padld with and 35 Idl"north from mid uuM line of the hill I O 1 1/4 to We opYmNg of a Ovw cancan to me narthast dM a rad4> of 20.W lest and o ' I 1 18; - cenvd and. Of 8919 ti I thence along Will dwee 31.24 lent; 3. thence NOIOO'•6w 71116 INN: I Mmca N697916T IIS.W tool to M. wnl IN< of Lot ) of and ro least 13,lavneal center l I 1 < It INe al Let 7 and the deal me of Lot 5 of said 70 West 6usFea Cale, than.. dmg ln 1 X0.1`0. se 66. W . M-" don, the Ewnddry of Let 6 01 lab 70 ah sl 13u>um 6 •3 I I Centel the losewin Ids. e 9 <wrasX 1 L 569'!6'2i w b386 tut: I 1 2. [nonce XW114TW 104.60 INN: 3. Mends .6975'24% 390.69 INt: 4.SW-4SM-E 293.50 fast to the beginning of anon-tangnt curt w to the M«n dth a rodw. Of 175,m feet led a c<nhd Tpe of Se'•0'3Y and o cnora p ell- bear, M" 41"E: s th-c. dmg Ine IwoeNg thilse, (12) cwras., 1. dmg daw aune 167.W fast 2. Inmw N8117Y24F 16].12 last: 3, thmte ='43'M-E 11.66 hen: CITY OFF WHEAT'7RjIIDGE a. Mmes 569Zi2i W R.W last, I ~s 1~ r ~I1 I I' ~I 5. Mmes 5061>2!W 7.95 led: 6, thence N8974'24E 5'ib INI; D t f- `1~{`l 1 I, IL J IJJU 7. Ihance W WW. 25.W fNN: LI 6. thence N9914'24% 25.W fast: 1 1 9. It 5061T2."w 559.64 1-1 u LL3 u NO, Mance S7845'14 'W 19•.52 feel: PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT 11. Inman 56919'16"w 1".W feel: 12. Mmes WI91'M E SW Iwl to Me pain! of beg-ing , e Pace, c-tarn., a,po>inably 2967M a. R. or 6.MO boa \O t and non a„ out, a6dnidq one Matt" mid ma as per the aa.iq hone ' con'.k. this We robe and life of Sawaly least Ousinem Curls Re-Suad:,nalson a -odin<im el ,pat of Me City 1 ..I Ridge, Calaoda, and ay Meth p-I. dws ..at. to the o of Me Off, of melt Ridge and m ham gidasy oan" and/a nkimly nmchimd ulilllaf and ad N di thou ,-,ions of mb red Moberly leech o deignolN a anla and not-0--y fm he i,..t. Tim, naldolime m nerds-Tim. mdni mare, repair and rm,« ml. Of tidepe, a .4 .-1- 1, ananpeaan P.fic SaNc. Congan, of can. U.S. anst Canmmic-IW.e anal Ridge D9-to of Puplk waras ma City &gInes, 0-up... warm! Rid" Pak. and Rp«Ikn Comniatim M«I Ridge 0n«Ip of HmnNq and L'vm>enty Mein sal Cdar. Danatmsnt of Tranaaloloa I. bn Von Skk1e. a I'.ofe.io,d Lana Sorwaa ,pi.ler" N the State of Gemaaa, certify that an thn_"y of 1916, this plot ma Miami ands my air«t aaerJ+m. and to the beat of my professional NoMeags, and o/4f is aovrau. CASE wSrwy W2 - 74 - le MI- 76-20 W2 - 76 - 14 w - 75 - 20 wt - 64 - 10 WI - 66 - 9 let- 92- II s4-96-3 wt - 96 - to tar and on Indent of Fide. ma On. Ea,NesN9 Conpany 10375 E. Haas d Awnu. /.530 Gen, Cdof"o 50231 m" by monk kana .en . ad, b-m. W. or If not Ndu6" N said -W. tser.los. ethics Cdoad4(.ep.ndtoea -under Me 'We Clly of snort Rldgi a tenant. M Pragan (ESTP) and/o We BuMnna D.ricpmanl Zone (MZ) ,at be dwn" to be arms paid For by Me City of ith of R". ,at any Itm as cons(rv lao a Nddt" sn .c adlad by in. City a Oleaa anM scan Me tl. Motility of aid UIY ascent sterns pally nmcnlasd ulslbas ana/a M. U.S lest Canrnunkalnna snide t-.Im a Inslw" .hall la nain Me 111, ors Me emer and ands of Me Chy O.ER: "1K R, RICHTER 6565 5. SYRACUSE w>y xa. 1202 ENCLEWC(). CCLCNADU WIH (b3) 694-7315 0.13f. W A L MOaIER 11665 w, bin PL .HEAT III C0.0RAD0 6Wb-3878 (b3) 379-6654 Ew1fRI NO COM NvE -as ENC7NEOM PANY ma1~ T-w noS"I'l r 7 Of J We Ipegong N>yvn-t ware a<Ln o.l«g>a belpe ate MIs Wy of AA. III- , ti, a the a my heed and a0kbl >q. My comiV4>t erPs- NOTMy $E Noldly Polak CLFRN MO RECORDERS CERMCATE STATE M CCLIYaMO CCLMI ,K FSTERSOI) I hereby ce,tiy Mal Is dal war. Red N mY .1t,. a dM _ m, an M. _ any of N than yen Ge« pole 19 _ , and I. duly recodW ..yM S aRM`sC.IE MI' ie to ce,lily Mal ins Clly of YA«I Rigger Com"I by motbn al Ile den coned SI an Me day of , 19 adapt and I.- Ine .ilhin Mal ow octal We a-kativn n.,.an m... ATTEST: City Seal NOTES 1, Mia am fe tu,10,t to an mtkipated popaly sea sage pw the agree,nml Wtesen Me Wmodo Dgartmenl of irmapalation, Me City of a«t Ring., Dwa.na R. did K9na L Rknts, that was signed an 7 O 35, 1993, 2 Tne fa,..w wt 1 of the 70 W.,t e,naasa Centel. no. Nnam as M. La bolo vt; Is aoj«t to a mrvnm etc s and Olds. paYN, soae,nml at won lecoom under R cool:an No SQ7 58 in Me .1a.- Cwnly r«a,da. 1 hl[) E An'vep f- Colorado We you must carve any Ipd datkn Dosed upon any detect in the avwy within Mrw yeas eke, pu Fat diacaw adn eelecl N . anent may any «tkn Lama upon any del«I N Mb wervey be dpnmsic« mare Man la ,ova Non M , is of We cartl6calim ana- hereon. 4. We adj cl yryvty dea dthil p Mahar, dthin the 1.0 de,Oirp' n or edhba. fwne in the to.." r«aMd'n.Monsnta all nay Me,ebe be subject to the term; peMVma w.anml; cmdiCw; reaVkLM; cdigallaf and se tkns contained Mere9. TYPE r£ INSM"IfT ro Wet 9.aNeaa Call Rat RFrrmvN(: NFORMAngf R«ept.on No. eaO76366 Ch,,akn 1 D"W Vkl Court 0th Action 94 CV 1566 Cann-, l-_ and C,. poking E.--t R«eplion No. 8.078456 p,i1 Gain Deed R«.pl:m No. 66377115 5. Soared On Flood Nvmce Role Nap Gamily Pma No. "5079 -005 C .-Ing the Cily Of Wnsd Ridge and dales Febrvoy e, 19W Ismail by M. i"erd E w,ancy Nme,nnatt A9oay Me mbpcl paperty is wtsine Me SW-y.a no" Main. 6. CHM .oaanmla ana- d1nN M. nwnOa4a of thla pal and! vbl by Mir r«adnq of this Mat. Y oa peiwvy .riatnq aoaernsnt Ole n..eoY rocol« ...nom m anM 2. 7. The .tam safer atmtlan am(3) anoan hereon .1 be cmatrva" ana moMtOn. by me o haws, -.-I and oaagnv N ins ..mt Mat add enoinlenanc. is not paefam.a by mill mm lot City of anon! Ridge and Mw Me right to mis bale a.o(s) and Pslam the .---y swY, Me o t of msdl mid timer, hen; accav; and a'aa o2rma to tiny upon being, No Wldn9 w a,-c,-..1 b.':cmmucl" N Me detmr area(.) ma chov,. dle aNma aN«ain, the nyloAi olds«ta:.liq of atmtian ad.) wit be ~.a. wiMwl M. appall of u. City En,N.e. 6 EI,+,-font (6') -We .1st, m>ammta is. harm, yant" on pd-t. propalY adjacent to of Milk straste n.Me wOaNSion m Mott" am. Milan moments me dedicated for the N.ldloNm. aiatanonc., and'NA.anenl of .1«Vac, qo; tei.A.inn able; .4 taten,.kallm. fmNltllo VLlltiei am ds, an perm!!!" dMN any Oaten ro to anal plwts .Vesta N the abaMson, Pe,enan-1 .trvcimn ma mi. miller. anal at be permllt i dtnN ono ut.It, -.anent.. Ndae OI 0."(a) OI Trvd nerdy Nonana amen to our. dental" to on 1k -se O U Z O In tt W , W tt 4 ~ O w z a 'V 0 a p O U z Z O u z O ~N a I ~ o p Z O 0 O y a R O z t J UNINCORPORATED JEFFERSON COUNTY LA QUINTA SITE SEE NOTE N2 1 to I l i I I' I li I II i II I ( 11 1 M~M I 11 .i PMCEL in MR 3 PMtt I PAR AQME~.t J m . 1) I I NOR na I) 1 I I I i t (SEE 1 I I I II I I , I NOO'35'38-W 1 I I 1 I 1 1 I E05nnG 1 SJiNCNRC 1 1 I i I m <ii ~x ' ' I I »a, ss m~N 1xm. suJafu I u ~ 11 E 1 4 I II 1 1 II 1 I I I 1 1 p = 54'40'37 I I j R=175.00' I jj r I I L = 167.00' L17r I 1 1 / /I - - - - - - - - - - - - ' A ~ I 1v ulun [ASDA.1 iox-i>N V9w [y 1. x ~ ~ Iwav.1» stlAx. m wA....n. i m ~A L ' I 1 -t ,---r71 - 7 I 1 I-e, I / 1 1 1j~1 _ ~ /1'~- / I 1-_1c vlun •1.c.no- LVn. Ny I I A asi w.ar.6s mna 1 ` ` ^ • 1 Y ' ~ RsT N+f.RE m1a n. it egny[ I I I ______I______ 44- vKwlm T Mf RA[ K ~ r - 8 7 - N I a 19 . a sAr w....c [s A .[s~uaaE m1a ~ t _ ~ r v1.fn 6 ..suv m]. ; r - WOA6M Z__ I 0 I o L v]un tsr ~ A 1 asl 7 R0 7f 7 12 130.00' (N00'47) m 3 nn O O 3 0 Q, N W ID v N (NOO-10'71-W) IDASC As 1 1 11 1,18 I- 70 1 1 ' IF IOR~ERVIpEROADFIELD-- P 1993\ (SEE WR ~ I) I , 1 , Pl1` 1 O Sr, at' \ AREA = 6.860 ACRES ; \ e~\ I , \ P+ C v' uR1n U1[Y.1 ' A .[51 R1s.aE mnw n1aw~ I I 1 ers ♦ \ \ um. » FwwJ4 ]9 aNn [ zv.1 I I 1 'o - ]a a.¢w[xl n.x. I 1 I I \ AI _-A16=-19 \ IR, J \yL--t'-~ O ~ IT O' 16 \ n All 12424-W 3280' (S89'38'00-W) A11 'PM[£L A' CO KV By APRIL 1993 3 PARTY AGRENENI (W XOR No. 1) __IIJQp_4j'1ZW)______________________~_______________ --___-----_-NOt'00'46-W 68.43' BLOCK I r U.4 t.m[.f ~ AP LEWOOD GARD NS 3 LOT 7 PARCFI "A" DFSC. LOT 6 CURXEAI "G SrSRX DST.a MG RAT IIECEP. 6W]6b6 B 5r5 Al X ].01 1-5432'10-. R-26 30 xDl as w 7.09 ].oe xoo"♦ 1 w Af- 1- R-I L-7793 R-1 _7J A4 .24-M l w N Z 1 122 _ _ y_pp _ AJ plm ".O . I- r -1 _1 2794r n 4 .I .1 1- l fl-17 . - R-IJ - 911, All X69 5 l 11 1 1 N69' 9 W Al ] All N89 ♦ ♦ !0 X69' M .I l :w 7 '1 I 1 5. 9' OS w ♦ 12 E All h II fl- -I 1 1- l R- q AI ♦ J1, J I AI AI] 4' l3 9 l'1 I Al 1- R-1 L-5, . A19 IW l6 t. l 1. °DO'1 1 0 W 0 ♦1 69 Sl ]I M9:20 a A, w 1 v49'13 b w _ FRASK & /MfBC EA[JAEIAA9C QJ[N.It/]' LOT 5 I LOT 4 I LOT 3 I LOT 2 Iraxn AREA CE PMCFL 1 AND PMCEL 3 M PAR RR X L09K Dw GR.w TED , CDNS DARD WNAL wAMR I/31/6] A [F PAARXL B W fAKREO In Rr MREE PMIY ~NT 1/93 sTe XOR Ne. 1 N OIT)0'48-W ORMENT KARlxc SYS]EX On Q MEATADGE d6DXA1 RE s nTOI (N00'47'1 2-W) X T PI xE wa WSAMR aN IEIY RECFP, tb. 8119nE CEN 640>6J66 0 F010I0 IKOM MM r 0. RA51K CM W.KD m IS 1101010 SET p KOM wM R[L0w P1 m CM STMRD IS 116 GRAPHIC SCALE (Mflit) ly_tl R Z 1 i I 1 ~ u I 1 U z I I p I 1 I I/I a I w ~ 1 I I 4 I w ¢ p O r ~ a ~ 0 a O p z 1 I w 1 2 I ~ ° Z r o Y Z I w I - Q I ~ I a D ZINNIA STREET A: I c V :R 3 1 r NO- 4 .00' SOO'4 ' I SOl'01'50'E 5.00' (SOO'47'12'E) > _ I 892916"E 601 78 z 'p m • 1 . N89'430'E) u N0 0'30'44'w 35.00' o ' rc (N00 4712 W) W 10 1 ; 4 I m I I w o ' m N89 91 59-611 ' p a 1 (89'43 30 E) z p I I O I a ' D - 19'211 - 18 0 R 20.00 : i ILI L - 31.24' z , p 9DOr1S Mllr R ' : L3Lb' I A51 Wwo I I I /I I / l I / T I / vES1 A17 l. WARKR C Y[IIOI 19 / 70+9 SS R.WU GE 59w / /9`SDVM E12 xw 1/4, %C'19. 1 45. R 69w _ SHfff 2 Of J SEVENTY WEST BUSINESS CENTER RE-5UBVIVI5iUn A REPLAT OF LOTS 1.2.3,4,6 AND T OF 70 WEST BUSINESS CENTER AND A PART OF THE NW 1/4 OF SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP SS, RANGE SOW OF THE SM PJL CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COUNTY OF JEFFERSON. STATE OF COLORADO GRAPHIC SCALE _ (anal , W ~ tl M1 Z LOT 5 x 17380 SO. FT. x 0.40 ACRES 1T02644SO. 4 FT. :A s } ACRES 1 0.24 4 ACRES SHEET J Of J : -,70 WEST BUSINESS CENTER j,t 143 AN OFFICIAL DEVELOPMENT2PLAN'OF THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE COMBINED PRELIMINARY-FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN SHEET 1 OF 16 1 uaAL D.aeumw DeaM R aW NpY~1a L R1alnr b.NO M a.r:rf el let S nd DeaM. R. Rlddr M e.nr el u. bU a a,u u. M ppoappw.rtty of &W . Iewtoa M U.. NanN.at 1/4 a Seetbn ] SoaU, R_ av 8M•l of "e aU P,Nabd a1Mi1] m,NIGTION aa r )~a]6a oNe` fo prl loW Bok 1tma IN 4, wE O=Ld Mta pT~i«eaf l~ Sbbla.up•do.r4t ri•PD1da2P~u6 11 14 aid 11 ReW Vy (lmyr a n IM 6RY a 1MM RMpa Canty of YKr etNa EAA o - parilublY OwoOW O Mo.c d ~-a d V~ q s n egMh.a N44nbeMr ' CwmmnOhp al M Mrs 1/4 aarnr 01 old S0; U.,u deep M .nM the of Bald Ile 1/1, iM Iro el Nvnp. F UY twelplln Ma92p'lp-E Sl9 ae Iwt V, N00' ' ' •16ae1 D-111"•mJUe .iY he .1.4 •a r.q sbr+l••4,quW yYe 1 IbO1CLRPOlAlEO .E)}WSOI Ci71.fTY . . 00 . 30 44 feel to w ]10 4= =4 11.e.t 3xld Aw k the oepM. t ..mr of l t 4 . Me:,,er raarrM W ..pr•.a Y71W e 0 add n wd M Pant M 6.91,,44 Do .beat H.a Ise yYt 6r ea .au . wwl.w.nrtd6v.udrw..MrybM.y sty •,h• rd ,vv I:ursut s S. T,i/m• U.ta da.p M ba'+ldarl of .1,k let 1 u. fao.v,q top (4) awK.ew .rasa nom tArtW. t repo" V law .ru.0b+l.kr•eIM N 41ONtA 1. laaw-le-w 9118 feet Pnetel eR., as 3! feel .r ham laid eonU Rte of M NM 1/4 to the b M afp.un YOwrW ooAtrtY p p Y p yne aapaw b IM narUeat aU a ,du. of SS00 Mt and a crnbd a4. a 09x9 S{ MDiwiYRIWC I I 2 U.,ee alr4 loft w.ee 7134 het bb,rlkM and .n u k.far. v tkb a4.r n it_ _ WEST 33r_d. AVE. i j 1 ut.,ae Nm1D "-w n.le het , 2 I I • U.,ce NNW'18'E 11100 feel le M o..l m. of W 7 of Odd n foal Wo,,OO enter Al I I O U.x.+ abrq flu eat IM of bl 7 as M .al IM d bl 1 el .ad to Meet 9UMMa Cnln Mw4a If D:o bo'^+dl a let d d .ek n Mnl B k e D I 1 Z ,•.e EOM D:. beer (4) cwN.oo, ' /'1 I ~ I 1. Sa9x0 x1Y J01ee Mt V ; m i Un 2 n N002Y4TN Mala MC O r I O I I 1 Urn,, N&F7V24-E 390.81, feet . N I 1 i I CS004TWE 291W feet I. U. b M by of o nn-bnpnt e:,u wnaa,. to M .r t MU a raak,. of 17100 foot nd a enact n l 31'10" TI- 9• e . ant a Me, ohM bor. W14'41-E( Nl aamidm a9atr~~ NOTA6T Al., WEST 32nd AVE. 1 I ih.lee ala^9 M.(osoeb4 UH.n (I3) 1,1,88.,,. t2 71AARimq 0)egm9oN OEIOICASION Z I I I. dn9 laid a.w LJ.CV Ie.l All r...4 Ill. 4., •f _Z 1 I 2 0,n,ee N89x111'E 1a0.13 Mt lbb9Ar bYp lb are, teddy D 1 I 1 tMr.a !OO'IY3 -E 17.x0 loot N ,y'1 I I ! IMCe 340721'2I'M ]260 Colt 6 re PCANNn10AND DIVSIaPI@cynREC101 VICINITY MAP N T S 0. U.tw t 7.24-t 7.95 .M . . 0. U.wo Narwoo-E 6170 hat (37Y CODNCD CLOII GT ON 7. ,one M29w SS60 hot wtp•.tl t1b M~b tb Pb,a Raid 0b C am R. Moe Ha9,9'W-E x-0.00 (wk a A. F WH 9. th. lae7,b0Y M." hot( EAT RIDGE D l(~-fl f'" nn /7P 11 ".,a. B790vb9'w,a," feet a,. w. aerlY3a'w x9.DO feel, EyyYnAT a.t cut, - OCT 2 7 ~ 12 Unw lap29'f 6'w 191]1 hot W1)NTY Qa6AND QOD6nA1 ~}p. IC.ATt 1996 11 Uro =W502100 febl to M p*t d bepMb4. T4dmr.a...dtrmiash tb•.me.r M Pvot Cantab. appaknotaiy x911789 .a. IE r 6.880 aa.a .ava.kmyyar.rzarooao Gar Craaab b `,f~ f • 1 / LI L/ and h. -whodiandor the lwnrl. ana ga11oM nkya Mnl C; u,. Co lr, a ree, on el ` M~ II=N W book ?w J.aro C~.p pot mea.aaw PLANNING & ably"". b"nd . tale to ay.111 th :I, of mate;: DEVELOP CE C M 170nchl.ed vlNlh. as ...hw ue.e pwlFone of nld red paper(~,MNnce. oar UR A710N ENT d•"gnal.a o..a...I. nd need.-a-eay For U. an.wa n. ~.laal n f, Jan Von 6hdde, t Prof i land 9urwyor re htora h U. , apratM, montrlRAM repot nd r.olae.nnt of 1.1.phyle and Mnhic 11M, Pte. n4 ara.pa.tt aablK pa. plpsw ..otr pi h....nllary ...r M.S N l . Y that p Shah of Ihl. lopopaphb Oahla o, cplll that ,O Uh daY 1,( _J 1996, .urvey .a. Dr.pna and,, mY dlrecl sup.M.In vr hydrmte, drabuw dltM.. OW dmM Oa d opyatnauw Uw.la, 11 b 9 w Oooy uldrdaad nt raiale by U. wAv*9na Ulat OR M eeo and to III w b an.truOUnq and Mtallh .oh . . and to Ue blot of my p1,/.eebnd MnoM.dge and bNl.l h ac0rro4. . p o,, ..or .l loM I,, pea . . M,.., •wa,Dol owNe. Ib,... Mnm war. Ra dnb.. ,o l o carte nt pollen, fo, OOILOO .he_ t eM M puvv and yark for 95 pnNda for F st"NOO Iw 6.Hlwnen M IH a 1, to v wb OM~ Oak, le Nwrttbr 21.19, n It net bteWMd A eek w obvOol Un by%o U• M n eel yn .RkA by , . f M Ue (xt d b ~ Y O e fte, j ON, be baF, y eet RWp a+d be pal. b>> Ue MY net (o Of I~t Idpe Calarada ' C. epep. ,o N at of MM1 , r of epI fl. CMmold !Ma Tw k,O.tIM Pra wn (ESWiIP T n n e f o ar La4/s/a Ul for by o1, h. eo 0.Of, .1 l Z.. DraMebn . eM ml be dwna to b. wan. wb hr by Ue LII e( %.1 Rb e or and an Bend( of Pmsir and Hobo 10375 E N Company 10371 E H ) p , %.t R t "a eel It" w ee:uaoota n In.tasa ehn . too by the City a( yJ9.. Cdnado, eholl bvo no U. d. peprt 1 law ally ,,cope Non. i Melt C I ln ~ b i de ~ ~ . . arwrd A... /3x0 Den.w. Colorado 90231 at carlbn. wet, I in M OeMbOde y, etejy . jy ye,,O ,yy not INOOM, M oracrlv at ,o 0.. "1,,,y of the or as nee 11(Idr of Dad(s) d T.v.t hoe y nl.oee. dabs to areas daketa t6 Pace, .w. JOTERSER! COUNTY OXAK AND REEURDCR OCTOBER 18, 1996 By. SEPTEMBER 11, 1996 DEPUTY CiEid( AUGUST x, 1996 /SUAOf ! /ISL awyttn9y,~ ag16N,vr CRH "MUM-1,71 DVNER: ACNE R. RIOTER OVNCR- VIRGINIA L RIMIER ww OOONO a en.n -y{r r'te' 6]6! S. SYRACU9C VAY Na 1202 9 [5L0g6pp 11665 V. 391h ft. SDly. (]0]. ..e pRPIER: n nor ■l~ll'ie fn11A 3031 694-7215 VNEAT RIDGE C0.0RADO ON33-3979 LA..waoq Obla...... ( (303) 279-6954 1. ~ RRBAWRY~RVL OLtUnwOlf p691 YOUNGFIELD SERVICE ROAD 70 WEST BUSINESS CENTER AN OFFICIAL DEVELOPMENT2HANlOFt THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE COMBINED PRELIMINARY-FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN SHEET 2 OF 16 0 -7EXIT RAMP 80.06' - . - 17.66' =J1'IST SSB.ea' is I A ~R q.aCH s EHaosLWE 36.157 SF I v " uAx 0.83 ACRES c 2 ' ~ aT 28' 25' n xb m ROnI➢ VISA' b OIW51pf '[5 y LA QUINTA VA ~a as 25 25 ono sc 3571 SO R PAD MOTOR INN F Xi CWNiRY CAFE 6 7 RETAIL/BISTAUIUNT ,7 ,o EwsnHC lo.eaB so FT e Y Y~ 40.000 SO A > 0.92 AG. I ll Nms,wG [usme ~ n _ r 2 ' d'v an ~ oulPSnB ^ L, R i N 00WOO' W MONUMENT SIGN 1 FOR OFFCE SHOWROOM ^yi PROPOSED ENTRY I-70 SERVICE ROAD OPEN SPACE/BERM 6' PIIOPOSED llOODTN SITE PLAN DATA - ALTERNATE A IN, g WYPs1ER k ENQOSUBE L TOTAL AREA 8.3209 AC. 25' OPEN SPACE/BMl[ 0.66 AC. So' OF OPM/IANDSCAPM SPACE COYYERCUU A KO t 2 , S OIAYOND 9HAYROCR 0.02 AC. (1.38 AC. OR 0.000 9.F.)- Max 70.18' 3 BOLDING O.FA 2.880 S.T. ' l 2 MORE 1.508 S.F. YA]OINY BUDDING HEIGHT 60 ~Q CAR WASH I'm S.F. R VI PAREBIG REQUIRED 4 SPACES IGAYUL LIGHT POLE MGM 17' S W „ U PARJM40 PROYRIED 4 SPACES AU, EXTERIOR LOTTING STANDARDS SHALL BE IN COYPNANCE 111TH THE CRY OF WNEAT RIDGE ORDINANCE 1016. cHAFmi 28. AMIT 1. S=ON $ WQOYS 0.83 AC. 26-30(9) OF THE WHEAT RIDGE CODE OF LAWS. ENTITLED EXTERIOR O 19AND i SL , BUILDING G.FA 4.00 S.F. UGNIIIG STANOAAD2. H PARFIR PARIOTIG REQUIRED 44 SPACD9 PARKING PROVIDED H SPACES • MAXIMUH S.P. ALL COHHERCLU. STRUCTURES- 82,000 S.F. OR 22.6x NIN. 6 STACKNO SPACES FOR DRIVE UP WINDOW AL. JOINT ACCESS AISLES INTERNAL TO COIOIERCML AREAS 3HAL, BE • COUNTRY CAFE 0.68 AC. SPECINIED AS FIRE LUIES, W REQUIRED BY ME DISTRICT. ALL OwMIB, BUDDING CIA 3.671 S.F. TENANTS ANTI GULTIS SHAJL HAVE ME YOVEITBJIT THROUGH. AND USE = PARI3JIO REQUIRED 47 SPACES OF ALL PARIINIG. DIME AISLES AND CURB CUTS. PAMTIG FROMM 47 SPACES 8 100' ' • CONTINUED DEVEIDMIEJR OF TIOS PO D COMXE LATED TO START W 69.59 $ FUTURE RETAIlMSTAURAM 1.73 AC. EATER 1Da6 OR IN 1991. CW6(PLJCDON OF ALL DEMLOPNUIM 0 BUEDMG G.FA 10.976 S.F. COMLIff1.ATED WTTJINI 15 YEARS. 6 P~ (RGTTAUfUNT) PARIONG 223 CARE O MM PA RKING R 23 CABS • PIATTID EDT 4 (MIDENDAL) OR OPEN SPACE. 0.24 AC. 1 RETAIL BUTI SITE 0.15 AC. ME MIX BUBDMG G.TA LINT 9I. • AU. DURPS ZR9 SELL, BE e2ICLOSM AHED ARCHRECTURARJ.Y 3CRBEM). $ TURN-AROUIID PARKING REQUIRED 7 SPACES PAREQIG FROMM 7 SPACES OFFCE/EHOWROOY 1 97 C $434,170 SO, FEET . A . BUDDDG G.FA 28.000 S.F. ART M PAMbIG REQUIRED (OFFICE 0 60x) BO SPAM PARMIG PROVIDED SO SPACES N OQIO'11' W 201.59' I I I I I I I I I I I N I ~I I AU tl I I I ~ I 1 I I I 1 I I I R ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 1 :a I I I Iti R i I C $ I I I I I I id l l I I I I I_ 1 I I I ~ I 1 x , I I ~ W I i W~J ii. M4 f , I'1 I V 1 1 D - 69]9.16 R - 20.00' I L - 31.24' 1 1 I I I I I I I II I II I I II ~ II 1 II I 11 I 111 I I I ALTERNATE A ' Z RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE ~ GRAPHIC SCALE w 20 0 w SO ~ sFxE 1 Ha . w n LEGEND I OoS,NO PROPO50) X X s• BLVNN Iola I o-m~ ALTXRDCAL BARWER HWCE I ® NUIBFR OF PARMO SPACES I 10 "w 9D McAnM 9 c "9 AND GIITId I I I I -~i • ...m ® BMW I RIGHT-OF-WAY I LINE L BUILDING SUE F. SUM PAD I I SQ FT .24 AC. S.F. PAD I I I I I I SEPTEMBER 13. 1996 i 9 B g C S 70 WEST BUSINESS CENTER YOUNGFIELD SERVICE ROAD RETAIL 8000 v LA QUINTA MOTOR INN N 00".MI'W W 29150' MRUP 5-W4. s i 8 4 f EY AREA- .53 ACRES 36,157 SF WOOYS 4.200 SO FT 10.000 SQ FT 0.92 AG. I M I~~~!il L~ R FOR O FILE SHONHGIN I PROPOSED ENTRY i na Acros AN OFFICIAL DEVELOPMENTZPLAN r09 THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE COMBINED PRELIMINARY-FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN SHEET 3 OF 16 _ I-7O EXIT RAMP W71 SO FT PAD WINTRY CAFE OUSTING OPEN SPACE/BERM 9 C p& o d Lv 315'.•' e• PPE SITE PLAN DATA - ALTERNATE B ouMPStER n ExaosTRE TOTAL AREA 8.3289 AC. 50' NET[ pIAW LLSl Om 25 ONAMOND 911AMROCA 0.92 AC. BURDMG G. 2.080 S.F. LO =HE 1.800 S.F. kal CAR WASH 1.072 B.F. PARI(ING BIG REQUIRED 4 SPACES PAAKDIG PROVIDED 4 9jp PALtl Y wevDrs 0.82 AC. IS o FOR BURDDIO G.rA 4.100 S.F. H.E PARKING PARKOTIG REGUIRED 44 SPACES, PARIID'IG PROVIDED 44 SPACES ION. 6 STACEDNG SPACES FOR DRIVE UP IFIRDOW COUNTRY CAFE 0.00 AC. - BVHDIIC G.F.A 0.671 S.F. PAREING REQUIRED 47 "AM 5. PAAEpG PROVIDED 47 SPACES ' 69.59 F FUTURE CENTRAL RETAIL 1.73 AC. BUMLDWG R 19• W PARKING REQI ED (HESFAURANT) a C PARKING FROMM 81 CARS - RETAIL BUDDING SIR 0.16 AC. BUIIDMG G.FA 1.125 S.I. NINE TRUCK PARKING REQUIRED 7 SPAM TURN-ARODND PARKING PROVIDED 7 SPACES OFFICE mOwB00M 59, FEET / 1.97 AC. HUHDMG G.FA 28.000 S.F. PARKING REQUIRED (OFFICE W WOW ) 00 SPAM PAREING PROVIDED W SPAM IN 0001'11' W 2DA69' FT 211x• (2719] I-70 SERVICE B' PROPOSED WOODEN • 26' OPEN SPACE181116( 0.66 M COMMERCW. E Or OPEN/IANDSCAPED SPACE (1.60 AC. OR 68,000 9.F.)- 16.0E • I=UICI M BUILDING HEIGHT 80' iiw + • MAEDDFM LIGHT POLE MGM 17' ALL, ERTLRIOR LIGHTING STANDARDS, sHAIL BE IN WMPLLANCE RIH THE CITY OF ITHEAT RIDGE ORDIIANCE 1015. [RAPTOR 28. ARBCIR 1. SECITOK 26-30(3) Or THE WHEAT SIMS CODE OP Un. AMITIm ESTENOR LIGHTING STANDARDS. • WYDEIM BY. AIL W101ERCLAL STRUCTURES- 90•700 S.F. OR 26.0E • All JOINT ACCESS AMM INTERNAL TO WMIERCW. AREAS SHAH. BE WECUTED AS Me IAHSS. IF REQUIRED BY ME DISDUCT. All OWNERS, TTNARTS AND GUESTS SHALL HAVE FREE MOVEMENT THROUGH. AND USE Or ALI, PARKING, DRIVE AISLES AND CURB CUTS. • CONTINUED DEMOPMCNT Or THE PD IS CORTEY,unD TO START a GTER 1990 OR a IM. WMPIIUION Or AIL DEPEVJPMLNT IS CONTEIUTATEO TIPDIDN 15 YEARS. • PIATTEO TOY 4 (RlBIDRNTIAL) OR OPEN SPACE 0.24 AC. • AW DIRD•3RIS, W BE QIC16sm AND ARCH?KTURULY SCHEEKED. ALTERNATE B i ^ Z - j N RIGHT OF-WAY LINE - 1 \ GRAPHIC SCALE 1 b m SID tl I I I i 777 '-'~~-D i 1 1 SLLLC , NM - b It I , 1 I I I ~ 1 1 1 1 I W I I i l I ~ ° LEGEND ~ iq I I mswc PROrmD g 1 CV C') G ' I i(_ 1 WOaOFN iCNOE a I 1 I ~ I P-o-~ hCOUSIIUL BARRIER FORCE 1 1 • ' I' I I I p ® RUINER Q PARKING SPACES ' W ~ 1 F_ I I I I 1 I I i I i W I I I I _ _ _ o. 1 rl l nne Aw ar,FR 1 , II 4 II I I I ` L Z NNIA _ T I a I / `t I n I RIIT4P I I unc % i1 I Ii REINauto. PAD I I I. ,.125 S.F. :r. AD HI STE ill ~ ~ jl I +0. 6 SC M~14 m n I S.P. 6D. PAD l: I ll l i l; U ll I f I, I 'R - 6x]9'16! R - 2900' L - ]111' li I, I ,I I, I II I I, I I li 11 I ~ I 1 li II 1 ~ I I It II 1 I1 I l I I 11 I, II I SEPTEMBER 13, 19"6 O fRAS/ER Q HI[6E EAG/NEERAHC C17YPANr yo r' ~ _ SITE PLAN 40 JAM WA •N• r 19 T KH 9Y. 7-16-96 IUn •t R 9 a s 3 70 WEST BUSINESS CENTER ALTERNATE A LOTS 2 3 4, 6 AND 7 AN OFFCOMBINED PRELIMINARY-FINAL DEVELOPMENTNPLAN RIDGE I UTILITY PLAN SHEET 4 OF 16 EXIT R MP YOUNGFIELD SERVICE ROAD z av _ 7-WAY _ _ Noe•]1'2sT ss9.ee' _ LJNE GRAPHIC SCALE nod 77O P 2 W w xo a w eo T 25' OWnTER 10 9 OFND SHM •~.r r 1 I A Iw ga s ENCLOSURE 36.157 SF MpO I i scAte ,Mai - w n 1 - IIAX 0.83 ACRES 8. .r x ' wpOa~aT ° 35' LEGEND RVR/P 61519' c ' I 1 ACES p. L} iS• 7 _ M1S 4.w9 SO FT ' x T 9 Y ' 1 6 6 .o, 9.4 A '1 I _ w woo9EH FENCE LA QUINTA X H { 1 [N r No aur4 ~~O( I I 1 I a-o-- ACOUSICAL SARPoER rENCE I g M71 SO FT PAD IY'Ef ° \ Y S k MUG MOTOR INN F I ` C >,r g g ypQ 4 yq I I 1 F COUNTRY CAE NUMBER w PAIXxV/ pETN /RESTAUM i r e i.H A p ap} ; I 10 CuItw H~Ni CAnaN 9 ' xl t0 EXISTING 10.80 SG FT a 40.000 SO Fr I I axre AND 9UTTrR i ~ - s A ~ 4 .9 , > 0.92 Ac. - rt I i ~ I 4i uS F SKr YA1FR VNN x F.v. , • am aR) T I. i I j- suuunr sExEn • I I 11 5 A Ix A E I I ypp ~l3~°oi I , S I 1~ I l I o y fWpIH T I a 1S N ° OAS U NE d - r I 1 A E - 12 SPACES * i® ~ ElITtW~S~ T-.w~OCD - } i ; I I'-6" HIGH LIN 1 - b ' J P K' 150 S.F. MAX. fA MWUMENT SIGN [mnxc r.H ______________~~q - ti~ 3 i 1` F . w4c M ''Z NNIA `S'ST ® Iapwn b"--- Al I .I N IXn7OOb 39].50' 4 CONSd1DAlE0 MUTUAL WATER COMPANY - o o T¢ ° 214.N' 3)1.]9• b • G : I lY ~ 4 _ v • y, - ! A 5 NORTHWEST LWEWOCD SAN. DISTRICT _~„r A " I-70 SERVICE ROAD WEST ' NElencrn CF I j I US WEST COMMUNICATIONS r.x 1{e' eY ~ - ENTRY I ~ 5 SPA 5 w .va b - - - - E d b.• w ex 4v a 3T9.4Y I II LIGHT-OF-WAY PUBLIC SERNCE CO. OF COLORADO N I LWE b Snp F~ ~ N.C (e ee,abF ° N O.T{TI3 W ee64)• R O 3 i11 li IF PROPOSED SED WOODEN EN iF14CE 'i I II 5A11_ BUILDING SITE TO I 9., MY.MM r.E Nor 9.Y l Yf T I 9227 I.F. BU4D. PAD I } 1 - I~ ~ ~uS nwi 1 OPEN SPACE/BERM ~Io• I I I ~ Y Ptf. D Tfor a NOTES.. 1 $ fly 102 6 SI] Ff .24 AC. 1• ALL WORN SHALL DE PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WIN I 2 ill x. SF. PAD CURRENT Ott OF WHEAT RIDGE AND JEFFERSON COUNTY k E Q ErO.O R ) 11 I STANDARDS AND SPEOFICATWS AS APPROPRIATE y, {6? ! 2. dtt OF WHEAT RIDGE AND . RSON COUNTY SHALL NOT I N 074712 w I BE RESPWSIB]E FOR MAINTENANCE OF ON-SITE UTUTE MIX ~ 1 EMSTNG TBITY INFORMATION IS MOM GN SURVEYS _ _ TF p - e9Z9'161 ~ AND AS ULL dRMATQN ALL GATHERED TR UNCOVER AND VERIFI' _ z I ] I ~ 31.31 SOURCES. FHA TCN , I LOCATIW AND MVATGH OF ALL EXISTING UTUTES PROTECT THEM DUNPoC CONSTRRUCTION CROSSINGS M.C. P F1 I AND R W s. IT IS Trt RE~W98111tt OF iNE CCNS)RUCnON _ _ - - _ _ _ _ 6 B~CCfN ' 1 CE111~FHCOGOUCDTLOON (tTM8E00U 921 199)) GTON _ _ ' THE N ANY EXLAVAf47A ISLAND I I I S. THE COSIRUCTO4 OSION CTdi SHALL RESPONSIBLE NIN N I FOR )EUII EIO4W OWIROL DURING ME 1UCTON Or1 PERIOD. 1 B. I14E 2ME B BEN I I USED WAS THE FINISH FL001 CMY CAFE MEV- 5521.00 LLPIE EIEV. MATERIAL SHAM BE AS FOMOWS UN]ESS BEEDUCIRE IRON HIVE orNER"m 5' F.H. UNES SHAM SHAD E PVC --,69.59 m 5'.6'.9' $ 55 SHALL BE PVC MR ]5. STS SHALL BE PCO CLASS ] o' or e• N!E b' v 6'R SEPTEMBER 13. 1996 e Ex. E mum CN A /la ESC FF.IxIER d AMIBE R ME ) 6A, ESC E NEERWG COMPANY $ TURN-MOUND F '-AM EX ] /2. EX Pn02ECn 70 w[ST BUSINESS CENTER aA JM BERN TIM M UMIr: FINAL URIM1, PUN R U{1)e S ] . jP. N 001711' W 204.59' 2 "M, JV 9W~ 4 fe.. x.~ )Ae .V 9.. H: JA4 ~ ]903-01] 70 WEST BUSINESS CENTER LOTS 2 3 4, 6 AND 7 AN OFFICIAL DEVELOPMENT HAN 0P THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE COMBINED PRELIMINARY-FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN SHEET 5 OF 16 YOUNGFIELD - - _ I I EXIT SERVICE ROAD I-70 - RAMP _ 1.riy) I 30p. e. NDr31'13•E SSV.ee• ].DY _ x L V V IY-q vaaw ~~o p R M • ° RETAIL ,r_~ fN~,$y~RD AREA- .53 ACRES a uw0 sHM c eME[ 9 L 1. _ _ -6000 36,157 SF RLWAP 3'E'N' • I I 11 SPACE ~ ~ ~ 5 LA QUINTA 4.M SO RR E I G' F.K M71 SO FT PAD Y sTU a PWO MOTOR INN I I; A l,G r DAM T M I I mIxITRY wE R F.x. Ye .T 1: A 10 Ilo ETOSTNC 40,000 SO FT pt y & t_ a A ` A 9 P F . ,P 1 : 0.02 AD. 3a'E S2 A ~CT I A a'-I I A I.p I1~1o1 ~.Q I1pS', NT " SPACES _ I~ a3v TO 10'-5' HIGH MAx. I¢,,~+ Many e~xs IRE ro M Aa lmq~ -u-- - ~qI ,W 4- 3{• MONUMENT I~{I~1 1 11.xO0 50 TT • E - B9_ _ JW S.F. R X FA ! F I„ 1 w FOR OFFICE ___yEIOTROOfr- , • al ,i• m I 9i' .m r- Aa, n~ _ . _=v=.c 1 N OD W 391e0 R 9 K n 9 G tl k ALTERNATE B UTILITY PLAN I I EM.ML~i 1 1 II T± II I 11 I 1f R I ~ T € I I 1 I°I°~Ir A3 R a I-70 SERVICE ROAD WEST- - " 1 I t ILr rr m 1 _ - _ __P80POSE EMSIWD CI1R6 K QITIER _ ,•b taa• OF S. w •vu 's I- - EWRY I ;•_0= - k •'rA F»'aras I I1,1.w _ _ i x]a.a 1, f N arAT12' W 660.4T PETANNG wALL 1 II a ~PI W wt.. w[ MY33 MA, I 1 a' PROPOSEo WODOEN FENCE OPEN SPACE/BERM W xa MT I I~I; ~ 1 I I !1 W EINOO R I ,i 3 Sb' I J C $ I _ i 1 _ n - er. O xw~',W mlPrt r•ou L - ]13L li-..Lw-• - -r -a2r- - - _ - - - _ S E ISW1D FOt N.C P~.PKN I I 1--- W, S _Jsa.3a ~ P F a- PwE w' ar sv r rx W - p ME MM T TDHN-APdMD N IMOIYI• W x zv f I I Z-4- GRAPHIC SCALE b x0 _GO WON= sruE: 1 Wtl, - w n LEGEND EXISTING PltP W WDOOEx Fcmm D...p~ ncauslWx ll m m rNTxx I ® NAHA aF vAlllwa sPAOS I I = COPE AIM CDTTw _ - Jpr WATER AN I - SNaTNtt' SETAR 0 MANHOIE y MENroRNIT CAS WE I #C INIA'ST ® ,,e I -RIC W-OF-WAY \ i LINE 12TA1 ouwNC S,TE 1.113 SF. DUID. PAD I xa e Ian. vA0 I I I I I I RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE /r- / CONSOLIDATED MUTUAL WATER COMPANY NORTHWEST LAKEWOOD SAN. DISTRICT US WEST COMMUNICATIONS PUBLIC SERVICE CO. OF COLORADO TCI NOTES _ L ALL WOPIL SHALL BE PERFORMED IN ACLOROANCE WITH "RENT PTY OF WHEAT RIDGE AND JEFFERSON OWNTY STANDARDS AND SPEFJFKCATIONS AS APPROPRIATE. I OTY OF MEAT RIDGE AND X ERSON CWNTY SHALL NOT BE RESPONSBUE FOR MANTENANCE OF ON-SITE UTUTIES. 3. EMSTNG URUTY INFORMATION Is FROM nEMO SURVEYS AND AS GMT NFCRMARCN WTHMED FMOP AVAILABLE SWRGES. CONTRACTOR SHAM UNGOWR AND VERIFY LOCATION AND ELEVATOR OF ALL EMSTNO UTUTES a. S. THE CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR TELPMARY EROSON CONTROL. gIRINO THE CONSTRUCTION PERIOD. 6. NNE BEWCHMMK USED WAS ME FINISH FLOOR ELEV. OF CWNMY CAFE ELEV- 3511.00 7. ALL PIPE MATERIAL SHM BE AS FOLLOWS UNIESS SPEOFICALLY STATED OMENWISE: 6• F.N. ONES SHALL BE OUCTxE IRON PIPE. WATER LINES SNAIL BE PTC ss N,L BE P\C 9>A 33, STS SHALL BE RCP ML SS 3 SEPTEMBER 13. 1996 p lR.4s/EA J HRLBE 'I~ fNSNEER~RI: LOUP/NI' PROJECT: 70 WEST BUSNESS CENTER IpyT: FMPE UfNIY PVN P.,~ W. w f.., - YOUNGFIELD SERVICE ROAD 70 WEST BUSYNESS CENTER AN OFFICIAL DEVELOPMENT KAN'09 THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE COMBINED PRELIMINARY-FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN SHEET 6 OF 16 1 I- 70 _ XIT RAMP a \ _ - tS3A~gf- MOO __E ( - 3 1 r 1 1' 1 II 1 I I 1 II 111 i~D~ 3W R PAD F I I IFV-5e21! 4 I f r TRY CAFE . ISTING 1 x-- d ----0.1\~~ am a PROPOSED ENTRY OPEN / I / / w ve , A ~I I I ,R CI 0 °n S S\\ OO 1' W ~ I 1 n Vr \4 r / 10 14 Ifll ~c I~ 11 II II I ©5yr.)=8.2 CFS 0(100yr)=16.2 CFS A N 0010'11• w 201.89• a ravr com ALTERNATE A GRADING & DRAINAGE PLAN -~I a ~I u) \ I V I o r- -L - z RIGHT-OF-WAY UNE T ~ GRAPHIC SCALE b A 0 b BD ~ sues 19Nn - b n I LEGEND I FD251HG PROP0;9 9. 9MCDOI MOM I G-o-- ANMUSTICM 9ARRm ITNCC I ® 9A Y OF PARKING SPAOES 10 CITE IIDOITFCATKH / s=a : CI ANG WTiFT I H MINIAAE DFRL'1XN I NXNVnXm COIIWRI I IE'IF2111fX1 ARIA 2 BASIN `~OfJT -ly Qj C61O4 "T Z NNIA'ST - ` - - BASIN IRIE9 DETENTION VOLUME AREA / (C.F.) IUNET-OF-WAY I ETAIL BUILDING SITE 125 L BIRD. PAp .F.V-5537.50 NOTES 1. ALL WORK SHALL BE PERFORMW"IN ACCWOANCE IMTH :D ~T 4 WRRENT CITY OF 11NEAT RIDGE AND ~XFTERSON COUNTY FT.24 AC. STANDARDS AND SPECIFIWTOUi Sf 1AlD. PAD 2. CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE AND JFFERSON COUNTY SHALL NOT BE RESPOIISIBIE FOR MMNTENANCE OF GH-SITE UTIDTES I EXISTING UTILITY INFORMATION IS FROM FIOD SURVEYS AND AS BUILT INFORMATION GATHERED FROI AVAI B SOURCES. CONTRACTOR SNALL UNCOVER AND VERIFY LOCATIXI ANO E,VATO, OF All EMSTNC UTUTES SOME MMONG UPUTY CONNECTORS OR CROSSINGS AND PROTECT THEM DURING COISIRUCTIOI. 1. IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF TIE COIiSTRVCTON CEENTTER G, C0.M (TTMB00 923 19E]) CATION PRIOR TO ANY EXCAVATION. a TIE CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTCR s AU. aE RESPONSIBE FOR TEMPORARY EROSOI COIITRCI DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PERIOD. 6. BENCHMARK USED: FINISH FLOOR OF COUNTRY CAFE RESTAURANT EIEV~5521.00 7. ALL FINISHED FLOOR ELEVATIONS SHALL BE AS PER GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN. SEPTEMBER 13, 1996 LA QUINTA MOTOR INN ----.rte-\ 1\ ♦b 56FT % F.F. ELEV-524.00/ - `7 s li/ H'I )NeT,SiA[sTUmANy / ,0.316 SO FT i / / 000 tl; P. 0.9 AG. i / .y Fr. .7, SO FT Itl Y96 `.181 ( ROAD WEST 1 8.150 2 12,911 } 22.900 TOTAL 44,264 SECTION A-A (BEAM) HORIZONTAL SCALE-' 1' ` TO' VERTICAL EXAOERATiO2t 3:1- YO UNGFIELD SERVICE - ROAD (r ro eOGO' I ~ e• IW1 caxcAErt SPRUNT I Noxw s~m'w• LA QUINTA a MOTOR INN = I - I F e g p I >3 ~ yy R e a 3 9 I I !I I I . , s,- I II ~ 11\• `I ALL-F -v_.~__-_- / ~iIP~__'~ I l: ~=pro-\ 1\ / ~~:I 1 I 1 A / I / I 10' / / W 216 I I \ pp N \ W 1 ~ l \ Itl ` 1 1-_ a PC 70 WEST BUSINESS CENTER LOTS 2 3 4, 6 AND 7 AN OFFICIAL DEVELOPMENT KAN O? THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE COMBINED PRELIMINARY-FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN - )=14.9 CFS SHEET 7 OF 16 - € ---70 EXIT RAMp RETAIL IT ACRES 7M~T 81 sr 10 A.2CD Bb FT I 1 FPOUNTRY CAFE A EDBRFF w R AIL Fs. ¢ -VX4.00 StA]A• (Tlf]9'J _Y * I-70 SRVICE N w4rIT W eee.w OPEN SP) eA~A row ~r RR - ALTERNATE B j GRADING & DRAINAGE PLAN Z-4- 7,OF/-WAY GRAPHIC SCALE w N 0 w m I / SCALE 1 F - 40" I LEGEND OTTIMIG PROPOSED I ~)F s' rocDDN FENEE ADWBDCAL TAKER FENCE I ® MA EFR 6 PARO NG SPACES R. DRAINAGE DIRECTOR I ~ aRm AIO wTTm I mxTOU6s JPX` NITOR4 I DETENTION AREA I 2 eASel / ~a EAONEy) iF RUN too iR) L Q Ill POINT 41A m 8A91N ucS DETENTION VOLUME AREA / (C.F.) W RIGHT-OF-WAY I LINE 1 44,264 1 , I ALL yULpN 91E 1.12s Sr. e'un. veo I NOTES: 1. A11 WCRN SMALL BE PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE AI I WEAT RIDGE AND JEFFERSON COUNTY ENT CITY O CUR 'A FT .N 4 81~I D F 'P R S 1 . . AD 2. CITY OF YMEAT RIDGE AND .EFFERSON COUNTY SMALL NOT BE RESPONSIBLE FOE UMTENNRGE OF ON-SITE UTILITIES EDSTING UTIITY INFORMATION IS FROI FIELD SURVEYS AND AS BUILT WFORMAT )N GAMERED FROM AVAKABLL SOURCES. CONTRACTOR SMALL UNCOY£R AHD VERIFY LOCATION AND ELEVATION OF ALL EMSYNG UTUTES BEFORE MAxING UTILITY CONNECTIONS OR CROSSINGS I PROTECT THEW DURING 4. IT IS ME OF ME CONSTRUCTION CAROM CONTTR OF C0.0RAW~I-SOO-922 198] ) PRIOR TO ANY EXCAVATION. S ME CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESIIGNNSBLE FOR TEMPORARY EROSION CONTROL DURING THE CONSTRUCRON PERIOD. 6. BENCHMARK USED: FINISH FLOOR OF COUNTRY CAFE RESTAURANT ELEV-5521.00 7. ALL FINISHED FLOOR ELEVATIONS SHALL BE AS PER GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN. I SEPTEMBER 13, 19961 1 \ ENTRY - 1 I \ ~ •Axm oaY / r ~ 1~ I F DVUVS l e: Ex UPE I 1 1 SLY I / i / I 1 \ II 1 a 4gt ISY.( 4 ' \ 1 R x.s.`B A1hcW ~ / ` + I ~ 1 1 ♦ \ 1 I I ) 1 \ / I y E / 8 ,b I N ~ II If I 0(5yr.)=8.2 CFS G(100Yr)=16 CFS N 009'11' W 211.DY F.F. AI Fri 9 ~I ~I I ~I §I I (U DD ~I I ~ r_j FS. WALL 1 B,A50 2 12.91a ] 22.900 TOTAL HORIZONTAL SCALE: 1' -IV SECTION A-A (BERM) VERTICAL E7CAOERATIOFY 3:1' r 70 WEST BUSINESS CENTER LOTS 2 3 4, 6 AND 7 AN OFFICIAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN 09 THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE COMBINED PRELIMINARY-FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN " - SHEET 8 OF 16 ti-eKr YOUNGFIELD =e'°ao•rmK"`yee...y,K 1-70 EXIT R SERVICE ROAD 2•%{ y1-Ra AMP t 96•n' 2s. Nes E, [-AAA b w ItY p, TO T :3-MP s o0•~'06. 1 1 eo.m 7.69' 2 SKi1 - ro 9FYNN t 5 ~w + u 11 HU r ' I 6,6/66 ~ UI l No 6- YS F~~1.11 .6-JIW SON I I U . h(,L I ! z-ttc TI '1D' LA QUINTA SPAE db ^.9n 4400 SO SL 449 }ST SO R PAO - 1 h 36.157 SF 34NU _ 3 MOTOR INN - 14Ac0. Ise RS Z,rw 5 E - I5-JNU I8- - COUNTRY CAFE IIETAK/REtlIl61MT EASING MITI W R lo' JpU LA NDSC'.AT( 7Jbf CM PL LTt : ,P(e- J I C -Y•PIP 5-JNU w 8 0-Joe t R 5 FSL how III i v- w ~Sl+i B S 'PJ I _ 07 I ~cN 4-J8f „ "L=%~~ Z-PeP I I I I I I I „ 4- 6JBP R S Wu p GROUND sa 2-.MP t-SL 40,000 SO FT R r FOR OM :3L 7-Jbf ~T 7-JDF aJBP 1-5L : I. S310F 0.9 AC. I RcFs /-'2 MA / r 7 000041W r'La.'SF,4~~S L~ y _ _ _d!P I 11 1~~-tS I~'KI- I F Z-.WU C-b-JNU Z~ GRAPHIC SCALE b 20 b e0 9blL• 1 1„Y, - b 1l uOmm ® sr rPi w+ ~Kr11rR . v v. LcN r-70 c-arc. SERVICE ROAD WEST RETAIL BUILDING l ~ , 1,123 IT. SLID. PAD S l'l (~I / k,j ♦ / g-QC / 116.,2 T.~ i' \ {-$L T 9 4~P ,L K 9C4712 M 666.3 ' !}•JbF p OPEN SPACE/GERM k s 6ERM L} 3lD5GAPE R. N Cv.na9 Ee S = $ PLATTED LOT 4 1 •SL . 10,266 SO FT d R nam 0.24 Ac. y c rt A tam66 L L.b l-blmCl-lumbue) h~O wYbnow,(mmoWv.YVUd). sL 3.000 tJ. euaD. PAD 7 a a - Nz6•le• ~ 8 : eo~K9 6 aaT an m.n,n.v vrMCw- m ,9dam•TbJw 9dm P.b U•F90 P~P~®.i'Kdk K -3310.00 L ~ t . ~ rr.• a..r.-.,.... Y.4.rYYi r.m .rsmld) TOW S( t ZSMII L n 4r-1~ r~YT~w Trrr Yt-+I..-t Y,..l mmA COURT lb LUd,-P ArtbIMndM/6YvFWYR- tl m6 mdt id d S l et = Var b O }y A 2-SL ®m m,am p,reah.6sw.olc it q v i~ w. u~`i • u~c.Y..riti:ti To.Ibe.nW iKpW d69d~fbaN~od 60.d~betim bmMw by 7 11 : . lbnDbdl{tlY wvk dlt 1 V { ~ ~ tlr Lle6apl Art K 9 . ` V 3_~0 al n ~rra+.•r r~a-~.~Ir um.~. r - YNrY,r YU Ya 4 iblm JWmWI{hb w181odc er Ydv sld m{r ah-wiY SYL 3Adrh .O ,e. a ura~ YrTr.r +w w ~ .r wePw~aT wlbddAll ` - s Olm ®a~~ A991ve aucl6Y Rl~6dms6F4tl w0i0h/. .416NU-p~sMWO+n !SL 1. ,,..~4r ~w aHr. v..- btlM 24u114 dpIYrti Yrl--FyrbtlWN~ b 1,6~ Yr• IV~~, PTY - n li ~~r: iK+ vrr+ e. AO➢~mdLwwe6~Py~+T/~4b~-6Fia 8-4°R and ~ ~ Fdd oaK, ylW7r gmrL I, sFrrrl• CK TMM-MWMO M ~rar `Y.-,Y,wrr ;wtr~ Vr~w-, ~ W-Il d-Y6 od p4m arl,L Fed bI Pwy,6u9T SV1~Ydh 2k.&- VIII TIV Yrti r rYw . v rte- ~ T. A Plprp vw4 a e a®wdY 6sd.tla r6NYbd 87 P °9-0 /!•l9lR I 2-MA - Z_SL Y. av..r.r+. o...... 9ssr,A W6-AIiYrFCmr. F Q1CIEl79 'DFIEJIT I :v;JNJ 6J6F 19 CRH DEVELOPMENT (J l:wwm"9 ' 2000 YOUN0IIELD STYEET . Pr it 00MmO Pen6r9wr iOIM SUITE 288 1 a - r " • - LAS.EWOOD. COLO. 80218 - Tna y ..-1. 3u w • N 091CM w 2o..e9 i9e-572-8888 ALTERNATE A LANDSCAPE PLAN JULY /9, 1999 Auausr e, 1996 SEPTEMBER 12, 1996 ZINNIA ST S op•Jrb- , YOUNGFIELD SERVICE ROAD 70 WEST BUSINESS CENTER' AN OFFICIAL DEVELOPMENT 2 3 4 KAN 'O9 THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE COMBINED PRELIMINARY-FINAL- DEVELOPMENT PLAN •M16i0'r'em`vn9. SHEET . 9. OF 16 r-7- EXIT RAMP GH 110 1 Kc RETAIL LA QUINTA MOTOR INN £-lAh 7-JHU M 00'S0'W- t1 3A1\ 2-MA - d 4' s C po? ~ tt } : iJ n a w -JU0 9 rs ...0eW n 3 2-S L. - Y-~ b:J6! F • i 1 " f'S.7AF 5-ri 1 -35 1 $ _3UHU 5' t 6'MP 1 E . ■ ■ W 2 FOP li'm w n J•~- 1 0,000 SO FT S GRWND Sl I'm -Z• $L RETAIL X19 -F 2 Ac. -Rc SHOWFtWM 5JUD ~J 1 u AFP ~ /3L s•J6 2•SL -L SL qrr. I-70 S VI ROAD WEST ' rnoro9eo , 3-2~ -3-f~ .L•RO ALTERNATE B LANDSCAPE.PLAN JULY it, lose AUGUST t, toot SEPTEMBER 10, is9$ HW11 ' MA JHo 1-5L =N d -4490 - I-% -.l-4N 0 I-Rc - 1-4L 3 t-JNV AfP 1_Ib-JNV "z-~~ 1-SL t OPEN SPACE/BERM E$ k (aF-0JA LAxv55GAlIFY.t canPL S-re) ~ ~ $ I'$L _ nmaa . tvm~OA i V,y~. mypdr(=JO mirm),b•9MrbOC•.IaWOn°'H"uatsJ): -~5L m aR te.o,•... r..rcr.r m mu•e ♦Ttr W ~ ]0.t w t W,.,.,rru rrr .y.y.rrr ~,W,ppµr d9/tpW (1'r5 P•Or'0°'aTv~ld,} ACE[99 n" _L-111V r n rri... rAr. rr.• ran„-.,.Aru Atd1Y4 o[r/JW.p~rP'Irn =E AC= 3. V-U31M amNYOr wdnotUT tb•IAedrR9 2-SL pom9d19tWW tN Wart ,.,4.N S r..rr rrr rsrr•..•.r dN brtbr - rti z PMm~^{N..O.t. uOrmuLnm o u n.rn/.,...r 0r,....-r ,rrw• rs~ r,rr YR= ,•,.Yr MY1~ ~ ~ LVb „1tG lOf)< O/ POr aN rNr etllr•~r 041•Q LE1~ 3-~11U r u r..o+ rr+-•r ~m•.r• rwmOte.lb AT rebddgi4 ■~t~ S. AO pb -f tvd5.5 n mgr0 n tr9NSOn/• °N pLm mvAA•b mq t !-SL K ~yw,.. r~.~ irr~ _a~,W. bsNSyoWydylm r9 grlbr9rrlrnthr R~aOtl. >3 n n AA., I~-A✓.- iMr.+ R'u~ - m ReWJwt+m l A9 q9r md19w 9m9n M9PWbd b/~9~7'm $ ~r®er d0 sW 9d°Ur T/Agrraotf. .t • .e•r rn•W.+Y ,µr.. v.•r.r MM ~e xrr• a.r•. r....w iir~r..~•+ 7. AO tmOeP'0°°rdP~mrMY tlib M'P°°'~l mdnulvd b/ v rrr ,r,w,rr P°P"tY sra r • mawdV es~-. 9-9d90P9 ruNM5e5 W P/^Pm1 2-5L ,W nv..rwr• 0•.r..r 9Wx.70 NrtBrlrr G9rt. .SrJbF 1`i u■w"SEi _RH °SP C°B 8 $000 YOURGYIELD STRZIT Burro Sts LAH:EWOOD, COLO. $0218 808-232-8598 &-JNU f 4.181' H PMl WMK T1111N-Mpllr -2 -MA H o W 31.59' a _ 9 ,tr. R • 30.00' L mac Z~ GRAPHIC SCALE ta+r: t t,a - w n LEWD 0 ® 9r9r Ir~9I~ T BUILDING SITE n0. P9u LATTED LOT 4 0,266 SO F 0.24 Ac. 3,m u.t .PM la wG 10o,■rw T 1 1 t COMBINED PRELIMINARY - FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN DIAMOND SHAMROCK AT 70 WEST BUSINESS CENTER WHEATRIDGE, COLORADO ( SHEET V OF 16 MN MW ED MEN 1*aO P.M. M COD 1.Y, r[p ~(irl rup. r!!aE b Diamond Shamrock Diamond Shamrock 4 Corner Store YMMQ L a y r[R wm M ~ ' rp \ORV - CIXW 9MM i0 ra .Nl a .rs! s>x or b ' ~ 1, 0.wtgE4! Va G SWQ W Y1PQ SST a LEVATION II Cy EAST ELEVATION yr - r-o . r priovr rlsa 1 ED - Pm aMa P!/6 - 16O MR[ Y(!K Qsw aM¢ b b xlmC IRrll IFD Wo naac vun moL - n!x awr 1® BV9 y ^ mr•nt ^ b ~ 3 b b PM . MQ SIA2 ffi tI H !I rxx wxm - arr Nrwa ro vea -wLL ox xESr vo[ or - 'i `O~f~.ia,o1OA OF r ~ P Y ':d4 . fttdQ ttM5[ SOUTH ELEV ATION CCUCL SQDfF NORTH ELEVATION OPY/ISLAND ELEVATION txofm [uwlNx vo.R, ,/r - 1~ - W CONVENIENCE STORE & CANOPY ELEVATIONS Ill pCEN50v5. CMD16 MO wTE` S ME M9 U s Ig1E0 OMEP L h E r-lo Vr wr[ - - - I u~~ Car Wa h r ~ la T nn u rsw vMn ra ~N ( R WASH SIGN D °6 J > ; r~3 Id'ZoIT Car Wash ~,,,D _ ' 1 ~ ° ` 1.r-ra - rx- weQ -car $~ux ro p1A.µ N- tCar Corn r tore" b Dax ~ mElaw[Nt e < ■ % .s xm 0p1~ 6pLL1p1 cafe fL' r.1 Vr , I p~ T31III WING S~ ICN ~E SOUTH ELEVAT ION EAST ELEVATION (DD6aa7 r xr-r Vr-ro 1/r-r-r . V Diamond Stimrock CVI]R QiH9 YC1Ol !AV]S r-ro JONPPY SIB CN ~I'SS Fit 6LNNDING PRIC I E SIGN m[ bnn rMDU rMa Nrnl lwa, P.~n SIGN PLAN rw xQ Mn Ml oMNSNNS. canxs MD wSExvu ME mrx uxlts's NDrzD omEamsE lYI.4.Y. r,• T ~~l%~ `^IT _ ^ ~1 ?e HIGH RISE SIGN NOTE AYQO 91W.CR]{ 6 HIDIQ #i C M Mrs Q M # u'~•r Pvow~ Ua F ~N hw 4'.® 9a IGf~loa rV 1/»/rf il 'IMYTI: yW~ ~ f ®aCx V m - ME. SY[M 9M:R M41 W w[Sf yCC pr M la - S. 4 S MPI $r]I rPlll pl •DQr-S IOr. PPLS[xM1r MS Nq.MS CFN CL /}»1L . BRCR 391m1 ~M ' ~rl v MVSMM[M ix ' ~ 1 1 L - C,S • ID IS! SI. CCIMS C! T!S 9]N -1l 6 SV!•TCD 10 ~ Ca Sa ~W !Mr[ aid . , ~ID•r' ar ~ ■ OVwy Ibnr~ D rib' ( JTQA* , Diamond Shamrock m ux sE ` % % _ 9610 CDI.DDN .NE Blw. m •s reDw sM MIME. uofi 1•-.w NORTH ELEVATION WEST ELEVATION E[wn '/r-.•e 1/r-r-a EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 1-A ! r. lM ~R 0rm CAR WASH ELEVATION . m D.: Mx 1» .SLL puEN5FH5. CMOP5 .0 wIFNVLS ME "Y DMESS lgTtD DINERNISE O°'" OC M bIQ an c» L~ I b s I i \ 7W I 1 1 7 L L~_E~ LY.t T.T'J/ L EU i i3L~t1E> ~ 1.'Y Y 1TIE1: . SHEET11 OF 16 24 xZF~ OGEC'TYJFJpC- osorr,ow: M yn•rYe OTMr b q• b bC wy r rey. rr _u. I roc{: [++rl oa]v'{a,.n dSw<'k•Jl S:Efil .f. OIUn1O: „ego W. b,n ws, m .wn mpwa w1, bd ewaw. Ean ,y. w.wYn A CYMCT: { Y.• IYnW Minrivn ewnM un bw. LLIP,rrli,dY[l[RIrICY: I,y, e„qa YuwsY gwrq R.yr.n r.13 wq {rpw rr 1,0 w/M w !0 MN ]aY ,nprp.t.] wn wOll/[Oll CLYEH: • [0.E- , ww oa, St• bq • EOII COVEN fan`.l.B$ a.wc T_e M Srf11)rl]MOIIrtPruCltOw{: YIW n,wClWn b tp a eN. E AETTE WE IrE Irr[YEYT. COrKNE: Y . tY . JS' 70 WEST BUSINESS CENTER MGH RISE SIGN NG]E: O'mJ1'] a Jbmd 1di M~. 230 q. M1 G{A Ne sp, Me fea fml ioneef m me,atl,ny mrvicelWVdfr na]a IU q. M1 rm;F, wHl e, ems„ m „Emma w,wa ra.Epew p,;a anm,Ltia SGa[- ,R .r.p rM.S R'w G9+!` COrS.M~C T ] T'p YWwn, wn t,a_u1P KKI ]K[5 LL,M. ae ,TN MR/r RWr6C[Yr 1M i,[PMfi ✓ GS,/I Y p `S.R. >e N,Y r^PKL fKT1 .,]S u]R K.`IK iwT.C ]4 K`RMd MGl•P a~u°e.w] SO.v~]o .nom. 'P..m we..,,n..,,, a,+,rsw rP VS( w,n LU 1Y1 al.. YV( ,l➢ PNq-IYA] R[[nK][ ar•n`KS' KKp Ya il[v P,:S M 6lM Ol• w,v Lqp. {K[GnWi,e Va~].c PWVp 1' c0 Pw RV.G.OIy. .nCl, M[ 6W LT' wn• S,aC.O` ,rGiPaM W .v,[ MG-V VR.M PYa+J rM GM.pr 53R,,. ranra+ ~A] ~ t Y if[, 0cn[,[ rawa+d wn ]n.q rwm...G+a+. Rn .m c m a.R+ j .e.r 'u1i ,.cc. c. .a., R• _ `•e_ru.. ,•.+w.• r+w<caw. n'>.ema.. KO ,s< ur+ Re no• ,,..K a.-]». v...u...e a],. weT rtuo- Ko r-.eo-, n.., ,n ,e+r.-T...s,.m• .awn r~im•e~ ~ n Ne ~rtw •er.o+ttt w v anrf Krortnr r I .,o{ I . ,m •n-> ~ . o. e w oar -F~PEGIFIJ_1L115' GLV ✓A SV MQU PZBP, Cb F' +EWY IIPT.1. LEFp~•_:.- _ _ Ilv)'I L_•.:.lY: 14Tk7~ .°l'✓L: /L'cN T2 Gtu= 1' rt_-.- P(ir'. ~.bc Rn,+i-rO R'r$JILa. IJY. VI'J' rlt F.,>nn•- c P. 1 I 'P 1.]'.J 'Heim. c', -.~c~ LIEL 'CYJS_ ^G1"~ I~IS tl<•:•<~ti~ SLCXfi .I rv tl'j T, k• ~ T I ~yo.s cw ]cr I r hO J✓ I J LJ / J l_ U 1D A ~ r ~1~'TE: IIR. ]L'F UV 1!. Gi PF. ,VE.•N/b. _'y,_f.;'.+ -4 4a I D 7-1 1,-v , D) J1 l D T M VACUFC )qM ~ W e ~ •s,r.e REAR ELEVATION i=z _ T 7 I = = = = - J t A EA-5'r 51GE ELEVATION ,n.%'•.I .o ..r: o ...c~ n.n µ 7 SirE ELEVATION ac c q 4t t- w Z W U Cf) a ` ~~I ` f ~ D rw✓.n+rva L xn....m I ?4 - l I p I I - e - 4 1 111 50 UTp a.EVATION x..,. I... o w2 .,y ~.~n ~,>w ro a w. r o. n a y z 7 W tiw w tw.w.n. nr -~9'IBS [a w vQr w ~~i 5 KEYNOTES. L fOA~t ftVIN.W • YpY~0A.~0~RL myw l F~O.~YI.RAI Rv • OI.IMtIb. . lM ATw l Gl/w i~Y. ~Yw1~ Y M4C~.WM l .Yb1.. n.0 COO~1~ gym[ t MLPI~f40LC1 MIIM. SHEET 13 OF 16 ALTERNATE A MNT-ELFVATIQN - RESSAUSANT-BUILDING OR RETAIL BUILDING RE5TAURGNT REAR ELEVATION - FIESTAU.RANT_BUILDJNG._ OR RETAIL BUILDING .SIDE ELEVATION ._REST_AURANT_BUILDING_ •1 •m OR RETAIL BUILDING I..y 4Ki YC'-C 1 NEE: gVILO1I+G MI.T(cA-I A-~S "ftr T pjLGalO wlrtt WESr Fkor ErtrY LINE wa.L.~. • EACH SIGN FACE SHALL NOT EXCEED 350 S.F. - SIGN FACE COULD BE SMALLER THAN SHOWN • FINAL LETTERS. ILE SHALL BE SELECTED AT THE TIME OF INSTALLATION, -j \ 70 WEST CENTER / LA QUINTA MOTOR INN COUNTRY CAFE WENDY'S 4b CORNER STORE 0-DOEME CENTER I.D. SIGN N.'. S. N1Fl~AID OT CRH :'U.". QfiD1c"°°r.nc..nces*ccn mse s. r>xna~no eLw =1 _ _ ~ A ~ ~ -2-"116 .aRn~, cnw. Ims s0yns.+sn i i i i 1 I I _ i L u ~1 ALTERNATE B REAR ELEVATION - RETAIL BUILDINGS SIDE ELEVATION - RETAIL BUILDINGS i0 rMlfFi I,Y.P 1 i0 I-EiI1 SCE ~'-P~ TO E1KJa Q-P A ee E6'Oa :Pf-e• A in:Y RN' a VL<• 1 NOTE: EXTERIOR CONSTRIICTICN MATERIAL TO MATCH OR BLEND WITH WEST PROPERTY LINE WALL KEYNOTES- : xrt secE corsaEre u~c i. ca+cieiE cavr e.x r o~ererE+eiEet ~e ccvr. eiaOKi M[ MTi IL1i' s. oRnnr sasaa • ~r..i .:rnEx 1. C E. Gl s ,1 •LV'.rtlll SiL2~O:i e (u+-rE+uo ow+u'ar a ~avy,Ei eETOo ,e. MTi GrR<LK. 0. Y :Oil ~Y.C CLWJ22 C1G~'T' O. :+G<lCL RiK C0. a,0 ~4YE PREPARED BY: INTERGROUP, INC. ARCWITECT5 (T~ 26% S. COLORADO BLVD. ~I DENvER, CO 80727 303-158-8811 DATE 8-29.19% n III ~I u i~ i n i r f r li I V FRONT ELEVATION~:--RETAIL BUILDDJNGS '.I' 0• SHEET150F 16 OFFICE SHOWROOM TENANT 51Ct E SOUTH-ELEVATION _BUILDING LOT-6 tv-1.-0. rD III na.P 1 i Q/ U--LL -JI III' i ill II II~ ll--LL--11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1'^\ 1 1 1 11~ II I~ U--1~ NORTH ELEVATION -.BUILDING LOT 6__,.. rM~LCw bp0- A NOTE: EXTERIOR C095TRIJCTION MATERIAL TO MATCH OR BLEND WITH LLE5T PROPERTY LINE WALL I I KEYNOTES EJ ❑ i sLm raQ VC~arz >ao~ !J ❑ ❑ L DaR fN~41Y ny', iOY fIr4 N1'C l > w2weio amour<oa'ae a erYOM Y/Ir I'F1K KV f. PANT rata e. M!I!® WEST _ELEVATION =BUILDING LOT--_6 ty1'-0• fABT FIEVATION 9nsLM t f onsc a... aces n.w..n ercAwan •agrr•[i e[+oo v .err rr Lae~.u a s+oau raa cvue+e e~ma n .uiw mw ooo+.w here iAFIAAm BT: - PRLAOBOUT.O~C AACHRICf] ]696 S. Cpl BL~'U ® OEM'tR CoO eam -Ir-9` w>-nsam (r r. 8-x-56 DATE7.I2IW6 m m SHEET.160F 16 X 2 r.w..ax. m~r FRONT _ELEVATION =RETAIL- 1, 12 5 S. F. PA D NOTE: EXTERIOR CONSTRICTION MATERIAL TO MATCH OR BLEND UATU WEST PROPERTY' LINE WALL --a REAR ELEVATION - RETAIL b,r"m*1,125 S.F. PAD x SIDE ELEVATION _RETAIL_ k.'I."m 1,125 S.F. PAD mm WEST ELEVATION=DUPLEX- .,r-m• - EAST ELEVATION --DUPLEX. .,l .0- 0" mm [11 ...,.1 N + KEYNOTES- _ : .w.~r ewraee !1 m m m v e+oc.aasn ~l t > i"v aow _ ♦ roc r<auea > r..eaA (imve ro ow.erwn SIDE ELEVATION-DUPLEX- ,•.r-m" PP mm BY, PlIUIGBO". PIG ABCBMM ] s. cowB BL. Vw co mm 9-13 rE• wspwn 8 2l tI c eV. -7e DATE 7-Mlvee u~ LU LH 0 Y-H '~1 I U--LL !I II p~ `,II II- m UNNC015'tl4TED .E7FEVSOIf O l try LA OUINTA WEST 33fd_ AVE. i ! N a ,e O WEST .32nd AVE. z D lz VICINITY MAP N.T.S. Renner, Commission 6rOnwt. This I. to certify M. within pal hag been appeasd by Me Rmnh9 COMmlasicn of the ally of speak Rldls• Caaada I ~ I I C I Z I I ~ I M I M I 1 1- 10: I N I I ~ I _1 -1 I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I Wd.pr.an Pudic SARA.. Company of Cal°rado U.S. ft.t Camm.picatlon. Meet Ridge D9ecta Of Pudic wbrn aW CMY Fa9her ChdhpreM. Meal Rb9. Pat. and Recreation Canminbn Meal R.I. Dhsolor as Plannln9 ad Cam 111 Der --1 1, Jan Van Slcld.. a Prol.stland Land Sallee rphtew In the Slate of Caaradu. crt", that M W.-do), of 1996, MM pick ass pr.pred endr my direct sulr .IM, and to Me bast of my pafenlo°d Moded9e and belief he atarvt, CASE HISTORY WL-74-18 WL-76-20 W2-78-14 W-75-29 002-64-10 w-88-9 M-92-I1 va 96 - 3 002-96- 10 fa and on behalf of FraglM and Helps Enpn.erha Company IW75 E Harwrd Arenu. 9320 Dente. Wacada W231 70 WEST BUSINESS CENTER RE-SUBDIVISION A REPLAT OF LOTS 2,3AS,7 AND PART OF LOT 1 OF 70 WEST BUSINESS CENTER AND A PART OF THE NW V! OF SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP SS, RANGE 89W OF THE SUl P.Y. CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COUNTY OF JEFFERSOK STATE OF COLORADO p6satwnw Oeahc R. ad Vintage L RkAtr b.9p the emeg of Lot 2 and Dgalne R. Rhnte the eMr of the balance Of M. r.a pm , of 6.660 aa.e located F M. NMtnee,t IN of Station 29. Teenenb J Swth. Ran. 59 sent of Me 6th Pr.FNPd Yrkeken r.aad.d w TO Vast ,pegs Cenlr h the readt. of J.H. County It Reception MYmbr 80076366. ankle It part of 81odt 1 and 610. 4. Appleeood Cagdre., and ports of Lots 11 14 and 15. RoIDVy CadMe of in the Oty of W,ect Rkp4 Canty of Jefferson. Stole of Eobreda. ma. pa9MMlr deeat6M as to. Oammmch9 at IM WMl 1/4 aaner el aab Section 29; thence dM9 N. w gp the of Sob NW 1/4, the pa.1. of the 6ewMo. th M* awabtNn X8919'16"E 659.66 1.4 M. HOW wse- f sold MOO fast go in. meth TO Ud 89asyeas r Gender aged Me lw of l ba.9d9OIIrY4 me ..t e°mr OI late 4 o Meng dan9 M. bamdo y of gold tai 4 M. fasash9 four (4) naasr 1. 5891915"W 95.16 feet pae9tl with and W fast path ham Sold ewlh In. of ion HW o 1/4 to the b.,hnh of a arw cansoa to Me ne,thea•t with o fadL. al MOO Iasi and crN.d ap. el 69]9'16'; I lnMce dap paid arW 31.24 fast; 1 Mann Molw"*w Tate Mt 4. In.. H897VIVE 115.00 last to the east line of let 7 01 sold 70 Vast eu.h.n O.ntr Mrrce plan, M. Wasl Ih@ of Lot T and the asst ling of Lot 5 of rAd TO Wnt Ro•heas Censor, kinw 6"W 666.4) as Narae alas, M. barday of Lot 6 01 Sold TO Weal 8 sh..e C lsr the lasagna, lour (4) CCa,•.R I Q 1. S8916'21"W 2iQLN fast F ~r. I t MMp NOD1S1'Yw 304.60 Mt .l ~j J- I ~r) 1 1, MMn N69Z5'24"E ]90.69 M4 1 nr T ^ 1.500'u'J6"E 29]50 M1 1o ion b.gllnh0 of a nth-tan9Mt w,con. to th. "V I 1 a b.ani 56J1 ~WC Of 175.00 Mt and a cared woe of a4-40'37* and a chard II II ~ 7 t1 alma M. fmo.Yi, ivn. (1:) cMr..c ~(~.L7 L,f U ~ aona .a1a wr» 16T.ao Ml L Kyc DEVELOPMENT' thence Ngh) 5W 4"E IM12 feel 1 MM. SOP4SW E 17.50 feat: 4. InMn S6914'2elf 3ZW fast 1 than. 5061724"W 7.95 feet 6. th.nc. N897V24"E MW fast 7. then. NOO'35'J6"W 25.50 fast 6. MMn X8974'24'E 2100 fast 9. MMce 5061724"10i 559.84 Mt 10. Ibacce SnMN14'11 194.52 last; IL MM. 56929'16"w 194,00 fast It that. SIYM* 0"E 100 fast to the Point Of be9hnh,. pace, sanding npOrhrol~y nano It of 6.860 oar.. of M. City. MQDFA OF DEED OF, TRUST OMER: DWAINE R. 11157ER 6565 S. SYRAWW WAY Ho. 1202 E:NM WOCO, COLORADO Will (303) 694-7215 can dedicate OWiER: YAOPINA L. RICHTER 11665 w. 39M 9L WEAT RODE. CMORA00 80033-216]8 (303) 279-6554 _ faelg-0 j STATE OF C0.llRADO ) J'3TERSW) LOUlITY OY The Iaa,op, In.9urnrrt .n eaarowied9ed Nla. Me Mb day, of AD. 19 , by elth..e my nand and Offlcid goal. My oaerm vat n asp9as NOTARY XeL Notary Pudk STATE OF MORADO h• =NW OF J37TRSOft) (t AND REOOROM'S CERTIFICATE I heavy c.rt11Y that thl. pal Was fled h my elfin edoca _ m- M Ma _ dry of 19 aid I. duly reaaded M RM El. F. gold ,,AYW'S XRTfXAX This b to ceDly Mal the aty of Meat Ridge, Cdagadw by motion of It. of, goad ad on M. day al , 19 adopt and eppaw the slaps, plot awn accept M. dedications he. mad.. ATTEST: Oty Seen MOTES pead le .so the CtlaW° Dis an el Tr ago IallM.. the `a POW Of Meet Ra .t On,as R. and WgeW L Pickle, Mal snag sipaa M Apt 25. 1993. 2 The forms, Let 1 of the 70 Wnt 8 Imghg Cenir, nee ImOWre . Me L. Ouhta Sits, Is j,,it to o- p10)8158 aan~fN~ elm; s ent that em fanrdW ands, In tha, Reception Ho. 1 NOn2 Apoadhp to Calaodo tae Yw must aanmMce any lo9d potlac tined upon any .fsol In MY -Y Within W. yore after year fast clraw war Weak. he no .vast may any police based upon any defect In Mb MWr as commenced mass Man lM yea, horn the oats a M. crUnMken Wro.n hewn. 4, The M)sat PtOOrty If" sIMN ar partially Mash Me I.9d d..apticn a, eshblts found to Me 1d1.na9 rsearded h.Wma is Mw, CandlllM4 nVk 4 Obligations and ,eerWiM.agarcontahed Mersin. TYPE CP MaTNLYfNT RF(YYBMNf. NfdtNAllfN TO Wnt ,,aim (:entr Rat R.cepllon Na 8407636. DMeken 1 Ingmt Cart 0,9 ,satlan 94, CY 151111 Canman Aac.n and Mo.. passing Reception Na W754511 Ea.rnent Wit 0.1. Dead Receptwi H. 86077115 1 9a•e ; w flood Mwronn Rate Map Caamunlty Pa.l No. 055079 0005 C amWh9 the City of Meal Ridge and acted Fw o y 4. 19W Owed by the Faded Fm.r9May U..,..t Agency the a )..t "arty is ouwlde ion 600-year flood Plat. pip possament. pnvlwry aliens, t" sough ta r. caraway Yacebw . shad has, M meet 2 -Mdlny of MM plat All 7. The Ism .,,Y d•tMib11 aK(.) shown he. Vole be Can.bVat.d and Mchtahw as, the Omrt has., wan.a, and .shin, In the enact that sold maintenance be at prfamned by saw ems,. the ply of Mnt RM. shad have the rlol to ant. ON area(.) and pMlma the neceevy eah. The cast of snide, sake owner, hairs. Maesm, and s ions pagan to .y open b9h9• No holden,. .WCtun all be <MeWatw h the Intention Mn(e) and no M dirallme affecthyy 1lnn hydraulic wextrlsU. of dolenllan san(e) ell be made withwt ins appeal of the qty Dphee. & Elp'r1-fact (81 We utility opponents are bray plaited M 1Mt. pra9ettY ad)n^t in efl h Me subdIA.Ion or moFianon" Vast. and rwacesperIt of elepcaltk. 90, tY ion idle. and dedicated ~u e fpoe'ltles. , tti plmnonentalsM,ctorn papd Iwaterslie ete,a .slow not bbeeapencilled awithin old uURY eaSon pos. . ament. ANY ENGINEERING COMP hang'... SHEEP I OF 3 FRASIER & hALBE mop9."'"cea Holder Of OO&as) 01 Trvgt hrwY,tlasee. dam to aedg dedenned to Wdk u... UNINCORPORATED JEFFERSON COUNTY z ~Z y W T G ~ w 0 z IJ N < 0 U 2 u j NTA LA SEE INOTEE #21TE 0 I W N ~ b O z < N A O W a S o R. i 70 WEST BUSINESS CENTER RE-SUBDIVISION A REPLAT OF LOTS 1,t, AS AND 7 OF 70 WEST BUSMSIS CENTER AID A PART OF THE NW V4 OF SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP $9, RANGE SOW OF THE SM P.Y. 25.00' CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COUNTY OF JEFFERSON, STATE OF COLORADO 58924'24"W 32.80' 1"E) NOO.35'36"W 25.50' (S89'38'00-w) NOOK1 00 W All A I -170 .men .d S0617'11-N,I I~ I I II I I I I i I I' I I i II I II 11 i O - 54'40'37 I I I R- 175.00' ii L - 167.00' i Lys I 1 I %I - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I Ip ulU1Y [A9]Ol, ~~~'°y M [fR. ; i I / />o m [v-m 9v1a 11 am. x. wmaw i"oN'~~~-m ,uvn aia; i ~ 1 / I - 1- / I If7 --,-r- rF /f ~ 1 L_ p RuR a iebo+nw n,c I 4 ~ I I A m P19M9 mIm I-f- wm. r 9anxe I A !C v.G.1Dl R iM Mi W. ]S sIPN a.x,a aL I r ul[IR 9 ,Ef9.r[M OJf. I AREA = 6.860 ACRES 1 EmnNo SANCNRE I A. I I A7 I WW \1 111 \`1 1 \ \ 1 \ n I I 1 V p\ I I 1 ~ J J4~Yc \ A£ \ 1 I L oR 1 ' I 0 t I ( \ Ale e19 I I I \ Al I A19/ ~ .p A e MV BY A 1993 3 PARTY AWMINT Wn N. 1) LOT 7 r I ~ (NOO10'11"W) 2! uSX a 00'23'47"W 204.60' ,•91w N».eA' As 1FJ 91AEn LOT 6 1 LOT 5 An,LSrtn tr Au[ec FAC/N£EA/AC LOMiANY r BLOCK I LOT 4 I LOT 3 I LOT .2 rs.,o MEA 1 MO PM 3 ❑ w M1 PEA NM CN El W ROW fA A DA M ib CDN]CUDATED WNAL HAIFA 1/31/35 AREA 6 PA B WWRW BY TNRM PMTY AOtEF)1EAT 4/93 U id SEE NOTE " 1 NOIA0.48.W QIRRFNT BEA NG sY]mA QTY M Y AMCM Q NAL BEAMNc S151EN (NDD•47'1z"4) OHM ~Tu lw p K.T y9D"w E(AMO REBM MM YQLOW M = OM a SIANPED VIN is 1 11010 ow lmc CM A s u • / 1 w nMP ED GRAPHIC SCALE (awl Z~ 1 = I I I N 1 1 I < I I I I 1 I I 4; ~ O w < zo < N 0 U z ' W i z I ~ Z I I I A]I 1 c C4 M r___________-. 1 I 3 I SOO'47'12"E) ' I 1 7 16- 8 1 z 8'0 . I N8 30 E) z '44"w 0. R m i ' o X a s 47I W 3 I N00 qm I POI 7T OF BEGINNING y 0"E ' ' o w z 3 ) 43 < 0 z N I~ I a I I p - 89'29'18" g I: R - 20.00' z I: L- 31.24' 1.1 e I' D - 90nT1r A L-]1.8 1: 1 A] 1FA41RE0 I' I I / /d I J YC11011 39 / lOmsw 3r RMM 69 / / / `mllnl UNE NY 1/A, MC_39. T IS R E9M- ZINNIA STREET 70 WEST BUSINESS CENTER RE-SUBDIVISION A REPLAT OF LOTS 1.1,1,4,0 AND 7 OF 10 WREST SUSSlSS COITER AND A PART OF THE NS/ 1/4 OF SECTION 10, TOWNSHIP SS. RANGE SSW OF THE SL PJL CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, CMWff OF JEFFERSON, STATE OF COLORADO GRAPHIC SCALE IPrml ]yp~tl M1 LOT 5 m t 17386 50. FT. t 0.40 ACRES LOT 4 .A t 10264 S0. FT. t 0.24 ACRES SHEET J OF J fR45 J I VE fTCINEFRIAG COMPANY 7500 West 29th Avenue The City of \h7HPat RiAan rWn ,aAn Rr»1S Wheat Telephone 303/ 235-2846 FAX 303/235-2857 August 6, 1998 David D. Meyers Crosslands Construction Company 4600 S. Ulster Street Suite 1180 Denver, CO 80237 Dear David: Ridge This letter is in response to your request for change in lighting standards used in the canopy at the property located at 12851 West 32nd Avenue. \ During the public hearing process for development plan approval, the applicant's representative gave testimony that canopy lighting for the facility would be recessed. I believe that this public testimony encouraged City Council to approve the proposal despite opposition from the surrounding neighborhood. Upon inspection for the request for issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy, it was discovered that the lighting installed under the canopy is not recessed and has exposed bulbs. As an alternative to replacing all of the fixtures, Staff has agreed to allow you to use light baffles as shown attached in the existing bulbs on a trial basis. Even though the Temporary Certificate of Occupancy has been issued, if complaints are received from either the adjacent residential neighborhood or Wheat Ridge City Council representatives, the existing fixtures may have to be replaced. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me at 235-2848. Sincerely, Meredith Reckert, AICP Senior Planner cc: 12851 W. 32nd Ave. Permit file Galloway, Romero & Assoc. 08/07/98 02:25 PAX 9181 000 1 0410 yl?MI'AI III' 00121' Jun-21-00 03:24A OTTSDALE' DOWNLIGHT REFLECTOR AND TERNAL SOFT LIGHT BAFFLE INSTALLATION INSTRUCTIONS Tools needed for Installation: I. Larne Charger 2 Claw, Q,,/ A2q 7. Goggrea for S/a Pratevion n Z02 P.02 arnin ELECTRICAL SHOCK HAZARD IS POSSIBLE. Insure that all electricat current is turned oil before proceeding with this installation Preferred Installation Method Jr 8anfe is Crone-Shaped... 1 Put an the a•/e protection and make auto that any specratars are a safe Lidtunca away. 2. Open Ii;GUrg door using the hdek and at the lamp Changer. 3. Invert the lamp changer and remove the lamp from the socket. 4, Clean the tamp with the Clean dry cloth and return to the clamp portion of the changer- 3. Install the battle aver the Oaae of rho lamp with the large diameter Gown. Slide the reil4war down to The shoulderof the gloom portion. Sea fig.I 8 Reinstall the lamp in its socket and seat the [Amp by fightening, than Inosaning and ratightgning the lamp. 7. Remove the lamp Changer. a. Invert the lamp changer Ana close the fixture ooar using Ina hook enC. 9. !tppew Abcve steps for each of the remaining fixtures. if SARle f9 Flat.. ~ S 1 p l8ce bailie down. with Ne lerga cad tacind yrnt. You will notice a center halo, two slits near center hole. and a tab and 510} near the oulsida !Cgs. On an• IWO. Land one edge near slit or slightly. On other side. bend opposite 9CQA near ciriv Jlit Up sllgr•Il,. N'-.v hend !at: up slig-tl4. NoAdle•nata pliers may be halplul. Sea Fig-2, Turn aaffle aver sa Tat Lends are =lnq :;n•,vn. Will the OlUms of your Planda facing up. gran eAMte near gap an cut, c de Bdrra P01 nanes taq!th41, as 'hAt the slits mesh together. by overlapping edges and forming a cone. Mute! :Gge '•v.l§ = must ::verlap aver ecge• Conanue pulling together at autaiaa edge, so that tab meets slot. Allow sal; to InSgtt slot, p'ae Fig. 3 ,Vow tc bw maps t througn 9 above. Alternate Method JStrg a 30UN4 and araaer Of ac31:CICing Ann aye CMIaCIICn Cef!Crm :ho J00.9 e:eon :vii h.out the ULe of -a lamp chNrl5oe 2 IAUTICN A.Iow yui:iclrnt pmt rcr thn la,r.p to Coal after :urntnq oil :re e'eCnn to areVeat al:}rl Y. a Prcceed woh 1 Inr3ugh 9. i j.. , 0 L 1.9* 3>j t~$-:3 7 7 Fig-3 •-.•a,._ _ t.. ••t • Cncn6Y•D'N nr•t • 131J1 IN XA..3 -3. Tao (send Up Slightly) %L4, J Sld j Fig.2 T~775.KateNt you ~ MEMORANDUM DATE: 8/19/98 10:23:58 AM 'ro: Meredith Reckert Via: Pax City of Wheatridge Sending I pages FROM: David D. Myers including this cover page. RE: 207 Conoco - Wheatridge Canopy lights Ms. Reckert, as per my telephone conversation with yon on 8119/98. Crosslands Construction Company has installed the LSI light baffles at the CONOCO canopy located at 12851 West 32nd Ave. Installation of the fight baffles occurred Friday A.M. 8114/98. The intent of these haftles is to reduce the side glare from the Scottsdale fixtures, and funnel the light downward. Ms. Reckert, Cfosslands appreciates the City's position and want to cooperate with any problems. Should yon have any further concerns or problems, please contact me at (303) 771-2108 #409 CC: Dave Galloway (o; GRA T ~OHJ •~/HJ JJ/`T/1C~/Hl DIIiIMJ rti C'J•ni nc r~T •nn C T not City of Wheat Ridge Planning and Development Department Memorandum TO: Dwaine Richter, Diane Davies FROM: Zvleredith Reckert, Senior Planner SUBJECT: Allowed Uses DATE: August 26, 1998 Attached is a copy of the original list of allowed uses prepared for City Council by Glen Gidley for Case No. WZ-96-10. Staff has reviewed the list and concurs with it with one exception. At the end of the document in the list of Area E uses (page 1728), item no. 24 "Private clubs, social clubs, bingo parlors and similar uses" has been eliminated. Staff believes that the "Grange" facility could fit within this category (private clubs) and should not be eliminated, although bingo parlors are undesirable at this location. hicluded as page 3 of the document is a listing of uses allowed on the original outline development plan. cc: Jerry Dahl Alan White S_2(0.98 MEMOR -NDUM T0: City Council FROM: Glen Gidley. Director of Planning and Development RE: Richter Final Development Plan - Permitted Uses DATE: November 18, 1996 Based upon the concerns expressed by Council at the October IS meeting regarding potential uses within the proposed Richter Final Development Plan, it was clear that more specific information was needed. Therefore, I have evaluated the approved Outline Plan for areas C, D, and E (per attached Outline Plan), and compared the proposed uses in the Final Development Plan to the various commercial zone district regulations in order to develop a more specific list of permitted uses. Attached you will find Staffs recommended lists of permitted uses based upon this analysis. For each of three areas, I have provided copies of Section `'(B) Permitted Principal Uses" of the RC-l, R-C, C-1, and C-2 (Area E only) zone district regulations and checked those uses which we believe could be allowed pursuant to the Outline Plan. Of course, you may further limit these uses pursuant to Zoning Code Section 26-24 (1V)(A). Staff has indicated by a (X) those uses which we conclude fit the Final Development, Use Exclusion criteria of Section 26-24 (IV)(A), and which we would recommend be excluded. Attachments 54,54'0-S.F._ BUFFER PHASE e _.c_ _FFERSON COUNTY j I o n EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY CLO TO W. ~ w. r•1 BE 3.1. 9e LOS9o li j I I= ~ I D I~ -54.750 S. F.C < i n I - ' •I i I _ 1.66 AC.' O G r_ I O U I N I 1 ACCESS _ y( -„LESS Access F-- I• i i+ i I I • I o . 47 _ I ~ I I ACCESS I I i 11.960 S.F._ 0.271 A[. ACCESS ~~will 1I •a ~ ~ ~ rv!rv'I EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY _ R I -A JEFFERSON COUNTY R 1 . ES15iS c URCN I I I I I j I. I I I ! i I i i I I I I I ' • I I ~ I I I I • . I`I I I I I = I ' I I I ALLOWED USES PURSUANT TO RICHTER OUTLINE DEVELOPMENT PLAN AREA A: A 25' wide planting and berm buffer to adjacent residential development which shall have a 4 foot high berm with a 6 foot high closed wooden fence on the top of the berm which shall be decorative and pleasant to look at. This berm and buffer area shall contain domestic lawn, sprinkler system, rock and/or, gravel, and plant materials and shall be maintained in perpetuity by the maintenance entity of this development, its heirs, successors, or assigns. Area A contains 0.76 acres AREA B: Uses limited to: 1. Single family dwellings. 2. Duplexes. 3. Domestically improved landscaped open space that would be maintained by the commercial entity listed in Area A. Area B contains 0.445 acres AREA C: Uses permitted are all uses in the C-1 zone except: 1. Supermarkets. 2. Warehouses. 3. Large department stores. 4. Filling Stations. 5. Motels. 6. Lumber yards. No delivery shall be permitted to the rear or west of these shops, except during hours of 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday. No semi-trailer trucks shall be permitted in this area. Maximum building height - 35'. Area C contains 1.66 acres Allowed Uses per Richter Outline Development Plan AREA D: Uses permitted shall be all uses in the existing Wheat Ridge C-I zone. Area D contains 5.86 acres AREA E: Uses permitted: 1. Offices. 2. Warehousing for inside storage. 3. Parking. 4. Small shops. 5. Theatre. Area E contains 1.26 acres Page 2 C9 arbaraWEREDITH iditerannesuu wpd ~R~~ r-T - DCS "I' CODS Sec. '1G.20. Restricted Commercial-One Dis trict (RC-11. •er.• c-r.'' ,pose: This district is es:ab- iished to aroyide Co. a rcasor.abfy compatible t: si:ion benycer. residential and more iatcr.si•: c cc n. me ;ial land -uses. !t pro~ices for :csicatual scale. . .nboraooc oriented profcssioral 0 .ices o=.c s•_r. l- ces nici, by tae:: nature and threugh ces;gn .....,.alien. •.,iil promote neighborhood stability and p:u:_c'. c6 :^•borhood v'-dues and c:a a_tc:. Tac d:st::ct a!so -;'0' es limited nc!"n:;oraooc o:lertcd rctaUses pv spacial use app;o':a!. (Q) P,r,-:::cd Pr:ncipci Uses: NO building o: land shall be used and no building shall be here- ^tcr erected. converted or structurally altered un• less other vise provided herein csccpt Car ore (1) o: more of the following uses: ✓ (1) galleries or studios. ✓ (2) Banks. loan and finance offices. ✓ Clln;cs and olTlces for psychological, social, marital. cicvelop-mental or similar coun- sehnL: and treatment. including counseling and treatment for substance abuse a.._ al- coi,ohsnt: however, not inc!ucin(; resi_ca- ti;il "nc0i:ici e: residential cat:acre. ✓ Cor.:::: t.: buildings, ~-.\!.C.:'•.'s. Y.. V. C.A s. c!:urchcs, :ums and .1r., galleries ✓(5) Golf courses (but not inciuding miniature X golf or putting ranges, driving ranges, - yate clubs or restaurants) and those uses commonly accepted as accessory thereto when located on the same P:e.^ises. ✓(5) Goycrnmcrt or quasi.governmental build ings and offices or public utility buildir~, where outside storage, opts atians or reaair facilities rc not p!anncd. (7) !tomes fcr t:^.e Z! c nursing `tC-~cs and con- gregate care nonlcs. ✓(5) Medical and dental offices. clinics or labp• - ratorics. ✓(9) Offices, general administrative, business and professional. ✓(10) Par!cing of autompbiles of clients, oatients, patrons or customers of the occupants of adjacent commercial districts. ~L1) Schools: public, parochial and private (in- cluding private. vocational trade or prof'-'s• sional schools), colleges, unicersit(es, Pre- schools and day nurseries (including those uses commonly accepted as necessary thereto wi:cn located on the same Pr--'m iscs). 2; Scr:ice •a.a~!ii!:r. gnts as Its bcloa I:Ii !'!air, nail and cosmetic sCrnccs. ! 7 - fo? lnterior decoratc-_ _nop 'A'.^.ere goofs. except samples, are not stared upon t-.e (d Pickuo stations for laundr: and dry cleaning-_ _ (d) Shoe repair. (e) Studio for professional work or teaching of (Fine arts, photography, music, drama or dance. (f) Tailoring, dressmaking or clothing al- teration shop. (g) Watch and jewelry repair. / (i3) Residential group homes for eight (S) or fewer developmentally disabled persons. mentally ill persons or for elderly Persons. (See section 26-30(P) and section 26.5.) 14) -Liy similar use which, in the opinion of the zoning ad unistrator or, upon appeal of his decision, of the board of adjustment, would be compatible in character and im- pact with other uses in the district, would be consistent with the intent of this dis. tr ict, and which would not be objectionable to nearby property by reason of odor, dust. fumes, gas, noise, radiation, heat, glare, %4- br3tion, traffic generation, parking needs. outdoor storage or use, or is not ha-zardous to tic health and safety o, surrounding areas through danger of fire or csplosion. 2J'-n ~R~ G . [e:ation shop. Waicn and fewel-: 7e.Da1:. (3l Sto: :s for retail -.race as lists beio«•: (a) Antique store: provided, however, that no mare than two hundred (200) <_qua: e feet of building area shall be allocafe" to renal. v (b) Retail grocery/convenience store, lim- ited to five thousand (5,000) square fee: or less for the_nount of budding space devoted to retail use. Sec. 26-21. Restricted Commercial District L,-4,) Stor es for retail ::ade, Limiter :o two t^o-- (R-C). sand (2,000) sduare feet o: less for ih_ amo unt of building space devoted to a , (4) Intent cr.d ?n=ose: This district is estah- one (1) or combinations of the :ollow'ing Ce- lahed to accom^odate various types of of -ce uses tail s?ace: per forming administrative, professional and pert (a) A?parel and acc essor: scores. soaal services, and to o:ovide for a lirnired range CD) Bakeries. :e:if. of recall uses which are neighborhood orien:ed. It (c) Bicvcle stores. is the intent that general retail uses that serve (d) Book stores, newsstands, stationer: the community or region, wholesaling. ware. and cad s:ores. housing, indust.-ial, and uses which rec' e out- (e) Business naca:ae or compute.- stores. sicc storage or display be prohibited, since :aese (tl Camera and pnotogcapn =_erice a uses are incompatible with ocher uses in :Pis cis- supply stores. (g) Candy, nut and confec.:encr: stores. (h) Dairy products stores. BI ?crniaec ?nrcipcf Uses: No building o: (i) De!icatessens. land snail be used and no building shall be here- (j) Floral stores. ante: er ected, conveyed or st:uceuraily altercd un (k) Garden supplies stoics. le=_s otherwise Provided herein except for one ill (1) Gift, novelty o; souvenir stores. or more of the following uses: (m) Hobby and cat stores. (1) All uses Permitted in the Restricted (n) Jewelry stores. X Commercial-One District as " permitted (o) Music stores. pr incipal uses." (p) Notions stores. (q) Office supply stores. (2) Service establishments as listed below: (r) Optical stores. X (a) Ambulance sen-ice. (s) Paint and wallpaper scores. X (b) Equipment rontal agencies which rent (t) Pet stores. or lease any i*_em permitted for sale in (ui Picture framing (shopsi. this district, and where all irens for (vf Shoe stores. re.^.t or lease are contained within wf S' poring goods stores. buildings. Outside sto:a-c and display xl S:a:ione stores. are Prohibited. (yi Tobacco stores. (c) Exterminators. :ri To.., stores. (d) 1nrC7:ar decorat!n, <_ho'p. a. 'I'cievision.radio. _ma!! :??fiance r_ (e) Locksmith sho?. pni: and se-•ix (shop=_: f) Sao- -Co-';: hl , \'idea rcn:as. 172-3 ✓;,S „mali anirrial veterinary hospi. X Ch.^.s where -'ne'e a ^OC OCLSiCe Deice v - --7Un> i07 COBS. % (ol Any similar use which, in the opinion oC the zoning' administrator, or upon appe--LoC his decision, of the board of adjustment. would be compatible in character and irn- pact with other uses in the district, would be consistent with the intent of this .dis- trict, and which would not be objectionable to nearby property by reason of odor, dust, Cumes, gas, noise, : adiation, heat, glare, ti- bration, tra!Tic generation, panung needs, outdoor storage or use, or is not ha_a does to the health and safety of su:rourding areas t-rough danger of fire or e-qlosiori. i Sec. 26.22. Commercial-One District (C-1). L4) Inter.! C-r.d Pur ' vose: This rlstric: is es~ab- lished to provide for areas with s wide ra:.S_ of commercial land uses w-bich include office. gen. eral busi3ess. and retail sales and scr. -ice es:2b- lisbmens. This dis c is supported by the com- munity and/or entire region. (B) Per-icred Pr:rcioc! Uses: No building or land shall be used and no building shall be ^e e- a ler erened. conver_ed or s<rucnurally alto: ec n- iess othernise prop^ided herein except for o-e (I) or more of the following uses`. ,/(1) .AJ-1 uses pe=iaed in the Restrictcd Com- v me-cial Disr.:c_ as "oe^i[:ed or:ac:pal uses." 1726 X aCCO:C'_.^.Ce fit: lea; Wc_ La'-ws, Cnaoier 3. -✓X(3) Assembly halls arid convention face(;ies. (4) Automobile and Gga -duty truck sales and X rental, subject to the following require. ments: (a) Sales, rental and service of a tuck. tractor or semitrailer is prohibits (b) All parking and vehicle display a-eas shall be paved. (d There shall be a minimum of or.e tiou. sand five hundred (1,500) feet of sepa- ,ation between sales lots. (d) There shall be a minimum ten-foot landscape butte: adjacent to an.. public street, dish such butte: to be comole:ely within the property boundaries, al- though the owner may additionally landscape that area between the ;:ont property line and the street imo.ove. ments if aooroved by the public µ'0:4s director. Thee shall be no waivers 01 this landscape buffer :egccemen;. (e) ^enzvcr a parking to; or display !o: adjoins proper'. tonzd Co: :es(cen:ial use, a landscape butte: of t,c!vc (12) Ccet f: om said to, boundar, shall be re- quired. Within the twelve-root land. scape butler, a six-Coot view-obscuring fence o. decorative wall shall be co strutted. There shall be no waivers o; this landscape and fence buffer requi, e. me-it. (0 There shall be at least one (1) inter for landscaped island for each thirty (30) pa king and/or vehicle disolay spaces. Each such landscape island shall oc. cupy the equivalent of one (1) Pa. .1 - space, and each such requced island shall be landscaped with a minimurn oC one (1), two-inch caliper or larger, and four (4) shrabs o: acce-pt. able living e ound cover. ✓ 15) Auto service and repair and maintenance shops, including Lire sales Pout esd•.:ding X :ccapping). muffler shops. auto and !ighL duty ::cc:: fueling s__-tions, detail shops, -.2P No. 5 ' 'u-__ .'.OtSte_- S'obS, : ad:ato::epaer mops. !'eon- ca::o.^. ices and sound sys.e S^07s. Is :ate..^.t t0 e\clude boC µ'0::L or -::ng, and to exclude any such use p::- ma ilv for service, repair or maintenance - 11n:ck-[:actors or semitrailers. Body re- pair a^.d painting may be allowed as a "con. C:1. nal use. ✓(6) Banks, loan and finance offices. ✓M Child care centers. ✓(S) Clinics Co. psychological, social or m_,-a! counseling and treatment, inc:_C:1g cou-- seLrg and t:catmcs: for substance abuse and alcoholism, and including residential treatment facilities: L-5~ Commercial machine shoos. X10) Community buildings, Y..t.C.A's, Y.- W.C.A's• churches, libraries, narks, mu- seums. aquariums and art gale::-s. ✓(11) Golf courses, including private clubs, res- ,.._:ants and lounges, miniature golf Or X driving ranges, and those uses commoniv accepted as accessor': thereto w'-n located 0.1 the same P.crn;ses. ✓N2) Cove:. ^e.^.t or quasi-governme:aal build ings and O.,-5ces or public utility buildings, ~'he. e outside storage, operations or : epai: facilities are not planned. ✓(13) Greenhouses and landscape nurseries, in- c!uding both wholesale and retail sales of :elated p..oducts; provided, however, that X bull- storage or piles of materials, such as manure, peat, top soil, rock, sand. 5rew'ood o: s:mila materials, are screened f. om view from adjacent properties by a view- obscuring fence six (6) feet in height. Bulk storage or piles of such mate. ials shall not be oe: mitted within a front yard setback aria shall be no close: than twe-ty.,-,:e (25' .__.:o a Bice or rent lo: line w'::ich abuts ~esidzn:ial!v coned prop.,::v or •..'he: c toned iculr~: ai and the: e is a residential s::uc .:.e w't:. ^.::;L2Cn (15, ;qe: of t'? Cornmon grope ' I:.._. 17"- 'S-^ ?!:)c C: COD= ✓ (14) Homes for the aged, nursing homes and cc a. egate car.- homes. rn- o ✓(lo) Indoor amusement and recreational enter- x prises, such as roller rinks, bowling alleys, arcades and similar uses. a ✓(1S) Liduo. stores. ~i9) Medical and dental of-ices. clinics or labo- ratories. «i~: a:_ss scree-z._' ad, rem ..rA' f: oma!I_Lxets and a roxr.zs. (d) r'ae.^inators. (e1 Hai:, nail and cosmetic set-.lees. (0 Inte. for decorating shops. (g) Launcies and d.-y cleaning (shops). (h) Locksmith shoos. (i) Shoe repair [shops]. Q) Studio for professionalwe,kor teaching of fine arts, photog: aphy, music, drama or dance. (k) Tailoring, dressmaking or cot.^.:ng a. Lerati0n shops. (1) U:)holstec-: shoos. (m) %Va:ci and jewelry :e?air (shops(. X ✓ (20) Mortuaries and crematories. ,`~(29) Small ar.;=J veterinary bosnitals or cEnics X where th•r. e -,-e no outside pens or r ms for cogs. ✓(22) Ofrces; general business and proressional ✓(30) Stores for rein l trade as listed below: o offices. ✓(23) Parking of automobiles or clients, patients and patrons of occupants of adjacent cor..- me:cial dist.icts. X ✓ (24) Private clubs, social clubs, bingo parlors and similar uses. ✓ (25) Restaurants, drive-in restaurants, ice cream sales and similar related uses. ✓ (27) Schools, public parochial and private (in- cluding private, vocational trade or prores. sional schools), colleges, universities, pre- schools and day nurseries (including those uses commonly accepted as necessary the. eto when located on the same premises). (2S) Serf: ice establishments as listed below: X (a) Ambulance services. (b) Blueprinting, photostatic copying, and other similar reproduction services; howevcr, not including large P. inting, publishing and/or book binding estab- lishments. ;c) Equipment rental agencies; provided, X however, that the outside storage of ,z I trailers or other edulpmenL car (a) .-'_11':cue stores. (b) Apparel and accesso': stores. X (c) Appliance stores and incidental s^: vice and repair. (d) .A.: galleries a,- studicis. (e) Automotive paz-s and supplies sa!•_s. (f) Bakeries, retail. (g) Bicyd•_ stores. X (h) Boat, camper, and :ravel t aile. sa!•_s e snd se--ic s. (i) Book stores and newsstands. G) Butcher shops and food lockers, but not including food processing. (k) Business machine or compute: stores. (1) Camera and photographic service and supply stores. (m) Candy, nut and confectionery stores. (n) Cate:e:s. (o) Dairy products stores. (p) Delicatessens. (r ) Drug stores. (s) Dr%- goods stores. (u) 71o. al shops. X (v1 rurrii.urc stores. - (w•) Garcon suppln's stOre S. Y_pp. No, 1728 (Si C1"...^.0 ~'e l' ~ o.- souvenir SO-es. f_) Hardware stores. (aa) Hobbc and craft stores. (op) Home turnls n'.ng stores. - X (a) Home Cmprovements supply stores. (cid) Jewelry stores. (ee) Leathergoods and luggage stores. (M Liquor stores (sale by package). (gg) Linen supply. -r - ; r- (ii) Locksmith shops. Meat, poultry or seafood stores. X (kk) Motorcycle sales and ser ice. (11) Music stores. (mm) Newsstands Uor.the sale of newspa _ pers, magazines, etc.). -inn? ;Notions stores. (oo) O(iice supply [stores]. ipp) OoLica! stores. (qq) PainL and wallpaper stores. (rr) Pct stores. (ss) Picture framing [shops!. - pC ~ gun. (uu) Shoe stores. f%~) Sporting goods stores. (wow) Stationery stores. Television, radio, small appliance rc- pair and service [shops]. (yy) Tobacco stores. (z z) Toy stores. (aaa) Video rentals. X ✓ (31) Taverns, night clubs, lounges, private clubs and bars. (3?) Th X e: t, es (excluding drive-ins). / ✓ (331 An y similar use which, in the opinion of the 'zoning administrator, or upon appeal or his decision, of the board of adjustment. would be compatible in character and im pact with other uses in the district, w ou!d be consistent with the intent or this dis Lrict, and which would not be objectionable ;o pc p: operr: b 'Cason c odor, dust. ju-:os noise, radiation, heat, gi: e. ci b. atinn. ' afFic generation, Oa: '.{l.n.g needs, outdoor storage or use, or is not hazardous to tae health and safety of surrounding areas through danger of fire or explosion. 17.29 A7F 1 A I FElY- D ; Sec. ^G20 Restricted Commercial-One Dis- trict (13ZC-1). This di<_t:ie is cstab- (.y) ! ar.: and ?-.-Dose. !shed to 0, oxide for a reasonably compatible L7 2-n' bco-vCen:csidential and mere intensive coin' r..crciai land uses. It provides for rros;dential scale. n_ 3011hood-oriented professional ofitces and scr. cCS hich, b': their nature sac -,-rough design -tita oa. .iii p om•ct0 neighborhood s:a.3ili:y . d protect neighborhood values and character. 7hc dis.rict also procid•_s Gmitcd neighborhood- :icntcd rotail usesb special use approval. (3) Pe:.-:::cd Prir-c:pci Uses: \o building or !and shall be used and no building shall be here- of ter erected, converted or structu. ally altered un- less otherwise provided herein CXCI•pt for one 11) or m07C of the following uses: V" (1) gal Ia.ics o: studios. ✓(2) Banks. loan and finance maces. ✓(3) Clinics and offices for psychological. social, manta!. developmental or similar coun. schng and treaement, including counseling ad treatmru for substance abuse and al. cohol;srn: ho,c%cr not iaciuding :csiden- ..al Izlcalucs o. :cs;dcnLial. trCatmC.^.t. :.M.C.A's, 1- - V..C i. Ch U.1ca CS. Ilpra:I?>. Ca::-:.~. R:u ✓iSl Golf courses (but not including miniature golf or putting ranges,. driving ranges, pri- x Fate clubs or restaurants) and those uses commonly accepted as accessory thereto when located on the same premises. (6; Government o: quasi.governmcn.tal bui!d- ings and offices or public utility build;: g where outside storage, opera;tons or re.pzu faciii:ics a:c not planned. t✓: 7 i Homes for the a;cd, nu: sin' homes and con grcga:c care homes. %Izdic3 and dental ofGccs, c!inics or labo- ratories. ✓(9) Offices, general administrative, business and professional. ✓(101 Parking of automobiles of clients, patients, 'patrons or customers of the occupants of adjacent commercial districts. Schools: public, parochial and private,(in- cludin.g private, vocational trade or profes- s;onal schools), colleges, universities, pre- schools and day nurseries ;including those uses commonly accepted as necessary thereto when located oil th•. same psr:- isesi. es:abllshnicnts ns l:_.c0 a_!o uc ;:air, nail and cosmetic sr.:iccs. In) !nterlor decora::ng itloo w""> g^x S. except samples, are not s:o re•. L'pc.^.:.._ pr em:ses. (c) Pickup stations Co. laundry and d- cleaning. _ (d) Shoe repair. - (e) Studio for professional work or Leac";" of fine arts, photography, music, d. ----a or dance. dressmaking or ciothir.g -I- (0 Tailoring , teration shop. (g) Watch and jewelry repa r. ✓(13) Residential group homes for eight (5) or fewer developmentally disabled persons, mentally ill persons or for elderly personz. (See section 26.300 and section 26.5.) (1;) Any similar use which, in the opirvon of the zoning administrator or, coon appeal o. his decision, of the board of adjustc:er.t, would be compatible in character and im• pact with other uses in the district, wot_ld be consistent with the intent of this d s- trict, and which would not be objectionab!e to nearby property by reason of odor, dcs:, fumes, gas, noise, radiation, heat, glare, i bration, traffic generation, parking needs. outdoor storage or use, or is no: h _W do_s to the health and safety of sc::oundi-17 areas through danger of fire or c:`-jlosion. zoo:~~ ._._cion shop. G^1 eachh and je"•Iel,-ep i3) Scores for retail trade as liste_ below: (a) Antique store; provided, however, that no more than two hundred (200) square feet of building area shat be alloc.t?: to repair. Co) Retail grocery/convenience store, lim- iced to five thousand (5,000) square :-2e- or less for the amount of bolding space devoted to retail use. Sec. 26-21. Restricted Commercial District (R-C). (A) lnie. c,-.d Pc.^ose: This clisric is estab- lis:,ed to accommodate var,:ous types of oMce uses oer:onning adrzarustrative, professional and per. sonal services, and to n ovide for a l _:ii:ed range of retail uses which are neighborhood oriented. It is the intent that general retail uses serve the community or region, wholesaling, ware- rousing, industrial. and uses which :ecu::e out- side Storage 07 display be prohibited, since these uses arc incompatible with oche: uses in this c s- (B) Pcrmi::ed Pr'r.cipei Uses: No building or l =-.d shall be used and no buiiding <_hall be here- after erected, converted orstruc:urally altered un- le<_s otherwise provided herein cscepc fe: one M o: more of the following uses: ✓ (1) All uses permitted in the Restricted Commercial-One District as "permitted principal uses." ✓ (2) Service establishments as listed below: X (a) Ambulance ser -ice. (b) Equipment rental agencies which rent X or lease any item permitted for sale in this district, and where all items for rent or lease arc contained within buildings. Outside story;,- a.. display are prohibited. (d E.xterminators. (d) Interior decorating shop. (c) Locksmith shop. m Shoe repair p.., )c ✓,1 S:o.es for retail trade, limited to two thou- sand (2,000) square feet o: less for amount of building space devoted to ar- ore (D or combinations of the :ollo«ir.g tail space: (a) Apparel and accesso}• stores. Cc) Bakeries, ref). (c) Bicycle stores. (d) Book stores, newsstands. stationer: and card stores. (e) Bus ness machine or co^pu:er stores. (f) Ca.:.era and photog:aph(c service r.d supph• stores. (g) Candy, nut and confectionery stor•_s. (n) Dairy products stores. (i) D•=licatessens. local stores. (k) Garden supplies stores. (l) Gift, novelty or souvenir stores. (m) Hobby and crafft stores. (n) Jewelry stores. (o) %lusic stores. (p) Notions stores. (q) Ofifce supply stores. (r) Optical stores. (s) Paint and wallpaper stores. IU Pet stores. (u) Picture frarning (shopsl. (vi Shoe stores. by Sporting goods stores. I:c; Stationery stores. i 1 Tobacco stores. Tov stores. 'I'cleeision, radio, spat( appiiance r_ pair and sera ice ;s::ops' fw, Video rentals. l7^_3 - _ :c ✓ %5! Smal! ........at vee :y h0S=;ta!s ^d clinics where there are not ou_ide pens a.- - ns fo, dogs. ✓;o! Aay similar use which, in the opinion of tre zoning administr, awr, or upon appeal of his decision, of the board of adjustment. would be compatible in cha: acter and im- nad with other uses in the district, would . oe consistent with the intent of this dis- trict, and which would not be objectionable to nearby property by reason of odor, dust, fu...es, -ga, noise, radiation, heat, gl?.-e. - b:ation, tratTic generation, pa L ng needs, outnoo: sto.age or use. or is .not hazardous to the health ahd safety of surrounding areas through danger of Q: or erotosio. 42r_/_~ L) Sec. 26-22. Commerciel•One District (C•1). (A) Ir.:er: crud ?-nose: This d sis C is es ab• fished to orovide for areas vith a wide rang- of co ame^al lend uses w ich include otTice, gen. eral business, and retail sales and sew. esab- lishmen ts. This dir=e is supported by the corn- munity and/or ent.re region. (B) Permi-ed Prirc ocl Uses: No building or land shall be used and no building s=hall be here- Ltter e:-ec ed, converted o: 5:-uct7s7ally altered un• less otber ise oro,.ided here. except for one (1) c: more of the oLoAi^.g uses: ✓ (1) .y uses Pe:red is the Resacted Ca X mercial Dis:r:c_ as "pe-mi:ted pr:^cipa! Uses." 1725 L✓ (2) Aduit _n-er _-;r,.._..- X in accordance with V:nea: n:cg° CcCe Laws, Ch ap-er 3. x ✓i3) I.ssembly halls and convention. Cacilities. ~~-.✓(4) Automobile and light-duty truck- sales and rental, subject to the following recui:e- ments: (a) Sales, rental and service of a truck. tractor or semitrailer is orohibited. (o) All oar.L ng and vehicle display areas shall be paved. (c) There shall be a ninimum of one thou- sand five hundred (1,500) feet of sepa- ration between sales lots. (d) There shall be a minimum ten-root landscape butler adjacent to any public street, with such butler to be completely within the property boundaries, al- though the owner may additionally landscape that area between the front property line and the street improve- ments if approved by the public dcector..There shall be no waivers of this landscape buffer reducement. (e) Wheneve. a par;Ling lot or display lot adjoins proper:} toned for residential use, a landscape buffer of twelve (12) feet from said lo: bounder- . shall be . e- quired. Within the twelve-Coot land. scape buffer, a six-foot view--obscuring fence or decorative wall shall be con-" strutted. There shall be no waivers of this landscape and fence buffer reaui, e- ment. (0 There shall be at least one (1) interior landscaped island for each thirty (30) parking and/or vehicle display spaces. Each such landscape island shall oc- cupy the equivalent of one (1) perking space, and each such required island shall be landscaped with a minimum of one (1), two-inch calipe.- tree o. larger, and Cour (4) shrubs or accep:. able living ground cover. 3 shops, e ~ :ransmiss(on ,`:gn^e..: ca-- -cashes, ;.oisce-. stops.:aci2:_.:ruderrsi:aps,lub Ca'IC❑ se Ric°_s and sound syc;am l: is the intent to exclude body -work or •a::.^. and to exclude any' su ca use p:; manly for service, repair or maintenance to truck-tractors or semitrailers. Body r_ pair ad painting may be allowed as a cor.- dlttonal use. ✓(o") Banks, loan and finance offices. ✓M Child care centers. ✓tS) Clinics for psychological, social or marital counseling and treatment, including coun- seling and treatment for substance abuse and alcoholism, and including residential treatment facilities. X ✓9) Commercial machine shoos. ✓(10) Community buildings, YA.C.A's, Y.- W.C.A's, churches, libraries, parks, mu- seums, aquariums and art galleries. ✓ (11) Golf courses, including private clubs, :es- X taurants and lounges, miniature golf o: driving ranges, and those uses commonly accepted as accessory t..a:c'to when located on :,.e same premises. ✓(12) Government o. quasi-governmental build- ings and oMces or public utility buildings. ",here outside storage, operations or repair facilities are not planned. Greenhouses and landscape nurseries, in- cluding both wholesale and retail sales of related products; provided, however, that bulk storage or piles of materials, such as manure, peat, top soil, rock, sand. Firewood or similar materials, are screened C. om view from adjacent properties by a view. obscuring fence s Lx (o) feet in height. Bulk storage or piles ofsuc: materials shall not be permitted within a front yard setback and shall be no closer than twentv-Cive (25) ,`•2•ti: to a side or rea !a Gnu w;n.ich abuts residentially zoned proper-~ y or where toned Agricultural aria there is a, eside.n.:ial st.-Uc «it,.i.. E" e c n (151 feet of common p:pp• t: line. (13) t/ X t,"'~(5) Auto service and repair and maintenance shops, including tire sales (but excluding X recapping), mu tier shoos, auto and lie::• duty truck fueling /stations, derail shops. Juan. No. 5 3 ^_6-:? lt-=q? ?.2 DG _7 Cif- COC,E ✓(1?) Homes iortheaged,-nu,singi;ome4anccon ren: =iai! be Aft: is ase_s _c.e_nec ;.egzte ca e homes. 1.07n (e« ,:On all streets and a - hotels motels or bed -and breaZast fames p rope-;,S. rope;-i , (d) a rs. Exte. r for transient occupancy. There shall be one 1 a i nail l and ser^.ces. r , thousand (1,000)squareieet of gross lot area 0 (f) Int decorating shoos. ior er Interior for each unit. (g) Laund. ies and dry cleaning (shops(. ✓(16) Indoor amusement and recreational elite-. (h) Locksmith shops. prises, such as roller rinks, bowling alleys, (i) Shoe repair (shops(. arcades and similar uses. Studio for professional work o: tezching ✓ (17) indoor ilea markets; however, outdoor lea of fine ars, photography, music, d: a.:.a X markets are prohibited. (k1 or dance. Tailoring. dressmaking or clothing ai- ✓ (1S) Liouor stores. te.ation shops. (1) Up:^.olster: shoos. L,"11 9) Medical and dental offices, clinics or labo- (n;1 Wa-ch and jewelry repair [shops]. ratories. ✓✓(20) Mortuaries and crematories. ✓(229) Sm all animal veterinary hospitals o. clinics where t.,_. a are no outside pens or runs for 1/(21l Motor fueling stations. dog s. ✓(221 OMiices; general business and professional ✓(30) Sto res for eta l trade as listed below: Oc5ces. (2_3 a) Parking of automobiles of c`ients, pat en:s j (a) fo) :Lntiquestores. Apparel and accesson• stores. - and patrons of occupants of ad acent com- l (d Appliance stores and incidental sr.- mercial districts. .ice and repair. ~'14) X Private clubs. social clubs, bingo parlors and (d) Art galle:;es or studios. similar uses. (e) Automotive parts and supplies sales. (n Bakeries. retail. ✓ (25) F.estauranLs, drive-in restaurants. ice tea-:. (g) Bicycle stores. sales and sinular related uses. x (h) Boat, camper, and travel trailer sales ✓(26) Rooming and board nghouses. and ser-ices. (i) Book stores and newsstands. ✓(27) Schools, public parochial and private (in- 6) Butcher shops and food lockers, but not. eluding private, vocational trade or profes- including food processing. sional schools), colleges, universities, pre. (k) Business machine or computer stores. schools and day nurseries (including those (1) Camera and photographic service and uses commonly accepted as necessary supply stores. thereto when located on the same premises). (m) Candy, nut and confectionery stores. ✓ (25) Service establishments as listed below: (n) Caterers. (o) Dairy products stores. X (a) Ambulance services. (p) Delicatessens. N Blueprinting, photostatic copying, and ,(c) Department or variety stores. other similar reproduction ser•: ices; (r) Drug stores. however, not including large p-intin.g, (s) Dry goods stores. publishing and/or book binding escab- (t) Electrical and supplies and senice, but lishments. x not indud;ngcontractors storageya-d. (c) Equipment rental agencies; provided, (u) Flo. al shoos. - X however, that the outside storagr of (v) Fu-niWn: stores. trucks, trailers or ocher equip neat for (v:) Garden supplies stores. C..r J.:.O 3 (x) Gift, novelty a souvenir s.res. (v) Grocery stores. H~Cw='e stores. (aa) Hobby and crass stores. (bb) Hone furnishing stores. (cc) Home imorovenents supply stores. (dd) Je%velry stores. (ee) Leathergoods and luggage stores. (tM Liquor stores (sale by package). (gg) Linen supply. (hh) Lumber yards and building supply stores; provided, that unenclosed X storage of any materials shall be screened from %ie%v from adjacent prop- erties and streets. (ii) Locksmith shoos. (ij) Meat, poultry o: seafood stores. (kk) 9Iotorcycle sales and senice. l1) Music stores. (mm) Newsstands (Cor the sale of newspa- pe.s, magazines, c.c.). (nn? Notions stores. . (oo) Of !ce supoly Istoresi. (po) Optical stores. (qq) Paint and wallpaper stores. (rr) Pet stores. (ss) Picture framing (shopsi. (t t) Plumbing and heating suppiv stores X and shops, but not including contras tc: s' storage yards. (u j) Shoe stores. (vv) Spa ring goods stores. (u-lv) Stationery stores. (cx) Television, radio, small appliance re- pair and scr.-ice (shopsl. (}y) Tobacco stores. (z z) Toy stores. (aaa) Video rentals. (31) Taver ns. nightclubs, lounges, private clubs and bars. (3?! Theatres (excluding drive-ins). (33) Any similar use which, in the opinion of the zoning administrator, or upon appeal a! his decision, of the board of adjustment, would be compatible in character and im- pact with other uses in the district, would be consistent with the intent or lh!s dis. trice. and v: hich woi:ld not be objectionable 1 2. o n r oy p:eperry OF reason oC ocx, ciu>_. ,noise, aciation, hea, gia:A, ,ratien.::a1Tc g°ner..tion, o1rring neecs. outdoor storage or use, or is not hazardous to the health and safety or surrounding areas through danger of fire ore plosion. - 17219 r ~ ~ LL?.i~ / /11 R/ 4 Sec. 26-20. Restricted Commercial-One Dis- trict faC-11. (A) i•^rcn: cnd rposc: This district is cs:ab- I;shcd to provide Co: a reasonably compatible t: an- sition between residential and more intensive com. mercia! land uses. it provides Co., residential scale. neighborhood oriented professional otTices and ser. :ices which, by their nature and through cosign !imitation, ill promote ncichbcrhood stability no. protect neighborhood values and ci: acer. The district also orovicies limited neighborhood oriented retail uses by special use approval. (B) Pc: rr.i:red ?r:•:cipcl Uses: No bui!ding or land shall be used and no building shall be here- after erected, converted or structurally altered un- less otherwise provided herein except for one (1) or more of the following uses: 1✓(I) Art galleries or studios. 1/(2) Banks, loan and finance of-5ces. t✓(3) Clinics and offices for psychological, social, marital, developmental or similar court- seling and treatment, including coun<_cling and ucatment for substance abuse and al. coheGsm: however, not including residcn tial facilities or residential trcacr,:cn:. golf or ou. -angc"s, driv;^ ng p: i- vate clubs or Iles - nts) and those uses ccmnoal_ ,accepted as acccs_,-v thereto ✓(6) Government o: quasi-governmental build- ings and otTrces or public utility bur.,.:..g %vherc outside storage, operations or repi: facilities are not planned. ✓(S) Medical and der.tal offices, clinics or labo- rato'ics. ✓!9) Offices. general administrative, business and professional. ✓l0) Parking of automobiles of clients, patients, patrons or customers of the occupants of adjacent commercial districts. eluding , . •aee, vocational tr a_ profes- sional schools), c . unive'SitleS, pre- schools and urscries t ..-r, ding those uses ...monly accepted as ne- Ssary ises). V (4; . `1'~) Serv:Ce OSLa-';5-.n1^nLS as hsted h^_low: scups. c.?"'"'' and art gaileries. Lil air, nail and cosmetic services. \ 7 ?on o premises. (c) Interior decora:ing shop w--e > Otis, except samples, a e not stored uppn :he cleaning. _ (d) Shoe repair. ` (e) Studio for professional wort: or teaching of (Fine arts, photography, music, dr a- a or dance. (D Tailoring, dressmaking or clothing al- teration shoo. (g) Watch and jewelry repair. m W entah aisabled persons, fewer o entally e r for eidzrly persons, (1.) Any similar use which, in the opinion of the zoning administrator or, upon appeal of his decision, of the board of adjustment, would be compatible in character and im. pact with other uses in the district, would be consistent with the intent of this dis- trict, and which would not be objectionable to nearby property by reason of odor, dust, fumes, gas, noise, radiation, heat, glare. vi• bration, traffic generation, parking ne 's. outdoor storage or use, or is not hazardous to the health and safety of surrounding areas through danger of fire or explosion. ibl Pickup stations for laund-. aad d i 2iQ? 1"?0 3 __,o No. i_ ~r\c~ C- i - t2 ra aOn snC 7. P ..;ch and jewzze =pa J) C es :-or :et2:I trade as listed Je!O~t': (a! Antique store; provided, however, ;ha; no more than two hundred (200) squz e tee; of building area shall be allotted to reoai:. ll7) Retail grocer./convenience store, !iM - iced to five thousand (5,000) square "e_* or less to. the a-nount of bulding space devoted to re'l use. ✓ i) Sta.-es for retail trade, limited ;0 two c^oc~ Sec. 26•21. Restricted Commercial District 000) squ~2 feet or less `or :h2 d i' (R-C). san ace devoted to a- ildi f b a_..o - .g sp u un; o one (I)o. combinations o; the fOLo 'ir.~ (A) 1-.e... _:c ?'_•.-7os2: This is zstan• fished to actor ^odate ve-ious types of 0-M-ce uses tail space: perfo :a:.g adaa:__.jstrative, o:ofessional and per' a) ppa et and accessory stores. sonal set ices, and to provide Co. a IL I.ted range CO) 3zleries, re~I. Of retail uses which are neigh bo.hood Oriented. It fc; B;cycle stores. is :n2 intent that g neral retail uses L..-: sen'e (d) Book stores, newsstands, stati07cr' the community o. region., wholes3l «'a e. a:.d card s:0:es. h0'.5:^(,', C1CU5:r:al, and uses Which require out- (e) Business Machine or computer stores. SICe St0:3g_ C: C1SOlav be pro-l7:-ed. Sinc_ _.^.ese (.I C=era arld photographic seance anz .:525 L f 1.^.Comp3::712 ~,i:, other ;]ses 17 :.`.:s C:5- SL'73lY st0: Z5. Candy, nu[ 2AC COnfedt:0n2r+ 5tOr2 S. (h; Dai.-y products stores. 3) ?c• -(::ec ? .:rx: Uses: No bul ng o: (i) Delicatessens. land shall be used and no building sha11 be here' j) Floral stores. _ftererected. converted a.st.-ctu:allyaltered un• (!c) Garden supplies stores. less othenise pro•idec' herein except for one i11 (1) Gift, novelty o: souvenir stores. a. more of the tollo-mn uses: (m) i-lobby and ratt stores. oil AP ~)Emg _P d ;R •4: P r'_ 1 (n) Jewelry stores. ~ - Sin.. _ (0) %tuslc stores. i (p) Notions stores. • d b l w li bli h a (q) Office supply stores. ste o : e s ments s (2) Service esta (r) 00tical stores. 1 _ (s; Pain: and «'z:!paper s:o:es. - (u Pet stores. o: lease any item permitted I - e in lui Picture framing (shops!. this district, and why-_ all items for (v1 Shoe stores. :en: o: lease contained within Lw Soo ing goads s:ores. bu;!d:nutside storage and displs'. i.,l Statione'n stores. Iv. Tobacco stores. (C) LS:Cr Mt nato.s. foe stJ r25. snail appil ant^_ Ri i' 'i : i (d) In:C:io- deco. shop. o. on. r. C% s c (2) JCF'Smal: shop, pJ:: and so-:C2 :shops!. shae repair. sl^'la_- use w'hi&. In t..e O?:.^•'-On Oi the zoning administrator, or upon appeal o, his decision, of the board of adjustment, would be compatible in ch =ratter and im. pact with ocher uses in the district. would i be consistent with the intent of this dis. t-ict, and which would not be objectionable to nearby properv., by reason of odor, dust, - fumes. gas, noise, radiation, :heat, gl re, 2 br tior., t..a1T:c <ner ti C) ? 4 r.~ needs. E ou:docr storage or use, or is not has-a:eous ,I to the health and safety 0! sL.70" ndi;` I aces through danger of fire or explosion. _ , n c. i- Sec. 26.22. Commercial-One District (C•11. L4) leer.., and Pu.=ose: This district is es:ab- lished to provide for areas %ith a wide range of co:n.neraal land uses which indlude office, gen- eral business. and -.tail sales and service es:ab• lisbments. This district is suppor'.ed by the com- munity and/or entire region. (B) Perm=ed Princ op! uses: No bulcng or land scat be used and no building shall be ::ere- after erected, converted o: struct%_:ally alter-: un- less otbe.- jse prodded herein, except for -n e (1) or note of the following uses: i 1726 '_00 iND JET c_0":'c` - ✓t'2) SAL'!t?nt2^a:^:.^..?.._e;:aJll;am?.ni; '.v;;:-• X in accordance with V<' ea' n c Code of Laws. Chapter 3. rental, subject to the following ments: (c) (d) Sales, rental and service of Uck- tractor or setnitr ailer is PrOhi:iI ill parking and vehicle disPla are as hall be oaved_ ere shall be a minimum of ne thou- sa ' five hundred (1,500) fe t of sepa- rati between sales lots. men's it approve 3 .,:__1 :?p~,ali -t2.^.:use-c?s.c`-~~ashes.:. holster: shops..-adia:r.repair ;i:ops, i_., r. ca:fen ser.ices and sound syszm shoos. is the intent to exclude body work o. Painting, and to exch_'de ar. ;uCI U;c' 7r1- ma-7ily- for-se R'Ice, :2pa!r or maintenance to truck-t-actors o. semitrailers. Body re Pair and painting may be allowed as a con' ditional use. L'~(o) B s, loan and finance offices. r' ✓(S) There \ebu be a minim- m ten-foot land;cTer adjacent any public s[: 22 t, uch bulfe: CO e cOm 012:21}' within property b mcaries, al- thougowner ma acditioaalh landscape th-' area b weer the front X10) Proper", line nd th street imp-oye- quired. Nithi the t •elve-Coot land- ✓(12) the public woks be no waivers of Clinics for psycholo cal, social or marital counseling and trea:menc, including coon. seling and treatmen: for substance abuse and alcoholism, and including residentia 'reatmenc facilities. - Commercial machine shoos. G Zooo t 4, . lib: a: ies. :r as, mu• seums, aquariums and art galleries. lot o. displa•: !o; -U:ants and lounges, mini golf o.- ed for esidzn;ial driving ranges, ar^ se Uses commonly use, a landscap• bu •er of ;•.yelve 11I acrep:e' cessor: tncre:o when loca;•_c _ feet from said 1 bou da sh e all be director. There this landscape b (e) ~t nenever a par adjoins proper:y /heh buffer, six-Coot view--obscuring or dec atiye wal shall be con. ed. Th re shall be o waivers of nds and fence b 2: require' . (1) sh be at least one 1) interior !a d island for each ir ty (30) and/or vehicle disola spaces. ch lan dscape island all oc- cne equivalent of one (1) p ring sand each such requced land se landscaped with a mini, urn o(1), two-inch caliper tre_ or 'and Cour (4) shrubs or acce ~5) :auto service and repair and Maintena ~ZOoo r~ shops, including tire sales (but excluding X recapn;ng), muffler shops, auto and Ggh:- duty t..-:xk Cuzling stations, c_:a ! S'-005. Government o. quasi-governmental build- ings and ocTces or public utility buildings. wire:e Outside storage. operations o: repair facilities are not planned. cl g both wholesale and retail sal- of :elate products; provided, howey , that bulk stcr e o to piles of materi such as manure, pe p soil, rock, nd, firewood o: similar mat ;als, are s _ened from view from adjacent -oP . ties by a view- obscuring fence suet rzet in height. Bulk storage or piles o Uch . ;terials shall not be Permitted , ' hin a fro,, vard setback and small be o closer :aan tw, .-y-rive (25) fee: to a s'_e o: rex lo: line w_. I abuts : esidcn:'alh zoned nrepery o: ••vhe. ` zoned A,-;c- ic- .:u: al and there is n resden:!_; . ruc- -U.- within ,1ft2en (151 ice: of ...2 comet •n t ;2; -c ace - (d) Exter7-.!naLorS. (e) Hair, nail and cosmetic services. (q Interior decorating shops. (g) Laundries and dry cleaning (shopsj. enter, (h) Locksmith shops. P- - U II (0 Shoe repair [shops). 6) Studio for professional work or teaching of Fine?-'S' photos aphy, music, crania or dance. (k) Tai!oring, d: essmaking or clothi-g -I- L-'(7 S) Liquor Stores. -L 00 O W CeraUOn shops. (1) Up:^.ols:e:y shops. ✓(L9) Medical and dental offices, clinics or !aba (mI wa:c ; and jewelry repair [shoes;. ratOrleS. x(22) Offices; general business and Professional offices. ~23) Parking of automobiles of clients, Pa:ien:s JJ and patrons of occupants of adjacent com. Or me:cial c strics (35) sales , drive-in restau: a. ice c7ca-m m far related s. (261 Rooming an (27) Schools, publi chial and P ' 'e (in- cluding pri e, voca ral trade or proies :ion al s .ools), colleges, ( niversities, pre scho and day nurseries u. uding those u _s commonly accepted as cessa. ✓ (25) Service establishments as listed below R)) Blueorinting, photostatic copying, and other similar reproduction services; however, not including large prin:(n publishing andror book binding estab I!shments. I ','~,(3o) Stores for :eta l t,-ade as listed below: < Zoo0 i (a) Antique stores. lb) Aopa:el and accessory stores. . i erer (d) A galleries or studios. (e) Automotive parts and supplies sai•:s. (9 Bakeries, retail. (g) Bic:c!e stores., W Book stores and newsstands. (j) Butcher shops and food lockers, but not including food processing. (k) Business machine or computer stares. (l) Camera and photographic service and supply stores. (m) Candy, nut and confectionery stores. cate!~F (o) Dairy. products stores. (p) Delicatessens. n_ n - (t) Electrical and supplies and ser-icc, but, notinc!,d:ng contrac.orsstorage :-es. (u) Floral shops. (w) Ga:d•_n supplies stores. Suva. Na 5 C•'Y"`~~ 7C' 0 ~ g~ -9Eh (x) Girt, novelty 0' souvenir stores. 0;-D.-~r - - ✓ (aa) Hobby and craft stores. 'm a ni ;.:s - . . P't ✓(dd) Jewelry stores. ✓(ee) Leathergoods and luggage stores. ✓(M Liquor stores (sale by package). stores; provided, tha enclosed storage of anv . serials shall be screen view Cram adiacer.t p; oa 11 ✓(ii) Locksmith shops. ✓ (jj) Meat, poultry or seafood stores. X k1 Motorcycle sales and service. ✓(11) Music stores. ✓mm) Newsstands (for the sale of nc•vspa pers. magazines, etc.). ✓(nnI Notions stores. .100) Orrice supply (stores). ✓(pp) Optical stores. (ss) Picture framing (shops]. W 1• . b4E am~ _ lV..~... (uu) yy Shoe stores. ✓ (w) Sporting goods stores. ✓(wZV) Stationery stores. (xx) Television, radio, small appliance r0• pair and, service (shops]. (yy) Tobacco stores. ✓ (zz) Toy stores. ✓✓(aaa) Video rentals. 'mac ✓ (32! Theatres (excluding drive-ins). ✓(33) Any similar use which, in the opinion o', the zoning administrator, or upon appeal of his decision, of the board of adjustment. would be compatible in charade, and im pact with other uses in the district, would b•_ consistent with the intent of this dis- trict, and which would not be ubj0ccionab!c to a_a.by p,-operty :Cason o odor, cuss. iL^t'o ^U152, -acia:ion, hea•. 7i2_ b,='ion, t.aT:c 'rest on, p n~ needs, ouzo oc :.Ora.1e Or Use, or is no* hazzacous to the health and :..rety of surrounding areas through danger of fire or explosion. to PJ NV 15 ~KcA ~ Sec. 26-23. Commercial-TNvo District (C-2). (A) Inlcnt and Pur ose: This district is estab- lished to provide for areas with a wide range of commercial land uses which include office, gen- cral business, more intensive retail sales. -whole- S. sale businesses, and light manufacLu. d; tact generally dcoends on the cntire rcr,~on for tre ma: keL area. (3) Pcrmilted Principe! Uscs: No bulking or land shalt be used and no building shall ba here' i _i. less OtnO:'••'.sC -DrovideQ ne:2:n CXCOpC i0r C.^. Or m0'e Of t P collow'ing uses: Dis:ict s "pe:nit ed principal uses. ('2) \S2 sement p~-al veterinary hospitals and cl; ,its. on houses. (5) scn-ice and maintenance hops. i^ . Lire sales and recappi. g, mu:-r. . uto and lig:^duty'r:ch fUC1!rg,, 't'ail steeps, tune-u si:. •.s. s. phalste:~ shops. r later : lu rlCaLion Se:vice, 0U r, ijsLC- , maj : meth: ^ical rep (shcpsl, boc,• , and sticx uding any suer: rimaril for sere Cc, ep~: o: mir, Lo Lruc. -trad.oa or cmitrailcrs, suo outside storage p ovisions set Con:: bsection ( )(3) her C. (6) A building con' actors service shoo z.c storage yard inci 'an to an of ce;sho•v- room principal u T is would include ca:- pen.ters, painters, oofers, elecU'icians. plumbers, heating d air cwnditionin, con- tranors, and simJ - ses which do not use hea,.: equipment t: e business, b,._, ho','' ever, do have veh des. Is, machine-: anc s,p,Iics used i the b iness stored upon the premises, thcr ins c or outside, aad ..'here some stom war may occur UPC- premises. outside s rage areas sha-" some be screened om view fro adjacent prep- e .ies and s ects by a six-C t opaque well or fence. S eking of mate 'als and sup- pGes shall of exceed the heig L of the fence. Addition y, for uses which in olvc custcm work an or fabrication upon t. e premises. no sin, machine shall esc d five (Si horse? •er and provided that n exccssi•:c noise, vibration, dust, emissio of heat. ,!are radiation, smoke or fumes _c pro due to the erLent that it is da .-Cro*s. ha udous or a nuisance to the rem nable C. oymcnt of use of adjacent proper' cs. , %U. 15 1733 ~ 2g.21 niDGC. C:-n COD= Inc sales, sertilce, rental and storage, ct to outside storage and display p sins szt forth in subsection (C)(3) hzy (9) _ Cre a-- and milk distribution (10) Dying -id cleaning shops. ti 1) Farm equ oment sales, service -id storage, subject o utside storage an ' display pro- visions set -th in subsecti . (C)(3) hereof. 13) Government o quasi-go v rnmental build- ings and office . fire ations, or public utility buildings, vhe e outside storage or reoair facilities ar anned subject to out- side storage provis' s set forth in subsec- tion (C)(3) hereof. s and con- i i3) Homes for the ed, nur gTCg3i2 Care Omes. Ice pia.^ts d delivery 115 Manufact ring and/or strial 00, crations -here operatine (1) ma- chine es not exceed sepo•ver. cI ex lu ingany industrian ;seed in any ther section.of thisu 'act to out ide storage provisirth in -ub- se tion (C)(3) hereof. /(17) Shops for custom work or for making arti- Zooo L cles, materials or commodities to be sold it l . e retail on the premises, and where no sing machine exceeds rive (5) horsepower, and provided, that no excessive noise, vibra• tion, dust, emission of heat, glare, radia- tion, smoke or fumes are produced to the extent that it is dangerous, hazardous or a nuisance to the reasonable enjoyment or use of adjacent properties, subject to outside storage provisions set forth in subsection (CO) hereof. [IS! Theatres (including drive-ins;. ✓ (191 Mini-warehouses for inside storage. ✓ (30! Wholesalc businesses. U,,, !'l: % oo6,orking or carpentry shoos for the making of articles for sale upon the prcm- L000¢~ is•_s. such as cabinets or custom furniture: Ii e\C?SSiv? n015?. pro%':4ed. rowev?:, that no b: all0n. dUSt. 43i0n of n_..:. ,Q1 diation, s-:oke o.- fumes are procuced to t:'e erenc t:^.at it is da-Ige-Ous, hazardous, o: a nuisance to the reasonable enjoyment 0: L'S2 of adjacent Properties- 2 2) Any similar use which, in the opinion of the zoning administrator, or upon appeal of his decision. of the board of adjustorent, would be compatible in character and ir:l- pact other uses in the district, would be consistent with the intent of this dis- trict, and ich would not be objectionable to nea-bv property by reason of odor, dust_ fumes, g" nciSe, radiation, heat, glare, --i- bration, t.a is generation, ?a-king needs. outdoor storage o: use, or is not hazardous to the health and safety of surrounding areas through danger of fire or explosion. iii= i 4NH City of Wheat Ridge Planning and Development Department Memorandum TO: City Council FROM: Alan White, Planning and Development Director C.7W SUBJECT: Richter PCD DATE: September 28, 1998 After Council's discussion of the preferred uses for the Richter property, staff prepared a list of permitted uses for each of the use areas on the property. This list is attached and entitled "Permitted Uses Richter PCD." Richter has responded with the letter from Faegre & Benson. Two alternative plans are being proposed, similar to the 1996 request. The chart on the first page does not correspond to the subsequent text and this creates some confusion in what Richter is proposing. In summary, most of the restrictions Council wanted were agreed to. Staff would point out the following for each alternative: Alternative 1: One Fast Food Restaurant in Area D 1. Use Area C (Fruit Stand Parcel) - No other uses except landscaping and open space, according to the chart. The narrative states that uses would be limited to medical and dental offices, Christmas tree sales, and produce sales (in a permanent structure). 2. Use Area D (Middle Parcel) - Richter added the following uses: A. Exterminator Service A b B. Hotel 14F a-SK~ dqr~ C. Auto service and repair and maintenance shops 00 D. Music Stores / Taverns, night clubs, lounges and private clubs and bars were listed as uses not allowed, but what if these uses are part of a hotel? 3. Use Area E (Northwest Parcel) - Richter added the following uses: A._Wlami arehouses )A B. motel #4 C. Building contractor office and shops (no outside storage) V~ D. Apartments vv E. Research Laboratories ? F. Child care center G. Auto service and repair (must be. contained in building) /Ja H. Upholstery shops (Furniture fie) L Ff 1. Plumbing and heating supply stores and shops, but no outside storage t6 J. TV, radio, and small appliance repair. Y4 The bolded wording above indicates staff concern with the uses. Alternative 2: One sit down restaurant in Area D or two retail buildings 1. Use Area C (Fruit Stand Parcel) - The uses put together by staff would be allowed if a sit-down restaurant is located in Area D: 2. Use Area D (Middle Parcel) - Richter added the same uses as Alternative 1. 3. Use Area E (Northwest Parcel) - Richter added the same uses as Alternative 1. ' Staff has a concern about any uses occurring in Area C. Although this small parcel might be developable for small uses, the following issues should be considered: 1. Any medical and dental office will be required to provide twice the amount of parking that a retail use would under the Code. Area A, since permitted uses remain the same as under the original Outline Plan, can only be used for landscaping. No parking is permitted. It is not likely that the required number of spaces can be provided and still meet landscaping requirements for a medical/dental office. The parking on Alternate B is indicated in an area where the trees required by the approval of the Conoco Breakplace were planted. 2. Access to the parcel allows motorists destined to this site to turn left on the relocated frontage road into the site. In order to do this, the motorist must turn through a left turn lane. Should the left turn lane have more than 1 or 2 cars, cars waiting to turn will back cars up on the frontage road and potentially W. 32nd. This is not a safe situation. 3. The parcel might better serve as a transition between the residential neighborhood and the commercial area by being only a landscaped area. This would decrease the impacts to adjacent properties and the neighborhood. Staff recommends that Use Area C be restricted to landscaping only. i -E 98 LIED 10: 19 AM ;:If: :F_C-GF.E & SENSON GORSUCH KIRGIS LLP FAX NO. 3033765001 9-20-9£3 ; 9:47:L1f DENVER- FAEGF-E & BENS021 LL.p P. 03/106 303 376 5001;: 2/ 5 2500.tZaruriLrc ?L11•r.A, 370 SEVE -H SrAF.F.r DpNv1;K, COLo1tADO 80202-4004 TklWryoryg aop•?92-SWU pK+~1M1LL po~•020-Oeao MANE n. I)AVIES dda.im'vd(vegrc.cmn ,1111ieZ0.U~iSN Septnmber20, 1098 Gerald G. Dahl, T3, q, C-Mrsuch Kirgis LLC 1315 Arapahoe Street ' Tower One, Suite 1000 Denver, CU 80202 Dear Gerry: This letter is written to follow up on our recent discussions regarding a possible resolution of the. issues in the ca;_ styled as !{Mohler v. City of Wheat Ridge, Jofli:rsoa Ununty ' 13st in C".our' Cwsc No. 96CV2641, This will confirm our understandin,, 012" our discussious and this letter are ton idored off- to compromise under Rule of Lvidenc,- X109 and are not admissible in this, or any other, proceeding. TO sunimarive our understanding ol'the City's position, the City hus nffcrcd lu en to into a Stipulation, subject to approval by the JelTerson County District Court and the Wheat Ridge City Council, approving a Final Development Plan for the 70 West Business Centcr Property, ns .ubrnitled by Dwaine Richter in August 1996 (the "Plan"), modified to reflect thu prior appiuval ccacily; the Conoco 13rcak Place, and with the tbllowing modifications as to uses: F!V TERNAITIVE 1 t . ARCA IC i (l.ecs Conoco Break Place) 1 P40 useS odtcr than landscaping and opei (INN a:RSA C - - tl,css Conoco Break-Kcc) 'Uses listed on While List uses llstca oil list tit "Permitted Uscs" prepared by Alan White dated September 4, 1998 (the "White List"); Fast Food Use would require a "scrubber" to minimize odors. ARE D U50.511SM3 On White LIST except # 14 (Fast Food Restaurant); Layout could be tither one sit-down reswuntnt or (Alternate A on Plan) 2 strip retail buildings T3 on UNus 17.5teu nn USL OI "Permilied Uses" on the Wi» to List 412EA E 'listcd nn WhigLisL• Ek-wr Mlnnmpotix D~Muinm L*adon F> kfvrt 09/20/98 SUN 09:49 17:1'/ItX 40 73441 SEP-23-98 WED 10:20 AM GORSUCH KIRGIS LLP FAX NO, 3033765001 P, 04/06 SENT 51(;EAEGRE & 13ENSON i 9-20-98 ; 9:48.V ; DnrVtR 303 370 0001;9 tV Gerald E. Dahl, Esq. 5eptcmber 20, 1998 Page 2 We understand that the City would approVe the alternatives stated, and would not rLluitu Mr, Richter to Select an alternative now. The alternative would be selected at the tine of the development the undeveloped portion of Area C or Area D. We nl.co understand that there would be no chano s to signage, access or the uses for Area A, or the residential/duplex lot which is shown a$ Area bon the Plan. We understand that the approval proposed by the City tvuuld not modify the Outline Dcvelopmcnt Plan ("ODP"), except that under Alternative 1, the ODP would be modified to provide that Area C, except the portion approved in connection with the Conoco T9reak Place would be used only 1'or landscaping and open space. Accordingly, additional uses and configurations could be applied for, consistent with City ordinances; in the futurr., except for the restrictions on Area C:, as noted above. Further, we understand that under Alternative 2 nbove, tlae wooden fence shown on the plan would be extended from the northeast currier of the lot and soull), along the eastern boundary, to a paint consistent with acceptable sight triangles for 32"i1 Avenue. Mr. Richter will agree to this proposal with the following modifications: Alternative 1: 1. Area C (less the o rtion unorovcd for the Conoco Rrcak Places). Tic following uses only would he allowed: medical and dental ofliccs, Christmas tree sales, produce saics (in a permanent structure as shown on Plan); this use would be consistent with the current use and w,)uld n511 permit a convenience store or similar use. Mr. Richter wuuld forego the other uses allowed under City ordinances. 2. Area D. Pursuant to the ODP, all C-1 uses are permitted within this area. Thu White List significantly reduces the list of approved uses. Mr. Richter would nonetheless agree to the reduced number ol'upprovcd -uses as set forth in Alternatives 1 and 2, and would prefer to express the allowed RC-1, RC:, and C-1. uses as follows: A. All uses which are allowed within the Restricted One District (KC-1) except the following: (1) Community Buildings, 'YMCAS'YWCA& churches, p3rks and aquariums (2) Golf Courses (3) lloines for the aged (4) Schools: public, parachial and private (including private, vocational trade or professional schools), e:olleges and univcrsitics (5) Residential group homes for 8 or rewcr developmentally disabled persons, mentally it I persons or elderly persons 00/20/93 sav 09:49 i9;1/RX SO 73441 u. . avaa.a.ouv-i va.. v..~r.i Hato . lobo u SEP-2-98 WED 10:20 AM GORSUCH KIRGIS LLP FAX NO, 3033765001 P. 05/06 SENT BY:I?AEGRE & BENSON 9-20-33 : 3:48AM DENVER 303 376 SU'*'.'."- V 5 Gcxald fi. Dahl, Esq. 'eptemhcr 20, 1998 VagL. 3 B. All uses which arc allowed within tie Restricted Commercial District (R-C) except the following: (1) Ambulamx service (2) ]equipment rental agLncies which rent or lease any item nermittod for sale in this district (3) Small animal veterinary hospitals and clinics C. -All uses which are Onwed within the Commercial - Unc District oxcapt the followin g: (1) Adult entertainment establishments in accordanou with W heat R.idgc Code of Laws, Chapter 3 (2) Assembly halls and convention facilities (3) Automobile and light truck sales and rental (4) Commercial machines shops (5) Community Buildings, YMCAs ctc_ (6) (1nlrcourscs (7) Grcenhouses, landscape nurseries, etc. (R) 1Iomag for the aged (9) Tndoor amuscment and recreation enterprises such ns roller rinks, bowling alleys, arcades and similar uses (10) Indoor flea market (11) Liquor store (12) Mortuaries and crematories (13) Motor fueling; stations (excluding the existing Conoco) (14) Priv to Clubs (15) Rooming and boarding houses (16) Boat, camper and travel trailer sales (17) Linen supply (18) Lumberyards (19) Motorcycle sales end service (20) Taverns, night clubs, lounges, privutc clubs acrd bars (21) Drive through restaurant would he limited to one, located on the e22stern potiion of Area D 3. AM,;,' h. lJnder the 0171', the following uses ore allowed: offices. wnrehnusire Ihr inside stordge, parking, small shops, thaaters. The White List significantly limits 1h;so, uses. 11r1r. Richter will nonetheless agre to a reduced number of approved uses if the R glowing arc dales to the White List: (a) Mini-warehouse (b) l-lotel/motel 09/20/08 SUN 09:49 ITMIX No 72-141 S-P-23-98 WED 10:20 AM GORSUCH KIRGIS LLP FAX NO, 3033765001 P. 08/06 §EINf BYTAEGRE & BFNISON ; 9-20-9a ; 9:48.4M DENVER 3019 376 5001:!: 5/ 5 Cictald E. Dahl, Esq. Scptetnber 2~, 19J8 puFc 4 (c) (d) (C) (1) (9) (h) (i) (J ) ~6Bternalive 2: 13uilding contractor office and shops, (no uutside storage) Aparbnents Research laboratories Child care center Auto service and repair (must be contained within building). Upholsteryshops Plumbing and Heating Supply stores and shops, but no outside storage. TV , radio, and small appliance repair. Arga C. No (;hange from City proposal, i.e., uses would be those included on the White list. Area t) ,and Area P,. Lases as listecl above, except no drivuLbrvugh restaurinL on Atea D. One additional matter, the Plan was submitted in 1996 in conjunction with s n;nlat Lo take into account the relocated frontage road. The re-plat was rejected alone with the flan. We would like the agreement to provide i'nr the approval of the portions of the replal, other tlttat those replatted as part of the Conoco Break Place, We look forward to your response to this counterpruposal. Very truly yours, DBD;bcdps cc: Mr. I)wainc'Kichter 132JP11' 7:4.1 AM ~ 17utnc ht. UavTe' s * 09/20/98 SLIN 00:49 ITX/Ra NO 73441 DWAINE R. RICHTER 6930 East Girard #205 Denver, Colorado 80224 TELEPHONE 303-584-0669 November 16, 1998 Mr. Alan White Director of Planning & Development City of Wheat Ridge 7500 W. 29th Ave Wheat Ridge, CO 80034 Re: 70 West Business Center Dear Alan: Enclosed herewith please find three sets of final drawings for the subject property which were presented to me late Friday Nov. 13, 1998 by ESC. Each set contains a site plan and alternate site plan, landscape plan, a plan indicating the building elevations and a plan showing the grading and drainage. I have made some red line changes on the drawings for some of the things I see that need revision. After you have had a chance to review the above, please let me know when we can meet to discuss them. 11- Ver VneJRVI Y"3 D . Richter cc: Diane Davies City of Wheat Ridge Planning and Development Department Memorandum TO: Greg Knudson, Development Review Engineer FROM: ~ ~ Meredith Reckert, Senior Planner SUBJECT: Case No. WZ-96-10/Richter DATE: November 16, 1998 Attached is one set of the revised documents for Case No. WZ-96-10, a request for approval of a combined preliminary and final development plan and plat for 70 West Business Center. This case was denied by City Council and the owner appealed the decision to district court. The court found in favor of the applicant and directed Mr. Richter to work with the City to achieve a recordable development plan and plat. Keep in mind that a subsequent case (WZ-97-13) was approved, recorded and built (PCL site). The revised drawings must incorporate this approval as well as a revised outline development plan. Please review the attached drawings and return comments to me at your convenience. If you need anything else, let me know. Three copies of the plan set were submitted. I would like to return one set with all of our redmarks if possible. DWAINE R. RICHTER 6930 East Girard #205 Denver, Colorado 80224 TELEPHONE 303-584-0669 Hand Delivered December 15, 1998 Mr. Alan White Director of Planning City of Wheat Ridge Wheat Ridge, CO 80034 Re: 70 West Business Center Dear Alan: Enclosed herewith please find the following documents: 1. Three revised sets of preliminary and final development plans dated December 14, 1998 which were prepared by ESC. 2. Two sets of redlined drawings which you gave to me at our last meeting. 3. Revised Final Drainage Report Summary by ESC and copy of the Dainage Report as relined by Greg Knudson. 4. Three revised copies of the plat. I hope that you find these drawings meet all the requirements that you have made. Please let me know if they d t. Ver /~,.ruly your D a' R. Richter cc: Diane Davies RECEIVED DEC 1 5 W98 .c kim City of Wheat Ridge Planning and Development Department Memorandum TO: Greg Knudsen, Development Review Engineer FROM: Meredith Reckert, Senior Planner SUBJECT: Case No. WZ-96-10/Richter DATE: December 17, 1998 Attached are the latest revisions for the combined preliminary and final development plan and plat and supporting documents for 70 West Business Center (Case No. WZ-96-10). Please review and submit comments back. Your original redlines are included as well. 1?/38/98 88:11:43 GORSUCH KIRGIS-> 383 235 2857 RightPA% Page 882 GORSUCH KIRGIS LLP ATTORNEYS AT LAW MEMORANDUM TO: Meredith Reckert FROM: Gerald E. Dahl DATE: December 29, 1998 RE: Richter: 70 West Business Center Combined Preliminary-Final Development Plan Here is my suggested plat note for inclusion as a condition of City Council approval of the referenced plan, and which should be included on Sheet 2 of 11: Notwithstanding the approval of an outline plan for the 70-West Business Center on , 19 , the City Council has determined that only the uses listed hereinabove, including the listed Cmitations upon such uses, may be permitted on Areas A, B, C, D and E. Pursuant to Wheat Ridge Code of Laws Section 26-25(IV)(A), the City Council hereby expressly finds, based upon evidence deemed persuasive and adequately appearing in the record of the pubCc hearings before the City Council on , 1998, and 1999, that the uses not shown hereon (which are hereby denied), and the prohibited aspects of the uses shown hereon as permitted but limited, are incompatible with uses made on surrounding properties or elsewhere within the planned Development District, or would create excessive traffic, noise or air pollution or will result in density or intensity of use which would be damaging or deleterious to the stability, unified operation or integrity (both economic and aesthetic) of the surrounding area. The City Council, in approving the uses, and only the uses, as listed and limited hereinabove, specifically relies upon and applies the power and authority granted by Wheat Ridge Code of Laws, Section 26- 250V)(AJ, which provides, in pertinent part: GEO\53027305482.07 1Z/38/96 86:12:27 G6RS6CH HIRGIS-> 383 235 2857 RightFAX Page 883 (AJ General Regulations. Each Planned Development District establishes its own list of permitted uses, as well as development and use standards and requirements, and such are specifically set forth in the development plan and reviewed by the planning commission and approved by city council. However, approval of uses stated in the outline development plan constitutes tentative approval only of the uses so stated. The planning commission and/or city council specifically retains jurisdiction to limit the approved uses to be made of, and on, the property at the time of final development plan approval upon an expressed finding, based upon evidence deemed persuasive and adequately appearing in the record of the public hearing before either the planning commission or the city council, that the uses so limited or denied are ercompatible with uses made on surrounding properties or elsewhere within the Planned Development District; or such uses as proposed would create excessive traffic, noise or air pollution; or that such uses would result in a density or intensity of use which would be damaging or deleterious to the stability, unified operation or integrity (both economic and aesthetic) of the surrounding area. Approval of the outline development plan shall not be construed to be approval of a preliminary development plan or a final development except in respect to general concept GED/mmw GEM530271305482.01 2 12/38/98 88:11:87 GBRSRCH RIRGIS-> 383 235 2857 RightPAX Page 881 GORSUCH RIRGIS LLP ATTORNEYS AT LAW TO: Meredith Reckert OF: City of Wheat Ridge CITY: Wheat Ridge, CO 80215 FROM: Madonna M. Wyman DATE: Wed 12-30-98 08:09AM MESSAGE: NOTE: THIS IS A REVISED MEMORANDUM REGARDING RICHTER. IT WAS REVISED ON 12/30/98. PLEASE DISCARD MEMORANDUM SENT LAST EVENING. This message may constitute privileged attorney-client communication or attorney work product, and unauthorized use or disclosure is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, please advise us by calling collect at (303) 376-5141 and forwarding the document to us by mail to the address listed below. CLIENT NAME: Wheat Ridge FILE NO. FAX NO.: 303-235-2857 PHONE NO. NUMBER OF PAGES: 02 (not including this page) FOR ASSISTANCE, CALL 303-376-5148 Gorsuch Kirgis LLP Tower I, Suite 1000 1515 Arapahoe Street Denver, CO 80202 Telephone: (303) 376-5000 Telecopy: (303) 376-5001 53027 303-234-5900 ~a cflo ao~a~ CONTACT NUMBER: 2 DATE: 114, 1999 SUBDIVISION NAME: 70 WEST BUSINESS CENTER FILING #3 ENGINEER: NAME: Engineering Service Company PHONE: (303) 337-1393 FAX: (303) 337-7481 CITY REPRESENTATIVE: JOHN MCGUIRE REMARKS: 1: In note 2 , 2nd Instrument should be filing NO. 2 2: Line "L4" and same line in legal are different distances- 668.73 and 668.43 should be 668.43 3: All closures are within tolerance for both lots and blocks 4: All previous comments have been addressed. 5: 6: 7: 8: 9: 10: ENGINEER REPRESENTATIVE: Brett L. Miller REMARKS: After talking with you on the phone, I found the note regarding cross access easement for lot 2. There is adequate language on the plat. How contact made: person phone letter fax REPRESENTATIVE: City: Engineer: Callback 1 Date: Remark: Callback 2 Date: Remark: Callback 3 Date: Remark: January 5, 1999 Mr. David Addor. P.E. Engineering Service Company 14426 East Evans Avenue, Suite 150 Aurora, Colorado 80014 John McGuire, City Surveyor Re: 70 West Business Center Filing 3, I-70 & Second Review Comments of Final Drainage Master Drainage Study, & Grading/Drainage Service Road Street Construction Plans Dear Mr. Addor, West 32nd Avenue - Report Summary to Plans & I-70 I have completed the second review of the above referenced documents for the 70 West Business Center Filing 3 received on December 17, 1998, and have the following comments: Drainage Study The drainage study submitted is acceptable for that area described in the report being between the existing Country Cafe to the north and the existing Conoco Station to the south. Street Construction/Traffic Engineering Plans (Sheet 8 of 11) 1. Please note on the plan the location and alignment of the new sidewalk to be continued east along the existing curb and gutter to the west entrance of the existing Country Cafe. This walk needs to be a minimum of 4-feet wide and be in improvement will need to conform with City standards (see attached detail) 2. A corner-style handicap ramp will need to be placed at the west corner of the west entrance to the Country Cafe (see attached detail). Please note on the detail that the maximum slope of the ramp is 12:1, tooled joints are to be placed at 8-inch intervals and that ramp is to be colored concrete (Davis Tile Red). Application for Minor Dumping/Landfill Permit Prior to the commencement of any onsite grading, an Application for Minor Dumping/Landfill Permit, along with fees due, will need to be submitted for review and approval. The total volume of in-place cut/fill needs to be calculated to process this permit. Mr. David Addor, P.E. ESC Page 2 Traffic Engineering The previously approved traffic impact study for I-70 West development will need revised accordingly to reflect the latest development proposal. Questions regarding this request can be directed to the City's traffic Engineer, Mr. Steve Nguyen, P.E., 303-235-2862. Public Improvements Cost Estimate & Guarantee Please submit an itemized engineer's cost estimate of the proposed I-70 Service Road public improvements for review and approval. Upon acceptance of this estimate, a letter of credit reflecting total costs of the approved cost estimate, will need to be submitted by the owner/developer for review and approval. Right-of-Way Construction Permit(s)/Licensing Prior to any construction of the public improvements, the necessary right-of-way construction permit(s) and respective licensing will need to be submitted for processing by the City. If you have any questions, please contact me at 303-235-2868. Sincerely, Greg Knudson, M.P.A. Development Review Engineer cc: Dave Kotecki, Sr. Project Engineer Steve Nguyen, Traffic Engineer Meredith Reckert, Sr. Planner File 81/14/!'9 88:37:84 GORSUCH KIRGIS-> 383 235 ZR57 RightFA% GGRSUCH KIRGIS LLP ATTORNEYS AT LAW Page 881 T0: Meredith Reckert OF: City of Wheat Ridge CITY: Wheat Ridge, CO 80215 FROM: Madonna M. Wyman DATE: Thu 01-14-99 08:36AM MESSAGE: Attached is redline of Richter Preliminary-Final Development Plan. This message may constitute privileged attorney-client communication or attorney work product, and unauthorized use or disclosure is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, please advise us by calling collect at (303) 376-5141 and forwarding the document to us by mail to the address listed below. CLIENT NAME: Wheat Ridge FILE NO. FAX NO.: 303-235-2857 PHONE NO. NUMBER OF PAGES: 02 (not including this page) FOR ASSISTANCE, CALL 303-376-5148 Gorsuch Kirgis LLP Tower I, Suite 1000 1515 Arapahoe Street Denver, CO 80202 Telephone: (303) 376-5000 Telecopy: (303) 376-5001 53027 303-234-5900 81/14/99 88:37:39 GORSUCH HIRGIS-> 383 235 2857 RightFHX Page B82 GORSUCH KIRGIS LLP ATTORNEYS AT LAW MEMORANDUM TO: Meredith Reckert FROM: Gerald E. Dahl DATE: DeeembeF 29, 1998janquy 1-4, 1999 RE: Richter: 70 West Business Center Combined Preliminary-Final Development Plan Here is my suggested plat note for inclusion as a condition of City Council approval of the referenced plan, and which should be included on Sheet 2 of 11: Notwithstanding the approval of an outline plan for the 70-West Business Center on , 19_, the City Council has determined that only the uses listed hereinabove, including the listed limitations upon such uses, may be permitted on Areas A, B, C, D and E: Council here+Ugyez~,ess~yyF -finds-, based r? evidence deemed perstrasAw and adequately appearing hi Me re06Fd Of the jelfbft heaAW--before --the- City Geunev/ - on-.____._............_..-_ ---'998,----and , _._1-999;--that- -the -uses--mot- shown -hereoa- fwhieh--are hereby denied), and Me prohMited &Wefs of f - be uses shown hereon :tied but #mhed, are aAh- with tises; made on Distrlct;--er----- wotdd... per_SUin; _ _t4 _ Si?!a _._~9!L!b~4.e51 Finel Development Plan and provided, however, that the Owner shall have the contmuin right, pursuant to the portion of this Zoning Code then applicable to make application fpr apRrpval of a new or amended Final Dev..elppmgn; Plaa permit;inggaa_other..than.._;hpae..lis;ed.hereinabpv_e. Such appbcat~on shall be processed and may be granted or denied pursuant to portions of the Zoning Ordinance then applicable. ereate--exeesshw-tra#ie -noise -or-air-poNutloo or-wiN result-in-donsdty-er intensity -of--use -+vhioh would Ne damag+mg--or- deleterious -to--the G€-D\530-27\30548-2:41 G ED\53027\305482.02 01/14/49 00:30:3H GORSUCH RIRGIS-> 303 235 2857 RightFAX Page 003 stability,-unified-operation --or-Integrity-fbeth-eeonoiWc--and -aesthetic) of-the-surrounding-brae--The City Council, in approving this Combined Preliminary-Final _ Development Plan for the uses, and only the uses, as listed and limited hereinabove, specifically relies upon and applies the power and authority granted by Wheat Ridge Code of Laws, Section 26-25(1V)(A), which provides, in pertinent part: (A) General Regulations- Each Planned Development District establishes its own list of permitted uses, as well as development and use standards and requirements and such are specifically set forth in the development plan and reviewed by the planning commission and approved by city council. However, approval of uses stated in the outline development plan constitutes tentative approval only of the uses so stated. The planning commission andlor city council specifically retains jurisdiction to limit the approved uses to be made of, and on, the property at the time of final development plan approval upon an expressed finding, based upon evidence deemed persuasive and adequately appearing in the record of the public hearing before either the planning commission or the city council, that the uses so limited or denied are incompatible with uses made on surrounding properties or elsewhere within the Planned Development District,- or such uses as proposed would create excessive traffic, noise or air pollution; or that such uses would result in a density or intensity of use which would be damaging or deleterious to the stability, unified operation or integrity (both economic and aesthetic) of the surrounding area. Approval of the outline development plan shall not be construed to be approval of a preliminary development plan or a final development except in respect to general concept GED/mmw GE-D. 553 -2.7.\30 2-.O-IG_-ED'M 27j~.05482 O2 2 January 15, 1999 Mr. David Addor, P.E. Engineering Service Company 14426 East Evans Avenue, Suite 150 Aurora, Colorado 80014 Re: 70 West Business Center Filing 3, I-70 & West 32nd Avenue - Third Review Comments of Final Drainage Report Summary to Master Drainage Study, & Grading/Drainage Plans & I-70 Service Road Street Construction Plans Dear Mr. Addor, I have completed the third review of the above referenced documents for the 70 West Business Center Filing 3 received on December 17, 1998, and have the following comments: A Subdivision Improvement Agreement will need to be executed by the owner/developer. For the owner/developer's information and review, I am including a copy of this document which also includes red-lined information that applies to this development. Drainage Study The drainage study submitted is acceptable for that area described in the report being between the existing Country Cafe to the north and the existing Conoco Station to the south. Street Construction/Traffic Engineering Plans (Sheet 8 of 11) The plan and profile construction drawings submitted are acceptable for the proposed public improvements along the I-70 Service Road West frontage. Application for Minor Dumping/Landfill Permit The previously requested Application for Minor Dumping/Landfill Permit, and fees due has not been submitted for review and approval. Again, the total volume of in-place cut/fill needs to be calculated to process this permit. Mr. David Addor, P.E. Engineering Service Company Page 2 Traffic Engineering The previously approved traffic impact study for I-70 West development will need revised accordingly to reflect the latest development proposal. Questions regarding this request can be directed to the City's traffic Engineer, Mr. Steve Nguyen, P.E. 303-235-2862. Public Improvements Cost Estimate & Guarantee The previously requested itemized engineer's cost estimate of the proposed I-70 Service Road public improvements has not been submitted for review and approval. Upon acceptance of this estimate, a letter of credit reflecting total costs of the approved cost estimate, will need to be submitted by the owner/developer for review and approval. Right-of-Way Construction Permit(s)/Licensing Prior to any construction of the public improvements, the necessary right-of-way construction permit(s) and respective licensing will need to be submitted for processing by the City. If you have any questions, please contact me at 303-235-2868. Sincerely, Greg Knudson, M.P.A. Development Review Engineer cc: Dave Kotecki, Sr. Project Engineer Steve Nguyen, Traffic Engineer Meredith Reckert, Sr. Planner John McGuire, City Surveyor File GORSUCH KIRGIS LLP ATTORNEYS AT LAW TOWER SUITE 1000 1515 ARAPAHOE STREET DENVER. COLORADO 80202 I TELEPHONE (303) 376-5000 FACSIMILE (303) 376-5001 GERALD E. DAHL DIRECT DIAL (303) 376-5019 gdahl@gorsuch.com January 15, 1999 Diane Davies Faegre & Benson, LLP 370 17`h Street, Suite 2500 Denver, CO 80202 Re: Richter: 96CV2691 Dear Diane: RECEIVED JAN 191999 You and I have spoken about my proposed plat note, which you have rejected, including the redline revision I circulated yesterday. I agreed to prepare new plat note (enclosed) based on the language of the Stipulation and Motion we jointly filed in the case. The note would be placed on Sheet 2 of 11 of the Combined Preliminary-Final Development Plan. Please note that I have added Stipulation Paragraph 5 to the plat note. I believe we have agreed, although you must confirm this, that the Plan will be considered at a fully noticed public hearing before the City Council. Mr. Richter and/or his representative will be expected to appear and to support the plan as submitted and as limited by the Stipulation and its exhibits, and to not object in any way to the inclusion in the hearing record of: 1 . The October 28, 1996 public hearing record. 2. The November 25, 1996 public hearing record and resolution of decision of the same date. 3. The District Court's July 24, 1998 Judgment and Order. 4. The Stipulation and Motion for Approval of Proposed Procedure for compliance with the Court's July 24, 1998 Order. 5. The Plan itself and any required attachments. GED\53027\306848.01 Diane Davies January 15, 1999 Page 2 6. Documents and testimony submitted by the public. The City insists upon conducting a public hearing on the Plan. The Council's decision will be to approve or deny the Plan in the manner described in the Stipulation. Please advise immediately whether you agree with the procedure described and plat note enclosed. I sincerely hope that our efforts to get this matter proposed cooperatively are not at an end. Sincerely, GORSUCH KIRGIS LLP Gerald E. Dahl Enclosure cce: Meredith Reckert Robert Middaugh GED\53027\306848.01 NOTE # On or about June 20, 1975, the City of Wheat Ridge approved an Outline Development Plan for the Property described herein. On July 9, 1984, the City approved a Combined Preliminary and Final Development Plan for the Property. On or about July 9, 1996, the owner filed an Application with the City to amend the Combined Preliminary and Final Development Plan and re-plat portions of the Property to reflect changes in the property configuration related to the relocation of the 1-70 Service Road on the Property by the City (the "Application"). On October 28, 1996, after notice and hearing, the City conducted a public hearing on the Application in accordance with the procedure for approval of final development plans under City Code Section 26-25. Following a continuation of the hearing, the City denied the Application by resolution dated November 25, 1996. The Property owner commenced Civil Action No. 96 CV 2591 in the Jefferson County District Court seeking Rule 106(a) relief challenging the decision of the Wheat Ridge City Council on November 25, 1996 denying the Application. On July 24, 1998, the Jefferson County District Court entered its Judgment and Order setting aside the decision of the City Council and remanding the matter to the City Council for "further proceedings consistent with" the Court's findings and opinion. On October 16, 1998, the Jefferson County District Court approved a Stipulation signed by the City and the Property owner agreeing upon both an acceptable substantive approval of a final planned commercial development plan and replat for the Property (the "Revised Plan"), as well as a procedure for approving that plan and replat. The Revised Plan is the Plan approved herein. The Stipulation contains the following paragraphs, inter alia: Recital Paragraph 11: The uses set forth in the Revised Plan are encompassed within the Application, and represent fewer uses and less intense usage of the Property than the uses set forth in the Application. Stipulation Paragraphs 1(b) and 1(c): b. Uses and Conditions. The Revised Plan shall approve the uses listed for Areas D and E. Richter may apply for the approval of additional or modified uses for Areas D and E in accordance with the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws in effect from time to time. C. With respect to Area C, Richter agrees that such Area shall be subject to the uses and conditions set forth on Exhibit B and Richter agrees that no other uses will be permitted on Area C. Stipulation Paragraph 5: The parties hereto agree that the Revised Plan, by its terms, shall be binding upon and inure to the GED\53027\306855.01 1 benefit of the successors, heirs, legal representatives, and assigns thereof and shall constitute covenants running with the Property. To the extent permitted by law, Richter and all future successors, heirs, legal representatives, and assigns of Richter shall be jointly and severally responsible for all terms, conditions, and obligations set forth in this Revised Plan. The City may, at its discretion, record this Revised Plan with the Clerk and Recorder for Jefferson County. GED\53027\306855.01 2 JAN-25-9P MON 10:51 AN FAX NO. P. 01/03 c- mail:gdah1@gorsuch. cant Direct: 303-376-5019 TO: TO: FROM: DATE: RE: GORSUCH KIRGIS LLP ATTORNEYS A'r LAW Telephone: (303) 376-5000 Telecopy: (303) 376-5001 Meredith Reckert, Planning & Development City of Wheat Ridge 7500 W. 29' Avenue Wheat Ridge, CO 80215 Robert Middaugh, City N aiiager City of Wheat Ridge 7500 W. 2911 Avenue Wheat Ridge, CO 80215 Gerald E. Dahl January 25, 1999 Wheat Ridge Telecopy`No, :303-234-5924 Phone 1~0.303-234-2848 TELFCOPY NO.: 303-234-5924 PIIONF NO.303-234-5900 MFSSAGF: Attached is letter from Diane Davies regarding Richter NO. OF PAGES TO FOLLOW: 2 CLIENT NAME: Wheat Ridge FILE NO. 53027 CONTIiwrN IALITY NOTICE: The information contained in this tt:lt:cupier message is confidential htfonn(dioll intended only for Elio uae of the individual or entity named above. If the reader of this Message is not the intended recipient, you are htrcby nolified Ova any dtsseminarion, distribution or copy of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have roceivul dik communication in error, please immediately notify us by telephone and return the original message to us abbe above address via the U,S. Postal Service, r-OR ASSISTANCE, CALL (303) 376-5141 Received: 1/25/99 10:44AM; JAN-25-99 MON 10;51 AM SENT s'!: FAMPE x+ MfNbUN CITY OF WHEATRIDGE; Page 2 FAX NO. P. 02/03 1-44 1 FAEGRE & BENSON LLP 7.500 RFTnM7.7G PLA7-A370 S L r STRRTr COLORADO 8022-400 DRNvER, 1'r1,R%mNP. vas-5nr apps nIAN„ n. OAVIUf MLSfMllli y09-oz0-oGO9 ddavl hFd.F.cy~c.eom Yw ~ iucu January 22, 1999 Gerald B. Bahl, L33q. Gorsuch Kirgis LLC 1515 Arapahoe Street Tower One, Suite 1000 Denver, CO 90202 Re: Richter! C~lt_v 0f Wheli WIN (303) 376.51101 Dear Gerry- f 1 have received your letter of January 15, 1999, including the language which you I as defined in the Stipulation and Motion fot I wilnid like to include on the Revised Plan Approval of PrapDSed Procedure. for C'.ompttance with Court's July 24, 1998 Order). Aftcr consideration of each of the proposed plat notes which you have prepared, we have careful ~ concluded that our initial position was correct, and that it's not appropriate to include any note on the Revised Plan. As you of course know, Judge V illano ruled that the City of Wheat Ridge should not ; have denied approval of the Plat and Final 1)eveloptnent Plan which were submitted by Dwain Richter in 1996- The Court remanded the case to the City "for further Proceedings consistent with the Court's findings and opinion"- Our understanding of the purpose of the Stipulation was to agree on a procedure which was "consistent with the Court's findings and opinion." It was also our understanding that if approved under the Stipulation, the Revised Plan would have the same effect as than any other final development plan in Wheat Midge. The Stipulation does not provide for any such notes on the Revised Plan. No such note is required by Wheat Ridge ordinance. Your current desire to add a note in an effort to irnposc home limitations on the property not contemplated by the Stipulation or tl c Revised Plan are ina-insistent with the letter and the spirit of the Stipulation and the Court's m.uidtitc. Accordingly, we will not agree to any sort of "note" on the Revised Plan. The Revised Plan has been prepared by Mr. Richter at great expense in reliance on lhel Stipulation and with significant input from the planning stag' at the City of Wheat Ridge. We would like the Stipulation, which addresses approval of the Revised Plan to be submitted II to the City Council. With respect to the hearing, although we do not agree Ihat a public hearing is either nucessary or appropriate, we will agree to a public hearing. We do expeci the City tD give Pewwr bliw990dis D Maiwes Lardow Prwekf tt 01/22/99 FBI 16;37 [Tat/RX NO $1271 Received: 1/25/99 10:44AM; > CITY OF WHEATRIOGE; Page 3 JAN-25-99 MOH 10;51 AM FAX NO. P. 03/03 sEYvl t3"f FAErY,E & BISON 1-ems + ` I C*erald r,. Dahl, Esq. ` January 22, 1999 Page 2 any notice which you deem ncecssarY. Further, we expoct that the hearing will be a ,,proceeding consistent with the Court's findings and opinion." TThe hearing should be noticed and conducted ns such and not as a public hearing on a newly filed final developmen plan- We do not object to the inclusion into the record of any of the items listed in your ` letter, however, we do reserve the right to objcet to the public submitting do, uume t w the testimony outside the scope of the hearing, and of course reserve the right content of any testimony or document 1 look forward to hearing from you regarding the setting of a hearing. very truly yours, /V6 ❑J c 13. Da tes D13]7:smikm DNVR1I40f 7nxoI 01/22/99 LgRI 16:37 [TX/RX No 81.271 7500 West 29th Avenue The City of Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80215 Wheat Telephone 303/ 235-2846 Ridge FAX 303/235-2857 February 3, 1999 Ryan Yee Engineering Service Company 14426 East Evans Avenue Suite 150 Aurora, Colorado 80014 Dear Ryan: This letter is in regard to your most recent submittal for the 70 West Business Center Planned Commercial Development combined preliminary and final development plan and plat. I have reviewed the submittal and have concluded that the following needs to occur: On the plat document, please revise Note #8, to reference "Lots 1 and 2 of Block 1 with the building permit for Lot 2 of Block 1." This may have already been done. All original changes requested by John McGuire, City Surveyor, should be incorporated into the plat document for the next submittal. If you have questions concerning any of his comments, please call him at 303- 235-2858. In regard to the combined preliminary and final development plan and plat, please make the following changes: 1. It is may understanding that the alternate site plan (for the Arby's restaurant design) is no longer necessary. If that is the case, all pertinent sheets can be removed and the plan set renumbered. 2. On sheet 2, please modify note #3 under use area B to read as follows: " domestically improved landscaped open space that would be maintained by the owner of Area A as designated on this document.". (Sorry, this was my mistake.) 3. On sheet 2, Items 14. E.and F. pertain to all uses within the development. Please make them separate notes instead of under item 14. 4. Our City Attorney is still working with the owners' attorney on language regarding use limitations. This will be added to Sheet 2. 5. On sheet 3, please note the fence running along the common boundary of Lots 2 and 3 of Block 2 as being solid and 6' high. 6. On sheet 3, please change maximum building height for Good Times to 25'. 7. Please add the following under the general notes: "All trash enclosures shall be made of non-flammable material.". 8. On sheet 3, for the concrete patio area on Lot 2 of Block 1, please add the following "landscaping to be consistent with Sheet _ of _ 9. On sheet 5, please remove note #9 (reference to landscaping for Arby's restaurant). 10. The landscaping installed by PCL on Lot 2 of Block 3 consisted of nine trees extending to the southern limit of the brick wall. What will the rest of the landscaping consist oP Please revise this sheet accordingly. 11. Rick Cavallero of Good Times has indicated that the concrete patio area will be surrounded by and the interior broken up by landscaping. Please revise sheet 5 accordingly. 12. Please designate all elevations sheets as being sheet - of within the plan set. 13. Lighted banding will not be allowed on the western building elevation of Good Times. 14. The Good Times elevations shown are somewhat different than those provided by Rick Cavallero. Please revise accordingly. I have indicated to Rick that there still needs to be more brick in the building elevations or carried out by other site features such as planting boxes. The western elevation is especially stark looking. It is imperative for all buildings within the development to have some similar architectural features. 15. Ditto on the elevations for the retail building. Regarding construction phasing with the building permit issued for Lot 2 of Block 1, the City will require arking lot improvements extending west to the western most drive aisle of Lot 3, Block 1 and including the northern portion of the common access from the I-70 Service Road West,. With this the parking island medians will need to be completed between Lot 1 and Lots 2 and 3. There is also a requirement for off-site construction of an equestrian path within the CDOT r-o-w along the frontages of Lots 1 and 2 of Block 1. This case is scheduled for review by City Council on March 8, 1999. I will need 15 folded copies of all sheets of the development plan and plat (but not including street construction plans) no later than February 22, 1999, for packet distribution. If you have questions concerning any of the above, do not hesitate to contact me at 303-235- 2848. Sincerely, Meredith Reckert, AICP cc: Dwaine Richter Rick Cavallero Greg Knudson Jk~ x 7500 West 29'" Ave., Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80215 Planning: Phone # (303) 235-2846 Parks & Recreation: Phone # (303) 235-2877 Public Works: Phone # (303) 235-2861 Fax Phone # (303) 235-2857 DATE ~ "`3 " V q Name: K i L vac /Gc ✓c~ Organization: Fax: 3G~ - Z-7 5 -G/ Phone: From: YLr--~p / V--74 Dept: Planning Parks & Recreation ❑ Public Works ❑ Subject: # of Pages: (Including cover page) Comments: S. Sag Original to follow in the mail ❑ Yes A 'No HP OfficeJet Personal Printer/Fax/Copier Fax Log Report for DEVREVFAX 303 235 2857 Feb-03-99 11:15 AM Identification 93032730177 Result Paees Tvce Date Time Duration Diagnostic OK 03 Sent Feb-03 11:13A 00:01:34 002586030022 7.4.0 7500 West 29th Ave., Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80215 Planning: Phone # (303) 235-2846 Parks & Recreation: Phone # (303) 235-2877 Public Works: Phone # (303) 235-2861 Fax Phone # (303) 235-2857 DATE ""3 - Name: Organization: Fax: Phone: 303 - 3 3 -7 L/,S-/ From: /~~ytr~i7Z Dept: Planning Parks & Recreation ❑ Public Works ❑ Subject: # of Pages: (Including cover page) Comments: Original to follow in the mail ❑ Yes XNo AP OfficeJet Personal Printer/Fax/Copier Fax Log Report for DEVREVFAX 303 235 2857 Feb-03-99 11:12 AM Identification 93033377481 Result Pages Tie Date Time Duration Diagnostic OK 03 Sent Feb-03 11:11A 00:01:33 002586030022 aa9 u 1,999 DISTRICT COURT, JEFFERSON COUNTY, STATE OF COLORADO Case No. 96 CV 2691, Division 4 STIPULATION AND MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF PROPOSED PROCEDURE FOR COMPLIANCE WITH COURT'S JULY 24, 1998 ORDER DWAINE R. RICHTER, d/b/a 70 WEST BUSINESS CENTER, Plaintiff, vs. CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, a municipal corporation of the State of Colorado; CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, the governing body of the City of Wheat Ridge, DAN WILDE, in his official capacity as the Mayor of the City of Wheat Ridge; TERI DALBEC, JERRY DITULLIO, DON EAFANTI, JEAN FIELDS, JANELLE SHAVER, KEN SILVER, TONY SOLANO, and CLAUDIA WORTH, in their official capacities as present members of the City Council of the City of Wheat Ridge, Defendants. Defendants, City of Wheat Ridge, et al., by and through their counsel, Gorsuch Kirgis, LLP, (the "City") and Plaintiff, Dwaine R. Richter, d/b/a 70 West Business Center, ("Richter") through his counsel, Faegre & Benson, L.L.P., (collectively, the "Parties") respectfully move this Court for approval of the Parties' method of compliance with this Court's Order dated July 24, 1998 and in support thereof, state as follows: PROCEDURAL HISTORY 1. Plaintiff owns certain real property known as the 70 West Business Center, located at 32nd and Youngfield, City of Wheat Ridge, which is the subject of the within action (the "Property"). 2. On or about June 20, 1975, the City approved an Outline Development Plan filed by Plaintiff for the Property (the "ODP"). On July 9, 1984, the City approved a Combined Preliminary and Final Development Plan for the Property. KLE\53027\299306.01 3. On or about July 9, 1996, Plaintiff filed an application with the City to amend the Combined Preliminary and Final Development Plan and re-plat portions of the Property to reflect changes in the property configuration related to the relocation of the I-70 Service Road on the Property by the City (the "Application"). 4. On October 3, 1996, after notice and a public hearing, the Planning Commission for the City of Wheat Ridge voted unanimously to recommend that the Application be approved, concluding that the Application is "consistent with the underlying outline development plan and C-1 zoning regulations." 5. The types of uses stated in the Application for the Property are uses permitted under the existing ODP for the Property. 6. On October 28, 1996, after notice and hearing, the City conducted a public hearing on the application in accordance with the procedure for approval of final development plans under City Code Section 26-25. Following a continuation of the hearing, the City denied the Application by resolution dated November 25, 1996. 7. Plaintiff Richter commenced this action seeking Rule 106(a) relief challenging the decision of the Wheat Ridge City Council on November 25, 1996 denying the Application. 8. On July 24, 1998, this Court entered its Judgment and Order setting aside the decision of the City Council and remanding this matter to the City Council for "further proceedings consistent with" the Court's findings and opinion. 9. Subsequent to the City Council's November 25, 1996 denial, and prior to the July 24, 1998 Order, Richter submitted, and the City Council approved, an application for final plan approval of a portion of the Property for development as a "Conoco Break Place." That project has since been constructed. 10. The Parties have engaged in discussions to determine what proceedings might be appropriate in light of the Court's Order remanding this matter to the City Council, and the Parties have agreed upon both an acceptable substantive approval of a final planned commercial development plan and replat for the Property, as well as a procedure for approving that plan and replat. The Parties respectfully request this Court approve the terms of the Stipulation as outlined below. 11. The uses set forth in the Revised Plan (as defined below) are encompassed within the Application, and represent fewer uses and less intense usage of the Property than the uses set forth in the Application STIPULATION The Parties stipulate and agree as follows: KLE\53027\299306.01 2 1. The City agrees to review and consider for approval the Final Development Plan for the 70 West Business Center as submitted by Richter in August of 1996, (the "Plan") with the following modifications and revisions: (referred to as the "Revised Plan"): a. Area. The area of the Revised Plan shall exclude all property previously approved as part of Case Number W2-97-13, approving the Conoco Break Place Development. The Area Diagram attached to this Stipulation as Exhibit A designating various parcels of the Property alphabetically is hereby made a part hereof. - b. Uses and Conditions. The Revised Plan shall approve the uses listed for Areas D and E. Richter may apply for the approval of additional or modified uses for Areas D t7 and E in accordance with the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws in effect from time to time. C. With respect to Area C, Richter agrees that such Area shall be subject to the uses and conditions set forth on Exhibit B and Richter agrees that no other uses will be permitted on Area C. d. There shall be no modifications to the signage or access as shown on the Application, or to the uses on the areas designated as Area "A," or on the residential/duplex lot designated as Area "B." woO"'~ J e. The Replat. The replat submitted in 1996 regarding the relocated frontage road shall be approved with the exception of the portions already replatted as part of the Conoco Break Place. 2. The Revised Plan shall be submitted to the City in accordance with Section 26- 25(v)(B)(3) of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws within two weeks after the date of disposition by this Court regarding this Stipulation and Motion. 3. In the event the City Council shall fail to approve the Revised Plan containing substantially the same elements as described in Exhibits A & B attached hereto, this Stipulation shall be null and void and of no further force and effect. 4. The City Council shall consider the Revised Plan at a regularly scheduled public session. In the event the City Council approves the Revised Plan in substantially the same form as referenced by Exhibits A & B, such decision of the City Council may not be further appealed by Richter pursuant to Rule 106, C.R.C.P., or otherwise. 5. The parties hereto agree that the Revised Plan, by its terms, shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the successors, heirs, legal representatives, and assigns thereof and shall constitute covenants running with the Property. To the extent permitted by law, Richter and all future successors, heirs, legal representatives, and assigns of Richter shall be jointly and severally responsible for all terms, conditions, and obligations set forth in this KLE\53027\299306.01 3 Revised Plan. The City may, at its discretion, record this Revised Plan with the Clerk and Recorder for Jefferson County. WHEREFORE, the Parties respectfully request this Court approve the Stipulation of the Parties and approve the proposed procedure for complying with this Court's July 24, 1998 order and remand and order such further relief as the Court deems proper. Respectfully submitted, GORSUCH KIRGIS LLP By: VYJfewV Gerald E. Dahl, #7766 Kelly Elefant, #26023 Tower I, Suite 1000 1515 Arapahoe Street Denver, Colorado 80202 Attorneys for Defendants FAEGRE & BENSON LLP By: :~roj/ e, ~J seph . Montano, #3695 y1 Diane B'. Davies, #11182 Russell O. Stewart, #14317 370 17th Street, Suite 2500 Denver. Colorado 80202-4004 Attorneys for Plaintiff KLE\53027\299306.01 4 DISTRICT COURT, JEFFERSON COUNTY, STATE OF COLORADO Case No. 96 CV 2691. Division 4 ORDER APPROVING STIPULATION AND APPROVING PROCEDURE OF COMPLIANCE WITH THIS COURT'S JULY 24, 1998 ORDER DWAINE R. RICHTER, d/b/a 70 WEST BUSINESS CENTER, Plaintiff, vs. CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, a municipal corporation of the State of Colorado; CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, the governing body of the City of Wheat Ridge, DAN WILDE, in his official capacity as the Mayor of the City of Wheat Ridge; TERI DALBEC, JERRY DITULLIO, DON EAFANTI, JEAN FIELDS, JANELLE SHAVER, KEN SILVER, TONY SOLANO, and CLAUDIA WORTH, in their official capacities as present members of the City Council of the City of Wheat Ridge, Defendants. This matter comes before the Court upon the Stipulation and Motion of the Parties for Approval of Proposed Procedure for Compliance with the Court's July 24, 1998 Order. The Court being fully advised in the premises by having read the Stipulation and Motion and being of the opinion that the interests of justice would be served by granting the Motion, DOTH ORDER: The Motion is hereby granted, and the Stipulation of the Parties and the procedure by which the Parties propose to comply with this Court's Order dated July 24, 1998, remanding the matter to the Wheat Ridge City Council for further proceedings is hereby approved. SO ORDERED AND APPROVED this day of 1998. Michael C. Villano District Court Judge KLE\53027\299306.01 GVIRTA ItJtJ r- i 0 r z H corto co •6REd1K PLACI-~ s EXF~IBIT 3 is Wc-vr 32~ o b,ViF-Hur-- EXHIBIT B APPROVED USES Richter PUD AREA C: 1. Landscaping and open space. AREA D: 1. Art galleries or studios. 2. Banks, loan and finance offices. 3. Libraries, museums and art galleries. 4. Government or quasi-government buildings and offices or public utility building where outside storage, operations or repair facilities are not planned. 5. Hotel/motel; no tavern, night club, or cabaret permitted; small bar or lounge permitted. 6. Medical and dental offices, clinics or laboratories. 7. Offices, general administrative, business and professional. 8. Parking of automobiles of clients, patients, patrons or customers of the occupants of adjacent commercial districts. 9. Service establishments as listed below: a. Blueprinting, photostatic copying, and other similar reproduction services; however, not including large printing, publishing and/or book binding establishments. b. Hair, nail and cosmetic services. C. Locksmith shop d. Interior decorating shop where goods, except samples, are not stored upon the premises. e. Pickup stations for laundry and dry cleaning. f. Shoe repair. g. Studio for professional work or teaching of fine arts, photography, music, drama or dance. KLE\53027\298490.02 h. Tailoring, dressmaking or clothing alteration shop. i. Watch and jewelry repair. 10. Stores for retail trade as listed below: a. Antique store; provided, however, that no more than two hundred (200) square feet of building area shall be allocated to repair. b. Apparel and accessory stores. C. Automobile parts; no repair, maintenance or service permitted. d. Bakeries, retail. e. Bicycle stores. f. Book stores, newsstands (for the sale of newspapers, magazines, etc.), stationery and card stores. g. Business machine or computer stores. h. Camera and photographic service and supply stores. i. Candy, nut and confectionery stores. j. Dairy products stores. k. Delicatessens. 1. Electrical supplies and services, but not including contractors storage yards. M. Floral stores. n. Garden supplies stores. o. Gift, novelty or souvenir stores. P. Hobby and craft stores. q. Jewelry stores. r. Music stores. S. Notions stores. t. Office supply stores. U. Optical stores. V. Paint and wallpaper stores. W. Pet stores. X. Picture framing (shops). Y- Retail grocery/convenience store, limited to five thousand (5,000) square feet or less. Z. Shoe stores. aa. Sporting goods stores. bb. Stationery stores. cc. Tobacco stores. dd. Toy stores. ee. Television, radio, small appliance repair and service (shops). ff. Video rentals. gg. Leather goods and luggage stores. hh. Butcher shops and food lockers, but not including food processing. ii. Meat, poultry or seafood stores. KLE\53027\298490.01 2 11. Theaters (including drive-ins). 12. Sit-down restaurants, ice cream sales and similar related uses. 13. One fast food restaurant with drive-through facility, limited to eastern half of the area; scrubber required. AREA E: 1. Art galleries or studios. 2. Banks, loan and finance offices. 3. Building contractor office and shops; outside storage, including trucks, not permitted. 4. Government or quasi-government buildings and office or public utility buildings where outside storage, operations or repair facilities are not planned. 5. Medical and dental offices, clinics or laboratories. 6. Offices, general administrative, business and professional. 7. Parking of automobiles of clients, patients, patrons or customers of the occupants of adjacent commercial districts. 8. Research laboratories. 9. Service establishments as listed below: a. Hair, nail and cosmetic services. b. Interior decorating shop where goods, except samples, are not stored upon the premises. C. Pickup stations for laundry and dry cleaning. d. Shoe repair. e. Studio for professional work or teaching of fine arts, photography, music, drama or dance. f. Tailoring, dressmaking or clothing alteration shop. g. Watch and jewelry repair. h. Locksmith shop. i. Blueprinting, photostatic copying, and other similar reproduction services; however, not including large printing, publishing and/or book binding establishments. j. Upholstery shops, furniture only. 10. Stores for retail trade as listed below: KLE\53027\298490.01 3 a. Antique store; provided, however, that no more than two hundred (200) square feet of building area shall be allocated to repair. b. Apparel and accessory stores. C. Automobile parts, no repair, maintenance, or service permitted. d. Bakeries, retail. e. Bicycle stores. f. Book stores, newsstands (for the sale of newspapers, magazines, etc.), stationery and card stores. g. Business machine or computer stores. h. Camera and photographic service and supply stores. i. Candy, nut and confectionery stores. j. Dairy products stores. k. Delicatessens. 1. Electrical supplies and services, but not including contractors' storage yards. m. Floral stores. n. Garden supplies stores. o. Gift, novelty or souvenir stores. P. Hobby and craft stores. q. Jewelry stores. r. Music stores. S. Notions stores. t. Office supply stores. U. Optical stores. V. Paint and wallpaper stores. W. Pet stores. X. Picture framing (shops). Y. Plumbing and heating supply stores and shop, outside storage including trucks not permitted. Z. Retail grocery/convenience store, limited to five thousand (5,000) square feet or less. aa. Shoe stores. bb. Sporting goods stores. cc. Stationery stores. dd. Tobacco stores. ee. Toy stores. ff. Television, radio, computer, small appliance repair and service (shops). gg. Video rentals. hh. Leather goods and luggage stores. ii. Butcher shops and food lockers, but not including food processing. jj. Meat, poultry or seafood stores. 11. Theaters (excluding drive-ins). 12. Private membership lodges. KLE\53027\298490.01 4 13. Shops for custom work or for making articles, materials or commodities to be sold at retail on the premises, and where no single machine exceeds five (5) horsepower; and provided that no excessive noise, vibration, dust, emission of heat, glare, radiation, smoke or fumes are produced to the extent that it is dangerous, hazardous or a nuisance to the reasonable enjoyment or use of adjacent properties, and limited to 2,000 square feet. No outside storage, including trucks. 14. Woodworking or carpentry shops for the making of articles for sale upon the premises such as cabinets or custom furniture; provided, however, that no excessive noise, vibration, dust, emission of heat, glare, radiation, smoke or fumes are produced to the extent that it is dangerous, hazardous, or a nuisance to the reasonable enjoyment or use of adjacent properties and limited to 2,000 square feet. No outside storage, including trucks. 15. Office warehouse uses subject to the following restrictions: a. No single office warehouse shall exceed 6,000 square feet and no less than 25 % of any office warehouse shall be devoted to office or retail use/space. At no time shall more than 75 % of any such office warehouse be devoted to warehouse space/use. b. No tractor trailers shall be permitted in this Area. C. No outside storage of goods/supplies, inventory, materials and/or merchandise shall be permitted, including trucks. d. No office warehouse shall exceed 25 feet in height. KLE\53027\298490.01 DAI-(~- Ki RECD ; .=D DISTRICT COURT, JEFFERSON COUNTY, STATE OF COLORADO FEB 0 4 1999 Case No. 96 CV 2691, Division 4 JUDGMENT AND ORDER DWAINE R. RICHTER, d/b/a 70 WEST BUSINESS CENTER., Plaintiff, it CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, a municipal corporation of the State of Colorado; CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, the governing body of the City of Wheat Ridge; DAN WILDE, in his official capacity as the Mayor of the City of Wheat Ridge; TERI DALBEC, JERRY DITULLIO, DON EAFANTI, JEAN FIELDS, JANELLE SHAVER, KEN SILER, TONY SOLANO, and CLAUDIA WORTH, in their official capacities as present members of the City Council of the City of Wheat Ridge, Defendants. THIS MATTER comes before the Court on Plaintiffs C.R.C.P. 106 claim to reverse the Defendant's denial of a proposed final development plan and proposed amendment to a subdivision plat. Having reviewed the briefs of the parties and the case file, and being fully advised in the premises, the Court finds and orders as follows: FACTUALBACKGROUND This is P. C.R.C.P. 106(a)(4) review of the decision by the City of Wheat Ridge to deny Plaintiff s request for approval of Plaintiffs land use development plan. Plaintiff is the owner of approximately 10 acres of real property located in the City of Wheat Ridge in Jefferson County, which is known as the I-70 Business Center (the "Property"). On July 9, 1996, Plaintiff filed an application for approval of a combined Preliminary and Final Development Plan for the Property. The Final Development Plan and requisite Subdivision Replat were reviewed by the Wheat Ridge Planning Division Staff and the Wheat Ridge Planning Commission. On October 28, 1996, after holding a public hearing regarding Plaintiff's Final Development Plan and the changes to the platting of the Property, Defendants denied Plaintiff's application. The Defendants noted that they would issue written findings explaining the denial at a later date. On November 25, 1996, Resolution 1564, which explained the denial in greater detail, was approved by Defendants. A number of reasons for the denial of Plaintiff's application were given by the Defendants at the public hearing and in Resolution 1564. Although articulated somewhat differently, the majority of the reasons given for the denial during the public hearing are embodied in the nine reasons stated in Resolution 1564. The nine grounds for denial stated in Resolution 1564 are as follows: a. The uses proposed for areas C and D on the proposed Final Plan and Plat are not sufficiently defined as required by Wheat Ridge Code of Laws § 26-25(V)(B)(3)(1), and are also not sufficiently specific so as to insure compatibility with adjacent land uses, as required by Wheat Ridge Code of Laws, 26-25(11). b. The potential uses for Area E are so unspecific as to prevent meaningful review of the rmmvat!bility of the development with adiacent land uses, as required by Wheat Ridge Code of Laws § 26-25(II)(A). c. The absence of a ten-foot high screen wall or other appropriate buffering device extending north from the existing screen wall to connect with the existing east-west screen wall around Area E contributes to the incompatibility of the development with adjacent residential uses. d. The proposed use of Area D for twenty-four hour businesses, including a fast food restaurant and twenty-four hour automobile service station, renders those areas incompatible with adjacent residential uses, as required by Wheat Ridge Code of Laws, 26-25(11 and (IV)(A)). e. The height and location of signs such that additional fight will be shed on established residential neighborhoods to the west, render the Application incompatible with those adjacent uses, as required by Wheat Ridge Code of Laws, 26-25(II), and does not comply with the Wheat Ridge Sign Code at § 26-410(e), regarding height of freestanding signs. f. The proposed development of a commercial building on the portion of Area C, shown as Lot 5 and containing 1,250 square feet for such uses is incompatible with the residential uses immediately to the west, and, in addition, relies upon a design which places the required parking for such commercial uses within use Area C, designated "a buffer and landscape area." Such areas may not be devoted to such uses. This renders that aspect of the Application inconsistent with Wheat Ridge Code of Laws § 26- 25(11)(E)(7). g. The areas and dimensions of portions of the subject property devoted to individual uses have changed significantly since the approval of the Outline Development Plan in 1975, such that the assumptions relied upon in granting Outline Development Plan approval may no longer be valid. Ri~h~ 7/24M h. The Application fails to adequately mitigate the overall intrusive impacts of the proposed development, including light, odor and noise. i. Based upon testimony in the record, the Application does not comply with the standards established at Wheat Ridge City Code of Laws § 26-25(II). DISCUSSION There is no dispute that Defendants acted in a quasi-judicial, adjudicative capacity when reviewing Plaintiff s application. In such a situation, a governmental body or officer will be found to have exceeded its jurisdiction or abused its discretion pursuant to C.R.C.P. 106(a)(4), when there is no competent evidence in the record to support its decision. Board of County Comm'rs v. Conder. 927 P.2d 1339. 1343 (Colo. 1996). In a Rule 106(a)(4) review of an administrative proceeding, the Court must decide whether there is competent evidence in the record to support the agency's decision. Plaintiff argues that the sections of the Wheat Ridge City Code cited to by the Defendants as the basis for their denial of Plaintiff s application do not contain sufficiently specific standards to be relied upon as grounds for denying Plaintiff's application. When a government entity makes land use decisions, the provisions that it seeks to enforce must be sufficiently specific "to ensure that any action taken by [the government entity] in response to a land use proposal will be rational and consistent and that judicial review of that action will be available and effective...." See Board of County Comm'rs v. Condor, 927 P.2d 1339, 1348 (Colo. 1996) (quoting Beaver Meadows v Board of County Comm'rs, 709 P.2d 928, 936 (Colo. 1985) (citing Cottrell v City & County of Denver, 636 P.2d 703, 709 (Colo. 1981))). Specificity is also required in order to "provide all users and potential users of land with notice of the particular standards and requirements imposed by the [government entity]." Id. It is important to ensure that the desire for specificity does not overwhelm the underlying purpose of the planned unit development provisions. The intent of planned unit developments is to allow for "the flexibility necessary to permit adjustment to changing needs and the ability to provide for more compatible and effective development patterns." Tri-State Generation & Transmission Co v. City of Thorton, 647 P.2d 670, 678 (Colo. 1982); see also Conde r, 927 P.2d at 1348. As a result, the Court must keep this goal of flexibility in mind when detc=ziing whether the provisions relied upon by the City of Wheat Ridge contain enough specificity to guide land users, the City, and reviewing courts. In denying Plaintiff's Final Development Plan application, Defendant's relied primarily on the ground that the development plan was incompatible with adjacent land uses. This "incompatibility" standard is referenced in seven out of the nine grounds fisted in resolution 1564.' As a basis for finding the development incompatible with adjacent uses, Defendants cited ' Grounds (a). (e) and (f) contain grounds for denial in addition to the "incompatibility" standard. Ground 0) cites to section 26-25(II) which is the general statement of intent and purpose of Wheat Ridge's planned development R"w 3 Ma to section 26-25(II) of the Wheat Ridge City Code, which contains a statement of the overall "Intent and Purpose" of Wheat Ridge's planned development districts. Defendants also denied Plaintiff's application on a number of other, more narrow grounds, which are not based on competent evidence in the record. These grounds and the reasons for their insufficiency are listed as follows: 1. Ground (a) states that the final plan did not meet the requirements of section 26- 25(V)(B)(3)(1) of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws. However, there is no section 25(V)(B)(3)(1) in the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws. It appears that Defendants intended to refer to section 25(V)(B)(3)(a)(3)(1), which requires the final development plan to include the following: Indication of all proposed uses for all buildings, structures and open areas. Outside storage and display areas must be indicated if proposed. Description of any proposed temporary or interim uses of land or existing buildings prior to development in accordance with the approved final development plan. The development plan does show the proposed uses for the buildings, structures and open areas. The engineering plan even includes the names of tenants in two of the structures. Defendants finding that Plaintiff's development plan does not satisfy section 25(V)(B)(3)(a)(3)(1), is not supported by any competent evidence in the record. 2. Ground (e) states that the signs do not comply with the Wheat Ridge Sign Code at section 26-410(e), regarding the height of freestanding signs. Section 26-410(e) permits signs up to 25 feet high, except that retail and service businesses within one-quarter mile of an interstate, are permitted to have one sign up to 50 feet high that is oriented to the highway. There is no indication in the record that the development plan provides for any signs that would violate this provision, and Defendants have not referred the Court to anything in the record showing such a violation. Defendants do refer to a planning division staff report in the Record, Volume 3, pages 54- 59. However, it does not appear that Plaintiff's signs will violate the code provision allowing 50 foot signs within one-quarter mile of an interstate. 3. Ground (f) states that parking in area C is impermissibly designated to be in a buffer and landscape area, which is inconsistent with section 26-25(II)(E)(7) regarding traffic congestion. Defendants do not contend that the parking in area C violates any specific requirement in section 26-25. Section 26-25(II)(E)(7) is merely a statement that the district. Section 26-25(11) contains the "incompatibility" standard. The only two grounds that do not contain the "incompatibility" standard are grounds (g) and (h). Rll~ 4 7/2s general purpose of the planned development ordinance is to minimize traffic congestion. This is a broad statement of purpose that provides no guidelines or standards outlining how a developer can achieve such a purpose. This subjective, highly discretionary standard, is not subject to review by a court, and is not a proper ground to invalidate Plaintiff's parking plan, absent a violation of any specific parking standards listed in Wheat Ridge's planned development district ordinance. 4. Ground (g) is not a valid ground for denial of an application. It merely states that any assumptions relied upon in granting the Outline Development Plan approval may no longer be valid. 5. Ground (h) states that the application fails to adequately mitigate intrusive impacts including light, odor and noise. Ground (h) does not find that any particular regulation relating to light, odor and noise was violated. Like the finding in Ground (f) relating to traffic congestion, Ground (h), while certainly an important purpose, is a generalized, subjective ground for denying a development application. Minimizing light, odor and noise impact is a goal to be achieved through more specific regulations. Ground (h) does not contain any standards outlining how a developer is to mitigate such effects. It does not provide any guidelines for the City to follow when reviewing a development plan to determine whether the plan is in compliance with the such a goal. It is therefore an improper basis for denying Plaintiffs development plan. Defendants' denial of Plaintiff's development application based on the above five reasons was improper. The Court understands that it is not its role to act as a zoning board of appeals. However, when it can find no competent evidence in the record to support Defendant's denial based upon these reasons, or when the sections in the City's code do not provide sufficiently specific guidance, the Court must find that the City acted arbitrarily and capriciously. The Court's inquiry into this matter does not end here. The main basis for the denial of Plaintiff s application was its incompatibility with adjacent land uses, pursuant to section 26-25(U) of the Wheat Ridge City Code. The Court must next determine whether this is a proper ground for denial of development application. Incompatibility with Adjacent Uses In Conde r, the Colorado supreme court noted that in the past they have approved broad criteria such as "'[c]ompatibility with the surrounding area' and `[h]armony with the character of the neighborhood' when applied in conjunction with more specific criteria relating to utilities and traffic." Conde r, 927 P.2d at 1348 (referring to the Tri-State case, in which the Thorton planned unit development ordinance was at issue) (emphasis added).Z This statement by the 2 Unlike the matter before this Court, the court in Tri-State was reviewing the constitutionality of Thorton's entire planned unit development ordinance. R.tF 5 '111498 Conder court indicates that without other more specific criteria, the general "compatibility" and "harmony" standards are insufficient reasons to deny a development application. In Cherry Hills Resort Dev v. Cherry Hills, 790 P.2d 827 (Colo. 1990), the Colorado supreme court noted that the city's master plan and zoning regulations evidenced a general intent that the effects of development on traffic congestion and fire protection be considered. However, the regulations provided no guidance as to how to alleviate any negative effects caused by the development. The court stated that "absent such guidelines, the City's land use regulation is insufficient to provide `all users and potential users of land with notice of the particular standards and requirements imposed by the [City] for [development plan] approval."' Id. at 832 (citing Beaver Meadows, 709 P.2d at 936). In the case of the Wheat Ridge City Code, section 26-25 (11) is entitled "Intent and Purpose." This section contains generalized statements of the goals and purposes of Wheat Ridge's planned development district provisions. It does not contain any specific or detailed provisions explaining how such goals are to be accomplished. The more detailed and instructive provisions are contained in other sections of 26-25. The general statement of intent and purpose contained in section 26-25(II) of the Wheat Ridge City Code of Laws contains perfectly acceptable criteria for consideration when reviewing a development plan. However, reliance upon such goals as the sole basis for approving or denying a development plan is insufficient. As the court in Conder noted, generalized goals such as "compatibility" and "harmony" with the surrounding neighborhood are proper criteria for consideration, provided that they are "applied in conjunction with more specific criteria...." Conde r, 927 P.2d at 1348. In this case, Defendants did rely on some of the more specific provisions of section 26-25 in denying Plaintiff's development application. However, the record makes it clear that the Defendants relied so heavily on the statement of general intent and purpose as grounds for their denial, that the other more specific portions of section 26-25 that were cited to are relatively insignificant and minor. Moreover, this Court has already determined that these reasons are not supported by competent evidence in the record, and cannot be used as a basis for denying Plaintiff's application.; The statement of general intent and purpose.centzined in section 26-25(11) contains broad policy goals that are intended to be effectuated through the more detailed provisions contained in the rest of the provisions in section 26-25. Standing alone, section 26-25(11) provides no guidelines for land users to follow when preparing a development plan. It provides no check on the City's discretion in reviewing development plans. Without any guidelines or standards, s Other cases have found that government entities acted arbitrarily and capriciously when they denied development plans based on such general standards. See Western Paving Constr. Co v Board of County Comm'rs, 506 P.2d 1230, 1232 (Colo. 1973) (denying special use permit); Beaver Meadows v. Board of County Commis, 709 P.2d 928 (Colo. 1985) (holding that county's regulations relating to costs of access road and emergency medical assistance not sufficiently detailed to suppo.t the county's decision to impose the costs of such items on the developer). Rkht. Ina approval or denial of a development plan is left to the unfettered subjective discretion of the reviewing body. Plaintiff is not attacking Wheat Ridge's entire planned development district ordinance. The ordinance clearly contains sufficiently specific standards with which to achieve the perfectly acceptable general goals evidenced in section 26-25(II). If the City were to rely on these specific provisions and not only section 26-25(11), and if there was evidence in the record to support such a decision, then the City's decision regarding Plaintiffs development plan would not have been arbitrary and capricious. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the decision of the City Council of the City of Wheat Ridge is hereby disapproved and set aside, and this matter is remanded to the City Council for further proceedings consistent with the Court's findings and opinion. j~ DONE in Chambers, this L: ~ day of July, 1998. MICHAEL C. VILLANO DISTRICT COURT JUDGE Richer 712NM FEE-05-1999 12:23 3k ~ GWI NIUES To: Meredith Reckert Fox: 235-2857 From Rick Cavallaro Date: February 5,1999 RE 32nd & 1-70 Number of Pager. Hi Meredith, FACSIMILE Thanks for taking the time to meet with me this week I think it was beneficial for both of us. A couple of quick things that I would Ice to run by you 1. We are planning to expand the front vestibule by We feet to allow for the addition of 10 window counter style seats. There will be five on each side, L-shaped along the front and side windows. Basically just some covered, outdoor seating. 2. can we add some neon to our section of the 50 foot pole sign - basically just open foce letters (similar to the Chefs sign across the street) and an outline around our section. Both these things will be documented on our submittal of plans, but I just wanted to get your feelings before we proceeded. Thanks for moving Dwaine s city council hearing to march 8th Let me know your comments when you can. Thanks for your help. 601 Corporate Crck. Golden, co 50401 GOOD TIMES 1 303 273 0177 P.01i01 Phone (503) 354-1430 Fax (303) 273-0177 TOTAL P.01 Good Times Restaurants Inc. GZkOM' DRIVE THRUBURGERS Gick covgloro Director of flestouront Systems 6 Development 601 Corporate Circle Golden, Colorado 80401 303.384.1400 Fax 303.273.0177 O, 0 Or 4' •`J O ~ G p • v'I t_ ha ~a 9 COLORADO 80215 1-he City of ~OF WHE4p~ Wheat C ~m GR.idge C, ZORN 0 Z-96-10 (Richter) which is a request for approval of a pment plan and plat for property located generally on the west side of I-70 and the westerly city boundary, Vest. This case is processed in settlement of Jefferson 1-Richter vs. City of Wheat Ridge will be heard by the ncil Chambers of the Municipal Complex at 7500 West i on March 15, 1999, at 7:00 p.m. the parcel under consideration must be present at this party, you have the right to attend this Public Hearing be the applicant's responsibility to notify any other hearing. any plans, please contact the Planning Division at 112 ' 42 r (303) 234- 0 • ADMINISTRATION FAX: 234-5924 POLICE DEPARTMENT FAX: 235-2949 7500 West 29th Avenue Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80215 FAX 303/235-2857 March 2, 1999 Troy Cucharola Rola Gardens Dear Troy: The City of Wheat Ridge This letter is in concern to your inquiry regarding use of the vacant property located within the 70 West Business Center on the north side of West 32nd Avenue west of I-70. Your question was whether Staff would be willing to administratively allow seasonal use of the property for bedding plant, produce and Christmas tree sales. Staff will not administratively approve a temporary bedding plant, produce or Christmas tree lot as an ancillary use, although we have done so in the past, or approve a temporary use permit administratively for any location within the 70 West Business Center for the following reasons: 1. The City and Mr. Richter are currently in the process of resolving a lawsuit related to a land use case denied by City Council in 1996. Pursuant to court order, the City is processing a combined preliminary and final development and plat which goes to City Council public hearing on March 15, 1999. 2. The court stipulation does not show temporary bedding plant, produce or Christmas tree sales lots as uses agreed to by City Council. 3. The property is zoned Planned Commercial Development. In a planned development, property must be utilized in accordance with the approved development plan. As mentioned previously, we have a public hearing date set for City Council to review a development plan for the property. Once it is approved, the land must be used accordingly. Since temporary bedding plant, produce and tree sales lots are not shown, these cannot be allowed administratively. An alternative would be for you to apply for a temporary use permit review by the Board of Adjustment which takes roughly a month and a half to complete. Staff is unsure whether or not we will not support the request. Please find attached a procedural guide for temporary use permits. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me at 303-235-2848. Sincerely, Meredith Reckert, AICP Senior Planner MEMORANDUM I Approved Date TO: Meredith Reckert FROM: John McGuire P. L. S. DATE: Monday, March 8,1999 SUBJECT: 70 West Business Center Subdivision Filing No.3 Meredith, I have checked the corrections that were listed on my last review 1-4-99 and all of our comments have been addressed. Cc: Greg Knudson File NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Notice is hereby given that a Public Hearing is to be held before the City of Wheat Ridge CITY COUNCIL on March 15,1999, 7:00 p.m. at 7500 West 29th Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado. All interested citizens.are invited to speak at the Public Hearing or submit written comments. The following petitions shall be heard: Case No. WZ-99-04: An application by the City of Wheat Ridge for approval of a rezoning from Residential-One B to Agricultural-One for property located at 4000 Nelson Street. Said property is legally described as follows: The South 100 feet.of the West 148.91 feet of the East 165.45 feet of the North 471.4 feet of the NW 1/4, SW 1/4 of Section 21, Township 3 South, Range 69 West of the 6' P.M. except the West 20 feet thereof deeded to the County of Jefferson in instrument recorded March 6, 1957, in Book 1048 at page 457, according to the recorded plat thereof, County of Jefferson, State of Colorado. 2. Case No. WZ-96-10: An application for approval of a combined preliminary and final development plan and plat for property located generally on the north side of 32"' Avenue between the west side of I-70 and the westerly city boundary, addressed as 3250 I-70 Service Road West. This case is processed in settlement of Jefferson County District Court Case #96CV269 I -Richter vs. City of Wheat Ridge. Said property is legally described as follows: LOT 1 AND LOT 2, 70 WEST BUSINESS CENTER SUBDIVISION FILING NO. 2, JEFFERSON COUNTY, COLORADO; AND COMMENCING AT THE SW CORNER OF THE NW 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 29; THENCE N89°43'30"E ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID NW 1/4 A DISTANCE OF 559.67 FEET; THENCE N00°16'30"W A DISTANCE OF 35.00 FEET TO THE SOUTHEASTERLY CORNER OF SAID LOT 4 LYING ON THE NORTHERLY R.O.W. LINE OF WEST 32ND AVENUE, SAID POINT BEING THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE S89°43'30"W ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LOT 4 AND SAID NORTHERLY R.O.W. LINE A DISTANCE OF 95.18 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVE; THENCE ALONG A CURVE TO THE RIGHT WHOSE CHORD BEARS N45°31'51" W A DISTANCE OF 28.16 FEET, SAID CURVE HAVING A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 89°29'18", A RADIUS OF 20.00 FEET, AN ARC LENGTH OF 31.24 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENT LYING ON THE WEST LINE OF SAID LOT 4 AND THE EASTERLY R.O.W. LINE OF ZINNIA COURT; THENCE NO0°47'12" W ALONG SAID TANGENT AND SAID WEST LINE A DISTANCE OF 70.18 FEET TO THE NW CORNER OF SAID LOT 4; THENCE N89°43'30" E ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT 4 A DISTANCE OF 115.00 FEET TO THE NE CORNER OF SAID LOT 4; THENCE N00 °47' 12" W ALONG THE WEST LINE OF LOT 7 AND THE EAST - LINE OF LOT 5, 70 WEST BUSINESS CENTER A DISTANCE OF 668.73 FEET TO THE NE CORNER OF SAID LOT 5, SAID POINT LYING ON THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 6; THENCE S89°40'00" W ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 6 A DISTANCE OF 303.88 FEET TO THE SW CORNER OF SAID LOT 6; THENCE N00°10'00" W ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID LOT 6 A DISTANCE OF 204.60 FEET TO THE NW CORNER OF SAID LOT 6; THENCE N89°39'00" E ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT 6 AND LOT 7 A DISTANCE OF 390.89 FEET; THENCE SO0°30'00" E PARALLEL WITH AND 40.00 FEET EASTERLY OF THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 6 A DISTANCE OF 293.51 FEET TO A POINT LYING NON-TANGENT ON A CURVE; THENCE ALONG A CURVE TO THE LEFT WHOSE CHORD BEARS S48°22'41" E A DISTANCE OF 76.98 FEET, SAID CURVE HAVING A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 25 °24'36", A RADIUS OF 175.00 FEET, AN ARC LENGTH OF 77.61 FEET TO A POINT LYING NON-TANGENT ON A CURVE ON THE NORTHWESTERLY R.O.W. LINE OF INTERSTATE 70 SERVICE ROAD WEST AS DESCRIBED AT RECEPTION NO. F0520327 OF THE JEFFERSON COUNTY, COLORADO RECORDS; THENCE ALONG A CURVE TO THE LEFT WHOSE CHORD BEARS S42°58'19" W A DISTANCE OF 17191 FEET AND ALONG SAID NORTHWESTERLY R.O.W. LINE, SAID CURVE HAVING A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 87°31'02", A RADIUS OF 125.00 FEET, AN ARC LENGTH OF 190.93 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENT LYING ON THE WESTERLY R.O.W. LINE OF SAID INTERSTATE 70 SERVICE ROAD WEST; THENCE ALONG SAID WESTERLY R.O.W. LINE THE FOLLOWING SIX (6) COURSES: 1. THENCE S00°47'12" E ALONG SAID TANGENT A DISTANCE OF 279.47 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVE; 2. THENCE ALONG A CURVE TO THE LEFT WHOSE CHORD BEARS S12°32'12" E A DISTANCE OF 50.91 FEET, SAID CURVE HAVING A .CENTRAL ANGLE OF 23 °30'00", A RADIUS OF 125.00 FEET, AN ARC LENGTH OF 51.27 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENT; 3. THENCE S24°17'12" E ALONG SAID TANGENT A DISTANCE OF 36.97 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVE; 4. THENCE ALONG A CURVE TO THE RIGHT WHOSE CHORD BEARS S12°32'12" E A DISTANCE OF 77.38 FEET, SAID CURVE HAVING A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 23 030'00", A RADIUS OF 190.00 FEET, AN ARC LENGTH OF 77.93 FEET TO A POINT OF TANGENT; 5. THENCE S00°47'12" E ALONG SAID TANGENT A DISTANCE OF 27.08 FEET; 6. THENCE S47°05'29" W A DISTANCE OF 31.99 FEET TO A POINT LYING ON SAID NORTHERLY R.O.W. LINE OF WEST 32ND AVENUE. THENCE S89°43'30" W ALONG SAID NORTHERLY R.O.W. LINE A DISTANCE OF 42.14 FEET TO A POINT LYING ON THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 4; THENCE SO0°47'12" E ALONG THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 4 A DISTANCE OF 5.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. TOTAL PARCEL CONTAINS (309,938 SQUARE FEET) 7.1152 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. Barbara Delgadillo, Re rding Secretary ATTEST: r Wanda Sang, City Cler To be Published: Wheat Ridge Transcript Date: February 26, 1999 C9Barb=NCCRPTS\PUBNOT109903I5.wpd a v I c v W d K N ` d N ~ y n: a a ~ Q o : a a i z R ~ 0 z > v Q: R C 'm p h y I a C > K N o N O O R W _ ~ N o o E N o ` a y U s 0 0 R E1.0 O y,C -6= # N O O ~ O O O O O O X_ U R ~ R (O (D D7 b O O N (O (O N R Q R° r U N 3 N 3 NN 5 N 3 N 3 N 3 N 3 N 3 N 3 u 0 O _ R R d N N E _ $ c E 0 m Q R E d V R Ro L N~ > V Q V o V 'CVO V Uo T N O R f/1U O o o Q p. OD N N m daD U>O N'O W U RN m:mom UI eD R ma RN otOX N a ~m0 NaU Km0 N va t10 U) U J~O cNU Y~O nl0 yR. EO Y V .~0 RNU ~E o 7IV U Um N X.2 w G7 N Q ? U N ~ R T O (O N = d W fm0 W c N N R V N W M R m O ' }1 N v"o °--o N d O' Enoo 3y N ❑ R V V two 5N a Uno RNa tno Ora 0 06Na Eno Na Rno 00. oaQ ~ m R a Nov C7 a Nc o.-U' (7 U 0 U m U' F m R t rG C N N E N m a Q ~ W ~ ~ ~ y . E - N O W E R 2 O b WE L) v ~ 8 E ❑ ❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ z R LO o Y m o N N N N n N v N N co N p o m m m m m m rn rn m Q 00 m m m m m n n m _ m v v v m v m v rn a m v rn o rn v rn W O E m m V o z aa w o N Z 0 Z a z } S z La v a U ~I O f1. m b v ~i U ro a v T p N U N P. 0 E z y H a d _ I c d W d d ~ a d y c d N N C 'U y N K a d C Q d U U ` a ~ A O Z 2 dl ~ d 9 a w C N mE0 a d U t O N O a c E m o m'~" y r v - # d 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 x_ v m a N m m m m m io co m co N d Q m° 5 p N 3 N 3 N 3 N 3 N 3 N 3 N 3 N 3 N 3 U_ p d L co O a _ N O j O j N W m U O m m 0 O O m 0 O C O m 0 ` m m U m 0 0 ? O.P CQO ~f/IO > m ~QO m K mug m mUp E m O oinm QO E.5 tn N ` N F om mam .m c a ' d 'c mm c LU E m ° m d D m` = m c d o E 0 um U o c0 dMU Q p NU c O GNU A0 cU > 0 rn d!- p U m c a K n U N ' c O . W _ N Q1 .e. m W N Q ry e ui C d~v ~ C ac r'o c o ~O mw d O S o 9 ~N C mo a2f e K d E E R a°-' -O N w of c°- o M O ~M_ O N O N M O o K M O o o c U m rn N U N U rL 0 d M U 0 U m L d Mp 'a N a m.c~ a a d~ C N~ amK d N Q c y 0 r o U N ~U iw E ❑ ❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ m z d ICJ _u W { N Q N N N M M M M M M p o rn rn rn rn rn m rn rn m Q m m m rn rn m rn rn rn °n °n r n n °n n °r W O E rn m rn m rn rn m m rn U z W 0 Q Q s~o p LL N o3: z a ~cW z to a V ~I ro Q m CO F W U LYi O N z d a ~O w b 7 N N N U d Qw 0 d z U ;a U F e v T A v m v~ .a N U Qw 0 z Y H a d v C ` d y U J u a a ° c Q d p a Z m m K t K I i O . p N w C ~ N 75 m E p a p m L 0 o m E m C E m p m'='' ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 N X t N (O b (O fp (p (p (O (O (p , < N N U N N N N N N N N N Q m 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 u 0 O N p a m M o rn a m C ~ O ~ Oi m ~ N N M (O N U O m j j W F Q TO O U U M O ~O } - `V dl~fOp U b N~%V mr' V O o N r' 0 U) V 0 G1 N d N O U O O~ N O C N LL N Z`= 0. N = N d i.N Try U N N ` _ m `pm U X --.2 j O QEV IOJ gK mY0 o YO B YO ~ _O N y V M OI O NRI 'c L 6 O10a O L ti C O D (1~ LQ _ O NQ O Q O O Q Z O N yn VI Q C . K Oa~ C U "O p ~Op~ 0 C C m 0 C ' 1 C ' ~ °a ` Np 00m O co -O > 3 =>Y m~U Hr0 o U ~aL N W:o a~O W O W O UFO YM O NO - V ' o Nis Y~~ wop C7 U C) 0 CD ` W C7 N L ~ O Na C N N Gl ~ O N Q ~ O O Q~ E N N -E N O U O. 00 U V i x E d In u_ LLI r N Q M M M M V d' O V V ~ C ~n rn .n rn m m o m ~n m o m m rn Q co n n n pr' n °r' n n n a n n n n n n 0~ W O E rn rn rn m m rn m m rn U p Z aa w z LLI xF-o LL N L L va " z a 0 = ~ 5 d V n a ~I Q N O a b0 C J ~i 0 v z m a O 0.i m v ~i N U N a O m z„ H U H Q v C m P N N a d a 0 z h a d c d a ~ a c c d d ~ U y ~ d a ~ a N C Q N u d a 5 z ? dl d d ~ c 7 hi I w 0' Z5 d . _ 7 d 6 a d O ` a y r U L O N m .2 N C y~ Y - d O O O O o o O O o x_ 0 m a d m m m m m m `O N d Q d w .L.. U N 3 N 3 N 3 N 3 N 3 N 3 ~3 N 3 N 3 v O ° N a _ d > O) M o DI W d I~ a0 (n N Y d _ ~ O d ~ ~ dfn N O Y # O > ry £ a 0 p N~ C ry p d am d N O NN ~coJ ~y0 _ RNO ry0ro Lw0 ZdN Leap TQ0 d ` : d Y O 0 o -'dOU 'dOU W 30 d~o adi c0 v2o -80 co Q U . d N N U d t0 d U . - 2 t O U fn Y U N U d d D Q NS O CF d U O N C d L C d - . a C O d 0 z Z5 } O d O ~p C Q C G > C d r N R d N N .V N a N O I 9 O d d U 2) Ed} 3 fn > U a fn O N Y co m D 0 L N a p°p~~-a-_ N N d ` c d C7 Lod UNO > d LO N m N ND CJ N N 5 f 0 O ONCJ O V U~ U a N "Q d L~ a y I L Q O) W O F. r J M N J ; N w N d~ ~ 1Il Q N N -f ~ ¢ N 0 U d.°. ~ ~U U~LLW y £ d d U U W r N 0 0 r 0 O) O N M V U' O o m m m m m m m m m o ' m m m m m m m m m d UJ0 U ' z W zz as N p LL. 0 c~ z a z Z ~ = UnW a c a d c v ~ d D C N C ~ ~ ~ a d a o Q _O f U ` a d Z > d dl d ~ C 7 ' a I I K > R' ;sw N ~ O E o a L O O ~ O D C d O d C a - # d O O O O O O O O O X U N L N N M m f0 N t9 M t0 b O N d d° ~ N 3 ~ N 3 N 3 N 3 N 3 N 3 N 3 N 3 d U _ O in a O vm smo Zao O rQo mao Uo 80 Oo :?Zo d 2 0 _wO pdj NO mho z = W `MaJ C'OO d C O ~ d0 U(n~ d OI a ~ U dDO dMU co dMU m D 0 U U Z9 w U ) a m~ w oa ~ o rndv MMO c c m U d~ U 0 -~N cU d U c d d d i+ w VI Q K} °o d a0 ' mw X O °aa magi Cdnm mrom D 'o m 'O N R -O O..O O 3 O d ~ O O V E oi3 N O d fn N V D O w O D N O ~Na d M O M N O U > O O U~ v m d ` D ( N m U' ~ o o~¢ ~(J U MIJ YU N'p dL~ a J N O m CAN m C N N d O N Q J N N Q :F C d N rG 'C O M - N w o W U U E w w ❑ ❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ Z d LO U W `L" Q l0 (O n M D7 O N M w V O O OOj pOj pOj Omj W m m m m ~ co r r r n r r r r r n n n n n n wWO E rn rn m m rn m rn m m U z w o T) x~o 3r 2 ° N O~Q Z o Z } o W ox < Uh~ a EI ro Q 0 W U ~i O d z a a° m b 0 7 N N d A. W O N zd « U H b G d T p a U N a N U a O z F d d d d d N 'N d a K d d C Z d dl d d 0= C I I K > K N O d 1~ C O C N ' a N dap - m E $ p 50 O O c o m E O c d o d!t ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 u rs a m m rn m m m rn m x_ N d Q rn N m N N N N N N N N Q d°~ 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 u L O N O II d ~ ryry ' C ~ U C H V R O d0 Nd' p U'~ 0 V » a d d W G 7 w o ' p 0 N N O c ow C U _ C U O O c Q d O d O M 9 O O M d E 0 ( O d d d d O d Y 0 U d a 0 M U " N A O O M U N O U Z U C Y U U N U N Y x Y N O V e d 9 a 9 N ` N N O N J O N O it O W K M d 12 N d y a N 10 - p N J a coo - ^ "6 n o N a O 0 L 0 0 N <'O o M "6 o p 9 m o d l~ n Y o 0 Q a _ V N m c'A ` ^C7 ~(7 ~O }C7 (7 U MU NMO N 'O d L 2 N = N N °d 9 Q 0 M _ 0 _ E d ~ -E O M O N O ~U ci~LLw E ❑ ❑ [I ❑ z d U) u { LLI C Q d' O O N r W O fO O u N N N O o m m m m m u i m m m m Go 0 d v v v v v v v v v _ W O E m m m m m rn m m rn V z Q W O W xF-o ~ o N2 c~ 03. Q z a o W z Lo 3 Q N 0 a W eq c y U ~i O m d z iC w Pte. b ~i U N Qy W O L z z ~ FO b T L N h ..7 N U Ci. O d z H a v c d ~ ? 22 d y C d p d ~ m K a a c a R m . .U U N K m c j 0 2 . - N ~ o C 7 . U a a U a N W ~ W N 0 E U y t 0 R G p C 0 .0 . r N ~ O O O p X U 16 ~ ~ N O N T O O N Q m° z U 3 3 3 U _ 0 N a a o o m 0° m~ m cm° 0 y. _ aD eD v s > Q aD (D d N O fn ` °O M N 0 N ma0 w N 9 - ~ E c U "O y U a M M U G1 N Q U N ry K Of ~ Q > M3 > N y °-N ~ -o =o . N d Zya o ~8 b o o r3 ~ m o U N w c~ N 'O N .C °L a M(7 }U' lU mcj U' C y N ry U N m Q o v M N 'o o c U U LL a E W w ❑ ❑ ❑ ® o ❑ z d ~ o W T N L Q M ~ V r N ^ p o rn u i rn u i m ~ co ` n n n _ ® a E v m v m v m z aaw Z LLI p N LL. 0 Q Z a Lu z I } CD O I I- = Q y n a Q d T 0 a W C .o O 0 z z Qn O W ro b > U v 0. O A z 0 ~ U H v a T p N ti W N U 0 v z ro H 7500 WEST 29TH AVENUE February 26, 1999 Dear Property Owner: WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO 80215 .,)e City of ~~OF WHEAT Wheat a m GRldge CO1ORNID This is to inform you that Case No. WZ-96-10 (Richter) which is a request for approval of a combined preliminary and final development plan and plat for property located generally on the north side of 32"d Avenue between the west side of I-70 and the westerly city boundary, addressed as 3250 I-70 Service Road West. This case is processed in settlement of Jefferson County District Court Case #96CV2691-Richter vs. City of Wheat Ridge 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 March 15, 1999, at 7:00 p.m. All owners and/or their representative of the parcel under consideration must be present at this hearing. As an area resident or interested party, you have the right to attend this Public Hearing and/or submit written comments. It shall be the applicant's responsibility to notify any other persons whose presence is desired at this hearing. If you have any questions or desire to review any plans, please contact the Planning Division at 235-2846. Thank you. Planning Division. C:\Barbara\CCRPTS\PUBNOTIC\wz9610letter.wpd (303) 234-5900 • ADMINISTRATION FAX: 234-5924 POLICE DEPARTMENT FAX: 235-2949 AGENDA ITEM RECAP Mc QUASI-JUDICIAL X - Yes No X PUBLIC HEARINGS _ PROC./CEREMONIES _ BIDS/MOTIONS _ INFORMATION ONLY AGENDA ITEM TITLE: _ CITY ADM. MATTERS _ ELEC. OFFICIALS MATTERS _ CITY ATTY. MATTERS _ ORDINANCES FOR 1ST READING _ LIQUOR HEARINGS _ ORDINANCES FOR 2ND READING _ PUBLIC COMMENT _ RESOLUTIONS WZ-96-10: Richter SUMMARY/RECOMMENDATION: Approval of a final development plan and plat. ATTACHMENTS : A)Build-out scenario B)Build-out scenario C)Findings of Fact - D)Court Stipulation E)Elevations F)Site Plan BUDGETED 1 ITEM: Yes 2 denial Fund Dept/Acct # Budgeted Amount $ Requested Exepnd._~_ Requires Transfer/ Supp. Appropriation No Yes No SUGGESTED MOTION: COMBINED PRELIMINARY AND FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN Option A: "I move that Case No. WZ-96-10, a revised combined preliminary and final development for vacant properties located with the 70 West Business Center, be APPROVED for the following reasons: a. The combined preliminary and final development plan conforms to the stipulation agreement agreed to by Council and approved by the District Court. b. All requirements for a PCD submittal have been met. With the following conditions related to construction on Lot 2, Block l: 1. Elevations for the north and south side be incorporated into the plan set. 2. Brick wainscoting be shown on all four elevations of the Good Times building. 3. The off-site equestrian path along the eastern boundary of Lots I and 2 of Block 1 be constructed prior to C.O. for Lot 2, Block 1. 4. The eastern row of parking on Lot 3, Block I with adequate drive aisle be constructed prior to issuance of a C.O. for Lot 2. 5. The sanitary sewer line across Lot 3, Block I be constructed prior to issuance of C.O. for Lot 2, Block 1. 6. The eastern parking lot on Lot 1, Block I be constructed prior to issuance of C.O. for Lot 2, Block And with the following conditions related to the development in general: 1. The fence along the western property line of Lot 2, Block 2 be built prior to the issuance of C.O. for Lot 2, Block 1. 2. A landscape plan meeting Section 26-32(B) of the City Code of Laws be submitted, reviewed administratively and be incorporated into the plan set. 3. The traffic light on W. 32nd Avenue be installed at the earliest possible date when warrants are met. 4. That the opening to the sound barrier wall be closed, and the fire district decide whether a trap door needs to be installed for access to the fire hydrant." SUBDIVISION PLAT Option A: "I move that Case No. WZ-96-10, a revised combined preliminary and final subdivision plat for vacant properties located with the 70 West Business Center, be APPROVED for the following reasons: 1. It is consistent with the preliminary/final development plan. 2. All requirements of the subdivision regulations have been met." C:\B ..%CC"TS\we610c .,c d CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE PLANNING DIVISION STAFF REPORT TO: City Council DATE OF MEETING: March 15, 1999 DATE PREPARED: March 5, 1999 CASE NO. & NAME: WZ-96-10/Richter CASE MANAGER: V~Reckert ACTION REQUESTED: LOCATION OF REQUEST: NAME & ADDRESS OF APPLICANT(S): NAME & ADDRESS OF OWNER(S): Approval of a final Development Plan and Plat 3250 I-70 Service Road West Dwaine Richter, 6930 E. Girard #205, Denver, CO Virginia Richter, 11665 W. 391n Place, Wheat Ridge, CO APPROXIMATE AREA: PRESENT ZONING: PRESENT LAND USE: ZONING: SURROUNDING LAND USE: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR THE AREA: DATE PUBLISHED: DATE POSTED: DATED LEGAL NOTICES SENT: ENTER INTO RECORD: 7.152 acres Planned Commercial Development Vacant N, S, W: Jefferson County; E: A-1 N, W: low density residential; S: church, low density residential; E: I-70 Commercial Activity Center February 26, 1999 March 1, 1999 March 1, 1999 (X) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN (X) CASE FILE & PACKET MATERIALS (A) ZONING ORDINANCE 0 SLIDES (X) SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS (X) EXHIBITS Q OTHER JURISDICTION: The property is within the City of Wheat Ridge, and all notification and posting requirements have been met, therefore, there is jurisdiction to hear this case. I. REQUEST The applicant requests approval of a combined preliminary and final development plan and plat on vacant parcels within the 70 West Business Center. This case is scheduled for City Council public hearing in resolution of Jefferson County District Court Case #96CV269 1 -Richter v. City of Wheat Ridge. II CASE HISTORY At the time of original application, existing within the planned development were a restaurant (Country Caf6) and hotel (La Quinta) to the north which were approved in 1984. A parcel of land directly to the east, adjacent to I-70, was rezoned pursuant to Case No. WZ-96-3 as part of the negotiations with CDOT to relocate the I-70 Frontage Road. The road and sound wall were completed in 1995 and this parcel was incorporated into this request. Case No. WZ-96-10 was a request for development plan and plat approval on all remaining undeveloped parcels with the PCD. This included the then-vacant Conoco property directly adjacent to 32"d Avenue (which was subsequently developed). This 1996 application which included two alternate build-out scenarios, attached as Exhibits `A' and `B', was comprised of the following: Alternate A Area C: 925 sf retail Area Dl: 1808 sf convenience/gas with 1072 sf car wash Area D2: 4400 sf fast food Area D3: 10,848 sit-down restaurant Area E: 28,000 sf office/showroom Alternate B 1,125 sfretail Same 4200 sf fast food 19,200 sf of retail in two buildings Same Planning Commission reviewed Case No. WZ-96-10 at a public hearing held on October 3, 1996. The request was recommended for approval with the following conditions: 1. The traffic light on W. 32nd Avenue be installed at the earliest possible date. 2. Enclosed dumpsters be provided for all buildings. 3. The handicapped parking space for the retail development be moved closer to the building. 4. That the opening to the sound barrier wall be closed and the fire district decide whether a trap door needs to be installed for access to the fire hydrant. 5. Lighting for the canopy signs on the west side of the Diamond Shamrock building be turned off from 11:00 p.m. to 6:00 am daily. 6. That a C high wood fence be continued from the noise barrier to West 32' Avenue behind retail building on Lot 5. City Council Page 2 WZ-96-10/Richter Whether or not the berm on Lot 4 is removed will be determined at the time of construction of the duplex by the property owner. At the discretion of the developer, a wall or fence is to be constructed between the two properties. That the developer work with Public Works Department on the creation of a berm that will extend along West 32"d Avenue west as far as possible to I-70 Service Road to aid in alleviating headlight glare into residential property. Evergreen trees be utilized when possible so long as the integrity of the sight distance triangle is maintained. In regard to the conditions of approval, the following actions were taken prior to Council review: 1. The City's Public Works Department budgeted the installation of the traffic signal in their 1997 capital improvements program. 2. Enclosed dumpsters were provided for all buildings except for the small building on Lot 5 which was to have garbage cans. 3. The handicapped space on Lot 5 was moved closer to the building. 4. The opening in the fence along the western property line was shown as being closed with fire department access only. 5. The western canopy sign was shown as being unlighted from 10 p.m. to 6 a.m. 6. The applicant added a six-foot solid fence on Lot 5 extending south to West 32"d Avenue. 7. The applicant opted not to include a note regarding removal of the berm and relocation of the fence once the duplex was built on Lot 4. 8. Regarding extension of the berm along 32nd Avenue, it was extended to the west but coniferous plant material to block glare was not added. The case was forwarded to City Council for a public hearing on October 28, 1996 where it was denied. Attached under Exhibit C is a copy of the findings of fact prepared for the denial. Subsequent to the denial of Case No. WZ-96-10, but prior to the stipulation and settlement of the district case, an application was filed for development plan and plat approval on the southern portion of the site (Case No. WZ- 97-13). The case, which was approved by City Council on January 12, 1998, allowed for a 3241 square foot gas station/convenience store with 880 square foot car wash. Conditions of approval were as follows: 1. Diesel fuel sales not be allowed on the property. 2. A drive-through window on the convenience store is not permitted. 3. No staging of buses for tourism be allowed on the property. 4. No overnight parking of semi-tractors or trailers be allowed on the property. 5. The nine trees shown on the east side of the gas station be moved to the east side of the buffer wall. 6. 50% of the trees on site be coniferous. 7. The equestrian/pedestrian path is to be built within the CDOT right-of-way along Lot 3 with the building permit for Lot 3. A Certificate of Occupancy was issued for the building on September 1, 1998. City Council Page 3 WZ-96-10/Richter In July of 1998 , the District Court entered its Judgment and Order setting aside the City Council's denial of the final development plan and plat in 1996 and remanded the matter back to the City for further proceedings. In late August, staff began meeting with the applicant to discuss a plan and uses that would be acceptable to the City. Staff and the applicant developed a list of permitted uses for the remaining areas of the development. This list was reviewed with City Council, changes were made, and the revised list was presented to the applicant. A final list was presented to Council on September 28' at which time Council agreed to the list of uses and directed staff to proceed with preparing a stipulated settlement to the court case. The court approved stipulation in November. In it, the City agreed to review and consider for approval the final development plan and the subdivision replat as it is now being presented to Council. A copy of the stipulation is attached as Exhibit D. III. DEVELOPMENT PLAN The proposed development plan has incorporated the uses agreed to by City Council as sheet 2. The corresponding map separates use areas into categories A, B, C and D. Please note that uses allowed in Areas A and C are landscaping and open space. Consistent with the original outline development plan, Lot 3, Block 2 is to be used as a duplex or single family residence. The development plan for this structure will be reviewed administratively through the building permit process. Lot 2, Block 2 accurately represents the plantings done previously (by the owner, the City and the developer of the Conoco project), however, does not show proposed landscaping for the southern 70' of the property. Staff will require that a landscape plan meeting Section 26-32(B) of the City Code of Laws be submitted, reviewed administratively and be incorporated into the plan set. A six-foot high solid fence is shown extending south from the sound barrier wall to provide additional noise mitigation. Lot 2, Block 1 is proposed as a "Good Times" drive-through restaurant which is consistent with the use stipulation agreed to by City Council. Hours of operation will be from 10 am to midnight. An outdoor eating area is shown to the south of the building with landscaping in accordance with sheet 4. Parking on the lot is adequate for either the double, drive-through or drive-through with inside seating. The building will be oriented to the east so that the majority of signage is exposed to the freeway and not the neighborhood to the west and southwest. Although the western elevation is not shown in the plan set, staff has included it as Exhibit E. This elevation will have no lighted signage or lighted banding. Both the southern and western building elevations need to be incorporated into the plan set. Adequate parking, dumpsters and landscaping have been provided. Brick wainscoting matching other brick used in the PCD has been incorporated into their corporate design. This needs to be shown on all four elevations. Staff is concerned regarding the phasing of improvements and how they will tie into the adjacent parcel to the west which will not be developed at the same time, and the existing parcel to the north which is already developed. As such, the following recommendations are given regarding infrastructure improvements and parking areas: City Council Page 4 WZ-96-10/Richter 1. The off-site equestrian path along the eastern boundary of Lots 1 and 2 of Block 1 be constructed prior to C.O. for Lot 2, Block 1. 2. The eastern row of parking on Lot 3, Block 1 with adequate drive aisle be constructed prior to issuance of a C.O. for Lot 2, Block 1. 3. The sanitary sewer line across Lot 3, Block 1 be relocated prior to issuance of C.O. for Lot 2, Block 1. 4. The eastern portion of the parking lot on Lot 1, Block 1 be constructed prior to issuance of C.O. for Lot 2, Block 1. A speculative retail building roughly 13,000 square feet in size is proposed for Lot 3, Block 1. This building has also been oriented to the east so that there will be no lighted signage on the southern or western facades. Architectural materials used include brick, split faced block and smooth block. All parking, landscaping and dumpsters are adequate for the building. A single, 50' high sign will be used jointly by the buildings on Lots 2 and 3, Block 1 at the northeast corner of Lot 2. A 28,000 square foot office/warehouse has been proposed for Lot 1, Block 2. No changes are proposed from the pre-court case review document. Architectural materials will be brick and split faced concrete block. All parking, landscaping and dumpsters are adequate. A 150 square foot monument sign is proposed at the entrance to the property. An existing 6' solid fence surrounds the property along the west, south and north. Attached as Exhibit F is a site plan for the potential grange on Lot 1, Block 2. The building shown is about 10,000 square feet in size with 47 required parking stalls. Because the size of the building is dramatically smaller than the one shown on the development plan, there would be a substantial increase in the amount of landscaping on the site. Information regarding building elevations and architectural materials is evolving as the two parties continue discussions. Staff would request administrative review and approval of the grange building and site plans through the building permit process. IV. SUBDIVISION PLAT A subdivision plat has been submitted which accurately reflects existing and proposed development. Staff concludes that all requirements of the Subdivision Regulations have been met. V. STAFF CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION Staff concludes that the revised combined preliminary and final development plan and plat for Case No. WZ-96-10 is in conformance with the court stipulation and gives a recommendation of approval with the following conditions: Conditions of approval related to construction on Lot 2, Block 1: 1. Elevations for the north and south side be incorporated into the plan set. 2. Brick wainscoting be shown on all four elevations of the Good Times building. 3. The off-site equestrian path along the eastern boundary of Lots 1 and 2 of Block 1 be constructed prior to C.O. for Lot 2, Block 1. City Council Page 5 WZ-96-10/Richter 4. The eastern row of parking on Lot 3, Block 1 with adequate drive aisle be constructed prior to issuance of a C.O. for Lot 2. 5. The sanitary sewer line across Lot 3, Block 1 be constructed prior to issuance of C.O. for Lot 2, Block 1. 6. The eastern parking lot on Lot 1, Block 1 be constructed prior to issuance of C.O. for Lot 2, Block 1. Conditions of approval for the development in general: 1. The fence along the western property line of Lot 2, Block 2 be built prior to the issuance of C.O. for Lot 2, Block 1. 2. A landscape plan meeting Section 26-32(B) of the City Code of Laws be submitted, reviewed administratively and be incorporated into the plan set. 3. The traffic light on W. 32nd Avenue be installed at the earliest possible date when warrants are met. 4. The opening to the sound barrier wall be closed, and the fire district decide whether a trap door needs to be installed for access to the fire hydrant. VI. RECOMMENDED MOTIONS COMBINED PRELIMINARY AND FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN Option A: "I move that Case No. WZ-96-10, a revised combined preliminary and final development for vacant properties located with the 70 West Business Center, be APPROVED for the following reasons: The combined preliminary and final development plan conforms to the stipulation agreement agreed to by Council and approved by the District Court. All requirements for a PCD submittal have been met. With the following conditions related to construction on Lot 2, Block 1 1. Elevations for the north and south side be incorporated into the plan set. 2. Brick wainscoting be shown on all four elevations of the Good Times building. 3. The off-site equestrian path along the eastern boundary of Lots 1 and 2 of Block 1 be constructed prior to C.O. for Lot 2, Block 1. 4. The eastern row of parking on Lot 3, Block 1 with adequate drive aisle be constructed prior to issuance of a C.O. for Lot 2. 5. The sanitary sewer line across Lot 3, Block 1 be constructed prior to issuance of C.O. for Lot 2, Block 1. 6. The eastern parking lot on Lot 1, Block 1 be constructed prior to issuance of C.O. for Lot 2, Block And with the following conditions related to the development in general: The fence along the western property line of Lot 2, Block 2 be built prior to the issuance of C.O. for Lot 2, Block 1. City Council Page 6 WZ-96-10/Richter 2. A landscape plan meeting Section 26-32(B) of the City Code of Laws be submitted, reviewed administratively and be incorporated into the plan set. 3. The traffic light on W. 32nd Avenue be installed at the earliest possible date when warrants are met. 4. That the opening to the sound barrier wall be closed, and the fire district decide whether a trap door needs to be installed for access to the fire hydrant." Option B: "I move that Case No. WZ-96-10, a revised combined preliminary and final development for vacant properties located with the 70 West Business Center, be DENIED for the following reasons: 1. 2. 3." SUBDIVISION PLAT Option A: "I move that Case No. WZ-96-10, a revised combined preliminary and final subdivision plat for vacant properties located with the 70 West Business Center, be APPROVED for the following reasons: 1. It is consistent with the preliminary/final development plan. 2. All requirements of the subdivision regulations have been met." Option B: "I move that Case No. WZ-96-10, a revised combined preliminary and final subdivision plat for vacant properties located with the 70 West Business Center, be DENIED for the following reasons: 1. 2. 3." E:\Reckert\wz9610sr.wpd City Council Page 7 WZ-96-10/Richter A t' P a 70 EST BUSINESS: CENTER AN OFFICIAL DEVELOPMENTgHANFOF THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE COMBINED PRELIMINARY-FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN iD SERVICE SHEET 2 OF 16 - YOUNGFIE OAD $ r-1~ / 4_._._ RAMP - - - V . •-__r- - BOCD ' .1).8 0' 1 539.88' ztir .4 m s 0 Ed 25' N f IG" 25 D IP5 • s o ! Q MAX , 38,157 SF 0.83 ACRES _ RPPA 5'6'p L 5~ Y ar 23 25• ag y LA QUINTA ' S TS 4.400 SO a MOTOR INN p t-w E • CWNTRY CAFE BET All T . Fx 1B EASDNG 10.&8 w R m 40.000 SO FT - - R x..n +R 1A•.T 0.92 Ac. 4f R N 00J 00* W 293.80' L MONUMENT 9GN 1 FOR OFFICE SHOWROOM ^b PROPOSED ENTRY OPEN SPACE/GERM *1~ SITE PLAN DATA - ALTERNATE A CURB RETAINING WALL 8' PROPOSED WODDEN F & EN( O O SD' H N Q S VI o IsAND i v S'v5'p• of e• arvc FIRE TRUCK g Tulin-ARauNo BERM N 00101' W 204.59' I-70 SERVICE ROAD TOTAL AREA 8.3289 AC. RRR PIAN = DIAMOND SHA13tOCR 0.92 AC. BUDDRG GFA 2.880 BY. mu 1,808 S.F. CAR WASH .on S.F. PAROTNG REQUREO 4 SPACER PARKING PROVIDED 4 SPACES W )rs 0.53 AC. BmDING G.FA. 4.0 BY. PARKNG REQUIRED 44 SPACES PARKING PROVIDED 44 SPACES MIN. a STACKING SPACES FOR DRIVE UP 1GNDOW COUN] CAFE 0.88 AC. BUDDWG CFA 3,5)1 BF. PARAING RE011IRM 47 SPACES PARING PROVIDED 47 SPACES FUTVRS RE7AIl./RE3CAURAM 1.73 AC. BUDDRG GFA 10.978 BY. PARKING REQUIEM (RESTAURAM) 123 CARS FARMING PROVIDED 129 CARS RETAR. BDDDDNG SHE 0.18 AC. BUDDING OJA 1.125 By. PARING R"UIRED 7 SPACES PARMNG FROMM 7 SPACES OFFICE/SHOWROOM 1.97 AC. uIa DUM GFA 28,000 SF. PARKING HEGUmBD (OFFICE • 80x) 88 SPACES PABRRG PROVIDED 80 BP • 25' OPEN SPACR/BERM 0.80 AC. L • COMMERCIAL S OP OPEN/IANDSOAP® SPACE .00471: (1.38 AC. OR 80,000 By.)- 18.8% )0.18 • MAZORM BUODINU R2GBT SO• aa¢s r9ort a amwr ' YAmLM UD POID HEIGAT 37' I ALL P.A LiOANDARDS SHALL HE IN COMPII.INCE WITN THE ST THE CITY OF F WHEAT EIDGE DE ORDINANCE 1018. CHAP}ER Ye. ARTICLE 1. BI:CI'!ON 28-90(91 OF THE BAT RD1GE RODE OF LAWS, ENITh ¢¢TEROR WFI LRHTIN STANDAR DS • MAM1= S.F. ALL COMMERCIAL STRUCTURES- 82.ODO S.F. OR 22.Bx • AIL SOINT ACCESg Armes INTERRAL TO COMYeRCGL ARPA9 B1IA11. B¢ 9P¢LRI® A9 PINE LANES, 8 REQUDN® BY FDNE DISTRICT. AIL DINERS , U X13 SBALL HAYR FA¢E YOVCI®'NT THROUGH; ANp U3R ~ P 0 ~G RIVE A13185 ANO CURB CU19. O • CONTOfUED R D O ~ IN F P ALL PP1@R OYPIETION 1 js C CORTEII "llDWRImi 18 YEARS. • RATT® LOT 4 (RE9IDpNTIAL) OR OPEN SPACE 0.24 AC. • AIL DUMPSTERS WBL BE m=SEO AND ARCEDTeC111RA1LY SCREENW. XHIBIT A e ALTERNATE A " z '-N / RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE r- ~i5 GRAPHIC SCALE I I 40 20 0 40 eD b I ~1 1 g 1 I I C 1 I i i J scue 1 War - 4o n ~ 1 1 1 1 m ! I I I ' 1 3 !1 I LEGEND Bg i I~i i I fpSRVC PROPOSD g 1 1 i I -3E --X e' xccaw FENCE ACOARCAL BARRIER FENCE I i I 1 I ( ~ I ® NivB1R a PuaFNC svAas o ! r. I ~ W I i I 10 LtW1E IVDENTE1CARg1 i i ~ I I CURB AN0 GUTNFR rF I I R ' I ' II 2'I O.w /y~~ 11 1 I ' 1 I i i4'12'11 0 12 14' - I i i I Z NNI A '$T ® "PRaP PIS 1112. 10 12' (2' 4 RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE b.! hl. I; ETAIL BUILDING SITE I I li 925 ¢F. BVIID. PAp 1 I I 1412 "B.F. s F7..24 AC. ?1 PAD I I I I I li I I, I I; I - MOO.I ; I J1.24' I ~ (r I r 11 !i - I I•. QCPTCIAFI'17 12 1008 e on) FSC 0M ESC p fRAgER a iIINBE 'f'c, E ONEERING LT1A/PAW • 10AA4 ESC JOB m" 0 A4 ESC ~n r 4 tA. y PR0.1ER: 70 WEBT [EASINESS CFMER a tAM .V UNIT: SITE PLW a e/os JY Z4 W, xws+ 40 sr w 1 ~ TAaA GN .AN W. VUI W°'N N NH wC: GY 1-16-96 .p r J902-O1J 019 R. 9 R tl 9 6 a 5 YOUNGFIELD SERVICE ROAD s LA QUINTA MOTOR INN 70 EST BUSINESS CENTER LOTS 2 3 4, g AND 7 AN OFFICIAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN Od THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE COMBINED PRELIMINARY-FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN SHEET 3 OF 16 I-7p EXIT I ) rs NNNn... RETAIL W. RFT 5F. OAms'RR 8 - AREA- .83 ACRES F, 36.157 SF 4,200 s0 R I (XJNNRNY r.1{E P _ Er N5 ~ EDSRNG 4 D r R 40.000 SQ FT 1 0.92 Ac. 9 P I 1 I 1 I I ~ I I x I 1 ' I I I I i i I 1 I 1 i x i ; I 1 ; I I•o q I 1 1 I 1 I I i I I I I a 1 1 RC ICMT-OF-WAy LINE / I I ALTERNATE B LEGEND I EDSiWG PRTPpgD I •-3E-3E 6• rAmER FvuE C, ACpI51MX BARRIER FRN(F NUMBER OF PARKING SPL 11 -1 13 A E I F I I 11 A_ I I i U y 111 g ®-i ~ 1 2'1 WRB AID Q1TIL4 V'(' II - $ I!!+~~R 1. O _ tl~ $ 14' 12'110 12' sir 10'-S- HIGH MAX. Lwgip 5 1® I=11 1 150 S.F. MAX FAC MONUMENT SIGN 11,200 50 R FOR OFFICE R aL N 59~ N.T SHOWROOM _ - - II W 19].50' ~ • - - ~ L R y $ `a•'. z1a34• Z NN IA 1L~\'S7 \ ® laver --EDsm EO.P. 2s PROPOSED -I-70 SERVICE ROAD WEST 2 SPACES + 'I ENTRY EXLSIWC NRB A TIER 56y{ .I o n o 1 __IP tY 10 12' 1Y Men - s SPACES 12- (MIN. RETAINWo WALL PROPOSED YDODw F FwE YRSs OPEN SPACE/BERM z 8 O C Q~ xxO E N U - L~ O 51SN' B' PPE • 26' OPEN SPACE/BEWI ° COCIAL E OF OPEN/1ANDSCAPED SPACE 0.68 AC (SS, OR 511,000 9.F,)_ • uAEDRIY SURDD,G REIG}R 16.9E • • YA7N1nv IJCM POI( xEIGRT 50 • AIL ES[CIUOR LGFTfpG 9TANOAR0.9 SHAIJ. HE IN COUPt]ARCE WRH THE CRY OF W1PAT RIDGE ORDINAN ]016 CE EHAPTOt 28 17 . , ARTKCIE 1. 9ECITON N- or CODE OF CANS. Q1t11T,FD EEt'SRIOR LIC K IIING STAND t HDxE • KAMMUY B.P. ALL CoWn,pAU 9'RRUCTURB9- 9g70D S.P. OR 25DS ° AIL JORR ACCESS A6SI.LS IINIZRIPAL TO Co- CJAL AREAS MLA BE SPECRI® A9 FIRE LANES R REQUBUD BY PIKE D . S CT. aL oNNERB. UB3I3 SLVL HAVE FREE YOVEYENT THROUG pG H. AND USE DRrvE AL41E9 AHD GUII CUPS, • CONTR,U® DEVEUJPYwT OF THIS PD IS CONTEMPLATED TO START W LATER Im on p 1997 L O . COYPI TI N OP AIL DEVELDPYCN'I L8 COIREIQ'GTED WRFIDN 15 YEARS. • PLATTED NOT 4 (RBS'IDENTAL) OR OPEN SPACE 0.24 AC. ° AIL DUMPSn,,, WSJ. DE i,C W AND ARCENIEC7URAKLY SCREENRo oma/sRomou 1.97 AC. 4 t PARKING REQUIED Coma • 605) 80 SPACES - - - PARKING PROVIDED W SPACES N 0091YY W 1DaW' - IE X H I S I V SUE PLAN DATA - ALTERNATE B s wRE TOTAL AREA 8.8289 AC. 6C MAN USES 25 DLWDND SHAMROCK 0.92 AC. BUILDING GxF 2,880 S.F. MEN 1,808 9!. CAR WASH 1.072 BY. PARING RRQuunD 4 SPACES PROVIDED 4 SPACE.9 = ISLAND FOR TEAMS 0.89 AC. PARKING N C BUHDDIG G.FA 4,400 9.P. . . - PAREDNG REQUIR® 44 SPACER PAR a PROVIDED 44 SPACES YIN. 8 STACKING SPACR9 MR DRIVE UP TlND0T wuR CAPE 0" AC. R BUDDING G.FA 8,501 By. PARESG REQUIRED 47 SPACW ' 8 PAREA'G PROMED 47 SPACES 89.59 $ FUTURE CENTxAa RUAa 1.78 AC. - $ BUDDNNG GPi 19.200 S.F. PAREBIG REQUIRED (RESTAURANT) 81 CARS PARKING PRO w 81 CARS RETAR BUDDING SRS 0.18 AC. ~ TRUCK BUDDENG GJA 1,128 S}, TURN-AROIMD PARING REQufRKD 7 SPACES PARKING PROVIDED 7 SPACES I I li I ` 1 HAItBHC I I i n b~! 25 p, 1.,125 SF. BURR. PM I i iI . t o n d l I I I I I - I 'HA IIIT f f0.~55 50 E! St /c 3, EF. BARD. PAD Aa>9 soHr yR.y m1.9F rAai '0 ~ R L . I I I I 89Z9'18~ I taw I : I ]1.24• I I: I {S I I I~ I II I ~ ~1 I . I it I ~ I I' 1 II I, II I ~ I II I 1 I 1 i I I • -nIIW ESC ' FRAp t FM(BE omlr ESL EM(ih,27)M'C D17AIAA)V • ~9nM EBC • nt ESC mAY--1O..E~ ' Eno 4U ~QIECf: 70 WES BUSWE58 CE 5 VIM .Y HALT: SNIE PIMA 1 N eFM .AI a+r:r Y. tic. 40 A.Y )ne JU M JAM AW ► 3902-013 le M.4M W h 0.Y- M NH NNW. )-15-96 rDP e:c 11/19/96 16:33:12 h TFAX 4.00->CITY OF WIIEAT RIDGE &FAX RESOLUTION 1564 BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, STATE OF COLORADO CASE NO. WZ-96-10 IN RE THE APPLICATION OF DWAINE RICHTER FOR APPROVAL OF A FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND PLAT FOR THE 70 WEST BUSINESS CENTER - PLANNED COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT LOCATED AT 12851 WEST 32ND AVENUE FINDINGS AND DECISION Page 002 This matter coming on for hearing upon the application of Dwaine Richter for approval of a Final Development Plan and Plat for the 70 West Business Center - Planned Commercial Development located at 12851 West 32nd Avenue (hereinafter the "Application"), the Wheat Ridge City Council, acting pursuant to Wheat Ridge Code of Laws § 26-25, adopts the following findings and decision: . 1. The Application wasfiled on July 9,1996. On September 18,1996,the Wheat Ridge Planning Commission held a public hearing on the Application. That hearing was continued to October 3, 1996, at which time the Planning Commission voted to recommend approval of the Application, with conditions. 2. The public notices required by lawhaving been published, and the public hearing having been conducted, the City Council has jurisdiction to hear and decide the case. 3. On October 28, 1996, the City Council held a public hearing on the Application. Evidence was taken in the form of documents and testimony from the applicant, City staff, and from other witnesses, including a number of homeowners in the immediate vicinity of the proposed development. 4. On October 28,1996, atthe conclusion of the public hearing on the Application, the City Council voted to deny the Application and to direct that findings be prepared in support of that action for their consideration. 5. The City Council hereby enters its findings and decision denying the Application by Dwaine Richter for approval of a.Final Development Plan and Plat for the 70 West Business Center - Planned Commercial Development located at 12851 West 32nd Avenue, for the following reasons: a. The uses proposed for areas C and Don the proposed Final Plan and Plat are not sufficiently defined as required by Wheat Ridge Code of Laws § 26-25(VI(B)(3)(1), and are also not sufficiently specific so as to insure compatibility with adjacent land uses, as required by Wheat Ridge Code of Laws, 26-25(Iq. CtEOX58027%189781.1 EXHIBIT C 11/19/96 16:33:49 1 TFB% 4.00->CITY OF WREST RIDGE 1tFAX Page 803 b. The potential uses for Area E are so unspecific as to prevent meaningful review of the compatibility of the development with adjacent land uses, as required by Wheat Ridge Code of Laws § 26-2501)(A). c. The absence of a ten-foot high screen wall or other appropriate buffering device extending north from the existing screen wallto connect with the existing east-west screen wall around Area E contributes to the incompatibility of the development with adjacent residential uses. d. The proposed use of Area D for twenty-four hour businesses, including a fast food restaurant and twenty-four hour automobile service station, renders those areas incompatible with adjacent residential uses, as required by Wheat Ridge Code of Laws, 26-25(11) and (IV)(A). e. The height and location of signs such that additional light will be shed on established residential neighborhoods to the west, render the Application incompatible with those adjacent uses, as required by Wheat Ridge Code of Laws, 26-25(11), and does not comply with the Wheat Ridge Sign Code at § 26-410(e), regarding height of freestanding signs. f. The proposed development of a commercial building on the portion of Area C, shown as Lot 5 and containing 1,250 square feet for such uses is incompatible with the residential uses immediately to the west, and, in addition, relies upon a design which places the required parking for such commercial uses within use Area C, designated "a buffer and landscape area." Such areas may not be devoted to such uses. This renders that aspect of the Application inconsistent with Wheat Ridge Code of Laws § 26-25(II)(E)(7). g. The areas and dimensions of portions of the subject property devoted to individual uses have changed significantly since approval of the Outline Development Plan in 1975, such that the assumptions relied upon in granting Outline Development Plan approval may no longer be valid. h. The Application failsto adequately mitigate the overall intrusive impacts of the proposed development, including light, odor and noise. Based upon testimony in the record, the Application as filed does not comply with the standards established at Wheat Ridge Code of Laws § 26-25(11). WHEREFORE, the Application is denied for the reasons set forth above. ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Wheat Ridge, this 25 day of November, 1996, by a vote of in favor and against. * Mayor did not sign this Resolution DAN WILDE, MAYOR GED\58027\189781.1 -2- 11/ W915 16:34:20 L PFHX 4.00->CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE 1tFAX Page 004 ATTEST: WANDA SANG, CITY CLERK APPROV S 0 FORM: GERALD-5- . DAHL, CITY ATTORNEY V" 1 GED\830271189781.1 -3- 03/08/99 MON 15:18 FAX 303 376 5001 GORSUCH KIRGIS JGII o1.p,GVPG~C CGYJIMY •iVf.1V"70 , Y,OQ"lG WYYCx-' OF 41 4 DISTRICT COURT. JEFFERSON COUNTY, STATE OF COLORADO Case No. 96 CV 2691, Division 4 PROPOSED ORDER RE UNOPPOSED MINION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME WIS141N WHICH TO FILM= REVISED PLAN PURSUANT TO STIPULATION DWAINE R. RICHTER, dJWa" WEST BUSINESS CENTER, Plaintiff, W._. CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, a municipal wtporadon of the State of Colorado; CITY Comm OF THE CITY OF WHEAT Ru*E, the imcrning bodY of the City of wheat ildge, DAN W ILDE, in his official capacity as the Mayor of the City of Wheat Ridge; 11R1 DALBEC, JERRY DITULLIO, DON EMANIST, JEAN FIELDS. JANEId.E SHAVER, KEN SILER, TONY SOLANO, and CLAUDIA WORTH, is their official capoidties as present members of tho City Commit o£the City of Wheat Ridge, Defendants. This matter, wining before tho Court OA Plaintif 's Unopposed Motion for ExtMAOR of 'l'imo Within Which to File Revised Plan Pursuant to Stipulation, and the Court being fully advised in the promises, it is hareby ORDERED that the Motion is Granted and the time within which Plaintiff Amil submit a Revised Plan, as provided in the Stipulation And Motion for Approval of Proposed Procedure for Compliance with Court's Order of July 24, 1998, is extended to and inchndiag November 13, 15198. . Dated this day of,~ 1998. BY THE COURT: ORDER The moving party is ordered to mail a easy t OER to all otter pan_z;s) and file a CHItT{FtCATE OF MAIUINCi certificata ci mailing 1 ashsY MW {lava aWiYa a ee0r d YEN with the Court within five doORMt to rho eeansa er parmes lft% at days wr .~a raoo2 EXHIBIT D 03/08/99 MON 15:19 FAX 303 376 5001 GORSUCH KIRGIS 10003 DISTRICT COURT, JEFFERSON COUNTY, STATE OF COLORADO Case No. 96 CV 2691, Division 4 STIPULATION AND MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF PROPOSED PROCEDURE FOR COMPLIANCE WITH COURT'S JULY 24, 1998 ORDER DWAINE R. RICHTER, d/b/a 70 WEST BUSINESS CENTER, Plaintiff, VS. CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, a municipal corporation of the State of Colorado; CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, the governing body of the City of Wheat Ridge, DAN WILDE, in his official capacity as the Mayor of the City of Wheat Ridge; TERI DALBEC, JERRY DITULLIO, DON EAFANTI, JEAN FIELDS, JANELLE SHAVER, KEN SILVER, TONY SOLANO, and CLAUDIA WORTH, in their official capacities as present members of the City Council of the City of Wheat Ridge, Defendants. Defendants, City of Wheat Ridge, et al., by and through their counsel, Gorsuch Kirgis, LLP, (the "City") and Plaintiff, Dwaine R. Richter, dIbla 70 West Business Center, ("Richter") through his counsel, Faegre 8r Benson, L.L.P., (collectively, the "Parties") respectfully move this Court for approval of the Parties' method of compliance with this Court's Order dated July 24, 1998 and in support thereof, state as follows: PROCEDURAL HISTORY 1. Plaintiff owns certain real property known as the 70 West Business Center, located at 32nd and Youngfield; City of Wheat Ridge, which is the subject of the within action (the „Property") 2. On or about June 20, 1975, the City approved an Outline Development Plan filed by Plaintiff for the Property (the "ODP"). On July 9, 1984, the City approved a Combined Preliminary and Final Development Plan for the Property. IaXN530771299306.01 03/08/99 MON 15:19 FAX 303 376 5001 GORSUCH %IRGIS 3. On or about July 9, 1996, Plaintiff filed an application with the City to amend the Combined Preliminary and Final Development Plan and re-plat portions of the Property to reflect changes in the property configuration related to the relocation of the I-70 Service Road on the Property by the City (the "Application'). 4. On October 3, 1996, after notice and a public hearing, the Planning Commission for the City of Wheat Ridge voted unanimously to recommend that the Application be approved, concluding that the Application is "consistent with the underlying outline development plan and C-I zoning regulations." 5. The types of uses stated in the Application for the Property are uses permitted under the existing ODP for the Property. 6. On October 28, 1996, after notice and hearing, the City conducted a public hearing on the application in accordance with the procedure for approval of final development plans under City Code Section 26-25. Following a continuation of the hearing, the City denied the Application by resolution dated November 25, 1996. 7. Plaintiff Richter commenced this action seeking Rule 106(a) relief challenging the decision of the Wheat Ridge City Council on November 25, 1996 denying the Application, 8. On July 24, 1998, this Court entered its Judgment and Order setting aside the decision of the City Council and remanding this matter to the City Council for "further proceedings consistent with" the Court's findings and opinion. 9. Subsequent to the City Council's November 25, 1996 denial, and prior to the July 24,. 199S Order, Richter submitted, and the City Council approved, an application for final plan approval of a portion of the Property for development as a "Conoco Break Place." That project has since been constructed. 10. The Parties have engaged in discussions to determine what proceedings might be appropriate in light of the Court's Order remanding this matter to the City Council, and the Parties have agreed upon both an acceptable substantive approval of a final planned commercial development plan and replat for the Property, as well as a procedure for approving that plan and replat. The Parties respectfully request this Court approve the terms of the Stipulation as outlined below- 11. The uses set forth in the Revised Plan (as defined below) are encompassed within the Application, and represent fewer uses and less intense usage of the Property than the uses set forth in the Application STIPULATION The Parties stipulate and agree as follows: 10004 KLM53027\29M.oi 2 03/08/99 MON 15:20 FAX. 303 376 5001 GORSUCH RIRGIS 1. The City agrees to review and consider for approval the Final Development Plan for the 70 West Business Center as submitted by Richter in August of 1996, (the "Plan") with the following modifications and revisions: (referred to as the "Revised Plan"): a. Area. The area of the Revised Plan shall exclude all property previously approved as part of Case Number W2-97-13, approving the Conoco Break Place Development. The Area Diagram attached to this Stipulation as Exhibit A designating various parcels of the Property alphabetically is hereby made a part hereof. ig 005 b. Uses and Conditions. The Revised Plan shall approve the uses listed for Areas D and E. Richter may apply for the approval of additional or modified uses for Areas D 40 and E in accordance with the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws in effect from time to time. c. With respect to Area C, Richter agrees that such Area shall be subject to the uses and conditions set forth on Exhibit B and Richter agrees that no other uses will be permitted on Area C. d. There shall be no modifications to the signage or access as shown on the Application, or to the uses on the areas designated as Area "A, or on the residential/duplex lot designated as Area "B." rltwi e, The Replat. The replat submitted in 1996 regarding the relocated frontage road shall be approved with the exception of the portions already replatted as part of the Conoco Break Place. 2. The Revised Plan shall be submitted to the City in accordance with Section 26- 25(v)(B)(3) of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws within two weeks after the date of disposition by this Court regarding this Stipulation and Motion. 3. In the event the City Council shall fail to approve the Revised Plan containing substantially the same elements as described in Exhibits A & B attached hereto, this Stipulation shall be null and void and of no further force and effect. 4. The City Council shall consider the Revised Plan at a regularly scheduled public session. In the event the City Council approves the Revised Plan in substantially the same form as referenced by Exhibits A & B, such decision of the City Council may not be further appealed by Richter pursuant to Rule 106, C.R.C.P., or otherwise. 5. The parties hereto agree that the Revised Plan, by its terms, shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the successors, heirs, legal representatives, and assigns thereof and shall constitute covenants running with the Property. To the extent permitted by law, Richter and all future successors, heirs, legal representatives, and assigns of Richter shall be jointly and severally responsible for all terms, conditions, and obligations set forth in this IME\5302MM06.01 03/08/99 MON 15:20 FAX 303 376 5001 GORSUCH KIRGIS 11006 Revised Plan. The City may, at its discretion, record this Revised Plan with the Clerk and Recorder for Jefferson County, WFIEREFORE, the Parties respectfully request this Court approve the Stipulation of the Parties and approve the proposed procedure for complying with this Court's July 24, 1998 order and remand and order such further relief as the Court deems proper. Respectfully submitted, GORSULFIIC RGIS LLP By;-- wv...y Gerald E. Dahl, #7766 Kelly Elefant, #26023 Tower I, Suite 1000 1515 Arapahoe Street Denver, Colorado 80202 Attorneys for Defendants FAEGRE & BENSON LLP By_ L c)J Po J seph D . Montano, #3695 Diane B. Davies, #11182 Russell O. Stewart, #14317 370 17th Street, Suite 2500 Denver, Colorado 80202-4004 Attorneys for Plaintiff =\5302'A299306.01 4 03/08/99 MON 15:20 FAX .303 376 5001 GORSUCH RIRGIS 10 007 4 F OV114rA ia►J i 1 1 l ri I 0 r oc I~ z N Como c.o OPWAK FL AC35- 1 r ~ r war Wu ,v Avmt-u,~- = E x i s i r 03/08/99 MON 15:21 FAX 309 376 5001 GORSUCH HIRGIS .J ~ EXMIT B APPROVED USES Richter PUD AREA C- 1. Landscaping and open space. AREA D: 1. Art galleries or studios. 2. Banks, loan and finance offices. 3. Libraries, museums and art galleries. 4. Government or quasi-government buildings and offices or public utility building where outside storage, operations or repair facilities are not planned. 5. Hotel/motel; no tavern, night club, or cabaret permitted; small bar or lounge permitted. b. Medical and dental offices, clinics or laboratories. 7. Offices, general administrative, business and professional. 8. Parking of automobiles of clients, patients, patrons or customers of the occupants of adjacent commercial districts. 9. Service establishments as listed below: a. Blueprinting, photostatic copying, and other similar reproduction services; however, not including large printing, publishing and/or book binding establishments. b. Hair, nail and cosmetic services. c. Locksmith shop d. Interior decorating shop where goods, except samples, are not stored upon the premises. C. Pickup stations for laundry and dry cleaning. f. Shoe repair. g. Studio for professional work or teaching of fine arts, photography, music, drama or dance. U008 03/08/99 MON 15:21 FAX 303 378 5001 GORSUCH KIRGIS ~ .J I Tailoring, dressmaking or clothing alteration shop. i. Watch and jewelry repair. 10. Stores for retail trade as listed below: a. Antique store; provided, however, that no more than two hundred (200) square feet of building area shall be allocated to repair. b. Apparel and accessory stores. c_. Automobile parts; no repair, maintenance or service permitted. d. Bakeries, retail. e. Bicycle.stores. f. Book stores, newsstands (for the sale of newspapers, magazines, etc.), stationery and card stores. g. Business machine or computer stores. h. Camera and photographic service and supply stores. i. Candy, nut and confectionery stores. j. Dairy products stores. k. Delicatessens. 1. Electrical supplies and services, but not including contractors storage yards. m. Floral stores. III Garden supplies stores. o. Gift, novelty or souvenir stores. p. Hobby and craft stores. q. Jewelry stores. r. Music stores. S. Notions stores. t. Office supply stores. u. Optical stores. V- Paint and wallpaper stores. W. Pet stores. x. Picture framing (shops): Y. Retail grocery/convenience store, limited to five thousand (5,000) square feet or less, Z. Shoe stores. aa. Sporting goods stores. bb. Stationery stores. cc. Tobacco stores. dd. Toy stores. ee. Television, radio, small appliance repair and service (shops). ff. Video rentals. gg. Leather goods and luggage stores. hh. Butcher shops and food lockers, but not including food processing. ii. Meat, poultry or seafood stores. 10 009 KLE1530=98490.01 2 03/08/99 MON 15:21 FAX 303 378 5001 GORSUCH RIRGIS a 010 11. Theaters (including drive-ins). 12. Sit-down restaurants, ice cream sales and similar related uses. 13. One fast food restaurant with drive-through facility, limited to eastern half of the area; scrubber required. AREA E: 1. Art galleries or studios. 2. Banks, loan and finance offices. 3. Building contractor office and shops; outside storage, including trucks, not permitted. 4. Government or quasi-government buildings and office or public utility buildings where outside storage, operations or repair facilities are not planned. 5. Medical and dental offices, clinics or laboratories. 6. Offices, general administrative, business and professional. 7. Parking of automobiles of clients, patients, patrons or customers of the occupants of adjacent commercial districts. & Research laboratories. 9. Service establishments as listed below: a. Hair, nail and cosmetic services, b. Interior decorating shop where goods, except samples, are not stored upon the premises. C. Pickup stations for laundry and dry cleaning. d. Shoe repair. e. Studio for professional work or teaching of fine arts, photography, music, drama or dance. f. Tailoring, dressmaking or clothing alteration shop. g. Watch and jewelry repair. h. Locksmith shop. i. Blueprinting, photostatic copying, and other similar reproduction services; however, not including large printing, publishing and/or book binding establishments. j. Upholstery shops, furniture only. 10. Stores for retail trade as listed below: ICM530271298490.01 3 03/08/99 MON 15:21 FAX 303 376 5001 GORSUCH BIRGIS a. Antique store; provided, however, that no more than two hundred (200) square feet of building area shall be allocated to repair. b. Apparel and accessory stores. C. Automobile parts, no repair, maintenance, or service permitted. d. Bakeries, retail. e. Bicycle stores. f. Book stores, newsstands (for the sale of newspapers, magazines, etc.), stationery and card stores. g. Business machine or computer stores. h. Camera and photographic service and supply stores. i. Candy, nut and confectionery stores. j. Dairy products stores.. k. Delicatessens. 1. Electrical supplies and services, but not including contractors' storage yards. m. Floral stores. n. Garden supplies stores. o. Gift, novelty or souvenir stores. P. Hobby and craft stores. q. Jewelry stores. r. Music stores. s. Notions stores. t. Office supply stores. U. Optical stores. V. Paint and wallpaper stores, w. Pet stores. X. Picture framing (shops). Y. Plumbing and heating supply stores and shop, outside storage including trucks not permitted. Z. Retail grocery/convenience store, limited to five thousand (5,000) square feet or less. aa. Shoe stores. bb. Sporting goods stores, cc. Stationery stores. dd. Tobacco stores. ee. Toy stores. ff. Television, radio, computer, small appliance repair and service (shops). gg. Video rentals, hh. Leather goods and luggage stores. ii. Butcher shops and food lockers, but not including food processing. jj. Meat, poultry or seafood stores. 11. Theaters (excluding drive-ins). 12. Private membership lodges. [0oil KLE153027\299490.01 4 03/08/99 MON 15:22 FAX 303 376 5001 GORSUCH RIRGIS (¢1012 13. Shops for custom work or for making articles, materials or commodities to be sold at retail on the premises, and where no single machine exceeds five (5) horsepower; and provided that no excessive noise, vibration, dust, emission of heat, glare, radiation, smoke or fumes are produced to the extent that it is dangerous, hazardous or a nuisance to the reasonable enjoyment or use of adjacent properties, and limited to 2,000 square feet. No outside storage, including trucks. 14. Woodworking or carpentry shops for the making of articles for sale upon the premises such as cabinets or custom furniture; provided, however, that no excessive noise, vibration, dust, emission of heat, glare, radiation, smoke or fumes are produced to the extent that it is dangerous, hazardous, or a nuisance to the reasonable enjoyment or use of adjacent properties and limited to 2,000 square feet. No outside storage, including trucks. 15. Office warehouse uses subject to the following restrictions: a. No single office warehouse shall exceed 6,000 square feet and no less than 25 % of any office warehouse shall be devoted to office or retail use/space. At no time shall more than 75 % of any such office warehouse be devoted to warehouse space/use, b. No tractor trailers shall be permitted in this Area. C. No outside storage of goods/supplies, inventory, materials and/or merchandise shall be permitted, including trucks. d. No office warehouse shall exceed 25 feet in height. KLMS3027\298490A1 2'-6' MADE DOOR - ACCESS TO ROOF EQUIPMENT NG J GUTTER WITH DOWNSPOUT PAINTED TO MATCH DRYNi 1/4' EYEBOLTS (-UT VERTICAL SCIA BAND (BY OWNER) FIELD JOINT W GALV R SEEFLASHI OVER SERNNG W DRYVIT EXTERIOR- FINISH COLOR - AMARILLO WHITE )40 DOUBLE- TLAZE FIXED GLASS IN UM. FRAME NOTE: NO 24-HOUR UT FASCIA [41" HIGH PARAPET WALL HVAC UNIT EXHAUST FAN PAINTED WITH GALVANEAL METAL CAP /('HASP & LATCH DRYVIT MOLDING DETAIL AS TO TOP / OF DOORS AS POSSIBLE r114"SEYEBOLTS THIS SHEET w ICE CREAM ,I a = CONDENSING J DLIT A F 1 n N G G FR C EEZER/C NDENSIN OLER UNITS \ y R-PASS NGER SI E X EMBOSSED METAL PANELS ED TO MATCH DRYIAT PASSENGER'S SIDE ONLY q'-T 14'-0" 0/0 MAIN BUILDING ~ 4'-3° SERNNG YANG SERVING WANG 22'-6' OUT TO OUT OF SERVING WINGS FINISHED FLOOR WEST ELEVATiON SCALE: NOTE: REAR S.M. WALL & GUTTER TO BE PAINTED BY CUSTOMER W/AMARILLO MITE EXTERIOR LATEX TO MATCH ONYX i. (FMS TO SUPPLY PAINT) EXHIBIT E I I H m 7 7 I ~ I I ~~v I 7 I I I I 7 I 71 PARKING SPACES 13 I I I I u LL I 111 I I I I I I I I ,RnAxcc scx \ \ z 0 I i z I I ' 0 10 20 30 40 SO V DM LTD. SEXffMDBVELOPIAWr LTD. 688FOSBAYTOVM 821 MARQU=AVMM MROMAPOMMN.SMM (612) 332-158GTA"32-2428 V Al CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: March 15, 1999 Page - 2 Motion by Mr. DiTullio to suspend the Rules and allow a letter to be read by Cecilia White, she couldn't make it tonight for personal reasons; seconded by Mrs. Worth; carried 8-0. City Clerk, Wanda Sang, read the letter, which spoke against city wide elections for Councilmembers and suggested that citizens not sign a petition to put this on the ballot. PUBLIC HEARINGS AND ORDINANCES ON SECOND READING Item 1. Application for approval of a combined preliminary and final development plan and plat for property located generally on the North side of 32nd Avenue between the West side of 1-70 and the Westerly City boundary, addressed as 3250 1-70 Service Road West. This case is processed in settlement of Jefferson County District Court Case #96CV2691-Richter vs. City of Wheat Ridge. (Case No. WZ-96-10) Item 1 was introduced by Mr. Siler; title and summary read by the Clerk. City Attorney Dahl gave brief background on this matter. He suggested that the staff presentation be made prior to the public hearing and to hear the applicant last. Motion by Mr. DiTullio to suspend the Rules and have staff speak first, then the public comment, and the applicant speak last; seconded by Mr. Siler; carried 8-0. Alan White was sworn in by the Mayor and presented the staff report. Motion by Mrs. Shaver to suspend the Rules and allow Councilmembers to speak more than twice on this item; seconded by Mrs. Worth; failed 4-4 with Councilmembers Dalbec, Worth, Eafanti, and Shaver voting yes. The following speakers were sworn in by the Mayor: Harold Gosse, representing the Applewood Property Owners Association, is concerned about complaints from residents regarding code enforcement and parking violations that have not been dealt with efficiently. Appreciates City Council's efforts regarding site problems, vegetable stand, Christmas tree lot. Pat Underwood, 3238 Zinnia Court, asked that Open Space development be done before building permits are issued; is also concerned about the lighting at the Break Place. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: March 15, 1999 Page - 3 - Rene Diephuis, 3229 Zinnia Court, wants the barrier wall on the corner lot of Zinnia Street extended out to 32"d Avenue; is concerned about big trucks using the Break Place and tying up traffic and also truckers sleeping there. Mike and Shirley Coen, want the brick wall extended so the 10 ft sign for the warehouse will be shielded from their front yard. Bill Smithan, asked if the applicant has to follow a time frame on the duplex. Robert Kessler, attorney for the applicant, made applicant's presentation and answered some of the questions that had been asked throughout this meeting. Motion by Mr. Siler that Case No. WZ-96-10, a revised combined preliminary and final development for vacant properties located within the 70 West Business Center, be approved for the following reasons: A. The combined preliminary and final development plan conforms to the stipulation agreement agreed to by Council and approved by the District Court. B. All requirements for a PCD submittal have been met. With the following conditions related to construction on Lot 2, Block 1: 1. Elevations for the north and south side be incorporated into the plan set. 2. Brick wainscoting be shown on all four elevations of the Good Times building. 3. That the property owner, or future property owners, do not object to the construction of or use of an equestrian trail on the CDOT property to the east of Lot 2 and the existing Conoco. 4. The eastern row of parking on Lot 3, Block 1, with adequate drive aisle be constructed prior to C.O. for Lot 2. 5. The sanitary sewer line across Lot 3, Block 1, be constructed prior to issuance of C.O. for Lot 3, Block 1. And with the following conditions related to the development in general: 1. The fence along the western property line of Lot 2, Block 2, be built prior to the issuance of C.O. for Lot 2, Block 1. That being a 6 ft wooden fence on a 4 ft berm tapering down to sight triangle on 32nd Avenue. 2. A landscape plan meeting Section 26-32(B) of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws be submitted, reviewed administratively and be incorporated into the plan set. 3. The traffic light on West 32nd Avenue be installed at the earliest possible date when warrants are met according to the Court Order. 4. That the opening to the sound barrier wall be closed, and the fire district decide whether a trap door needs to be installed for access to the fire hydrant. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: March 15, 1999 Page - 4 - 5. That Lot 1, Block 2, be allowed for the relocation of the Maple Grove Grange Hall with administrative review of all landscaping and other requirements according to Code. 6. That the monument sign for Lot 1, Block 2, be limited to 8 ft in height. 7. That all exterior lighting must be inspected by the City for conformity to City Codes prior to a C.O. being issued. This is to be done on a lot by lot basis to include the identity sign. 8. No temporary Use Permits will be allowed on Lots 2, and Lot 3, Block 2, known as the area where the vegetable sales and Christmas Tree sales have been conducted. 9. That any fast food restaurant have scrubbers to eliminate odors installed. 10. No over night semi truck parking be allowed on any area of the final development plan during the construction period or thereafter, except for construction vehicles during the construction of the property. 11. That the question of the number of handicapped parking spaces will be addressed with the City staff. Seconded by Mr. DiTullio. Motion by Mrs. Shaver to add Condition No. 12. Landscaping for Lot 2, Block 2, be completed prior to issuance of a C.O. for Lot 2, Block 1.; seconded by Mrs. Worth; carried 7-1 with Mr. Siler voting no. Motion by Mrs. Shaver to delete the word "rock" from note 4 on page 10; seconded by Mrs. Worth; tied 4-4 with Councilmembers Worth, Siler, Eafanti, and Shaver voting yes; Mayor broke the tie by voting no; Motion failed 5-4. Motion by Mrs. Dalbec for an amendment to Condition 5. that staff is authorized to refer any site plan amendments to Lot 1, Block 2, to the Planning Commission and Council; seconded by Mrs. Worth; tied 4-4 with Councilmembers Worth, Shaver, Dalbec, and DiTullio voting yes; Mayor broke the tie by voting no. Motion failed 5-4. Motion by Mrs. Shaver to change the notes on the landscaping page No. 4, to read as follows: "All landscaping beds be composed of living material, unless otherwise noted; cedar mulch would be allowed behind the retail building, mulched areas to provide a 3" settled depth; seconded by Mrs. Worth. Mr. Siler made point of order; stating this is a reconsideration, that must be brought back by a member of the prevailing side; Mrs. Shaver is not on the majority side, this is clearly stated in Roberts Rules of Order. Chair agreed with Mr. Siler that this is a reconsideration of the same topic. Motion by Mrs. Worth to override the decision of the chair; seconded by Mrs. Shaver; failed 5- 3 with Councilmembers Dalbec, Shaver, and Worth voting yes. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: March 15, 1999 Page - 5 - Vote on main motion as amended carried 6-2 with Mrs. Shaver and Mrs. Worth voting no. Mrs. Shaver read from the Code Book section Planned Developments; she wishes Mr. Richter would downsize the Retail development, she fears this will be like Applewood Shopping Center. Motion by Mr. Siler that Case No. WZ-96-10, a revised combined preliminary and final subdivision plat for vacant properties located within the West 70 Business Center, be approved for the following reasons: 1. It is consistent with the preliminary/final development plan. 2. All requirements of the subdivision regulations have been met. Seconded by Mr. DiTullio; carried 6-2 with Mrs. Worth and Mrs. Shaver voting no. Motion by Mrs. Worth to instruct staff to work with CDOT in acquiring the right-of-way to continue the equestrian trail on down to the Wheat Ridge/Golden trail; seconded by Mrs. Dalbec; carried 8-0. ORDINANCES ON FIRST READING Item 2. Council Bill 5 - An Ordinance providing for the approval of a rezoning from Residential-One B to Agricultural-One on land located at 4000 Nelson, City of Wheat Ridge, County of Jefferson, State of Colorado. (Case No. WZ-99-04) Council Bill 5 was introduced on first reading by Mr. Eafanti; title read by the Clerk Motion by Mr. Eafanti that Council Bill 5 be approved on first reading, ordered published, public hearing be set for Monday, April 12, 1999 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 Mrs. Shaver; carried 8-0. DECISIONS, RESOLUTIONS AND MOTIONS Item 3. Discussion of Resolution approving a contract with the American Veterans Memorial Committee. Item 3 was introduced by Mr. DiTullio, who also read the title. FAX COYER SHEET 7500 West 29th Avenue Wheat Ridge, CO 80215 (303) 234-5900 City Administration Fax 234-5924 Police Department Fax 235-2949 Planning, Zoning & Building, Parks & Recreation, and Public Works Fax 235-2857 Wheat Ridge Municipal Court Fax 235-2829 Wheat Ridge Community Center Fax#:.... 467-5907 TO: FROM: ~-174 DATE: - ii j NO. OF PAGES: (NOT INCLUDING "COVER SHEET") " oclt of Gretchen Cerveny, mayor Roo Palm Wanda Sang Trmrorer City Clerk co District i Jerry DiTullio Lloyd Donnelly District B Ken Slier Ralph Mancinelli UNCTL MEMBERS District M Don Eafanti Janelle Shaver D strict N Claudia Worth Teri Dalbec COMMENTS: March 29,1999 oe~t City Council of Wheat Ridge % Meredith Reckert 7500 West 29th Avenue Wheat Ridge, Colorado RE: Civil Action No. 96CV2266, Division 1 Dear City Council Members, We attended the March 15, 1999 City Council Meeting, where case 96CV2266 was unanimously approved. We wish to point out that the Applewood Garden covenants are still active and alive on the Parcel of property between La Quinta and Steve Barnhill's house. This property is currently known as Lot 1 Block 2, and was previously referred to as Block 4, Lot 1, which was further divided into lots 5 - 11. We are specifically referring to the old lots 7 and 8. In 1981 The Protective Covenants for Applewood Gardens was extended to run with the land for the future benefit and limitation of themselves and those acquiring interests in the lots of Applewood Gardens. In 1984, Dwaine Richter, the owner of what were originally platted as Lots 8-14 of the Applewood Gardens Subdivision, annexed Lots 8-14 to the City of Wheat Ridge. At the time of the annexation, Richter replatted Lots 8-14 as Lot 7, which is now referred to as Tract A. The Colorado Department of Transportation, at that time also advised Wheat Ridge that the intersection of the Youngfield Service Road and West 32nd Avenue was too close to the I-70 off-ramp and would have to be. moved further to the west. It was agreed to relocate the Youngfield Service Road to the west side of Richter's property so that the new Youngfield S-ervice Road would occupy virtually all of the new Lot 7 of the I-70 West Business Center. However the restrictions of Applewood Garden covenants remained in effect on the property. In 1997, the City of Wheat Ridge condemned the protective covenants covering the former Lots 8-14 of Applewood Gardens Subdivision. The neighbors did not protest because the City of Wheat Ridge agreed to build a 10 foot high brick wall on the existing berm separating the adjacent neighborhood from the I-70 West Business Center, which you did. We are enclosing a copy of Exhibit 1, which shows the exact area proposed for release from covenant control in the motion titled, "Motion to Strike Defenses to Petition in Condemnation", filed in the combined court on Jan 2, 1997 in Jefferson County of Colorado. March 29, 1999 The new Youngfield Service road follows the brick wall north from 32nd Ave turning right at the end of Tract A (lot 7), continuing between La Quinta and the Country Cafe. The brick wall stops on the north end of Tract A (lot 7), just north of the Youngfield Service road where the road turns right. We, the undersigned wish to negotiate some sort of compromise with the city of Wheat Ridge relating to the still in effect Applewood Gardens covenants on Lot 1 Block 2, specifically the lots previously referred to as Block 4, Lot 1 and the proposed creation of a road to be continued north between La Quinta and Mr. Barnhill's property. We wish to have the 10 foot brick wall extended north along the East side of Mr. Barnhill's property, to further isolate the neighborhood from the commotion of commercial traffic, lights and signage. The Applewood Garden covenants 4, 6 and 9 state: 4. No noxious or offensive activity shall be carried on upon any lot nor shall anything be done thereon which may be or become an annoyance or nuisance to the neighborhood. 6. No sign of any kind shall be displayed to the public view on any lot except one professional sign of not more than one square foot, one sign of not more than 5 square feet advertising the property for sale or rent, or signs used by a builder to advertise the property during the construction and sales period. 9. As a part of each dwelling there shall be installed and maintained within five feet of the front tract-line a street light or lamp of not less than twenty watts, at a height of not more than seven feet above the ground. Such light or lamp shall be kept burning at all times during the hours of darkness, and shall be controlled by an automatic time-switch. We also prefer not to have any bright lights or signs glaring down from above the fence. Sincerely yours, Mic el Coe Shirley Coe Steve Barnhill 1~-,c FILED IN THE COMBINED COURT DISTRICT COURT, JEFFERSON COUNTY, STATE OF COLORAD NC 7 Civil Action No. 96CV2266, Division 1 JEFFORi UNTY +;faLflRAn9 MOTION TO STRIKE DEFENSES TO PETITION IN CONDEMNATION CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, a municipal corporation for the SL~Sj`,c~fy 4 _j, Pet ' i~Nt JE . 190, Colorado, %BAUMGART; 4 v . ~~I LEONARD ABOTE; ELIZABETH AMICONE; LAVONNE R. STIP and HELEN AUSTIN; NORBERT BAUMGART and BERNITLEY BRIAN BRAUER and KAREN JUNE BRAUER; CLARK G. BROWN and LINDA J. BROWN; THEODORE CANNON and GRACE CANNON; THOMAS CIANFRANCE and RITA CIANFRANCE; MICHAEL J. COEN and SHIRLEY M. COEN; HARRY L. CRESS and DIANE F. CRESS; JOHN CRIBBS; GINA DELZ; RENE DIEPHUIS and PEGGY L. DIEPHUIS; WADE A. DUNAFON and NINA KIM DUNAFON; RICHARD W. FISHER and PATRICIA F. FISHER; MARY J. GRIMES; GARY GRUBIN and NANCY GRUBIN; CHARLES B. HITT, JR. and CHYRE A. HITT; CECIL HOISINGTON and DELORES HOISINGTON; GARY HUGH HOLBROOK; ARVID C. IHLE and MARY L. IHLE; ROBERT IRWIN and FERN IRWIN; SUSAN KEENEY; ALAN D. KLIMPKE and VANDA R. WEUVE; ARTHUR DEAN LOCKWOOD; THOMAS MARES; GARY METCALF; PATRICIA MOTT; PHILIP T. NEFF and EMILY JANE S. BENNETT; DAVID P. NELSON and LINDA J. NELSON; IRIS NOBLE; STEVEN OLSON and HOPE OLSON; RICHARD F. PAGE; THE JOHN W. RANSONE and MARILYN E. RANSONE TRUST; DARREL L. SCHNASE and ALDA RUTH SCHNASE; PAUL D. SHAFFSTALL and MARY P. SHAFFSTALL; MICHAEL E. SMITHAM and ERIKA SMITHAM; WILLIAM A. SMITHAM, JR. and JANETTE SMITHAM; C. DAVID SNYDER and VIRGINIA G. SNYDER; OLIVER SPENCE and GRACE SPENCE; TERESA A. SPENCER; JOHN W. SPINKS and SHARON D. SPINKS; LYNN WEAVER and FRANCES WEAVER; RICHARD WOOD and KAREN WOOD; and ROBERT BAMMERLIN, as Treasurer of Jefferson County, Respondents. COMES NOW Petitioner, city of wheat Ridge (hereinafter "Wheat Ridge"), by and through its attorneys, Gorsuch Kirgis L.L.C., and moves this Court for an Order striking the defenses to the Petition in Condemnation raised by a number of the Respondents appearing pro se in their Answer, dated October 17, 1996. MUR\53027\167682.1 AS GROUNDS THEREFOR Petitioner states as follows: 1. This action involves the condemnation by the City of Wheat..Ridge-.of protective covenants.covering-.the_former,.Lota a.-14, Applewood Gardens Subdivision. The protective covenants encumber not only the area actually used for roadway construction but also two strips of land on either side of the road right of way retained by the owner of the adjacent property, approximately 40 feet east of the road right of way and approximately 23 feet west of the road right of way. A diagram of the right of way and the area encumbered by the restrictive covenants is shown on Exhibit 1. 2. Respondents claim that acquisition of the restrictive covenants as they apply to lands outside the actual road right of way is a taking for private use rather than for public use. 3. A question of public use is a judicial question that the Court must resolve. Pine Martin Mining Co v Empire Zinc Co., 11 P.2d 221 (Colo. 1932). 4. Acquisition of the restrictive necessary to allow the roadway construction. public roads is a public use and the decision property to acquire to serve a public use is decision that will not be overturned absent a bad faith. covenants is Construction of of how much 3 legislative showing of fraud or 5. Furthermore, acquisition of the restrictive covenants as they apply to property adjacent to the roadway is necessary to prevent the creation of an uneconomic remnant by the construction of the roadway. A municipality may acquire additional property to prevent the creation of uneconomic remnants. 6. The legal basis for the acquisition of the restrictive covenants on the adjacent property is more fully elaborated in the accompanying memorandum brief. WHEREFORE Wheat Ridge moves this Court for: 1. An evidentiary hearing to consider the objections to the Petition in Condemnation raised by the Respondents. MUR153027U67682.1 -2- 2. An order striking the objections to the Petition in Condemnation. Respectfully submitted, KIRGIS L.L.C Malcolm M. Murray, #72 9 Maureen H. Juran, #2 64 1401 17th Street, Sui 1100 P.O. Box 17180 (80217-0180) Denver, Colorado 80202 (303) 299-8900 ATTORNEYS FOR CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE MUR\53027\167682.1 -3- 1 EXHIBIT 1 BLACK 4: : LOT I I 9 LA 01ANfAIan 11 I 5 e 7 6 • . . 7 I LOT 2 . . . . . •'1., ~.L I I~ 5 ° ! t~l 1 I 1 I 4 0y : M 11 I j .:4`: • 3 . •Y. yT. .1 I I ; ~Nr I I ~ a LOT 3 I v 2 dr 1 q .tl, I + h o .Y~.: ' ' ♦ LOT 4 ~ •'C•` . 1 I to tV t x' 1 Z N J W. 32nd AVENUE - /klcaab ~~o~dn ~a4c•.Latq~ ~asra ~✓r+w~AAn 0,/06/99 1'UE 15:46 FAX 303 376 5001 GORSUCH RIRGIS GORSUCH KIRGIS LLP Ar7oaa Eys AT I:+w .ow;¢ 1. Suer. 1000 : 1515 AAA AHOE Sne:r I DfiNVEK. CVLUMoo 50202 !'rFLEria+~E (303) 376.5000 ! FM:S+un.E (303) 37o-50ui GEPACD E. DAHI DIRECT DEAL 13031 376-5019 C= l: gd.hlsaI;ouuch C= April 5, 1999 Wheat Ridge City Council City of Wheat Ridge 7500 West 29L" Avenue Wheat Ridge, CO 80215 Re: 1-70 West Business Center Dear Members of the Council: I have reviewed the, letter dated March 29, 1999, addressed to you from Michael Coen, Steve Barnhill,. and Shirley Coen. While the letter states that the City Council approved "Case No. 96-CV-2266" on March 15, 1999, that case number is actually the Jefferson County District Court case number for the condemnation action the City filed to remove the restrictive covenants. The writers of the letter advise that the protective covenants for Applewood Gardens Subdivision extend to certain lots of property in the 1-70 West Business Center. As the letter points out, the City In 1997 condemned the Applewood Gardens Subdivision protective covenants as they would have affected the-City's right to build and maintain the relocated .frontage road. The extent to which the Applewood Gardens Subdivision protective covenants apply to other private property in the Subdivision, whether or not owned by Mr. Richter, is not an appropriate issue for the City to address. The City's zoning actions in approving a final development plan and plat for the 1-70 West Business Center entitles the developer to complete commercial improvements and construction on the property as a matter of the City's zoning ordinance. The zoning decision does not and cannot affect private covenants. Whether and to what extent private covenants protecting the Applewood Gardens Subdivision might impair or impede construction of the commercial facilities on the 1-70 West Business Center is a matter exclusively for discussion and/or litigation between the developer and the beneficiaries of. those covenants: the homeowners in the Applewood Gardens Subdivision. The City does not have power to act in any way to enforce these private covenants. The property owners have indicated their desire "to negotiate some sort of compromise with the City of Wheat Ridge" pertaining to the Applewood covenants. Such negotiation would be inappropriate for several reasons: (a 009 GE01730271313834.01 01/06/99 TUE 15:46-FdS 303 376 5001 GORSCCE RIRGIS Q010 Wheat Ridge City Council April 5, 1999 Page 2 1. As indicated above, the City does not have a proper role in enforcing or defending against the enforcement of private covenants. This Is a matter exclusively for discussion and/or litigation between the developer and the homeowners' association. 2. Construction of a 10-foot brick wall extending north along the east side of Mr. Barnhill's property is not required as a feature of the final development plan and plat which was approved on March 15, 1999. It is not appropriate for the City to add conditions of approval after the decision has become final. 3. The Council acted to finally approve this project on March 15, 1999. The-next Council meeting, at which the matter could have been reconsidered pursuant to Council Rule 6.3, was March 22, 1999. This was not done, and the decision may not now be further reconsidered by the Council. In the event the homeowners wish to challenge the action of the City Council in approving the final development plan and plat, they may seek to do so under Rule 106 of the Colorado Rules of Civil Procedure within 30 days of the effective date of the Council's action. In conclusion, while I recognize that the Applewood Gardens homeowners may wish to argue that their subdivision covenants impair or impede commercial construction on portions of the 1-70 West Business Center property, that activity should not and cannot involve the City as a party litigant. Further, absent a new application for amendment of the approved development plan, the final approval of the planned commercial development is not subject to further Council review to accommodate additional design changes as proposed. I conclude that there is nothing further for the Council to act upon in this matter and recommend that no action be taken in response to the letter. Sincerely, GO H KIRGIS LLP Gerald E. Dahl GE018 UA313834.01 7500 WEST 29TH AVENUE WHEAT RIDGE, CO 80215-6713 (303) 234-5900 City Admin. Fax # 234-5924 April 7, 1999 Mr. Dwaine Richter 6930 E. Girard, #205 Denver, Colorado 80224 Police Dept. Fax It 235-2949 RE: 70 west Business Center Amendment Number 2 Dear Mr. Richter, "Wheat GRidge This letter serves as a follow up on the revised traffic impact study for the above site as required in the letter to Mr. David Addor with Engineering Services Company, your design consultant, dated January 5, 1999. The amended development plan shows a change in the proposed land use of this site. As a result, the overall trip generation may increase/decrease compared to the original plan. The City is requiring a letter from the transportation consultant who originally did the study. The consultant needs to review the trips generated by this change in land use and identify any potential roadway improvements which may be needed if there is a substantial trip increase. Please have your consultant submit the requested letter to the City at his earliest convenience. Should you or your consultant have any questions regarding this matter, I may be reached at 235-2862. Since~rely~,~ Steve Nguyen, PE Traffic Engineer cc: Dave Kotecki, Senior Project Engineer The City of Greg Knudson, Development Review Engineer Meredith Reckert, Senior Planner Cad RECYCLED PAPER The City of 7500 WEST 29TH AVENUE WHEAT RIDGE, CO 80215-6713 (303) 234-5900 Wheat Ridge City Admin. Fax # 234-5924 April 22, 1999 Michael and Shirley Coen 13146 W. 33 d Avenue Golden CO 80401 Dear Michael and Shirley: Police Dept. Fax # 235-2949 The letter expressing your concerns regarding the I-70 West Business Center approval by the Wheat Ridge City Council has been conveyed to the members of the City Council and the City Attorney. I have attached for your review a response by the City Attorney to the members of the Wheat Ridge City Council. As the City Attorney's letter to the City Council indicates, the approval of the I-70 West Business Center by the City Council was legally and appropriately undertaken and no further review or conditions by the City Council pursuant to your request should be considered. Any issues which you have with covenants should be directly raised with the property owner as the City cannot and should not be a party to those discussions. Absent a further application for development at the I-70 West Business Center, the City of Wheat Ridge considers this matter concluded. Sincerely, Robert C. Middaugh City Manager cc: Steve Barnhill 13149 W. 33rd Ave. Golden CO 80401 CD RECYCLED PAPER 04/06/99 TUE 15:46 FAX 303 376 5001 GORSGCE KIRGIS Q009 GORSUCH. KIRGIS LLP ATT,oaNEY1 AT Lnw TOWER 1. SVITC 1000 i 1515 ARAPAHOE STUET I WNWA. Cmomoo 50202 1 TFLI.VUONF (303) 3765000 ! FAlslun.E (303) 375.5001 , GexAlo E. DAHI DInECr Dlnt (303) 376-5019 I email: gd+6lsugormch.com April 5, 1999 Wheat Ridge City Council City of Wheat Ridge 7500 West 29'" Avenue Wheat Ridge, CO 80215 Re: 1-70 West Business Center Dear Members of the Council: I have reviewed the. letter dated. March 29, 1999, addressed to you from Michael Coen, Steve Barnhill, and Shirley Coen. While the letter states that the City Council approved "Case No. 96-CV-2266" on March 15, 1999, that case number is actually the Jefferson County District Court case number . for the condemnation action the City filed to remove the restrictive covenants. The writers of the letter advise that the protective covenants for Applewood Gardens Subdivision extend to certain lots of property in the 1-70 West Business Center. As the letter points out, the City In 1997 condemned the Applewood Gardens Subdivision protective covenants as they would have affected the. City's right to build and maintain the relocated frontage road. The extent to which the Applewood Gardens Subdivision protective covenants apply to other private property in the Subdivision, whether or not owned by Mr. Richter, is not an appropriate issue for the City to address. The City's zoning actions in approving a final development plan and plat for the 1-70 West Business Center entitles the developer to complete commercial improvements and construction on the property as a matter of the City's zoning ordinance, The zoning decision does not and cannot affect private covenants. Whether and to what extent private covenants protecting the Applewood Gardens Subdivision might impair or impede construction of the commercial facilities on the 1-70 West Business Center Is a matter exclusively for discussion and/or litigation between the developer and the beneficiaries of those covenants: the homeowners in the Applewood Gardens Subdivision. The City does not have power to act in any way to enforce these private covenants. The property owners have indicated their desire "to negotiate some sort of compromise with the City of Wheat Ridge" pertaining to the Applewood covenants. Such negotiation would be inappropriate for several reasons: GM530271313834.01 04/06/99 = 1S:46 FA-1 303 376 5001 GORSUCH FIRGIS rdOlA Wheat Ridge City Council April 5, 1999 Page 2 1. As indicated above, the City does not have a proper role in enforcing or defending against the enforcement of private covenants. This Is a matter exclusively for discussion and/or litigation between the developer and the homeowners' association. 2. Construction of a 10-foot brick wall extending north along the east side of Mr. Barnhill's property is not required as a feature of the final development plan and plat which was approved on March 15, 1999. It is not appropriate for the City to add conditions of approval after the decision has become final. 3. The Council acted to finally approve this project on March 15, 1999. The -next Council meeting, at which the matter could have been reconsidered pursuant to Council Rule 6.3, was March 22, 1999. This was not done, and the decision may not now be further reconsidered by the Council In the event the homeowners wish to challenge the action of the City Council in approving the final development plan and plat, they may seek to do so under Rule 106 of the Colorado Rules of Civil Procedure within 30 days of the effective date of the Council's action. In conclusion, while 1 recognize that the Applewood Gardens homeowners may wish to argue that their subdivision covenants impair or impede commercial construction on portions of the 1-70 West Business Center property, that activity should not and cannot involve the City as a party litigant. Further, absent a new application for amendment of the approved development plan, the final approval of the planned commercial development is not subject to further Council review to accommodate additional design changes as proposed. 1 conclude that there is nothing further for the Council to act upon in this matter and recommend that no action be taken in response to the letter. Sincerely, GO H KIRGIS LLP ; Gerald E. Dahl G E D\'3 3027\313834.01 DWAINE R. RICHTER 7020 East Girard #205 Denver, Colorado 80224 TELEPHONE 303-584-0669 May 5,1999 Mr. St e Nguyen, PE Tra c Engineer C' y of Wheat Ridge 500 West 29th Ave. Wheat Ridge,CO 80215-6713 Re: 70 West Business Center Amendment Number 2 Traffic Study Dear Mr. Nguyen: In your letter to me of April 7, 1999 you requested a letter from the transportation consultant who originally did the traffic study. Enclosed herewith please find a copy of letter dated April 26, 1999 from Leigh, Scott & Cleary, Inc. which answers your concern regarding any increase in traffic for the subject property. If you have any questions, please call me or Mr. Ariniello. ;Taene Truly s, R. Richte cc: Meredith Reckert, Senior Planner LEIGH, SCOTT & CLEARY, INC. TRANSPORTATION PLANNING & TRAFFIC ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS 1889 York Street Denver, CO 80206 (303) 333-1105 FAX (303) 333-1107 E-mail: lscden@ecentral.com Mr. Dwaine Richter 6565 S. Syracuse Way, # 1202 Englewood, CO 80111 Re: 70 West Business Center Wheat Ridge, CO (LSC #960830) Dear Dwaine: At your request, we have prepared this Addendum to our August 27, 1996 Traffic Impact Analysis for the 70 West Business Center. The purpose of this Addendum is to compare the trip generation characteristics of the revised land use plan with those of the land use plan analyzed in our earlier TIA and to determine if additional roadway improvements would be required. The new site plan includes a gas station/convenience store with car wash, an 800 square foot fast-food restaurant with drive-through, a 13,400 square foot retail shopette, and a 28,000 square foot office/warehouse. The trip generation estimates for these land uses are shown in revised Table 1, indicating that a total of 2,832 vehicle-trips would be generated by the site on an average weekday. This compares with 5,386 average weekday trips that were estimated in the 1996 TIA (see enclosed Table 1). Morning and evening peak-hour trips are also substantially less than what was estimated in the 1996 TIA. Based on significantly lower expected site-generated traffic volumes, it is our opinion that the traffic impacts of the revised development plan will not be any greater than what was projected in our August 27, 1996 TIA and that the recommendations contained in that report are still valid. We trust that our findings and recommendations will assist in the further planning for the proposed development. Please call if we can be of additional assistance. Respectfully submitted, LEIGH, SCOTT & CLEARY, INC. \geuw'• Frr%rlrn,,,, By: 149$2 Alek J. Ariniello, P.E. a AJA/wd GAPRQI CC7S\ 1900\960830\A 1.70WLW April 26, 1999 _C OD ( Cl) m h co N 00 N T O x W c c O V O 00 00 (D 2 a) (D CO M T F CL d m c w c O CF. a) 2 C N (n O N N I- O N (D 00 O N Q X `a w cy. O C LO ~ y Cl) N r . - C ) L Q C r Q) W a) N - 00 O n N 0 7 C\l v w Cl) O r I ( c ,71 O N CF. UO r r O L CL 'X U) O r N r W N C O V 00 Cl) Z 2 ~ O T N O O ac :D F Q o w CC 2 C 2 CF, ' Ir N (n V V )n N O W v ca Q X N r z 0) a)w0 a) c Q W .T a N V a) - 2 . CT. O C ' 7 It N _ (D m LL C . - a) 2 C Q LO (n N r co ft N LL (1) w a) CC m O a F . F ~ - _ v v r o w m c N C N r f~ 00 . L 034 ` Y N O O v rN- N 3 > a~ v o U) W ¢ ~ co W W 0- L LL LL LL (1) U) co a) Y Y Y Y ~ _ c N O ,.N. O 00 V: O Co roE oc z o o co co N c C a) (a C _ Vl U) (n m C N O E J F p r- O O > co O O F C L ft O C -0 U ca d a) 0) N O 0 L a) -cu a) 3 is j (A ' aNi o a . o ° - m O C L O L a) 0 •3 F L co N C a) 7 U) U) D 0 C O ~ o V N . Y ca c U C7 _ (a g a (D CD d a J N d ¢ O ~ C O r N O = O m C U . N V co C7110) m = C r N co j HN co O v CO v IT M C O T CO O N LL X W N C p V r CO co O V O N d H c N W O cr. m= V LO m co r` m c C7Y~ z_- co m T N Q 'X ` n. w cr. . N C ((D rn (D Cl 7 N Q N c L W m m co (O Cl) O It N ^ V Cl) Q r N V ~ rn w T N c (n d.X to C\i r w N C cr 0) O 0 (m~ M Z O C` ` CL (D CA N O m w o R ' W C aC Y g C 7 i, ClC co) n N O(D N O O - WU Z6 (L LIJ m U N c G LO V N Cl) 00 C B LL N a N co . r r m Q = 0 w H N M A ❑(D 0) Y co v r a ~ n o r o L = ~ > r s ca C o 3 N W i v L L W 0- LL LL . U) L c M `o ro N y Y Y n m~ N O C Z~ Lo N pNj N a) C7 00 V W rn Oro ai N REc c U) m J C C O 0 < C 0) ca O L m O z p v c a c c m m o F j Q 00 C ! c L as cm U) (D C p W m O j O m 0 Y O O -O L O c. 7 y o CO LL o U) ro '3 o E u E a) LL N (U CC L (p CU r w o° 3 ti 3 - c L LL a m o v c m w c o o m y o ` a mot: m m a) o m - co i~ cn cc N m E O U c - Y mZ 5 m ❑ o2J i a d a d d > N U F-- (U T C N J m a CC O C O r N `O . O m N N O L C a) U) C 0 LL co 2: m m N Cl) 0 HN _ l)vN vV L DWAINE R. RICHTER 7020 East Girard #205 Denver, Colorado 80224 TELEPHONE 303-584-0669 Fax 303-758-0889 Telefax 303-235-2857 July 22, 1999 Mr. Alan White Director of Planning 7500 W. 29th Ave P. O. Box 638 Wheat Ridge, Co. 80034 A RECE~VED JUL 2 1999 Re: 70 West Business Center Dear Alan: You will recall that the subject property was approved for development on March 15, 1999. At the time of approval it was required that the berm on the west side of the property be extended south toward 32nd avenue as was shown on our final development plan. After the plans were approved I called you to discuss the removal of the berm on the north side of Lot 3, Block 2 70 West Business Center Filing No. 2. This is the part of the existing berm that turns west from the north/south line and runs west to Zinnia Court. You will recall that you discussed this with Meredith and you both agreed that this portion can he removed. A red lined drawing is enclosed to indicate the subject area. I now have an excavating company ready to remove the old section and to construct the new portion. Would you please give me a written statement that this is our understanding and that this is permissable. Also advise if a permit is required for this work. Thank you very much for our help in this matter, Alan. Very ruly yours 'l Dwaine R. Richter i , , EXISTING CONOCO 1 0 Xl ~ a , 5 , :30 1 F rj'r rl ihis INA). 2 I I DEVELOPWNTPLAN RECOFM AT ODP BOOK 93, PAGE tl RECEPTION#FO5T7756 ~ po .oo ooe op ~ ~~O 00 L gas I r I rl-P A /-o7-3 7500 West 29th Avenue Wheat Ridge, Colorado 802 Telephone 303/ 235-2846 FAX 303/235-2857 July 29, 1999 Dwaine Richter 7020 East Girard #205 Denver, Colorado 80224 Dear Dwaine, The City of Please let this letter serve as follow-up to your correspondence dated July 22, 1999. On March 15, 1999, the Wheat Ridge City Council approved an amended final development plan and plat for 70 West Business Center pursuant to Case No. WZ-96-10. One of the conditions of approval for construction on the Good Times Restaurant pad site was that new fencing be constructed along the western property line of Lot 2, Block 2. The fence is to be of a solid wood variety, 6' in height built on a 4' high berm extending south to W. 32nd Avenue. The berm and fence must taper down to 36" in height as they approach the right-of-way so no sight distance obstructions are created. See diagram. Prior to commencement of fence construction, a permit with a construction drawing must be secured from the City by a licensed fence contractor. With construction of the new fence, the City will allow the existing fence and berm along the north side of Lot 3, Block 2 to be removed.. We would encourage you to contact the adjacent property owner to the north of Lot 3 prior to removal of the existing fence. Other conditions of approval which must be fulfilled prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for Lot 2, Block (3230 I-70 Service Road West) are: 1. The eastern row of parking on Lot 3, Block 1, be paved with adequate drive aisle. 2. The installation of landscaping on Lot 2, Block 2 including the extension of the irrigation system and application of grass seed (mix to be determined by owner and staff with professional consultation) 3. The opening in the sound barrier wall be closed with consultation with the fire district as to whether a trap door is needed for access to the fire hydrant to the west. 4. The City pursue extension the equestrian path along the development's western boundary within the CDOT right-of-way. If you have any questions or need to discuss this further, do not hesitate to contact me at 303-235- 2848. Sincerely, Meredith Reckert, AICP Senior Planner cc: 3230 I-70 Service Road West WZ-96-10 I' . 4w . ffw+ / .aRw ,.wf .•tlram r ~ Aw ias fvatl w vs J•sR s •..w fwa Rtl If1 r~rr RR• fffr. RR• ww•M•R.tl r----------------------------- 1 I I I I i I I 1 I I 1 I ~Lo 1 I 1W~V1.51ti~a~aftltl~tl 1. A~ Ll t 0A v 1 - I "A IV V I v I V I I S4/r I h ~ I I p p 12Q2 I F i.d.l •':i~: S . 70 wwr nRvigw camso n _ =v ~.4 ItlfK - _ -...i--.,-:.~z..,c:..._-'___•_""'R ' s \ ~ - n.a x~ ~ X1 - \ max. 1 ~ w• _ ~ A lF1MCE IIGD 7YE7~ 1~ Wool ML~ calffma , , Lvr 7 , LET a I I I I I I 1 • A ~1 I E i I ~ a^~ I•~ ' -LOT far ~ , ♦ y9 I lar Rack 1 uPLSWO UMM _ ♦ ri I AV 6 _ t J I - -----W a~, - - - - AVJ= I 4, - ,mn ,.s . ,Raff,ffrvr tars fa•>• rao waa .c: ~ ,frfff ~a~.,f Rao:, , yOnA.M..OYMT ur n:°°`,= Ilpl Wi C! TO OL,60MOIR AM YL1.1 01A - R~tlO~ ~ ~ . a•'• R4VCtl .i c0 Wqt Y. MR M M.a9 RL.tl O fc0 +iC.w`< ..•,n. ....v-,- ~ --,we 11@IO. MYl.1M R/..Y R~u~O tl >I® ` »--•aa M .LA 1•Y IOUI/WI tIC air i flan[ 1) WY.Y MnLMI Wulr ]D rQT R4R . fIRaO furl[ r¢r t\ Mbo .,ao ' VK~o+t rrti .m! KO~=,:. air ar~wur w~mc e~ ,o~oRw,u xac•~ m. ~ae ayiRAS ,-,R•r; forts r¢r RRa - ras. ~ ~r a n~]ie Ralp - 1•-fq» w M .ur MR as a< u.f, ommm ex,a•o• e~..,...,......~+.« w•.. Rauwa .-.w lR1.7J ve..~.., Ira A' -m •Li w'+ vxr w w.a :u°n!'°.ICY?'~R:~r.. xu.. fwA°w•°°Na~a iaa rf: m f¢r ° .u' ~upeeafpar[ r¢r a aau m ~m ~ w. ••~iccuwm1O n`..i~mi.~iwi. ~o.°C,e,n ROL fU•RY ♦Ip aa~ apal 11 ,o1M f' a~ ,•R eartr? .c~r.Alw,t ro ao,f fwl w.e A¢ •wmrt nwaw~l tlo vst "w ra ...-.r .r .p . sn.r• sows A t Rao al•nR. v.. 101YR[ 1f2r aflr tlo may 4. RRRww. ar< Rrn M. aRtl am rv ..u e.aa. M)U R(a.0 -~tl lYif ILLr M1fW.Rr YOY ~ . L IQ .C 9~ba~:brv ae~%y^ILL rM11 VaalaO lrL R r0[ OR 1w-RWRWL WIOML u m.a-.. rraa •IwMI'O. b f•.1m s. mmL .N a4Y.M. _s MV.r »1{a9 Id1! u p ILLT i +,CVX+J wiM ME '1 µ T.+~a~ riu Y vYL. Yt a/ T e+.aNTw • ^u •w r? Y~n+au -.•.:JY RT 'T+w.'i -'1 W3+K ~n n.. I~T ^-.n[ yn•- .e L -vOM1CY( M1 P > &_Y bK: Z N R.+1Cl a. 'Y( u( 1 Y. .y SHEET 3 0 70 WEST BUSINESS CENTER :AMENDMENT NO. 2 vR AN OFFICIAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN OF THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE COMBINED PRELIMINARY-FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN SITE -PLAN - --'---art~rinc 70 Q J I itl u¢ Dwaine R. Richter 7020 EAST GIRARD # 205 DENVER, COLORADO 80224 TELEPHONE 303-584-0669 FACSIMILE 303-692-9557 August 22,1999 Ms. Meredith Reckert, AICP Senior Planner City of Wheat Ridge 7500 West 29' Ave. Wheat Ridge, CO 80215 Dear Meredith, Thank you for your letter of July 29, 1999. In your letter you imply that the new section of the berm and fence that will be extended to 32nd avenue be constructed prior to the removal of 46 existing berm on the north line of lot 3, block 2. "With the construction of the new fence, the City will allow the existing fence and berm along the north side of Lot 3 to be removed." This is not what I proposed in my letter to Alan White dated July 22, 1999 and it would be very expensive to do it this way. I am sure you do not intend to be punitive. What needs to happen is to move the existing berm from the north line of lot 3 to it's new location in the north/south configuration. I am writing to you about this now so that when the excavating contractor, Schoelzel & Co, LLC, applys for a permit, there will be no misunderstanding. If we have to build the new section first before the old section can be removed then this will require two equipment move in costs, and two moves of required dirt for the two sections of the berm. There is no need for doubling the expense for this work. I assure you that the fence will be extended as required by the Council minutes of March 15, 1999. You also listed four other conditions of approval which must be fulfilled prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for Lot 2 and there is no disagreement with these conditions. However, you left out a very important condition that needs to be completed by the City and that is condition number three of Mr. Siler's motion of March 15, 1999 which states that "The traffic light on West 32nd Ave. be installed at the earliest possible date when warrants are met according to the Court Order." I have received complaints from the Country Cafe and Conoco that their business is hurt because of the lack of a stop light at this corner. I have suggested that they contact the City regarding this matter since it is out of my control. Surely when Good Times opens for business the warrants will be met and the City's responsibility to construct will also be met. I urge you to keep your part of the agreements and go forward with the installation of this signal now. Very ly yours, Dw e R. Richter cc:Aradalan Hardi - Country Cafe 3291 Youngfield Service Road Golden, CO 80401 cc:David Geist Petroleum Concepts, LLC 4600 S. Ulster St. Denver,CO 80237 cc: Schoelzel & Co, LLC 7500 West 29th Avenue The City of Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80215 Wheat Telephone 303/ 235-2868 Ridge FAX 303/235-2857 August 24, 1999 Mr. David Addor, P.E. Engineering Service Company 14426 East Evans Avenue, Suite 150 Aurora, Colorado 80014 Re: 70 West Business Center Filing 3, I-70 & Approval of Final Drainage Report, Street Drawings and Grading/Erosion Control Plan Dear Mr. Addor, West 32"d Avenue - Construction This letter is to inform you that the final drainage report, street construction plans, and the grading/erosion control plan for the above referenced project have been reviewed and approved for construction. Please be aware of the following items regarding the construction of the project: 1. The proposed drainage facilities shall be constructed and approved by the City of Wheat Ridge prior to issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy. 2. Erosion control for the project shall be placed in conformance with the approved drainage/erosion control plan and shall be maintained as needed during the course of construction. 3. All drainage improvements shall be constructed in conformance with the approved drainage report and plan. 4. Upon completion of the drainage improvements the engineer, Mr. David Addor, P.E. Engineering Service Company shall provide to the City of Wheat Ridge a letter of certification stating that the various improvements, as defined in the drainage report and plan, have been accurately surveyed to confirm that their construction is in accordance with these documents. The certification letter shall be written and stamped by the engineer who prepared the drainage report, and shall be submitted for review and approval by the City prior to issuance of the Certificate of occupancy. 5. It will be the responsibility of the contractor for the project to repair any damage to the existing public improvements on West 32nd Avenue and/or I-70 Service Road West as a result of related construction traffic in the area. Also, the contractor will be responsible for maintaining West 32nd Avenue and the I-70 Service Road West on a regular basis such that they are free of construction debris and tracking from construction traffic accessing the site. 6. It will be the responsibility of the developer/owner, to provide the necessary testing for subgrade compaction, and other related material tests for those improvements to be constructed within public right-of-way. (SEE ATTACHED MATERIAL SAMPLING & TESTING REQUIREMENTS) 7. Prior to any construction of the public improvements, the necessary right-of-way construction permit(s) and respective licensing will need to be submitted for processing by the City. If you have any questions, please contact me at 303-235-2868. Sincerely, Greg Knudson, M.P.A. Development Review Engineer cc: Bob Goebel, Public Works Director Alan White, Planning & Development Director Steve Nguyen, Traffic Engineer Darin Morgan, Codes Administrator Meredith Reckert, Senior Planner John McGuire, City Surveyor James Jacobsen, Eng. Tech II Dwaine Richter, Developer File 2/99 CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE MATERIALS SAMPLING AND TESTING REQUIREMENTS FOR CONSTRUCTION OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS DESCRIPTION 70WFILING3-4.LTR Materials sampling and testing for public improvements shall be performed by an independent materials testing company at the expense of the developer. •Unless otherwise designated, all referenced specifications, standards or policies shall be the latest edition as revised or updated by approved supplements published and issued prior to the date of the building permit. REQUIREMENTS All materials sampling and testing shall be performed by certified, experienced and qualified materials testing technicians who work under the supervision of a registered professional engineer in the State of Colorado. All materials sampling and testing equipment shall be serviceable and calibrated. Soil classifications and moisture-density curves shall be provided to the Department of Public Works inspector prior to in-place density testing. Materials testing technicians shall furnish copies of failed test results to the inspector promptly as the results become available. On a weekly basis when testing is being performed, the developer shall furnish the inspector with copies of all test results taken during the prior week and a cover letter, signed by the supervising registered professional engineer, which summarizes the results and discusses any failed tests or inconsistencies. The City materials testing requirements are provided in Table 720-1. All testing procedures, point of verification and central lab requirements shall be as specified in the Frequency Guide Schedule of the Colorado Department of Transportation Field Materials Manual. One test is required for any fraction of the specified frequency. The reference to Section 203.07 in the table is from the Colorado Department of Transportation Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge Construction. Table 720-1 City of Wheat Ridge Materials Testing Requirements Type of Test Frequency Remarks Soil Survey (Classification), 1 per 1000 feet of roadway, Surveys for roadway, AASHTO M145 sidewalk or pipe trench sidewalk and trench may be combined Moisture-Density Curve, 1 per on-site soil type AASHTO method AASHTO T99 or T180 1 per import material source determined by soil or materials type Embankment in-place density 1 per 300 feet per lane per 8 Minimum density per soil , Colorado Procedures inch loose lift classification, Section 203.07 Roadway subgrade in-place 1 per 300 feet per lane Minimum density per soil density, Colorado Procedures classification, Section 203.07 Sidewalk subgrade in-place 1 per 300 feet of sidewalk Minimum density per soil density, Colorado Procedures classification, Section 203.07 Pipe trench in-place density, 1 per 200 feet of trench per 2 Minimum density per soil Colorado Procedures foot vertical interval classification, Section 203.07 Aggregate base course in- 1 per 300 feet per lane Minimum 95% of maximum place density, Colorado density, T180 Procedures Lime treated subgrade in- 1 per 300 feet per lane No less than 95% of std. dry place density, Colorado density and opt. moisture, Procedures T99 Cement treated base in place 1 per 300 feet per lane Density in accordance with density, Colorado Procedures contract documents, T134 Hot Bituminous Pavement 1 per each HBP grade and Within specifications of asphalt content and gradation Marshall blow specified approved mix design Hot Bituminous Pavement in- 1 per 300 feet per lane per lift 92-96% of mm density place density, Colo. except Grade F to be 90-95%, Procedures T209 Concrete compressive 1 per 100 cubic yards PCC pavement, structural strength concrete, sidewalks and AASHTO Procedures curbing Concrete air content and 1 per 50 cubic yards PCC pavement, structural slump concrete, sidewalks and AASHTO Procedures curbing /M-C. M Galloway, Romero & Associates Design Engineering Planning 5350 DTC Parkway Englewood, Colorado 80111 (303) 770-8884 (303) 770-3636 fax RECEIVED APR 2S1999 April 26, 1999 Ms. Meredith Reckert City of Wheat Ridge 7500 West 291h Avenue Wheat Ridge, CO 80215 Re: Petroleum Concepts - Conoco Breakplace W. 32 n' Avenue & 1-70 Frontage Road Wheat Ridge, Colorado Dear Meredith: In response to your April 6, 1999 letter I offer the following on behalf of Petroleum Concepts, LLC(PCL): 1. Canopy Lights: Since the City has requested a change, PCL has directed the contractor responsible for installing the conditionally approved test lights to remove them and replace them with a flush, flat lens model. We will forward you the schedule for this work once it is available. 2. Signs: The signs on the site are exactly the signs that were shown on the plans approved by the City. They are just normal signs no different than the signage contained on almost every commercial building in Wheat Ridge. The closest any of these signs are to residential properties is at least 250'. It is difficult to comprehend how these signs could be a nuisance for any neighbors especially when evaluated in the site context. There are brick walls, landscape belts and arterial streets intervening between PCL and the nearest residential properties. PCL respectfully declines to comply with the request to limit the hours the signs can be lighted. 3. Site Lights: The site lights also are as indicated on the plans approved by the City. The nearest site light to any residentially zoned property is approximately 150'. Intrusion of light at this distance is beyond their capability. Without clearer direction from the City on this matter it is difficult for PCL to assess, however PCL feels strongly that they are in compliance with their approved plans and applicable City codes. As you know, the approval process for this project was filled with extreme animosity on the part of the neighboring residential properties. Many hours were spent evaluating every aspect of PCL's plan, resulting in a superior development. The continuation of complaints by only a few people needs to be tempered by the City in their evaluation of the issues. PCL is and will continue to be a solid member of Wheat Ridge's business community. Please contact me if you have any questions or comments. Sincerely, Gallowao & Associates David W. Galloway cc: Dave Geist, PCL Conoco/General/DOGS/Letters/ConocoPCL-dwg-Wheat Ridge areakplace.doc 7500 West 29th Avenue Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80215 FAX 303/235-2857 April 6, 1999 Ginnie Hansen Petroleum Concepts, LLC 4600 South Ulster #1180 Denver, Colorado 80237 Dear Ms. Hansen: The City of Wheat Ridge This letter is in regard to lighting on your property located at 12851 West 32 d Avenue in the City of Wheat Ridge. We have received numerous complaints regarding the canopy lights which were not installed by the contractor as originally approved through the public hearing and building permit processes. During the public hearing process for development plan approval, the applicant's representative gave testimony that canopy lighting for the facility would be recessed and therefore, less intrusive to the residential neighborhood to the west and southwest. Staff believes that this public testimony encouraged City Council to approve the proposal despite opposition from the neighborhood. The contractor changed the fixtures from those approved without receiving authorization from the City of Wheat Ridge Planning Division. At the time of issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy, David D. Meyers of Crosslands Construction agreed that if the city allowed the lights to remain as installed on a trial basis, he would replace them with the approved, recessed fixtures if complaints were received from the surrounding low density neighborhood. We continue to receive complaints from the neighborhood and are therefore requesting that the fixtures be replaced as soon as possible. The monument sign and lighted wall signs on the west and south facades of the convenience store have been causing a nuisance for the nearby residential property owners as they remain on through the night. Would it be possible for those signs to be turned off every evening at 9 or 10 p.m.? The 50' high freeway-oriented sign as well as the canopy signs and wall sign on the eastern side of the building would remain lit 24 hours per day providing exposure to traffic on I- 70. The site lighting has also proved to be intrusive to the adjacent residential neighborhoods. We would ask that shields or another acceptable alternative be placed on the fixtures to eliminate as much bleeding and glare as possible. Please contact this department regarding your schedule for correction of these problems. I can be reached at 303-235-2848. Sincerely, Meredith Reckert, AICP Senior Planner cc: Building permit file Code enforcement file Dwaine Richter David D. Meyers - Crosslands Construction Dave Galloway - Galloway, Romero & Assoc. 1 IAI 1/IaCYIt l€G~ ]~a&I~00mQY1 ® I7Aa1®A®®EIiA~•A At~:YIAiL MUL YIAY. 11. 1997 1.35PIul 60'NA,~' ;0W-RNO. 6783 P. 1/3 Is) G.E~II~;~uti+s a_Roiriera & Associates Dtesigri En3irieoriing Planoing 53$0 IJTC Parkway Englewood, Colorado 8.l}111 1303} 77CI-.388,4. (3013) 770-3636• I'A;6 FAX TRANSMITTAL T1:; 1~f~'~.c~/,•/''.t:YoiaC.r+'~_ __.FAX NIIMRER:.._.a''.~"' 3 sriz- CCAAFIANY~ CITY & !3TATE- FROM: DESCRI17PON OF CAN IENTs: NUMBER OF PAGES INCLUDING TRANSMITT.nL L1- fER ,r r?r a'y .•.u✓' L C /r ~s:..~ ~.~.-nt ,,..y.r j/ e,~;'rc.- .A,.."~r<".I~ +u.~err COMMENTS:; R eceJ.ved: 5/10/08 1 : Pi P ld; _ v'hY. li'. 1999 1:35rr,ly A- O1'4A.Y ROW-RR Construction company CITY OF WHEAT'RIDGE; Page 2 NO. 8783 P. 2/3 a955 S R I98fine UM J., SWW 150D Hlohiands (Ranch. C',0 KIM Phone 30.-U&6 ,444 FU: V-Z. 14EL1634 DATE: ;5110/99 7:41:02 ANI TO: 'pave Galloway Via: Fax ip.:Lh1.3., Li,C FROM; DAVID 1Wt lAtS lu:: 207 Coleco - Pr'IrcatrAp'. C,AaNOI?*V UGHT REPLACP;INIENR MR. GALLOWAY, AS FEF. M'Y LAST FAX AFFIL 22, 1999, CROSSLANDS CONSTRUCTION COMPANY WILL REMEDY 1"HE CONCERNS OF THE SCOTTSI)A L.E:.LICHT FD(TIJRES INSTALLED AT TITS BR.EA h PLAT"Y. AT 32,nd & YOUNGFIELD 17N'P5ftAlF-JDCi9 COLORADO. CR OS SLAND F S CONSTRUCTION AND CAR LTON :ELECTRIC WILL BE REPLACENG ]CIE SCOTTSDALE W1TF]I THE " 131 PL["-HM[( lPNI? FLATLENS" (see etICIDSed cut Sheet). TBE SCHIE3DUI:E!CI ]~E?I.r9.I;;E:19EP1T WILL BE. TI3E IVF17 'OF "fl.' 1st 4i l3 AF'F'FEC.'IraTli'4'O~JF.1'A1':iF.NCT., AND LOOK D)R.WARD TO t'UTf[NG CLOSUF.E TO THIS CC,N(:rlVJ,Z. SIIOLI'LI7'YCIU HA; VFi.A'K'4' C;j[JFiSTI0t~15, PLF:AS13 CAUL ME A"C (303) a46-1444 ext# 2:S STN CIE RELY, A ~ 1lopp 3a DA,.VI:E) D. M'd'i3RS ~ CC: C: k+ i DDN EL ECTRIC, DAVE GEIiST, IEl F DUR BON W/ X) 9D7 `ON li-O: 66 r OUSO 773IL9flil'M 1DnUSNOD SaNW"ISSOHO Received: 5/`0/98 T:36PKA; 4,1Y. 1? 1';? 1 38INI Sk-..``lY <.IM=.C ~Isi:~~ t~p€:go`~glEl 1 DIMENSIONS 19-112x) .J J ' L1t•99/iG- I]ruppnial.ens fral L905 Itlf40~' tr ~ ! . ~ I . jl Ircemun~i~ Nov 3611am ~WIA'AAI~!ImA18u1ar®eaiM~®oA~®AAll7All~mNml~IE®1f~EAUmfJ1A®A- CITY OF pdHEATRIDGE; Page 3 NO, 8783 P. 3/3 RICHMOND Q.WT,I Ap f n A 7 O b 4 A I ro i 7 ' ~ t t 0RDEfRINUa INI'IPI)MUM-01NII Select appropriate voiee from each column 10 formulate, aider code. Refer to example oelaw Lmnlualrn _ PimrlhuAlpl Lamp Unni Sodu Lens Ling valtnap" Luminslfn RAW options Frnflc alnlfkge _ _ _ T RIC S - Symmslri~ 175 _ -9•'MF~-9+ppf 4lalel Lldlee _ al3pr egamacs OL-Dn.~>pa aPOV WNT - WPAIa LL - Loge Lamp ,So 2 50, e00 Wan IF0 Fisamsc Bias:; lens 20FV BLK -'Black cL-CM104 Lamp !90 . VIA - MOWllanCe 76-C?3 WNW fiat 24CV 13117-aian[tl 2MA-r-mounlinA 775 4cowiln 250 Tampered Glasee 277V Bracket , . eecv No - No options MT- vVii 1'ap EXAMPLE OF A 7`WIGA.OFIDER STANDARD hil(,) LATIN G KI1' 4fgn6dlip Nl _ - Gan9n1E 16 FEltllnps \ _ - cane®~a,~`"~ IiIWAf~tli~®IAt9AHIIAt7ARAm@e9AAlAl®CIDIAi>alAIW10®®AAAi61~ AA'6FF~ef 'Poi Inlsrna.iunel emile.7es, comell IaGlpry. 6PR ONIAL Z JB IMOUINITING KIT Urtutelight ICondul - - da. ,6e~u°q,1 t 10 eta 1 b 1"e~10 Vy ?0/i) 971)"0N IiL.a40 661 I'll./90 HIC;, w S 400 - ;)INIH - SII. 'E;?IDV 1IVHT NO IMM? 9*,74:: 01Z ninmLIL5N07 SaNVISS0119 i 70 WEST BUSINESS CENTER AMENDMENT NO. 2 AN OFFICIAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN OF THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE COMBINED PRELIMINARY-FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN SHEET INDEX PREPARED FOR: DWAINE R. RICHTER COVER SHEET ..............................................................................1 OF 10 6930 EAST GIRARD #205 DENVER, COLORADO 80224 SITE USE PLAN 2 OF 10 PHONE: (303) 584-0669 PREPARED BY: ENGINEERING SERVICE COMPANY SITE PLAN ..............................................................................3 OF 10 ATTN: DAVID ADDOR LANDSCAPE PLAN 4 OF 10 1300 S. POTOMAC STREET, SUITE 126 . AURORA, COLORADO 80012 GRADING, DRAINAGE & EROSION CONTROL PLAN 5 OF 10 PHONE: (303) 337-1393 UTILITY PLAN ..............................................................................6 OF 10 STREET PLAN & PROFILE BUILDING ELEVATIONS (GOOD TIMES) BUILDING ELEVATIONS (OFFICE/WAREHOUSE)..... BUILDING ELEVATIONS (RETAIL) ..7 OF 10 ..8 OF 10 ..9 OF 10 ..10 OF 10 REcE01v AD 31999 MAR QYXEY'e CAITIFlCAIIGN: TIE BEUM SIGNED OWNER(5). OR IFGLLLY DF9GN4TED MFM(S) ryEREG,, GO NEREBT "a THAT ME PRJ uGN1r DEAAIBED IQREOX Mu BE OE PED AS A PLANNED GEYe1LPXENF IX ALCOADWGE WRX ME 15E5. RESNVILTOW AND OONIN IONS COXDBIED IN MB PWI. AND A5 NAT O1HFMnBE PE flECIYREp B! UW. I ('RE) FORMER REO]FJNE TNT ME MPRPTL OF FlXIL pfYdDPYEM PLW (MD T) FOES NBF fAF/TE A VESNEO PROPERLY RW'HL LASED PROPERTY ILGHIS .:'A ONLY .OUSE AIA .Y.TALE PUISLA4T TO ME PRGAENS OF MOTION 3B-B(G) OF ATINGLE I OF ME CAGE OF LAWS OF ME QRY OF WHEAT RKICE GONANRE OF OWERGI) OR KAR(S) ]0 WBC, LLD. STATE OF CO.O COUNTY OF JEFFEflmN A ME FOREGOING NSMUNEM WAS ACI(NUHEOCED BEFORE ME THIS _OAY OF A0. 19-, BY WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFG 5FM. W COMMISSION EXPIRES' S BILE W YASL J3N0 FORTE q~ ❑ ~ A Fz i 1^I - I I CME HUTOfI I m-74-18 m-ie-1D m-78-14 m-79-20 m-e1-1n NZ-ES-9 W -92-11 m-98 3 Z; 9B-IO 9]-13 GETFR4 NOTER 1. .W. WORK WRKN ME PUBLIC RRMT-OF-WAY OR EASEMENT $HN.I CONFORM TO ME C OF WNFAT RIDGE ENGINEER. REGULATONS .0 DESIGN STNNORADS. 1. M APPRIMI) qGM-OF-WAY WNSIRUCIION PERNIF µ0 A NUMK:NA WNIRALTOR'S LICENSE IE REQUIRED PPoOR 10 AVY WORK COMMEPM WITHIN ME PUBLIC RNNT-OF-W.1Y. PM' WORK PERFORMED WRHN STALE RN91T-OF-WAY SOUL. REOWRED AN APPROMEO STATE CONSTRUCTION PERMIT PRIOR TO AW WRIT COMMENCING. IT 5HNL BE ME COKTR. ORS RESMnIBIIM TO HONEST ME OMNFR/GEVEIDPER OF ANY PROSUSA IN CONFORMING TO ME MPRP'fD CONSIRUC110N PLANS FOR ANY EIEMEAT OF ME PROPOSED NPRGrt EN15 PRIOR TO RS CONSTRUCTOR. 4. R SLNLL EE ME RESPoN9BINT OF ME DETEIDPFR OUMNG OTNSMUCTDN ACTM11L5 TO RESOLVE CONSTRUCT. PROHENS WE TO CHANGED CONpDCNS OR DESIGN ERTKR5 ENCOUNTERED BY ME GONTOMOTGO WRING T£ PROGRESS OF AW PORTION OF ME PROPOSED IOU IF, IN ME OPNIDH OF ME C1ETS INSPECTOR. ME NOpF1UTONS PROPOSER BY TIE pEYF1DFER Tp Ti£ APPROVED P4 IMgLW SROUPCIM CHANCES TO ME CNMAGIET OF ME WORK OR TO FUTURE CONTIGUOUS PUBLIC OR p ,NAM NPROYEYEMS, ME OEVELGT£R 9W1 BE ROPONSIBLE FOR SUBMITTING REY5ED PIONS TO ME CITY OF WUT PoDGE FOR APPROVAL PRIOR TO NR' FORMER CONUTPIMMN RELATED TO TNT PORTION OF WORK MT IMPROVEMENTS MRSTRUCIOD NOT IN ADCOROVRX WITH ME MPROVED PUNS, OR ME MPNGYEO REVISED PUNS, SW11 BE RFNTA'FD I ME ILWROrI]JEM9 SLMLL BE RECONSTdCRO TO THE AFP.2PSD PW6. 5. BORE SFAATS - ME CONIRICFOR SHALL CON1 T BLUE STMES FOR LOCATION ON LNOET:ROLWD G5, E16RRC .WO IEUyHCNE IIRITES AT NF.ISF 48 MU16 PRIOR TO COMLfNCEIIEM OF MT CON4IRVGTON. PRONE 303-ST4-8]CO. 0. AL MLM FA6 5'1411 BE PEIG M PRIOR TO ME P CEMENT OF OJNCIiUF. OTH NON.Fl TON OF ME RLSPECINE OMNER, .WART LAMS OF .W. CLFMIOUIS. WRNGLE9. VALVE COVERS AAq SURVEY MJNUNEM9 PRIOR TO ME RNAL PAVING UFO. 8. ME CONTRACTOR SW11 PRWDE ALL UGHS. SIGNS WRTADES. FUGLEN OR OTHER OEVA'ES NECESYA! TO PROVIDE FOR ME P4T„G SAFETY IN K GLANCE GOTH ME CURRENT MMNWJ. ON UNIFORM TWFTIC CONTROL DEVICES 9. ME CONTRKTOR S PROVIDE AND AWMAN INORE$B AW EOIESS ID PNNAIE PROPERT ADIKENT TO ME PORK THROUGHOUT. ME PERNO OF CONSTRUCTION. PRIOR M BEGINNING MT WDR,{, ME OONT QR EIVLL ORTMN A WRITTEN AOREFNIXF FROM M£ AFFECTED PROPERTY ORNER(5) IMPKTED W TG4 RECESS 10. PPoOR TO ME MVt UFT OF SURFME PAH EM, N UNDERGROUND UTUIY IWNG S BE NSTAUED !NO SEWAES GONMCRONS MBENO OUT BEYONO ME WK OF OURS/SP.EW.W( UNE WHEN A EO 0Y ME MUTY. SEANCE FROM OUBUC UNDES AND FROM SAWTMY Z. E. 9WL BE HYDE AVMARIE FOR EM]I LOT N S A MANNER TNT Mu NOT BE NECESSVPY TO DISTURB THE STREET PAVEMENT, OURS, GUTTER AND SIDEW WHEN CONNECTIONS AAE COLE. 11. A NMAQ COPY OF -AS SUL,T" PEAS SW31 BE SUBtaTED TO ME CM OF WRFAT RUGE PRIOR TO RN& ACCEPLR OF ME WORK. 12 ME CONTRACTOR SHNL NOTRY ME CITY INSPECTOR AT OF 24 HOURS PRIOR TO ME DESIRES INSPECTION. 13. HO POR110X OF ME STREET MAT 0E FlNAL PAVED UNTIL NL SRiEE! I, , IMPWNCMEHIS, OE9CNED TO SERE Mf STREET MD/CR OEVU.OPMEM, NAVE BEEN CONPIEIED. 14. SUES MONUNEMS MUST BE SET MMIN 00 DAYS OF GOMPLETON OF P.M. OWNNE R PoCHIER BEING ME OWNEQ OF L0T 4. LOT 8. AND A PART OF LOTS 1 AXO TO WEST EU9XE5E CIII2R Tlt£RIfR WBH PN(( OWNER OF LOTS 1 AND 2 70 WEST BUANE55 LFMER SUBOM90H FlUNG W. 2, AND VNGINN L RKHRA AS PART OWNER OF LOR I AND 2 70 WEST BIISWESS CENTER SUBOMSEIN FNNC N0. L SIIWTED IN ME FgRMWEST ONE-0UARTE4 OF SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 3 SOM1. WEER RI EMCZW OF7J 1` kdA S WD WLOMyyq=W PANTINIARLY OESOR®ED AS FOUAWS: LOT 1 MU LOT 1, 70 WEST BUSINESS CENTER BLROMSION RUNG NO. 1, JEFIVWN COUNTY, WIORMO; LAID .fie rn 1-1 m-1.1 (b. -,a, F Ira OESfFPitlm(CNRNME,) 1. THENCE SW47'12-E &ONG SNO TANGENT A OISTAVCE OF AND 219A] FEET TO A PON T OF CURVE; 2. MENGE NUGNG A COME TO ME NFSN NHOSE OiGRD SEWS 1 MERGE S24'I7'12-E AOXG SW T.WGEM A ORWME OF 3&97 FEET TO A POINT OF Ct ' 4. MENCE "NO A CNNE TO ME WOUSE [.Rn o<~ AN L 11K55 W. 391H WrNFAT RAGE CgUD LNSO 80O33-3978 EFATE OF COWNADO A COUNT, OF JEFFERSON ME FOREGOING BOMUNENC WAS PLYNOM£OGED BEFORE ME THIS _OW OF , AD. 19- S( A GERM& ANOIE OF 2 WOO , A MIMUS OF 1OUD! FEET, M AL LENOIN OF ]].93 FEET TO A PoM OF TAMC.EM; 5. MERGE SW4YI2'E ADNO yA TANGENT A DSTAICE OF 27.09 FEET; 5. TAME MW '29V A D47MFE OF 31.99 FEET TO A PONT LYPG ON SVD NORTHERLY ".W. ONE OF WEST 32ND AVENUE; FENCE S9W4S30Y/ NDNG SNO NORMERLY R.O.W. ME A DRMGAOE OF 4214 FEET TO A MNT LYNO ON ME FASIENLT ONE OF SAID ILT 4; FENCE SW47'121E &ONG THE FAS'IE3Y ME OR SAD LOT 4 A DWACE OF &00 FEET M ME POINT OF BEGINNING; TOT& PARCEL CONTNNS (309.839 SHAME REED 7.1152 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. WITNESS NY WAND AND OFFlCLLL SUN, W CGMWSSION EXPIRES APP uRYFD MIS MY OF 19_, BY ME WHEAT RIDGE PAWNING COM"ON. APPRCI TES DAY Or- IQ~ BY ME WHEAT RIDE CIR' COOK, CRY SEAL ATRST: C CLERK GFRM~ $ BIER L NRtFR, A RbiT550N41 LAW SURRyOR REGISTFIiED IN ME STALE OF CMDRWb, CERTIFY TNT ON T{S MY OF 19_. MIS PfAN1 WAS PiEFA® UNDER MY DIRECT EUPERYSION, AND TO ME BEST OF NY PROF£4pMN. KNOROEDCE AND BELEF S IGCUF M PROFEAIONLL LS NO. 27808 FOR MO ON BUWF OF FNOdEERWO SEANCE COMPANY my .COG RFC[IIOFR'e ENiY`~ . MIS WCIMU? ICCEPIED FOR FlUNG N ME OFTCE OF ME COUNTY OOTERKERSO AD RECORDER OF JEFFFR50N I. AT GO LDEN, COIDRMO. PACE - MY CF AD. T9_, IN ME B30K flECPTON JUFX COpHry CLBiK A1D RECOflpkF f . IY• IY 39' SCALE 1" = 40' r--------- I I I I I I I I I I I Lar 1 70 WEST BUSINESS CENTER AN OFFICIAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN OF THE CITY OF WHEAT COMBINED PRELIMINARY-FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN SITE USE PLAN DEPICTING AREAS A, B, C, D & E, AND THE USES AGREED THOSE AREAS IN THE SETTLEMENT OF CASE #96CV2691-RICHTER VS. CITY OF WHEAT 4--------- 1 70 I Z I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ~ t. iSlnM.. V1mCtAi.Vm csp 9PIL M6e 6 1.91][ fMl! ORLIML i PMO. 1,rbmn~m bn ne~°owmvwa:.rm wl r.Q 1xv vuvn a p flmb w..m~ txlf OWflE4 W STIG'6 2 Bi14 IaX NY IMVQ at114 S IIDI~M9~464YS1W! ML YO GYY¢4 4 ML U~ 0 6~{ CN4EaplfE~aFP~/lLI9 a ,R~A~p!R/,ipX~pL_V6.ViE IQA~NNp@ f.9WLL BN ai I YI~ Me ~n UR x644 PWAIm e.IRYk MII RIIIII 6fiE5. CIWQ OI WRVWES aHCEI. Zlf➢AL MYI6RYA£ 9Qi]3 M9 flC{E9RM. mPN°xiave ax tic ~®wns°O~°dw~mn°pPpXmneu °A is Im smrmWON.= a P~Q 91e nv wcvr Z Wm our acww G sOm 21 N yV~®~ Wl R( 011WiC M,IX[ MI9. L VxaTG a~.S511MlL~M CWMW MRxeW 90. /IQ 0. (~9~~p14 MINX 9Q. IQNL 1 ~ ~ I,lf ~ iK~V.9CC i19ueN'wlMn ItdelC xoM m+t secrY Clrmmli RE.K OM[ q 1/f0 YOR. 104 MMIC 91pE M6M4D. WR.FII.TMRYAE TWIT IPf 0 (LVeNm) 11. MAF/B QICLI eM-Np. 114-01!1 PHEY141IIS Q O6 i~ tl0 90M 161)]0 ~LEi IOOfMial~ ~I~ 4h ~ a~19,I1~p OM 6Pf1fO6wmwC ~ 11TW1 a O.A'ilC aID411 'Ol fiE F@.OQ PAT.C IQIMNMf. m snQV: L 6r1¢ lax 1xo rvnQ anus 1 Hale u~ vamle sum an9c raa¢ s ~ none ,or 9xe,m. A IBW YD tlTIY aiGb. tIMZ YI LW WM6 1 aiCC aMF➢.IL MIQ11RlT£ 96109 ND flaE99pYL 0.PYWM a~OW 4LEEF9~MQ1A~~~W p91 RAIMI 4SMO0¢ 19M1ii FSiIHIDIYFXIe K tC16 e0R RIDGE TO FOR RIDGE, COLORADO 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Lar a 1 ra >yier a axnl 1 suemnemN PILI rlurm Ila 2 n 1 1 1 oeemetr rwlr~caxm ♦>•«r voal axr~v I Icc~liw rosm» I A6A E (OMg1ED) NEA E (O]XIJINT) L Slflbe fQ SIILgIIW~F p, ID~Imy®M 161MGVFR (FDSYbM4 OPeE~. L ~e~5pw[ RI V eLL~IC ~ 9Wl e[ 11. FMAf IF]w6~ 10E IL 9YP5 ftp O611Y 'RR Di W t11mATMi ~ Oa LYm9 YQ ZRRIM p IL 94LL~~RN~ SAMAtlo 70 WEST BUSINESS CENTER AMENDMENT NO. 2 AN OFFICIAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN OF THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE COMBINED PRELIMINARY-FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN SITE PLAN R .T a• .X SGLE 1' - 40• LEGEN D EYS W 8' HGN WOODEN F M PRDPOSFD B' XID" MOOOEN FENCE PRWOSED LOT INE Oi NUMBER W PNWNG STNLS C COURSE Cµ O D RMRA ATA TABLE IFHGDI Ct C< 9J]Yla' 8.5.(p' BEWNG tJ4.1T NMW544 LF 120.6'Y (1 2S]tl00' 123.00' S1.2T 51X3212 50.91 C3 2Tb'M' 190.00' XS3' 51X]2'124 7738' G 89'29'18' 20. W' 311Y NIS'SI 5100 28.18 c5 a3za'3R' 1TS.m' n.Rr aw c5 Brst 'DT tss.a0• " t9a9r w sazm • a9'ty 172.91 1TZSr r I LOT 1 ~ WEST g~ gulflEta EM1M9 1w IMI Race ) ) ) ) 1 a ) LET 3 70 WEST AUEINA88 OANTAA SUAOMtM PUNS NO. 2 ) ( ( I I I I I I I I I I I g I b I I < I ~ I i I I I I I I 9 2 R w 9 I ~ I I I I I LET 7 8 I I I ~ I I I ) I I ~ I ~ (RO. 70 c mcc N'LT 50• xGR cones La aw >R9 .v PNF (NC 'A~ I ML I ' I wclasm A1451EV I ~FVNPE ql£-N ME\ EL91YE HMIYVpR➢ I 0 I RIG :..ry P.WP • L xHR , 9 Q ~ I I I I b R Ta "no Son, 0909 rzES Lo00 TexAxr AIIPA rzxAxr uEA N9xumRr ux R9R 1% miT. PER FACE ♦ry 4111 IV sa r,rc (IY tlw mx) sro. WE DETAIL X - ENTER to SIGN SV 1'=10' O V • ~l WBR WIE/@MI 0' LOT 5 70 N)OB'r EUOW26t CANTAA KIERSTATE 70 SERVICE ROAD WEST tRa... vua¢) 0Rw LOT A LET A ; LOT 4 LET S AIOGE 1 .MAL_PN7E00 OAAOENL I I RtA ZpM STM DATA, ATANTE 1 TOT& 9REA - 128.039 SQUARE FEES OR 28935 ACRES ENSRMO cauA GFE mE r t. BLOIX 1) AAFA t MI.201 SO= R dR 1.MM ALNFS NST PMT OFD Oflf10NENT PLLN IECMiOFD AT OW B JB• PAGE 48 Fdl'fPItlN @BW76385 CCO TIMES RESTN@AM 511E (LGT 2 9LCK 1) MTA - 27.400 SQUME FEET OR 0.0290 MR6 (DOUBLE ORNE-TNRU) BAU W G.FA - BOB SOUME FFEf PMNNG REWRED 10 SPMm PIIIXMG ~DED I SPACES (5WC£ GRNE-1XPoU W ONE-IN) mmm GFA - 2100 SQUARE FEET P.WXW(: REANRED S SPACES PINOtIO PBWIOEO - b SPICES MVBIJM BUIRDMO mc - 25 FEET IEBi BUNIIK SBE Lc j M 1) MEA - 55.A18 SOWRE fEEf OR 1.2727 MR6 MAMNG W'A - I3,410 4AH4E iFET PIAd.G REwu-O 90 S m RARNNC NMOM ~ BO SPICES MVMUM RNLOMG Ifr]GW - 25 EEET ZINNIA STREET cs ~ I 41 I I J I I j ~ o w o I - - ~ q <n I b g • Z N e Ixr, mIID x0D0 EoAS o I 9~ ~ I SAT 2 $ I am COURT (b' RA1ej al'IR} DAT FA OM TOTAL MFA - 12X,885 S(WkAE FEET OR 29358 KR6 nmKR6 SFET IORw0)I4RE5 S FEET P. lw RFgUgFD : DO SPICES PANBNC PROAOED 80 SPICES HARMAN SUEDNC NEBBIF - 25 FFEt IuasclsE MFR: (Lm z adx z) MFA 1V 9pUME FEET OR 021 /GR6 PACE A A9FA ~ 9,&52 bUAVE FELT CR 0.2282 M.R6 OLPfA' 511E (LOT 5 BLOCK 2 AREA - 10.288 !QUME FEET OR 0.2157 M%5 BL11➢BM. G.FA 2823 SQUARE fEEf W OMM BUMMG REGNT = 28 FFEi N 05 4 L13 4L EXIEItlOR I%I MI E MHOS 5HVL BEM COIWIrAMCE 1V11N 1NE 1 GIY OF MHFAL FIIXS OROXNVCE 1015, CVMIFA 28. AQRCIF I. SE. 1B-b(S) OF 1RE "UT MWE CODE OF WYS, kNRI4D E%1EF10R U.9 snR9Nms NE JMM M:CFSS ASIES INIEAIW. TO WBM9 ME4S 9 BE SP M AS FEE LWES. IF PEWURED BY ME OISIRICf. ALL OWNERS. X4!10015 MD CUESIS SYNC ILKE TREE Ngfl1ENT ThROUCIL MD USE OF NL PM C. OML ASKS A40 CURB CUR NL 1PA41 ENCLOSURES $R/11 9E WOE OF N0.FW0Y$E KATE 70 WEST BUSINESS CENTER AMENDMENT NO. 2 AN OFFICIAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN OF THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE COMBINED PRELIMINARY-FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN LANDSCAPE PLAN P 1r A6 w SCALE 1' = 40' LEGEND ZWO. 6' "H WOODEN FEHL'E PROMSED 0' NOH WOODEN FFNCE . - P0.CP09D ON ME ® E-RD -1 C URW D ATA TAB LE CWIH RbI1S LEHOM CWRD CHORD WN.T Ct 1 3• BSDY 13,.17' N 5'54T I2D.6r C3 5 M 135.00' 51.2T SIT3TI2 50.91' C3 33'30'00• 190.00' ]].93' S,73X124 ]].3B' C{ BT39'IB• 31 31' N 11Y 36.18' 05 3521']8• 11IS75.W' 11. 81 W=4 SW= 41T 78.96' c6. eT3YO3_ 128.W' 190sY Saz58't9Yl n3SY )NTATE 70 O Y IU7 ' W 'a + * ' j ® ~ • *>:,ti ~ y:l j . i : 9 t : ~ j ri 1 unaN TITLE SPKF/RA4 (LW W WNG mlu wm LIS _Y, 1 1 I I W I I it I i 9 LOT - I ' i 70 YYEBT auzl Lo 8 LOT 7 1 LOT 9 LOT 0 1_BL 0' 79A I S I BLB[ I I F; _ __l I I - - - - - - - - - - - - - fUN I-Sclicum c R' w rsuus msus w z uwm ewir muxx, rw ,ru aae, sl utx w w a -6 qx w+nwv c zo clnu nw n sex,s rags c rcxx, ma ,w .w almn to .mmo ~ m„r T ~ ur m.wx .w¢ mwc w,e ss rr/uws w swwcas x P wva oa wrrEws cmwru iwma ~-Vr wesA ae e/.nn mxn. w urn w m~Ir/vlcr, m arurl ous uuus xwxr I-,? ~"u eee. zswam muxx. w wo ow axram 9-IS f mMm. w ,~c w~ rl Imww wmnnu wmme.ucwwv+ s x caawm .z .w zoxco `:k~i) I sw 5- x-I - - .eo m• uxrcx t- Dw r Nwvr 1t 1' FOR Y= t x9rlwKx[ - 1-07 4 i OT 3 I APPLEYIO3)tl flAAOsN8 R+A ZCwa I 1 1 1 1 ur I' RJR 11116 Y YMOtrv W 3S• NNO N Y PYE i f PIE z§ Zy nee gg LOT 2 g I -------J-------- - - - - - - - 03 ZINNIA CCURr ceo' aD.a, HOB 1. LANMWE SOEDRiDES (1 .10 tt1LER4NCE) "LL BE AS F01LOW5 (M( O ERNSE STATED): SOD MEAS - 2' BROW FINISH GRADE (1• SOL PRERM 1014 + 1' SOD). PIIWF ARE/5 - 4' BELNY FlN@I MADE (1' WIL PREPN =T 4 3' MULCH). 2 WRIFY FIELD CONDITIONS ANT NOTIFY n E LMDSCME A MELT OF ANY OISCREPMUES PRIOR TO PROCEEDING W1TH TIE WORK. 3. PRONDE A S MEO UYDUT OF ALL PILWO!%G LOCATONS MO ALL EDGER LOMONS FOR REMBY THE WIOSWE MCHIIER, PRIOR TO SEGNNING THE WDRK. 4. MULCH .VL PLWIING B_E05 WIM ROCK OR CEDAR W UNLESS O IE SE N .MULCH Pll AREAS TO PRMDE A 3 SETTED DfPM a ALL PV WTEFt SPECIFIED ORE SUBJECT TO AVMLARL . SUISIT11E PLANT WTERIALS WY BE USED IF ODAUTT OF PLANK ARE EOLLAL TO OR SUPERIOR TO THAT SPECIFIED. S. NL PUNT AND LAWN AREAS TO BE SPRNKLED BY AUIDWTC SPRINKEER SYS1W. RFAAIUST MD ADO NEW SMINKL£R SYBIEM, PS NECESSUtY. 7. NL V DSC M AREAS MD P WTFSkLS SHNL BE PEAPERVLLY MNNTNNED BY INDMDU PROPEKN USERS, OR A COWAERCIAL MNMEWNCE MSOCI WN EBTABUSHM BY PROPERTY OWNER, 70 WEST WSINESS CEMER. & 1MDSWE PLW FOR t 3. BLOCK 2 SHALL BE OETERMINM AT TIE nME OF BUILDING PERMIT. I I I I I I ~ I I I I I I I I I I ZINNIA STREET (w' ao.WJ i I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I i I i I I I r----------- I I I I I I I I I I I I I LOT 1 70 YJEOT 8=1l9a8 tlEUTEA I Pmvlwm®r~.ERVYL Onannem mrac I 4.EF 4-I I ❑ 1-W I-PP 1 I 1 1 2- 1~A 1 I I 1 ~ O A I 9 @ I I-9. I 1 I I 1 I O O 2~ 1` 3wN la-.ea I- 1xsm~cnxeco 1 I I I I I-4 yg I i x+'il-RE _ _ I I I EYBIId] COLIlrl1Y cN£ I t-d LOT 8 I I lar a w x- EP 70 WEST BUBILYE89 CENTER - . - 8 ll8tl1Y197fIN 71LI80 Ntl. 2 • I x-YP xb1 - I ~ ~ tl OEH A@ PPNKC I I I Ar~w~P ~n I 1-It0 <-9F I-ql 3-YP /t / J ` II 11 ~1 F ETAL TLRF IN omATE 70 SERVICE Rd9D 'NEST (0.0. W. gPF$) 70 WEST BUSINESS CENTER AMENDMENT NO. 2 AN OFFICIAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN OF THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE COMBINED PRELIMINARY-FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN GRADING, DRAINAGE & EROSION CONTROL PLAN 0 IY Ip' W STALE 1 = 40' LEGEND IXTINC B' Wp1 WOODEx FENCE MTRNC WMOUN UNE PR MED 8' t "NOBEM FENCE ® PM?' cCNIDIIR N2 - PNCPWm M UNE FIDN clnc N li C URVE MTA TABLE CWFE CENiRFl NICIE FIDR6 M CHORD Clplal LFNCM c1 W2CIZ• 85.CO• 13Atr NM'zS•u*E 120.87- C2 2T30'W 123.Op' 812Y S1TSY1 50.91' Gl ]S]0 W 190.W JJ.93 S1T3R f PJ8 C4 8a2a'le• P. W' 3121' NAS31 S1'M 'N.18' C3 YSN ]e• 1JS.W' JJ.61' SK2241 ]8.98' OR ar3raz• 1z5.W' lao.a3'sazsa'1a nzar I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I DEIEHTON FOND 3 (VMUNE 22,900 CF) LOT I 70 Waal SMIN-0913 taNYJi F tlMIINi®CCYiFCIxLDP O,,E R1JLMq IIIIIIII11I~1 o f-I o EMUNO cotJMMf CAFE 70 _ _ - - - - - 1 a E%6TNG CCfpCO '1 LTiT 3 70 'APA'f a0aLlaae =INTER RU90171a1m PILING Na. 2 w I w 9 9 ~,Pe m®. sM,~ 11,.. 44 SILT FENCE FF-VNO.W W I I ~ I I <s I I Lm a 70 1Y2971' AUM915A I LET 7 Lm a taafm 1 S I I I I ~ I I I ~ 1 1 \ _ _ L Lm a 1 L0'f 4 i Lm 0 I 1 aLOGX 1..SPPI WZ100 UMBRA I R4A ]<M'O ~ I I I I 1 I ZINNIA COURT LOT 2 ~ I I <n I 4 03 3 Ms i ¢ t CALL IfRfT'l NOTFaCATION 1 C@fIBt OFCOLORADO iWROn~BS.wTe F9NFaa ~ uxuaadWm Nam1 anno I / NOII: HQDS: (1.1TxIMOFD) 1. HL s SE PE ACC w11H a. AU. E3EVATroxs 4411 BE ~•.a.~.= as.m.m. "'°"•Pv I % , Y FERSON ME RRENT EM CRY OF M'0 JEFFERSON COUNTY cU WIXT ER GtU& GRI➢ ARE AS PER ING XO A4D OIWWCE F.q. ( FOI EaFK NS $IOxM R05 AND SPEpfIG1pN5. ME I-'!0 SEMTE RND NEST PIISUC WPRq'FYFNFS 51411 / z. CM W NNGT PONE AND JEFFERSON MJNW 5441 RM N MN 1 RE 1111111IF5 BE NARN"m BY THE ;Wt CINE Ix WAI(S) AVO/OR CWRMY PESWMS1dE !S' fMAIFMI OF 1k4T \ OdIENFREN POND 2 1 1 -S . BE RESPOHSaEE FOR WI IEt CE OF IN PVHIC M FAYATE a1PRFNENFM IN ME JO wFST . r (W E 12 914 CiJi 1 3. E)(W URIIt INFORIV.TDIE 5 FipN Fff1d SURaEI'S g WANESS C Q ON A DLLY BASS, OR AS NEEDED, SUCH , NEE, AS NET INFORNAWN, GAMERED FROM AVMIRIE TAT THEY AE FREE OF ROD MD OMER CONSTRUC11P4 SOURCES. CONRALIOR 4 UNCOVER MD Y£REY DEBRIS MXMN4 M. THE StFL i XCAMM MD EI£MTNIN OF Al E=MG URURES I BEFORE N4R0 mm =RNBO ONS OR CROSSWGS FNLAE M COMPLY RIM THIS WOUWEIAERT WLL RESULT I MD PRO= MEN )AtlW CON4RJCIpN. IN THE FNFORCETIEM OF MfIC1E It. SPEMEO NUSkNM5. _ ` _ SECRON 15-21(3) OF ME WHEAT RIDGE WOE OF UWS. R 15 ME fl UD' OF THE WNSTRUCRON _ Ncv TO ME UT9 W NMN on fff1~lY1B5: 1987) OF L II (1-.'W-sn -lsm) IER OF PBR " VA Nrc ExavATron. cm of ~TRIIXXE BA A5: OEBORREED INLET PROTECTION 1 VEHICLE TRACKING CONTROL PAD tR TOP W BRASS C N P.WOE GE WX WX AT ME ' ME R s. ME C WNR4LTMt RES POns@IE MN F zsC a. , R. IEC110 OF R 32K L'R 5F Szxo T. W N. AT ME xIFA5 794M 1. DURING ME FOR IOIPORIAY EROSION CONIRW ALRB S UE AV fl1 W % flS. RVE L IM. coxsRNCRW PmIW 27. Euvnnox = sszzn• F.F.~ANtO I I I 1 1 1 g I € I g I I i 1 1 I I I I i ZINNIA STTRM 70 WEST BUSINESS CENTER AMENDMENT NO. 2 AN OFFICIAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN OF THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE COMBINED PRELIMINARY-FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN UTILITY PLAN f 14. D w m SCALE I' - 40' LEGEND EVSIINO GAS UK -s`- - am,nmo SWRA41 SEWER UK ---ns--- IXRTND SRMN SEIYEN ME n _ IXBFBW WAIFN ONE - - - - U.. 1pEPNONE ME EIOSTNO S. OWN WOODEN FENCE a PROPOSED smff Q SEWR TINE PROPOSED MUER ME PROPOSED W HON WOODEN FENCE PROPOSED UN ME C UNrE D ATA TA COURSE RAD415 IFACIN BHDRO 1CHORDGIH Cl 9PZ5fY 6l.. I3.1r RuM5'54E 120.67 3S 00 125.00 51.3 S1Z521 1 0 3J 00 190.00 71.95 51ZY112 ) .]6 Cf 6429'l6' 20.0 31.21' NAS31'51 W 2A16 05 25'11 S6 1]5.00 '11.91' S M 41 70.96 C6 613,07 125M.. 19o.9s 54ZSA19w 1]2.91' CALL UTLRY NOTFICATION CENTM Or COLORADO cNi 2eiv+NCe eaoR WNw Cf utIX~N/d up2t NU116 NPIFS 1. I WORK SW DE MRFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WHIN CURRENT CRY OF WHEAT RERZ STANDARDS AND SPFyIFIGATONS.MD Jf101I60N Cg1N1T 2. CRY OF WHEAT RIDGE AND .IEFFFREOR COUNTY S ROT BE RESP ER.E MR MNNIENMOE OF ON-SITE URUTES. 3. E)R5 URUTY INFORIMNON 6 FROM FIE1D SURVEYS M AS BURT INFORWTION GATHERED FROM AVA4 SOURCES ONIRACTOR SHN1. UNCOVER AND YERIM UC MON IND EUNA110N OF H EXERINC UTRRIES BEFORE WANG URUR CONNFCHWNS OR CROSSNOS AW PMORCT THEM DMINC ONSIRUCIIOK f. R IS NE R6PoNSRB OF TVE 0N51RULTON OMMCIOR TO NO11FY T£ LFBUIY NOMCCIGN CDTER OF CIXMVCO (1-00-922-1907) PRIOR TO ANY E%W.0.. 5. THE ONSIRUCTON CONTACTOR SWL BE RESPONSBIE MR TEMPO EROSION CONIR04 OURWO THE CgN51RUCIlON PERIOD. 6. NL PIPE WWRX SH BE AS FOULMS MI SPECN1G11.Y STATED OMERTASE: 6' F.H UNES SW BE DUCTEE IRON PIPE. WATER UN0 S BE M ES S BE P BOB ]5. 51S SILLLL BE REP CN55 3 m Ci 0g No ~V I I I I I I I I I I I I i I ~ I I I 1 I I I i ZINNIA STREET Eb' RO.Wd I I I I I I I I I li I I i I I I I I 1 v 1r 9r SCP1E 1" = 40' a'9ME~t ~9a• STA1+29.9'! 4.VE t -5 6TA 1+79.97 S t. STA 2+19.97 xuE t ~ o< r A.o J r CWIPACRD 9V0-PWL. mwwam m vu aF R1x ~ Vµ1SY .tlLiMV2 Y1M MONOLITHICALLY PLACED 6- VERTICAL CURB, GUTTER do SIDEWALK SECTION A-A SF L 1'.Y - - - r cvuvAClm sDa~v.DE ° au m Wix E9Ww aNe s vumR Avwm r-w 4' CONCRETE WALK SECTION B-B . 1'.r xrw soar TO t~"is°G'on OFF ..Tm wNE rmm.mm at.vm Air Nm roeuz.rm •Mns rvE nsn•. ~ au~en PRS(S➢ r Wt¢ Art!cxm covoc~E.uN 4 S MR. DCR 1 Y~ S<INTERSTATE 70 .a r- , / L__-_- a L _I r1 ~ c . s IX6T. IW911U'PPW PMIP / T / J 1 9 h r i O p o o rr XI «P rr « N E9 + 9.i + 1L o. ♦ I L + EE 1r I P S > > W ,1 . ~ d . 10 WW W d d 4'I 5524 'ss 5524 5520 c~nw aF UPPAV~ m UP OF 5520 +w 2. PROPOSED t1P OF GV11Qt PROF1lE EAST Sim OF 1-70 SETMCE AND WEST l P O'. P IS P P f a V N N h afV > ~ > d ' d R~. d W t d W _ W u 5524 v+S 5524 5520 5520 01-00 D+q M90 1+A t+W 3K0 +W VWNG CENTEREIRE PROFII£ OF 1-70 SERNCE ROAD WEST CALL umrry NOTFiCAT10N cEwo or COLOR400 Pw x~W~n~ .MEites i CRY OF Wr1FAWPo BN OERPo® M: TIN OF B C W WNGE BOX AT THE M 1 M"M S=N 39, R.WW. AT THE Rl1FISEC110R OF W 3MD AYE A RE SIIZEIS F1F'AT[IN I HE SHEET 8 OF W GOOD TIMES cW 4 i ~tR 3 - s. . OPTIONAL RE57ROOM am e . V4' . P-0' n iGPWPAPIFEI B 2 . V4' . V-0' %{R FY A L9fFR FLOOR PLAN E . 114- . I•-®' RIGHT SIDE ELEVATION CG . V4' . I.-C. FRONT ELEVATION SHEET 9 OF 10 OFFEE/WAREHOUSE TA. PARAi£T o0'-O' ,ep^I~'IU/ ~ ' 'ppI II l ZEE FMLA4 FLOg2 ICO'-0' A I SOUTH ELEVATION NOTE: EXTERIOR CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL e'•I'T m' TO MATCH OR BLEND WITH EXISTING BRICK WALL IN TRACT "A". t-A--IF 1 L s NORTH ELEVATION 3 4 1 F~ F-1 - - _ T ~~LYnyIII '~~III KEYNOTES: I !BEST ELEVATION ow„Y ~LAee MUa.Lw neTAL Fw.r~ s"•I'-0' EAST ELEVATIGN SIMILAR 3. Or£REPD GFRKaE COiR 4. OTA' GEdM tEfAL pOCF 5. DFTNi FABC:IA 1`x/`\'\~~``Iy1 P UtED ~./l 'L OAgC GMY GL48B W AWIIWIT 6i~T 0, dITIER AND CgWgbJT 9 PAFA°ET pEYdy I MTAL CAP FLA6MPY IL WWTH FAQ L iE BLLCK O. /Yy..LgU MEf4 DOJR MID F,yY£ 13. GPLIT FAGS taiLf£TE CLGCK DATE OF LAST REVISICN: I-T-SS PREPARED BY: INTERSROUP, INC. ARCHITECTS 1000 WEST LITTLETON BLVD. LITTLETON, CO 50110 303-'138-8877 SHEET 10 OF 10 RETAIL TO. P43 T 119'-0` J, d rEral R0.'F s• Ta m•• 1 - - ~ Ta FAlCA -m• InI TENANT 8 GNAGE s ao Fe e m 1 It 3 ~ T 2 FMbN R0.'R 'F6'-0' A AST ELEVATION ' NOTE: EXTERIOR CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL -0" ~s -I TO MATCH OR BLEND WITH EXISTING COUNTRY CAFE AND CONOCO ® n BREAKPLAC'c. (vu e UNLIT TENANT SICsNACsE r II 13 I1 WEST ELEVATION 1 4 II KEYNOTES: T LLI - T - A - ~ z. cacr~TE cauv, aesE s. b° DIAMETER prEEL P+FE couaN T 4. 9TMMDMO EEeIi tETel Id~CF D. DRTNT FACCIA b. LKaXl FIX11I8 NORTH & SOUTH ELEVATION 1 ~ m~+ T 4 PMIJ'ET CEYR.D 10. METO L4°R.W'!Pb IL YICOtN FACE CLTY~E XCCK 12 IYM1dY YEiel OCdR AVD FRAME 19. GPIIGNAL Dla°LAY WNDNa GN MOT FG E MAY M AD M FMAL LQB TILN DRdYRYap. IA EPLIT FACC ~ ML DATE OF LAST REVISION: I-9-99 PREPARED BY: INTERGROUP, INC. ARCHITECTS 4000 WEST LITTLETON BLVD. LITTLETON, CO 80140 303-938-889T . , q w;~ - ti` ~~r:o 6 •.~.,~w.::'...r . PREPARED FOR: DWAINE R. RICHTER 1 4 ~1 1 q ~ i M ♦ 1i ! ~ i ~ i • • ! 0 M ~ i # ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ D ~ 0 i ~ ~ ! ~ • i ~ 4 ~ ~ • b ~ # l b i i i ~ i 0 ~ ~ 6930 FAST GIRARD X205 DENVER, COLORADO 80224 a a _ E PHONE: (303) 584-0669 PREPARED BY: ENGINEERING SERVICE COM ATTN: DAVID ADDOR f 1300 S. POTOMAC STREET, S AURORA, COLORADO 80012 } i PHONE: (303) 337-1393 ~ .t 1 ~ i•~~# iti i~•w4l~i4Mi♦!r!N'!l00~•i49~~~~#~~+~~WM~i4+~~lilW~+4~•i~A464W8~41~~ai ~r ~ _ _ ~ ~ ~ w~ Zvi ■ '4 f.~. ~ ~ ~ ■ 3 t o d,a/ 4 e a 4 ~ r~ ! l S ® ~"`4 ~ " f~ ~ ~b . ~ a~~.,~w~, 1 1. 1. Ail. ~VQRK i~r''i'i-iii THE PUBLIC 62iGM1~-OF-WAY OR EASEMENT SHALL DWAINE R. RiCHTEt~ E.~EI dG iNL LV~lni~S~ QF LOT 4, LC~T 6, A,P~r, ~ ~a CpNFGRM TO 1"E-iF GTY OF' WHEAT RIDGE ENGINEERING REGULATIt3NS, OF ~.OTS 1 ANf7 7, ~'U WEST SI;~IMESS CENTER, TOGETHER ~VIT AND DESIGN STANDARDS. OWNER dF LOTS 1 AND 2, 70 WEST BUSINESS CENTER SUBDiV FILING N0, 2, AM1ID V1f;GlNIA L, R{GNTER AS PART pWNER QF L 2. AN APPROVED RIGHT-O~-WAY C9NSTRUCTiQN PERMfT AND A MUNICIPAL 2, 70 WEST BUSINESS CENTER SUBDIVISION FILING N0. 2, SITU CONTRACTOR'S LICENSE {S REQUIRED PRIOR TO ANY WORK COMMENCING THE NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER QF SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 3 WI~`HIN THE PUBLIC RIGHT-flF-WAY. ANY WC}RK PERFORMED WITHIN RANGE 69 WEST OF THE 6TH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, iN THE CITY WEST 33RD AVEivUE. STATE RIGHT-OF-WAY SHALL REQUIRED AN APPROVED STATE WHEAT RIDGE, CpUNTY OF JEFFERSON, STATE OF COLORADO, M C~I~STRUGTION PERMIT PRIOR TQ ANY WORK COMMENCING. PARTICUkARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS; 3. 3. IT SMALL BE THE CONTRACTOR'S RESPONSIBILITf TO NOTIFY THE LOT 1 AND LOT 2, 70 WEST BUSINESS CENTER SUBDIVISIQN Fi OWNER/DEVELOPER OF ANY PROBLEM IN CONFORMING TQ THE 2, JEFFERSON COUNTY, COLORADO; ~ ~ w ~ APPROVED CONSTRUCTION PLANS FQR ANY ELEMENT OF THE PROPOSED ~ ~ o IMPROVEMEPITS PRIOR 70 ITS CONSTRUC~IQN. AND ~a <r 4. 4. IT SHALL 8E THE R~SPONSI~ILiTY OF THE DEVELOPER DURING COMMENCING AT THE SW CORNER OF THE NW 1 /4 OF SAID S CONSTRUCTION ACTtVITiES TO RESOLVE CONSTf2UCT10N PROBLEMS DUE THENCE N89'43'30"E ALQNG THE SOUTH UNE OF SAID NW 1 /4 :s z a ~ ~ TO CHANGEQ CONbIT10NS OR DESIGN ERRORS ENCOUNTERED BY THE DISTANCE OF 559.67 FEET; THENCE N00'16'30"W A DISTANCE G(}N'TRACTpR DUUiNG THE PROGRESS OF ANY PORTION OF THE 35.40 FEET TO THE SOUTHEASTERLY CORNER OF SAID LOT 4 L 0 h PRUF'i~SEi: WORD. 1~, IN THE QF'INION OF TWE CITY'S INSPECTOR, THE THE NORTHERLY R.4.W. LINE OF WEST 32ND AVENUE, SAID P41 MOQIFIC~4?EONS PROPOSED BY THE DEVELOPER TO THE APPROVED THE POINT OF BEGfNNING; THENCE S89'43'30"W ALONG THE SQ F. W 4- d r WEST 32ND AVENUE ~ PLANS INVOLVE SiGNI~`ICANT CHANGES TO THE CHARACTER OF THE LANE OF SAID LOT 4 AND SAID NORTHERLY RA.W. LINE A DIST WORK 01~ 7C7 FUTURE CONTIGUOUS PUBLIC OR PRNATE IMPROVEMENTS, 95.18 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVE; THENCE ALONG A CURVE T w w ~ ~ THE: DEVELOPER SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR SUBMITTING REVISED RIGHT WHOSE CHORD BEARS N45'31'S1"W A DISTANCE OF 28.1 r F , Pt,ANS TO THE CITY 0~ WHEAT RIDGE FOR APPROVAL PRIOR TO ANY FEET, SAID CURVE HAVING A CENTRAL ANGLE QF 89'29'18", A FURTHER GQNSTRUCTION R~LATE[~ TQ THAT Pt~RTION OF WORK. ANY RADIUS OF 20.00 FEET, AN ARC LENGTH OF 31.24 FEET TO A to to IMPROVEMENTS CONSTRUCTED N07 IN ACCORDAMCE WITH THE TANGENT LYING ON THE WEST LINE OF SAfD LOT 4 AND THE E APPRQVED PLANS, OR THE APPROVED REVISEp PC~4NS, SHALL BE R.O.W. LINE OF ZINNIA COURT; THENCE N00'47'12"W ALONG SAI w -z a ~ z 2 X ~ Z N N d F2EMOVED AND THE IMPROVEMENTS SHALL BE RECONSTRUCTED TO THE TANGENT ANp SAID WEST LINE A DISTANCE OF 70.1$ FEET TO APPROVED PIANS. CORNER OF SAID SOT 4; THENCE N89'43'30"E ALONG THE NOR LINE OF SAID LOT 4 A DISTANCE OF 115.04 FEET TO THE NE 5. 5. BLUE STAKES -THE CONTRACTOR SNAIL CONTACT BLUE STAKES FOR SAID LOT 4; THENCE NQO'47'12"W ALONG THE WEST ~iNE OF L LOCATION ON UNDERGROUND GAS, ELECTRIC AND TELEPHONE UTILITIES AND THE EAST LINE OF LOT 5, 70 WEST BUSINESS CENTER A AT LEAST 4$ HOURS PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF ANY CONSTRUCTIQN. OF' 668J3 FEET TO TWE NE CORNER OF SAID LOT 5, SAID P0 PHONE 303-534-6700. ON THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 6; THENCE S89'40'OQ"W 1~+iITY ~AAP s. ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 6 A DISTANCE OF 3 6. ALL UTiI.ITY POSES SHALL ~E RELOCATED PRIOR TO THE F'LACEMEN7 OF FEET TQ THE SW CORNER OF SAID LOT 6; THENCE N00' 10'40" CQNCRETE. ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID LOT 6 A DISTANCE OF 204.60 N 1' T SCALE THE NW CORNER OF SAID LOT 6; THENCE N89'39'00"E ALONG 7, 7, WITH NOTIFICATION OF THE RESPECTIVE OWNER, ADJUST RIMS OF ALL CLEANOUTS, MANHQLES, VALVE COVERS AND SURVEY MQNUMENTS NORTH LIh1E OF SAID LOT 6 AND LOT 7 A DISTANCE OF 390.8 PRIaR TO THE FINAL PAVING LIFT. THENCE S00'30~00"E PARALLEL WITH ANO 40.00 FEET EASTERL THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 6 A DISTANCE OF 293.51 FE 8. THE CONTf2ACTOR SHAI~~ PROVIDE ALL LIGHTS, SIGNS, BARRICADES, POfNT LYING N4N-TANGENT ON A CURVE; THENCE ALONG A CU 8. FLAGMEN OR OTHER DEVICES NECESSARY TO PRdVIDE FOR THE PUBLIC THE LEFT WHOSE CHORD ~FARS S48'22'41 "E A DISTANCE OF 7 SAFETY IN ACCQRDANCE WITH THE CURRENT MANUAL ON UNIFQRM FEET, SAID CURVE HAVING A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 25'24'36", A TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES. RADIUS OF 175.00 FEE?, AN ARC LENGTH OF 77.61 FEET TO LYING NON-TANGENT ON A CURVE ON THE NORTHWESTERLY R. 9. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE AND MAINTAIN INGRESS AND EGRESS LINE OF INTERSTATE 70 SERVICE ROAQ WEST AS DESCRIBED AT 9. TD PRIVATE PROPERTY ADJACENT Td THE WORK THROUGHOUT, THE RECEPTION N0. F052Q327 Of THE JEFFERSON COUNTY, COLOR PERI00 OF CONSTRUCTION. PRIOR TO BEGINNING ANY WORK, THE RECORDS; THENCE ALONG A CURVE TO THE LEFT WHOSE CHOR rn 07 - CASE hbSTORY CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN A WRITTEN AGREEMENT FROM THE BEARS S42'58'19"W A DISTANCE 0~ 172.91 FEET AND ALONG AFFECTED PROPERTY OWNER(S) IMPACTED BY THIS ACCESS. NORTHWESTERLY R.O.W. LINE, SAIb CURVE HAVING A CENTRAL OF 87'31'02", A RADIUS OF 125.00 FEET, AN ARC LENGTH OF WZ-74-18 10. 10. PRIOR TO THE FINAL LIFT OF SURFACE PAVEMENT, ALL UNDERGROUND FEET TO A POINT 4F TANGENT LYING ON 7HE WESTERLY R.O.W. UTf~iIY MAINS SHALL BE INSTALLED AND SERVICE CONNECTIONS OF SAID INTERSTATE 70 SERVICE ROAD WEST; THENCE ALONG STUBBED OUT BEY~NO THE BACK OF CURB/SIDEWALK LINE WHEN WESTERLY R.O.W. LfNE THE FOLLOWING SIX (6) COURSES: WZ-76-20 WZ-7$-14 ~r~ wz-~s-zo ALLOWED BY THE UTILITY. SERVICE FROM PUBLIC UTILITIES AND FROM wz-s4- ~ o SANITARY SE1lJERS SHAI.I. BE MADE AVAILABLE FOR EACH LOT IN SUCH A MANNER THAT WILL NOT BE NECESSARY TO DISTURB THE STREET wz-~s-s PAVEMENT, CURB, GUTTER AND SIDEWALK WHEN CONNECTIONS ARE wz-92-~~ MADE. WZ-96-3 11. 11. A MYLAR COPY OF "AS BUILT" PLANS SHALL BE SUBMITTED Tb THE CITY OF W-b-1 WHEAT RIDGE PRIOR TO FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE WORK. WZ- 7 -1 c.. CLERK AND RECORQER'S CE~CTlFI(:THIS DOCUMENT ACCEPTED FOR FIL - - - 1, u 12. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY THE CITY INSPECTOR AT LEAST 24 HOURS PRIOR TO THE DESIRES INSPECTION. CLERK AND RECORDER OF JEFFER<. 13. 13. NO PORTION OF THE STREET MAY BE FINAL PAVED UNTIL ALL STREET ON THE DAY OF LIGHTING IMPROVEMENTS, DESIGNED TO SERVE THE STREET AND/OR DEVELOPMENT, HAVE BEEN COMPLETED. PAGE RECEPTION JEFFERSON COUNTY CLERK .`-`tD RE 14. C-r) 14. SURVEY MONUMENTS MUST BE SET WITHIN 60 DAYS OF COMPLETION OF PROJECT. ErKxvmwm Service C^MWY BY: 1306 South Potomac Street, Suite 126 lam Aurora, Colorado 80012 Phone: (303) 337-1393 Fax: (343) 337-7481 engineers-surveyors DATE Of LAST REVISION: 2-24-99 24' 60' ~ _ . } ..~.~,m_ +urw 0 12' 4f7' 8t}' p_... ~ d r , , # S . ( ~ ~ 6 r { ° ~mm.m. saae~wr ,~..d. ®.s.~ . , ..,r.+ .wm v-:~r, m....w~w...«.. ~....rm .~.w.. s~ m~+r.„ w ~ ( ~ { x j fit.... y i. r_.._ ~ 7 1 ' i ..m~~._~_~.. ~ ~ i ~ ~ F'~ LEGEND ~y w ~ L ~ _ ~ v~ ~ ~ t ~l ~ ~ , -~--r---=-- EXISTfNG 6' HIGH WOODEN FENCE F { i t -;r--o-~--- RROPOSED 6' HIGH WOODEN FENCE } f ~ 4 Y i9 d t F{r r ~ 7 1 ~ ( ~ n ~ Ei ` 1 7 I r I i tf {ys ~ - - • - - PROPOSED SOT LINE ~ ~ i ~`s j m. EXISTING TREE k t { t 7 S { 1 ~ ~ ' I { t f S 1 { ~ { cum oA~r~, ~r,~~LE f i . I , € ~ F I { ~ i ~ 9 i ~ ~ w ~ ~ E I ~ i i [ COURSE CENTRAL Rp,DiUS LENGTH C}~C~i~f~ t;NbRD P a I ` ~ f ~ k 6 i I f _ _ fi ~ Ii. l 1 { t ~ fi m._~ , C1 90'26'12" 85.Q0~ 134.17' C~44'25'S4"E 1~C},6%''" C2 23'3Q'00" 125,C}C)' S t .2?° ~ 5 ~ x'32' 12"E ~C ~ 1 I j ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~_m,~ _.___~.m_~ E ~ , i ~ ~_..w~ I k I ~ __.r ~ { i N 1 A ~ -p 'y 1 M -F -•x ~p C3 23'30 40 19i},(}(~ 77.93 ~ 2'.x~: 12 E , ~ ~ I ..__,,.~..e>.~. S ~ ~ ~ k b ( ~ i E ~ ~ N C4 89'29'18 20.G4' 3'.~4' N4~5":~}'~1"W 2~ t~~' i ~~-~7 ~ ;3 ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~.JF C5 25'4°36" 175.00' 77.1 ` S~8`c~'~1 "E ?i~,98' I t ) ~ a { ~ C6 8T31'02" 125.U0' 19Q.~3' ~~2'`1~i~° 19°W t 72.91 ` t t I ` ~ ~ r ff ~ ~A~ ~,,~y i PCO u~~ ~a~r~ ~r~aa~~ ~ ~ ~ 1' f, 6 ~ s ,j + ~ ~ I f ~ ~ cl 3 ~ i z _ 1 ~ ~ ~ pp4 E ~ AAC'nI~AAC~IT yin ~ CouRSE ~E~F~ir~c3 ~E r+{:~f~ F r..''.. ~ t 1 R t 4 i i(.._.. ~ 1 ~ rftl r i I ~ ~m.~ f ; $ , ; t i ~ ~ !f ! i`_ n~~W.. J ~ } ~ i L4 N~39'39'Ut~"E ~ vU p I ji E f ~ L5 S~t6'30'6~"4h' 385°74" ~.m. I ~ ~ i ~o ~ { I { ' ~ ~ ~ d ~ ~ ~ - ~ ~ a F f { ! f { ~ r L7 52.4° i 7' 1 ~ "E 3fi,97' r ~ 1 s ~ 1 ~ j I ~ i ~ i L8 SC7Q'47'12°E 27.~F~t' 1 ~ R~ t ° i~ L9 `~~"''05'2"W' 31,99' f } L1 Q S8J'43'3C)"W ~ X2.14 4 i ~ ~rv s L1 T SOq'47'12"E F~.00' I k ~ d 1 I f t ~ , {f F L12 St3~'43'3Cl"W ~~~.18' C I i E ~ 1 t Y~ i ~ o" , ~d ~1 ~ ~ 1 ~ F } t 1 t'rr 4 1 ~ ! 'j ~ ~ ' r I; • ~i 5 m. ,o' ~A ! lei. I ~`~fd ;t~ 1 E t'e ~ .t.. ~ ~ ~ 1 :t 4~~ ~t t~ 's t ~ I, ~ ~ ► r ~ r ~ ~ ~ ~ .~d i ~t ~l • ;s fiw 1 i , v~ f. 4, ~ t~ ~ ~ ~ - ~ b 't Ll ~+d~ i ~ti s, dt ~ a ~ ~ ~ L 1 ~ ti l k ~a, r _ , .k ~ _ . ~,J . _a~ _d 4. i C ~ .mot. { ~ ~ t ~ i ~ M r , . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ t ~ ~ i I I ~ 1 I ~ ' ! i ~ E 4 L- E r ~'i `~f r-r-j L~"~ C1.1 w~ M C~q r OLULL SHR A SRlREA FROEBEL 5 GAS. NTAiNEi CONTAINER 12°-18HT. 7. ALL LANDSCAPED AREAS AND PLANT MATERIALS SHALL BE PERPETUALLY MA.'NTAIN WI TAINED i DIVID AL 4d.J CONTAINER tie°-1s~ Hr. PROPERTY USERS, OR A COMMERCIAL MAINTENANCE ASSOCIATION ESTABLISHED B CONTAINER - OWNER, 70 WEST BUSINESS CENTER. I F RY PROPRRTY t3 CONTtuNER 12° MIN SPREAD LANDSCAPE PLAN FOR LOT 3, BLOCK 2 SHALL BE DETERMINED AT THE TIME OF W q 1 t ` I REMARKS . H _MP d`A Cf) CONTAINER 15" MIN SPREAD ,ate CONTAINER 15" MIN SPREAD CONTAINER 15" MIN SPREAD K 70 WEST BUSINESS CENTER A AN OFFICIAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN OF THE COMBINED PRELIMINARY-FINAL DEVE GRADING, DRAINAGE & EROSION C 4' 24' 6Q' 0 12° 40' 80" S I.iALE I 'p = 't V' t ~ - _ - _ , i • e.. f'..~'' r. o ~ ~ ~ ~ EXISTING 6° hiiGH WQODEN FENCE ~ ;f ---________zo-------___ ~XlSTING CONTQUR LifdE f o a- r= PFZOPOSED 6' HIGH W04DEN FENCE j i o PROP~5~~3 CONTpUR LINE IS - ~ - PRaPOSEb ~.GT LiNE E ~+r ~ ~ ;~pj i ~ r ~ FLQW ~fRECTE{?N ~ _ . , ~ t (i ~t, t~ f ' F~ t ~F ~i; s ~ ~ i CURVE DATA TA~L~ ~ ~ COUR5E CENTRAi. RADIUS LEhiGTN ! l NC7RD CN~~C) ANGLE _ BE.•{~~NG LE~+~:;, t-~ `~i C1 90'2612" S5.4Q' 134.17' fw~4`25F54"E 3~,..~~'' C2 23'30bQ" 12~,0C?' 51.27' ~1~''.~2'12'°E ~r~.~t' G3 23`30'00" 19}.00° 77,93' S12'32'12"E 77.3' C4 89°2'18" ZCl.C~O' 31.L«~' +~4~'31'~1 "W 2~t. ? GS 25`24'36" 17~.t~Q' 77.61' a4~3'22"41 '6.~f3' C6 87'31'42" 125.+3(a' 19(}.93' S4%`~~' ~ g"W 172.E PCD( UI~E DATA TAF3LE ~ cauRS~ SEARING ~EN~TH L1 N00'4~'`1~~"W 273.3y' ~ N~39'39'QC}"E ?70.84' L3 NGQ'11 `C~C}"W 25.50' L4 N89'3~'t7(3"~ 25.+~G`3' L5 5tJ6`30'60"W 3z~~. ;~4' L$ 504'47'12°'E 27.08' l.9 S4T05'29'"W 31.99' ' ~ . _ _ _ - a ~ ~ I "y'" ~ { s l i 3 ' t r~ r' r ' ~ rr; R i 7 ~ is * ~ ~y ~ ~ I~ 4 `v k 9 =p ~ ~ ~ ~ ~E ~ 4"~~ 9 y 'c ~ 1 i J ~ ~ k f J i } 1 , ~ f ~+fy 4r'« R./ ~i.~ ~ Z a x f F ~ r [ „W ads { ~ / l ~ t ~ ~ ~ { ✓ff ~ j, Y 1 ~ 8 e 'h~J I s 1 4 ~ ~ 1 'y } ; ~ . ~ . 4 1~ ~ i9 i ~ M " ~ a .w "T' ~ ' d L w ~ } _ _ _ s ~ k u 4 r ~ ~ ;r ! r ,r 4! _ t t ~ Q a l~:f i , y @ L v. p p 3; 9 1" tv d ~ ~ ~ - 1 r ' ~ f i a ~ , f `L r''~ i 4 ~J i a I 1 S r i a 1 F 3 ~ s ~ ~ 9 j I s j 9 it f 4 ~ E x j ? 1 I i ~ i ! ~ ~ c } i ~ ~ ~l E I '.VF 1 I ~ s i I ~ Pa f ~ ~ i f t a ~ ~J~~~~~ ~ Ate' ~Tl'A~,~iEC' TAI T#~_ PAS ~,NC ~ E F P~C~' ~a A TP4F 1.1~ ~~;..TE~ C~Rf?9~~ C~SU~' E~. NE .~6L F~ , {~F YNl't9~ ~3~,~€~ FA9Ftf~:e STS ~dG, ~~PF~li~hi;~ ~fl "ER ~F tF~ f~R~ 115L~, t~~E 4E~iC~ F~~ SliP3R,T, FALTER ER ~ CSCR~ °---4- pF TAitE~ Iip ~~JFL+4P 1?Jl'Hk`TtC .T£R F,~f~C. i x r1^ r t ~r ~~~G~ r~~ ~L~ ~~a~~s ` ~sTU~s ~ , ~ 1lV1EfitCE r AREAS [)t~~+i~ ~~ta~~t~Cti~ ~PEh~~~ ~ ~ } ;,Ep~N7 FF f 1 f 2. TC~ ~£~RE ~ VELt7~t`f 4~' St~E3 FLT ! L~1+-~'~3-~DERATE r' Lr7N~fF'1~.f. 4L7 f fJ ~ f J f t1P'.3.9 4~ppg, l'~i.4,N7V ~ I !f ~y 6q~ rG~^k~ } { k~e ,.„r... .u-- .r 1 i i l f t 1 r ~ i `aTAh,I ~?4TE9VT7 fT #t~t'fD ~X'~~4TE~ %sll. T1~ H. ~ r >f~ 1- t ' ~ , t S i ~ ~ ~ i r i i 4 i t t W f / S-,~ 1 ~ ~ 1 ~ } 3 ti' J i ~ 4 1 r5 , `t 1 ~ ,t r ~ ~ 1 i ~ ! ~ s ~p~ ~y g I~ ~GVt~~ ~.~Grs E~CA~rA ~ A J~ \ ~ ppyy~~ ~~yy,,e p ~ ~y ~~,C`~~ ~ WnL+~ taP+ L.V~ ~i'c1,L.~. 1, 1 1 a ~u~ ~p ! p y S /~w~~~{ j 'E~AtE~t' FR ENTERING ST S~'STE~IS ~F~VR ! W 'a _ ~y ~ iWb -r w. 4M1~ M f ~ ~ 1 i t ~ t f ~ } 7 ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ , 3E yy ~ - fr E r s ~ ~ ~ Y !WWII F i , ~ f .A"I .~d9tk^, 4. fi ~.i I'+~r4d i ,:f t.'~-4-~i S:lr_!r.t E.';*-fir ! , ^~d f `~r?r:i I °1^~ . " ~RCES. CONTRACTOR SHALL UNCOVER AND VERIFY DEBRIS TRACKING FROM THE S1TE.v v vy •vy v WAIVE R. RICHTER _t g7'ICZd ANCLEl EVAT1ON OF AI _I FYISTW(; 11TH 17117C 6565 S 6565 SOUTH SYRACUSE WAY, SUITE 1202 t 4- Ill i ~ ~ i 't l 'r r E CLE y COLORADO 80111 C\j W F C~-- INLET P ROTE C"JI 0 N" l " - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E~•. AMENDMENT N0. 2 4° 24' 60' = CITY (~F WHFAT Rln(;F 0 12' 40' 80' .4 ~ w .,.~,e,~,n \ ~ M y ~.....,....M1-- ` . SCALE 1 " = 40' j~) ~"~ra ,av.++w.. f ~ w>. Y'! w~ °°'w"-spa. , ~ ~ i ! ~ ~ r ~ '1 ~ - -c- - - EXISTING GAS LINE VELOPMENT PLAN f f i `t Y' - - -ss- - EXISTING SANITARY SEWER LINE `~1 - - -srs- - EXISTING STORM SEWER LINE - - -w- - - EXISTING WATER LINE - - -r- - - EXISTING TELEPHONE LINE EXiS71NG 6' HIGH WOODED! FENCE ~NTERSTArE 70 - -L' k vAR~es> ss PROPOSED SANITARY SEWER LINE Z; . PROPOSED WATER LINE w PROPOSED fi' H~c~ waao~N ~~rvc~ - . PROPOSED LOT LINE CURVE DATA TABIE _ CQUFtSE CENTRAL RADIUS LENGTH CHARD CHQRO ANGLE C E fi+KINC; ~~~iGTH , G1 90'2fi' i 2" 85.00' 134.1 N44'25`54"E t 2C~ 6 7' j PC C2 23"3Q'd0" 125.CK1' 51.27' ~ t 2'32' 12"E ~u.91 C3 23'30'QO" 1 ~G,04' 77,93' St 2'32'ti 2"E 77.38` C4 89'29"18" 20,t~±~' 3t.~4' Na5'3t'St"W ~~.16' C5 2~'24'3b" 175.00' ??.6 i ' ! 5413"'~''~ 1 „E 'E~ 9g' C6 87'31'02" 125,OtJ' 130.93` ~~?`5t~'19'1M' 1?2.91' uN~ QA~r~, T,~~~~ F couasE ~~~~~r~c t_~NCrH ~2 N~i9':i9'fl~"E 17~~r34~' T L4 N~39'3~,~~ E ZSCU I ~ ~ ~ ~ 1~. i' L5 5~6'3t~`f+C}"w 38~i 7~' T FIB ~T - ~ ~ ~~E a RE F#Y~i ~ ~ , t t ~ , s r° ~ ~ j' ~ L6 S89°43'3Q"W .32.65' X1T E ~ -~~u.__~ ~~E T~ L7 S14't~'1L"E ;36•x'' i ;F -.P~ m ......~,~.4. ~ it 1 1 ~ ~ ~~~~~r. l.9 S47`~5'Z~J"W 31.9' ~ L10 S~9'43'30"W A~2.14' t 1 ~4~ '~I` S S ~4 `S M1 L12 ~3'3G.,w ; w.. j., 1 y ,.~R.~, ` 1 k__~ } ~ r L,14 ~i~3~ 43'3U"f 1 i S.Ofl" y ( ky. ~ ~ t f~~ ~ E 1 ky, ~ L15 ~v~~"4"?'t2`1ti ~68.~3' ~f ~ \ t, ~i6 S8J'4E3'QO"V~l ~~4'~3v~8L3~ L17 NOQ 10 04"W 204.6U' _~-~-r°~ Lt$ N$9 39`~~"E 39Q ~9` j l ~ h\ j ~ ~..r.~,....,..,. ry"~.. N, ~E 1.t3 5~030'flQ"E 2~~~.51' ~ i r~/~,r~1'~A 1> ~7'1 I ~ 4tV ~l~L 'T 7r 7 tp~ L~~.'t7# i F5 PRQP. ~iRE HYDRANT CALL. UTILITY N4T~IGATiC~I r t cE aF ct~.o~o t 1-~-'~7 w~srue & P~ CALL 2 BUSINE55 GAYS ~N ADVANCE BEFORE YOU DiG, GRADE, OR EXCAVATE FOR THE MARKING OF UiVDERGROUND MEMBER UTI1.tT1£S i- t ~ ~J r° F ~5 J t~- Hors: _ r ~ 1. AL,L WORK SHALL BE PERFORMED 4N ACCORDANCE WITH `t CURRENT CITY C3F WHEAT RIpGE AND JEFFERSON COUNTY STANDARDS AND SPECIFICATIONS. 2. CITY 4F WHEAT RIDGE AMD JEFFERSdN COUNTY SHALL NOT BE RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTENANCE OF ON-SITE UTILITIES. 3. EXISTING UTfLITY lNF4RMATION IS FRdM FIELD SURVEYS ~ AND AS BUILT INFORMATION GATHERED FROM AVAILABLE SOURCES. CONTRACTOR SHALL UNCOVER AND VERIFY a LOCA'i'tON AMD ELEVATION 0~ ALL EXISTING UTILITIES BEFORE t~AlCiNG UTILITY CONNECTIQNS OR Ci2QSSINGS ~ ..~n rnn~-rrr ruc~~ (lt IOIAtf` /~AAICTDI I/`TIf1AI rout! rnvI [:.✓s ITl{..M vv~~~I'm v ~+v..~.vv..u.. UWAINt K. Kl(;HI 4. IT IS THE RESF~ONSlBIUTY OF THE CONSTRUCTION 8" RCP -AS 6565 6565 SOUTH SYRACUSE WAY, SUIT 1202 ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO 80111 CONTRACTOR TO NOTIFY THE UTILITY NOTIFICATION CENTER OF COLORADO (1-80d-922-1987) PRIOR TO ANY EXCAVATION. DESIGN BY: cr_ 54 THE CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE t RML DF?A11M1 BY: JOP ~ FOR TEMPORARY EROSION CONTROL, DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PERIOD. CHECK BY: ORA 6, ALL PIPE MATERIAL SHALL BE AS FOLLOWS UNLESS ~ ----a--o---4-a-~--~---a---~----~-~,z SPECIFICALLY STATED OTHERWISE.- 6" F,H, LINES SHALL ~ SCALE.- Eno BE DUCTILE IRON PIPE, WATER LINES SHALL BE PVC ~ NC)R~: t•s40, SS SHALL BE PVC SDR 350 STS SHALL BE RCP CLASS 3 Phor VERT. L 4' 24' 60' SCALE 1 " = 40' ~ ~ ~ ~ ti } 4 a j~ C ~i y { ~ ~ I 7"J a ~ 1 1. _ ~ ~ i Syr ~i ~ ~ m ~ _ ~ a. v, ~ ~ r ` ~ t ~ 50' R.O.W. ~ ~ i y~ g° ~ I ' ~ _ F.: t . 68~---~~ Z1 P T HAS R ~ .e ~ ~r a .I s h. .F n I ~LYw•m•-w +w. sae +Y .w Wr c} ~ r ~ ~ ~ ~ s h., g~,~'. ~ "l.PS 1 ~~,r ~ , i , f ~ ~ ~ y, f r6 3 4 STA. 0+00.45 j ( ; ~ ~ h P ~ x .r L SCALE: i"=5~ 50' R.O.W. 2.28' a ~ SAw c~ ~ Y• a1 STA. 0+29.97 SCALE: t "=5• 50' R.G.W. ~ 3. i 2' 12. SAWCU v ~ 3. yR~s~~MiM • 'AY/ 7YT f#O won D `,~A . m gip` s Pik y sr~ {{A'"AEI • d X~~' 1I~J~ ! 1~1 pr 4x J fir/ j \~y tr w~ R eW`w ~ wen ~ wMl r.wn /w~ '4M V ~MM► STA. 0+79.97 gyp,,`/~ SCALE: 1 °'=5' r 50' R.O.W. . k 9 Yk6 ~ r~/q 2~_ 79~ 1 G~ ~ SAW ~ ~ ' I #'!F S ~i t y 6 i~ STA.1 +29.97 SCALE: 1"~5` P - 50' R.O.W. _ 2.96' 12. 1 z S• ~ SAWCU 0 a ~ 2 STA. 1 +79.97 L. SCALE: i "s5` 50' R J.W. 1 2.75" 11. ~ SAWCUT fl v ~ 3. ~~LZ~ STA. 2+29.97 SCALE: t»=5, CALL UTILITY f~TiF~Al10N CENTER OF COLORADO 1.5" RAD. 6° TRAhlSIT 2. 1. 1-800-922-1987 CALL 2 BUSINESS DAYS IN ADVRPfCE BEFORE YOU DIG, GRADE, OR EXCAVATE FOR THE - ~ MONOLITHICALLY P 6~ VERTICAL CURE, GUTTE 4 MARKING OF UNDERGROUND MEA~IBER UTilIT1ES tl~lGE BM DESCRIBED AS: G4P IN RANGE BOX AT THE WEST 1 /4 CORNER SECTION 29, T.3S,, Ii~TERSECTION OF W 32ND AVENUE AND ALKIRE STREETS. i~7.71' SECTION A- scA~e: ~»=2, N tU LL ~ ~r~" ~ PROP. 4'C0 ti-- Lt'o - 4 DWAINE R. RICHTER 65&%5 6565 SOUTH SYRACUSE WAY, SUITE 1202 EN LE OO , COLORADO 80111 uMwEn BY: EXISTING CURB s RHY 4' CONCRETE SEC"rION TElk-- SCALE: 1•=2• DRAWN BT: RHY CHECK 8'Y: ORA c.~ SCALE t :n C-) c~ HM: i 0=400 C'J Pt 1 7=4* ___a..~._~ e..m ~_m tl ~ ~ t~ _W___...~ ~ i `F, ~ L t k h_ 5 o~,~ ~o ~e m' ~ - ~ i r % - y I ( t . _W ~0,~ i \ _ ! L ~ 1 i ~ ~ I 1 i j GAR ~ ! 1 I I ~ ~ ! ! ~ / i~ !i } t i ~ F f ~ a ~ j € a ~ I ~ ~ ~ j 4 f 9 ~ ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~f 5 e' ~ r` e 1° i SCALE t/d" _ !`~Q}~i i a e ~_T~ OF PARA~T MEt FLAgi-llNts ?O tOP O~ PARAP~'~ MAT ~'4 d'- " ~EL: 1S~'_~i" tom' aF ~CX~1T ~14'-t1" g Y R RED NEON a CL ~ R 45" n; A . ~ , a a~ t~ . ~ i pLrtF'~ ~ ~ : r ~ t, i k ~s, - i INIS~ED FLOOR JL. 1 I L ~ ~in~t~u r~.cxm ~ ► ~ tr ELa FULLERTON BUILDING SYSTEMS, INC. f~- cr- LiJ RIGHT 51DE ELEVATION N Lm E! A TOO~ 10 N T P.O. BOX 308 x1 SCALE z 1/ SCALE I/4•• 11_0" HIGHWAY 60 NORTH WORTHINGTON, MN 56187 PH (507) 376-3128 FAX (507) 376-9530 SHEET 9 OF 10 OFFICE/WAREHOUSE 1 } I 9f n lam. r r T " (i i ~!i I I~~, :I r~ i '3 l a 2...- `f a _ 11 ~ t I~ 4 S L 1 t ~ s. I 1~+ r°}^, ~ j f' r-'k ~`i ,F~ 4 '4F ~'~S - Y~ T•~ U,l t~t_. f'j~ ,~_7 DATE OF LAST REVISIO PREPARED BY: w.. LU INTERGROUP, INC. .f .z- L cf~ 2000 WEST LITTL' r LITTLETON, CO u 3fD3-138-881 s ~ ~ .,~.w,. ,w.,. ~ ~ ~ t P . ANT Y jj r "3 ~ r i i j ~ 1 i E r°+ I i '°6p`~x °i°m°~w i amore. sm~weum m .wm~ ~.,x _ avrw 'ter eetaeen+aw .zmma.!+.r .eww~acww t t ( t t ° t e s _ ~ j ..J , ~ rr ~ ,t 1 7~ WEST BUSINESS CENTER SUBDI A RE-SUBDIVISION OF LOT 4, LOT 6, AND A PART OF ! OTS 1 AND i r 1 t f ~l AND LOT 1 AND LOT 2, 70 WEST BUSINESS CENTER ~UB CITI iATCf1 IAI T4JC AIW 1 /d !lC CC(`TI(lAI 70 T ZC A ROW j I I I } i i 1 ~ i i ~m m~:-~ w ~ } c i f t ! + 4 E ~ !4 f fpp..{it 211,.E I e III i ,f ~ fi s ~ ~ P t t 4 i i i I 4'~b i ~ a E i. f 4 a ~ a. ~ { f f~ ~ a ,s i t" 8 t afi A 1 p _r ~ ~dLl ! J ~ r ~ ~ h .,a ~..,...n..._~. ~ ~ . . _ C~ i dd s / n ~w. . _ _ i „~m•. }k _ v,. .m _ _ ~ . LL _r 4;4;y'y$$~ pp { g{ i e T f ~ I i i. ~a 1 iJ ~ .r ~,,R~ ~ . . ~t. s ~ ~ I F ~.r .am..~,r~ 13 t A. { Y' R yyi w. r. eW ,mt „,......,«e mv. •rt F we gyn. r.... -e~ ~ +..~w r. W W ~ s' ur .in» ~rv ru. ,w w as w .re ~nr.,l~ r ~ +'+r x~ aw am en r- w m• :n. w~ na xw .gym. -rv' s..+. sa mn .n+ a. ~++v v. +m m. ua.~. re: r_. .m 1 ~ I i f ~ r ~ ~ ~ w ~ ~ s k tt 1 ' ~ ,.s: u..: , . ~ ~ f [ 1 t ~ 4 ~ ~ 4 ~ ~ t I ~ t ~ ~ ~ f i I ~ ~ ~ 4p}14~ ~ Jg Y{r Y ~ ~F`t^ j{ r~ # }~~■1 ~¢y}j ~._.+o-.u..r..,.........~»w.«»...«e.~.. 5 t V ~~Ii..~I I haw I~15.i t.+r~ti~~ I'lP ~y1i~ W T ~ ~ ~ I K t:t , , t ~ ~ i i a- j- _r . wo., ~ ~ ~ d z._ . , u i'0. ~ f r .ate 0 tl~ ~ v Wx d ~..~w.. 1 q 1~ ,j v.. ; S Wt R e P 4~ iR f ■ 't Y Y T 'C.^ bn V~r ~!#V R"9ITy1rn ~gg;` Nr V 1 +„a` WNp.~y'+.~A A..r s s: y jpw~~ 1 "N y'F_ V~il• S^"''l hA.! W ~ W WWWW WWW~ i 4..✓ yyy xy~ IV L._. ~ Q ~m ~Mrrrrr,rir/~ r7 4-' CHISTORY UIYiZ31VIV I UN-) I Rlts i %,VUTt i %oIVI . At, I #VN V4+ %.f7 1 V EQUESTRIAN/PEDESTRIAN PATH ~ T BUILT 1NITHI FEET. SAID CURVE HAVING A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 89'28'18", A ATTEST: rORAY i COMMON ACCESS AND ROSS PARKIPJG EASEMENT RECEPTION Nan 84078458 . THE Qr%C WAY Al n~ ' rls eKIn 1) WITU Of Iii tNIKU'N- prOLArr l7n wZ-74-18 wz-7s-2o wz-7s-1a wz-7s-2o WZ -84-10 WZ--$8-9 WZ-92-11 L6 wz-ss-s ~y wZ-96-10 c~ ,y WZ-97-13 y ~d ~ , ~ `"`~J ~ ~dr tee 1~ !EZ°r ~ s. ~ 5. The City of ADMINISTRATIVE PROCESS APPLICATION GWheat ~Rid~re Department of Planning and Development B 7500 West 29th Ave., Wheat Ridge, CO 80033 Phone (303) 237-6944 Applicant Dwaine R.Richter Address 6565 S. Syracuse Way Phone 694-7215 #1202 Englewood, CO 80111 Owner Same as above Address Phone Location of request North-West corner of 1-70 and 32nd Ave. Type of action requested (check one or more of the actions listed below which pertain to your request.) ❑ Change of zone or zone conditions Site development plan approval Special use permit Conditional use permit Temporary use/building permit Minor subdivision Subdivision Preliminary Final See attached procedural guide for specific requirements. Detailed Description of request Preliminary-Final Development Plan A&8 and final Re-plat of 70 West business en er List all persons and companies who hold an interest in the described real property, as owner, mortgagee, lessee, optionee, etc. NAME Dwaine R. Richter ADDRESS 6565 S. Syracuse Way #1202 PHONE 694-7215 Englewood, CO 80111 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 fully be accomplished. Applicants other than owners must submit po at rney from the owner which approved of this actioA7on his beha l Signature of Applicant NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF COLORADO Expires 10.13-99 P Received sworn to me this day , 19 'i_ 8 Variance/Waiver Nonconforming use change ❑ Flood plain special exception Interpretation of code Zone line modification Public Improvement Exception Street vacation Miscellaneous plat Solid waste landfill/ mineral extraction permit ❑ Other ary Ptyblic - My commission expires Receint No. Case No. 001 JEFFERSON COUNTY EXISTING AGRICULTURAL ZONING A-' I[J~~I ACCESS U E 5a}aO ~.f.I 7.26 AC. < BUFFER - RNASE III' - I JEFFERSON COUNTY w EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY 9 -8-- I 6 R1-A I 9.ay y5A5C~.E I m 0.1/ 7\ m STREET TO w 11x1 1Y1. BE CLOSED I. I O I ~ I u it I z < z III J ~ N } I C < W O 71.555 SI _ Z m n 1.66 AC: C ACCESS P, - - I 254 350 S. F.. 1 \ 5.66 AC. I ACCESS I ACCESS I I I ~ 002 7500 VJE GI - :VLN`.C WHEAT RIDGE. CO 80215-6797 City Admin. Fax = 23:-5924 July 15, 1996 Police Dept. Fax c 235-2949 Mr. Kumar Halbe, P.E. Frasier & Halbe Engineering Company 10375 East Harvard Avenue, Suite 207 Denver, Colorado 80231 GWheat Ridge Re: 70 West Business Center, I-70 & West 32nd Avenue - Review- of Conceptual Master Drainage Study Dear Mr. Halbe, I have completed my review of the master drainage study received on July 2, 1996 for the above referenced project. Per our telephone conversation on July 15, 1996, the study submitted was for conceptual purposes only, and based on this premise is acceptable by the City of Wheat Ridge at this time. In addition, a final and more comprehensive drainage study for the entire site will be submitted at a later date for the City's review and formal approval. If ly/Ou have any questions, please contact me at 235-2868- / Si cere Greg7Knudson Development Review Engineer cc: Bob Goebel, Public Works Director John Oss, Sr. Project Engineer Meredith Reckert, Planner II File 003 a'x 1.%-=-2~7 00 July 16, 1996 The Wheat Ridge Depa for approval of a P1, and plat Your response to the would be appreciated date will constitute The Crty o. ,Wheat 'Ridge :tment of Community Development has received a request Commercial Development final development plan at the property described below. following questions and any comments on this proposal by 7u 41 1996 No response from you by this no objections or concerns regarding this proposal. CASE NO: WZ-96-10/70 West Business Center LOCATION: 12851 W 32nd Avenue REQUESTED ACTION: Final development plan and plat PURPOSE: Approval of five commercial building sites APPROXIMATE AREA: 8.3 acres 1. Are public facilities or services provided by your agency adequate to serve this development? YES NO If "NO", please explain below. 2. Are service lines available to the development? YES NO If "NO", please explain below. 3. Do you have adequate capacities to service the development? YES NO If "NO", please explain below. 4. Can and will your agency service this proposed development subject to your rules and regulations? YES NO If "NO", please explain below. 5. Are there any concerns or problems your agency has identified which would or should affect approval of this request? Please reply t0%//`L%~~ M Rorkr~rt Department of Planning & Development DISTRIBUTION: XX Water District (Consolid4ted Mutual XX Sanitation District ~orthwest) Lakewood XX Fire District (Lakewood) XX Adjacent City (Jefferson County XX Public Service Co. XX US West Communications State Land Use Commission State Geological Survey XX Colorado Dept. of Transportation Colorado Div. of Wildlife XX TCI of Colorado Jefferson Co. Health Dept. Jefferson Co. Schools XX Jefferson Co. Commissioners XX Denver Water Board W R Post Office XX W R Police Dept. XX W R Public Works Dept. W R Parks & Recreation Com. W R Forestry Div. W R Building Div. <pc>referralform C, 004 MEMORANDUM TO Meredith Reckert Planning and Development FROM Deri Patt Police Department SUBJECT CASE N0: WZ-96-10/70 West Business Center 12851 W. 32 Avenue DATE July 19, 1996 I have reviewed the site plans for 70 West Business Center. Based on the two site plans that I reviewed, below are my comments. ALTERNATE B: The 6,300 sq.ft. retail building on the east side of the development has three parallel parking spaces between it and the property line. This proposed plan may increase the opportunity for criminal activity to occur. With only three parking spaces, there will be limited natural observation from pedestrian and vehicle traffic. BOTH: The Office Showroom in the northwest section of the property has limited access for any sort of emergency response/containment either day or night. Also this piece of the property potentially will have limited natural observation, which may raise the risk of criminal activity. Lighting, landscaping, and building design will need to be carefully reviewed when those plans become available. Is a traffic light planned at the Intersection of 32/Zinnia? I don't know the traffic studies, but driving the area, there can be a significant increase in traffic generated from this development. Thank you Deri 005 ONSOLIDATED mutual water July 19, 1996 Meredith Reckert, Case Department of Planning City of Wheat Ridge 7500 West 29th Avenue Wheat Ridge, Colorado Manager and Development 80215 CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE FL rpn,JUI 24.~;'r"S PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT Re: City of Wheat Ridge Case Number WZ-96-10, 70 West Business Center (12851 West 32nd Avenue), proposed final development plan and plat for approval of five (5) commercial building sites Dear Ms. Reckert: This will acknowledge receipt of your correspondence dated July 16, 1996 regarding the above referenced project. Please be advised that the above referenced property is in an area served by The Consolidated Mutual Water Company. Domestic water service may be provided to this property subject to compliance with the Company's rules, regulations and requirements for such service. The Company's rules, regulations and requirements further require that each separate structure be served by a separate tap and meter, and in order to receive domestic water service, the property must also front a Company main. If the future planned use of this property is within any of the above categories, the owner, engineer or architect should contact this office as soon as possible so that we may determine what water system improvements will be needed to serve this property. Fire protection requirements should be obtained from Wheat Ridge Fire Protection District and those requirements forwarded to this office by the Fire District at the earliest possible time. We can then determine if additional system improvements would be required to meet the demands set forth by the Fire District. THE CONSOLIDATED MUTUAL WATER COMPANY 12700 V sE 27[h Avenue • P.O. Box 150068 • Lake«lood. Colorado 80215 Telephone 238-N51 • Pas 237-5560 006 Meredith Reckert City of Wheat Ridge July 19, 1996 Page 2 If you should have any questions or comments regarding this correspondence, please contact this office. Sincer y, Walter S. elton, PLS/PE President /jl cc: Dwaine Richter (Applicant) Dave Roberts, Wheat Ridge Fire Protection District Michael Queen, CMWCo Water Distribution Manager John Allen, CMWCo Engineer 007 DENVER WATER 1600 West 12th Ave ue •De ver, Colomdo 00254 Phone(303)628-6000•Tele opier No.(303)628-6199 July 22, 1996 M. Reckert, Planner Planning and Development Department City of Wheat Ridge 7500 West 29th Avenue, P. O. Box 638 Wheat Ridge, CO 80034-0638 Re: Case No. WZ-96-10/70, West Business Center Dear Mr. Reckert: CITY ()F WHEAT JUL 2 41996 L-1 L~fj PLANNING & DEVELOPM ENT The above referenced project, located at West 32nd Avenue and Xenia Street, is located with the contract service area of the Consolidated Mutual Water Company. Water service to this development is subject to the Operating Rules, Regulations and Charges of both the Consolidated Mutual Water Company and the Denver Water Department. The developer of this project is requested to contact the Consolidated Mutual Water Company at 238-0451 to obtain information on Consolidated Mutual's requirements for water service. To obtain information on Denver Water's requirements for service, please contact a Plan Review Coordinator in our Sales Administration Section at 628-6100. Sincerely, James F. Culligan Distributor Services Supervisor JFC/rma cc: Wally Welton, President, The Consolidated Mutual Water Company N AVfPV FC.RECKERT2.DOC CONSERVE og West Metro Fire Protection District 9ool west Jewell Avenue Lakewood. CO 80232-6505 Bus: (303) 989-4307 Fax: (3o3) 98"725 July 23, 1996 Meredith Reckert Department of Planning & Development City of Wheat Ridge P.O. Box 638 Wheat Ridge, CO 80034-0638 Re: WZ-96-10/70 (West Business Center, 12851 W. 22nd) Dear Meredith: CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE D Fpm F77 JUL L25 1996 PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT West Metro Fire Protection District has major concerns about this development. The emergency access and width does not meet our requirements. Along with this, water distribution and hydrant placement has not been discussed, or approved by the District. I strongly recommend that no action be taken on this plat, until all fire department requirements and concerns are met. Respectfully, Michael Zarlengo, Assistant Chief Fire Marshal MZ/pt "Whatever It Takes"... To Sffve 009 SUBDIVISION MEMO AND CONTACT NUMBER: 1 DATE: 23 July, 1996 2 .ky SUBDIVISION NAME: 70 WEST BUSINESS ENGINEER:. NAME: FRASIER & HA PHONE: (303) 751-91 CITY REPRESENTATIVE: CHUCK BRADEN REMARKS: WHEAT RIDGE IS TWO WORDS CONTACT ENTER RE-PL LBE 51 FAX: (30 RECORD T _ 3) 751-1282 L1 STARTS "COMMENCING.." 3: L1 "WEST LINE OF SAID NW" (SOUTH L INE?) 4: 2 UNNECESSARY " L2 OUR BEARING AND DISTAN N R907 26'16' E 55 9 68 FEET 6: L3 OUR BEARING IS N 00°30144" W 7: L6 OUR BEARING IS S 89°29'16" W PA RALLEL WITH SECTION LINE L10 & L14 OUR BEARING IS N 01000'4 6" W 1,11 & L13 CONFLICTING LINE DESCRIP 2 TIONS (EAST & WEST) . 10: L20 OUR RECORDS SHOW THIS AS PART OF A CURVE (THUS NON-TANGENT) 11: NEED BEARING FROM PC TO RAD PT ON ALL NON-TAN GENT CURVES 12: T36 OUR BEARINGS ARE S 89°29'16" W & S 1°01'5 0" E RESPECTIVELY I AM UNABLE TO RUN CLOSURE AT THIS TIME DUE TO 411 ABOVE ENGINEER REPRESENTATIVE: JAN VAN SICKLE REMARKS: SR QirJ LI ' 6J 65 ) - lt,) i ~ G ~ ~ s+1 * / /S ~i L:.E oG 5 NOlPAl I.'mNL How contact made: person PHONE letter FAX REPRESENTATIVE: City: Engineer: 010 r(ONSOLIDATED mutual water July 25, 1996 Meredith Reckert, Case Department of Planning city of wheat Ridge 7500 West 29th Avenue Wheat Ridge, Colorado Manager and Development 80215 CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE D :~9 n 17 6 6 JUL 199 PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT Re: City of Wheat Ridge Case Number WZ-96-10, 70 West Business Center (12851 West 32nd Avenue), proposed final -development plan and plat for approval of five (5) commercial building sites Dear Ms. Reckert: We sent you a letter on July 19, 1996 regarding the above referenced project. We had listed Wheat Ridge Fire Protection District as the fire protection district. We were just informed by Mr. Dave Roberts of the Wheat Ridge Fire District that this property is not in their area. It is served by West Metro Fire/Rescue. If you should have any questions or comments regarding this correspondence, please contact this office. Sincerely, Jackie Lamb Engineering Secretary /jl cc: Dwaine Richter (Applicant) Dave Roberts, Wheat Ridge Fire Protection District Assistant Chief Mike Zarlengo, West Metro Fire/Rescue Michael Queen, CMWCo Water Distribution Manager John Allen, CMWCo Engineer THE CONSOLIDATED MUTUAL WATER COMPANY 12700 Vest 27th Avenue • P.O. Box 150068 • Lake,ood. Colorado 50215 Telephone 23S-o51 • Fax 23--5560 011 MEMORANDUM TO: Timothy Carl, Planner FROM: Administrative Review Team (ART) DATE: July 25, 1996 RE: Wheat Ridge Referral; 70 West Business Center ART has the following comments: Intersection spacing along the proposed I-70 West Service Road does not meet a number of County requirements. Normally the County would remain silent about this issue since the Service Road is not under County jurisdiction. In this case however, comments are necessary because this relocated street provides access to the County's asphalt plant. According to Section 3.6.6. of the Roadway Design and Construction Manual (attached), there are too many access locations along the Service Road; - some are located too close to West 32nd Avenue; some are too close together; and some are not in alignment with opposite access locations or sufficiently off-set. These deficiencies could contribute to congestion, turning conflicts, and driver confusion. If this proves correct, these problems might impact the County's hauling operations. Conversley, the County's truck traffic could exacerbate traffic problems. 2. The Traffic/Transportation Section in this department would like the opportunity to review a traffic study for this development if one was required by the city. Realignment of the service road solves some operational problems, but the traffic generated from this development may cause new ones or existing ones to get worse. A traffic study is needed to identify the impacts and the street improvements that will be necessary to mitigate the impacts. The County would be interested in leaming about the level of impacts expected on streets under County jurisdiction and the improvements that would be needed, if any, to mitigate the impacts. The applicant should dedicate sufficient right-of-way to accommodate street improvements for West 32nd Avenue. The improvements should be as identified in a traffic study and will surely include separate lanes for left and right turning movements at the Service Road/Zinnia Street intersection with 32nd Avenue. The applicant , at a minimum, should be responsible for constructing the right turn decel lane and contributing to a traffic signal if one is not already funded. 012 4. An additional south bound lane for the Service Road at the West 32nd Avenue intersection should be considered. Three south bound lanes would separate left and right turning movements and through traffic through the intersection. The additional lane should improve traffic operations in this congested area. If one is added,the through lane needs to align with the opposite side southbound lane. If you have any questions, please contact me at 8489. Je PO'Neall Development Administrator JO copy to: Wiley Timbrook, Director, Road and Bridge Department Jeanie Rossillon, Design and Review Engineer Brad Sheehan, Development Review Coordinator Nanette Neelan, Traffic/Transportation Engineer 013 3.6.6. Driveway Spacing. Driveway locations shall be in accordance with the following figure and table. l~ ..avow mnosn[ ~ m s s ~ ~ I ma W ass arnaw~ wIM 5[CIU. W ~ K CMIe uab O J P C S STREET ' cote r w sve/Mt•r>'es' a ms•e. s w/Mr M .a ..:r > ..s. a wwew r ..s+. a r .er. F.gure Reference O:alance Rnidevrliol Wr ewoys P '5• . From property lines C From streets/roods Between d,newoys D 10' on locals 5 Z 200• ars 5 on col 325• on arterials Nan-Residenliol Dme.ays On Colleclon 5'• From properly lines P C 300' Frain Inef:al streets/roads 200- . From cO,lact , streets/roods C 125' . From local streets/roods 8elween driveways 5 1&1' 30 MPH design speed 5 200' 35 MPH design speed Non-Residential Driv<.oys On Arteriole 5, . From WopeM1y Imes C 500' from streets/roods Between drhewoYs 5 275' 40 MPH design speed 5 325' 45 MPH design speed • Except at shared access locations. TM C dimension naY be raduced it oPWa+ed by the Director of the pepoM1menl of Highways and TronsPorloNon due to the existence of limiting factors. TM minimum distance shall be no less than 150 feel. R the WPdaaed driveway is restricted to right t1rh mo+ements W d it is hat aligned with an existi'19 W Planned left lWn lane. the C dimension may M reduced if oppro"ha by lM ({rector of tM Oepartment of Highways wand JrongporloMn dr+ta the e.ialence of linilirg faelom. II sgnoliI tan . 4s,,p(opa.,d:.the: m"'um C distance shoo M increased to 660 feet 3.6.6.1. Centerlines of driveways accessing collectors, and not in linear alignment shall be offset a minimum of 150 feet. 3.6.6.2. Centerlines of driveways accessing arterials without raised center medians, and not in linear alignment shall be offset a minimum of 150 feet. This minimum distance shall be increased as necessary to accommodate left turns. 014 July 26, 1996 board of County Commissioners Gary D. Laura District No. 1 Betty J. Miller District No. 2 John P. Stone District No. 3 Meredith Reckert, Planner City of Wheat Ridge 7500 West 29th Avenue PO Box 638 Wheat Ridge, CO 80034-0638 Re: Response to Combined Preliminary - Final Development Plan (32nd Avenue/I-70) Dear Ms. Reckert: The Jefferson County Planning and Zoning Department had an opportunity to review this proposal. We offer the following comments and suggestions: Too many access points exist on this site. Access points of this magnitude will serve to create traffic problems. Access points should be re-evaluated for this proposal. Further, access points between areas of development (existing or proposed) should line up. The access point for the Office Showroom should be re-examined. A car pulling onto the service road will have difficulty seeing on-coming traffic. There are many areas on the proposed development (please see attached red- marked comments) that have vehicle conflict zones. Parking areas located adjacent to or directly on accessways through the development do not work. These areas should be re-examined. Handicapped parking should be located next to buildings where individuals have close connections to sidewalk areas. ■ Trash receptacles should be screened and located away from highly visible areas. The trash receptacle for the gas station should be moved. No landscaping has been indicated on the plans received by the County. Landscaping should be used to provide aesthetic treatment to a site, as well as screen and buffer parking, structures, and related elements. 100 Jefferson County Parkway, Golden, Colorado 80419 (303) 271-6511 015 ■ Where will delivery trucks unload materials for the Office Showroom? ■ The car wash for the gas station may create ice conditions at the entrance/exit point for the facility. The stacking distance for the car wash appears problematic and should be re-evaluated. There is no indication of parking for people using the convenience store portion of the gas station. The Jefferson County Highways and Transportation Department has also reviewed this request. Please refer to their attached letter dated July 25, 1996. Coordination should occur with the County in regard to traffic for this site. If you have any questions, please contact me at 271-8772. - - Sincerely, D imothy W. Carl, Planner Jefferson County Planning and Zoning 016 Service Public Service) Public Company of of Colorado 55015th Street, Surte 700 Denver, CO 80202-0256 July 26, 1996 FAX(303)571-78T7 City.of Wheat Ridge 7500 West 29' Avenue P. O. Box 638 Wheat Ridge, CO 80034-0638 Re: Re-Plat of 70 West Business Center, #WZ-96-10170 Public Service Company of Colorado (PSCo) has reviewed the development plans for Re-Plat of 70 West Business Center. To ensure that adequate utility easements are available within this development, PSCo requests that the following dedication language, or plat note, be placed on the preliminary and final plats for the subdivision: Eight-foot (8) wide utility easements are hereby granted on private property adjacent to all public streets in the subdivision or platted area. These easements are dedicated for the installation, maintenance, and replacement of electric, gas, television cable, and telecommunications facilities. Utilities shall also be permitted within any access easements and private streets in the subdivision. Permanent structures and water meters shall not be permitted within said utility easements. PSCo also requests that these utility easements be depicted graphically on the preliminary and final plats. While these easements should accommodate the majority of utilities to be installed in the subdivision, some additional easements may be required as planning and building progresses. As a safety precaution, PSCo would like to remind the developer to call the Utility Notification Center, at 1-800-922-1987, to have all utilities located prior to construction. If PSCo has existing gas or electric distribution facilities in this area, the developer should contact PSCo's Engineering Department at (303) 425-3867, regarding the use or relocation of these facilities. If you have any questions about this referral response, please contact me at 571-7735. Thank You, zz ~ Teresa Wilson Right-of-Way Processor NMD: Multi-family 017 7500 WEST 29TH AVENUE WHEAT RIDGE. CO 80215-6797 City Admin. Fax # 234-5924 July 30, 1996 (303) 234-5900 Police Dept. Fax x 235-2949 Mr. Kumar Halbe Frasier & Halbe Engineering Company 10375 E Harvard, Suite 320 Denver CO 80231 The City or Wheat GRidge Dear Mr. Halbe: I have reviewed your submittal for a subdivision plat at 1283= West 32nd Avenue and have the following comments: 1. The title should read "70.West Business Center Amended Subdivision" "A Replat of Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 6 and 7 of 70 West Business Center and a part of the NW 1/4 of . . . . " 2. Is Lot 1 included in the replat? If so, a signature block must be added for the owner. 3. Is there a mortgagor on the property? If so, a signature block must be provided. 4. Dedicatory language must be added. 5. Signature block for Mountain States Telephone and Telegraph should be changed to U.S. West Communications. 6. Signature block for the City Engineer can be removed. 7. Signature block for the Director of Community Development should be changed to Director of Planning and Development. 8. Dedicatory statement must be added. 9. Note on page 1 should be changed per redmarks. 10. Case history box must be added. 11. Easements being vacated by this document must be shown as "hereby vacated". 12. Show the structure on Lot 2. 13. Will I-70 Service Road West be dedicated by this document or by separate document? Please change language accordingly. 14. There is already a Lot 5 which is not included in the submittal. This will create confusion. 018 Mr. Kumar Halbe Page 2 July 30, 1996 15. Drainage detention/retention areas must be shown with appropriate language. Attached are comments from outside reviewing agencies including a significant number of comments from the City's Public Works Department which need to be incorporated into the next submittal. If you have questions concerning any of the above, do not hesitate to contact me at 235-2848. Sincerely, Meredith Reckert Planner MR:slw CC: Dwaine Richter Ron Hoisington 019 mEmoRANDI ' N1 Approved Date TO: MEREDITH RECKERT, PLANNER u FROM: JOHN OSS, SENIOR PROJECT ENGINEER Et al RE: 170 BUSINESS CENTER REFERRAL DATE: JULY 30, 1996 The Engineering Division Staff has reviewed the information submitted and has the following comments: We are extremely disappointed with the cooperation received from the developer on this project. The majority of the comments below were addressed at a preliminary meeting held earlier this year with the developer. None of the comments or ideas shared at that meeting were included in this submittal. The entire meeting was a waste of everyone's time. If this is the type of cooperation we will receive on further reviews, the review process will be very lengthy. We are almost at the point of totally rejecting this submittal until previous comments of the meeting are addressed. However, in good faith, we have proceeded with an initial review. If further comments are not addressed, further reviews will cease until such time. This review only considers information contained in Alternate A. If the developer persists in progressing with 2 alternates, make required changes to Alternate B. As much as possible, the comments have been grouped under headings by plan sheet title. Public Improvements: 1. Curb, gutter and sidewalk must be provided along the east side of the frontage road from the recently constructed curbwalk installed by the City to West 32nd Avenue. The design width of the roadway, exclusive of the turn lane at 32nd Avenue is 34 feet flow line to flow line. 2. Curb, gutter and sidewalk must be provided along the property's 32nd Avenue frontage. Provided laneage in this area will be finalized after completion of the traffic impact study and review of its recommendations. 3. When the City constructed the roadway, the outer 2 feet and the top lift was omitted from the east side of the roadway where there is no curb and gutter. This was done to allow for future placement of curb, gutter and walk. The developer is responsible 1 020 for construction of the remaining 2 feet and the top lift of HBP. A milled edge will be required at the centerline to provide a neat edge to pave to. The developer will also be responsible for restriking the affected portion of the service road. 4. The proposed plan shows radiussed drive cuts. This does not meet City Standards which require curb cuts and driveway aprons. The only location the radiused corner is acceptable is the east west access drive that leads to easterly towards Wendy's. 5. Curve identification chart shown on plan sheet does not have corresponding identification on curves on plan. 6. Recently constructed improvements on 32nd Avenue are not accurately shown. 7. Recently constructed improvements on service road are incorrectly shown, specifically in the vicinity of LaQuinta and the restaurant. TRAFFIC: 8. A traffic impact study is required for this development to address impacts and required enhancements to the service road and 32nd Avenue. 9. The length of stacking on the service road left turn bay and the requirement and sizing of left turn bays on 32nd Avenue will be determined by the traffic impact study. 10. The traffic impact study will also investigate and determine if the intersection meets warrants for a traffic signal. 11. If a traffic signal is warranted, construction of the signal will be the developer's responsibility in accordance with the 3 party agreement between the developer, CDOT and the City. 12. If construction of a,traffic signal is warranted, the new signal must be hard wired into the City's signal system at the off ramp. 13. There is a need for a 10 ft bikeway to connect the existing service road to 32nd Avenue. The logical place is at the east side of the to be vacated service road right of way. If part or all of the bikeway is located on CDOT right of way, permission from them will be required. 14. South access to the service station is too close to the West 32nd Avenue intersection and is unacceptable. 15. The junction of the access road approach to the service road northwest of LaQuinta is incorrectly designed. This junction needs to be perpendicular to the curve in -the service road to minimize confusion. Minimum length of the access road perpen- 2 021 dicular segment should be no less than 50 feet. 16. Care must be exercised during grading design and building placement to provide adequate site distance across the chord of the curve on the service road to the west of the restaurant. 17. Lot 4, the residential lot, is to have no direct access to West 32nd Avenue. Provide cross access easement to the Service Road through Lot S. 18. The proposed access to the parking lot just west of the restaurant is too close to the existing access at the restaurant. The access to these areas need to be redesigned with just one access point. 19. Check internal turning radii to insure that trash trucks, fuel tankers, delivery trucks can safely make turns with out backing and filling. SITE PLAN: 20 we are recommending the main east west access to Wendy's be 30 feet wide rather than 24 feet. 21. Existing and proposed handicapped ramps must be shown on site plan. 22. Need to provide a 10 foot landscaped buffer between improvements and back of walk/right of way line and on site improvements. Exact locations and requirements need to be coordinated with Planning. 23. Handicapped stalls should not be concentrated as shown. The other sites should have some of the proposed stalls. No check of the correct number was made by this office. 24. Width of drive opening to retail building site is not identified. 25. The five parking spaces shown in the retail building site appear to end at the foot of the soundwall, the bottom of which is 4-5 feet above general ground surface. If substantial amounts of the berm are removed for this parking, we will require a structural engineer to examine and certify that the wall will not be harmed by this activity. We will also require placement of brick in the excavated area to blend in with the existing wall features. In addition, the sprinkler system may be damaged. 26. Need handicapped stall at retail building site. 27. Measurement at office showroom shown on plan as 62.59 ft appears to conflict with other dimension of 64 £t. 28. What is the hatched area neat the center of the 29 space parking lot and what are the letters HC representing. If 3 022 handicapped, suggest using the same symbol used elsewhere on the plan. 29. What are the 2 squares in the parking area just east of the HC symbols. These need to be identified on the site plan. 30. In general, the parking lot lay out and circulation plan seems to be inefficient. 31. Parking for retail building site encroaches into Tract D which is called out as open space/berm. 32. Parking lot for lot 6 encroaches into Tract C open space/berm areas. 33. Show proposed water and sewer mains on the plans. DRAINAGE: 34. The drainage plan submitted for the site has been approved as a conceptual plan. A final drainage plan addressing specifics of the site(s) will be required. 35. If the runoff is to be directed into a CDOT facility, approval will from CDOT will be required. 36. If the runoff is directed north along the off ramp, care must be taken to address any areas that will detain and pond flows to the north. 37. Show drainage flow arrows on the site plan and approximate location of drainage detention/retention ponds. 38. Provide language on plan discussing permanent easements for detention pond and responsibility for maintenance of same. 39. If parking areas are utilized for detention purposes, the recommended maximum depth of ponding is 9 inches. For areas where this depth is exceeded, warning signs are required. 40. This site is in excess of 5 acres. An NPDES permit must be acquired from the State Heath Department. 41. We will require an erosion control plan as part of the final drainage report. PLAT: 42. The right of way issues contained in the 3 party agreement between the Richter's, the City and CDOT have not been finalized to date. The Richter's need to dedicate to the City the right of way described in Parcel A so CDOT will vacate the existing parcel containing the abandoned service road. 4 023 43. The details shown on the plat referring to the relocated service road right of way and the yet to be vacated service road right of way are incorrectly shown as having been finalized. 44. The descriptions of the land contained in parcels a and b of the 3 party agreement do not match the calls shown on the plat. CDOT has contacted us and is concerned about these discrepancies as are we. 45. Modify signature block on plat to combine Director of Public Works and City Engineer into one signature line. 46. The mayor's certificate area of the plat has the word "approve" misspelled. 47. Plat should not show two lot 51s. 48. Plan calls out an open space/berm as 25 feet. Plat calls out Tract D as open space/berm of 23.80. 49. Need to annex 26.56 ft wide strip on west side of office showroom. Our review of the City Boundary indicates that this parcel is not part of original 70 West Business Center Plat and is not within City Boundaries. 50. Need to identify ownership of this parcel if not belonging to the Richters. 51. Need to show City Boundary line on plat. 52. Plat does not show easement for water and sewer lines running east west between LaQuinta and restaurant to the west line of the property. 53. Is the 30 ft ingress egress easement near the LaQuinta site to be vacated? If so, it should be appropriately identified. 54. In plat legend, line type for existing lot lines is incor- rectly identified. The legend line type is not the line type actually used. 55. Need dimension and bearing on common line between Tract C and Tract D. 56. On the site plan on sheet 1 of the plat, what is Alkire C.? 57. Wheat Ridge is spelled as 1 work in the Replat legal description. 58. Mountain States Telephone and Telegraph has been US West Communications for a number of years. 59. If Dwaine Richter is the owner of the property as is claimed in the legal description, why is there a signature block for Virginia Richter? Clarify this situation and place correct 5 024 information on plat. 60. In legal description, need space between "lot land the". 61. Need line above "Deputy Clerk" for signature block. 62. Need detail of junction of two curves by corner of LaQuinta property. Information given is incomplete and undecipherable. 63. Plat shows 175.00 ft, legal description shows 174.99. 64. Suspect acreage shown in legal description is incorrect. Does Richter still own the Country Cafe? Need to remove acreage from LaQuinta site, add in acreage from CDOT vacation (after action is complete) , add in small strip west of Lot six (after annexation), delete area owned by City (right of way) after action is complete). 65. Site map is incorrect. It does not show LaQuinta, vacated CDOT right of way, City right of way, additional strip of land west of lot 6. 66. The calls around lot 6 are incorrectly described. The 26.56 foot parcel is not part of the original 70 West Business Center nor was it part of lot 6. 67. Rotate site map so north is to top of page to honor standard practice. 68. R-I-A is incorrect on site plan. Should be R1-A for zoning purposes. 69. Show lot line for lot 2 (Cafe) on the site plan. 70. Need a comma in "362846". 71. Youngfield is misspelled as "Youngsfield". 72. Legend on plat does not match lines used. 73. Need to show 50 foot setback line from CDOT right of way on east side. 74. Also on cover sheet, need to fill in sheet - of 75. The way lines are presented on the plat is confusing. Please shade or high light existing conditions versus proposed conditions. 76. 30 ft water easement on the plat is incorrect. Need to show existing easement and proposed easement. The unneeded easements must be vacated in order to construct permanent improvements on the land they encumber. 77. Show any other existing easements for gas, electric, 6 025 sanitary sewer, etc.. Show any changes to these existing easements and make required vacations. See note above. 78. Final Development Plan shows lot lines between Wendy's and the filling station and down the center of the access road. If these really are proposed, they need to be reflected on the plat. 79. If there are internal lot lines, the internal joint access roads need to be dedicated as permanent access easements. Even if there is only one ownership of the site proposed, these joint access easements should be called out as permanent access easements to accommodate future sales. 80. Any subdividing of a parcel of property as may happen in the future can for most circumstances be done only by following the City's minor or major subdivision regulations relating to property subdividing. 81. Additional comments about plat closure: The following bearings and/or distances don't agree with the original plat: 11, 16, 17, 18, 26, 29, 34, and 35. the above line numbers are based upon line 1 being the line that starts with: Commencing at Line 21 doesn't match what they provided to get closure. Suggest the traverse through existing pins. UTILITY MAP: 82. On utility plan, "Wheat Ridge" is incorrectly shown. 83. Is the sanitary sewer private or public. If public, provide a permanent easement. 84. Existing sanitary sewer line is shown under edge of car wash. 85. Show water and sewer services for building sites. 86. Fire District will doubtless require internal hydrants for fire protection. 87. Existing gas line goes through proposed Wendy's and sign structure. Show rerouted gas line and easements required for provision of service. 88. Electrical service and transmission on site needs to be underground. Provide appropriate easements as required by PSC for provision of service. 7 026 89. The City's name "Wheat Ridge" is incorrectly spelled on Alternate A cover sheet IN CONCLUSION, WE WILL CONTINUE AFTER THE DEVELOPER'S CONSULTAN MEMO. WITH AS MANY COMMENTS AN THIS SUBMITTAL, THERE ARE V D IN THIS INITIAL REVIE REVIEW OF THIS PLAN AND PLAT SET TS ADDRESS THE CONTENTS OF THIS D CONCERNS AS WERE IDENTIFIED IN ERY PROBABLY ITEMS WHICH WERE OVERLOOKE W. WE EXPECT TO FIND AND COMMENT ON THESE DURING THE NEXT SUBMISSION. 027 =o-ONIE. 303 23;-69-14- The C.%.ry of - C 3CX 536 TE - 75CC We T 29TH AVENUE . WHEAT P.iDC-. CC'-CRADO 5003 G Jh ea} L GRidge July 31, 1996 This is to inform you that Case No. WZ-96-10 which is a request for approval of a Planned Commercial Development combined fin rievPloomPnr la " sign variances and subdivision plat for property located at 12851 West 32nd Avenue will be heard by the Wheat Ridge Planning Commission in the Council Chambers of the Municipal Complex, 7500 West 29th Avenue at 7.30 p.m. on n + 1; 1QgF All owners and/or their legal counsel of the parcel under consideration must be present at this hearing before the Planning Commission As an area resident or interested party, you have the right to attend this Public Hearing and/or submit written comments. It shall be the applicant's responsibility to notify any other persons whose presence is desired at this meeting. If you have any questions or desire to review any plans, please contact the Planning Division. Thank you. PLANNING DIVISION <pc>phnoticeform I i "The Carnation Cite" 028 if y - cC ~ O Z N 4 CZ) C5 o < o U y y Er d Q N ~ j~ % rc'n N F Rl ~ h O iA p J, 9 y m¢¢ n F co T W > y v w 0 2 ~ V O 3 O ~N O Er U O y? = J o Q a m ° o ao C 7 N s U N N E 0 i n P a P r co _ 8 ~ form w mat we can rewi _ A m t ' ~ r3 L pack i15paC2 Eces nO o° 9 -ly 'aHireretl dl E o ~ B ~ I r ¢ c c 3 > m 6 Y C S. O l 4 i r-i T 43- 2/ sl O m o e o '7 @ QI mT 9 1 ~ ~i C CJ ` °a p AJ .d -n .4 a CC Lo In I R E % m 9 T V D 0 c > o c U y p o- p H U' f'I W % % t v a%i c y m ra LL ~ D 3 O 61 C y S ¢ T % o h a n W `m ¢ ~'ClO = Z ° U o . 0 U d U m O N > O y ~ J O ~ ` a y p ¢ D < o c3 P ~ P I~ ~ E ~ ~ ~ a C t `o m Q L ri @ q ~ O C C ~ J c 3 a m~ a v o ~ ~ ~ \ ~ 9 T Q g efr Lt M 7 m t ~ '6 r r1 D m te :J M V p NW l Ft 3 ¢ 3 F : _ < U Q CT) O U. Cn 1 I-C) 'I I ILL (v ~ 1. \ ` v \ m _ J a U' U U > 01 X CD a co co U) 9 C - - s5 r si O - Sr +1 :J - a r V S ° o - y _ p 9 L1 Gt o b _ _ - _ a v C ~ Y b 4 ~ ~ V~ '7 N O 1 L O 9 C r1 rl i:i ~ g ¢ - 4 ro O O O O k- U M V C LL ~ C:l 006 ETh 096 d T06 E2h 096 d 206 E2h 096 d 029 f y T N r a N do -o o ~ $y m ~ F a O N ¢ N ¢ j ~ ~ O N O 0 C ' 3 ` z N O t + V Q Cu Q L 3 v 3 e _ R os r R ^y - R 3 a o `o a c $ o 6 o R m c S v i 9 2_m W ~ ~y - n c o ~ U 6 m V z WU F N ~ y d N O N [_J Q a n W m - 3. m _ LL rl LL r m N_ N ra T 3 rj Q T W ¢ ¢ N Ho E 0 LU $ V r U 'd . ~cOCJc ' ~ o ~ Q' m x O O 3 N O z _v O Y / o d > O _ Q A d o N 0 e p a ~ 5 v n v r a V U -i J n r •ri OK b Q a N i ~ (V N {p ai b C O a? ~ c N Q CC N m _ E 0 Qo 0- m ~ Q W ~ LL S ~ T = o ` N I, e Q _ s F ~ o a m 4 e o V ^ ^ ° I e ~ ~ ~ r ` ? Ot rn - _ ~ ~ o ~ n 2 ~ ,C O t a; ~ a "1 O .J ,N, ~ n J o 9 c Y H E m .•1 lV Z m ti co p f•~ -7 E Q 1-4 1:4 o i1 O v c O ^t v W < N U vi tc a ~ rn . . m a C L b z r_ O v W N J > G 14 C C W c t .15-t J 44 44 9 I U C r c w 1Ti y L p Ct rj w U 3 e.69 ETh 096 d i N V c v ° o J J ~ cf) w x ° . C f1 O - - c~ - V C ~ .4 l2 J ~ 1] ? 7 C .'-i r4 rl O L a~ O I I ~ _ _ W G _ U N d cn o - O I _ d C _ = o N C L V I t1 I i \ t n d N~ 2 17 T m DCV I n n O N d C N N m ~ R r I M c p ~ LL N o a Q~ w N ~ ~ U U s O 14 ri 17 C V ~ f~ •.4 e i] 7 _ C7 C ~ w C C M h O ~4 C% 0 N Z U ^I 869 ETh 096 d I 669 ETh 096 d I a Q v a N N ~ y a N ~ N _ N J - O c C O c 030 9 2 Q > a o m p d .ma ~ N N m C N y U O C R 3 ~ m n O N Q Q j d ~.~❑O0Z' O ~ CI _m O O Q fr g ~ 'n n 4 E n B o - o ~ y p Y $ 5 ~ o B y ~ ; N q4 3 ~ fr d o m g P 3 0 m 9 9 ~ a z ~5 ¢ u W~ J J ~ V o N O ?4 lr c m ~ 7 c~ O 4n r'~ V h6U ETh 096 d 0 W M LU 6 W ~T U N U Q T W N C .u i 14 ~ FI w V J v ~ 7 C7 H .i U) P-4 J-I C E5 i m m p m m NN ` m C m a m m L/7 C 0 . a ? o y❑ y O D m N , O N N 'U C RI W N N' mD _ i N LU N y ri LL mD - a a m a. m S T O y a Q < o y LU g p~ ~ N O r (V O V ` m m ~ J J Q d m N 76 O ~ Q~ ` ❑ Q ` V Q m gS m E fr $ ° S ~ E m T y C Q Y Y • m fr O m $ fr o W m 9 _ E N +I 7 T C3 i ~ N ~ U T W o : G - Lo d ~ cc I i i V of U v cl ~ cy 76 ao o 44 r 14 o N } o a y p a -IT i I S6U ETh 096 d a W ~ N N LL ~ ~ T a y W m Q U J d S ~ m m f ti Cl) - C 0 ~X O In c6 a i 9 .i w `o Y+ O y e p o ~ I A7 C < y a m 099 ETh 096 d N _ T _ m - c co m 0 a y ~ r 0 U U a° co D 0 c 0 lL a 031 O ~ U _N 0 N o a P m y~ e T y V d a y rl 3> L N d S O N < ¢ 7 d -4 a 5 O N U ro ~ U a` a y Q e - E o 3 `e d ~ N m _ T ~ 4 G N = a > m < ' ' ra P' r N b N d E fn LL w t N N LL Ul 1 9 m 3 d < N 4 m S W < o N< m a W E C:) C g, -n J o a p m 6 a Q ~ c N {y d ~ < m N ~ -N N i N T ~ J a 2 Qo N g _ E 6 $ J .i m m ~2 Nj i m O y Vr O . o e ~ = s g ~ g 7 ~ ~ ~ E ~ ~ :1 8 m a~ 0 4 nJ S U V) 7 a- V) D F g ~ ~ d E g ~ 5 ~ 3 C a - g E" m ~ v ° 'f 7 n m - E§ S E m a 9 T ' 7 m m ~ co) ~ Q ~ a c 2 a 108 .2 : W m- ►W Im m W V ¢ U r ~ N y L i i ¢ ~xLL ui 0 a C V U N v U ' of o= f w= p a I \ = o o - a c " 73 14 r4 0 I _ '7 ^f O 3 I .1 F C .-i r C I O M -4 O 9 U O M .-1 C7 tl _ w 968 Elh 09 6 d I T68 E I Th 09 6 d O O b c~ C ~ O LL V) d U N E 0 T C \ D Q a O W N. LL 1 d a ` _ V < N W O d ~ U N N 1E a2 E o ¢ O OO r m „ 7 v \ c m z ~ m m m _ S Vl ~ a - m co _ c C7 - .i u a d O LI ~ m Nx o a ui ~ U a v O U +1 ~ N u v ~ U) y V1 H 11 O O 'D U) T W fa U N 7 n u M cn 568 ETh 096 d 032 J J 'J ~ N m _ " - G L `y J r ¢ > U o y N' E N N` y 3' a a+ a o H¢¢ m _.O cq Q V u c m r.{ m - n O m U Q d a U N W L ~ W L) ' > U D a N N 'U a < d N C N t d 9 - e O ¢ nos SENDS Q = E . A ttacM1 ch t .The Pe[ ' ' r 3. Article a F i - co A b~ . j uNE - n 1 ~ a V 3 'J C J 4 4 m E r-I ' 5. Fece $ e g_ 3 u 2 rn n S. Sign o s m ' E 6 1 C a m a 2 PS FO 2 0 r-1 .-i i - ~ m g Z~ 0. M L6 C 'p N A v J v U i - _ C u C - o C U O O n \ 7 c 0 3 - _ 3 O $4 > v 7 O N O If 4j rn 0 Nt U , I z .n ri C7 I c . 999 ETh 096 d ~A 269 ETh 096 d a a Im o E -0 Q ~ m W N R C 'ri LL N j - III ~ ~ ~ ~ T $ N ~ ~ ~ .W > m o N P' m ~ m N _ i ~ C y > J o- a m m Qo I IQ I m m ~ _ IV 7 c S4 U N N 0 0 a ^ m CO a a w X rn O LL ¢ n a 0 m W \ I-U \ N ' c N U .i U i o \ = 3 n 0 $4 3 l r a _ n E69 E4h 096 d r n 033 ' L 0 9 x Y T m Y a~ m U N p - D 9 m w d E m - L Y y V Y S 3 i m Y T N y¢¢ y F T W O m e ❑ o z D V p - tr U Y ` pI/ p N Y Vy O 3 s ~ F vJ E o - R y s B fr g o T. ~ s C J q s h~ m ? o R E Y, ~ ~ v y; t'1 - 7 1 ~ E -4 -0 V w. M I> 11 a N 4J Q w ti y o U', ~ +1 Q lW a C v = Lm is c rrn ` NI a n L n m o y N ~ N Y T a 2 a ~ o z d T ~ m I" i m m m w LL T W U .m x 0 0 - ~ O 1.._ 1 a i I I I C o I ? ~r T ~ v c _ N 1 T I ~ U O 0 y Q o ~ N N LO ro a W w U i e L U U U CO r e - Un n c r~ 999 ETh 096 d 698 z tl C ~ y J _ C _4 c va 9 S4 L1 J w yt ^j r{ ti a O N t~j m ~ N Y N ~ .Y N N T N O Z ao 2 x N Q) 7 C C rv 0 co a Z a x rn v e1 ~ i ~i O N L(l. 7j L O .-4 « 7 n O 9 E`Ch 096 d _L Cc LU W c w ~ i F N ~ .0 W W - x E T > O Y a a m a O d a N e N > 0-1 -m ~ o `u l C f I Ily y o T f m N Y ~ r:_ C CD 7 m c [ w CO) ~ T6' y Q A O d Q1 X U ,6 a N >r L U U_ Cf) 'n c t a d N v °a U Q C rn m T `m C T co Cl) -w ro a d ..J ~ N U t= U U U 9 U ~ > 71 H rl 7 Q 4 O y Cf) .i .r i U e U' C l i w U C o q 0 C) ~ 1 s r_ o -1 e- ~ O p G; a n_ O - 069 ETh. 096 d 034 r~ L V N m °o m 9 O O T y n 2 O m 2 Z D C v m O m 0 N_ a m V m m 0 H S w tl ~ w m (p o c r p rt G _ . K r- o a L m re r• o a 2.. i N (D o n o C Li r- w 0 C a N m C O cn ~ = D ~1 \ C ~1 0~--- s J m m o m 9 O O m y 2 0 Z Oy Z D C o m O m 0 N N V N N C] £ w n \ N N io O G W r rt K o n ~ n S Lo (D `O. Fl. Fl. P+ Fh O ' _--.h n N r N.,. - o Co. In M n , -'i o r` D ~ C7 Z T ~ G w J IE 2 . d. O r~ C O mD V., T, CD co D;' a CM, ti~ 1 035 1 41 - i v m ro ~x B Td m `9- F m d m m m o y~ ro ~ O m N E M W '00 ~ m e SENDER: fl • Complete items 1 and/or 2 for atltlilioml services. T c '3 > a m wo S . ~ a • Rinl yaur name antl atltlress On tM reverse of Nis form so that we m o N < ¢ j Q _ U > o C roa. - ❑ ❑ z ~ 4 N • Attach this form to tha font of the mailpiece. or on Ne back if space Oces ' ti ~ / • The Return Receipt will stww to wlfpm tM article was dMitl a the d ~ere U > xf /-i a d J I Article Adtlressed to: 4 CL y m a p UNE 1• 3111 jdiid t.CL S.*,11 tf13:: 324J 2Snn1d ~',ol.7YC ' . m E s Cohen CO aJS01 j - : . ~ . . ~ m B Re i ~T 4 ~ og a v l 5. Received By: (Print Name) 6. Signature: (Addressee or Agent) - ; u o u u w 1 x ~ U 0 C w ~ 55 , PS FORM 3811, January 1996 g E g r R 5 c l.f "l 2 - O F g E 3 N in ~ C - p ^ T ~ E ° ~ I Q o ~ . d PS FORM 3811, January 1996 ~ - r ^1 '_7 i ~ ~ ~ s o Z W ¢ Cy Lb - tea _ _ _ - ~ _ _ m L99 ETh 096 d U r1 ~ t a v ru o e3 U U Y .-a y U l iE +1 to ~ if rh Y ~ ~ c^. r > o 3 d fl ~ \ M J ~ i a J a ^ U) - 34 C CO - Y r l fl C ~i O -i a U - V a :v 3 °o - - - 14 y V °o O r-1 a O .i N It g rl N G' J 0 f'1 .K, 0 z h O Li - J Z U w cn cn c = _ _ w cn CO a. 299 E2h 096 d V = o _ r l 5 1 Y ,e. $4 O i U = o ~ z= z Y ~ C! N ri E99 ETh 096 d ~ rn ~ T m T r fl XLL a Ic Ci N U rn C °o b C7 0 O a 036 i N ~ o y y ay n t y w 0 n o w 75 zoo o N o a z -I Q S m A S F a a J ~ W_ w H W M JLy~ O Q Ory C N N d a o a ~ G j N? J O Q e c n ai 4 .i E S ~ ¢ m O Y i•1 0 ~ 4 4 E ~ :'i 1 ~ fr ^ r jj _ ~4 a Z pg ~a $ j 'V ^ ? te ¢m a -D ~ -7 ~ p N . ~ 0 0 15 N N • • Cj G e U~ o = > OF J O al ~4 O o p o v a_ 2 CO - ' ^ lie - _ O m v © r M u O u `n N a h99 ETh 096 d c Q) U_ N N O- ti tT' cc cc ~ a m w LL N ry ~ ra S y cc w T O ~ T r U > ~ m g N 0 J a = o a SO s yv m \ UJ G Q j ~ J v Cl M N U L 7 ~ p O _ m o +i J E7 en 00 YI r1 » N Cl J '-f• "1 O S cc 0 fn y c5 a 4 ~ i N o receive the _ s (for an extra fee): 1', W . E ee's Address s y 0 Eed Delivery - aster for fee. _a - I d _ U ~ T ` O r 0 [ [ED o c m _ In > _ s and fee paid.! 7 I m co - I T ~ + T _ - Receipt M__ f 2 O , Q! Y~ N i \ ~ \ er N v U o= _ _ r f Q \ _ J uo u rf 1.1 O ~ N J \ _ - - co J .p 1 V - _ - - p o O a - _ - O ct) 42 4J 1~4 - - 9 r.7 C ° ~i Ln09 en U z O - _ w 6C9 ETh 096 d 299 ETh 096 d j c in S O 037 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 15, 1996 at 7:30 p.m. at 7500 West 29th Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado. All interested citizens are invited to speak at the Public Hearing or submit written comments. The following petitions shall be heard: 1. Case No. MS-96-7: An application by Lawrence Gill for approval of a two-lot minor subdivision on Residential-Two zoned land located at 6000 West 32nd Avenue. Said property is legally described as follows: A part of Block 1, STEBBIN'S SUBDIVISION, situated in the Southwest One-Quarter of Section 25, Township 3 South, Range 69 West of the 6th Principal Meridian, County of Jefferson, State of Colorado, being more particularly described as follows: Beginning at the Northeast corner of said Block 1, from which point of beginning.the Northeast corner of the Southwest 1/4 of said Section 25 bears N 00°19'11" W a distance of 30.00 feet; thence S 00019'11" along the East line of said Block 1 and along the East line of the SW 1/4 of said Section 25, on an assumed bearing, a distance of 211.00 feet; thence S 89041148" W, parallel with the North line of the SW 1/4 of said Section 25 a distance of 167.00 feet; thence N 00019'11" W, parallel with the East line of the SW 1/4 of said Section 25 a distance of 211.00 feet; thence N 89041148" E, parallel with the North line of the SW 1/4 of said Section 25 a distance of 167.00 feet to the Point of Beginning. 2. Case No. WZ-96-10: An application by Dwaine R. Richter for approval of a Planned Commercial Development combined final development plan with sign variances and subdivision plat. Said property is located at 12851 West 32nd Avenue. The following legal description pertains to the subdivision plat: Commencing at the West 1/4 corner of said Section 29; thence along the West line of said NW 1/4, the basis of the bearings in this description, N 89029'16" E 559.13 feet; thence N 00047'121' W of 35.00 feet to the north right-of-way line of West 32nd Avenue, the southeast corner of Lot 4 of said 70 West Business Center and the point of beginning. Thence along the boundary of said Lot 4 the following four (4) courses; 1. S 89043'30" W 95.18 feet to the beginning of a curve concave to the northeast with a radius of 20.00 feet and a central angle of 89029'18"; 2. along said curve 31.24 feet; 3. N 00047'12" W 70.18 feet; 4. N 89043130" E 115.01 feet to the east line of Lot 7 of said 70 West Business Center; Thence along the west line of Lot 7 and the east line of Lot 5 of 038 said 70 West Business Center N 00047'12" W 668.43 feet; thence along the boundary of Lot 6 of said 70 West Business Center the following four (4) courses; 1. S 89040100" W 330.44 feet; 2. N 00010'11" W 204.59 feet; 3. thence N 89039'000 E 417.45 feet; 4. S 00030'00" E 293.50 feet to the south line of Lot 1 of said 70 West Business Center and the beginning of a curve concave to the northeast with a radius of 175.00 feet and a central angle of 25024'33"; thence along the following eleven (11) courses; 1. along said curve 77.60 feet to the beginning of a non-tangent curve concave to the south with a radius of 125.00 feet and a central angle of 02055'29"; 2. along said curve 6.38 feet; - - 3. N 89039'01" E 211.11 feet; 4. N 52043'35" E 51.25 feet; 5. N 89039101" E 7.07 feet; 6. S 00030'39" E 70.89 feet; 7. S 89024'24" W 32.73 feet; 8. S 06017'24" W 7.95 feet; 9. N 89030'31" E 55.19 feet; 10. N 00021'02" W 25.50 feet; 11. N 89038159" E 25.05 feet; to the west right-of-way of I-70; Thence along said right-of-way S 06031125" W 559.66 feet; thence S 79009'50" W 194.49 feet; thence S 89043130" W 194.00 feet; thence S 00047'12" E 5.00 feet to the point of beginning. Parcel contains approximately 8.33 acres. The following legal description pertains to the final development plan: Lots 2, 3, 4, 6 and 7 of the 70 West Business Center Subdivision, City of Wheat Ridge, County of Jefferson, State of Colorado. 3. Case No. ZOA-96-9: An amendment to the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws, Zoning Code, Section 26-30(P) pertaining to Group Homes for Handicapped, Developmentally Disabled, Elderly Persons and Children. yI~,, L Sa/ nd a Wiggins, SeVi ATTEST: Wanda Sang, City Clerk To be Published: July 26, 1996 Wheat Ridge Transcript b:\a81596.phn 039 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING . befc:e Notice is hereby given that a Public ....i::g is to he held the City of Wheat Ridge Planning commission on A.S., :196 at 7:30 p.m. at ] 500 West 29th Avenue. sions Ridge. PColorado ublic All iO,ijascad citia.ns are invited co apeak at -he Hearing o submit written Comments. The following Petitions shall he heard: 1, 5-96-7 M application by Lawrence Gill for spprov 1 of a two-10, minor nuteivi.i.- on Residential o zoned land located at 6000 Wm[ 32nd Avenue. Said property s legally described as fell...: A par[ of Block 1, STEBBIN'S SUBDiv3SION, situated in the Sourhwesr One-Quarter of SeetiOn 25, Township ] South, Range 69 West of the 6th Principal Meridian. County of Jefferson, State of Colorado. being more Particularly described as full...: Beginning at the Northeast corner of said Block 1, from which point of beginning the Northeast corner of the Southwest 1/4 of said Section 25 beats N 00.19'11• M A distance of 30.00 feet: thence S 00.19111• along the East line of said Block 1 and along the East line of the Sg 1/4 of said Section Z5, on an assumed bearing, a diacance of 211.00 fast; thence 5 8....... W. para!!el With the North line of the SW 1/4 of sallel '.atithnthe Eascaline-off 161.00 feet: thence N 00.19.11• W, par+ the SW 1/4 of said section 25 a discs--- of 211.00 feet: thence N 89.41.48• E. P. r.llel with the North line .Of the SW l/a Of aaitl Seesi.n 25 a distance of 167.0a feet to the Point Of Beginning. 2, ......10' M applit,tion by O+aine R. Richter f approval of a planned Ceaercial Oevalopment combined final deve 32 dbAvenue.a The Saidlp epercYl is lao[edga.v13851 Westn t following legal description parcel co the audiviaion plan commencing at the Nest 1/4 Corner of said Section 29; thence long the Wset line of said NW 1/4, the basis of the bearings in this description, N 89.29'16• E 559.13 feet/ thence N 00147'12• W of 32nd e, 35.00 to north line . f West southeasttcorneraof I.ot 4loftsata`dw70 West Buins.. Centeri°-mud the! Point of beginning. o Thence along the boundary of Baia Sot 4 the following four lsl nurses; 1. S 89143'30• W 95.16 fee, to the beginning of a curve conc. co the northeast with a radio. of 20.00 feet and a central angle of 89.29'18•; 2. along said curve 31.24 feet; 3. N 00-47'12• M 70.18 feet; 4. N 89143'30• E 115.01 feet to the ...c line of We 7 of said 10 Men Budneu Center: Thence along the west line of Lot 7 and the e+ac line of lac 5 of said 70 Wes. Busine.. Center Y 00.47'12• W 668.0 fee[; thence along the boundary of Inc 6 of said 70 Wes[ Business Center the following four 141 coot...: 1. S 09.40'00• W 330..4 feet: 2. N 00.10'11• W 204.59 feet; 3. thence N 89.39'00• E 417.-5 fee.; the .oat F. :va Of W, 1 . 4. 5 00.30'00• E 293.50 feet to 70 West Business Center and the beginning Of a ur,. Ooncae v nortea the with a thence radius &long ft hey following eleven IS311 angle Of course: giOniOg 9e^a 1. along curve concave to the6 southtwith ,a radius of 125..0 [e<ca>.d central angle of 02.55'29-: 2. along said curve 6.38 fee[: 31 N 89139'01• E 211.11 feet: 4. N 52.43'35• E s1.2S feet: 5. N 890901• E 7.07 feet: 6. 5 00.30'39• E 70.89 fee[: 7. 5 69.24'24• w 32.73 feet: S. S 06.17'24• W 7.95 feet; 91 N 89.30']1' E 55.19 feet: 10. N 00.21'02' W 25.50 feet: 11. N 89•]8'59• E 25.05 fee[: ce in., West right-of-way of Thence along said right-o[-wsY S 06.31'25• W 559.66 fees: thhe-ncce 5 79.09'50• M 191.49 fees thence S 09•U'l0• W 194.00 fee[: N<nc! 5 OOY7'12- E 5.00 tee[ to the point of beginning. Parcel concaua appresimately 8.33 acres. The following legal description pertains to the final develOpxnc plan: Lace 2. 4. 6 and 7 of the 10 ...I Buelness Center SuMivi.ian. City of Wheat Ridge, County of Jefferson, State of Colorado. 3 QU x~2O,,n-96-9 M amendment to the Wheat Ridge Cade of Laur CotleCOtle, Seetinta1101 .n Elderly Group persons Homes fora..di!Q s p<d. Oev<lo Y Disabled. and aren _ Children. sauna rs-Wiggann, s~q[.a ry ATTEST: Wan a Sang, Caty C Mk To he published: July 26. 1996 Wheat Ridge Transcript b:\aa1596.phn 040 SOX C_ W'-:EAT FIC.. OE. GO CASE NO. 6)Z - f! -/Q The City or heat =c<ep,_::_N-23 Ridge POSTING CERTIFICATION PLANNING COMMISSION - CITY COUNCIL - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT (Circle One) HEARING DATE: ALC(:Lc(S T I, ti)/4-/A) fC residing at as the applicant for Case No c 1- nr (n a m e) 5' aQpt~°uCE a d d r e s s; WZ-9(, -/0 ~f / kj L. G hereby certify that I have posted the Notice of Public Hearing at ,Nrv< - z-7o UP. 31`2dc,-~ - ZO9105T R,,51 dxcs, (1 o c a t i o n) on this day of / cAc,u S T 19 2(o , 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 this case and will be placed in the applicant's case file at the Department of Planning and Development. M A P <pc>postingcert rev. 05-19-94 o, , 7-0 041 R- PGD wv~a}.gj> viLK/_ i i F Ili NW 2~ _os• ¢c+>w =e>..ary 8. x.995 a= - SGn`E '.a00 O - 042 PO - DWAINE R. RICHTER 6565 SOUTH SYRACUSE WAY #1202 ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO 80111 TELEPHONE 303-694-7215 August 2, 1996 Merideth Reckert City of Wheat Ridge P.O. Box 638 7500 West 29th Ave. Wheat Ridge, CO 80034 Certified Mail Re: Development Plans 70 West Business Center Wheat Ridge, Co. Dear Merideth, This letter will serve as an invitation to you for a neighborhood review of the subject development plans that are currently being processed in the City of Wheat Ridge. The plans will be available for you to see and discuss at 3000 Youngfield Street, suite #285 between the hours of 6 P.M. to 7:30 P.M. on Thursday, August 8, 1996. I hope you will take this opportunity to see what we are doing with this site. Very truly'yo Dwaine R. Richter cc: Merideth Reckert Ron Hoisington Dave Galloway 043 DWAINE R. RICHTER 6565 SOUTH SYRACUSE WAY #1202 ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO 80111 TELEPHONE 303-694-7215 August 6, 1996 Sent via Fax & Mail IDLE CITY OF W"u"T R 2T n~ D AUG 1 41996 P~,pNN~N" & DEVELOPMENT 4 Ms. Meredith Reckert, Planner City of Wheat Ridge 7500 West 29th Ave. Wheat Ridge, CO 80215 Re: 70 West Business Center Engineering Division Staff 170 Business Center Referral to Ms. Reckert of July 30, 1996 Dear Meredith: This letter is in response to the subject referenced memorandum, a copy that you forwarded to me. I do not know what preliminary meeting held earlier in the year that Mr. Oss is referring to in his letter to you of July 30, 1996. I will address myself each comment listed in the memorandum in the same order. In items where there is no immediate action required, I will simply state "Noted". Where changes are required and have been made in our plans, I will state "Comment included in final plan". 1. Comment included in final plan. 2. " 3. See response to #1 in respect to curb and gutter. Roadway construction is in accordance with the Stipulation for Settlement and Dismissal dated November 21, 1995 paragraph #1. b. 4. Comment included in final plan. 5. It 6. " 7. " " 8. Traffic study by Leigh, Scott & Cleary, Inc. has been submitted to the City. 9. See comment # 8. 10." if " it 11. Traffic signal construction is covered in paragraph # 5 of the Stipulation for Settlement and Dismissal. 12. See comment #11. 13. Ron Hoisington has contacted Mr. Rudy Blea at CDOT to discuss a bike path on the CDOT R-O-W immediately to the east of 70 West Business Center and Mr. Blea indicated to Ron that the CDOT does allow such uses on its R-O-W and that a permit must be applied for by the entity that will construct the bike path. Enclosed herewith please find an application for such a permit so that the City may proceed with this matter. 044 14. See traffic plan. 15. Comment included in final plan. 16. Noted. 17. If 18. See traffic study. 19. Noted. 20. The West Metro Fire Protection the east west access to Wendy's be plans. District has recommended that 25 feet. This is shown on the 21. Comment included in final plan. 22. Ten foot landscaped buffers between improvements and back of walk/right of way line have been installed except the small island between the two south curb cuts of Diamond Shamrock. At this point, because of the new service road, the diamond Shamrock site is pinched down and it is not possible to install a ten foot landscaped buffer here. Section (IV) (A) USE AND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS page 1746 in the 3rd paragraph down provides "Requirements for setback, lot coverage, height, density, area, buffering, landscaping, signage, etc. may be more or less restrictive than such requirements in similar zone districts, 23. Comment included in final plan. 24. " 25. Noted. 26. Comment included in final plan. 27. " 28. " 29. " 30. Our Planner believes that the parking layout is efficient. 31. Noted. 32. A one to two foot retaining wall will be constructed to hold the berm. We will have this designed by a structural engineer. 33. We have submitted utility plans. 34. Noted. 35. " 36. " 37. Comment included in final plan. 38. Will be included in final drainage plan. 39. Parking areas utilized for detension will be submitted in final construction drawings. 40. An NPDES permit will be submitted with final construction drawings. 41. Erosion control plans will be submitted with final drainage plan. 42. The R-O-W issues refered to here are resolved in the Stipulation for Settlement and Dismissal agreement paragraph 1. C.. 43. This change in the plat is being done right now and will be submitted to you. 44. The the legal description that was used in the Three Party Agreement is different from the legal description used in the Stipulation for Settlement and Dismissal agreement. The City changed and used different legal descriptions on each document. Which description do you intend to use? 45. Comment included in final plan. 045 46. " 47. " 48. Plan needs to be corrected to 25 feet. Plat has been corrected to show 25 feet. 49. " 50. Lot 1 is owned by La Quinta, Lot 2 is owned by Dwaine R. Richter & Virginia L. Richter and the balance of 70 West Business Center is owned by Dwaine R. Richter. 51. Plat is being changed. 52. " 53. " 54. Comment included in final plat. 55. " 56. " 57. " 58. " 59. Virginia L. Richter and Dwaine R. Richter each own one-half of lot two and Dwaine R. Richter owns the balance of 70 West Business Center except Lot One. 60. Plat is being changed. 61. Comment included in final plat. 62. It 63. It 64. Noted 65. Site map is only for the purpose of showing the general location of the site within the the Metro area as we understand it. Therefor no change has been made except to orientate the top of the map to the north. 66. Comment included in final plat. 67. " 68. " 69. Lot 2 line will be shown on plan. 70. A comma will be placed in 362,846. 71. Comment is included in final plat. 72. It It is shown on the plat 73. We do not believe we are required to have a 50 foot set back on a side property line. 74. Comment included in final 75. Plat will be changed. 76. Comment included in final 77. Plat will be changed. 78. Lines between Wendy's and center of the access road are 79. Noted. 80. " plan. plan. Diamond Shamrock and down the lease lines and not lot lines. 81. Plat closure: We have a problem completing this plat until the "basis of bearing " problem is resolved. On the one hand we cannot violate the plat that was done in 1984 by Richard Torrey because it is a matter of record, on the other hand the City is refusing to proceed with its approval if we use that basis of bearing. Mr Jan Van Sickle is attempting to resolve this issue with the City and is attempting to contact Mr. Oss. 82. Comment is included in final plan. 83. Sanitary sewer is not on a dedicated easement. 046 84. Comment is included in final plan. 85. It 86. We have met with the Fire District and we are in agreement with their requirements and these requirements are shown on the plans. 87. Comment is included in final plan. 88. Noted. 89. Comment is included in final plan. We are doing everything possible to comply with the suggested changes and are working at top speed to get those changes on the plat. We would like to meet with John or Bob Goebel as soon as Jan Van Sickle has them completed. Please call me at your convenience if you have any further questions. rflii ly yours. Very t Dwa1 e R. Richter cc: John Oss Ron Hoisington - CRH Development Specialists Kumar Halbe- Frasier & Halbe Engineering 047 STATE OF COLORADO DEPARTMENT Of TRANSPORTATION Region 6 vr~o~ 2000 South Holly Street Denver, Colorado 80222 CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE D _ Fan August 9, 1996 A(o 1 1 19096 City of Wheat Ridge rr7~' _ _ 7500 West 29th Avenue V ~u U P.O. Box 638 IELANNING & DEVELOPMENT Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80034-0638 Attn: Meridith Reckert _ RE: WZ-96-10/70 WEST BUSINESS CENTER, I-70/32ND AVENUE The Colorado Department of Transportation has reviewed the proposed West Business Center and we have the following comments: 1. The access, as shown, does not conform to access code requirements and cannot be granted. The spacing between access locations is too close and the number of access locations is excessive. If you have any questions, please contact Gary Prentiss or Rudy Blea at 757-9886. Sincerely z xz~- Gary E. Prentiss R-6 Access/Utility Administrator GEP/gt CC: L. Warner L. Lipp K. Harding ref file I-70 rf 048 DWAINE R. RICHTER 6565 SOUTH SYRACUSE WAY #1202 ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO 80111 TELEPHONE 303-694-7215 August 9,1996 Via FAX & Mail Fax # 235-2857 Director of Public Works City Of Wheat Ridge 7500 West 29th Ave. Wheat Ridge, CO 80034 Re: 70-West Business Center Bike Path Dear Bob: 140~ In a recent meeting with Meredith Reckert regarding the subject 70 West Business Center, we discussed the possibilty of a bike path on or near the subject property. Since we do not have the space for the right of way on my property, we discussed the possiblity of of using the adjacent CDOT right of Way for the path. Meredith asked us to make the contact with CDOT. As a result, Ron Hoisington contacted Rudy Blea and discussed this idea with him for a path on the immediate east edge of 70 West Business Center. Mr. Blea indicated to Ron that the CDOT does allow such uses on its R-O-W and that a permit must be applied for by the entity that will construct the bike path. We have gone as far as we can with this matter. I am forwarding the copy of the application for permit that Mr. Blea sent to Ron so that the City can proceed with this matter as quickly as possible. Very truly you Dw ne R. Ri h er / cc: Meredith ReckertL- Ron Hoisington c. ~s 049 ONSOLIDATED mutual water August 12, 1996 Meredith Reckert, Case Manager Department of Planning and Development City of Wheat Ridge 7500 West 29th Avenue Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80215 Re: Seventy West Business Center Dear Meredith: CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE nT? AUG 13 996 ,i_~] G U iP1ANN; DEVELOPMENT On Wednesday, August 7, 1996, Mike Queen and I met with Dwaine Richter regarding the above referenced project. We have reviewed the two utility plans labeled Alternatives "A" and "B." Either Alternative, depending on the final development layout of the property, is acceptable to Consolidated. Domestic water service may be made available to this property under either development plan, subject to compliance with the Company's rules, regulations and requirements for such service. We understand that the fire protection requirements and placement of fire hydrants have been established by the West Metro Fire Protection District. The required water main re- location and installation of proposed fire hydrants would be at the sole expense of the owner and/or developer of this site. Mr. Richter is aware that Consolidated does all of its own design and construction in-house, and has been advised of the needed applications and amount of preliminary deposit. As you are aware, we have an existing easement over and across this property, a portion of which will have to be vacated at some future time. We will agree to do that upon: a) completion and recording of revised easements, and b) completion of all the work associated with the required re-location of the existing water facilities. THE CONSOLIDATED MUTUAL WATER COMPANY 12700 Yes[ 27111 Avenue • P.O. Box 150068 • Lakewood, Colorado 80215 Telephone 238-0451 • Fax 237-5560 050 Meredith Reckert, Case Manager Department of Planning and Development City of Wheat Ridge August 12. 1996 Page 2 We will want to coordinate our respective requirements to assure minimum impact on the newly constructed Zinnia Street. In that regard, we may need a. right-of-way across the westerly portion of the Diamond Shamrock site, which is not shown on Mr. Richter's plans. That can be addressed at a later time, but should not be overlooked. If you have any questions, please give Mike or I a call. Sincerely, Walter S./ Welton, PLS/PE President /rm cc: Mr. Dwaine R. Richter Michael Zarlengo, West Metro Fire Protection District Michael E. Queen, Water Distribution Manager 051 August 14, 1996 T0: ,3iry Wardle FROM: r-Meredith Reckert RE: Case No. WZ-96-10 The City has received a request for approval of PCD final development plan and plat for property located at 12851 West 32nd Avenue. Pursuant to Case No. WZ-96-3, the City rezoned property directly to the east from A-1 to PCD to facilitate the relocation of Youngfield Service Road (now known as I-70 Service Road West). Part of the discussion regarding the road relocation and rezoning was that an existing bikeway adjacent to the old service from West 32nd Avenue north to Clear Creek was being displaced. The developer who acquired the old right-of-way was directed to participate in the reconstruction of this bikeway. Upon recommendation of staff, the developer's agent has made a proposal to the Colorado Department of Highways for reconstruction of the bikeway on the adjacent I-70 right-of-way. CDOT responded favorably and indicated that a permit will be required for the entity that will be doing the bikeway construction. Please refer this issue to the Parks and Recreation Commission in regard to location for the path and who should be responsible for the cost of construction. Planning Commission will review this case at a public hearing held on August 15, 1996. A City Council public hearing date has not yet been established. 052 CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE PLANNING DIVISION STAFF REPORT TO: Planning Commission DATE OF MEETING: August 15, 1996 DATE PREPARED: August 7, 1996 CASE NO. & NAME: WZ-96.10 CASE MANAGER: Meredith Racked ACTION REQUESTED: Approval of a PCD final development plan and plat LOCATION OF REQUEST: 12851 West 32nd Avenue NAME & ADDRESS OF APPLICANT(S): Dwaine Richter, 6565 S Syracuse Way, Englewood 80111 NAME & ADDRESS OF OWNER(S): Same and Virginia Richter, 11665 W 39th Place, Wheat Ridge APPROXIMATE AREA: 10 acres PRESENT ZONING: Planned Commercial Development PRESENT LAND USE: Restaurant, hotel, vacant SURROUNDING ZONING: N. W. W: Jefferson County; E: A-1 SURROUNDING LAND USE: N: low density resid, vacant; S. church, low density; E: 1-70; W: low density residential COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR THE AREA: Commercial Activity Center DATE PUBLISHED: July 26, 1996 DATE POSTED: August 1, 1996 DATED LEGAL NOTICES SENT: July 31, 1996 AGENCY CHECKLIST: (XX) ATTACHED RELATED CORRESPONDENCE: (XX) ATTACHED ENTER INTO RECORD: (A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN (XX) ZONING ORDINANCE (XX) SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS ( ) OTHER ( ) NOT REQUIRED ( ) NONE (XX) CASE FILE & PACKET MATERIALS ( ) SLIDES (XX) EXHIBITS JURISDICTION: The properly is within the City of Wheat Ridge, and all notification and posting requirements have been met, therefore, there Is jurisdiction to hear this case. 053 Planning Division Staff Report Case No. WZ-96-10 Page 2 L REQUEST The applicant requests approval of a combined final development plan and plat with sign variances. The property is known as the 70 West Business Center and has a restaurant and hotel on It which were approved in 1984. A parcel of land directly to the east was rezoned pursuant to Case No. WZ-96.3 as part of the negotiations to relocate the frontage road. The road has been completed and this parcel has been incorporated Into the request, although ownership transfers have not yet occurred. The plan and plat also include a parcel on Lot 6 which is not In the City of Wheat Ridge. This property must be deleted from the proposal or shown as landscaping. Since this case is not a rezoning a neighborhood meeting Is not required. However, the developer is holding an "open house" at the LaQuinta and has Invited the neighboring property owners to review the proposal and ask questions. 0. REFERRALS Wheat Ridge Public Works has reviewed and approved a conceptual drainage plan. They are in the process of reviewing a traffic study which could affect required public Improvements and curb cut locations. They have also had numerous comments on the development plan and plat which need to be addressed. Depending on traffic warrants, a signal at Zinnia may be required. West Metro Fire District Is working with the developer to resolve fire access Issues. Hydrant Installation will be required as shown on the utility plan. Parks and Recreation Commission will review this submittal In regard to the ten-foot-wide path location and who should be responsible for construction of the path. Consolidated MuWal Water District will require a partial water line relocation. 111. DEVELOPMENT PLAN The development plan proposes two different scenarios both of which include a 1700 square foot gas station convenience store with car wash and 35W square foot fast food restaurant along West 32nd Avenue. They also both show a 1125 square foot service facility on Lot 5 and a 28,000 square foot officelshowroom facility on Lot 6. The developer has proposed the two development alternatives to remain flexible In regard to the development market. Alternative A provides for a 11,200 square foot "sit-down" restaurant. Alternate B allows for 19,700 square foot of retail In two structures. There are no changes to Lot 4 which is designated as a duplex. All requirements for landscaping coverage, parking and setbacks have been met. The exception is sign heights which will require variances. The applicant Is providing a six-foot-high solid wood fence continuing north from the new 12 foot sound wall to provide buffering. All buildings will match the brick used in the wall. There are some Inherent problems with the site plan which must be addressed prior to City Council as follows: 054 Planning Division Staff Report Page 3 Case No. WZ-96-10 1. There are too many curb cuts too close together for the convenience store/gas station along the east side of the service road. The some Is true along the south side of the service road on the north end of Lot 2 for the Country Cafe. 2. There are no specific parking stalls for the convenience store only. 3. No loading area is shown for the office/showroom space on Lot 6. 4. There are potential conflicts with cars backing out from parking spaces Into primary access aisles on Lots 2 and 6. 5. A ten-foot-wide concrete bike path to allow access from West 32nd Avenue north to the-greenbelt is not shown. The developer Is working with CDOT to allow construction on the 1-70 right-of-way east of the property. it Is unclear as to who will be responsible for construction of the path. 6. Parking for Lots 5 and 6 extends into Tracts C and D which is to be used for open space, berm and fencing. This is a violation of the outline development plan. 7. On Lot 6, the open spacelberm area is 20 feet wide where on the plat it is 25 feet wide. This is a specific violation of the outline plan. it needs to be widened to 25 feet. 8. Staff had originally requested the eastern 40 feet of Lot 6 be used as landscaping as there is the potential for a future extension of the straight portion of the service road directly to the north. This area Is shown as parking required for the offlcelshowroom building. If the street is extended If will displace required parking for the building. If this happens, additional parking will have to be provided perhaps on property acquired to the north. 9. Lot 6 landscape plan requires 25 additional trees or shrubs. We suggest these be placed and maintained on the outside of the fence. 10. There is a total of six signs shown on the property in addition to the two existing 50-foot-high signs for LaOuinta and the Country Cafe. Three of the six new signs are 50 feet in height. This requires a specific variance for all three of the signs. See Section IV. Variances. 11. The proposed fast-foot restaurant crosses a gas line which will have to be relocated. 12. The signage be amended to reflect any variance approvals or denials. 13. Dumpster enclosures are not shown. IV. VARIANCES There are two existing 50-toot signs on the property. Staff has concluded that while all of the new businesses are allowed signs, none of these signs can exceed 25 feet in height. The developer Is requesting six additional signs, three of which are 50 feet In height. Staff would support a variance for one additional 50-toot sign. Staff has the following comments regarding the criteria used to evaluate a variance: 055 Planning Division Staff Report Page 4 Case No. WZ-96-10 Variances must be considered separately from the other cases and requires a greater-them-majority vote based upon Wheat Ridge Code of Laws Section 2-W*). and Section 266(D)(2). Staff has the following comments regarding the criteria used to evelueRe a variance: 1. Can the property in question yield a reasonable return in use, service or income lf permitted to be used only under the conditions allowed by regulation for the district in which it is located? If the variances are not granted, the property can still be used as proposed and provide a reasonable return in use, service and income. The developer feels that 50-foot-high signs are essential for 1-70 exposure. Staff concludes that the majority of the high signs could be eliminated by combining business information on one or two of the freeway-oriented signs. 2. Is the plight of the owner due to unique circumatarmes? Circumstances are not unique. The sign code is applied consistently to all commercially-zoned properties through the City of Wheat Ridge. 3. If the variation was granted, would it alter the essential character of the locality? Staff concludes that granting the variances would produce a "forest" of very tell signs thus negatively affecting the area. 4. Would the particular physical surrounding shape or topographical condition of the specific property Involved rem it In a particular hardship (upon the owner) as distinguished from a mere inconvenience, N the strict letter of the regulations were carried out? The topography of the site in relation to the freeway can be considered a physical hardship as 1-70 is elevated at least 16 feet above West 32nd Avenue. it Is for this reason that staff would support one (1) additional, mufti-use 50-toot-high sign. 5. Would the conditions upon which the petition for a variation is based be applicable, generally, to the other properly within the same zoning classification? It this request is approved, Staff is concerned that a negative precedent could be set for similar variances. 6 Is the purpose of the variation based exclusively upon a desire to make money out of the property? Staff concludes that the request Is for marketing purposes. 7. Has the alleged difficulty or hardship been created by any person presently having an Interest in the property? The physical hardship has not been created by the developer. 8. Would the granting of the variations be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other property or improvements in the neighborhood in which the property Is located? 056 Planning Division Staff Report Case No. WZ-96-10 Page 5 Granting of the variance should not be detrimental to the public welfare, although it will be a distraction for travellers on 1-70. There could be a negative affect on aesthetics in the area, especially adjacent residential uses. 9. Would the proposed variation impair the adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property or substantially increase the congestion in the public streets or increase the danger of fire or endanger the public sallety or substantially diminish or Impair property values within the neighborhood? Staff would conclude that an excessive number of tall signs could diminish and impair property values within the adjacent residential areas. Staff concludes that in general, the variance criteria do not support approval of the request for three additional Wfoot-high signs. However, because of the grade change between the property and 1-70, Staff would support one additional freeway sign, to be located upon the eastern portion of the property. V. SUBDIVISION PLAT Currently, the property exists as seven separate parcels measuring cumulative as 9.9 acres. The proposed subdivision will replat Lots #2, 3, 6 and 7. Minor changes are proposed for Lot 1 (LaOulnta parcel). Lot 5 (single-family residence already bulk) and Lot 4 (vacant, duplex lot) remain the same. As the developer wants to maintain land ownership, Lot 3 will encompass the existing Country Cafe, the fast food restaurant and gas station along West 32nd Avenue and the retell or sit-down restaurant shown on development alternatives A & B. Tracts "C" and "D" are a part of Lots 5 and 6, respectively. There are changes which need to occur to the re-subdivision plat as follows: 1. Since changes are occurring to the boundaries of Lot 1 current (La0uinta) it needs to be shown as part of the replat and LaOuinta must sign as owners. 2. Lease lines for building pads should not be shown. 3. Drainage easement location with appropriate language must be shown. 4. Identify the relocated frontage road as 1-70 Service Road West". 5. M the new street Is dedicated by deed, the language should read 1-70 Service Road West dedicated by separate document recorded at Reception No. T". 6. If CDOT still owns the eastern parcel, they must sign the plat. 7. Correct acreage must be shown. 8. Numerous legal description problems. 9. A note regarding cross access through Lot 2 should be added. VL CONCLUSION 057 Planning Division Staff Report Case No. WZ-96-10 Development Plan Page 6 Staff concludes that all requirements for final development plan have been met and that the proposal, in general, is consistent with the under) ng outline development plan and C-1 zoning regulations. For these reasons, a recommendation of proval is given with the following conditions: 1. All concerns from Ci departments and outside agencies be resolved prior to City Council public hearing; G' -C>c'r art~ uv 2. All comments in Section III of this report be addressed Subdivision Plat Z l Staff concludes that a subdivision replat is required to accommodate the new development. Staff further concludes that all requirements of the Subdivision Regulations have been met. For this reason, a recommendation of Approval is given with the following conditions: 1. All concerns from City departments and outside agencies be resolved prior to City Council public hearing; and 2. All comments in Section V of this report be addressed. Variances Staff has concluded that there is no hardship, the developer has options to combine signage and that a dangerous precedent could be established for similar requests. For these reasons, Staff concludes that criteria do not support the request for three additional 50-foot-high signs. However, since there Is a physical hardship, Staff gives a recommendation of Approval for one additional freestanding sign. The development plan will need to be amended to reflect action on the variances. VII. RECOMMENDED MOTIONS: Development Plan OPTION A: "I move that Case No. WZ-96-10, a request for approval of a PCD final development plan for property located at 12851 West 32nd Avenue, be Approved for the following reasons: 1. All requirements for a final development plan have been met; and 2. The proposal is consistent with the underlying outline development plan and C-1 zoning regulations. With the following conditions: 1. All concerns from City departments and outside agencies be resolved prior to City Council public hearing; and 2. All comments In Section V of this report be addressed. 058 Planning Division Staff Report Case No. WZ-96-10 Page 7 OPTION B: 'I move that Case No. WZ-96-10, a request for approval of a PCD final development plan for property located at 12851 West 32nd Avenue, be Denied for the following reasons: 1. 2. 3. Subdivision Plat OPTION A: 'I move that Case No. WZ-96-10, a request for approval of a subdivision replat for property located at 12851 West 32nd Avenue, be Approved for the following reasons: _ A subdivision replat is required to accommodate the new development; and 2. All requirements of the Subdivision Regulations have been met. With the following conditions: All concerns from City departments and outside agencies be resolved prior to City Council public hearing; and 2. All comments in Section V of this report be addressed.' OPTION B: 'I move that Case No. WZ-96-10, a request for approval of a subdivision replat for property located at 12851 West 32nd Avenue be Denied for the following reasons: 1. 2. 3. Variances OPTION A: 'I move that the request for three sign height variances for property located at 12851 West 32nd Avenue, be Approved for the following reasons: There is a physical hardship due to the change in elevation between the property and 1-70. With the following condition: Only one additional sign may be 50 feet high.' OPTION B: "I move that the request for three sign height variances for property located at 12851 West 32nd Avenue, be Denied for the following reasons: There is no hardship. 2. The developer has options to combine signage. 3. A precedent could be established." 059 Planning Division Staff Report Case No. WZ-96-10 Page 8 OPTION C: 'I move that the request for three sign height variances for property located at 12851 West 32nd Avenue be Approved for the following reasons: There is physical hardship due to the change in elevation between the property and 1-70.' b:\wz9610.sr 060 Case No. WZ-96-10 AGENCY REFERRALS SUMMARY Fire: (West Metro) Working with developer regarding emergency access and fire hydrant installation. Schools: Water: (Consolidated Mutual) Will require line relocation. Sewer: (Northwest Lakewood) No response. U S West: No response. Public Service Company: Can serve. State Land Use Commission (over 5 acres): State Geologist: Q6 Ile Colorado Dept of Transportation: No response. '"Iaz~ Jefferson County: (Health, Commissioners, Planning) Has commented regarding traffic. Adjacent City: TCI: No response. CITY DEPARTMENTS Public Works: Reviewing traffic study. Requires revisions to development plan and plat. Parks and Recreation: Will review at 8/21 Parks & Recreation Commission meeting. Police: Has commented regarding safety Issues. Building Inspection: agrefsum.frm 061 . NaING04?ORATED -EFFE4SON GOU%7 I 3 !d `s , gi - PGD ' b ~ \ ow I A~ , s a.ic , R-I x: PGD J G-I OFFICIAL _ZO.:E ,.~40-3O ND4r ZONING MAP ?A4G= _0- 5OUND4Y . WHEAT RIDGE 115~CNA-5 OwNE45^!?l C,Tr_,MtT LIKE COLORADO DEN0-5 MULTICLF ADD4ESSE5 MA? A:>' TED: .5. I-y< _as- `Cevs O^ =e,.O,y B. Ic/q5 ,a. Q. Q i ~ . I NW 2~ ob~ SGA:E ~.<Gb 062 The City of ADMINISTRATIVE PROCESS APPLICATION Wheat Rid a Department of Planning and Development 6 7500 West 29th Ave., Wheat Ridge, CO 80033 vhnna (3n31 237-6944 Applicant Dwaine R.Richter Address 6565 S. Syracuse Way Phone 694-7215 #1202 Englewood, CO 80111 Owner Same as above Address Phone Location of request North-West corner of 1-70 and 32nd Ave. Type of action requested (check one or more of the actions listed below which pertain to your request.) ❑ Change of zone or zone conditions Site development plan approval Special use permit Conditional use permit Temporary use/building permit Minor subdivision Subdivision Preliminary Final ❑ See attached procedural guide for specific requirements. variance/Waiver - - Nonconforming use change Flood plain special exception Interpretation of code Zone line modification Public improvement Exception Street vacation Miscellaneous Plat Solid waste landfill/ mineral extraction permit ❑ Other Detailed Description of request Preliminary-Final Development Plan A&B and final Re-plat of 70 West business Center List all persons and companies who hold an interest in the described real property, as owner, mortgagee, lessee, optionee, etc. NAME Dwaine R. Richter ADDRESS 6565 S. Syracuse way #1202 PHONE 694-7215 Englewood, CO 80111 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 LaKfully be accomplished. Applicants other than owners must submit p -at rney from the owner which approved of this actioAon his be 715 if Signature of Applicant sworn to me this day 1 17- NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF COLORADO Expires 10-18.99 Public 19 q(_ My commission expires /0- uate xeceivea nev jj . ,vv. 063 PUBLIC HEARING SPEAKERS' LIST V LX CASE NO: WZ-96-10 DATE: August 15, 1996 REQUEST: An application by Dwaine R. Richter for approval of a Planned Commercial Development combined final development plan with sign variances and subdivision plat. Said property is located at 12851 West 32nd Avenue. SPEAKER NAME, ADDRESS & PHONE (PLEASE PRINT) Position o Please IN FAVOR Request heck OPPOSED a ~ 5-6362 iL L 7-432'116 0 //INi.4 c Fea~/i A w- b&4 r art /Q v 064 FAEGRE & BENSON PROFESSIONAL LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP 250o REPI.iEuc PLAZA, 570 SEVENTEENTH STREET DENVER, Coww o 8o,oz-4oo4 TELEPHONE 303592-9000 FAb1.MILE 303-1120-0600 DIANE B. DAVIES 303/8300658 August 15, 1996 HAND-DELIVERED Planning Commission City of Wheat Ridge Re: Case No. WZ-96-10; Approval of PCD for 70 West Business Center (the "Property"); Planning Commission Meeting Date August-15, 1996 Commission Members: This firm represents Dwaine Richter (the "Applicant") with respect to certain matters involving the Property and its development. The following is presented to supplement the oral presentations made at the Planning Commission Meeting on August 15, 1996, particularly regarding the allowed height of signs as shown on the Combined Preliminary and Final Development Plan, Lots 2,3,4,6 and 7, Seventy West Business Park (the "Plan"). The Planning Division Staff Report for the Plan indicates that the Applicant has requested approval of a combined final development plan and plat with sign variances. This is not correct. No application for variance has been made. The Applicant does not seek or require a variance with respect to signs. The signage on the Property, as reflected on the Plan complies with the approval given by City on July 9, 1984 to a Combined Preliminary & Final Development Plan for the Richter PCD, known as the "I-70 West Business Center" (the "1984 PCD") Pursuant to a Stipulation entered into between the City and Mr. Richter in 1995, which resolved litigation between the Applicant and the City regarding the Property, the Signage Final Development Plan contained in the 1984 PCD applies the Plan before the Commission today. Under the Stipulation, which has been made an Order of the Court, Mr. Richter is entitled to construct the free-standing signs authorized by the 1984 PCD. The Planning Staff has asserted that the three new signs shown on the Plan which are 50 feet in height require a variance. The Planning Staff concludes that a variance is appropriate for one 50 foot sign. The Report, however, is in error in its analysis and conclusion with respect to the signs and the need for a variance.- Deaver Minneapolis Des Moines Washington, D.C. London Frankfurt Ahnaty 065 August 15, 1996 Page 2 The Planning Staff concedes that the number of signs on the Property is dictated by the Stipulation and the 1984 PCD. Apparently, however, the Planning Staff interprets the current Sign Code to limit the number of 50 foot signs on the Property. This analysis is incorrect. Under the Stipulation, not only the number, but also the size and height of the signs can be no less than what was allowed under the 1984 PCD. The Stipulation, paragraph 7, states the City's acknowledgment that Richter is entitled to erect signs approved in the 1984 PCD. The 1984 PCD states: "ONE FREE STANDING SIGN WILL BE ALLOWED PER COMMERCIAL LOT. NOTE: SIGNS MAY BE LOCATED ANYWHERE WITHIN THE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN OF LOTS 1,2,3,6,7. The 1984 PCD contains a drawing of a freestanding sign, which is shown at approximately 50 feet in height, based on the scale of the other measurements shown. The 1984 PCD also states that the maximum height for the _ freestanding sign will be in accordance with sign regulations. Finally, the 1984 PCD contains a note which states: "All additional provisions and allowances of the City of Wheat Ridge Sign Code (Original: January, 1979, Last Update: November 30, 1983, Chapter 19A-1 thru 19-16. Signs, Effective Date 9/19/78) shall remain in effect." The "sign regulations" and Sign Code referred to in the 1984 PCD allow freestanding signs of a maximum height of 25 feet, except that signs within one-quarter mile of the interstate highway that are oriented to the interstate highway may be constructed to be 15 feet above the elevation of the interstate at certain intersecting roadways, one of which is 32nd Avenue. There is nothing in the Sign Code or the 1984 PCD which limits the number of signs which may exceed 25 feet. Given that each of the signs proposed in the Plan is within the stated proximity to the interstate and the interstate is at least 25 feet high at 32nd Avenue, the proposed signs are within the approval given in the 1984 PCD. Moreover, we believe that the Planning Staff has misinterpreted the current Sign Code, as it applies to the Property in light of the Stipulation. The Report states: "Staff has concluded that while all new businesses are allowed signs, none of these signs can exceed 25 feet in height." Staff acknowledges that each business is allowed a sign. The plain language of the current sign code allows signs up to 25 feet in height, except that "retail and service businesses within one-quarter mile of an interstate highway, that are oriented to the interstate highway, are permitted one (1) free freestanding sign up to fifty (50) feet high." §26- 410(E)(1). This provision applies to the Property, which is adjacent to I-70. The provision indicates that each business within one quarter mile of an interstate highway is entitledone 50 foot sign. The maximum number of signs per development, as set forth in §26-410(e)(2), does not address the height of signs (i.e., it does not limit the number of 50 foot signs, but rather total signs). The limitation of signs per development of subsection (2)'does not apply to the Property pursuant to the 1984 PCD and the Stipulation. The Staff analysis incorrectly merges the two subsections together to create a limitation on the number of 50 foot signs. This analysis leads to the Planning Staff conclusion that a variance is required to approve any 50 foot signs under the Application. 066 August 15, 1996 Page 3 The Planning Staff's analysis with respect to the appropriateness of a variance should be ignored. The signage pursuant to the Plan should be approved based on the terms of the Stipulation. Very truly yours, FAEGRE & BENSON LLP 'Diane B. Davies dbd:davdb DNVR1:60005917.01 067 The City of 7500 WEST 29TH AVENUE WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO 80215 August 16, 1996 Gary E. Prentiss R-6 Access/Utility Coordinator Department of Transportation Region 6 2000 South Holly Street Denver, CO 80222 Re: Case WZ-96-10 /I70 West Business Center Dear Gary, QOPV I am in receipt of your letter to Meredith Reckert concerning the above development. The Public Works Department agrees with your comments relating to the number of access points and their closeness, etc. We have communicated our concerns to the Developer and he is in the process of revising his proposal. We do not think CDOT has jurisdiction to regulate access on this section of the service road. In accordance with the April 1993 three party agreement between CDOT, the City of Wheat Ridge and Dwaine Richter, the City of Wheat Ridge owns and has jurisdic- tion of the relocated portion of the service road. This jissue is clarified on page 2, paragraph 2 of the agreement. Please contact me at 235-2863 for further discussion of this matter. Respectfully, John IDES, PE Senior Project Engineer 1 G%Vheat Ridge (303) 2345900 • ADMINISTRATION FAX: 234-5924 POLICE DEPARTMENT FAX: 2352949 068 7500 WEST 29TH AVENUE WHEAT RIDGE. CO 80215-6797 City Admin. Fax # 234-5924 September 5, 1996 Mr. Alex J. Ariniello, P.E. Leigh, Scott & Cleary, Inc. 1889 York Street Denver, CO 80206 (303) 234-5900 Police Dept. Fax a 235-2949 RE: Traffic Impact Study for 70 West Business Center W. 32nd Avenue and Youngfield Service Road Dear Mr. Ariniello, r;e C-;v 0, 'Wheat "Ridge I have reviewed the revised traffic impact study dated August 27, 1996, referenced for the above locations and have the following comments: ❑ The revised study shows the recommended improvements on 32nd Avenue and the Youngfield Frontage Road but it still does not discuss the alteration of existing geometry on 32nd Avenue. West 32nd Avenue was recently widened to 2 lanes per direction approximately from Zinnia Court to the freeway ramps. The widening was to improve the order of the movement on 32nd Avenue approaching the freeway ramps and to increase the stacking area to accommodate the peak hours traffic, especially for eastbound. My interpretation from the Recommended Improvements in the study is that one of the through lanes that Wheat Ridge and Jefferson County created earlier would be converted into a left turn lane to accommodate the traffic turning into this development. This would defeat the purpose of our earlier effort to the above improvements. The City's position on this issue would be that the developer will be responsible to build the left turn lane on 32nd Avenue in addition to what already exists. This would require the additional widening to create the left turn lanes on 32nd Avenue. Please include a recommended improvements sketch which reflects the above on the next submission. ❑ The attached letter is generated from Jefferson County Department of Highways and Transportation regarding their concerns and comments to this development. Jefferson County borders with Wheat Ridge immediately west of the development and thus being affected by the traffic generated by this development. The traffic impact generated by this development will affect Jefferson County significantly as it affects Wheat Ridge roadways and its neighborhood, thus these comments need to be addressed. They are in the process of reviewing the revised impact study dated August 27,1996. I will forward to you any future comments regarding this development when I receive from the Jefferson County Department of Highways and Transportation. 069 ❑ A modified site access for Diamond Shamrock was faxed to Richard Gipson for his review and comments on September 4, 1996, (please see the attached). He was contacted and informed of the access modification. My understanding is that he will review with his colleagues and inform me of his decision. ❑ The latest analysis of the Peak Hour Volume warrant indicates that the signal at the intersection at 32nd Avenue and Youngfield Service Road would be warranted with the development of phase I, which consists of the development of Diamond Shamrock and Wendy's Hamburgers. If so, the signal should be built and operating by the time Wendy's and Diamond Shamrock are complete. We are in receipt of the Court decree in which Wheat Ridge will be responsible for the design and construction of the signal. We will request funding from City Council for this signal in 1997. Please note that all of the roadway improvements to accommodate this development on both 32nd Avenue and the Young-field Service Road must be constructed at this time. ❑ As mentioned in the previous comment letter, the proposed access to the retail area located immediate west off the loading dock to the Country Cafe needs to be closed off to minimize the number of driveways located adjacent to the curve. These curves create a limited sight distance and therefore driveway access should be placed far away from them. It would be safer for the drivers to use the shared driveway between the Country Cafe and the retail/restaurant located along the north-south segment of the Service Road. The existing loading dock access is farther away from the curve and also serves only service vehicles. Please address the above comments and resubmit for further review. Should you have any questions I can be reached at 235-2862. Sincerely, Steve Nguyen, P. . Traffic Engineer cc: Bob Goebel, Director of Public Works John Oss, Senior Project Engineer Greg Knudson, Development Review Engineer Meredith Reckert, Planner II Nanette Neelan, Jefferson County Dept. Of Highway and Transportation Jean Montoya, Jefferson County Dept. Of Highway and Transportation Dwaine R. Richter 070 - ard of County Commissioners Highways and Transportation Suite 3500 Phone: (303) 271-8470 Fax: (303) 271-8490 September 5, 1996 Steve Nguyen City of Wheat Ridge 7500 West 29th Avenue Wheat Ridge, CO 80215-6797 RE: Traffic Study for 70 West Business Center S-~`tvv Dear ML_Nguyen: Gary 0. Laura District No. 1 Betty J. Miller District No. 2 John P. Strnre District No.3 Thank you for referring the 70 West Business Center traffic study to us for our review, along with your written comments regarding the traffic study. We have reviewed this information, and have the following comments: We agree with your comments on the traffic study and would like the applicant to address the issues you discussed, including: signal warrant phasing of the proposed development and geometric improvements length of left turn lanes on 32nd Avenue existing lane geometry redesign of site access to minimize the conflicts on Youngfield Service Road trip generation for the proposed development In addition, we would request that the traffic study include a system analysis of the Youngfield Service Road/32nd Avenue intersection, because of its proximity to three other signalized intersections--the southbound 170 off-ramp and on-ramp at 32nd Avenue, the Youngfield Street/32nd Avenue intersection, and the intersection of Alkire/32nd Avenue. The level of service calculations should also consider a system analysis. 2. Jefferson County is concerned about traffic impacts from the proposed development on 32nd Avenue west of the site, which is a county street. 32nd Avenue west of the site is currently operating at an unsatisfactory level of service due to high traffic volumes, the existing two-lane configuration of the roadway, the lack of left and right turn lanes at intersections, and the existence of eight intersections between Eldridge Street and the Youngfield Service Road. In 1995, Jefferson County counted 16,000 trips per day on 32nd Avenue west of Zinnia Street. My estimate is that the proposed development will add about 700 trips per day to 32nd Avenuc west of the site, thus worsening the existing 100 Jetterson County Parkway, Golden, Colorado 80118 (303) 271 -6511 071 Mr. Steve Nguyen September 5, 1996 Page 2 situation of queuing traffic on 32nd Avenue at the unsignalized intersections. The estimate of 700 trips per day includes a reduction of 45% and 55% respectively, for pass- by trips to the fast food restaurant and the service station/convenience store. The traffic study should be revised to address the impacts of the proposed development on the existing unsatisfactory situation on West 32nd Avenue west of the site, including whether the development should be phased until improvements are made to 32nd Avenue. 3. 32nd Avenue is classified as a minor arterial on the Jefferson County Major Thoroughfare Plan. The applicant should be required to dedicate a minimum of 50 feet of right of way along 32nd Avenue on the north side to accommodate the planned configuration of 32nd Avenue as a four-through-lane facility, and any additional right of way needed for acceleration/deceleration lanes. We appreciate the opportunity to offer these comments. We ask that any traffic study revisions be forwarded to us for our information and review. Please contact me at 271-8470 if you wish to discuss these commcnts. Sincerely, ~&V-i Jean Montoya Transportation Planner 1m copy to: Nanette Neclan, Traffic/Transportation Supervisor Jeanie Rossillon, Design and Review Engineer Jerry O'Neall, Development Administrator File 072 4 L ~ NN. 11 90W u... Approx. Scale n n l 1. = 50' I I LEIGH, 5COT1' k CLEARY, PcRK G1{oP 73 tAN17 /.gyp ~C vEw!'T l-c~T iN Diamond 5 Shamrock ,Jtmj To 6LLOw ry tY~ jr, Jsct ✓s S Pump Lbna. 11' le' 12 may..) r lo• Figure 10 Recommended Improvements 70 Weal Business Center (LSC #9G0830) July. 1996 073 MODFICIJ Lc~ss L6YGuT f w"Eqr MEMORANDUM ° o a U ^ To: Planning Commission From: Meredith Reckert, Planner cotoaroo Re: Case No. WZ-96-10/Richter Date: September 13, 1996 Please be advised that Staff is requesting a continuance of Case No. WZ-96-10. The reason for continuance is that design issues relating to public improvements, drainage and the resubdivision are still unresolved. The next available public hearing date is October 3, 1996. MR:slw 074 P.O. 60X 638 TELEPHONE: 303.23+-6944 The City Of 7500 WEST 29TH AVENUE • WHEAT RIDGE. COLORADO 80034 cWheat Ridge September 24, 1996 This is to inform you that Case No. WZ-96-10 which is a request for nrnuAi of a Pta-in,d Commercial Development combined final- %7 t t nt n with sign variances and subdivision plat for property located at 12RSt west 32nd Avenue will be heard by the Wheat Ridge Planning Commission in the Council Chambers of the Municipal Complex, 7500 West 29th Avenue at 7:30 p.m., on n tnhir R 1496 All owners and/or their legal counsel of the parcel under consideration must be present at this hearing before the Planning rQmmi5;sion As an area resident or interested party, you have the right to attend this Public Hearing and/or submit written comments. It shall be the applicant's responsibility to notify any other persons whose presence is desired at this meeting. If you have any questions or desire to review any plans, please contact the Planning Division. Thank you. PLANNING DIVISION <pc>phnoticeform "The Carnation City" 075 7500 WEST 29TH AVENUE WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO 80215 subject: 70 WEST BUSINESS CENTER RE-SUB date: September 25, 1996 Wheat ~Ridae I HAVE REVIEWED THE PLAT SUBMITTED SEPT. 19 1996 AND HAVE THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS. - - 1. THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION NOW INCLUDES THE PROPERTY CURRENTLY OWNED BY C.D.O.T. WE FEEL THIS THREE PARTY AGREEMENT NEEDS TO BE COMPLETED PRIOR TO SUBMITTAL OF THE FINAL PLAT SO THAT OWNERSHIP IS NOT A PROBLEM. AS IT STANDS NOW, WE WOULD REQUIRE SIGNITURES FROM C.D.O.T. AS OWNERS ON THE PLAT. 2. THE NAME SHOULD BE 70 NOT SEVENTY. 3. THERE ARE SOME MINOR TECHNICALITIES THAT NEED TO BE ADDRESSED IN THE LEGAL WHICH ARE BASICALLY TYPOGRAPHIC IN NATURE. (303) 234-5900 • ADMINISTRATION FAX: 234-5924 POLICE DEPARTMENT FAX'. 235-2949 076 to: GREG KNUDSON from: JOHN MCGUIRE MEMORANDUM Approved Date TO: MEREDITH RECKERT, PLANNER t FROM: JOHN OSS, SENIOR PROJECT ENGINEER, RE: RICHTER DEVELOPMENT, 70 WEST BUSINESS DATE: SEPTEMBER 25, 1996 r-SFP 2 S 1996 ERG & DEVELOPMENT We have completed review of the above subdivision and have the following comments: 1. The developer (Mr. Richter) has included a portion of property owned by CDOT in the plat and site plan without providing a signature block for CDOT. The abandonment of this property by CDOT to the developer is covered under a 3 party agreement between CDOT, the City and the developer. CDOT was advised by the City in early April of this year that the conditions in the agreement had been met and that the next step was for them to deed the land to the developer. We have discussed this matter with the City Attorney and we are contacting CDOT to come to a resolution of this matter. 2. We have not completed final review of the traffic impact study. The study has identified to date the requirement for a left turn lane in each direction on 32nd Avenue and a dedicated right turn lane from 32nd Avenue to the Service Road. In addition, the study has identified the need for a double left turn from the Service Road to West 32nd Avenue. These additional lanes may require additional right of way and/or easements on both 32nd Avenue and the Service Road to accommodate the roadway width. 3. We have reviewed the information presented in the Combined Preliminary-Final Development Plan (plan). The plan does not show final information relating to required lanes on the Service Road and 32nd Avenue. We agreed to review these plans without this information pending completion of the traffic impact study and inclusion of its conclusions into the site plan. There may be problems with setbacks, etc on the site plan if there is additional right of way required for additional lanes. In addition to the above, there are other minor concerns we have with the site plan that we are working on with the developer. . 077 4. We are continuing to work with the developer on the drainage report. The report has been approved as to concept. The outstanding concerns are technical in nature and should be easily addressed in the next submission. 5. We have minor problems with the plat outside of the discussion in Item 1. These are technical in nature and should be resolved on the next submission. In conclusion, we recommend that this development be taken to Planning Commission for action. We would request that Planning Commission require the developer meet Staff's requirements prior to taking this development to City Council for final disposition. 2 078 C1Tfy OF `+`''r.-AT RlDOE~ i-3m n? MEMORANDUM D ~ SEP 3 0 1996 U L5 T0: Wheat Ridge City Council and Planning Commission KpNNIN6 & DEYfLi MENT FROM: Residents of Zinnia Court Between 32nd and 33rd Avenues RE: Development Plans of Duane Richter DATE: September 26, 1996 The majority of this memo was presented to the Wheat Ridge Planning Commission on August 15th by the homeowners on the 3200 block of Zinnia Court in response to the development plans presented to the community by Mr. Richter on August 8th. The concerns of the neighbors most directly impacted by the development were then shared with the Applewood Property Owners Association on September 11 th. 1) A 24 hour gas station in such close proximity to the neighborhood will result in added noise, air, odor and light pollution. The wall, for which the neighbors diligently lobbied and greatly appreciate, will not prevent this pollution from impacting their neighborhood, especially those owning two story homes. To maintain the health, safety and integrity of the area, a non-polluting, non-24 hour enterprise should be considered. 2) Even though the current wall attempts to separate the area into two distinct residential and commercial entities, it is not sufficient. The two parcels adjacent to 32nd and west of the new Zinnia Street are planned for a small office building and a duplex housing unit. This negates the separation of residential and commercial in addition to retaining a direct view of the commercial property from the first two east-facing homes on Zinnia Court. The only way to maintain the integrity of the neighborhood is to extend the new existing wall to 32nd Avenue, between the proposed office building and duplex. This is desirable even if the wall has to angle onto the duplex lot. A truncated taper will most likely be necessary as the wall extension reaches 32nd. This will also prevent office workers from parking on Zinnia Court and then walking through the duplex lot to the office building. If the City of Wheat Ridge is unwilling to pay for the wall extension, the cost should be shouldered by the developer in meeting his obligation to the neighborhood and the tenants of his, hopefully soon to be built, duplex housing unit. 3) The integrity of the neighborhood also demands limited access to the commercial development at the nor-them end of the new wall near the La Quinta. The opening that exists in the wall at the east end of 33rd Avenue must be permanently closed. With all-night establishments being proposed, this will increase foot traffic, loitering and littering, especially by adolescents, in the neighborhood. Likewise, if the development is successful and adequate parking spaces are not available for the proposed-restaurants, their clientele will be tempted to park in the neighborhood and walk through the opening in the wall. The home owner nearest the opening already has circulated a petition requesting the closure that has been signed by nearly 50 residents. Again, the request is not that development be 079 prohibited, but that the integrity of the neighborhood be maintained. 4) Additional, related concerns that must be addressed include: a) The existing traffic congestion on 32nd Avenue makes it nearly impossible to turn from Zinnia Court onto 32nd. The addition of a senior class to D'Evelyn Junior and Senior High School in 1997 will further increase the congestion. Any commercial development will only exacerbate the problem. The widening of 32nd all the way to Alkire should be considered along with encouraging the Colorado State Highway Department to construct a west bound exit from Highway 58 to Interstate 70. Such access would greatly reduce the Coors and Table Mountain traffic on 32nd Avenue. b) In addition to the existing parking spaces for the La Quinta and Country Cafe, over 250 parking spaces are being planned for the new commercial enterprises proposed by Mr. Richter. A single two lane road with numerous, traffic stopping, curb-cuts connecting the development to 32nd Avenue does not seem sufficient for emergency access and adequate traffic flow. Any blocking of traffic will spill over onto an already congested 32nd Avenue. The new road in the development, Zinnia Street should be widened to four lanes with carefully planned curb-cuts. This is the only road into and out of the entire development. c) The likelihood of a new restaurant, planned in proposal A, seeking a liquor license is very high. The negative impact this would have on the neighborhood and the obvious legal battle that would ensue, mitigates against proposal A. A large, popular restaurant also would increase the noise, air, light and odor pollution. The worst case scenario would be a barbecue restaurant spewing intolerable, noxious odors into the neighborhood. The small retail strips of proposal B, open nine to nine, represents the more desirable option for residents. d) The proposed signage with a maximum of 50 feet is entirely unnecessary and unacceptable. West bound traffic on 1-70 can readily. see 35 foot signs in sufficient time to exit at 32nd and Youngfield. However, due to the curve in 1-70 west of that exit and the even further west exit ramp for east bound traffic, even a 75 foot sign at 32nd Avenue would not provide east bound traffic with sufficient time and space to exit for any of the proposed establishments. Signage must be kept low and to a minimum since only west bound traffic will be able to see it and exit in time. In summary, the City Council and Planning Commission are encouraged to consider: 1) disallowing a gas station on this side of 1-70 since an adequate number already exist on the east side of 1-70, 2) extending the new wall to 32nd Avenue thus separating commercial from residential, 3) closing the opening in the wall at the end of 33rd Avenue to avoid commercial parking and foot traffic in the neighborhood, 4) disallowing the restaurant, proposal A, in favor of the two retail strips of proposal B, and 5) limiting all signage to 35 feet realizing that east bound traffic will not be able to see any signs. Your willingness to understand and respond to the concerns of the immediate neighbors of the proposed development is greatly appreciated. Please assist the community in maintaining the integrity of the neighborhood and the Applewood quality of life. Thank you. 080 The City of 7500 WEST 29TH AVENUE WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO 80215 GWhe at GRidge September 27, 1996 Mr. Robert E. Leigh, P.E. Leigh, Scott & Cleary, Inc. 1889 York Street Denver, CO 80206 RE: Traffic Impact Study for 70 West Business Center W. 32nd Avenue and Youngfield Service Road Dear Mr. Leigh, I have reviewed the your letter dated August 27, 1996, referencing the above locations and have the following comments: An additional thru lane for east bound 32nd Avenue was added when the frontage road was relocated. Eastbound left turns did not warrant the construction of a left turn lane. This development creates the need for the left turn lane. It is the developer's responsibility to provide adequate facilities to serve the development without impeding the existing traffic flow. It is therefore the developer's responsibility to construct the left turn lane. There is a discrepancy in the required length of the left turn lane for east bound 32nd Avenue to northbound Youngfield Frontage Road. The letter from Alex Ariniello dated August 27th, 1995 states that the length should be 375 feet with 100 foot taper. Your letter states that the length should be 80 feet with 120 foot taper. Please verify the required length of the bay and include that information on the next submission. As mentioned in my letter to Alex Ariniello dated September 5, 1996 referencing the modified site access for Diamond Shamrock, an island should be placed at this driveway to prevent left turns into the station due to the limited sight distance. The Public Works Department has identified this potential hazard. Our position is that the motorists should not be put in this dangerous position. We are therefore enforcing this issue even though a small volume of traffic is exposed to this hazard. I have discussed the island with Richard Gipson regarding the ingress portion of the access. I asked him to contact his engineer to layout the tanker path through this access and determine if widening the entrance will accomodate the tankers. The Public Works Department is waiting for the outcome of the request. The conceptual roadway improvement plan, which was included with your letter dated September 16, 1996, should reflect on the street improvement plan for this development. (303) 234-5900 • ADMINISTRATION FAX: 234.5924 POLICE DEPARTMENT FAX: 235-2949 081 Mr. Robert E. Leigh Leigh, Scott & Cleary, Inc. Page 2 Please address the above comments and resubmit for further review. Should you have any questions I can be reached at 235-2862. Sincerely, Steve Nguyen, P.E. Traffic Engineer cc: Bob Goebel, Director of Public Works John Oss, Senior Project Engineer Greg Knudson, Development Review Engineer Meredith Reckert, Planner II Dwaine R. Richter 082 he City of 7500 WEST 29TH AVENUE WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO 80215 September 30, 1996 Mr. Dwaine R. Richter Richter Realty 6565 South Syracuse Way, #1202 Englewood, CO 80111 Wheat GRidge RE: Right-of-Way at W. 32nd Avenue and Youngfield Service Road, for 70 West Business Center Dear Mr. Richter, Per your request, I have reviewed the right-of-way at the above location and have identified the areas where additional right-of-way is needed. They are located at the Diamond Shamrock access, northwest and northeast corner of the intersection of W. 32nd Avenue and Youngfield Frontage Road, please see the attached sketch. Per the plan, the sidewalk and/or handicap ramp radius at these locations are within private property. Normally, for street construction, the public facilities such as curb, gutter and sidewalk are placed in the right-of-way for maintenance purposes. At the northeast corner of the intersection, the right-of-way dedication is needed to place a 35-foot radius at flowline, handicap ramp, sidewalk, signal pole and cabinet. At the northwest corner, the right-of-way is needed to place the curb radius, handicap ramp and a future signal pole. The right-of-way for the north approach, in front of Diamond Shamrock, has to be wide enough to accommodate a 52-feet section, flowline to flowline. Please see the attached sketch. In addition to the above, there should be a minimum of 2 feet dedicated as right-of-way behind the sidewalk for signage and utility devices. I hope the above comments clear up whether right-of-way is needed. The above comments should reflect the street improvements plan. Should you have any questions, I can be reached at 235-2862. Sincerely, Steve Nguyen, P.E. Traffic Engineer cc: Bob Goebel, Director of Public Works John Oss, Senior Project Engineer Greg Knudson, Development Review Engineer Meredith Reckert, Planner II John McGuire, City Surveyor Kumar Halbe, Frasier & Halbe Engineering Company (303) 234-5900 • ADMINISTRATION FAX: 234-5924 POLICE DEPARTMENT FAX: 235-2949 083 MINUTES OF MEETING October 3, 1996 CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE PLANNING COMMISSION 1. CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by Chairperson LANGDON at 7:30 p.m., on October 3, 1996 in the Council Chambers of the Municipal Building, 7500 West 29th Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado. 2. ROLL CALL: MEMBERS PRESENT: Robert Eckhardt Harry Williams Carolyn Griffith Jay Rasplicka Carl A. Cerveny - George Langdon Janice Thompson Warren Johnson - EXCUSED ABSENCE EXCUSED ABSENCE STAFF PRESENT: Glen Gidley, Director of Planning & Development Bob Goebel, Director of Public Works Meredith Reckert, Planner Sandra Wiggins, Secretary PUBLIC HEARING The following is the official copy of Planning Commission minutes for the Public Hearing of October 3, 1996. A copy of these minutes is retained both in the office of the City Clerk and in the Department of Planning and Development of the City of Wheat Ridge. 084 Planning Commission Minutes Page 2 October 3, 1996 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 4. APPROVE THE ORDER OF THE AGENDA Commissioner WILLIAMS moved to approve the agenda for the meeting of October 3, 1996 as printed. Commissioner RASPLICKA seconded the motion. Commissioner THOMPSON asked if it would be an appropriate time to request that regarding the first case (under public hearing) that the request be divided into two separate motions. Mr. Gidley suggested that the appropriate time to make that decision would be when Commission gets to that item on the agenda. Motion carried 6-0 to approve the agenda. 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Commissioner WILLIAMS moved to approve the minutes for the meeting of September 18, 1996 as printed. Commissioner THOMPSON seconded the motion. Motion carried 6-0. 6. PUBLIC FORUM (This is the time for anyone to speak on any subject not appearing under Item 7 of the Public Hearing section of the agenda.) No one had signed the roster nor came forward to speak at that time. 7. PUBLIC HEARING 1. Case No. WZ-96-10: An application by Dwaine R. Richter for approval of a Planned Commercial Development combined final development plan with sign variances and subdivision plat. Said property is located at 12851 West 32nd Avenue. (Continued from September 18, 1996) Commissioner THOMPSON moved that when Commission is ready to make a decision on this case, two motions be made as follows: 1. One motion concerning the requested subdivision; and 2. a second motion concerning the requested sign variances. Commissioner GRIFFITH seconded the motion. Motion carried 6-0. Ms. Reckert stated she had three additional pieces of information to distribute to Commission. Two were letters from area 085 Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 October 3, 1996 residents and the third was a sign plan for the Diamond Shamrock monument sign. Ms. Reckert reiterated to those present that this case had been continued and that Planning Commission had taken testimony at the Public Hearing on August 15, 1996. She added that included in the packet materials provided to Commission was all written testimony, as well as copies of the minutes. Ms. Reckert went over the revised plan, which was projected overhead for ease in viewing. Ms. Reckert concluded her presentation and asked for questions Commissioner THOMPSON reported that although she did not attend the public hearing on the case before Commission, she had listened to the tapes and felt she was prepared to make a decision that night. Additionally, Commissioner THOMPSON informed those present that the case presently under discussion was brought up at the Town Meeting she had attended the previous Tuesday evening. At that time, she had informed those individuals who inquired about the case, that she could not discuss it as no decision had yet been made. Commissioner THOMPSON voiced her concern regarding the following: traffic on West 32nd Avenue; no stop light being installed at 32nd Avenue and the Frontage Road; stacking of vehicles on West 32nd Avenue; possible re-development of the area to the north and need for more right-of-way on West 32nd Avenue; adequate room for stacking when headed east and turning into development; on and off ramps at I-70; transition from commercial uses to residential uses and possible trash problems; light glare; placement of handicapped parking; developer is trying to pack too much into small space - small retail space should not be built; continuance of wall to West 32nd Avenue; wall should be continued to West 32nd Avenue; no reason not to continue wall to north end of the development; one-way-in/one-way-out at Wendy's; location of drive-up window; impact of showroom on residential neighborhood; berm adequate or should wall be continued at that location; location of dumpsters for restaurant, will they be enclosed; dumpster for showroom currently located next to residential area; evergreens being utilized for buffering and not just deciduous trees. She stated she would like to have someone respond to her concerns. Mr. Gidley stated he would go through Commissioner THOMPSON's concerns one-by-one, adding that Bob Goebel,-Director of Public Works, was present and could answer questions regarding intersection design, design of West 32nd Avenue, and the traffic signal. 086 Planning Commission Minutes Page 4 October 3, 1996 Bob Goebel answered that the traffic report did indicate a signal would be necessary when the gas station or Wendy's is built. Funds are budgeted in 1997 to construct that signal, which will be hard-wired to the signal at Youngfield, the off-ramp on the West side of I-70 and the signal at Alkire, which is in Jefferson County. He elaborated. Commissioner THOMPSON asked if mention of the signal should be made in the motion. Mr. Goebel stated it wouldn't hurt to include it. Commissioner THOMPSON had concerns regarding stacking on West 32nd Avenue and the ingress/egress off from West 32nd Avenue into the site. Discussion followed. Commissioner THOMPSON stated that if a signal is installed, that would address the stacking problem. Mr. Goebel agreed it would Mr. Gidley offered to talk about some of the other issues including the transition from residential to commercial. He stated that generally, the transition was dealt with in 1974 when certain parameters were built into the outline development plan. He elaborated. Ms. Reckert stated that the landscape plan showed mostly deciduous trees, with low-growing junipers along West 32nd Avenue. She added the evergreen buffering would be low. Mr. Gidley noted that the developer feels that the combination of landscaping and the berm along West 32nd Avenue addresses the neighborhood concerns. He stated that the handicapped parking space did need to be relocated. The small building on that lot was extremely tight, and that was been brought to the attention of the developer. It does meet minimum requirements, he added, but it is a design issue. Mr. Gidley stated the Wendy's drive-up window was located on the west side. He didn't believe the showroom building would be an easily-marketed building, due to its' location. He added that the dumpsters for the restaurant were shown on the plan. Mr. Gidley spoke about the retail building site of 925 square feet, remarking that it might accomplish a "sound barrier" objective, making the sound barrier wall unnecessary. If the building is not constructed, he added, it might be best to have the duplex access off the Frontage Road, rather than West 32nd Avenue or Zinnia. 087 Planning Commission Minutes October 3, 1996 Page 5 Commissioner THOMPSON asked if the building was constructed, why wouldn't you recommend having the wall extended to close off anv opening, so that high school students could not "cut through". Mr. Gidley answered that more than likely the duplex would have a side yard fence. Commissioner THOMPSON voiced her concern including the small retail building, even though it met minimum standards. Commissioner ECKHARDT stated it was his understanding that the subject building was previously approved and it was office space. Mr. Gidley stated he believed Commission ECKHARDT was correct, it was office space, not retail. Ms. Reckert checked the plan. Mr. Gidley stated only "limited retail" was allowed on that site. The building itself, was not approved, he added. The applicant, he stated, had chosen to interpret the outline plan by the "use area" being designated on the plan to convert into a building. He elaborated. Ms. Reckert stated that the outline plan does allow retail along that side, however, there are limitations. The building limited to office/warehouse type uses was the building in back of the subject building (Lot 6). Commissioner ECKHARDT noted that with seven parking spaces, the business couldn't be very large. Chairperson LANGDON asked if Commission should hear applicant's testimony before further discussion. Mr. Gidley reiterated that the case had been continued for specific purposes. He explained that those purposes were to address concerns after the public hearing was closed. The primary purpose to reopen this case for the purpose of clarifying the revisions necessary, based upon the previous submittal - not to go through the entire public hearing again. Commissioner GRIFFITH asked if commission decided against allowing the small building and decided in favor of extending the wall, who would be responsible to maintain the landscaping? Mr. Gidley answered that it would be on the applicant's land and would be applicant's responsibility to maintain. Mr. Gidley explained the importance of specifying what Commission wants in that area, whether a building, landscaping, extension of the wall, etc. 088 Planning Commission Minutes October 3, 1996 Pace 6 Commissioner THOMPSON asked regarding the restaurant shown on alternate 'A', would the restaurant share the dumpster with Wendy's? She added that she did not see a dumpster for the restaurant. Ms. Reckert stated it would be her recommendation that Commission include that a dumpster be added for that pad site in their motion. Commissioner THOMPSON asked if Wendy's traffic circulation would allow only one way in and one way out? Ms. Reckert answered "angle" parking is shown. which is generally utilized for one way, but full-width aisles are also shown, which would allow two-way movement. They could do some striping on the lot for circulation purposes. Commissioner THOMPSON asked Mr. Goebel how he felt about the small retail site, the curb cut and the location of same? Do you feel traffic can move safely through this area as the proposal plan indicates? Mr. Goebel stated the amount of traffic generated by such a small retail outlet would not be large enough have a significant bearing on traffic circulation. He elaborated. Chairperson LANGDON asked Ms. Reckert if two 25-foot entrances would be adequate. Ms. Reckert stated it would provide for one-way circulation. She elaborated. Commissioner THOMPSON asked if it was necessary to address business hours for the proposed development? Mr. Gidley stated that if limits are placed on business hours, it would be the first application of limiting business hours in Wheat Ridge. He added that he would have concerns about setting such a precedent. He wasn't certain that it could be enforced. Chairperson LANGDON agreed that it would be difficult to enforce such a limitation. Discussion followed. Mr. Gidley noted that one condition that could be placed would be that Diamond Shamrock canopy signage on the west and south not be illuminated. He reminded Commission that the applicant had agreed to lower sign height along west 32nd Avenue. He elaborated. 089 Planning Commission Minutes October 3, 1996 Page 7 Chairperson L.ANGDON asked if it would be possible for Diamond Shamrock to reduce lighting at night. Mr. Gidley reminded Commission that there would be two other types of signs - a 50-foot sign and a ten-foot sign along 32nd Avenue. Chairperson LANGDON stated that when he spoke of reducing the lighting, he was referring more to the ten-foot sign than the 50- foot sign. Dwaine Richter, the applicant and owner of 70 West Business Center, came forward to speak. Mr. Richter has been sworn in previously. He went over items listed on page 2 of the staff report regarding items needing to be addressed relative to the final development plan, bringing those present up-to-date. Chairperson LANGDON asked if it would be best to address each of Mr. Richter's statements now? Mr. Gidley suggested that Commission allow Mr. Richter to finish his response. Questions could then be directed to specific items. Mr. Richter then updated Commission on the status of corrections to be made to the subdivision plat and items discussed at the August 15 Planning Commission which were not addressed. Mr. Richter stated his strong feelings against limiting business hours. He pointed out to Commission a berm and six-foot fence which he had built in 1984. He noted a sprinkler system had been installed, as well as landscaping and that the project had been quite expensive. He felt he had met the City's requirements and added that it was unfair to expect him to do more. He elaborated. The cost to continue the sound barrier wall 91 feet to West 32nd Avenue would be $10,500. Mr. Richter stated much of the noise comes from Interstate 70. He elaborated. He added that a building would provide more protection to the residents than continuance of the sound barrier to the south. He went on to talk about building coverage and disagreed that the site, as proposed, would be too dense. Mr. Richter went over questions Commissioner THOMPSON had voiced and offered to answer any other questions Commission might have. Commissioner THOMPSON asked Mr. Richter where the dumpster would be placed for the retail restaurant. Mr. Richter stated the lot was small and therefore, he felt the trash accumulation would be small. He added he would make certain that it was added. 090 Planning Commission Minutes October 3, 1996 Page 8 Chairperson LANGDON asked Commissioner THOMPSON if she had further questions or if any of her previous questions had not been answered to her satisfaction. Commissioner THOMPSON answered that Mr. Richter had covered them well. Mr. Richter introduced Mr. Bob Leigh of Lee, Scott and Cleary. Following that Mr. Gipson of Diamond Shamrock would speak, he added. Bob Leigh, of Leigh, Scott and Cleary, 1889 York Street, Denver, was sworn in. He reported that his firm prepared a traffic impact analysis that was required by the City. Mr. Leigh reported that the overwhelming majority of the traffic would be generated by the gas station and the fast food restaurant (801). He elaborated. Commissioner ECKHARDT asked who would be paying for the signal? Mr. Goebel stated that the City would be paying for the signal as part of an agreement reached between City Council and a judgement placed on the City by the courts. Chairperson LANGDON asked if Jefferson County would participate. Mr. Goebel answered that Jefferson County will participate in communications with the signal on Alkire Street. That way, he added all signals can be controlled by computer. Commissioner THOMPSON asked if the signature block for the Colorado Department of Transportation was necessary? Mr. Gidley answered that is a minor issue. He elaborated. Commissioner THOMPSON asked about Alternate A and B on the plan. Ms. Reckert answered that the applicant has requested approval of both alternatives. Approval of both alternatives would allow more marketing possibilities. Rick Gipson, real estate representative with Diamond Shamrock, 520 E 56th Avenue, Denver, was sworn in. Mr. Gipson offered to answer any questions Commission might have. Chairperson LANGDON reiterated that a motion had been approved to separate the issues. Mr. Gidley answered that there would be a separate motion regarding the signs. Discussion could be heard, however, regarding signage. 091 Planning Commission Minutes Page 9 October 3, 1996 Mr. Gipson pointed out that items No. 5 and 6 (Items needing to be addressed relative to the final development plan), the supplemental document provided at that night's meeting, does reflect a significant change in street signage along West 32nd Avenue. It reduces the height from a 25-foot pole sign with 125 square feet of illuminated sign face to a 50 square foot illuminated sign face with a height of ten feet. Additionally, the structure would move approximately 100 feet east. Mr. Gipson expressed his confusion over item No. 6, whether the concern was light projection or just what. Mr. Gidley stated that the reference made was for canopy signs. The canopies are quite tall, he explained, and there are residential areas to the west and south. Since the canopies would remain illuminated all night, Staff was requesting that they not be lit. Mr. Gipson explained the sign configuration. He added that the illumination would be "soft" and would not project light. He elaborated. He said they would be visible not invasive. He stated Diamond Shamrock would certainly like to retain the I illuminated lights as part of the marketing package of the facility. There were no questions at that time. Commissioner THOMPSON asked Mr. Gidley to point out the made to the original sign proposal. Mr. Gidley walked to the overhead and pointed out to Commissi locations of the signs on the original submittal (Three 50-fo high signs and two 25-foot-high signs, plus signage on the walls). He then pointed out the changes that had been made f that original submittal. He further elaborated. Commissioner THOMPSON asked if the canopy sign would illuminate . residential back yards, even with the height of the sound barrier wall? Mr. Gidley stated he had never been in the back yards of the homes in that area. He said the sound barrier consisted of a four-foot-high berm, with a ten-foot-high solid masonry wall on top of it (14 feet of elevation). He thought there was a possibility that they would not. However, he pointed out that the homes from another area would be able to see the canopy light. He reminded Commission that it is a commercial area and had been zoned as such since 1974. Commissioner ECKHARDT suggested that at 10:00 or 11:00 p.m. the west signs could either be turned off or dimmed. 092 Planning Commission Minutes October 3, 1996 Page 10 Mr. Ginson stated due to this particular type of signage, if the signs were dimmed, it would be like shutting them off. Commissioner FCKHARDT suggested the signs may not be necessary. Mr. Gipson stated it was Diamond Shamrock's desire to have the signs illuminated, but should Commission decide the signs are not necessary, Diamond Shamrock would still do fine at that location. Chairperson LANGDON announced to those present that there were four persons who had signed the roster to speak. He reminded everyone wishing to speak that only items regarding new information (information presented at this meeting) would be discussed. Mike Coen, 13146 West 33rd Avenue, Golden, was sworn in. Mr. Coen spoke of plans to install a "trap door" to service three fire hydrants, should the opening in the wall be closed. He thought the trap door was unnecessary. He was in favor of the continuing the brick wall, should the road be constructed. He had concerns about covenants that had been in place since 1965. He added that he had never seen a sprinkler on his side of the berm, and that the landscaping consisted of tall weeds and grass. Commissioner THOMPSON asked Mr. Coen where the fire hydrants were located? Is the trap door needed? Ms. Reckert answered that the hydrants were interspersed around the site and the City had worked with Consolidated Mutual Water and Lakewood Fire District on the location of the hydrants. She added that the City could verify if the trap door is necessary. It may not be needed. Commissioner GRIFFITH asked Mr. Coen if he did or did not want the wall extended. Mr. Coen stated if the road is constructed, he would like the wall extended. Commissioner GRIFFITH asked if there wasn't a fence there already. Mr. Coen stated there was a six-foot wooden fence. Chairperson LANGDON asked who would pay if the wall was extended? Mr. Gidley stated the City had built the wall adjacent to the public street right-of-way, but if the wall was extended, the developer would pay for it. 093 Planning Commission Minutes October 3, 1996 Page 11 Emilv Bennett, 13206 West 33rd Place was sworn in. Ms. Bennett stated that some lots in the development were still covered by covenants. She added that the City of wheat Ridge has started a condemnation proceeding to relocate street right-of-way and this procedure would also remove the covenants. Ms. Bennett stated she planned to file a protest. Mr. Gidley apologized for interrupting, but informed'Commission the matter Ms. Bennett was referring to was in litigation and it was inappropriate to discuss it at that time. It was not an issue for Commission to consider, he added. Ms. Bennett disagreed. Chairperson LANGDON informed Ms. Bennett that the legal process has begun and Planning Commission was not empowered to interfere with that process. The request before Commission, he added, will not include the covenants. Chairperson LANGDON asked Ms. Bennett if she had other issues she wished to comment on. Ms. Bennett answered she thought the color of the Diamond Shamrock canopies would be closer to "kelly" green rather than "holly" green. She was certain that the proposed canopy signs would be seen from her home. Brad Brauer, 3238 Zinnia Court was sworn in. Mr. Brauer pointed out his home on the projected map. He stated he was surrounded by Wheat Ridge on two sides. He stated he had been asked to represent approximately 15 residents on Zinnia Court. Mr. Brauer had written the letter dated September 26, 1996 handed out that night. He stated his and neighbors' concern was for the integrity of the neighborhood and they appreciated Commission's concern regarding the impact of this development. Mr. Brauer had concerns regarding access and inadequate roads servicing the development. Chairperson LANGDON asked if Mr. Brauer's concerns were regarding information brought forward that night? Mr. Brauer disagreed that the wall need not be extended, as there was no way of knowing when the duplex might be built. Mr. Gidley stated the site of the proposed duplex allows only a single or two-family dwelling. Mr. Brauer stated that the lot in question has not been developed now, it's assumed it will be built and act as a.barrier. Mr. Gidley stated that was not the building he was saying would act as a barrier. The building he was referring to was the commercial building. 094 Planning Commission Minutes Page 12 October 3,.1996 Mr. Brauer had concerns about the foot traffic crossing the empty lot, which is landscaped with natural weeds, grasses and dead trees. He stated a wall would help buffer the neighbors and keep the trash out. He elaborated. Mr. Brauer asked if the opening would be closed. Chairperson LANGDON stated he believed that the opening where the fire hydrant is located will be closed. Mr. Brauer stated he appreciated the closure of that area. He noted that when the high school adds a 12th grade, traffic will increase significantly. Mr. Brauer stated that if there is a choice between alternate 'A' and 'B', the residents prefer alternate 'B'. The reason for their choice is that alternate 'B' would reduce the amount of traffic, reduce peak time traffic, and prevent an "all-night" establishment. Mr. Brauer stated the canopy sign(s) will be visible from his two-story home and he was hopeful that the canopy signs would not be illuminated. Mr. Brauer thought that 50-foot signs was overkill and explained why. Chairperson LANGDON asked if the 50-foot sign would be placed before the 32nd Avenue exit? Discussion followed. Mr. Brauer spoke of the existing traffic congestion and stated that one of the biggest problems was that there is no south-bound access onto I-70 westbound coming off Highway 58. He also spoke of the poor quality landscaping done in 1984 and the broken sprinkler system. Mr. Brauer told of his concern for light pollution into their neighborhood. Commissioner THOMPSON asked if plans exist to extend the service road to the north. And, if so, will the commercial office showroom conform to the parking regulations? Mr. Gidley stated that Planning Staff had suggested on several occasions that rather than the alignment shown, that alternate alignment occur directly north behind the LaQuinta, across the Salter property and connect further to the north. That alignment was not chosen. Mr. Richter was willing to work with Staff to provide the potential for that to occur. If that alignment were to occur, it would remove a long line of parking, however, that parking would have to be replaced. He elaborated. Commissioner THOMPSON reiterated that the fire department has approved the plans and there is adequate access. Mr. Gidley answered yes, that was true. 095 Planning Commission Minutes Page 13 October 3, 1996 Commissioner THOMPSON asked about the statement Mr. Gidleyy had made regarding a fence around the proposed duplex. She felt a barrier should be constructed between commercial and residential. Mr. Gidley stated there was a barrier, consisting of a four-foot berm and a six-foot fence on top of the berm from east to west. Commissioner THOMPSON asked why is the responsibility of the duplex owner to provide the barrier? Mr. Gidley asked if the wall was extended in a north-south _ fashion, then should the berm/fence be removed? That is what you would have in a normal residential area. He elaborated. Mr. Brauer asked to speak regarding the wall question. He spoke in favor of the wall remaining. He stated it protected his home from the ugly field and the traffic noise on West 32nd Avenue. He elaborated. Commissioner ECKHARDT suggested that a solid fence be installed along the west side of Lot 5, which would be an extension of the berm until such time as the building is constructed. Then extend the berm down to the building and out to West 32nd Avenue if necessary. Chairperson LANGDON asked if Commissioner ECKHARDT was suggesting a six-foot privacy fence? Commissioner ECKHARDT answered he thought that would be appropriate. Commissioner THOMPSON stated some type of a division should be made, separating residential from commercial. Commissioner ECKHARDT asked Commissioner THOMPSON if his suggestion was reasonable? Commissioner THOMPSON answered yes, it was. Commissioner ECKHARDT stated he preferred to see the small retail building as strictly an office building. He stated it would have the same exterior as the duplex, and it is probably a good way to transition from residential to the west and commercial to the east. Norm Ross, 3135 Zinnia Street, was sworn in previously. He stated he was also concerned about the quality.of life and his property value. Mr. Ross requested a copy of .the revised plan. He was provided same. One of his concerns was the barrier and he was in favor of a four-foot wall being placed on the barrier to block light, noise and trash. Mr. Ross spoke in favor of 096 Planning Commission Minutes Page 14 October 3, 1996 evergreen trees rather than deciduous trees utilized on the berm. He voiced his concern regarding the installation of a traffic signal to aid in traffic congestion. Signage was another of his concerns. He thought 50-foot signs were not necessary. Mr. Ross felt the proposed bikeway was located too close to I-70. He suggested it be relocated to the east edge of the old service road. Mr. Ross inquired when discussion would be heard regarding architectural details/building materials? He was concerned that the traffic movement though the development was not going to work well in certain areas. Mr. Ross thought approval should be given for either alternate 'A' or 'B'. He was in favor of limiting business hours and turning lights off at 11:00 p.m. He asked - Commission to address unresolved issues. There were no questions at that time. Chairperson LANGDON called a short recess at 9:55 p.m. Meeting reconvened at 10:05 p.m. Chairperson LANGDON listed resolved issues from the various lists in the staff report. Regarding outstanding or unresolved issues, Mr. Gipson was invited back to the podium. Mr. Gipson stated that if Commission did decide that lighting of the canopy on the west be dimmed or turned off, to consider early dark hours in winter and allow perhaps use of a timer to cut the light at a specific time. Discussion was heard. Mr. Gipson stated he was willing to keep the west canopy light off from 11:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m. Chairperson LANGDON suggested that Mr. Richter address the landscaping and the sprinkler system. Mr. Richter stated the sprinkler system had been turned off years ago. The flooding Mr. Brauer referred to was caused by trash clogging the irrigation ditch cleanout which resulted in over- flowing on the north side of 32nd Avenue. He added that the irrigation pipe had been relocated with the construction of the street and there has been no further problem. He has tried to cut the weeds three times yearly. Mr. Richter stated his objection to constructing a wall. He would not object to constructing a wooden fence. He elaborated. Commissioner WILLIAMS asked Mr. Richter if he planned to turn the sprinkler system back on and install some landscaping on the berm? 097 Planning Commission Minutes Page 15 October 3, 1996 Mr. Richter stated the berm was planted in native grasses for arid climate. The sprinkler system is not really necessary, he added. Commissioner WILLIAMS asked if Mr. Richter would agree to build a six-foot wooden fence across the property line. Mr. Richter stated he would if that is what Commission wants him to do, although he does not see the need for an additional fence. There would be a fence installed when the duplex is constructed. There was no further discussion at that time Commissioner THOMPSON stated she would make the motion, however she needed to ask one question. She asked Mr. Gidley if it was possible to extend the plantings and the berm there near the corner to alleviate the problem with the lights that have concerned the neighbors across the street. Also, she asked Mr. Gidley for some further discussion of the duplex wall. Mr. Gidley stated that the berm could be extended from 32nd to the I-70 Frontage Road west, so that vehicle lights would not project across the street to the south. The grading plan can be modified to accomplish that, providing that sight visibility at the intersection is accommodated. Additionally, he stated that the landscape plan could be modified to include evergreen trees on the berm acting as a light barrier. Deciduous trees could be planted in other areas of the berm, allowing for visibility into the site. The third issue was a barrier between the duplex and the development. He suggested that one possible solution might be that the owner be allowed to remove the berm and relocate the six-foot-high wall or fence at the property line, giving the owner a bit more usable space, better access to parking facilities and integrating the site with residences to the north. Chairperson LANGDON asked if Mr. Gidley was suggesting that the decision be left to the discretion of the owner. Mr. Gidley answered yes, he was. Commissioner RASPLICKA asked if Commission requires the extension of the fence that the City built, would it be at City expense? Mr. Gidley answered no. He pointed out on the projected map where a berm with a fence on it current exists and where the fence would be constructed. Commissioner THOMPSON moved that Case No. WZ-96-10, an application by Dwaine R. Richter for approval of a Planned Commercial Development combined final development plan be Approved with the following conditions: 098 Planning Commission Minutes Page 16 October 3, 1996 1. The traffic light on West 32nd Avenue be installed at the earliest possible date. 2. Enclosed dumpsters be provided for all buildings. 3. The handicapped parking space for the retail development (Lot 5) be moved closer to the building. 4. That the opening in the sound barrier wall be closed, and the fire district decide whether a trap door needs to be installed for access to the fire hydrant. 5. Lighting for the canopy signs on the west side of the Diamond Shamrock building be turned off from 11:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m. daily. 6. That a six-foot-high wood fence be continued from the noise barrier to West 32nd Avenue behind retail building on Lot S. 7. Whether or not the berm on Lot 4 is removed will be determined at the time of construction of the duplex by the property owner. At the discretion of the developer, a wall or fence is to be constructed between the two properties. Commissioner ECKHARDT asked Commissioner THOMPSON if she had meant to include the signs on the west and south sides of the Diamond Shamrock facility in her motion. Commissioner THOMPSON stated it was her understanding it was the lighting of the signs. Commissioner ECKHARDT asked if she wanted to include the west side of the monument signs on west 32nd? Commissioner THOMPSON stated that could be included in the motion regarding signage. Commissioner ECKHARDT agreed. 8. That the developer work with Public Works Department on the creation of a berm that will extend along West 32nd Avenue west as far as possible to I-70 Service Road to aid in alleviating headlight glare into residential property. Evergreen trees be utilized when possible so long as the integrity of the sight distance triangle is maintained. Commissioner GRIFFITH seconded the motion. Motion carried 6-0. Commissioner WILLIAMS asked what would the second motion cover? Chairperson LANGDON answered the second motion would be regarding the requested sign variances. He summarized the changes made. Commissioner THOMPSON stated personally, she felt the requested number of signs was too many, however, the developer and City have come to a compromise. 099 Planning Commission Minutes October 3, 1996 Page 17 Commissioner ECKHARDT stated he felt the lighting on the west side of the monument signs should be turned off at 11:00 p.m. along with the canopy sign. However, if evergreen trees are planted on the berm, it may not be necessary. Chairperson LANGDON stated he was impressed with signage he had seen recently which utilized a more controlled lighting that didn't seem so harsh. He elaborated. He thought this was the type of signage that was planned. Commissioner WILLIAMS agreed. He thought government can be allowed to regulate too much. Commissioner ECKHARDT agreed with Commissioner WILLIAMS although the people living in the area have rights as well. If the signs are not invasive, leave them on. However, he felt that turning the lights off at 11:00 p.m. would not be a real problem to the developers. Mr. Gidley stated that from a functional standpoint, the signs proposed are prefabricated boxes and it would be impossible to light just one side. He thought the evergreen trees possibly could be placed so that they block visibility to the homes on the corner. Chairperson LANGDON stated he felt that the monument signs lighting would not be obtrusive to the adjacent neighborhood. Commissioner THOMPSON asked if she should make reference to the revised sign plan? Mr. Gidley answered if Commission desired to amend the development plans relating to the issues of freestanding signs then indicate the motion is directed toward modification to the development plan related to freestanding signs and specifically the following signs. Then state what you wish to state. Commissioner THOMPSON moved to approve the modification to the development plan for the 70 west Business Center concerning the freestanding signs as follows: 1. The monument sign for the office showroom will be 10'-5" high and a maximum sign face of 150 square feet; 2. The existing signs for LaQuinta and Country Cafe . . . Commissioner ECKHARDT informed Commissioner THOMPSON that her motion only need to specify changes to the modified sign plan. Commissioner THOMPSON asked if Commissioner ECKHARDT would like to make the motion. 100 Planning Commission Minutes October 3, 1996 Page 18 Commissioner ECKHARDT moved that the freestanding signs be approved as depicted on the 70 West Business Center Official Development Plan. Commissioner RASPLICKA seconded the motion. Motion carried 6-0. Commissioner ECKHARDT moved to approve the 70 West Business Center re-subdivision plat with conditions as stated in the staff report. Commissioner THOMPSON seconded the motion. Motion carried 6_0. 2. Case No. WZ-96-8: A City-initiated large area rezoning from Commercial-One (C-1) to Residential-One C (R-1C) and Residential-Two (R-2). The rezoning area is generally located on either side of West 29th Avenue, between Fenton Street and Sheridan Boulevard. Mr. Gidley presented the staff report. Entered into the record and accepted by the Chairperson were the Comprehensive Plan, Zoning ordinance, case file, packet materials and Code of Laws. Commissioner THOMPSON noted that 2875 Benton Street and 5560 West 29th Avenue had two different addresses. Mr. Gidley stated that City address maps need to be updated. He explained that when multiple addresses occur on a single lot, because of the small scale used, it was often difficult to get all address numbers on the map. Rod Weuve, owner of 2860 Ames Street, was sworn in. He stated he purchased the property as income property. The zoning is presently C-1 and he wishes to retain the C-1 zoning. Mr. Weuve added that several of his renters have had businesses they maintained at that location. He felt that if the City rezones his property to residential zoning, it would decrease the resale value and limit his income. One of Mr. Weuve's letters had been included in the packet and he had a second letter, which he provided for the record as well. Mr. Gidley asked Mr. Weuve if the businesses which were operated at his property received a business license from the City? Mr. Weuve answered he did not know. Mr. Gidley stated he had investigated the property on several occasions, and never observed any commercial activity from the street. He added that it was a residential neighborhood and the residents would like to retain the residential character. Encroachment into the neighborhood by commercial activities is why the rezoning was undertaken. 101 Planning Commission Minutes October 3, 1996 Page 19 Mr. weuve stated he understood that the zoning would be R-2, rather than R-1. Mr. Gidley stated that properties used as two-family dwellings would be rezoned R-2, any properties used as single-family homes would zoned R-1C. Mr. weuve stated his property was presently being used as a single-family residence. He elaborated. Commissioner THOMPSON asked about the possibility of a transitional zone such as Restricted Commercial. Mr. Gidley stated that RC-1 is the lowest commercial category and has the most limitations in terms of commercial activities. It would allow for office-type uses such a real estate or an attorney's office. Unless changes are made, it would still be a non-conforming use as a residence. He elaborated. Discussion followed. Mr. Gidley discussed the possibility of down-zoning the property from C-1 to RC-l. He noted that the uses Mr. weuve mentioned, furniture repair and auto repair, would not be allowed in that zone district. Mr. weuve stated that the property contains an over-sized two-car garage, which lends itself to commercial endeavors, such as furniture repair. He elaborated. He requested that the commercial zoning be retained. Discussion followed. Commissioner THOMPSON asked if any other letters of protest had been received? Mr. Gidley answered no. However, he added that he did receive a phone call. The caller was in favor of splitting the zoning on parcels that contain a home and commercial business. Normally, if possible, lots are not split-zoned. Chairperson LANGDON stated his concern regarding limiting citizens' income or livelihood. However, Mr. weuve's renters should have been licensed to do commercial activities. Mr. Gidley stated he could check to see if business licenses had been issued to that address. He suggested if Commission wished to do so, they could elect not to make a determination on that particular lot, and allow City Council make that decision, based upon further investigation of past business licensing. 102 Planning Commission Minutes October 3, 1996 Mr. Weuve stated he had a new renter applied for a business license. Steve Dukes, 5330 West 29th Avenue, attended the meeting in March and he rezoning. Page 20 He doubted that he had yet was sworn in. Mr. Dukes stated he supports the mass Dennis Willmore, 2857 Chase Street, was sworn in. He stated he enjoys helping high school students in the neighborhood with their cars. His hobby is finding old cars and fixing them up. Mr. Willmore was concerned that the rezoning might prohibit him from doing these things. Mr. Gidley stated that Mr. willmore or any resident, was allowed to sell automobiles that you own, up to three per year. Mr. Willmore stated that would be no problem for him. Discussion followed. Commissioner ECKHARDT moved that Case No. WZ-96-8, a City- initiated large area rezoning from Commercial-One (C-1) to Residential-One C (R-1C) and Residential-Two (R-2). The rezoning area is generally located on either side of west 29th Avenue, between Fenton Street and Sheridan Boulevard as shown on Exhibit 'A', be Approved for the following reasons: 1. To preserve and protect predominately low density character of the neighborhood; and 2. To recognize and exclude existing developed commercial uses; 3. To rezone to bring this area into conformance with the Comprehensive Plan; and 4. To rezone from C-1 to R-1C and to R-2 to avoid creation of non-conforming uses. With the following condition: 1. The property located at 2860 Ames Street be excluded from this motion and that property remain as it is presently zoned. Commissioner RASPLICKA seconded the motion. Commissioner THOMPSON requested that Commissioner ECKHARDT accept a friendly amendment that relative to 2860 Ames Street, Staff investigate past uses of that parcel and defer decision on it to City Council. 103 Planning Commission Minutes October 3, 1996 Page 21 Commissioner ECKHARDT agreed to accept the friendly amendment. Commissioner THOMPSON asked if any special provision needed to be made for 5560 West 29th Avenue? Mr. Gidley stated that if Commission wished to split-zone that property, part C-1 and part R-1C, then modify Commissioner ECKHARDT's motion and specify that split zoning be considered for that parcel. Commissioner THOMPSON stated her intent was to leave the entire parcel commercial zoning. Mr. Gidley stated that his recommendation is to retain the commercial zoning on that property. He explained. Motion carried 6-0. Commissioner ECKHARDT moved to extend our 11:00 p.m. limitation. Commissioner GRIFFITH seconded the motion. Motion carried 6-0. 3. Case No. ZOA-96-7: Proposed amendment to Wheat Ridge Code of Laws, Chapter 26. Zoning Code, Section 26-20. Restricted Commercial-One (RC-1) zone district regulations regarding RESIDENTIAL USES. Mr. Gidley presented the staff report. There were no questions at that time. Commissioner ECKHARDT moved that Case No. ZOA-96-7, a proposed amendment to Wheat Ridge Code of Laws, Chapter 26. Zoning Code, Section 26-20. Restricted Commercial-One (RC-1) zone district regulations regarding RESIDENTIAL USES, be forwarded to City Council with our recommendation for Approval. Commissioner WILLIAMS seconded the motion. Motion carried 6-0 8. CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING 9. OLD BUSINESS 10. NEW BUSINESS 1. Joint Meeting with City Council Mr. Gidley informed commission that a joint meeting with City Council had been scheduled for Monday, October 7, 1996 at 7:00 p.m. 104 Planning commission minutes Page 22 October 3, 1996 2. Capital Projects Information regarding Capital Projects had been provided to Commission from Public Works Director, Bob Goebel. 3. Commissioner THOMPSON stated she was having surgery November 6, 1996 and would not be able to attend the November 7 Planning Commission meeting. 11. DISCUSSION AND DECISION ITEMS 12. COMMITTEE AND DEPARTMENT REPORTS 1. Commissioner RASPLICKA asked if Commission members had anything for him to take to PWAC on October 17. Commissioner ECKHARDT stated that at the recent Town Meeting, many people had mentioned the need for sidewalks throughout the City. Commissioner THOMPSON noted that, at that same meeting, it was mentioned that many businesses do not have their addresses clearly posted. Chairperson LANGDON stated that mention was also made of problems with Wheat Ridge's many ZIP CODES. 1. Update on Comprehensive Plan Review Report 13. ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned by consensus at 11:40<" ~ . Y Sandra Wiggins, etary 105 CERTIFICATION OF RESOLUTION CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE PLANNING COMMISSION CASE NO: WZ-96-10 LOCATION: 12851 W. 32nd Ave APPLICANT(S) NAME: Dwaine R. Richter OWNER(S) NAME: Same REQUEST: Approval of a Planned Commercial Development combined final development plan with sign variances and subdivision plat APPROXIMATE AREA: 10 acres - WHEREAS, the City of Wheat Ridge Planning Division has submitted a list of factors to be considered with the above request, and said list of factors is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, and made a part hereof; and WHEREAS, there was testimony received at a public hearing by the Planning Commission and such testimony provided additional facts. NOW, THEREFORE, based upon the facts presented and conclusions reached, it was moved by Commissioner THOMPSON, seconded by Commissioner GRIFFITH, that Case No. WZ-96.10, an application by Dwaine R. Richter for approval of a Planned Commercial Development combined final development plan for property located at 12951 West 32nd Avenue be Approved with the following conditions: 1. The traffic light on West 32nd Avenue be installed at the earliest possible date; 2. Enclosed dumpsters be provided for all buildings; 3. The handicapped parking space for the -retail development (Lot 5) be moved closer to the building; 4. That the opening in the sound barrier wall be closed, and the fire district decide whether a trap door needs to be installed 5. Lighting fox the canopy signs on the west side of the Diamond Shamrock building be turned off from 11:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m. daily; 6. That a six-foot-high wood fence be continued from the noise barrier to West 32nd Avenue behind retail building on Lot 5; 7. Whether or not the berm on Lot 4 is removed will be determined at. the time of construction of the duplex by the property owner. At the discretion of the developer, a wall or fence is to be constructed between the two properties; 8. That the developer work with Public Works Department on the creation of a berm that will extend along West 32nd Avenue west as fax as possible to 1.70 Service Road to aid in alleviating headlight glare into residential property. Evergreen trees be utilized when possible so long as the integrity of the sight distance triangle is maintained. 106 Certificate o' Resolution Page 2 Case No. WZ-96-10/Richter VOTE: YES: Eckhardt, Williams, Griffith, Rasplicka Langdon and Thompson NO: None I, Sandra Wiggins, Secretary to the City of Wheat Ridge Planning Commission, do hereby and herewith certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by a 6 - 0 vote of the members present at their regular meeting held in the Council Chambers of the Municipal Building, Wheat Ridge, Colorado, on the 3rd day of October, 1996. George/'J..:.Langdon, chairperson WHEAT RIDGE PLANNING COMMISSION b:\wz9610a.res Sandra Wiggins, "-y WHEAT RIDGE PL- ION 107 CERTIFICATION OF RESOLUTION CITY OF 'AHEAT RIDGE PLANNING COMMISSION CASE NO: WZ-96-10 LOCATION: 12351 West 32nd Ave. APPLICANT(S) NAME: Dwaine R. Richter OWNER(S) NAME: Same. REQUEST: Re-subdivision plat APPROXIMATE AREA: 10 acres WHEREAS, the City of Wheat Ridge Planning Division has submitted a - list of factors to be considered with the above request, and said list of factors is attached hereto and incorporated her=in by reference, and made a part hereof; and WHEREAS, there was testimony received at a public hearing by the Planning Commission and such testimony provided additional facts. NOW, THEREFORE, based reached, it was moved Commissioner THOMPSON Dwaine R. Richter for located at 12851 West conditions: upon the facts presented and conclusions by Commissioner ECKHARDT, seconded by that Case No. WZ-96-10, an application by approval of a re-subdivision plat for property 32nd Avenue be Approved with the following 1. The title should read 1170" rather than "Seventy"; 2. Drainage easement locations must be shown; and 3. Minor technicalities related to the legal description must be corrected. VOTE: YES: Eckhardt, Williams, Griffith, Rasplicka, Langdon and Thompson NO: None. I, Sandra Wiggins, Secretary to the City of Wheat Ridge Planning Commission, do hereby and herewith certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by a 6 - 0 vote of the members present at their regular meeting held in the Council Chambers of the Municipal Building, Wheat Ridge, Colorado, on the 3rd day of October, 1996. 'q I~ George J,iLangdon, -Cair per son Sa ra Wiggins, Sec ary WHEAT RIDGE PLANNING COMMISSION 'WHEAT RIDGE PLANNI v OMMISSION b:\wz9610c.res 108 CERTIFICATION OF RESOLUTION CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE PLANNING COMMISSION CASE NO: WZ-96-10 LOCATION: 12951 West 32nd Ave. APPLICANT(S) NAME: Dwaine R. Richter OWNER(S) NAME: Same. REQUEST: Sign variances APPROXIMATE AREA: 10 acres WHEREAS, the City of wheat Ridge Planning Division has submitted a - list of factors to be considered with the above request, and said list of factors is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, and made a part hereof; and WHEREAS, there was testimony received at a public hearing by the Planning Commission and such testimony provided additional facts. NOW, THEREFORE, based upon the facts presented and conclusions reached, it was moved by Commissioner ECKHARDT, seconded by Commissioner R-ASPLICY-k, that Case No. WZ-96-10, an application by Dwaine R. Richter for approval of sign variances for freestanding signs on property located at 12851 West, 32nd Avenue be Approved as depicted on the 70 West Business Center Official Development Plan. VOTE: YES: Eckhardt, Williams, Griffith, Rasplicka Langdon and Thompson NO: None. I, Sandra Wiggins, Secretary to the City of wheat Ridge Planning Commission, do hereby and herewith certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by a 6 - 0 vote of the members present at their regular meeting held in the Council Chambers of the Municipal Building, Wheat Ridge, Colorado, on the 31d day of October, 1996. George~J ~ ,zangdon, ~'e airperson Sa ra Wiggins, Secilt y WHEAT RIDGE PLANNING COMMISSION WHEAT RIDGE PLANNING ISSION b:\wz9610b.res 109 CERTIFICATION OF RESOLUTION CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE PLANNING COMMISSION CASE NO: WZ-96.8 LOCATION: As specified below APPLICANT(S) NAME: City of Wheat Ridge OWNER(S) NAME: Various REQUEST: Large area rezoning from Commercial-One to Residential-One C and Residential-Two, generally located on either side of West 29th Avenue, between Fenton Street and Sheridan Boulevard APPROXIMATE AREA: n/a WHEREAS, the City of Wheat Ridge Planning Division has submitted a list of factors to be considered with the above request, and said list of factors is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, and made a part hereof; and WHEREAS, there was testimony received at a public hearing by the Planning Commission and such testimony provided additional facts. NOW, THEREFORE, based upon the facts presented and conclusions reached, it was moved by Commissioner ECKHARDT, seconded by Commissioner RASPLICKA, that Case No. WZ-96-8, a City-initiated large area rezoning from Commercial-One to Residential-One C and Residential-Two generally located on either side of West 29th "venue between Fenton Street and Sheridan Boulevard as shown on Exhibit be Approved for the following reasons: 1. To preserve and protect predominately low densiry..character of the neighborhood; and 2. To recognize and exclude existing developed commercial uses; 3. To rezone cc bring this area into conformance with the Comprehensive Plan; and 4. To rezone from C-1 to R-1C and to R-2 to avoid creation of non- conforming uses. With the following condition 1. The property located at 2860 Ames Street be excluded from this motion and that property remain as it is presently zoned. Staff is to investigate past uses of that parcel and defer decision on it to City Council. VOTE: YES: Eckhardt, Williams, Griffith, Rasplicka, Langdon and Thompson NO: None. 110 Certificate of Resolution Case No. WZ-96-8/Large area rezoning I, Sandia Wiggins, Secretary to the Commission, do hereby and herewith Resolution was duly adopted by a 6 at their- regular meeting held in th Building, Wheat Ridge, Colorado, on WHEAT RIDGE b:\wz968.res caliper son COMMISSION Page 2 City of Wheat Ridge Planning certify that the foregoing - 0 vote of the members present e Council Chambers of the Municipal the 31d day of October, 1996. sarnnna wigg WHEAT RIDGE nary COMMISSION 111 CERTIFICATION OF RESOLUTION CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE PUNNING COMMISSION CASE NO: ZOA-96-7 LOCATION: City-wide APPLICANT(S) NAME: City of Wheat Ridge OWNER(S) NAME: various REQUEST: Proposed amendment to Wheat Ridge Code of Laws, Chapter 26. Zoning Code, Section 26-20. Restricted Commercial-One (RC-1) zone district regulations regarding RESIDENTIAL USES. APPROXIMATE AREA: nja WHEREAS, the City of Wheat Ridge Planning Division has submitted a list of factors to be considered with the above request, and said list of factors is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, and made a part hereof; and WHEREAS, there was testimony received at a public hearing by the Planning Commission and such testimony provided additional :acts. NOW, THEREFORE, based upon the facts presented and conclusions reached, it was moved by Commissioner ECKHARDT, seconded by Commissioner WILLIAMS, that Case No. ZOA-96-7, a proposed amendment to Wheat Ridge Code of Laws, Chapter 26. Zoning Code, Section. 26-20. Restricted Commercial-One (RC-1) zone district regulations regarding RESIDENTIAL USES be forwarded to City Council with Planning Commission's recommendation for Approval. VOTE: YES: Eckhardt, Williams, Griffith, Rasplicka, Langdon and Thompson NO: None. I, Sandra Wiggins, Secretary to the City of Wheat Ridge Planning Commission, do hereby and herewith certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by a 6 - 0 vote of the members present at their regular meeting held in the Council Chambers of the Municipal Building, Wheat Ridge, Colorado, on the 3rd day of October, 1996. --George J,iLangdon „Chairperson Sandra rggins, Secr7 4fyly WHEAT RIDGE PLANNING COMMISSION WHEAT RIDGE PLANNING ISSION b:\zoa967.res 112 PUBLIC HEARING SPEAKERS' LIST CASE NO: WZ-96-10 DATE: October 3, 1996 REQUEST: An application by Dwaine R. Richter for approval of a Planned Commercial Development combined final development plan with sign variances and subdivision plat. Said property is located at 12851 West 32nd Avenue. (This case was continued from September 18, 1996) SPEAKER NAME, ADDRESS & PHONE (PLEASE PRINT) Position o Please IN FAVOR Request heck OPPOSED ~~1, ck G~ N ~ h Szo E Sir` lul l lz t: C 131 to W CE>J EMic E NN - 15,06 w• 33~ 19 . ~ d e~ 323 8 ; ~,ru G-~ if t x 113 P.O. BOX 638 TELEPHONE: 303237-69a= The City of 7500 WEST 297H AVENUE • WHEAT RIDGE. COLORADO 8003= G V V eat 'Ridge. October 11, 1996 This is to inform you that Case No. WZ-96-10 which is a request for approval of a P1annPA CnmmPrrial DPvplopment comhinpd final ApvPlnnmpnt plan with cian varianePC AnN subdivision Plat for property located at 19851 wpet 19nd Avpn„p will be heard by the Wheat Ridge City Council in the Council Chambers of the Municipal Complex, 7500 West 29th Avenue at on ClrtnhPr 9R, 199(. All owners and/or their legal counsel of the parcel under consideration must be present at this hearing before the City Coon it As an area resident or interested party, you have the right to, attend this Public Hearing and/or submit written comments. It shall be the applicant's responsibility to notify any other persons whose presence is desired at this meeting. If you have any questions or desire to review any plans, please contact the Planning Division. Thank you. PLANNING DIVISION <pc>phnoticeform "The Carnation City" 114 m N J y m ° X m T ~ m 4' o` `m > ~ a o d O'y N a m L m N U y 3 > a m m o m ° a O N ¢ j m1200 `o z' p U m o a = E - 8 m - ~ o a a~ ~ a F 8 K ~ a $ - ~ i Y p ii Y s F E o ? s 5 F ag -=3 m Y ~ 3 ~ rim t` W v u g N• • a a Q v Q W C N w ti V w ~ F- a' ( a m T a m 6 W > N O FT U m d m o _ m m ~ ~ o Z rp ~ 4 O ~ r cd r 3 r-1 it ~ C +C r'•1 f `D ' C I 73 ~ c s Co y ^ O a S r Ij 9 C U O -4 N O -4 (h O 14 4 M 1 e O U c7 ,V 4 4 Aim 0 17 .1 0 Z u v; I L~r 695 E`Ch 096 d a Q d 16 (C Q. a ~[7t/t T- ~ m- a M c p M LL N y .N L ` o ~V. N U N ~ C O - O 0 W LL T• W U O(z I a N m m ~ a ~ m N ~ N d > a p m 1 l i.J c d W U c U N ilso wish to receive the 1 0 rvices (for an extra fee): I .5 Q_,_ g se Addressee's Address Restricted Delivery ; y ;uutt postmaster for fee. _ , ` limber ;0 413 568 m _ Type - d CC Z p tT C D - W D elivery, 0 m D ~,`s Address ~ uested and fee Paid) 1 0 m M* ,q m a a HecelpL Return Q r b ti of LL Lo m a IN ya U > 0,4 _ 7 F U) 14 U O cJ 0,O L a0 ~4 .4 CO r-4 .•f :t! CS 0 U $4 c - I U ~ Oy o O 4 1 0; d - _ O v U If 14 y Cw O O x O C n M C ri ~ r"t f • U VM c I ~ tD O _N If N r1 •r4 n7 Q w O I - : 495 E2h 096 d 495 E2h 096 d ~ i CC a) U U y 0 Q- rn 00 n 0 0 b c~ Q !n c 115 N m N .D~ v p M1 _ N a N y N Lfl U U N do- G D . N y D N W_ N W cr I L N N O N U_ m ~ ' ~ S F LL 9 d ~ •O N D- +II ` D Cf W ~ T 1 N- N y<¢ y E CO T W ~ CC1❑ c Z -D UV U -3 N V y cr (NJ N_ - I CD CD a m W 6 .DO 2 o E 7 o o < p a ^ Co 8 _ I y 'R~ CI m m E X i b 41 _ u ~ E ~ 7 tJ N a _ 1 0 ~ T- 14 6 ~ N g :1 r i"'1 ~^s0 M co v . co ~ a 'JM; D f . w ~ ~ Y m O1 O S W ~ ¢ N LL n : ° a co d o I c 1 t I I \ 3 O - o u r. a].a of u o z C 7s ? 4Om o i o C U T _ _ =o C C 1 o= ~ v y C I ~ w _ = pb o v~:~ r I t I w J J m 4t5 ETh 096 d U_ <!J c - _ n O _ = v ~`7~qR q, a a W N lL m L F D LLI FT Q C y~ N d N 0~ N > U d J y d D Z y 6 Qo 0 ~ v n m 4 j 7 C O J - n J 1 w 2 I ? U CV Q ~ U W m Q LL y E \ y U N 0 _ d J ~ < ° o . p m_ T m , c r r LI tr ~f Q LI O - z d , g o m r o = ~ m a 1 x1 o to J rn no RJ G - C +i • N ~ OJ N C "i co 'd 0 n 015 E2h 096 d N ^ 1 n 1 N T `m c ¢ LL N ui ~ a U r U e> 7 U ~ N > o ~ 0 >1 0 = V $4 N C 34 0 m C-4 0 ~ O C➢ Ve~ , U Y Z _ cr) I ww N a w e ~ 215 E 4h 096 d U c~ N Io 0 d Cc N a 116 q N N t d T d a N a ` m $ w d15 m o = p ~9 p o q y °_m E m w ~i " N ~3 CC 't L m c- 0 .a N m a ~ r cc - H N Q LL ' c n w > Q T U N N' C❑ 0 z H a1 ` U U y O N O V ] O N T J _ O Q In iJ O p Q Q e 1~ Co - v o ? . Y 3 ^3 ~ rl _ y m°o H C U S 73 0~ c L4 'Z u L 1 ~2 7z ° H z a 3 t^ , N O ~ m 7H 8 gib R c u ` T m ¢ T ~ o E Cl) _ ¢ 2m c C- S n¢ v 0 C 0 O ( 2 9 R Q 2 W N l I 6 to a c~ ~ C ~ m a 1 4 o ~ H Q U b o > 'os rn i Cn = of _ ` 2 ^ y cc 0 \ CI U o ~ = _ ' ~ 1 r _ a C N = = aw _ C so 9 D - M O v ~ c= ?o 9 0 1-4 2° J z o EL5 ETh 096 d this W. so Mat . can re, n Meoastnso eBoasnot[ was oelieetey a tF Gate ce stian eaVAnuo 0 to s w M e a h^ H .-1 4 ~ o .c e v U N O nCC) 0 M al 41 O! 0 U 4 ~ 4 y C 1 N L t•1 4 ~ -1 J.N -t C07 hL5 E2h 096 d N N d T d m v o` ~ ~ m e 2 a . o h N E m w_ t U O ~ N ~ S LL 3: °a 0° w m uj O Q~ mo w ~ U ROD Z o l-T V o . : N . Er ~ / U Q . N x O ` a y a o E v c A e p _ 8 E t L 3 ~ y . 0 ~ Q n s_ E g w a c n N 2 ~ E ~ m C tIl ~ O y ¢ Z, A 9 :I 'J = N i V ' I U D n a a ~ ~ C N m U N J ~ Q p \ T y ~ N N C m N 0 Q r co d Cl) m ¢ ¢X O ~ LL N co a Cf) 4c co i n C A M " 0 C 0 7 n O j a = f 5L5 Elh 096 I _ I d " U d O D 0 O O LL r ` N 9 T U I N N -j "0 V _ N 0N N y C m y ~ m y ra 3 ~ a ti ~ m a v _ s d N Q C y O C ❑ O O V U Z N Q' O EL ~S a Y o 3 3 ~ $ - - 3 i 4 ~ F a N ~ ? s e o ~ 6 F s F ~ 0 5 a ' m v E s m ti a E ¢m r 3 ws ~ - - ~ m W . 2 X ~ 6 m _ . . Y ~ ' a N T F T G rT J ^I T n •.i SUi ] 7 - •n J U > c~ '7 0 r-1 V 'J O C f4 L t +i 9 U to c. C: 0 a'07 M 8 a 9L5 ETh 096 d D Q C N ai C a 2 y ~ Ala N U' O o. I I OJ _ T _ Q L6 to i a U e M1 Q n u7 C U I w . ° m Ng ~ ¢ = ( w E U. s f= N a ~ I~ « Q n W L) N e W -0 G Q d x GJ "t O_ r ~ '0 2 E / n v r m - I T + I o _ p c; 3 C _ _ 1 T r m X a _ - iri ro W ~ C M 6 li I Ci M N N a Q C d d Q J 0 Z of (n 8. RI W O D 00 s o Q ° o \ _ w C1Uco o - v a = 5 _ ° o a = ; off bo a n vim a!r, D » LLS ETh 096 d 945 ETh 096 d a U- d Q _ S_ N U _ N E 0 o_ N C_ a r Q_ Co ti co c in c6 a U C D 0 C O a, 118 8 ~ y y v m ~ r p N ~ = L'1 ~ y m D E m W ry N U n 0 LL 0 0 S F- CC 0¢¢ s C w ;5200c Z ° U O N U N N U x O < a y A a e v c ~ z - S ~ 0 O _ > / w F 0 fr E a O .-t H - g O .r ~ O J ~ 1 g F 2 3 "fi ? 1 r 1 m - 9r _o . j ,o C - ol ~o o Q . m a n C a d N J 0 I o. IS LO ( U LO cc t m C ~ Y IS ~ ~O T U V1- E 0- a y v f I $4 N ti - Q c Q rn- I ~ x ~ 2 ~ _ c ~„y7 n 1 m co CO) ~.y 1 2~: O 0 X _ vi rc a .r N ~ N U U > ~ I I Ic Cl) N 0- _ U) i ' r O Q) >7 ~ F SI th O H .-1 C^ p <n u w _ D^ Q (_V1 a N ~ N ~ Y y ry N N O y T N Z ao ~ ro c_ yam. U~ U - 0 0- rn- w LL 1 ~ T ' w ' U O i u ~j 1 1 C 7 L7 0 ma c N N P N n U IU U E - 0 o - T _ Q yO T y N y ~ - co 0 QX o m a v .t. U i U 7 m U ~ Q U) U ~ e ~ ( d L $4 ' 1 0c O O 1/ t 1 vHu t m Q C S .14 Old W N -4 M 0 6tS- E'fh-1) 96 d h95 E2h 096 d l U U U U r n 7 C N U) co cn N 1 ~ 140 - - - ' a yXU 1 C -1 - O N ~ p j [ C ¢ 2: rM 595 E2h 096 d 119 I also wish to receive the , i~ SENDER: following services (for an extra fee): . conw!are itma + ardor z br aEtliuorai senica% 1.0 Addressee's Address 1 0l thus Icrm so Nat xe ran relum Nis cab ie+erss N y ~ e on rwr game a~ aderes . ❑ Restricted Delivery 2 o Wal Artath Mu'tartn b Ne 1mfM1 I lM maiWi2C2. M on NE tadt ~ s°aCe EOes rot cet1n1 a,q Ns We dHirere0. dO~ . Consult postmaster for fee. . ) • Tha ReWm ReoW wil Wt. to venom was 4a. Article Number 4 3 Article Addressed to: P 960 413 566 o UNE t. Service Type ab v r ° I Pi Sident . o 3339 . F,ll%ire CERTIFIED Golden CO 30401 C • m 7. Date of Delivery rn p D 2 sZ%: *RZ~96~10 S. Addressees Address ° m I ,j Received By: (Print Name) 5 (ONLY A requested and fee Paid) o . 6. Signature: (Addressee or Agent) H 11 I X Domestic Return Receipt I I 1. ' 111 ; PS FORM 3811, January 1996 I i O JA nrA~1 U m 4 C Cnobv m;8 995 E4h 096 d U * f ~ o d C d ~ ` a I I l ~ o `v U ~ O ~ _ _ - oy •.1 Pry ~ n i °f r $ - PD i G r•i O wi 7s , lJ = U rrio a W roc U) 00 - Qo co rn -4 s r-i - • tD - 'J tam U 43 qx;l O m f N 8 3 ° I a co p 3 o 1 N 4 g I OF m o .a 0 _ - cr F Mo Z ,q ~i w H a rn I 0- - _ U) = ZSS E TC 096 d L9S C'Ch 096 d j 120 C C C Y i y Y N Y yY D` T b ¢ J D"' Y Ci. ¢ L' Y Ln u7 API (J ) U N to ` y y D N O y N y fTl W N FFF m J y y N N LL d C ` j y 4 S H D y ~ 1 3 D y. d D Y N ym¢¢ n CC W > N c c~❑ 0 E. FT U m ai ? i z O J a 0 ¢ O O r o e ri cd e 3 - ~ z g ~ Sg as s a a my 4 F I S y 4 C` Y T f n G 3 Q 1 Z U e e o L7 ~ S ~ ~ ~ I d 2 E 3 a +i t1 rl ~ r l a _ m _o a H 3 9 u a ¢ H 3 _ w 5 ¢ v La Cf) t6 a JIM a o U ~ ~ U i e ` I i N ei ~ -i g o q 14 0 0 y 193 o u c k V ~ U S i . f z a o 1 C w 3 i vi G 955 E`Ch 096 d d U U 0- U) 0 b 0 O lL a u u y k ca N cl~ I 2 ° - ty t7 .7 0 N t~- D D a U D i d ~ a m O T Y N y c y m Y ~ a r ¢ Ir c 1 , ; ~ 5 ~a Y Y C 2 O U ~ w X ¢ iri ~ ro y a N N ' o I O ~ CI ~ ° W O < iJ ~ m c _ ~ E7o M O o ~ = _ A C W ~ 1 n - a o _ O .1 1 _ . =s a3 n - ° 3 m 3 _ _ _ +1 l ~n G o L ~ 0 ,4 J D l ~ 0 0,4 J. r C i ~ I, - c W i I 655 ETh 096 d 095 ETh 096 d m m T m a U r ~ N U eJ U c C- 0 0 b c`1 O a 121 J n L_ ~ y ti i ? o co mn ~ O H S N Lr7 D D m v E m W y m H U ` O LL y 3 6 a m° S a N ovrei a c W T$ O N m O' u N O J O Q a N J_ dom. 9 Z O Q v r a 5 m J ~ 4 7 m g >1 > Y o 3 s ^ $ fr ~ o ca c o z a O, S D o a C 1 Q E °u m d t'} t7" m ¢m r a r - 4, ¢ 4 ~ 7 cc B cc G V T ..J t0 N g i . 14 Le) X95 E'Ch 09 u .i w G7 O D O 6t O c ~~o w c . Qt .i ~ V n7 a ~ C to nom U , U a U m 1 r ~ i U form so that we can re Ip pack it space tlo•s tq 8s tleliuetep arb the tlata - (c case - ~vanua m a. r m ~ M O- a _ C3 8 i 0 ~ Cl) C C UI F." O 0.1 'dO b Nw .-1 t+1 w •U r1 ~ C 6 n m ~ L 0 R 7 d °m C1 a - _ i 955 E2h 096 d 9 9 Q) ~ y 9 t K d a ~ o ~ > ~ o > o U y mo C' = d N V E N ti ~ ~ O 3 ~ °v m ° d o vmi ¢ ¢ - a z' p ~ N V N o Q ~ d@ $ i • Q m t ~ s d n ~ Y ~ g g o P ~ a O E ~ ~ s - c t Wg N• ~ W LL (r n Ill rT U V N D Q c d J 0 C si 14 a 40 Ors C CO r-. ll - C J n - 9 - j 1.4 LD C/) a, D 00 Izi i - 7 - l ~ ! ^ M ' C X Q o N N v y ~ - m j _ " O y W~ i Ov iq 1 n. _ - o © ca .1 C q 3 - - _ = tC ca C ` am _ . y . LL LL Z 295 E2h 096 d 122 m m .-mm m m ~ v m a m m m m E m W d Qr. Lm t_mJ ~L m a LL P \V m$ m ' m 9 m a `v S r a -y S om ¢2 ' a E n W U ~ ~ ❑ -D tr ~ S r a` a ~ m $ E-- o s S tl54 54 ~4 \ _ a5 CD, t• 140 v q ` ~ 5 ~ r rIM „T• . ~ _ 2 ~ Y• y y E 3 A O r - U SO r-1 m ~7 -C OD E ~ ~ O OZ ~ m cX 's ao I 4~ - m --g ~I I _ _ IC U F _ N v.''_ _ a 7 O c6 e M Ov a G7 U o 0 o co a SS ~ 2 3 .4 C ~ ~ CO ~ co 4~ C 0 o ' N - A co o O i m m rNt tO ¢ Z C U Z Q ~ U 'e W V7 E95 ETh 096 d a 123 l 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 28, 1996 at 7:00 p.m. at 7500 West 29th Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado. All interested citizens are invited to speak at the Public Hearing or submit written comments. The following petition shall be heard: 1. Case No. WZ-96-10: An application by Dwaine R. Richter for approval of a Planned Commercial Development combined final development plan with sign variances and subdivision plat. Said property is located at 12851 West 32nd Avenue. The following legal description pertains to the subdivision plat: Commencing at the West 1/4 corner of said Section 29; thence along the West line of said NW 1/4, the basis of the bearings in this description, N 89029'16" E 559.13 feet; thence N 00047112" W of 35.00 feet to the north right-of-way line of West 32nd Avenue, the southeast corner of Lot 4 of said 70 West Business Center and the point of beginning. Thence along the boundary of said Lot 4 the following four (4) courses; 1. S 89043'30" W 95.18 feet to the beginning of a curve concave to the northeast with a radius of 20.00 feet and a central angle of 89029'18"; 2. along said curve 31.24 feet; 3. N 00047'12" W 70.18 feet; 4. N 89043130" E 115.01 feet to the east line of Lot 7 of said 70 West Business Center; Thence along the west line of Lot 7 and the east line of Lot 5 of said 70 West Business Center N 00047'12" W 668.43 feet; thence along the boundary of Lot 6 of said 70 West Business Center the following four (4) courses; 1. S 89040100" W 330.44 feet; 2. N 00010'11" W 204.59 feet; 3. thence N 89039'000 E 417.45 feet; 4.-- S 00030100" E 293.50 feet to the south line of Lot 1 of said 70 West Business Center and the beginning of a curve concave to the northeast with a radius of 175.00 feet and a central angle of 25024'33"; thence along the following eleven (11) courses; 1. along said curve 77.60 feet to the beginning of a non- tangent curve concave to the south with a radius of 125.00 feet and a central angle of 02055'29"; 2. along said curve 6.38 feet; 3. N 89039101" E 211.11 feet; 4. N 52043135" E 51.25 feet; 5. N 89039'01" E 7.07 feet; . 6. S 00030139" E 70.89 feet; 7. S 89024124" W 32.73 feet; 124 8. S 06017'24" W 7.95 feet; 9. N 89030131" E 55.19 feet; 10. N 00021'02" W 25.50 feet; 11. N 89038159" E 25.05 feet; to the west right-of-way of I-70; Thence along said right-of-way S 06031'25" W 559.66 feet; thence S 79009'50" W 194.49 feet; thence S 89043'30" W 194.00 feet; thence S 00047112" E 5.00 feet to the point of beginning. Parcel contains approximately 8.33 acres. The following legal description pertains to the final development plan: Lots 2, 3, 4, 6 and 7 of the 70 City of Wheat Ridge, County of ATTEST: Wanda Sang, City Clerk West Business Center Subdivision, Jefferson, State of Colorado. Sandra Wiggins, S Itary To be Published: October 10, 1996 Wheat Ridge Transcript c:\wp60\files\102896.phn 125 George Bickley 3550 Parfet St. Wheat Ridge, CO 80033 October 21, 1996 WHEAT RIDGE CITY COUNCIL 7500 West 29th Ave. Wheat Ridge, CO 80215 Honorable Members, I am very concerned with the RICHTER property zoning at 1-70 and W. 32nd that you will be considering at your Oct. 28th meeting. As a WHEAT RIDGE RESIDENT for over 50 years and one who knows the area well and drives it almost daily I'd like to express my STRONG OPPOSITION to the proposed 24 HOUR FILLING STATION with two 50 FOOT SIGNS and a FAST FOOD RESTAURANT. We already have 3 FILLING STATIONS, 2 TRAFFIC LIGHTS and AMPLE FOOD PROVIDERS in that area. Surely there is a better use. I respectfully request you turn this down. Sincerely, Distributed to: LbutlClt 8 " ' y y~~ Date: ! 90 Mayor: ✓ / George Bickley CRY city cleric ✓ City Treas ab 126 TO: WHEAT RIDGE CITY COUNCIL RE: COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN: NW CORNER I-70 AND 32nd AVE. Enclosed you will find copies of some material being circulated, by the so-called Applewood Property Owner's Association (APOA), to residents of the Applewood area lying west of I-70. This is part of an orchestrated effort, by a small, well organized, very vocal group of obstructionists to impose their will on a neighboring community. Some spokesperson for APOA will appear before the Council on October 28th and tell you that APOA represents all of the 1000 plus homeowners who live within the Applewood area lying west of I-70 and that all of these 1000 homeowners oppose what your Planning Commission has approved for the property in question. I want you to know that APOA does not represent me in any way, shape, or form on any issue. From what I can tell APOA probably has less than 100 card carrying, dues paying, conspiratorial meeting attending members. If APOA in fact represents the remaining 999 property owners then the spokesperson should be carrying 999 signed copies of the attached petition. The hardcore members of APOA appear to operate under a sincere belief that they were here first and other property owners (particularly developers and anybody from California) have no right to develop their properties for the highest and best use. To them, pedestrian friendly would be a park and aesthetically compatible would be an open field of yucca and sumac. My recommendation to you is to listen to your professional planners and planning commission and give any comment offered by the so-called Applewood Property Owners Association the weight that it really deserves, zero, zilch, zip. Then they won't be able to brag in their next news letter about how they stuck it to the Richters and buffaloed the City of Wheat Ridge into doing their bidding. Ask the APOA spokesperson if they would make up for the tax revenues that you would give up if you turn down the proposed development. Also ask the spokesperson if APOA would be willing to buy the property from Richter to keep it from being developed to protect their quality of life. By the way, I hope it's an Arby's. We could use one in the neighborhood. CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE D r~ Non Illegitimous Carborundum, nrp nn n ' OCT 2 2 1996 j L~ U U ~pOl CD PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT 127 October 23, 1996 Wheat Ridge City Council 7500 W. 29th Ave., Wheat Ridge, CO Dear Sirs: We and our neighbors are very concerned about additional commercial development planned for corner of 32nd and Youngfield/I-70. DteZ9KAed by City Ad fttoe D t : /0 - 2S-9~ Tb: Mayor V_~ a e v City Clerk ✓ Ctbr Ater. City 7teee. s o Hee D e other. d ~ ~ the proposed / the Northwest A horrendous traffic problem already exists in the immediate vicinity on W. 32nd Ave, west of the Interstate. A visit by the city council at any time of the day would readily verify the congestion. A visit between 6:45 a.m. and 9 a.m. and be- tween 2:30 and 6 p.m. would show more vividly the extent of the existing problem. Keeping in mind the foot traffic in the area because of the vast number of students attending Maple Grove Elementary school and D'Evelyn Junior/Senior High schools, the dangerous situation for personal injury accidents would be great- ly compounded. Many may be injured seriously, and a number of deaths might occur if your approval for further development goes through. Turning into the church's parking lot is no easy manuever, even on a relatively quiet Sunday morning. A wedding or funeral pro- cession could then be filmed as a segment of a Keystone Cops movie. Ir's imperative that traffic in the area be reduced, not given a green light to be increased. It's obvious that the City of Wheat Ridge wants to continue to march into new territory, again and again, to satisfy its lust for additional tax dollars. The definition of good citizenship includes responsibilities by local officials and a city to plan ahead intelligently and with concern and consideration for its neighbors. Approving the proposed building of an unneeded 24- hour gas station and a fast food restaurant would only add to the surplus of such facilities. The greed for more tax dollars could conceivably result in a loss of patronage by businesses within the existing city. Est- ablished operations might do less business and collect less money in sales taxes (and profits) if residents in the area make their purchases elsewhere. That is a very definite spin-off. We urge you to reject the Planning Commission's 'proposal for more commercial development as not being in the best interests of Wheat Ridge, its businesses, citizens and its neighbors. SSi e~reel R'o`bec`L~ ` Bernhard, %05 Flora Ln., 128 Golden, CO 80401 Letter of Petition From Applewood Property Owners Association member Please reconsider the Planning Commission's approval for the proposed 24-hour gas station, a fast food restaurant, and two 50-foot neon signs on the Richter property (northwest of I-70 and West 32nd Avenue). Anything that increases traffic or impairs the values of nearby homes, to the magnitude that these two portions of Richter's plan most certainly will, must be defined as "crammed development" not "planned development." The fact that Applewood Mesa is not a part of Wheat Ridge does not relieve your responsibility to be a good neighbor. We respectfully request that you only consider uses (on the Richter property) that are 1) "pedestrian friendly" with this already traffic-choked area and 2l aesthetically rornnatihle with the Anniewood Mesa area; and therPfnrP, not approve the proposed gas station and fast food restaurant. Sincerely,_ Myra J. germ h r rct oJf e, lYEk nJF4 A.¢..D printed name 3U0S?Q,9R_A LIj_ address & zip code G (fe yo/ 129 _ AGENDA ITEM RECAP AGENDA ITEM 31 Meeting Date our a~) Ig9~a QUASI-JUDICIAL X r Yes No X PUBLIC HEARINGS CITY ADM. MATTERS ELEC. OFFICIALS MATTERS MATTERS x ORDINANCES FOR 1ST READING CITY ATTY PROC./CEREMONIES . _ BIDS/MOTIONS LIQUOR HEARINGS _ ORDINANCES FOR 2ND READING _ _ INFORMATION ONLY PUBLIC COMMENT _ RESOLUTIONS AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Case WZ-96-10: Request by Dwaine Richter for approval of a Final Development Plan and Plat for the 70 West Business Center - Planned Commercial Deve lopment located at 12851 West 32nd Avenue SUMMARY/RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends conditional approval of the Final Development Plan and pl at as per attached staff report. ATTACHMENTS: BUDGETED O 1) Staff report ITEM 2) Supporting materials Yes No 3) Plans & plats Fund Dept/Acct # Budgeted Amount $ Requested Expend.$ Requires Transfer/ Supp. Appropriation Yes No SUGGESTED MOTION: I move for approval of Case No. WZ-96-10, a request for approval of a PCD Final Development Plan and Plat, with the following conditions: 1. Detailed landscape plans shall be submitted to staff for review and approval with the first building permit requested for this site. Said plans shall provide details along the West 32nd Avenue frontage which provide for a combination of berms and year-around landscaping to which is a pleasant feature, and which mitigate vehicle headlights from shining into residential properties to the southeast, and which screens visibility of the Diamond Shamrock monument sign.from residences to the southeast. 2. The two 50-foot high signs shall be designed with V-shape panels so as to mitigate visual impacts to residences to the west.. 3. The Diamond Shamrock canopy sign, west elevation, shall not be illuminated. 130 CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE PLANNING DIVISION STAFF REPORT TO: City Council DATE OF MEETING: October 28, 1996 DATE PREPARED: October 22, 1996 CASE NO. & NAME: WZ-96-10 CASE MANAGER: Meredith Racked ACTION REQUESTED: Approval of a PCD final development plan and plat LOCATION OF REQUEST: 12851 West 32nd Avenue NAME & ADDRESS OF APPLICANT(S): Dwaine Richter, 6565 S Syracuse Way, Englewood 80111 NAME & ADDRESS OF OWNER(S): Same and Virginia Richter, 11665 W 39th Place, Wheat Ridge APPROXIMATE AREA: 10 acres PRESENT ZONING: Planned Commercial Development PRESENT LAND USE: Restaurant, hotel, vacant SURROUNDING ZONING: N. S. W: Jefferson County; E: A-1 SURROUNDING LAND USE: N: low density residential, vacant; S. church, low density; E. 1-70; W: low density residential COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR THE AREA: Commercial Activity Center DATE PUBLISHED: October 10, 1996 DATE POSTED: October 14, 1996 DATED LEGAL NOTICES SENT: AGENCY CHECKLIST: (XX) ATTACHED RELATED CORRESPONDENCE: (XX) ATTACHED ENTER INTO RECORD: (XX) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN (XX) ZONING ORDINANCE (XX) SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS ( ) OTHER ( ) NOT REQUIRED ( ) NONE (XX ) CASE FILE & PACKET MATERIALS ( ) SLIDES (XX ) 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. 131 Planning Division Staff Report Case No. WZ-96-10 Page 2 1. REQUEST ' / The applicant requests approval of a combined final development plan and plat. The property is known as the 70 West Business Center and has a restaurant and hotel on it which were approved in 1984. Attached is a reduced copy of the original outline development plan. A parcel of land directly to the east was rezoned pursuant to Case No. WZ-96.3 as part of the negotiations to relocate the frontage road. The road has been completed and this parcel has been incorporated into the request. / Since this case is not a rezoning a neighborhood meeting is not required. However, the developer has v held an 'open house' at the LaQuinta and has invited the neighboring property owners to review-the proposal and ask questions. REFERRALS Wheat Ridge Public Works has reviewed and approved a conceptual drainage plan and is in the process of reviewing the final plan. They have reviewed a traffic study which determined required public improvements and curb cut locations. Depending on traffic warrants, a signal at Zinnia may be required. All major concerns have been addressed. West Metro Fire District is working with the developer to resolve fire access issues. Hydrant installation C/ will be required as shown on the utility plan. Parks and Recreation Commission has reviewed this submittal in regard to relocation of the ten-foot-wide bike path and who should be responsible for construction of the path. Consolidated Mutual Water District will require a partial water line relocation. Jefferson County has commented regarding the traffic impact and design issues. They have been working with our Public Works Department in regard to public improvements. III. DEVELOPMENT PLAN A. Land Uses 9 / The development plan proposes two different scenarios both of which include a 1700 square foot gas station /convenience store with car wash and 4400 square foot fast food restaurant along West 32nd Avenue. They also both show a 925 square foot retail/service facility on Lot 5 and a 28,000 square foot / office/showroom facility on Lot 6. v The developer has proposed the two development alternatives to remain flexible in regard to the development market. Alternative A provides for a 10,975 square foot "sit-down" restaurant. Alternate B allows for 19,200 square foot of retail in two structures. There are no changes to Lot 4 which is designated as a duplex. Staff concludes that all proposed uses shown on both alternatives are permitted pursuant to the approved Outline Development Plan. B. Site Building Layout & Design 132 Planning Division Staff Report Page 3 Case No. WZ-96-10 Generally, the overall site layout including building locations, setbacks, parking, landscape coverage, access, building materials and design are acceptable. All buildings will either use brick which matches the new brick wall along the west side, or will use materials, color and accents which match or blend with the west brick wall. A landscaped berm with ten foot and six foot wall and fence surrounds the site along the west side, providing a buffer to the residential uses to the west. A short landscaped berm and elevation differential of four feet is shown along West 32nd Avenue. The berm has been extended further west to provide more visual buffer to residents to the south. The landscape plan for this area should be revised to increase the intensity of mid-height shrubs and trees to provide greater, year-round visual buffering. C. Signage Signage includes wall signs on buildings and freestanding signs. Generally, all signs conform to the City's sign code or were already approved pursuant to the 1984 prior approved plan, and subsequent court settlement between Mr. Richter and the City. Staff is pleased by the cooperation of the applicant .regarding signage, however we do recommend the following revisions and/or requirements. 1. Regarding the two 50-foot-high signs, Staff recommends a V-shaped sign design with the two illuminated sign panels oriented toward 1-70. This design should mitigate visibility of these tall signs from the western neighborhood, especially at night when they are illuminated. 2. Regarding the Diamond Shamrock canopy signs, staff recommends that the sign upon the west I f - elevation NOT be illuminated, so as not to disturb residents to the west and south. IV. SUBDIVISION PLAT Currently, the property exists as seven separate parcels measuring cumulative as 9.9 acres. The proposed subdivision will replat Lots #2, 3, 4, 6 and 7. Minor changes are proposed for Lot 1 (LaQuinta parcel). Lot 5 (single-family residence already built) and Lot 4 (vacant, duplex lot) remain the same. As the developer wants to maintain land ownership, Lot 3 will encompass the fast food restaurant and gas station along West 32nd Avenue and the retail or sit-down restaurant shown on development alternatives A & B. "-7 Tracts "C" and "D" are a part of Lots 5 and 6, respectively. All requirements of the Subdivision Regulations have been met. V, PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Planning Commission reviewed this request at public hearings held on August 15 and October 3, 1996. At the October 3rd meeting a recommendation of Approval was given with the following conditions: 1. The traffic light on West 32nd Avenue be installed at the earliest possible date; 2. Enclosed dumpsters be provided for all buildings; 3. The handicapped parking space for the retail development (Lot 5) be moved closer to the building; 4. That the opening in the sound barrier wall be closed, and the fire district decide whether a trap door needs to be installed for access to the fire hydrant; 133 Planning Division Staff Report Page 4 Case No. WZ-96-10 5. Lighting for the canopy signs on the west side of the Diamond Shamrock building be turned off from 11:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m. daily; 6. That a six-foot-high wood fence be continued from the noise barrier to West 32nd Avenue behind retail building on Lot 5; 7. Whether or not the berm on Lot 4 is removed will be determined at the time of construction of the duplex by the property owner. At the discretion of the developer, a wall or fence is to be constructed between the two properties; 8. That the developer work with Public Works Department on the creation of a berm that will extend along West 32nd Avenue west as far as possible to 1-70 Service Road to aid in alleviating headlight glare into residential property. Evergreen trees be utilized when possible so long as the integrity of the sight distance triangle is maintained. In regard to the conditions of Approval, the following has been done: 1. The City's Public Works Department has budgeted the installation of the traffic signal -in their 1997 capitol improvements budget. 2. Enclosed dumpsters have been provided for all buildings except for the small building on Lot 5 which will have garbage cans. 3. The handicapped space on Lot 5 has been moved closest to the building. 4. The opening in the fence along the western property line is shown as being closed with fire -1 department access only. 5. On sheet 10, the western canopy sign is shown as being unlighted from 10 p.m. to 6 a.m. (Staff recommends this sign not be illuminated.) 6. The applicant has added a six-foot-sign on Lot 5 extending south towards West 32nd Avenue. 7. The applicant has opted not to include a note regarding removal of the berm and relocation of the fence once the duplex has been built on Lot 4. 8. Regarding extending the berm along West 32nd Avenue, pursuant to Sheets 6 and 7, the applicant has extended the berm to the west along West 32nd Avenue but has not added coniferous plant material to help block added glare. (Staff recommends that Council provide staff with authority to require more and different landscaping at the building permit stage in order to meet this objective.) VI. Development Plan Staff concludes that all requirements for a final development plan have been met and that the proposal, in.general, is consistent with the underlying outline development plan and C-1 zoning regulations. For these reasons, a recommendation of Approval is given, with the following conditions: 1. Regarding landscape buffering along West 32nd Avenue: Staff recommends that Council require a detailed landscape plan for the area to be approved by staff with the first building permit requested. The intent is to provide for a year-round visual buffer and pleasant landscape feature which mitigates vehicle headlights from shining into residential properties to the southeast, and which screens visibility of the Diamond Shamrock monument sign from the same residences. 2. Regarding signage: F/ v 134 Planning Division Staff Report Page 5 Case No. WZ-96-10 a. 50-foot-high signs are to be designed with V-shaped panels so as to mitigate visual impacts to residences to the west. b. The Diamond Shamrock canopy sign, west elevation, shall not be illuminated. Subdivision Plat Staff concludes that a subdivision replat is required to accommodate the new development. Staff further concludes that all requirements of the Subdivision Regulations have been met. For this reason, a recommendation of Approval is given. VII. RECOMMENDED MOTIONS: Development Plan OPTION A: "I move that Case No. WZ-96-10, a request for approval of a PCD final development plan for property located at 12851 West 32nd Avenue, be Approved for the following reasons: All requirements for a final development plan have been met; and 2. The proposal is consistent with the underlying outline development plan and C-1 zoning regulations. With the following conditions: Regarding landscape buffering along West 32nd Avenue: Staff recommends that Council require a detailed landscape plan for the area to be approved by staff with the first building permit requested. The intent is to provide for a year-round visual buffer and pleasant landscape feature which mitigates vehicle headlights from shining into residential properties to the southeast, and which screens visibility of the Diamond Shamrock monument sign from the same residences. 2. Regarding signage: a. 50-foot-high signs are to be designed with V-shaped panels so as to mitigate visual impacts to residences to the west. b. The Diamond Shamrock canopy sign, west elevation, shall not be illuminated. OPTION B: '1 move that Case No. WZ-96-10, a request for approval of a PCD final development plan for property located at 12851 West 32nd Avenue, be Denied for the following reasons: 1. 2. 3. " Subdivision Plat 135 Planning Division Staff Report Case No. WZ-96-10 Page 6 OPTION A: "I move that Case No. WZ-96-10, a request for approval of a subdivision replat for property located at 12851 West 32nd Avenue, be Approved for the following reasons: A subdivision replat is required to accommodate the new development; and 2. All requirements of the Subdivision Regulations have been met. b:\ccwz9610.sr 136 Planning Commission Minutes Page 2 October 3, 1996 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 4. APPROVE THE ORDER OF THE AGENDA Commissioner WILLIAMS moved to approve the agend or the meeting of.October 3, 1996 as printed. Commissioner LICKA seconded the motion. Commissioner THOMPSON asked if it would b an appropriate time to request that regarding the first case ( der public hearing)-t-hat the request be divided into two separ a motions. Mr. Gidley suggested that the app priate time to make that decision would be when Commissi gets to that item.on the agenda. Motion carried 6-0 to apprAe the agenda 5. APPROVAL OF Commissioner WILLI moved to approve the minutes for the meeting of Septe r 18, 1996 as printed. Commissioner THOMPSON seconded the mo on. Motion carried 6-0. 6. PUBLIC RUM (This is the time for anyone to speak on any subje not appearing under Item 7 of the Public Hearing sect' n of the agenda.) No one ad signed the roster nor came forward to speak at that time. 7. PUBLIC HEARING 1. Case No. WZ-96-10: An application by Dwaine R. Richter for approval of a Planned Commercial Development combined final development plan with sign variances and subdivision plat. Said property is located at 12851 West 32nd Avenue. (Continued from September 18, 1996) Commissioner THOMPSON moved that when Commission is ready to make a decision on this case, two motions be made as follows: 1. One motion concerning the requested subdivision; and 2. a second motion concerning the requested sign variances. Commissioner GRIFFITH seconded the motion. Motion carried 6-0. Ms. Reckert stated she had three additional pieces of information to distribute to Commission. Two were letters from area 137 Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 October 3, 1996 residents and the third was a sign plan for the Diamond Shamrock monument sign. Ms. Reckert reiterated to those present that this case had been continued and that Planning Commission had taken testimony at the Public Hearing on August 15, 1996. She added that included in the packet materials provided to Commission was all written testimony, as well as copies of the minutes. Ms. Reckert went over the revised plan, which was projected overhead for ease in viewing. Ms. Reckert concluded her presentation and asked for questions. Commissioner THOMPSON reported that although she did not attend the public hearing on the case before Commission, she had listened to the tapes and felt she was prepared to make a decision that night. Additionally, Commissioner THOMPSON informed those present that the case presently under discussion was brought up at the Town meeting she had attended the previous Tuesday evening. At that time, she had informed those individuals who inquired about the case, that she could not discuss it as no decision had yet been made. Commissioner THOMPSON voiced her concern regarding the following: traffic on West 32nd Avenue; no stop light being installed at 32nd Avenue and the Frontage Road; stacking of vehicles on West 32nd Avenue; possible re-development of the area to the north and need for more right-of-way on West 32nd Avenue; adequate room for stacking when headed east and turning into development; on and off ramps at I-70; transition from commercial uses to residential uses and possible trash problems; light glare; placement of handicapped parking; developer is trying to pack too much into small space - small retail space should not be built; continuance of wall to West 32nd Avenue; wall should be continued to West 32nd Avenue; no reason not to continue wall to north end of the development; one-way-in/one-way-out at Wendy's; location of drive-up window; impact of showroom on residential neighborhood; berm adequate or should wall be continued at that location; location of dumpsters for restaurant, will they be enclosed; dumpster for showroom currently located next to residential area; evergreens being utilized for buffering and not just deciduous trees. She stated she would like to have someone respond to her concerns. Mr. Gidley stated he would go through Commissioner THOMPSON's concerns one-by-one, adding that Bob Goebel, Director of Public Works, was present and could answer questions regarding intersection design, design of West 32nd Avenue, and the traffic signal. 138 Planning Commission Minutes Page 4 October 3, 1996 Bob Goebel answered that the traffic report did indicate a signal would be necessary when the gas station or Wendy's is built. Funds are budgeted in 1997 to construct that signal, which will be hard-wired to the signal at Youngfield, the off-ramp on the West side of I-70 and the signal at Alkire, which is in Jefferson County. He elaborated. Commissioner THOMPSON asked if mention of the signal should be made in the motion. Mr. Goebel stated it wouldn't hurt to include it. Commissioner THOMPSON had concerns regarding stacking on West 32nd Avenue and the ingress/egress off from West 32nd Avenue into the site. Discussion followed. Commissioner THOMPSON stated that if a signal is installed, that would address the stacking problem. Mr. Goebel agreed it would. Mr. Gidley offered to talk about some of the other issues including the transition from residential to commercial. He stated that generally, the transition was dealt with in 1974 when certain parameters were built into the outline development plan. He elaborated. Ms. Reckert stated that the landscape plan showed mostly deciduous trees, with low-growing junipers along West 32nd Avenue. She added the evergreen buffering would be low. Mr. Gidley noted that the developer feels that the combination of landscaping and the berm along West 32nd Avenue addresses the neighborhood concerns. He stated that the handicapped parking space did need to be relocated. The small building on that lot was extremely tight, and that was been brought to the attention of the developer. It does meet minimum requirements, he added, but it is a design issue. Mr. Gidley stated the Wendy's drive-up window was located on the west side. He didn't believe the showroom building would be an easily-marketed building, due to its' location. He added that the dumpsters for the restaurant were shown on the plan. Mr. Gidley spoke about the retail building site of 925 square feet, remarking that it might accomplish a "sound barrier" objective, making the sound barrier wall unnecessary. If the building is not constructed, he added, it might be best to have the duplex access off, the Frontage Road, rather than West 32nd Avenue or Zinnia. 139 Planning Commission Minutes October 3, 1996 Page 5 Commissioner THOMPSON asked if the building was constructed, why wouldn't you recommend having the wall extended td close off any opening, so that high school students could not "cut through". Mr. Gidley answered that more than likely the duplex would have a side yard fence. Commissioner THOMPSON voiced her concern including the small retail building, even though it met minimum standards. Commissioner ECKHARDT stated it was his understanding that the subject building was previously approved and it was office space. Mr. Gidley stated he believed Commission ECKHARDT was correct, it was office space, not retail. Ms. Reckert checked the plan. Mr. Gidley stated only "limited retail" was allowed on that site. The building itself, was not approved, he added. The applicant, he stated, had chosen to interpret the outline plan by the "use area,, being designated on the plan to convert into a building. He elaborated. Ms. Reckert stated that the outline plan does allow retail along that side, however, there are limitations. The building limited to office/warehouse type uses was the building in back of the subject building (Lot 6). Commissioner ECKHARDT noted that with seven parking,spaces, the business couldn't be very large. Chairperson LANGDON asked if Commission should hear applicant's testimony before further discussion. Mr. Gidley reiterated that the case had been continued for specific purposes. He explained that those purposes were to address concerns after the public hearing was closed. The primary purpose to reopen this case for the purpose of clarifying the revisions necessary, based upon the previous submittal - not to go through the entire public hearing again. Commissioner GRIFFITH asked if Commission decided against allowing the small building and decided in favor of extending the wall, who would be responsible to maintain the landscaping? Mr. Gidley answered that it would be on the applicant's land and would be applicant's responsibility to maintain. Mr. Gidley explained the importance of specifying what Commission wants in that area, whether a building, landscaping, extension of the wall, etc. 140 Planning Commission Minutes Page 6 October 3, 1996 Commissioner THOMPSON asked regarding the restaurant shown on Alternate A, would the restaurant share the dumpster with Wendy's? She added that she did not see a dumpster for the restaurant. Ms. Reckert stated it would be her recommendation that Commission include that a dumpster be added for that pad site in their motion. Commissioner THOMPSON asked if Wendy's traffic circulation would allow only one way in and one way out? Ms. Reckert answered "angle" parking is shown. which is generally utilized for one way, but full-width aisles are also shown, which would allow two-way movement. They could do some striping on the lot for circulation purposes to help show people. Commissioner THOMPSON asked Mr. Goebel how he felt about the small retail site, the curb cut and the location of same? Do you feel traffic can move safely through this area as the proposal plan indicates? Mr. Goebel stated the amount of traffic generated by such a small retail outlet would not be large enough have a significant bearing on traffic circulation. He elaborated. Chairperson LANGDON ASKED Ms. Reckert asked if two 25-foot entrances would be adequate. Ms. Reckert stated it would provided for one-way circulation. She elaborated. Commissioner THOMPSON asked if it was necessary to address business hours for the proposed development? Mr. Gidley stated that if limits are placed on business hours, it would be the first application of limiting business hours in Wheat Ridge. He added that he would have concerns about setting such a precedent. He wasn't certain that it could be enforced. Chairperson LANGDON agreed that it would be difficult to enforce such a limitation. Discussion followed. Mr. Gidley noted that one condition that could be placed would be that Diamond Shamrock canopy signage on the west and south not be illuminated. He reminded Commission that the applicant had agreed to lower sign height along West 32nd Avenue. He elaborated. 141 Planning Commission Minutes October 3, 1996 Page 7 Chairperson LANGDON asked if it would be possible for Diamond Shamrock to reduce lighting at night. Mr. Gidley reminded Commission that there would be two other types of signs - a 50-foot sign and a ten-foot sign along 32nd Avenue. Chairperson LANGDON.stated that when he spoke of reducing the lighting, he was referring more to the ten-foot sign than the 50- foot sign- Dwaine Richter, the applicant and owner of 70 West Business Center, came forward to speak. Mr. Richter has been sworn in previously. He went over items listed on page 2 of the staff report regarding items needing to be addressed relative to the final development plan, bringing those present up-to-date. Chairperson LANGDON asked if it would be best to address each of Mr. Richter's statements now? Mr. Gidley suggested that Commission allow Mr. Richter to finish his response. Questions could then be directed to specific items. Mr. Richter then updated Commission on the status of corrections to be made to the subdivision plat and items discussed at the August 15 Planning Commission which were not addressed. Mr. Richter stated his strong feelings against limiting business hours. He pointed out to Commission a berm and six-foot fence which he had built in 1984. He noted a sprinkler system had been installed, as well as landscaping and that the project had been quite expensive. He felt he had met the City's requirements and added that it was unfair to expect him to do more. He elaborated. The cost to continue the sound barrier wall 91 feet to West 32nd Avenue would be $10,500. Mr. Richter stated much of the noise comes from Interstate 70. He elaborated. He added that a building would provide more protection to the residents than continuance of the sound barrier to the south. He went on to talk about.building coverage and disagreed that the site, as proposed, would be too dense. Mr. Richter went over questions Commissioner THOMPSON had voiced and offered to answer any other questions Commission might have. Commissioner THOMPSON asked Mr. Richter where the dumpster would be placed for the retail restaurant. Mr. Richter stated the lot was small and therefore, he felt the trash accumulation would be small. He added he would make certain that it was added. 142 Planning Commission Minutes October 3, 1996 Page 8 Chairperson LANGDON asked Commissioner THOMPSON if she had further questions or if any of her previous questions had not been answered to her satisfaction. Commissioner THOMPSON answered that Mr. Richter had covered them well. Mr. Richter introduced Mr. Bob Leigh of Lee, Scott and Cleary. Following that Mr. Gipson of Diamond Shamrock would speak, he added. Bob Leigh, of Leigh, Scott and Cleary, 1889 York Street, Denver, was sworn in. He reported that his firm prepared a traffic impact analysis that was required by the City. Mr. Leigh reported that the overwhelming majority of the traffic would be generated by the gas station and the fast food restaurant (80°1). He elaborated. Commissioner ECKHARDT asked who would be paying for the signal? Mr. Goebel stated that the City would be paying for the signal as part of an agreement reached between City Council and a judgement placed on the City by the courts. Chairperson LANGDON asked if Jefferson County would participate. Mr. Goebel answered that Jefferson County will participate in communications with the signal on Alkire Street. That way, he added all signals can be controlled by computer. Commissioner THOMPSON asked if the signature block for the Colorado Department of Transportation was necessary? Mr. Gidley answered that is a minor issue. He elaborated. Commissioner THOMPSON asked about Alternate A and B on the plan. Ms. Reckert answered that the applicant has requested approval of both alternatives. Approval of both alternatives would allow more marketing possibilities. Rick Gipson, real estate representative with Diamond Shamrock, 520 E 56th Avenue, Denver, was sworn in. Mr. Gipson offered to answer any questions Commission might have. Chairperson LANGDON reiterated that a motion had been approved separate the issues. Mr. Gidley answered that there would be a separate motion regarding the signs. Discussion could be heard, however, regarding signage. 143 Planning Commission Minutes Page 9 October 3, 1996 Mr. Gipson pointed out that items No. 5 and 6 (Items needing to be addressed relative to the final development plan), the supplemental document provided at that night's meeting, does reflect a significant change in street signage along west 32nd Avenue. It reduces the height from a 25-foot pole sign with 125 square feet of illuminated sign face to a 50 square foot illuminated sign face with a height of ten feet. Additionally, the structure would move approximately 100 feet east. Mr. Gipson expressed his confusion over item No. 6, whether the concern was light projection or just what. Mr. Gidley stated that the reference made was for canopy signs. The canopies are quite tall, he explained, and there are residential areas to the west and south. Since the canopies would remain illuminated all night, Staff was requesting that they not be lit. Mr. Gipson explained the sign configuration. He added that the illumination would be "soft" and would not project light. He elaborated. He said they would be visible not invasive. He stated Diamond Shamrock would certainly like to retain the illuminated lights as part of the marketing package of the facility. There were no questions at that time. Commissioner THOMPSON asked Mr. Gidley to point out the changes made to the original sign proposal. Mr. Gidley walked to the overhead and pointed out to Commission locations of the signs on the original submittal (Three 50-foot- high signs and two 25-foot-high signs, plus signage on the walls). He then pointed out the changes that had been made from that original submittal. He further elaborated. Commissioner THOMPSON asked if the canopy sign would illuminate residential back yards, even with the height of the sound barrier wall? Mr. Gidley stated he had never been in the back yards of the homes in that area. He said the sound barrier consisted of a four-foot-high berm, with a ten-foot-high solid masonry wall on top of it (14 feet of elevation). He thought there was a possibility that they would not. However, he pointed out that the homes from another area would be able to see the canopy light. He reminded Commission that it is a commercial area and had been zoned as such since 1974. Commissioner ECKHARDT suggested that at 10:00 or 11:00 p.m. the west signs could either be turned off or dimmed. 144 Planning Commission Minutes October 3, 1996 Page 10 Mr. Gipson stated due to this particular type of signage, if the signs were dimmed, it would be like shutting them off. Commissioner ECKHARDT suggested the signs may not be necessary. Mr. Gipson stated it was Diamond Shamrock's desire to have the signs illuminated, but should Commission decide the signs are not necessary, Diamond Shamrock would still do fine at that location. Chairperson LANGDON announced to those present that there were four persons who had signed the roster to speak. He reminded everyone wishing to speak that only items regarding new information (information presented at this meeting) would be discussed. Mike Coen, 13146 West 33rd Avenue, Golden, was sworn in. Mr. Coen spoke of plans to install a "trap door" to service three fire hydrants, should the opening in the wall be closed. He thought the trap door was unnecessary. He was in favor of the continuing the brick wall, should the road be constructed. He had concerns about covenants that had been in place since 1965. He added that he had never seen a sprinkler on his side of the berm, and that the landscaping consisted of tall weeds and grass. Commissioner THOMPSON asked Mr. Coen where the fire hydrants were located? Is the trap door needed? Ms. Reckert answered that the hydrants were interspersed around the site and the City had worked with Consolidated Mutual Water and Lakewood Fire District on the location of the hydrants. She added that the City could verify if the trap door is necessary. It may not be needed. Commissioner GRIFFITH asked Mr. Coen if he did or did not want the wall extended. Mr. Coen stated if the road is constructed, he would like the wall extended. Commissioner GRIFFITH asked if there wasn't a fence there already. Mr. Coen stated there was a six-foot wooden fence. Chairperson LANGDON asked who would pay if the wall was extended? Mr. Gidley stated the City had built the wall adjacent to the public street right-of-way, but if the wall was extended, the developer would pay for it. 145 Planning Commission Minutes October 3, 1996 Page 11 Emily Bennett, 13206 West 33rd Place was sworn in. Ms. Bennett stated that some lots in the development were still covered by covenants. She added that the City of Wheat Ridge has started a condemnation proceeding to relocate street right-of-way and this procedure would also remove the covenants. Ms. Bennett stated she planned to file a protest. Mr. Gidley apologized for interrupting, but informed Commission the matter Ms. Bennett was referring to was in litigation and it was inappropriate to discuss it at that time. It was not an issue for Commission to consider, he added. Ms. Bennett disagreed. Chairperson LANGDON informed Ms. Bennett that the legal process has begun and Planning Commission was not empowered to interfere with that process. The request before Commission, he added, will not include the covenants. Chairperson LANGDON asked Ms. Bennett if she had other issues she wished to comment on. Ms. Bennett answered she thought the color of the Diamond Shamrock canopies would be closer to "kelly" green rather than "holly" green. She was certain that the proposed canopy signs would be seen from her home. Brad Brauer, 3238 Zinnia Court was sworn in. Mr. Brauer pointed out his home on the projected map. He stated he was surrounded by Wheat Ridge on two sides. He stated he had been asked to represent approximately 15 residents on Zinnia Court. Mr. Brauer had written the letter dated September 26, 1996 handed out that night. He stated his and neighbors' concern was for the integrity of the neighborhood and they appreciated Commission's concern regarding the impact of this development. Mr. Brauer had concerns regarding access and inadequate roads servicing the development. Chairperson LANGDON asked if Mr. Brauer's concerns were regarding information brought forward that night? Mr. Brauer disagreed that the wall need not be extended, as there was no way of knowing when the duplex might be built. Mr. Gidley stated the site of the proposed duplex allows only a single or two-family dwelling. Mr. Brauer stated that the lot in question has not been developed now, it's assumed it will be built and act as a barrier. Mr. Gidley stated that was not the building he'was saying would act as a barrier. The building he was referring to was the commercial building. 146 Planning Commission Minutes Page 12 October 3, 1996 Mr. Brauer had concerns about the foot traffic crossing the empty lot, which is landscaped with natural weeds, grasses and dead trees. He stated a wall would help buffer the neighbors and keep the trash out. He elaborated. Mr. Brauer asked if the opening would be closed. Chairperson LANGDON stated he believed that the opening where the fire hydrant is located will be closed. Mr. Brauer stated he appreciated the closure of that area. He noted that when the high school adds a 12th grade, traffic will increase significantly. Mr. Brauer stated that if there is a - choice between alternate 'A' and 'B', the residents prefer alternate 'B'. The reason for their choice is that alternate 'B' would reduce the amount of traffic, reduce peak time traffic, and prevent an "all-night" establishment. Mr. Brauer stated the canopy sign(s) will be visible from his two-story home and he was hopeful that the canopy signs would not be illuminated. Mr. Brauer thought that 50-foot signs was overkill and explained why. Chairperson LANGDON asked if the 50-foot sign would be placed before the 32nd Avenue exit? Discussion followed Mr. Brauer spoke of the existing traffic congestion and stated that one of the biggest problems was that there is no south-bound access onto I-70 westbound coming off Highway 58. He also spoke of the poor quality landscaping done in 1984 and the broken sprinkler system. Mr. Brauer told of his concern for light pollution into their neighborhood. Commissioner THOMPSON asked if plans exist to extend the service road to the north. And, if so, will the commercial office showroom conform to the parking regulations? Mr. Gidley stated that Planning Staff had suggested on several occasions that rather than the alignment shown, that alternate alignment occur directly north behind the LaQuinta, across the Salter property and connect further to the north. That alignment was not chosen. Mr. Richter was willing to work with Staff to provide the potential for that still to occur. If that alignment were to occur, it would remove a long line of parking, however, that parking would have to be replaced. He elaborated. Commissioner THOMPSON reiterated that the fire department has approved the plans and there is adequate access. Mr. Gidley answered yes, that was true 147 Planning Commission Minutes Page 13 October 3, 1996 Commissioner THOMPSON asked about the statement Mr. Gidley had made regarding a fence around the proposed duplex. She felt a barrier should be constructed between commercial and residential. Mr. Gidley stated there was a barrier, consisting of a four-foot berm and a six-foot fence on top of the berm from east to west. Commissioner THOMPSON asked why is the responsibility of the duplex owner to provide the barrier? Mr. Gidley asked if the wall was extended in a north-south fashion, then should the berm/fence be removed? That is what you would have in a normal residential area. He elaborated. Mr. Brauer asked to speak regarding the wall question. He spoke in favor of the wall remaining. He stated it protected his home from the ugly field and the traffic noise on West 32nd Avenue. He elaborated. Commissioner ECKHARDT suggested that a solid fence be installed along the west side of Lot 5, which would be an extension of the berm until such time as the building is constructed. Then extend the berm down to the building and out to West 32nd Avenue if necessary. Chairperson LANGDON asked if Commissioner ECKHARDT was suggesting a six-foot privacy fence? Commissioner ECKHARDT answered he thought that would be appropriate. Commissioner THOMPSON stated some type of a division should be made, separating residential from commercial. Commissioner ECKHARDT asked Commissioner THOMPSON if his suggestion was reasonable? Commissioner'THOMPSON answered yes, it was. Commissioner ECKHARDT stated he preferred to see the small retail building as strictly an office building. He stated it would have the same exterior as the duplex, and it is probably a good way to transition from residential to the west and commercial to the east. Norm Ross, 3135 Zinnia Street, was sworn in previously. He stated he was also concerned about the quality of life and his property value. Mr. Ross requested a copy of the revised plan. He was provided same. One of his concerns was the barrier and he was in favor of a four-foot wall being placed on the barrier to block light, noise and trash. Mr. Ross spoke in favor of 148 Planning Commission Minutes Page 14 October 3, 1996 evergreen trees rather than deciduous trees utilized on the berm. He voiced his concern regarding the installation of a traffic signal to aid in traffic congestion. Signage was another of his concerns. He thought 50-foot signs were not necessary. Mr. Ross felt the proposed bikeway was located too close to I-70. He suggested it be relocated to the east edge of the old service road. Mr. Ross inquired when discussion would be heard regarding architectural details/building materials? He was concerned that the traffic movement though the development was not going to work well in certain areas. Mr. Ross thought approval should be given for either alternate 'A' or 'B'. He was in favor of limiting business hours and turning lights off at 11:00 p.m. He asked - Commission to address unresolved issues. There were no questions at that time. Chairperson LANGDON called a short recess at 9:55 p.m. Meeting reconvened at 10:05 p.m. Chairperson LANGDON listed resolved issues from the various lists in the staff report. Regarding outstanding or unresolved issues, Mr. Gipson was invited back to the podium. Mr. Gipson stated that if Commission did decide that lighting of the canopy on the west be dimmed or turned off, to consider early dark hours in winter and allow perhaps use of a timer to cut the light at a specific time. Discussion was heard. Mr. Gipson stated he was willing to keep the west canopy light off from 11:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m. Chairperson LANGDON suggested that Mr. Richter address the landscaping and the sprinkler system. Mr. Richter stated the sprinkler system had been turned off years ago. The flooding Mr. Brauer referred to was caused by trash clogging the irrigation ditch clean out which resulted in over- flowing on the north side of 32nd Avenue. He added that the irrigation pipe had been relocated with the construction of the street and there has been no further problem. He has tried to cut the weeds three times yearly. Mr. Richter stated his objection to constructing a wall. He would not object to constructing a wooden fence. He elaborated. Commissioner WILLIAMS asked Mr. Richter if he planned to turn the sprinkler system back on and doing some landscaping on the berm? 149 Planning Commission Minutes Page 15 October 3, 1996 Mr. Richter stated the berm was planted in native grasses for arid climate. The sprinkler system is not really necessary, he added. Commissioner WILLIAMS asked if Mr. Richter would agree to build a six-foot wooden fence across the property line. Mr. Richter stated he would if that is what Commission wants him to do, although he does not see the need for an additional fence. There would be a fence installed when the duplex is constructed. There was no further discussion at that time. - Commissioner THOMPSON stated she would make the motion, however she needed to ask one question. She asked Mr. Gidlev if it was possible to extend the plantings and the berm there near the corner to alleviate the problem with the lights that have concerned the neighbors across the street. Also, asked Mr. Gidley for some discussion-of the duplex wall. Mr. Gidley stated that the berm could be extended from 32nd to the I-70 Frontage Road west, so that vehicle lights would not project across the street to the south. The grading plan can be modified to accomplish that, providing that sight visibility at the intersection is accommodated. Additionallv, he stated that the landscape plan could be modified to include evergreen trees on the berm acting as a light barrier. Deciduous trees could be planted in other areas of the berm, allowing for visibility into the site. The third issue was a barrier between the duplex and the development. He suggested that one possible solution might be that the owner be allowed to remove the berm and relocate the six-foot-high wall or fence at the property line, giving the owner a bit more usable space, better access to parking facilities and integrating the site with residences to the north. Chairperson LANGDON asked if Mr. Gidley was suggesting that the decision be left to the discretion of the owner. Mr. Gidley answered yes, he was Commissioner RASPLICKA asked if Commission requires the extension of the fence that the City built, would it be at City expense? Mr. Gidley answered no. He pointed out on the projected map where a berm with a fence on it current exists and where the fence would.be constructed. Commissioner THOMPSON moved that Case No. WZ-96-10, an application by Dwaine R. Richter for approval of a Planned Commercial Development combined final development plan be Approved with the following conditions: 150 Planning Commission Minutes Page 16 October 3, 1996 _ 1. The traffic light on West 32nd Avenue be installed at the earliest possible date; 2. Enclosed dumpsters be provided for all buildings; ~3. The handicapped parking space for the retail development (Lot 5) be moved closer to the building; - 4. That the opening in the sound barrier wall be closed, and the fire district decide whether a trap door needs to be installed for access to the fire hydrant; - 5. Lighting for the canopy signs on the west side of the Diamond Shamrock building be turned off from 11:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m. daily; 6. That a six-foot-high wood fence be continued from the noise barrier to West 32nd Avenue behind retail building on Lot 5; 7. Whether or not the berm on Lot 4 is removed will be determined at the time of construction of the duplex by the property owner. At the discretion of the developer, a wall or fence is to be constructed between the two properties; Commissioner ECKHARDT asked Commissioner THOMPSON if she had meant to include the signs on the west and south sides of the Diamond Shamrock facility in her motion. Commissioner THOMPSON stated it was her understanding it was the lighting of the signs. Commissioner ECKHARDT asked if she wanted to include the west side of the monument signs on West 32nd? Commissioner THOMPSON stated that could be included in the motion regarding signage. Commissioner ECKHARDT agreed. - 8. That the developer work with Public Works Department on the creation of a berm that will extend along West 32nd Avenue west as far as possible to I-70 Service Road to aid in alleviating headlight glare into residential property. Evergreen trees be utilized when possible so long as the integrity of the sight distance triangle is maintained. Commissioner GRIFFITH seconded the motion. Motion carried 6-0. Commissioner WILLIAMS asked what would the second motion cover? Chairperson LANGDON answered the second motion would be regarding the requested sign variances. He summarized the changes made. Commissioner THOMPSON stated personally, she.-felt the requested number of signs was too many, however, the developer and City have come to a compromise. 151 Planning Commission Minutes October 3, 1996 Page 17 Commissioner ECKHARDT stated he felt the lighting on the west side of the monument signs should be turned off at 11:00 p.m. along with the canopy sign. However, if evergreen trees are planted on the berm, it may not be necessary. Chairperson LANGDON stated he was impressed with signage he had seen recently which utilized a more controlled lighting that didn't seem so harsh. He elaborated. He thought this was the type of signage that was planned. Commissioner WILLIAMS agreed. He thought government can be allowed to regulate too much. Commissioner ECKHARDT agreed with Commissioner WILLIAMS although the people living in the area have rights as well. If the signs are not invasive, leave them on. However, he felt that turning the lights off at 11:00 p.m. would not be a real problem to the developers. Mr. Gidley stated that from a functional standpoint, the signs proposed are prefabricated boxes and it would be impossible to light just one side. He thought the evergreen trees possibly could be placed so that they block visibility to the homes on the corner. Chairperson LANGDON stated he felt that the monument signs lighting would not be obtrusive to the adjacent neighborhood. Commissioner THOMPSON asked if she should make reference to the revised sign plan? Mr. Gidley answered if Commission desired to amend the development plans relating to the issues of freestanding signs then indicate the motion is directed toward modification to the development plan related to freestanding signs and specifically the following signs. Then state what you wish to state. Commissioner THOMPSON moved to approve the modification to the development plan for the 70 West Business Center concerning the freestanding signs as follows: 1. The monument sign for the office showroom will be 10'-5" high and a maximum sign face of 150 square feet; 2. The existing signs for LaQuinta and Country Cafe Commissioner ECKHARDT informed Commissioner THOMPSON that her motion only need to specify changes to the modified sign plan. Commissioner THOMPSON asked if Commissioner ECKHARDT would like to make the motion. 152 Planning Commission Minutes October 3, 1996 Page 18 Commissioner ECKHARDT moved that the freestanding signs be approved as depicted on the 70 west Business Center Official Development Plan. Commissioner RASPLICKA seconded the motion. Motion carried 6-0. Commissioner ECKHARDT moved to approve the 70 West Business Center re-subdivision plat. with conditions as stated in the staff report. Commissioner THOMPSON seconded the motion. Motion carried 6_0_ 2. Cave No. WZ-96-8: A City-initiated large area rezoning fr Commercial-one (C-1) to Residential-One C (R-1C) and esidential-Two (R-2). The rezoning area is gene ally located on either side of West 29th Avenue, betwe Fenton Street and Sheridan Boulevard. Mr. Gidley presen ed the staff report. Entered into the record and accepted by th Chairperson were the Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Ordinance, c e file, packet materials and Code of Laws. Commissioner THOMPSON\noted that 2875 Benton Street and 5560 West 29th Avenue had two di ferent addresses. Mr. Gidley stated that C ty address maps need to be updated. He explained that when multi le addresses occur on a single lot, because of the small scale used, it was often difficult to get all address numbers on the ap. Rod Weuve, owner of 2860 Ames Street, was sworn in. He stated he purchased the property as inc e property. The zoning is presently C-1 and he wishes to eta in the C-1 zoning. Mr. Weuve added that several of his rent- have had businesses they maintained at that location. He elt that if the City rezones his property to residential zonin it would decrease the resale value and limit his income. One A Mr. weuve's letters had been included in the packet and he had a second letter, which he provided for the record as well. Mr. Gidley asked Mr. Weuve if the busiesses which were operated at his property received a business li nse from the City? Mr. Weuve answered he did not know. Mr. Gidley stated he had investigated the operty on several occasions, and never observed any commercia activity from the street. He added that it was a residential ighborhood and the residents would like to retain the residentia character. Encroachment into the neighborhood by commerci activities is why the rezoning was undertaken. 153 CERTIFICATION OF RESOLUTION CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE PLANNING COMMISSION CASE NO: WZ-96-10 LOCATION: 12351 W. 32nd Ave. APPLICANT(S) NAME: Dwaine R. Richter OWNER(S) NAME: Same. REQUEST: Approval of a Planned Commercial Development combined final development plan with sign variances and subdivision plat APPROXIMATE AREA: 10 acres WHEREAS, the City of wheat Ridge Planning Division has submitted a list of factors to be considered with the above request, and said list of factors is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, and made a part hereof; and WHEREAS, there was testimony received at a public hearing by the Planning Commission and such testimony provided additional facts. NOW, THEREFORE, based upon the facts presented and conclusions reached, it was moved by Commissioner THOMPSON, seconded by Commissioner GRIFFITH, that Case No. WZ-96.10, an application by Dwaine R. Richter for approval of a Planned Commercial Development combined final development plan for property located at 12351 West 32nd Avenue be Approved with the following conditions: I. The traffic light on West 32nd Avenue he installed at the earliest possible date; 2. Enclosed dumpsters be provided for all buildings; 3. The handicapped parking space for the retail development (Lot 5) be moved closer to the building; 4. That the opening in the sound barrier wall be closed, and the fire district decide whether a trap door needs to be installed for access to the fire hydrant; 5. Lighting for the canopy signs on the west side of the Diamond Shamrock building be turned off from 11:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m. daily; 6. That a six-foot-high wood fence be continued from the noise barrier to west 32nd Avenue behind retail building on Lot 5; 7. Whether or not the berm on Lot 4 is removed will be determined at the time of construction of the duplex by the property owner. At the discretion of the developer, a wall or fence is to be constructed between the two properties; 8. That the developer work with Public works Department on the creation of a berm that will extend along 'nest 32nd Avenue west as far as possible to I-70 Service Road to aid in alleviating headlight glare into residential property. Evergreen trees b utilized when possible so long as the integrity of the sight distance triangle is maintained. 154 Planning Commission Minutes August 15,,1996 Page 3 Commissioner ECKHARDT moved that Case No. M 6-7, a request for a two-lot minor subdivision for propert ocated at 6000 West 32nd Avenue be approved for the Poll ing reasons: 1. A subdivision is required o create the two parcels. 2. All requirements of a Subdivision Regulations have been met. With the followin condition: 1. Tract be shown as being hereby dedicated for right--of- way p oses. Commis oner WILLIAMS seconded the motion. Motion carried 6-0. 2. Case No. WZ-96-10: An application by Dwaine R. Richter for approval of a Planned Commercial Development combined final development plan with sign variances and subdivision plat. Said property is located at 12851 West 32nd Avenue. Meredith Reckert presented the staff report. Entered and accepted into the record were the Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Ordinance, Subdivision Regulations, case file, packet materials and exhibits. Commissioner ECKHARDT asked if all the proposed land uses had already been approved? Ms. Reckert answered yes, that was true. Commissioner ECKHARDT was concerned that the architectural rendering of the duplex showed exit/entrance onto West 32nd Avenue. / Ms. Reckert stated staff would not recommend any additional curb cuts onto West 32nd Avenue. She added for that lot the only access should be to Zinnia Court. Commissioner CERVENY asked Ms. Reckert what date the land uses had been approved on this parcel? Ms. Reckert answered that the original annexation occurred in 1974. Chairperson LANGDON asked Ms. Reckert for a list of the items requiring correction. Ms. Reckert stated the list was extensive. She added that rather than itemizing everything, she had laid out the general items in 155 Planning Commission Minutes August 15, 1996 Page 4 the staff report, but under conditions of approval, she had noted "all comments need to be addressed". She suggested that Commission be specific when making motions. Commissioner CERVENY asked Ms. Reckert about the recommendation from staff that Planning Commission continue this case to a date specific to make their decision. He noted that two Commissioners were unable to attend the meeting, and asked if their absence would preclude them from participation when a decision is made on this case? Ms. Reckert answered that the two absent commissioners could- - listen to the tapes to familiarize themselves with the issues. Ron Hoisington, Planner with CRH Development Specialists, 3000 Youngfield, Suite 285, Lakewood, was sworn in. He asked if it was possible to maintain the schedule with City Council on September 23, since staff has recommended continuation? Mr. Gidley stated that would be Planning Commission's call. However, he did recommend that prior to Commission making a decision on this case, items requiring correction or resolution be taken care of. However, should Commission make a recommendation to City Council, the recommendation include a stipulation that all matters of concern be resolved prior to scheduling the case before City Council. Mr. Hoisington stated it was their desire to stay on schedule and promised to do whatever possible to alleviate problems. He went over the items noted in the staff report on page 3, bringing those present up-to-date. There were no questions from Commission at that time. Diane Davies, legal representative with Faegre & Benson, 370 17th Street, Suite 2500, Denver 80202 was sworn in. Ms. Davies handed out copies of a Stipulation for Settlement and Dismissal and read a prepared statement into the record. Ms. Davies stated that because of the agreement entered into by the City and Mr. Richter, a sign variance was not needed. Commission had no questions for Ms. Davies at that time. Chairperson LANGDON asked commission if City Attorney Gerald Dahl had comments he would like to make regarding Ms. Davies" statement. / Gerald Dahl, City Attorney stated he disagreed with Ms. Davies / comments regarding the Stipulation for Settlement and Dismissal as the document does not mention sign height or size, the only 156 Planning Commission Minutes Page 5 August 15, 1996 thing it does is establish the number of signs allowed. He elaborated. Ms. Davies reiterated her belief that the current Sign Code did not limit the number of 50-foot signs. Mr. Dahl stated that the stipulation doesn't mention the old Sign Code or the new Sign Code. The Sign Code is mentioned only in the new Sign Code. Ms. Davies, he felt, was "asking" the Stipulation to do more work than it was intended to do. Dwaine Richter, 6565 S Syracuse Way, Englewood CO 80111. Mr. Richter stated that it was his intent when he signed the Stipulation for Settlement and Dismissal was that the freestanding signs referenced were 50-foot signs. He elaborated. Commission had no questions at that time. Alex Ariniello. 1889 York Street, Denver CO 80202 was sworn in. Mr. Ariniello stated his firm had prepared a traffic impact analysis report. He went over the plan and explained the need for additional curb cuts. There were no questions from Commission at that time. Mr. Hoisinaton stated that a detailed letter had been submitted to Public Works Department concerning the plat and necessary corrections. Bill Smitham, 3248 Zennia Court was sworn in. Mr. Smitham stated he was concerned about the proposed service station and its' close proximity to his home. He informed Commission that to his knowledge the station would be open for business 24 hours daily. He had safety concer s for his home and family and stated his oppositio service station. He asked if the existing wall could be extended to west 32nd Avenue. He elaborated. Chairperson LANGDON asked Ms. Reckert if she could project on the screen the appropriate slide. Ms. Reckert after checking with Mr. Goebel, she thought an extension could be done, still maintaining sight triangle regulations. Mr. Smitham stated he thought his request was not unreasonable Connie Mauldin, 3195 Zinnia Street was sworn in. Ms. Mauldin pointed out the location of her home. The front of her home faces Zinnia Street. Ms. Mauldin stated she had two requests: Add several large evergreen trees across the front in order to create a buffer. V 157 .l l Planning Commission Minutes Page 6 August 15, 1996 Ms. Reckert asked Ms. Maulkin to point out where she wanted the evergreen trees to be placed. Ms. Mauldin did so. She added that her second request was to move the freestanding signs away from West 32nd Avenue and relocate th ara me uac of the site. She could understand why the directory sign needed to be closer to 32nd. Ms. Mauldin stated she had a problem with school children who throw trash into the ditch that runs along 32nd Avenu She stated it is a constant maintenance problem to her. S e feared t e rash problem would increase with the development. Chairperson LANGDON asked if Ms. Mauldin lived within the City Limits? Mr. Gidley answered that the City boundary jogs around a bit in that area. Mr. Goebel stated that the City boundary is the south right-of- way line for 32nd Avenue. He added Ms. Mauldin's property was not within the City of Wheat Ridge, but the roadside ditch was a part of the City right-of-way. Commissioner CERVENY asked Ms. Mauldin how long she had resided at that location? Ms. Mauldin answered 15 and one-I~alf years. Harold Gosse. 14600 Foothills Road, was sworn in. Mr. Gosse stated that he lived about two miles from the property in question. He had concerns about .ncreased traffic' nd felt it would further impact an already ba si on. He elaborated. Commissioner ECKHARDT informed Mr. Gosse that Planning Commission could do very little, if anything, at this time since land uses had been determined previously. He stated he did not like the whole plan and that traffic would, indeed, get worse. Mr. Gosse stated his concern was with the intensity of the plan. He felt that traffic flow within the proposed eve opment would v be a problem, as Shirley Coen 13146 West 32nd Avenue, was sworn,in. Ms. Coen had a letter from a neighbor, who was unable to attend, which she requested be made a part of the record. She stated she was concerned about the nu igns requested., Steve Barnhill, 13149 West 33rd Avenue, was sworn in. Mr. Barnhill requested that the openi n the sound barrier wall e clo ety yeas s. He elabora ed a ointe ou the area a was referring o on the slide screen. 158 Planning Commission Minutes August 15, 1996 Page 7 Chairperson LANGDON asked why the opening in the sound barrier wall was left. J Mr. Gidley thought it was left open to access a fire hydrant. Mr. Barnhill had taken a petition around his neighborhood getting signatures of those in agreement that the opening in the sound barrier should be closed. He wanted the petition made a part of the record. Bruce West, 13200 West 32nd Avenue was sworn in. Mr. West was representing Devlon Junior/Senior High School. He suggested-that trash receptacles be placed in the area of the problem mentioned by Ms. Mauldin and they, at the school, would encourage students to use them. Chairperson LANGDON asked Mr. West what his position was with the school. Mr. West answered he was assistant principal. Commissioner RASPLICKA asked what the name of the school was. Mr. West answered the name was Devlon, a Jefferson County district-wide option school. Norm Ross, 3145 Zinnia Street was sworn in. He pointed out his home on the location map projected. Mr. Ross thanked the City for building the wall. He pointed out the location of his request for a similar wall to be built landsca 'ng• r. a ed s opposed to the gas station; fe there were too few parking spaces; he thought there were . ' m curb cut wanted to see the traffic study; and had concern with oposed location for the bike path. He wanted to know if the entire area could be rezoned. He elaborated. Commissioner CERVENY asked Mr. Ross when he moved into the area? Mr. Ross answered he'd lived there since 1981. Commissioner CERVENY asked if the current zoning was in place at that time? Mr. Gidley noted that when the parcel was annexed into the City of Wheat Ridge in 1974 it was rezoned to Planned Commercial Development. Commissioner ECKHARDT asked if Mr. Gidley knew what the zoning had been prior to the time the City of Wheat Ridge annexed it? 0 159 Planning Commission Minutes August 15, 1996 Page 8 Mr. Gidley stated that a large portion of it, but not all of it, was zoned residential, as there was a platted subdivision on about half of it. Mr. Ross stated he had pictures of horses grazing on the property and thought it had been zoned Agricultural. Commissioner CERVENY stated he thought it would benefit the developer to consider existin f~ =germs, as it could ease the difficulty enterin nd exiting the proposed development. Mr. Gidley reiterated to Commission that specific design - - standards that protect the public interest could be required on the development. He elaborated. Mr. Ross appealed to Mr. Richter to listen to the comments being made and revise the plan accordingly. Bill Salter 3475 Youngfield Service Road was sworn in. Mr. Salter gave a brief history of the area, as he had lived at that location 57 years. He stated his appreciation for the 12-foot wall installation and added that the storage facility would attract undesirables and wanted a 12-foot wall installed to protect the neighborhood. Rene Dieohuis 3229 Zinnia Court was sworn in. Mr. Diephuis was not opposed to business, but was hopeful that Mr. Richter would look for ways to ease the ex' tin traffic problems. He told of his difficulties getting onto 32n venue 8 ad d he wanted the 12-foot wall extended to 32nd Avenue and explained why. Commissioner ECKHARDT stated he had listened to the many different comments made and summarized his thoughts regarding those comments. Mr. Richter asked for an opportunity for rebuttal. Chairperson LANGDON stated he would get that opportunity. Mr. Gidley suggested an opportunity for rebuttal, then allow time for discussion. -Once the public hearing is closed, commission could discuss the case. Mr. Hoisinaton read down the various comments and concerns made by neighbors of the proposed development and stated efforts made and to be made to resolve those issues. Two major contributing factors to the traffic problems in the area he stated, was the poorly designed interchange and, the lack of-a right turn lane off from Highway 58 going west bound on Interstate 70. He elaborated. 160 Planning Commission Minutes August 15, 1996 Dwaine Richter spoke about the various.concerns voiced by neighbors of the proposed development had made the revisions to the plat requested by Commission for approval. Page 9 and comments He stated he staff. He asked Mr. Gidley stated it was not his intent to recommend similar wall, of similar height (12, 10 or 6 feet) be along West 32nd Avenue. A wall of 36 to 48 inches is wall that could provide some protection from lights, etc. He noted an example of recent development that such a wall. that a installed the type of vehicles, utilized Chairperson LANGDON closed the public hearing and asked the Commission for discussion. l Commissioner CERVENY suggested discussion and any recapping be done prior to when a decision is made on this case. He asked if Planning Commission made a decision on September 5, would there be ample time for City Council to hear it on the 23rd? Mr. Gidley answered there was no way possible the Public Works Department would have time to review the changes made to the plat, provide a full analysis to Planning and submit that information in time to be heard by City Council by September 23rd. Commissioner CERVENY was hopeful that it could be resolved as timely as possible. Mr. Gidley agreed. Commissioner CERVENY asked what schedule could be reasonably met? Mr. Gidley suggested that our regular mei held instead on Wednesday, September 18, the APA Conference in Colorado Springs. could review and report by September 18. could then go before Council sometime in 14th. sting September 19 be due to a conflict with He thought Public Works More than likely, it October, probably the Chairperson LANGDON asked Mr. Goebel if that schedule would work for him. Mr. Goebel stated it would depend on the quality and timeliness of the developer's submittals. He added he had not seen a final drainage study. Jefferson County Transportation and Highways had not yet responded. He elaborated. He stated_ his department would do their best. Commissioner ECKHARDT asked if Planning Commission could schedule a special meeting on September 12? 161 \ Planning Commission Minutes Page 10 August 15, 1996 Mr. Gidley answered a Board of Adjustment meeting is scheduled for that night. Commissioner ECKHARDT asked if the meeting could be scheduled for a different time. Mr. Gidley stated a special meeting could purpose of making a decision. Commissioner ECKHARDT asked if Commission a special meeting, could then the case go Mr. Gidley stated that the case would not City Council until final decision is made requirements have been complied with. He has made it clear that they do not want p with long lists of outstanding issues. be called for the made their decision at before Council? be scheduled before and all outstanding elaborated. Council rojects coming to them Mr. Gidley stated he wished to modify staff recommendations base upon information he had heard that night. 1. Recommend that the applicant be responsible for extending the wall, as currently constructed, in the areas indicated in blue on the transparency projected overhead. 2. Recommend that additional 60 feet of wall ten feet high (reduced to 48th inches high at edge of property), be extended in the same character and quality. 3. Recommend a short wall (to 48 inches) or berm be installed above the elevation of the crown of West 32nd Avenue be incorporated into the area indicated on the transparency. Upright, large landscaping should be added as well. v Mr. Gidley spoke of the importance of receiving the necessary documents in a timely manner. He felt that he number of c cuts o the plan was unnecessary. He of u(// in angerou other safety concerns regarding cur path. He added that those were the major issues and staff would like to see those issues, plus the "technical issues" resolved prior to scheduling a public hearing before City Council. He gave examples of those numerous unresolved issues. He elaborated. Ms. Reckert stated there were additional items staff would like to see addressed, based on comments from the neighborhood. \ 1. Extend the high wall to the north around the rest of the property; 162 Planning Commission Minutes August 15, 1996 Page 11 2. Extension to the south to 32nd Avenue; 3. Addition of a wall or berm or combination along West 32nd Avenue in front of main activity areas; and 4. Stressing the need for a final drainage report, so that staff knows that everything will work. Commissioner WILLIAMS stated he thought there were far too many h~P.. ~'e (~eFi}mygSinn_2 c7 C1Sion. _ Commissioner RASPLICKA asked if the opening could be closed or does it have to remain open for legal reasons? Mr. Gidley stated he thought Mr. Richter was accurate relative to the existence of a hydrant on the opposite side of the fence. He elaborated. Commissioner RASPLICKA thought it strange to build a big wall and leave a hole in it. Mr. Goebel stated there are ways to get through a solid masonry wall to gain access to a fire hydrant. He elaborated. Mr. Gidley reiterated that a special meeting could be held, so long as a date, time and place specific is given. Gerald Dahl recommended that the proper procedure would be to close the public hearing, and continue that hearing for action to a date, time and place specific. Chairperson LANGDON stated that commission's job was to listen, and make a recommendation to City Council. He elaborated. He stated a motion was in order. Discussion followed. Mr. Gidley suggested to continue for action to September 18, 1996 at 7:30 p.m. in Council Chambers. Should the applicant not provide necessary documents in time to proceed at that time, the matter could be continued to a later date. He elaborated. Commissioner ECKHARDT moved to continue for action Case No. WZ- 96-10 to a special meeting to be held September 18, 1996 at 7:30 p.m. in City Council Chambers. Commissioner CERVENY seconded the motion. Motion carried 6-0. 163 Planning Commission Minutes Page 12 August 15, 1996 Commissioner ECKHARDT moved that a resolution be drafted by that date (September 18, 1996) listing the recommended changes to the plan made previously by staff. Commissioner RASPLICKA seconded the motion. Discussion followed. Motion carried 5-0, commissioner JOHNSON was absent from the room at that time. Chairperson LANGDON called a short recess at 10:26 p.m. Meeting reconvened at 10:36 p.m. 3. Case No. ZOA-96-9: An amendment to the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws, Zoning Code, Section 26-30(P) pertaining to Group Homes for Handicapped, Developmentally Disabled, Elderly Persons and Children. Gerald Dahl stated that, in view of the hour, and since the case was published and posted, and the fact that no one was present to testify, he suggested that this case be continued to the next regular meeting, September 5, 1996. He suggested that the case be re-published for notification purposes. Commissioner ECKHARDT moved that Case No. ZOA-96-9 be continued to September 5, 1996. Commissioner RASPLICKA seconded the motion. Motion carried 6-0. 8. CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING 9. OLD BUSINESS 10. NEW BUSINESS 11. DISCUSSION AND DECISION ITEMS 12. COMMITTEE AND DEPARTMENT REPORTS 13. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Commissioner JOHNSON moved for adjournment. Commission RASPLICKA seconded the motion. Motion carried 6-0. The meeting adjourned at 10:49 p.m. fiu.9' cretary ASandrNAiggins' 164 IMMEDIATE ACTION REQUESTED To: Applewood Property Owners From: Applewood Property Owners Association Re: Commercial development plan: NW comer - I-70 & 32nd Ave. AN IMPORTANT COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT MATTER AFFECTING OUR QUALITY OF LIFE IS ABOUT TO BE DECIDED. A 24-hour gas station and a fast food restaurant with two 50-foot signs have been approved by the Wheat Ridge Planning Commission for the Richter property - to the south of La Quinta and the Country Cafe off of I-70 and West 32nd Avenue. Thew neat Ridge City Council will hear this case on October 28, 1996. Zltis will be our last opportunity to offer our point of view to the City of Wheat Ridge. We are asking you to read the rest of this letter and then sign the "Letter of Petition" to the Wheat Ridge City Council (attached). Mail the "Letter of Petition" back to Brad Brauer at the address given and the Applewood Property Owners Association will see that these letters are brought to the attention of the Council. Background The APOA Board of Directors has been following the 32nd and I-70 commercial development (the Richter development) at the request of the nearby neighbors. The Richter property was annexed some years back by Wheat Ridge and was designated as a "Planned Commercial Development." To date, the developments on this property include La Quinta and The Country Cafe. As stated above, a 24-hour gas station and a fast food restaurant have now been approved by the Wheat Ridge Planning Commission for the land south of the Country Cafe. Traffic on West 32nd Avenue is already a quagmire. This development will make a bad traffic situation wor e a d her traffic light so that drivers on n wi ha four traffic lights to contend with in 1/4 mile instea of the current three. You may have noticed that the Youngfield Service Road has been moved to the west side of the Richter property. This road is in violation of the 1961 Protective Residential Covenants, which were put into place to protect the bordering Applewood/Zinnia Court neighborhood. The City of Wheat Ridge has initiated condemnation actions to extinguish these Protective Covenants. APOA's Record on Growth and Development esolutton. Anything neigh APOA Board of Directors spirit of a "good 165 At the general membership meeting of the Applewood Property Owners Association in June 1995, a resolution was unanimously passed stating that the homeowners of APOA want to make What You Need To Do To Be Heard We urge you to read and sign the enclosed "Letter of Petition" and return it to Brad Brauer no later than October 23, 1996. The APOA Board of Directors will write a letter to the Wheat Ridge City Council in opposition to the development as proposed, and we need your support. We believe that the Wheat Ridge City Council has several "neighborhood friendly" members who will listen to our concerns. If you have questions regarding the above, please contact Bill or Brad (see below). Thank you. Sincerely, Bill Farrell Brad Brauer APOA Board of Directors Zinnia Court Neighbor _ Growth & Development Chairman 279-0408 273.0-2: What To Do 1. Sign and fill in the information on the enclosed "Letter of Petition." 2. Mail or deliver to Brad Brauer, 3238 Zinnia Court, Golden, CO 80401 no later than October 23, 1996. Or you can write a letter of your own and send it along to Brad. 3. Thank you for supplying your own envelope and stamp. Letter of Petition From Applewood Property Owners Association member Please reconsider the Planning Commission's approval for the proposed 24-hour gas station, a fast food restaurant, and two 50-foot neon signs on the Richter property (northwest of I-70 and West 32nd Avenue). Anything that increases traffic or impairs the values of nearby homes, to the magnitude that these two portions of Richter's plan most certainly will, must be defined as "crammed development" not "planned development." The fact that Applewood Mesa is not a part of Wheat Ridge does not relieve your responsibility to be a good neighbor. We respectfully request that you only consider uses (on the Richter property) that are 1) "pedestrian friendly" with this already traffic-choked area and 2) aesthetically compatible with the Applewood Mesa area; and therefore, not approve the proposed gas station and fast food restaurant. Sincerely, signature & printed name address & zip code 167 a Diamond Shamrock October 7, 1996 Ms. Meredith Reckert, Planner II Planning Department City of Wheat Ridge 7500 W. 29th Ave. Wheat Ridge, CO 80215 RE: Canopy Signage - West Face Dear Meredith, C1TY Or W'r1=AT Rlt)C ~~nn nr- OCt 0 81996 \J is PLANNING & DEVElQPMEMT Richard D. Gipson Real Estate Representative After the Planning & Zoning Commissioners approval of the 70 West Business Center and the sign package, I meet with residents to discuss the development. During the course of the discussion it was agreed that we would shut off the west canopy Diamond Shamrock sign between the hours of 10 PM and 6 AM. We appreciated the commission approving the 11 to 6 time frame but after discussing the subject with the home owners, it was determined the one hour difference was the appropriate action for us to take. If you have any questions please contact me. We appreciate your efforts through this entire process. Best Re ards, Rick G' Real st Diamond Shamrock Colorado Division 520 East 56th Avenue, Denver. Colorado 80216. Office: (303) 297-9777 168 MEMORANDUM TO: Wheat Ridge City Council FROM: Residents of Zinnia Court Between 32nd and 33rd Avenues RE: Development Plans of Duane Richter DATE: October 5, 1996 This memo is in response to the decisions made at the Wheat Ridge Planning Commission meeting of October 3, 1996. At that meeting the development pfarts for the 70 West Business Center were presented by Duane Richter and a representative of Diamond Shamrock. The Zinnia Court residents gratefully acknowledge the consideration given to their concerns at that meeting and at previous meetings of the City Council and Planning Commission. The beautiful, brick, sound barrier wall erected at the expense of the City of Wheat Ridge in order to separate the resi from the commercial subdivisions is greatly appreciated. However, it does not t4r completely fulfill its intent nor will it, once the gas station and fast food restaurant are constructed. Unfortunate) the wall was not extended south to 32nd Avenu a it been extended it would have served as a sound, si ht odor, an trash barrier . between the gas station/restaurant and the homes on the south end o Zinnia Court The existing empty lot separating the neighborhood from the planned development will continue to be an eye sore, a trash collection area with dead or dying trees and three to six feet weeds. Dozens if not hundreds of area complaints are registered yearly with the Wheat Ridge Code Enforcement Division concerning Mr. Richter's inadequate maintenance of that lot. At the meeting on October 3rd he admitted to the Planning Commission that he only mows the weeds, which he refers to as natural Colorado grasses only after the Code Enforcement Division officially demands compliance. Even now the vegetation/weeds on the east side of the new brick wall are an unsightly 2 feet high, greatly detracting from the pleasant appearance of the wall. How many Wheat Ridge residents can "get by" mowing their lawns only two to three times a year? The Planning Commission recognized the problem resulting from not extending the brick wall by unanimously agreein that Mr. Richter be re ui pmnaav from Zh6 ,•.a a~ a The ence wi separate the proposed office building west of t an nd AVani P. Mr. Richter vehemently argued that those two buildings would serve as a barrier that would be more effective than a fence built between them. Unfortunately, there are no definite plans for construction of either of these buildings. Mr. Richter has not bothered to build the duplex-for-nearly thirty years. it is open to speculation, if he will ever proceed with that project. Until that time the residents in agreement with the Planning Commission request that he be required to build the fence at his own expense, which is minimal for a developer of his stature. 169 6 foot, residential, wood fence will be totally inadequatell The above grade of 14 feet. Taking into account the 2 to 3 foot drop in the grade on Mr. Richter's property south of the wall results in a height difference between the wall and fence of 10 to 11 feet. In addition to being an inadequate barrier, this David and Goliath appearance will cheapen the value of both the new multimillion dollar development and the already established neighborhood. In response to this the residents are requesting that Mr. Richter be required to construct either a 10 foot fence on grade or a 6 foot fence on a 4 foot berm, similar to the existing east/west fence separating the empty lot from the first resident on Zinnia Court. The new fence, in addition_tnaro s~ eo~g commercial from re'dential. property and to being an adequate s6bnd si ht odor ann trash barrier, also- would connect wi an en in with the brick wall tote same extent t a he existing fence does. This fence, visible by both east and west bound traffic on 32nd Avenue, should be double faced wood with wood or brick columns similar to the wall opposite Walmart on the north side of 38th Avenue. The City of Wheat Ridge has already constructed an $80,000 brick wall, a new two lane road and traded valuable property in order to enhance the value of Mr. Richter's commercial development. Requiring him to install at his expense a ten foot high, double faced, quality wood fence as proposed by. the residents instead of the short, inadequate 6 foot fence only seems reasonable. This fence could remain or be removed upon construction of both the commercial building and the duplex. In addition to the fence he should also be required to provide for and adequately maintain the landscaping on both sides of the fence. In light of his admittedly poor, past performance in this area, this requirement is essential for the City of Wheat Ridge to retain its reputation as a desirable place to live and work. The residents commend the members of the Planning Commission for their other decisions made on October 3rd concerning the closing of the gap at the north end of the brick sound barrier wall and the numerous requirements within the commercial development. The representative of Diamond Shamrock made several comments during and following the meeting that reflect a genuine concern for preserving the Applewood quality of life and for developing a positive relationship with the residents of the neighborhood. At the insistence of the Wheat Ridge City Council the developer, Mr. Richter, who also lives in the area, can be held to the same high standard. Without your insistence and monitoring he will be true to character and fail to meet everyone's expectations. You are acutely aware that government needs to balance the needs for commercial development and growth with being responsible for protecting the quality of life of its residents. We are only askinato maintain the intenrity of the established. neighborhood, which will wweeLl cm_e the addition of the new duplex. when it is _bu lt. TUM M sions wil m uence the va ue of'47e" 7'~Busmess Center as well as the good will and support of the neighborhood for decades to come. Thank you for being responsible with your public trust and for being responsive to the concerns of the residents of Zinnia Court. 170 v(aFr 3 I eTq ~ T; G E~ o- yv.~,,,,~~rS D-l CITY OF WH-- ,J P fir? it D OT Q 3195& ~ U IJ ~I IJ ~ PLANNIM': DEVELOPMENT oke'~-- VP',C~e P(x~ h brvr s(Cv-- 6--.t i,rn ~38So L~ • '~Z AvP+~~ -L- i5 no* f)nSS r 66 for ur~~ 4a ~ Q,• w~ i Ism r/ri vi ~mm r ssciv% ~I -Fo A(4.* reJA,(C~ 5 vCS2 1Ue . ~J a.-q~ -r D t ~f, ~c rPSs &6(e - ba-,. L-f- r;,,_ I I0 4 b', Mm roe ff rer~ IS Sax ~ c~Ps~ o{ ~ ponoca de ve (o P V►e~• L_ ~ea~ r ua d~ b Q i w`le,'PffEd o eL e6-,^cer6,Ed ego ~G~ siG tM:tkd ~0`I ~u~au,~ (Q.P.r 6'k, tNk-5 uSSoG C6+.C cc w t J t~ S FS f c er s 1 I~~Q w~ w+ Sh 46 ILL &"et 5~~,t bLI y i.Lt' C&hor hec-~bors . c~6*~ reurFcJ ~t t` ~eQSa Co..s~d~( ~C~ tmar 1 Sc ch~oti,ce deJQ lo/~n~vT ~A h& Je ~eQ , t_ ire Alt5 e Far,-Yl~f wor...i~ ao'!!ha:,.. tc.a isa~O,'~icl o~ 5ul5~4n n, Care as s rr° , L o-. ,Llr¢ Px~'re r"e ch"c(eS+ea cCrra pU s -k I ~~e .c Z`i~f re g4s S~- oc~- (ccru' s'. . 6 a4- G~Dufs w i~G 4ti nt E+r i~ w l u N6F E?e ~(ec£S }o hD( SeS . UM,,S+ corn w Iat t_ 6 w~~ ~c daol to b~ a~ (o~(b l -F{~ s hydCts -(tics- des Fa ~f~ ~E , ~c~ cC~sfPS wit l be 46 r\u4~u-6-{~Lkprge~ oercl4aA I~~~d s s SMU -c~f(~1~f` final IV~[ms• . tz•h~~ ~fiv~SC~c~l~~ G.~eY~II 2' vtV'".C-r IIOL11 (4r~e e;rer~feo,~~rQes w~-t,C St~~res ereceE.- We ba i,~ ~c ocra~ . - ( I 171 fQSr ~ s V~ h br~r<r~ po0tLI bE 6Lt~ IC S . 1 Y~ .1~ Kc" r our ~ r ~en~rns ~51 f° C r of ~s Cis r r< Lc u~ ~V r 4-L l~!~t~rr ~ L ~ ~4 i^u r MEMORANDUM TO: Wheat Ridge City Council and Planning Commission FROM: Residents of Zinnia Court Between 32nd and 33rd Avenues RE: Development Plans of Duane Richter DATE: September 26, 1996 The majority of this memo was presented to the Wheat Ridge Planning Commission on August 15th by the homeowners on the 3200 block of Zinnia Court in response- to the development plans presented to the community by Mr. Richter on August 8th. The concerns of the neighbors most directly impacted by the development were then shared with the Applewood Property Owners Association on September 11 th. 1) the neighborhood will result in added o u , r f I y~`1, tion. The wall, , for which the neighbors diligently lobbied and noise ,100 1p t greatly appreciate, will not prevent this pollution from impacting their neighborhood, especially those owning two story homes. To maintain the health, safety and integrity of the area, a non-polluting, non-24 hour enterprise should be considered. 2) Even though the current wall attempts to separate the area into two distinct residential and commercial entities, it is not sufficient. The two parcels adjacent to 32nd and west of the new Zinnia Street are planned for a small office building and a duplex housing unit. This negates the separation of residential and commercial in addition to retaining a direct view of the commercial property from the first two east-facing homes on Zinnia Court. The only way to maintain the integrity of the neighborhood is to extend the new existing wall to 32nd Avenue, between the proposed office building and duplex. This is desirable even if the wall has to angle onto the duplex lot. A truncated taper will most likely be necessary as the wall extension reaches 32nd. This will also prevent office workers from parking on Zinnia Court and then walking through the duplex lot to the office building. If the City of Wheat Ridge is unwilling to pay for the wall extension, the cost should be shouldered by the developer in meeting his obligation to the neighborhood and the tenants of his, hopefully soon to be built, duplex housing unit. 3) The integrity of the neighborhood also demands limited access to the commercial development at the northern end of the new wall near the La Quinta. The opening that exists in the wall at the east end of 33rd Avenue must be permanently closed. With all-night establishments being proposed, this will increase- foot traffic, loitering and littering, especially by adolescents, in the neighborhood. Likewise, if the development is successful and adequate parking spaces are not available for the proposed restaurants, their clientele will be tempted to park in the neighborhood and walk through-the opening in the wall. The home owner nearest the opening already has circulated a petition requesting the closure that has been signed by nearly 50 residents. Again, the request is not that development be 172 . prohibited, but that the integrity of the neighborhood be maintained. 4) Additional, related concerns that must be addressed include: a) The existing traffic congestion on 32nd Avenue makes it nearly impossible to turn from Zinnia Court onto 32nd. The addition of a senior class to D'Evelyn Junior and Senior High School in 1997 will further increase the congestion. Any commercial development will only exacerbate the problem. The widening of 32nd all the way to Alkire should be considered along with encouraging the Colorado State Highway Department to construct a west bound exit from Highway 58 to Interstate 70. Such access would greatly reduce the Coors and Table Mountain traffic on 32nd Avenue. b) In addition to the existing parking spaces for the La Quinta and Country Cafe, over 250 parking spaces are being planned for the new commercial enterprises proposed by Mr. Richter. A single two lane road with numerous, traffic stopping, curb-cuts connecting the development to 32nd Avenue does not seem sufficient for emergency access and adequate traffic flow. Any blocking of traffic will spill over onto an already congested 32nd Avenue. The new road in the development, Zinnia Street should be widened to four lanes with carefully planned curb-cuts. This is the only road into and out of the entire development. c) The likelihood of a new restaurant, planned in proposal A, seeking a liquor license is very high. The negative impact this would have on the neighborhood and the obvious legal battle that would ensue, mitigates against proposal A. A large, popular restaurant also would increase the noise, air, light and odor pollution. The worst case scenario would be a barbecue restaurant spewing intolerable, noxious odors into the neighborhood. The small retail strips of proposal B, open nine to nine, represents the more desirable option for residents. d) The proposed signage with a maximum of 50 feet is entirely unnecessary and unacceptable. West bound traffic on 1-70 can readily see 35 foot signs in sufficient time to exit at 32nd and Youngfield. However, due to the curve in 1-70 west of that exit and the even further west exit ramp for east bound traffic, even a 75 foot sign at 32nd Avenue would not provide east bound traffic with sufficient time and space to exit for any of the proposed establishments. Signage must be kept low and to a minimum since only west bound traffic will be able to see it and exit in time. In summary, the City Council and Planning Commission are encouraged to consider: 1) disallowing a gas station on this side of 1-70 since an adequate number already exist on the east side of 1-70, 2) extending the new wall to 32nd Avenue thus separating commercial from residential, 3) closing the opening in the wall at the end of 33rd Avenue to avoid commercial parking and foot traffic in the neighborhood, 4) disallowing the restaurant, proposal A, in favor of the two retail strips of proposal B, and 5) limiting all signage to 35 feet realizing that east bound traffic will not be able to see any signs. Your willingness to understand and respond to the concerns of the immediate neighbors of the proposed development is greatly appreciated. Please assist the community in maintaining the integrity of the neighborhood and the Applewood quality of life. Thank you. 173 September 5, 1996 TO: Wheat Ridge Planning Commission Wheat Ridge City Council FROM: Zinnia Street Residents ATTN: Meredith Reckert CITY OF W ;="•T RIDGE O r-nri nr. SAP 0 10 1995 LJ - L. PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT This letter is in response to some of the points that were brought up at the Wheat Ridge. Planning Commission meeting of August 15, 1996. 1. The above meeting was the first that we had heard of the proposed gas station being open 24 hours a day. We find this very objectionable in ~rt(~• the midst of a residential area, and unnecessary. It is our hope that you will reconsider this, and have the gas station close at 9:00 or 10:00 p.m. as the other businesses in this area presently do, turning off their signs at that time as well. 2. It is our hope that serious consideration will also be given to having the business signs, except for the directory sign, moved away from the front of the property, along 32nd street, towards the nothern part of each business's property. The signs will still be visible from all directions, but will not be shining into our living room windows, and will help to keep 32nd street from taking on the appearance of another Colfax Avenue. 3. Regarding the possibility of a wall around the front of the area, which I had suggested at the meeting; I was pleased to hear Mr. Cidley say that such a wall was not unheard of - as Mr. Richter stated - and cited the shopping area at 38th and Wadsworth, which has a wall around the _ front. Several of us made a point of driving over to take a look at this wall. Constructed of beige textured cinder block, and of an average height of 4' to 5', the wall is attractive and, we believe, would be a positive addition to the property, but should be all of one height, rather than the varying heights of the wall on Wadsworth. Such a wall, along with large evergreen trees, would do a great deal towards providing a much needed buffer between the commercial property and the i surrounding residential area. f We hope these concerns and suggestions will be addressed by your groups. Thank you. 3/ ys z; ~5~• 174 SIGNATURE LIST Mr. and Mrs. Eugene Mauldin 3195 Zinnia Street Ms. Wendy Crotzer 3185 Zinnia Street Mr. and Mrs. Norm Ross 3145 Zinnia Street Mr. and Mrs. Edward Wilson 3125 Zinnia Street 175 MEMORANDUM TO. Wheat Ridge City Council Wheat Ridge Planning Commission FROM: Brad Brauer 3238 Zinnia Court Golden, CO 80401 RE: Development Plans of Duane Richter DATE: August 15, 1996 Forgive me for being unable to address you personally. I recently had minor surgery and am still recuperating. Being surrounded on the east and south by the City of Wheat Ridge, I have a high stake in the proposed development plans of Mr. Richter. My concerns over the plans presented to the community on August 8 are as follows: i ) A 24 hour gas station in such close proximity to my home will result in added noise, air, odor and light pollution. The wall, for which I and my neighbors diligently lobbied and greatly appreciate, will not prevent this pollution from impacting my family's health and comfort on the second floor of our home. To maintain the health, safety and integrity of our neighborhood, I request that a non-polluting, non-24 hour enterprise be considered. 2) Even though the current wall attempts to separate the area into two distinct residential and commercial areas, it not sufficient. The two parcels adjacent to 32nd and west of the new Zinnia Street are planned for a small office building and a duplex housing unit. This negates the separation of residential and commercial in addition to retaining a direct view of the commercial property from the first two east-facing homes on Zinnia Court. The only way to maintain the integrity of the neighborhood is to extend the new existing wall to 32nd Avenue, between the proposed office building and duplex. A truncated taper will most likely be necessary as it reaches 32nd. This will also prevent office workers from parking on Zinnia Court and then walking through the duplex lot to the office building. If the City of Wheat Ridge is unwilling to pay for the wall extension, the cost should be shouldered by the developer in meeting his obligation to the neighborhood and the tenants of his, hopefully soon to be built, duplex housing unit. 3) The integrity of the neighborhood also demands limited access to the commercial development at the northern end of the new wall near the La Quinta. The opening that exists at the east end of 33rd Avenue must be permanently closed. With all-night establishments being proposed, this will increase foot traffic, loitering and littering, especially by adolescents, in the neighborhood. Likewise, if the development is successful and adequate parking spaces are not available for the proposed restaurants, their clientele will be tempted to park in the neighborhood and walk through the opening in the wall. I believe another neighbor has circulated a petition that speaks to this matter. Again, the request is not that development be prohibited, but that the integrity of the neighborhood be maintained. 4) Additional, related concerns that must be addressed include: a) The existing traffic congestion on 32nd Avenue makes it nearly impossible to turn from Zinnia Court onto 32nd. Any development will only exacerbate the problem. Please consider widening 32nd all the way to Alkire. b) Over 250 parking spaces are being proposed for numerous commercial enterprises in addition to the existing motel and restaurant. Only a single two lane road connecting to 32nd Avenue does not seem sufficient for emergency access. Please consider widening the road in this development to four lanes. C) The likelihood of a new restaurant seeking a liquor license is very high. The negative impact this would have on our neighborhood and the obvious legal battle that would ensue, mitigates against proposal A. A large, popular restaurant also would increase the noise, air, light and odor pollution. Please, please - no barbecue restaurant. The noxious odor would be intolerable. Consider the small retail strips of proposal B first. In summary, please considers ) disallowing a gas station on this side of 1-70, 2) extending the new wall to 32nd Avenue, 3) closing the opening in the wall at the end of 33rd Avenue, and 4) disallowing the restaurant, proposal A, in favor of the two retail strips of proposal B. Thank you for seriously considering these requests. The cooperation of the City Council and the Planning Commission has been appreciated. Please help us maintain the integrity of our neighborhood and our quality of life. Thank you. 176 - ~-?/.~11C~L%-1.,ez•±-- ~~~..J_ln~~'/. ~LlP _ ~nE/,P~~: sL~~'=--~--C /0.; Z_ 4 - ='.v:-1 .33_K~_._~fzc•~r_~.czf_✓Tit~ _ ~QUS11~-'L`a~l~.-~~e~. L LC z7 G/C'S ~e P-e ae~,- ~1-czn`na> CcJa~;zo-~ s~ez~~ ~~~o(r~_.s Cray .Y~~o~! ~1s>bcn f ffilALos ~~(2G%1~~ 7i %/Z'Z ASP i V! /FYh /nrL - 1 ----------i I,FWAD tZF.~ r\ ; Gl/~J w ~ Q 3asb LT 1 3a y~ p%~' c~/~~~3 °J~ ~"F - JE'P~i CjT 3? Cw l~ Lz ld ex XIAI1,4 c7`, C oc960V 2J a ~iz~ 8o Yb i 177 _ L5n /N Via C.~ f1 V S SCU`~. ~~-~f~?~~Pzs~vJ~~{-- 3'. J?•-3~:r~•:_ 11 n a J p ' ~ i 1 - . r ~ - . _ _ / lY / - 7 C_-v . it L T / l 3s9~ 3.3 Y iG 1411 IL y. 178 A~ Il+C2~•iCZS . / co"p-e :1.yc~ .~a.----=~f~C•~ ctf- f~t~ GL.GL.QttST1~_ldjttll~----_LLfe~ _ f r~ I U . s s; ~ du d o a~,~ 13177 Wev-74A r,,,14 e e- I play JflflyA v z7 ` 5 .ti srC C°CSJ 4fiw (/~C.3r/ ~ L 32 V, lire 71K m x.11.. 10~ 22 7,K,~2, U- 3od - -o bra 2d 13 sva~ ( - 33:46_ " LUc~ 179 T/~,>1C~L~/RZ>`~-J//L~v S%Lf-C!_~~_Ld~L~C £L~e _.CL/~S LLG~Q1t~11~41_-LLl4~~~-Lffv~._ Renee-m roll J~s>bcn ~ ~if/,LOS ~phniE~:~oa S~~dY0.J-: ~I Zcfeil J',~y ASP L vd 4t ILL f!~% s 3a /0 atZ~ 3J7 3a l~s $U,,~L c-& 3a y~r ~2 c~ -3 2-4 n v~ l ~ ~ Go l~ I z c7'. l oc-PEav if-3g zz GzE so yb l c(a - - - 180 Seventy West Business Center except Lot one is owned by RICHTER FAMILY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, R.L.L.P. and will be leased to tenants as they are obtained. Each tenant will then maintain their own site and will be responsible or its upkeep. The berm maintenance will be governed by the following agreement: BERM MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT This Berm Maintenance Agreement (the "Agreement") is entered into this day of , 19 . By and between RICHTER FAMILY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, R.L.L.P. ("Landlord"), whose address is 6565 South Syracuse Way, #1202, Englewood, Colorado 80111, and address whose in consideration of the lease by Landlord to Tenant of square feet in 70 Business Center, Wheat Ridge, Colorado (the "Center"), pursuant to a lease agreement dated 19, (the "Lease"), and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby confessed and acknowledged, Landlord and Tenant agree as follows: 1. There has been constructed on the West boundary of the Center an architectural screen designed to separate the residential area to the west from the commercial zone in the Center, consisting of a 25 foot-wide berm (the" Berm") with a fence on top of the Berm. The Berm is shown on Exhibit A, attached hereto and made a part hereof. 2. Included within, upon or under the Berm are improvements consisting of lawn, trees and shrubs, a sprinkler system, underground electric cable installed by Public Service Company, the Lee Stuart and Eskins Ditch and a wood, brick and block fence. 3. During the initial term of the Lease, and during all extensions and renewals thereof, Landlord and Tenant agree to share in the annual maintenance cost of the Berm and the improvements described in Paragraph 2 above, based on a ratio of the square feet of land leased by Tenant in the Center to the net usable square feet of land in the Center. Utilizing this formula, Tenant will pay % of the annual maintenance cost for the Berm and improvements. a. Landlord will be responsible for scheduling maintenance of the Berm with the various contractors providing such services. All such costs shall be reasonable for similar expenses in the area in which the Center is located. For its services in administering the Berm maintenance. A statement will present to Tenant each year for its share of the maintenance costs for the previous year. The statement shall include copies of paid invoices. All records 181 of Landlord in connection with maintenance of the Berm will be available for inspection by Tenant during reasonable business hours. 5. Tenant shall pay the statement for its share of the annual, maintenance within 30 days of receipt. Statements not paid within 30 days of receipt shall bear interest at the rate of 1% per month thereafter until paid. In the event that either party initiates litigation or arbitration to interpret this Agreement or to collect sums due hereunder, the party that prevails in such litigation or arbitration shall be responsible for payment of all costs, expenses and reasonable attorney fees of the other party incurred in connection therewith. 6. Upon termination of the Lease, this Agreement shall also terminate. 7. This Agreement shall inure to the benefit of and shall be binding upon the parties hereto and their successors and assigns. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the date and year first above set forth. LANDLORD: RICHTER FAMILY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, R.L.L.P. By Dwaine R. Richter, General Partner TENANT: 182 e 0 n i F C C z U ua WTI N t w tl~~~E W I- 1 ZN 'p- $ m~ pyl2 ~_9 sac 4 W P4 ; ; 1 N m~ I I I 1 I I I I I ~ I I ~ I a I m i I 1 I r I ( r I ~ I I of I ..N Y I ~rr I mo >m ra___ veY 'P+CC 'M • _1_____1_____1___1. I~ I I I I I I I I I I °~Y ~ I I I I I ~ ! I I I I ~o I i I I III ~3 I I I I ~I I I I I I -9.! All! ~II~~A `ot a :9 't s era ~NCt ((fir go-H 183 CITY COUNCIL A NUTES CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO 7500 W. 29th Avenue, Municipal Building October 28. 1996 The Regular City Council was called to order by Mayor Wilde at 7:00 p.m. Councilmembers present: Teri Dalbec, Jerry DiTullio, Don Eafanti, Jean Fields, Janette Shaver, Ken Siler, Tony Solano, and Claudia Worth. Also present: City Clerk, Wanda Sang; City Treasurer, Jim Malone; City Administrator, Robert Middaugh; City Attorney, Gerald Dahl; Director of Parks & Recreation, Gary Wardle; Director of Planning, Glen Gidley; Chief of Police, Jack Hurst; Director of Public Works, Bob Goebel; staff; and interested citizens. APPROVAL OF MINUTES of October 14, 1996 Motion by Mr. Eafanti for the approval of the Minutes of October 14, 1996; seconded by Mrs. Dalbec. Mrs. Worth asked for several corrections. Motion carried 8-0. PROCLAMATIONS AND CEREMONIES Mayor Wilde administered the Oath of Office to Floy Jeffares, Civil Service Commission, and David Whitehead, Building Code Advisory Commission. CITIZENS' RIGHT TO SPEAK George Graul, 4200 Yarrow Street, spoke in opposition to the proposed Charter Amendment for Council/Manager form of government during Mayor Wilde's term. The old form of government has worked for over 20 years. John Jerman, 11694 West 37th Avenue, spoke in favor of the Charter Amendment for Council/Manager form of government. 184 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: October 28, 1996 Page -2- PUBLIC HEARINGS AND ORDINANCES ON SECOND READING Item 1. Reconsideration of Ordinance 1045 - amending the Code of Laws, Zoning Code, relating to Telecommunications Towers, in the City of Wheat Ridge, Colorado. Ordinance 1045 was introduced for reconsideration by Mrs. Dalbec. Mr. Middaugh explained that Council had previously passed this Ordinance, but that some additions had been made mainly regarding architectural compatibility, aesthetic appeal, and height of said structures. Mr. Gidley pointed out some of the changes that had been requested by Council and added to this Ordinance. The following speakers were swom in by the Mayor: Jim Kurtz - Phelan, Attorney for Sprint Telecommunications, addressed how the proposed ordinance will affect the three applications for building permits that had been previously approved by staff. These applications ought to be addressed in the ordinance and be allowed to proceed. He provided suggested language to be added to the ordinance. Gary Pultz, Senior Planner for Sprint PCS, gave a presentation. Ann Closser, Language Consultant and Attorney for Airtouch Communications, stated that her client had also applied for a building permit and expended money in reliance on the application. Motion by Mrs. Dalbec to suspend the rules and not limit the time for questioning; seconded by Mrs. Worth. After discussion, Mrs. Worth withdrew her second. Motion by Mr. DiTullio to postpone this to the November 18, 1996 meeting and to publish that as a Regular Meeting; seconded by Mrs. Fields; carried 7-1 with Mr. Slier voting no. Item 2. Emergency Ordinance 1054 - adopting a temporary moratorium on the acceptance, processing and issuance of demolition permits for historical structures within the City, and declaring an emergency. Mrs. Worth introduced Emergency Ordinance 1054 and read the title. Motion by Mrs. Worth for the approval of Ordinance 1054; seconded by Mrs. Dalbec; carried 8-0. 185 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: October 28, 1996 Page -3- Item 3. Approval of a PCD Final Development Plan and Plat for the 70 West Business Center, located at 12851 West 32nd Avenue. (Case No. WZ-96-10) (Dwaine Richter) Mrs. Worth introduced Case No. WZ-96-10 and read the title. Motion by Mrs. Worth to limit the applicant, public and staff to half an hour to speak on the subject; seconded by Mr. Solano; tied 4-4 with Councilmembers Eafanti, Fields, Worth, and DiTullio voting yes. Mayor Wilde broke tie by voting no. Motion failed 5-4. Ron Hoisington, 3281 Alkire Court, a Private Consultant for CRS Development Specialists, representing the 70 West Business Center, was sworn in by the Mayor. He gave background on the property in question and asked for approval of the final development plan and plat. He presented the applicant's case and answered questions. Glen Gidley was sworn in by the Mayor, presented the staff report, and answered questions. Speaking in opposition and sworn in by the Mayor were: Patricia Rubano, 13050 West 32nd Avenue, unincorporated Jefferson County, Don Phillipson, 14325 Braun Road, unincorporated Jefferson County, William Farrell, 14399 Garden Circle, unincorporated Jefferson County, Brad Brauer, 3238 Zinnia Court, unincorporated Jefferson County, Norm Ross, 3145 Zinnia Street, unincorporated Jefferson County, Emily Bennett, 13206 West 33rd Place, unincorporated Jefferson County. Their comments included no interest in being annexed to the City of Wheat Ridge; adverse impact on the neighborhood; times have changed since 1975 and businesses are conducted in a different manner today--longer hours, more traffic, etc.; bright light lighting on a 24 hour gas station; obnoxious aromas associated with fast food restaurants; added noise; increased hazards, such as gasoline tankers; neighbors have signed petitions in opposition to this proposed development; there are two schools nearby and it will only be a matter of time until somebody gets hurt; degradation of quality of life; additional trash; install traffic light at Zinnia. 186 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: October 28, 1996 Page -4- Robert Kessler, Attorney for Mr. Richter, was swom in by the Mayor and answered some of the neighbor's concerns. He also read an excerpt from the July 21, 1975 Wheat Ridge City Council Minutes into the record, in which a Mr. Arthur Brunton stated on his own behalf and that of other homeowners in Applewood Gardens area, that they support Mr. Richter's Outline Development Plan. Mr. Kessler also submitted a copy of the stipulation for settlement and dismissal regarding the lawsuit Mr. Richter had filed against the City of Wheat Ridge. Bob Lee, traffic engineer, was swom in by the Mayor, stated he had prepared the traffic impact study that was presented to Council. He disputed the neighbor's claims that traffic had increased on 32nd Avenue. The City of Wheat Ridge conducted a 3-day study of traffic west of the interchange on 32nd Avenue last year; they counted between 13,000 and 15,000 vehicles per day; the Colorado Highway Department did a study in 1975, which showed 13,000 vehicles per day; his firm did a peak hour study in July, which also showed between 13,000 and 15,000 vehicles. Over the last 20 years there has been only modest growth on 32nd Avenue, compared to 150% growth on many other arterials and roadways in the metro area. Motion by Mrs. Worth to suspend the Rules, continue the meeting past 11:00 p.m. and finish the Agenda; seconded by Mrs. Shaver; failed 4-4 with Councilmembers Eafanti, Worth, Daibec, and Shaver voting yes. (This needs 6 votes to pass). Motion by Mrs. Shaver to suspend the Rules and go past 11:00 p.m. to finish this item and the expenditure item; seconded by Mrs. Worth; carried 6-2 with Mr. Eafanti and Mr. Siler voting no. Mr. Hoisington cleared up a few items regarding the proposed office showroom, it could be called office warehouse. Motion by Mr. Solano to deny the application and to direct that a draft set of findings supporting the denial be prepared for Council consideration and be presented at the next meeting for action only; seconded by Mr. DiTullio; carried 8-0. 187 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: October 28, 1996 Page -5- Item 7. Approval of Expenditure Items. Motion by Mrs. Worth that the attached purchases be approved in the amounts indicated and that all costs be charged to the account shown on the purchase order report; seconded by Mr. Siler; carried 8-0. Mr. Siler moved for adjournment; seconded by Mrs. Worth; carried 7-1 with Mrs. Shaver voting no. Meeting adjourned at 11:30 p.m November 4, 1996 The continued City Council Meeting from October 28, 1996 was called to order by Mayor Wilde at 7:00 p.m. Councilmembers present: Teri Dalbec, Jerry DiTullio, Don Eafanti, Jean Fields, Janelle Shaver, Ken Siler, and Claudia Worth. Tony Solano arrived at 7:15 p.m. Also present: City Clerk, Wanda Sang; City Treasurer, Jim Malone; City Administrator, Robert Middaugh; City Attorney, Gerald Dahl; Director of Planning, Glen Gidley; Director of Parks, Gary Wardle; staff; and interested citizens. ORDINANCES ON FIRST READING Item 4. Council Bill 51 - amending the Code of Laws of the City of Wheat Ridge, Colorado, Zoning Code, relating to fences, walls, and obstruction to view. Council Bill 51 was introduced on first reading by Mrs. Fields; title read by the Clerk. Motion by Mrs. Fields that the original Council Bill 51 be approved on first reading, ordered published, public hearing be set for Monday, November 25, 1996 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. Eafanti; carried 7-0. 188 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: October 28, 1996 Page -6- Item 5. Council Bill 52 - An Ordinance providing for the approval of rezoning from Commercial-One (C-1) to Residential-Two (R-2) and Residential-One C (R-1 C) properties generally located along West 29th Avenue between Sheridan Blvd. on the east, and Fenton Street on the west, City of Wheat Ridge, State of Colorado. Council Bill 52 was introduced on first reading by Mr. DiTullio; title read by the Clerk. Motion by Mr. DiTullio that Council Bill 52 be approved on first reading, ordered published, public hearing be set for Monday, November 25, 1996 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 Mrs. Fields; carried 7-0. DECISIONS, RESOLUTIONS, AND MOTIONS Item 6. Copa Cabana building hazard assessment. Mr. Middaugh gave update on clean-up of Copa building. Mrs. Worth moved for approval of written quotation in the amount of $2,200 for purposes in performing an assessment of the two structures recently purchased by the City of Wheat Ridge at 44th & Field; seconded by Mrs. Dalbec; carried 8-0. Item 8. CONSENT AGENDA: A. Resolution 1563 - authorizing the collection and distribution of Municipal Court fees. B. Hayward Park Fountain Improvements (RFB #96-40). C. KGC Trust and Camper World ESTIP payment. D. Construction of the Soft Surface Trail in the Conservation Area of the Wheat Ridge Greenbelt. Mr. Solano moved for approval of A. B. C. & D.; seconded by Mr. Siler; carried 8-0. 189 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: October 28, 1996 Page -7- CITY ATTORNEY'S MATTERS Gerald Dahl distributed and discussed the revised Telecommunication Towers Ordinance. LECTED OFFICIALS MATTERS Janelle Shaver asked for consensus to authorize the City Administrator to work with Mrs. Stamper to apply for a grant for the Teen Center; consensus was 7 in favor. Mrs. Worth asked for consensus to wait until November 18 until we have the environmental assessment back for the Copa and then, if it's safe, let Peace Jam go in and start cleaning up the building and preparing it for a Teen Center; consensus was 6 in favor. Claudia Worth congratulated the Wheat Ridge Band for winning the State Championship. Mayor Wilde will write a letter of congratulations. Ken Siler asked that staff look into the feasibility of renting a local building for a Teen Center as an interim measure. Teri Dalbec asked about opening up an area for dirtbiking on the Greenbelt Meeting adjourned at 8:10 p.m. Wanda Sang, City APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL ON NOVEMBER 18, 1996 BY A VOTE OF e TO o 06 ~ Q L, -1 : ~g 1~ C a is Worth, Council President 190 !d/ZP~~ Co OR T'. BRUNTON Geologist - 3167 West 33rd Avenue, Golden, Colorado 80401 (303) 279-5744 MINUTES - 7/29/75 - Continued - Page 7. -July 21, 1975 TO: Wheat Ridge city council RE: Richter Annexation Outline Development Plan - Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council: _My name is Arthur F. Brunton, and I reside at 13167 West 33rd Avenue adjacent to and contiguous with the captioned annexed property. I.wish to make a statement on my own . ,behalf, and on behalf of the other homeowners in Applewood Gardens. As you know, the homeowners in Applewood Gardens have successfully opposed commercial development on the annexed tract for a protracted period of time, principally because we did not think that there were sufficient safe- ~puards in the form of buffers and amenities in the plans previously presented. Also, as you may know, we, or our designated representatives, have had some very productive discussions with Mr.- Richter. recently. The city ordinance before you tonight, and the 0utline Development Plan embodied therein and attached hereto as part of this statement, is the result of those discussions and the compromises made on both sides. That this compromise was possible is of significance because it evinces what can be accomolished when there is sufficient time allowed for discussion. It should be noted that this Outline Development Plan was supported by a majority of the contiguous homeowners, but is.still.opposed by some. For this reason, please con- sider~that this ;Outline Development Plan is a compromise and I - O/~F?_G.-ti'CF THE CL?K' OTTIS OF W'aT'AT RIDGE, COI,ORUC Mzn CGF ~FC~.. I - covx'(YYl)yygXI" Or Tit" 0il_-.I_" : ' I Sr:L DOOUI.SLT 11? LTY CUSTODY- ...1.~;~Cl~F~ ,`r_. 191 Wheat Ridge City Council July 21, 1975 Page 2 MINUTES - 7/21/75 - Continued - Page B. that each and every concession made by Mr. Richter has independent significance to the homeowners; and that without all of the concessions, the homeowners would not have supported this compromise. we, therefore, sincerely hope that Council. will approve the attached Outline Development Plan without modification, and will. not, in the futufe, give serious consideration to any proposed. changes in the Plan. Thank you. i tt Ar ur F. Brunton ~ _ - OT""10 Ow _ THE r r. C c'lY O :'8U?p? RI'%.:E; COLOPJ.DC f'IS IS A 'I RUE An CoRRECT -copy ) OF Ti.M- OHIGI- 21;.L. DOCU!%t;T III LiY CUSTODY. - DATE: ELISB'N.^•~JJC:Ld Tr...:,-.. - _ _ 1 192 zoo_-------- ggoo - lei - - - - y - - - 35!_- -S - I- - - - zZ 3 - r y, o~ o x_-5- - - - -----moo, ~o _ 5_00 201 r M- Fro 1 193 - /80g~X.-~S = /S 36 ZO0 IS - - - - - - Off'-!0v - = - -y~~ - yy - ~5 r ~s = ~14 'Fooo .~S = Co?o - Zao- =----3 y--- - f Zo U ~ 1c , ~ S' = 9 5 zo = zed - ' - `f _ g 8/ l! 4o-0 sooO- _yo - 6 /lr Roa--' Go C/ tib 194 Applewood Property Owners Association Growth & Development Committee November 18,1996 Mr. Dan Wilde Mayor City of Wheat Ridge 3596 Ingalls Street Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80033 - Re7 70 West Business Center/ "Richter Property' Dear Mayor Wilde, Thank you again for allowing the Applewood residents appear before the Wheat Ridge City Council on October 28, 1996. We were all very impressed by the Council's genuine interest in our concerns. It is our understanding that another meeting is scheduled for November 25,1996 and that possibly more will be discussed regarding this matter. In that regard, we thought the following information was pertinent: 1) Two (2) Schools Were Entirely Eliminated From the Traffic Study The developer's traffic study expert testified on October 28th that the traffic study was performed during June and indicated that the proposed development would have only a 20% increased impact on traffic. Please be aware of the following material omissions of this study: School is not in Session During June Maple Grove Elementary School has 385 total students of which approximately 30% ( 130 ) are open enrolled from areas outside the neighborhood. A total of 43 students take the bus in the AM and 59 take the bus in the PM. The remaining 200 or so students walk / are driven by parents. D'Evelyn Jr. / Sr. High School has 702 students presently and is scheduled to have 900 students next year. This school is a "choice" school that attracts students from all over the area. Presently 381 take the bus in the AM and 443 take the bus in the PM. The remaining 300 or so students presumably walk / d rive. 195 Page 2 of 2 These are very clever omissions from the traffic study - do you not agree? ( School Traffic Source: Jeffco Bus Terminal / Both schools are less than 1 mi. from the proposed development ) (2) The Proposed Project Signs Do Not Help the Project - But They Hurt the Residences The developer testified that the fast food and gas station will attract 75% and 90% respectively of what he termed "passer by " traffic. If that is true - then the proposed signs provide only superfluous benefit to the developer since the project depends primarily on existing traffic. We recommend that additional sign height limitations be imposed. We remain hopeful that the gas station/convenience store and fast food restaurant portions of the proposal are permanently eliminated form the development. The impact on traffic and quality of life to the adjacent residences makes those portions of the plan very unfair. There are certainly other commercial uses that would more compatible to this location. Thank you again for your consideration of these issues. Sincerely, wclwo William J. Farrell Chair of the Growth and Development Committee Applewood Property Owners Association 14399 Garden Circle Golden, Colorado 80401 273 - 0425 196 _ PUBLIC HEARINGS _ PROC./CEREMONIES _ BIDS/MOTIONS INFORMATION ONLY _ CITY ADM. MATTERS _ CITY ATTY. MATTERS _ LIQUOR HEARINGS PUBLIC COMMENT _ ELEC. OFFICIALS MATTERS _ ORDINANCES FOR 1ST READING _ ORDINANCES FOR 2ND READING X RESOLUTIONS AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Resolution with findings for Case WZ-96-10, 70 West Business Center Planned Commercial Development Final Plan at 12851 W. 32nd Avenue. SUMMARY /RECOMMENDATION: Council consideration was given to a final development for the PCD at 12851 W. 32nd Ave. at the October 28, 1996, meeting. Council motion was to deny and ask that the City Attorney prepare a resolution with formal findings for consideration at the November 25 City Council meeting. Adoption of the resolution is one option which the City Council might consider and the second option would be to reconsider the original denial and to direct the developer to prepare a revised PCD plan for future consideration. ATTACHMENTS: 1) RCM memo 2) Resolution 3) G.Gidley memo re uses. of denial. possible PCD AGENDA ITEM NOV. 25, 1996 Meeting Date No BUDGETED ITEM: Yes No Fund Dept/Acct R Budgeted Amount Requested Expend. Requires Transfer/ Supp. Appropriation Yes No SUGGESTED MOTION: I move for approval of Resolution t , or I move that the motion to deny case WZ-96-10, be reconsidered (this motion may stand as suggested or the City Council may add the following depending upon the direction desired). (Option to add to reconsideration motion)and that the developer be directed to prepare a revised development plan or City Council consideration at a subsequent City Council meeting that will address concerns and deficiencies noted by the City Council during the October 28, 1996 meeting of the City Council. AGENDA ITEM RECAP QUASI-JUDICIAL X Yes 197 CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE MEMORANDUM To: Mayor and City Council FROM: Robert C. Middaugh, City Manager SUBJ: RESOLUTION WITH FINDINGS FOR DENIAL OF CASE WZ-96-10, 70 WEST BUSINESS CENTER PLANNED COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT DATE: November 19, 1996 At the October 28, 1996, City Council meeting, members of council made a motion to deny Case No. WZ-96-10, regarding a Planned Commercial Development final plan for the 70 West Business Center at 12851 W. 32nd Avenue. The Council motion also included a direction to the City Attorney to prepare a resolution with findings in support of the denial motion. Attached is a copy of the findings as prepared by the City Attorney pursuant to City Council direction. As Council will note, the City Attorney has attempted to capture a number of the points which were raised by the City Council during discussion of the 70 West Business Center final plan. Enactment of the attached findings is one option which the City Council might pursue to complete or to continue its action on the 70 West Business Center PCD. If these findings are enacted, the developer of the PCD would have the opportunity to resubmit a new final plan for some future City Council consideration which ideally would encompass or attempt to incorporate concerns expressed by the City Council in the first hearing for the PCD. A second option which is available to the City Council is to pass a motion to reconsider the original motion of denial and either make amendments or corrections to the PCD to address City Council concerns, or ask that the developer take the PCD and attempt to correct as many of the deficiencies noted by the City Council and return at a future City Council meeting for continued City Council review. In the event the City Council wishes to pass a motion to reconsider, as is indicated the Council can take up adjustments to the PCD at the meeting of November 25, or direct the developer to return with a corrected PCD plan. The Council will still reserve the right at any future consideration of the PCD deny at that point if the adjustments are not sufficient in the council's eyes. Also attached is a detailed listing of uses prepared by the Planning Department as it relates to the PCD. One-of the principal questions which was addressed by the City Council was that there was a certain lack of clarity or certainty for uses shown on the final plan. The attachment is intended to provide the City Council 198 with a very detailed listing of uses which might be viewed as desirable and which are consistent within the framework of the originally adopted outline plan. This information is provided in order to assist the City Council in the event that reconsideration or some correction to the PCD is a desired alternative. Beyond the specificity of uses during City Council consideration of this item at the last meeting, items which were mentioned of concern also included a small retail building to the west of the frontage road near its intersection with 32nd Avenue, additional fence construction on the north/south alignment to screen adjacent residences, appropriate landscaping and berming along 32nd Avenue to provide for site enhancement and screening for residents and slightly different attention to signing, again to provide for a more ascetically pleasing overall environment. Each of these items in addition to uses could be taken up by the City Council and offered as amendments at the meeting or the developer could be directed to address said items and return with a revised plan for City Council review and discussion at a subsequent meeting. Respectfully submitted Robert C. Middaugh City Manager All. 258 199 11/19/96 16:33:12 RIGIITFAX 4.88->CITY or UHEAT RIDGE RightFAX RESOLUTION 1504 BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, STATE OF COLORADO CASE NO. WZ-96-10 IN RE THE APPLICATION OF DWAINE RICHTER FOR APPROVAL OF A FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND PLAT FOR THE 70 WEST BUSINESS CENTER - PLANNED COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT LOCATED AT 12851 WEST 32ND AVENUE FINDINGS AND DECISION Page 882 This matter coming on for hearing upon the application of Dwaine Richter for approval of a Final Development Plan and Plat for the 70 West Business Center - Planned Commercial Development located at 12851 West 32nd Avenue (hereinafter the "Application"), the Wheat Ridge City Council, acting pursuant to Wheat Ridge Code of Laws § 26-25, adopts the following findings and decision: 1. The Application was filed on July 9, 1996. On September 18, 1996, the Wheat Ridge Planning Commission held a public hearing on the Application. That hearing was continued to October 3, 1996, at which time the Planning Commission voted to recommend approval of the Application, with conditions. 2. The public notices required by law having been published, and the public hearing having been conducted, the City Council has jurisdiction to hear and decide the case. 3. On October 28, 1996, the City Council held a public hearing on the Application. Evidence was taken in the form of documents and testimony from the applicant, City staff, and from other witnesses, including a number of homeowners in the immediate vicinity of the proposed development. 4. On October 28, 1996, at the conclusion of the public hearing on the Application, the City Council voted to deny the Application and to direct that findings be prepared it support of that action for their consideration. 5. The City Council hereby enters its findings and decision denying the Application by Dwaine Richter for approval of a Final Development Plan and Plat for the 70 West Business Center - Planned Commercial Development located at 12851 West 32nd Avenue, for the following reasons: The uses proposed for areas C and D on the proposed Final Plan and Plat are not sufficiently defined as required by Wheat Ridgo Code of Laws § 26-25(V)(B)13)(I), and are also not sufficiently specific so as to insure compatibility with adjacent land uses, as required by Wheat Ridge Code of Laws, 26-25111). v'e oe 200 11/19/96 16:33:49 RIGIITFAX 4.08->CITY OF UIIEAT RIDGE Rig11tFAX Page 003 V- 5 b. The potential uses for Area E are so unspecific as to prevent meaningful review of the compatibility of the development with adjacent land uses, as required by Wheat Ridge Code of Laws § 26-25(11)(A). c. The absence of a ten-foot high screen wall or other appropriate buffering device extending north fromthe existing screen wallto connect withthe existing east-west screen wall around Area E contributes to the incompatibility of the development with adjacent residential uses. d. The proposed use of Area D for twenty-four hour businesses, including a fast food restaurant and twenty-four hour automobile service station, renders those areas incompatible with adjacent residential uses, as required by Wheat Ridge Code of Laws, 26-2501) and (IV)(A). e. The height and location of signs such that additional light will be shed on established residential neighborhoods to the west, render the Application incompatible with those adjacent uses, asrequired by Wheat Ridge Code of Laws, 26-25(11), and does not comply with the Wheat Ridge Sign Code at § 26-410(e), regarding height of freestanding signs. The proposed development of a commercial building on the portion of Area C, shown as Lot 5 and containing 1,250 square feet for such uses is incompatible with the residential uses immediately to the west, and, in addition, relies upon a design which places the required parking for such commercial uses within use Area C, designated "a buffer and landscape area." Such areas may not be devoted to such uses. This renders that aspect of the Application inconsistent with Wheat Ridge Code of Laws § 26-25(II)(E)(7). g. The areas and dimensions of portions of the subject property devoted to individual uses have changed significantly since approval of the Outline Development Plan in 1975, such that the assumptions relied upon in granting Outline Development Plan approval may no longer be valid. h. The Application fails to adequately mitigate the overall intrusive impacts of the proposed development, including light, odor and noise. Based upon testimony in the record, the Application as filed does not comply with the standards established at Wheat Ridge Code of Laws § WHEREFORE, the Application is denied for the reasons set forth above. ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Wheat Ridgo, this _day of Novombcr, 1996, by a vote of in favor and against. DAN WILDE, MAYOR GEG15902T 16979 1.1 -2 201 11/19/96 16:34:28 RIGHTFAX 4.88->CITY OF UHEAT RIDGE Rig11tFAX Pngc 884 ATTEST: WANDA SANG, CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO FORM: GERALD E. DAHL, CITY ATTORNEY GED\6]0]T1E9791.1 -3- 202 NIE>IORaNDUNI TO: City Council FROM: Glen Gidley. Director of Planning and Development RE: Richter Final Development Plan - Permitted Uses DATE: November 13, 1996 Based upon the concerns expressed by Council at the October 13 meeting regarding potential uses within the proposed Richter Final Development Plan, it was clear that more specific information was needed. Therefore, I have evaluated the approved Outline Plan for areas C, D, and E (per attached Outline Plan), and compared the proposed uses in the Final Development Plan to the various commercial zone district regulations in order to develop a more specific list of permitted uses. Attached you will find Staffs recommended lists ot'permitted uses based upon this analysis. For each of three areas. I have provided copies of Section °(B) Permitted Principal Uses' of the RC-I. R-C. C-I, and C-2 (Area E only) zone district re-ulations and checked those uses which we believe could be allowed pursuant to the Outline Plan. Of course, you may further limit these uses pursuant to Zoning Code Section 26-24 (IV)(A). Staff has indicated by a (X) those uses which we conclude tit the Final Development, Use Exclusion criteria of Section 26-24 (IV)(A). and which we would recommend be excluded. Attachments 203 _l 94.540-5.F. C ~ i 9u-FE9 - PHASE J EFFEa SON COUNTY IF 1 i 1 • I 'n l I ~ EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY _-.e _ •1' 1 O _ I 1 01, STp TD ACCESS r I:4' uL 0 I BE CLOSED ! I I I I I I,I I ~ ' '54.750 S ~ o ~ I' I• it I I , I 1.6 I-`I I III I_ L _ u m c II ;1.555 SF _ 5 AC.- ACCESS i _ .1 I n I ~ I I I _ 1 I _ ~../I I I I I I - I I ACCESS . 77 1 I-~' 11.950 A: o 0.:74 A- ACCESS WIZI - - - - - - - - - - EuSCING SINGLE F"A' 1 ~ 205 J 3._== _.-..O D'c Sec. 20-20. Restricted Comeacrcial-One Dis- :rice (RC-1). r-•c.:• cr.c ?_:pose: This district is cs:nb- i shed to araV idC Car a reasonably compatible tr_i- s:ticn'a_:••c,n residential and morC earnr..Crc:a! land _sCS, is provides for:es:dc::t;al sc arc. , .boyhood oneraed professional 0 ..COS. nd sc^ .tees b•- :acir na' -a end -r:O" des;;.. ...^t:arc:~,'.,•, promote ..^.eig!:bcr:^ood st ....d aro:CC n_ 'bborhood Values and c:a:ac:cr. The ._.so rrovidCS limited cr:ca:cd rural; usus by spcdC use approa!. i31 ?e:.-::red ?r:ca?ci Uses: \o building o: land small be used and no building shall be herc- ececed. com'er:ed or siructural!c altered un- 1•ass othe:~Vise. Provided herein except for onC (1) or more of tae following uses: ✓ (1) galleries or studios. ✓ (2) 3a:::1-s. loan and finance oTtccs. ✓ ICI Cfin;cs and ofTccs for psychologiCa!. social. _...a!. dcVclopmcntal or similar coun- se!c• and:rcame nt.includiI,counscIing L: and for substance 33USC a.... a!' cci:•o!:sn% ho"CVC.. not i::c!cdin!; res:':•_n ;ia! laCiilUCi or rCSldCaaa! C:'.[rNen: buildings. ~.\..C:•... ....ti 3rd a• `'I:._.riC= ✓!51 Golf courses four not including miniature T golf or butting ranges. driving ranges, p.-;- vate clubs or restaurants) and those uses commonly accepted as accessory thereto when located on tae same premises. ✓i5: ,OvCrnmcn-, o: quas;.governmental bc'r.c' ings and otTLces or public uuii:, build;... ..'here outside storage, opera:;Ors or re:_- facilities are not panned. ✓ r-1 !tomes Ca..ac a_ _rsing ^_mes and car. grcga:e arc hpnlei. ✓(jl \Lcd;cal and dental ofaccs. clinics a: lobo' rato:;cs. ✓(9) O(Tices, general administra:;vc, business and prof•CSSional. ✓(10) Parking of autornobilcs of C 1;Cnts, patients, patrons ar customers of the occupants of adjacent commercial dis:ric,,s. 111 Schools: public. parochial and private (in- cluding private. Vocational trade or proces- sional schoo!sl• colleges. Urt,Crsities, Pre- schools and day nurseries (inc!ud;ng :hose uses common!;: accepted as necessary t'ncreto located on same pram ises). Se r: teC i:.'. a!: i!: n`•: ":'i as I:>red below r:: and cosmct;c s_r:iccs. I-.1~" 206 !'C2 !J: C2cO r3 ::07 Ivne:e _SOOCO. excepC samples, a: e ^.OC 5tCreC. C]0.^. C':2 ic' Pickup stations f0r lau.^.dr: cleaning. (d) Shoe repair. (e) Studio for professional work or teacr ng of fire a-ts, photo, aphy, music, drama or dance. (fl Tailori=ng, dressmaking or clouting a teration shop. Watch and jewel 7; repair. fi3! Residential group homes for ei,I (S) or ' IV develoomentalli disabled persons. mentally ill persons or for elderly persons. ;See section 20.30(P) and section 205.) ✓ i1;1 -ny similar use which, in the opinion of tie zoning adnunist.ator or, upon appeal of his decision, of the board of adjustment. would be compatible in character and im- pact with other uses in the district, would be consistent with the intent of this dis• .rict, and which %ou!d not be objectionable ,o nearby property by reason of odor, dust. rumes. gas. noise, radiation. heat. 9!a--c. %i ':)ration. traffic generation. parking needs. outdoor storage or use. or is not h.azsdous t0 the health and witty of surour.cing _..as through dahg of ice or csplosion. 207 14 C teraticn shcp. hl Watc.^. and J°•.. el-: :epL. ✓ !31 Stores for.et-1 t. ace as lister _-!ow: (a) Antique store; provided, however, tha: no more than two hundred (200) squat fee: of building sea shall be ailoca' _c to repair. lim- X (b) Retail grocer.:/convenience store, ited to five thousand (5,000) square feet or less for the =ount of bu$ding sp2C devoted to reel use. Sec. 26.21. Restricted Commercial District (R•C). (A) Inter.: er.d tree: This dis:^e is es:ab- uses Trice 1isl,ed to accoc^odate va ious r.-Des of 01 pe:fornung ad Listrative, professional ~.d Per- sonal services, and to oroV^de :or a hr..itec range of : etai! uses which are neighborhood oriented. It is the inters: that general retail uses tha: serve the community or region, whc!csaling. -a:e- housing, indus:.ial, and uses whir:^. recut.e out- 5:6c storage or display be prohibited, since :--se uses a. _ incompatible with Other uses in this dis- (B) ~Crm i::fd nr.c ;pet Uses: No building or land shall be used and no building shall be here- a:ected.converted or st;vcturaik00 a:ecu less otherwise provided herein except for one il) or mot c of the following uses: ✓ (1) All uses permitted in the Restricted X Commercial-One District as "permitted principal uses." t✓ (2) Service establishments as listed 'below: X (a) mbulance service. X (b) Lpuipment rental ager:c;-s -`;.Ch rent or lease any item permitted for sale in this district, and cohere a!I items for rent or lease are contain•_d "I hin bu:!dtngs. Outside st0r3-9c 2nd poplar are prohibited. (c) _rterrnina:ors. (d) ly,cr:-r dcc3r,ring shop. Icl Locksmith Shop. Iri re Stores for retail trade, Cimiteri to :~o sand (2,000) scuse feet o: less for th_ amount of building space devoted to an-, one (1) or combi-a:ions of t..e following r_ tail space: (a) A?Pa e! and accessory s:cres. 3 ker es, re: Co) (c) Bicycle stores. (d) Book stores, newsstands. stationer: and ra d stores. (e) Business machine or computer stores. (fl Ca:-.era and pho.o;-.aphic s_-icc an_ supply stores. (g) Candy, nut and confectioner: stor^.s (h) Darr: products stores. (i) Deiicatessens. (j) Floral stores. (kl Garden supplies stores. (l) Gift, novelty or souvenir stores. (ml Hobby and Ca!", stores. (n) Jewelry stores. (o) Music stores. (pl Notions stores. (q) Office supply stores. (r) Optical stores. (s( Paint and wallpaper stores. It) Pct stores. (w Picture fra=ing (shopsi. (v) Shoe stores. (wj Sporting goods stores. (sI Stationery sores. (y) Tobacco stores. :,i 'ro•: stores. !'VI_,:slon..,..:o. _,1! appliance "2 1.1!r and se-`._ (shops. Video rch:ai 5. 208 T:DG_ C:7 CO"' X Cli-;CS •.vnere '.-.ere -r_ 710; OC_.-_ pen_ C7 C0-5. Any s:mIIar use which, in the 0:);nion 0" the zoning administracor, c: upon appeal of his decision, of the board of adjustmen . would be compatible in character and im- act «^th other uses in the district, would p be consistent with the intent of this .dis- trict, and which would not be objectionable to nea=rby proper-: by reason of odor, dust. fumes. gas, noise, radiation, heat. glare, bratio^. ;rziic ge^°ration. par'ng needs. outdoor storage o: use, o, is no-, h-a-ardous to the health and safety of SU:70L`nd;'I areas ;-rough danger of fire or explosion. 209 Sec. 26-22. Commercial-One District (C-1). (A) !.:tent erc Ps~osc: This ciistaC is esL-b- lished to provide (o: areas with s wide ra:.5_ of co-meraal land uses wbich include ofuce. gen- eral business. and retail sales and service es3b- lishmens. This dis^••c is suppo:'.ed by the ccm- n:unity a--td/or entire region. (B) Pa-i::cd Pr.:-c oe? Uscs: No building or land shall be used and no building shall be e.. _ ed. converted o: strut-~:ell.• al ter e? un- iess otherwise provided he.cir. exce?t (o: o::e (11 or =ore of thc`oLowiag cses: ✓(1) °11 uses pz ?red in the Rest:ic:cc Co^- X M e:cial District as " pen^itted ?ri-.c(?aI uses." 1,?5 210 Laws. Chapter 3. 'o) Assemble halls and con•:en:ion lac (:(es. ✓X Automobile and L'gh:-du-y :ruck sales and X rental, subject to the following require. vents: (a) Sales, rental and service of a truck. tractor or semitrailer is prohibi:ed. (J) All parking and vehicle display seas shall be paved. (d The. e shall be a minimum of one *.nou. sand five hundred (1,500) felt o: sepa- ration between sales lots. (d) There shall be a minimum :_...foot landscape buffer adjacent to any'publ(c street, with such buffer to be completely within the property boundaries, alt though the owner may additionally landscape that area between the f:ant property line and the street impr0ye- merits if aporoved by the public works director. These shall be no w•al" s o: this landscape but=t- redu_emcn.. (e) tt"n•enevc- a parking to, o. d;sp!aw to,. adjoins proper.: :oned for :esidentia ue, a landscape buffer of twc!ye (12) fce: from said lot boandar•: shs11 be rc- duired. Within the thwelvefoot la ..^.d sca pe buiTer, a sLC- oot t12w' ObsCL'r:.^. S' fence o. decorative wall shall be con. structed. There shall be no .waivers of this landscape and fence buffer req•_.: e men'. (0 There shall be at least one (1) ilte7i0: landscaped island for each this:y (30) parking and/or vehicle display spaces. Each such landscape island shall oc- cupy the equivalent of one (1) par bring space, and each such required isla .d shall be landscaped with a minimum of one (1), two•(nch cal;p>_r ire^_ or large,., and four shrubs or accep:• able living ground cover. 5! Auto scr.'icc and repair and maintenance shops, including ti=c sales Cou: c~ci•_diag X :ecappin,). mu:",ler Shops, auto and 'igat cusp fueling s...:io15, derail s--Ps. o No.5 3 'c '•casg?s,'7 :^.ois:e-: s:?Ops, sc=ar: epair snps. 1'_'J7i ca::on `__r ices `.d sound system snots... :5 t.._ I1:e.^.C t0 a\Clude bod w'O::i Or ^.:i1„ and to esdude any SLC.1 use p:i- pai r marily Co. service, repair or maintenance to truck-tractors o. semitrailers. Body pai: and painting may be allowed as a con- Ca:Onal L'S2. ✓(o) Banks. loan and finance o(Tices. ,-'(l) Child care centers. M✓(S) Cl:n{CS f0. Jsy'ChOIOS.CaI, SOClal Or Col'nsel:rig and t:ca:.Melt, 11C!__:.^.g COL'.^.. sell^g and .reatmc.^.. for su. os:aa,_ anus? and alcoholism, a_.d including :esicel:ial t:ea:men: facilities: (0) CO.mme:C:al machine shops. ✓10) Community buildings, Y.M.C.A's, Y.. R'.C.A's. churches, libraries, Parks, m_ seems, aquariums and art gal!eries. 1) Go!, courses, including private clubs. -es- and lounges, minia:u:e golf or X d.wing ranges, and those uses :ommont,- acCep:Cd as accesso^: ::^.2:c:o .y:^.?:: !OCat•_- On :hz sari.? prcmis?s. ~(12I Govera.:ent, or quasi-governme^:al build in-'s and Oalces or apJIIC utility bu;id;.1gs. Where ou'side storage, operations 0, repair facilities are not planned. ✓(13) Greenhouses and landscape nurseries, in. c!uding bosh wholesale and reuai! sales of :elated products; provided, how'eve.-, that x bulk storage or piles of materials, such as wood manure, peat, top soil, rock, sand. Firewood or similar materials, a:e screened f:Om slew' from adjacent pope.tics b a yiew'' obsccring fence su (0) feet in height. Bulb: storage or piles of such nateria!s s:^.a!( no. be permitted ..ithid a front yard setbac and shall be no close: than t.cnr:.::•:c i2 -.0 a side or rear lo: line abuts :esidea:ia!!y nolcd prcoer<y 0. •..'hre zoned -icuttu.: and there is a resid•r..:ial s:ruc- ._=C.wl:..... t e e n(151 see. O f..._ 0mr..01 ,_l 211 ?_7C3 Ci-: 0073 (1z) EOmes:0r the aged, nursing ..homes a.^.d cc::. greg=_te care homes. ✓(10") Indoor amusement arid recreational ente.- X prises, such as roller rinks, bowling alleys, ,caries and similar uses. ✓ (15) L:duo. stores. ✓i9) ?`:edical and dental ofTices, clinics or labo- ratories. x ✓(20) Mortuaries and crematories. 41 r 'rorral!s.r_esa.^.da aroa n: e5 (d) Este..^inators. (e) h3.i:, nail and cosmetic se-ices. (9 Interior decorating shops. (g) Laund.-ies and dry c eaning [shops[. (h) Locksmith shoes. (i) Shoe repair [shops]. (j) Swaio for professional work or tea-hing of fine a..-.s. photography. music. d:arna or dance. - (k) Tailorag, dressmieiag or c!oth(n; a. ter a:7Cn Shoos. (1) U7h01ste:,, shops. (m) atch and je'•velry repair [shops'. ✓(29) Small animal veterinary hosoif_als er clinics X where there _-t no outside pens o: for dogs. ,/(22) O.Tices; general business and professional ✓(30) Stores for x:ail trade as listed belew: otf ices. (23) Parking of automobiles 0f clients, patients and patrons of occupants of adjacent corn. mercial distric'.s. X ✓ (241 Private clubs, social clubs, bingo?a Io. s and similar uses. (?d) Restaurants, drive-in restaurants, ice cream sales and similar related uses. ✓(27) Schools, public parochial and private (in- eluding private, vocational trade or proles sional schools), colleges, universities, pre- schools and day nurseries (including those uses commonly accented as necessa.y thereto when located on the same premises). (2S) Se:-:ice establishments as listed below: X (a) Ambulance services. (b) Bluep, inting, photostatic copying, and other similar reproduction se--ices; however, not including I-, gC Printing, publishing and1or book binding estab. lishments. ;c) Equipment rental agcr.cie=_; provided, x however, that the outside storage of trues, trailers or O,--r CcUiPMCrL for J'_pJ. No J 1-25 (sl _nticLt stores. fo) Apparel and accessor: stores. X (c) Appliance stores and incidental s•_- Vice and repay:. (d) Art galle-ycs 0: studios. (e) Automotive parts a_.d supplies sales (0 Bakeries, retail. (g) Bic:c!•; stores. X (h) Boat, romper, and travel trailer and senices. (i) Book stores and newsstands. G) Butcher shops and food lockers, but net including food processing. (k) Business machine or computer stores. (1) Camera and photographic service and 5U'ppI)' Stores. (m) Candy, nut and confectionery stores. (n) Caterers.' (o) Dal-; products stores. (p) Delicatessens. Drugstores. (s) Dr: goods stores. (u) 710. al shops. X ('+1 rU':nf:u.'C stores. ( ) G a. sun?Iics stc-•s. 212 ON:. Q i l GL., no%e'--' cr sou 'e•ur =:x__. stores. iaa) Hobby and ral: stores. (bb) Home furnishing Stores. X (a) F_ome improvements supply stores. (dd) jewelry stores. (ee) Leathergoods and luggage stores. ((7 Liquor stores (sale by package). (gg) Linen supply. t.. ' is a (ii) Locksmith shops. ijj) ?teat, poultry or seafood Stores- X (kk) Motorcycle sales and ser -ice. llp Music stores. r..m) Newsstands (fo-..the sale of ❑c•.spa pers, magazines, etc.). inn) Notions stores. too) O(iice supply [stores]. ioo) Optical stores. (qq) Paint and wallpaper stores. is r) Pet stores. (ss) Picture Laming!shops!. (uu) Shoe stores. vv) Sporting goods stores. (,vw) Stationery stores. Television, radio, small appliance re- pair and service Ishopsl. (yy) Tobacco stores. (:a Toy stores. (aaal Video rentals. X ✓(31) Taverns. nightclubs, lounges, private clubs / and bars. X x/(321 Theatres (c%cluding drive-ins). 331 Any similar use which, in the opinion of the zoning administrator, or upon appeal o: his decision, or the board of adjustment. would be compatible in character and im pact with other uses in the district, wrould be consistent with Lhe invent or this cis trict, and which ,culd not be objectionnbic 17 '1" :o nearby prop?r_;: reason of odor, d__.. gas, nos acia:ion. nee b; a• ..:rafitc ger.erration. pa: ng r.eeds. outcoor storage or use, or is no: hL coos to the health and safety of surrour.cing areas .n.ough danger of Fire or esplosia.. 213 R 4 214 AI~F1_1 /D i :M Sec. 2G.20. Restricted (Vommercial-One Dis- trict Mc. I). ;A! ln:cr: cnd purpose: This district is Cs t36 !:i.ned to p. oxide for 3 rcason3bly compatible tram ..tic:: between residential and m0.'C :...tCns:':C coin. r Crcia! Ir.d uses. It provides for residential scale. nd:ghborhood-cricntco professional O:I:cCS; and sC^ .lees which, by their nature and through design ..nr anon. •,:1 promote neighborhood smbi!it.: aid 3rawc: neighborhood 'alues and character. hC O:srct aso ar0':loCs l:^i ed neighaorho00- _r:Cnxd retail uses by special use 3ppro':a!. i31 Per.-Pr•-e:pei Uses: No building or .and shall be used and no building shall be here. after erected, converted or sir Uctunally altered un- iess 0the., isc provided herein csccpt for one ! 11 Or more of the following uses: ✓ (l) A:--. gall•arics o. studios. ✓(3) Banks. loan and finance 0:uces. (3) Clinics and of%ces for ps)'CnOlogical. social. r..ariia!. developmental or similar cour.- sc!ing and trcatmcm. indcding counseling „nd treatrncnt Lr substance abuse and al c0..0!s nO,VC,,:r. riot inducing reside:. ,a! :_c:!itics or residential treatment. Golf courses (but not including rnlni3tu re golf 0. putting :Zinges. dri•:in~ ranges. pri- X gate Clubs or re5C31-173nts) and those uses commonly accepted as accessory" the.'et0 when located on the s3mc 3 _iliscs. ✓o; Government o: gc3si-goyc---lcnt3l build ings and oMccs or public utility building ,here outside stOr3gc. Ope.'3::Ons Or repair facilities are not planned. t✓q, ljor.cs for the 3;.:d. nLrsi-g h.mcs and con. grog= care homes. ✓I) Wical and dental OMCCs. clinics or !3bo• rato.':cs. ✓(91 0^-ices. general 3dministr3tiyc. business and professional. ✓(101 2arling of automobiles of clients- patients. patrons o: customers of Lie occupants of adjacent commercial districts. ✓ll! Schools: public. parochial and private (in- eluding pri,.ate. Vocational tnade or profes- sional schools). colleges, universities. pre schools and day nurseries iinduding those uses Co:anlonl.: accepted as necessary thereto when located oil *he s3mc p isesi. / .._y buildings. C. P.s. _ Oitab lis'.: men's ai CC J•J!0'.c'. "i E07 C s. churems. l:bra.._ . ...K . In' i': a... Gali and cOiT^:~se" KCi. numn "mS and an _RUA 0 .l 215 =ON-NO .tir0 tE\- ~b) ! ae 'Cr decora-!n= shoo 'a'."7e -^~y:CS. e Ccee- sa-:Toles, are not it07e-- "Don D. ses. (c) Pickup stations for lauadr: and d- cleaning. (d) Shoe repair. (e) Studio for professional work or teac:•-_.g of fine arts, photography, music, dr a=a or dance. (f) Tailoring, dressmaking or clothing teration shop. (g) Watch andjewelry :epai:. ✓(13) Residential grouo homes for eight (5) c: fewer developmentally disabled persons. mentally ill persons or for elderly persons. (See section 2H-XP) and section 265.) ✓ (141 P.ny similar use which. in the opinion of the zoning administrator or, upon apoe~ of his decision, of the board of adjustment. would be compatible in charaaec and im- pact with other uses in the district, w'o_ld be consistent with the intent of this dis- trict. and which would not be obir_tionab!e to nearby property by reason of odor, drat, fumes, gas, noise. radiation. heat, gla.-e• %i- bration, traffic generation, pa: king need's. outdoor storage or use. Or is no:`.a a.-do_s to the health and safety of sc::oundin; arcas through danger of fire or C\7loslon. 2;.::• 216 ~2/EJ-1 n _ A Wa:c-andjr.ve;_ e?air. (Jl StO:eS IJ: reta.'t trade as 115te_ "low: t/ (a) Antique store; provided, however, :ha: no more than to hundred (200) squa_-e feet of building area shall be allocated to reoair. CO) Retail grocery•/convenience stare, iced to Fn•e thousand (5,000) so '-'are :ee* ar less for the amount of-buit s?ace devoted to retail use. limited to -0 t"." Scores for retail trade ✓4: Sec. ^_6-21. Restricted Commercial District . • send (9,0001 sou_e fee: or less for (R•C). ann um of buil~r:g space devoted to (A) L::2.^.: C^Lr Purpose: This LSr:G :5 eStaS• On<` 0~~-1n~ ll) 0: COm0i..32:0n5 Of the 'all tees of of-ce uses !;shed:oeccoc•nodate anous ta=1 space: perfo.-^.ing ad-ai.tti.strative, ;=Cession-31 =ld per (a) A??arel and accesso~' stc:es. senal services, and to provide for a I ^ited range col S, series, :_=l. o: retail uses which are neighborhood o^ented. 1t (c) Bicycle stores. is the intcn- that general retail uses 'hat serve (d) gook stores, newsstands. s.atio-:e-: :he community or region, wholesaling, ware- and card stores. -eusing, industrial, and uses w-icb :ecu_e our- (e I . Bus;-less mac-Lne or computer stcre= s:Ce s-.a 3ge or display be 7ronlae0, since these (f! Camera an'. 7:lotog-37G:: se-~ cc uses : -C incompatible with Other t:SeS ....^.:s C:5- SUODIV S,07CS. lg! Candy. nu: and coaLc:ion>_-: swr^_. f-I Dairy products stores. (BI pc,.-::ed Pr_c:pal Uses: No b•_..ding or (il Delicatessens. lard shall be used and no building shall be here. (j) -!oral stores. a.- C. e: ected, converted o: S- -IC_ JIIIy ai:ered un' (kl Oz.den supplies stores. less ot-envise provided herein except 'c: one (ll (1) Gift, novel,,: o: souvenir stoles. o: mo:c of the following uses: (m) Hobby and ca-ft stores. ✓ (1) All uses permitted in the Restricted (n) Jewelry stores. Commercial-One Distric: as •-pe:mitted to) Music stores. i X principal uses." (p) otions stores. N - (q) 0(IIce supply stores. ✓ (2) Service establishments as listed below: (r) Optical stores. (s) Paint and wallpaper scores. X (a) . .bulance service. b) -quipmer.t renal agencies which rent (t) PC: scores. or lease any item permitted for sale ir. (ui Picture I. a^ing (shops!. X this district, and where all ;:ems for (v) Shoe stores. .•nin rent or lease are contained ` iwi Sporing goods stores. buildings. Outside storage a-.. displny Lx: Stationery stores. are prohibited. iyi Tobacco sto:cs. (c) ~vrmina•ors. i:: - Toy stores. _ filar.:'= - as : d ' (d) Interior decorating ~-..c? ? : io. sm.a Gcievision, ra • (c) Locksmith shop. [lac and sec: ice ;sno?s n Shoc repir. Video rent s. 217 L/ '.JI Small animal c'-:e..-;na7 ' 'al- any C!;r;CS W-`.Bre t.._._ are not O'L_id° vGs 0r ,._,ns for CCP. ~n}' Sl.^..:.la. use which, in t•'•e opinio C: .Ol the toning aominlst.rator, or upon ap,e.'-1 oi his decision, of the board of adjustment. would be compatible in character and im- pact «ith other uses in the district, would be consistent with the intent of this dis- trice, and which would not be objectionable to ne u-by property by reason of odor, dust, fu...es, ;az noise, radiation, heat, gl -e. i bra:ion, era Tic penerlC 0n. 7~'ti.needs. cutdoer storage or use, or is not ha=a. dous to t..e health and safety of surrounding a-eas through da^.ger of 57e or ex?losipa. 218 Sec. 26.22. Comsaerciol•One Distt ct (C-1). oral ?-nose: This dfst:iet is estab- lished to provide for areas with a ride r.=•5_ of o,,oe cjal land uses which include oTice, gen• eral business, and retail sales and service esrab- lsheens. This a s ir. is supported by the con- =,unity andjor entire :region. Pern:i:red Principe? Uses: No builcng or land. sha ! be used a d no b,61d:ng shall be here- convened or S. uc:s:ally altered un• a^.er erered, less o6- A-ise pro•-ided here;-. except icr c-e or 6. e of the ioLo iag uses: ✓ (1) -uses per.'tied X cercial District a Uses." in :..e Res-. ictzd Co - 'bzr =iced p::'ci?~! 1725 219 =OS!S~ _N0 7c --0?.'.(=S' ✓ f2l Aciuit e❑:2:CSrmer: e5 tabl3i: m2.^.S X In acco.dance Y.❑ _ n:cP Ccce c: Laws. Chap-e, 3. X ✓(3) Assembly halls and rmeation faci!i X ✓i4) Automobile and fig^:Lduty truck sales and rental, subject to the toilowing recui.e• ments: (a) Sales, rental and service' of a tuck. tractor or semitrailer is prohibited. (o) All parking and vehicle display areas shall be paved. (c) There shall be a minimum of one thou- sand five hundred (1,500) feet of sepa- ration between sales lots. (d) There shall be a minimum tea-toot landscape butler adjacent to any public street, with such puffer to be comoletely within the property boundaries, a!- thou,h the owner may additionally landscape that a -ea between the f: ox property line and the street improve. ments if approved by the public works dcector. There shall be no waivers 01 this landscape bt:ITer reouUement. (e) l6 acneycr a pcu k• ing lot o: display lot adjoins Property coned for reside^;ia use, a landscape buffer of twelve i1'-) feet from said lo; boundary shall be :e' qui:ed. Within the twelve-foot land. scape buffer, a sLe'foot .iew••obscu.-ing fence or decorative wall shall be cc-•" stetted. There shall be no waivers of this landscape and fence buffer requi.e. ment. (0 There shall be at least one (1) interior landscaped island for each thirty (30) parking and/or vehicle display, spaces. Each such landscape island shall oc. cupy the equivalent of one (1) parking space, and each such required island shall be landscaped with a minimum of one (1). two-inch caliper .._e o: large:, and four shrubs or acce--t- able living ground cove:. 7e7 ; . a. se :.:es. tat '.'as'nes. hoisceryshops, cation se:-.-ices and sound svsem shoes. L is the invent to exclude bod•: wo,k or 7a: nt:ng, and to exclude any such use D-:- marily for service, repair o. maintenance to truck-tractors or semitrailers. Body re- pair and painting may be allowed as a con- ditional use. ✓(o) Banks, loan and finance offices. ✓(7) Child care centers. ✓s) Clinics for psvcho!cgical, social or mari*-! counseling and treatment, ir.c!ud(ng coun- s2ii-g and treatme-: for substance 36use and alcoholism, and including residential t: eatmen.:acilit:es. X ✓9) Comme.dial machi.^.•= shops. ✓(10) Community buildings, Y.M.C.A's, Y.' W.C.A's. churches, libraries. ?arks, mu• set.'.^..s, aquariums and art galleries. ✓ (11) Golf courses. including private clubs. :es- X ta;:ants and lounges, miniature golf or caving rang,es• and those us_s com.^..an! a-cCoted as accesso. :..~:2t0 w'-a-. IOCat_- on .na same premises. ✓(1?) Gove.-men: or quasi governmental build. ings and otaces or public utility buildings. whe.e outside storage, operations or repair fac;!;ties are not planned. Greenhouses and landscape nurseries. in. cluding both wholesale and retail sales of related products; provided, howeve.. that bulk storage or piles of materials, such as r,.anuro, pea:, top soil, rock, sand. Ft.ew•ood or similar materials. ae screened f. om %iew• F.om adjacent properties by a view- obscuring fence six (o) feet in height. Bulk storage or piles of suet^ materials shall not be Permitted within a front yard setback and shall be no close: than t..entvfr:c (25) to a s(cc or rear !o'. line which abu[s . esice-tialw zoned prop•_7-~v o, zoned A gricullural and there is a csiden:;al stn:o _ «i:..... ~.aecn (15: feet of ...c common 7xpcr:•: lire. (13) Ll~ X 151 Auto service and repair and maintenance shops, inc!uding tire sales (but exc!ucing recapping), muMiier shops, auto and liz t ` du-.-,' u: ru~e=":~~:ue!ing /sta_ions,s, ce:aillsshoofs. PR N5. 220 3 26-12 ✓1141 Homes for the agp^,nu:sin.g homes and car- Fegace ca e homes. t✓(15) 'riotels, motels or bed and breakfast homes for transient occuoarc . There shy be one thousand (1,000) square feet o; gross lot area Co. each unit. ✓(16) Indoor amusement and recreational enter- p,ises, such as roller tints, bowL.ng alleys, arcades and similar uses. (11) indoor ilea markets; however, outdoor flea x markets are prohibited. ✓ (1S) Liquor stores. ✓(19) Medical and dental ofix-2s, clinics o: labo- ratories. ✓✓(20) Mortuaries and cematories. ✓(211 Motor fueling stations. u/(22) OeTces; general business and professional offices. ✓ (23) Pa k ng of automobiles of clients, patien:s and patrons of occupants of adjacent cam. me clal districts. ✓ 124) X ' Private clubs, social ci•ubs, bingo:)wlors and similar L'S25. ✓ (25) P.estaurants. drive-in restaurants, ice Beam sales and sirttilar related uses. ✓(26) Rooming and boardinghouses. ✓(2 7) Schools, public parochial and private (in- cluding private, vocational trade or profes- sional schools), colleges, uruve.sities, pre schools and day nurseries (including those uses commonly, accepted as necessary thereto when located on the same premises). ✓ (2S) Service establishments as listed below: X (a) Ambulance services. (b) Blueprinting, photostatic copying. and other similar reproc . uction se-:ices, however, not including large printing, publishing ancUor book binding es:ah lishmcnts. (c! Equipment rental agencies; ?rovided, x however, that the outside s:oragc of true:a, trailers or other equiom^.n: for c.pp. 1 a i ren: shall be 'xith:^ areas s:r__ :rCm'•.e~" Pram °tl itree t5 an: a_. nrooer(es. (dl Estna:o-s. (e) Hair, nail and cosmetic ser'•i^. as (f) Interior decorating shops. (g) Laundries and dry cleaning (shopsl. (h) Locksmith shops. W Shoe repair (shopsl. 0) Studio for professional work or teaching of fine ams, photography, music, dr a.:.a or dance. (k) Tailoring, dressmaking or clothing a. aeration shops. (I) upholster: shoos. (m) N a._h and jewelry repa.' (shop ,/(291 Small a:imal vzterinary hospitals or clinics where thzra are no outside pens or runs for dogs. ✓(30) Sores for reta l trade as listed be!o, : (a) An:iaue stores. (o) Apparel and accessor: stores. (c) Appliance stores and incidental ser vice and repair. (d) Art galleries or studios. (e) Automotive pasts and supplies sales. (0 Bakeries. : etail. (g) Bicycle stores. x (h) Boat, cam?e:, and t:avel traiier sales and se,-.iccs. (i) cook stores and newsstands. (j) Butcher shoos and food lockers. but not including food processing. (k) Business machine or compute., stores. (1) Camera and photographic service and suool.. stores. (m) Candy, nut and confectionery" stores. (nl Caterers. (o) Dairy products stores. (p) Delicatessens. (c) Deparcmcnto: va:iet stores. (r) Drug stores. (s) Dry goods stores. (t) Electrical and supplies and serdce, but not including contracc. s storage ands. (u) Floral shops. (v) Fur.:itu:c stores. (va Carden su?plies ston_s. 221 or Gift, no~'ei:.: r sx•er.ir stores. 9 G.-ccery stores. stor=_s. iaa) Hobby and Cra:t Stores. (bb) Home furnishing stores. (c-) Home improvements supply stores. (dd) Jewelry stores. lee) Leathergoods and luggage stores. l(1) Liquor stores (sae by package). (gg) Linen supply. (h h) Lumber yards and building supolc s;o.es; provided, that unenclosed x storage of any materials shall be screened f o-.n N'Ie%v from adjacent p:op- e.,ies and streets. iii) Locksmith shoos. iio ?feat, poultry 07 seafood stores. (I,) %f0:07cycle sales and scrvCe. (Ill Music stores. (n:m) NewSSLands )for the sale of ne«spa• pCrs, magazines. c:c.). lnnl Notions stores. (0J) O`~:Ce Supply Is;O. CSI. (a7) Ootlcal stores. (qq) Paint and wallpaper stores. irr) Pet stores. issl Picture framing !shops!. (t L) Plumbing and heating s•_ppl s:amcs X an-4 shops, but not including concrac tcrs' storage yards. (uu) Shoe stores. (vv) Spor-,ing goods stores. ("-w) Stationery stores. (c<) Television, radio, small appliance 'e- par and scn°ice (shops). (,pry) Tobacco stores. (z z) Toy stores. (aaa) Video rentals. (311 Taverns. night clubs, lounges, pri%'alC clubs and bats. . (32! Thcatres (CNCluding drive-ins) f33) An%. similar use which, in the oninion of the toning administrator, or upon appeal 0: his decision, of the board of adju>tmen:, would be co:npatiblc in chnraUcr and im wet with other uses in the district. Wou!c be consistent -it" the intent o.r ti:is cis. and :-hich ~•o::ld not be obtcc;innablc NJ :J -.,0 to nearby' prop'"ty'a'::.2 ason of odor. d-, s.. c:2t:O n, nea- ......_S,-• noise, a-. glare. -i. ^aP(ic 7e8e7at:On, pas:ung nee-_:S. b:atien. outdoor storage 07 use or is not haxardo•_s to the health and safety of surround:ng areas through danger of fire or explosion. 222 f:"4J~ ~lrS:.yr:YT..~r. ~±"er_t. ~.A~: C.r>1_.:_ , e!:a?,ap 223 R~~I Sec. 26-20. Restricted Commercial-One Dis- trict (RC-1). (A) inner.: cnc ?crposc: This district is estab- lished to orovide for a reasonably compatible ::a:t- sition betWeen Ics;dcnt!al and more tr.to.^.sive cPm- mercla! land uses. IL o.OV1dcs f0.' res:Centia_l scale. ..^;gllbOrh O0d or lentCC Professional o! ccs =d ser- es,,n;c,-. by their nature and t:•::oug: desiy ..mitation. •xiil promote neighborhood stability _..d protect neighborhood Values and c..._.._._.. -he district also oro,ides limited neighborhood. oriented :nail uses by special use is! ?c: .mired ?rinci?ei Uses: No building or land shall be used and no building shall be here: after erected. convened or strvctura_lly altered un- less other~,ise provided herein eccu?t for one 11) or more of the following uses: ✓(1) Art galleries or studios. ✓(2) Banks, loan and finance offices. ✓(31 Clinics and offices for psycho!ogical. social. marital, developmental or similar coup. sciing and t.catmcm, includ:'g coun<"cling and treatment for substance abuse and :J cohclism: however. not inc!cding :csidcn tial facilities or residential t7c3tmcn:. golf or ranges. d.r;v;.. ages. ?ri' ate clubs or res - nts) and those uses Cemmonl -accepted as aa: _ thereto ✓i6) Go,ernment or qu3si•governmental bu d- v ings and on-ices c: public utility bui,,.:..~ where outside storage. operations or re?ir facilities ac no'. o!alncd. 0 ✓ l51 Medical and den:=i offices, c!;nics or [a 00. r3torics. ✓(91 0Mces, genera! administrativc, business and professional. . ~10) parking of automobiles of clients, patients. patrons or customers of the occupans of adjacent commercial discrids. n. ocatlonal^ a_ proles- cluding ^ ate, v sional schools), c u..::'esitics. Dr e' schools and u:serics 1,.. l ldmg those uses r ...m0 my accepted 35 5 n:. <sa:y ises). V r;; ~ ~12) ccn'ic^ esta';lf<::nm~us as !iced bclo~~~: 1.'brarlcs. - nu 1;:1 nail and cosmetic 5C•ti'iCCS. _ ilC.-ies. and a:: la - •in 2 224 (b) In t2Cio, decorating shoo -mere goods. excepC sarnpies, a. e not 5:0: ec U7C. ^.e premises. (c) Pickup stations nor laundr: a..d dr: cleaning. (d) Shoe repair. (e) Studio for professional work 0. LeaCc--Ig of fine arts, photography, music, d- a a or dance. (0 Tailoring, dressmaki:.g or clot ung al- teration shoo. (g) Watch and jewelry repair. fewer ent3l1 olsabled persons, mentally ill per For elderly persons. aAd 11.1 Any similar use which, in the opinion of the zoning admin is:rator or, upon appeal of his decision, of the board of adjustment, would be compatible in charamer and im- pact with other uses in the district, wo, id be consistent with the intent of this dis- trict, and which would not be objectionable to nearby prooerr by reason of odor, dust. fumes, gas, noise, radiation, heat, glare..i- bration, tralrc generation, parking news. outdoor storage or use. or is not hn_ardous to the health and safety of surrounding areas through danger or fire or explosion. -?0 3 -:n N: i^ 225 -4.-- Sec. 2::0.^. snCd. 26-21. Restricted Comaercial District (R-C). (A! fn:e _:c ?_•.=0se: This cs•- r_ is es:ab- !fShed to ac==Odate v a^ous n_Oes of 0::_ ..Ce uses ::Ornll.^.g aC'1^3 L'3t1':e. Or0feSS1ona1 arlo per- sonal seances, and t0 pmv^.de for a ll_:.t:es r ^ge of r__ail uses which are neighborhood on-led- It i5 ..^.SCG: that .^.Crdl rCCJ_.'I 0525 SCE:e P_^C 0.^.1.^.. L'n;:C OC rec.Crl. W,^,0!251^.~r. W, n •u5 ng nGl S:r:1, 3 j_ .d Uses - 5'.Ce Starag- Cr GsOlav be p7o.^.:71'ed. S:^Ce :"Se -:525 3rd 1.^.C'-:oa-:71C 'v•" O_- uses in ^.:s =s j3) ?c,-lrrc ?.-..e7ei Uses: No O' land shall be used _-d no building shall be h_. _ erecter, converted Or 5:r1•C:Urai!y a 'ere0 Un- less othcnise provides herein e.XC2pt fa: one i!1 Or MOrC Ot t.^.e following uses: l/(2l Scnice establishnenL_s as fisted be!ow': a. (zase s .v item permitted f ' wz in this sis:iand w•h,-_ n:l items ro' -on' 0: lease _ COnt31n^_0 wi.-; bL'ad: JUTS Id I` 5:0"3g 3..C C:5710.' (C) (d) (n:CCIOC CCCOr1ti^.g 5' J. (C) L Oc Ksmith 5..^.07. M _n.._ rep:ur. V ',JI SZ0res :3r retail trade as !15th. Je!O%v: (al p rque sto-.e: provided. however. "a: no more tha_: zwo hundred (200) se'-'z--e fez- of building area sha11 be allocated to , euai r. iO) Re21 grocery;convenience store. i:ed to five thouse_nd (6,0001 square :ee: o: less for the amount c; 5u:idin9 spate devoted to re•_i use. ✓ SLa: es :o: retail _ ade, Lim;'.r- to :10 t`o'_ sand (2,000) scuare feet or less ror oun: of building space devoted :O -3ni' : a_ . one (1) or co^bina:ians Of tine folla~•'ing Lai! soace: (31 .1773:2! a_.0 accessory S--2s. fe 3:[+C!e stores. (C) nook stores, newsstands, and card stc4es. le! Bus Bless ^-_.....e Or CC-:J_:2: S:O f•_o. irl ca era and p'O'O9T3PG:C servIcc 1'._ SU-OIv stores. (g! Cancv• nut i.d confeC::0327: stor'_= (h; Da:.,' pr OCti_:S SLOr•=s. li) Delicatessens. lj) 1Or31 stores. (!c! Garden supp:;es stores. I) Gift, ncvelty 0. souvenir s:C rCS. Fobby and C:aA stores. (n) Jewelry stores. io) Music stores. (p) Notions stores. (q) Orrice supply stores. (rl Optical stores. (S) Paint and wi!?ape: stores. W Pet stores. (U) Picture fra-7n;ng[Sllopsl. (cl Shoe SLOrCS. ('.•'I SoO..ing goods stores. i.: ;LrtiOnen' stores. 'ro'o3cco stores. ~rOd stores. 'rci i5 loan r..dio, shah; 310iin^.ct (i,'.tr and 50-`6] (si10psi. 226 I. v` , .c si^p1. use « hich, i..^. :ae opiaioa of ✓ - the _cni.^.; administrator. or upon a?peall at his decision, of the board of adjust eat. would be compatible in character and i^:• vac: with other uses in the dSstrict. would be consistent with the intent of this dis- - ic- and which would not be objectionable to nearby provers: by reason o: odor, dust. . e• ~i ,^..es, Sv,noise, :ad13:10n, n2at, glare. b: atlCn, t.,,,,C Uene•aa On. vacly^.~ needi, OL•tdOCr St C:aee Or Use. Or is not h_arcous ,I 10 t.^.e heal:h and sa:e:v OI SL': r O U'71 C1n I are as aL'~.^. dan• e: 0, 11:e C: e\_los:on. 227 Sec. 26-22. Commercial-One District (C-ll. L4) e.:c ?-.-pose: Th s cistrir is estab- lished to pro,'ide for areas with a wide 7a :_-9C of cO:r= en=al land uses •,chich indt de ofuce. gen- eral business, and retail sales and ser• cc es ab- lsbnens. This ds-c is supposed by t'-- :om• muait, and/or en: region. (g) r'e.-i ed Pr'rc oel Uses: Na bui!ca; or lend shall be used z-.d no building shsll be `ere a^.er e:TMted. converted or s;ruci_rally alterec un- less otbe,,ise prn•^ced herein except fc- c..e (ll or more o: the follo•+-::g Uses: 1t - _ in 1i~J 220 ✓ Adci_ a _2::.. n... eS:ab!i5rm _..:5' X in aCCO:dance wi ~~-heat C~Ce 0: Laws, Ch ap:e: 3. rental, subject to the following Sales, rental and service of a t 1ck- tractor or semitrailer is prohibi• park ng and vehicle c spla zes call be paved. . .:7 511.005. - .r_nn^taa..' .eoa1:, a5.men_ se7-:.es. Ca: •.ca5::C5. _ nols:er•srops.r epa.. anOO_.._.r. cation services and sound se's-.em siocs. . is -re in:ent to exclude boci work or painting, and Co exa_de any such use 0r:. ma ay' lo: serv'lCe, repa:: 07 .^..aln'erta CCe to truck-tractors or semitrailer. Body r2 pair and painting may be allowed as a cc-.. Litlonal use. ✓(o`) Banks, loan and finance offices. (c) ere shall be a minimum of .e thou- sa. ' five hundred (1,500) fe t of seoa- ✓(S) . ati between sales lots. (d) There shall be a minim- n ten-loot landsca e buffer adjacent any- public St: 22C, w'7 such Ou within f(2: t0 2 COnplezly thin th property- b ,rda;ies, al- X ✓i91 trough the owner landscape J. area prone::.: lino ~d t mcn:s if approv d b di:eror. There s _-J this landscape bu (e) «neneve; a pa:,': adjoins property o use, a landscap• bu ` • accitional!y b ween the front f 10) street improve- the public works to ma ia! Clinics for psychological, social or counseling and trea:men-, inciuding coun- seiin.a and ..eocmen. for subs:an.'e abuse and alcoholism, and including :esidenuai treatment facilities. Car'merc(al machiac shops. L _000 r ---Y'--GhW Fo:.~. a; ICs. scums, aquariums and art g !tries. _ no w..t~_.s of regLi:emcn:. ..,.:ants and lounges, in in; golf or lo: o: disola•: lo: d: v:1g ranges, a-- se uses COMO.-l': ed for reside.^.:ial 0. :w'Clce aCCCp:C ..Ccl'i5J': :hC.'2:0 Ipcat':^_ fCC: f:on said I bou. dam-: shall be :c- qu;.cd. Withi the t •elve-foot land- ✓i1°_) Government o. quasi govern n•=n:a1 build scape buffer, sis•Coot view obscuring ings and oMces or public uti!i:c buildings, fence o. dec ative w•al shall be con-, where outside storage. operations o. repair strutted. Th :e shall be o waivers of facilities ate not planned. this lands and fence b -e= requirc- men'. (fl There sh be at least one 1) ir.tecior landsca d island for each ' it"' (30) pa: kin and/or vehicle disola • spaces. Each ch landscape island al! cc• cupy ne equivalent of one (1) p •b;ing spat , and each such requ::ed lard Sh be landscaped with a mini, urn of one (1), two-inch caliper .r__ o. I Eger, and four shrubs or acce (S) Au:o service and repair and maintenance : I<Z oOO shoos, inc!uding ',;,c sales (bLt exclud ^ X rfcapp;ngl, nuf.1 shops, auto and li-, .t, duty truck fueling s._tions. de:-ail shoos. - - - - clua. g both wholesale and :es-,'l sal- o: :elate o:oducts; provided, howev , that bulk stor a or piles of materi ' , such as nanu. e, pe cop soil, rock. nd, firewood or similar mat ;als.ares _enedf.on.icw from adjacent r-oo .tics by a view'- obscu: ing .ence SL[ ` reet in height. Bulk storage or piles o .:c:h ate: ials shall no. be permitted . ' hin afro:. ya:d se,-bac and shall be o closer than t,v-:i%c (25) feet :o a s'_2 o: :car to. line w'.. cr _'buts _sdon' coned propfrtv 0, . rf. coned o al and there is ❑ .'f SFd2nt: al o wit,l.^...fte-zn!eJ: '.":e: o" *.'.e comm. 'n 229 i _5. . y. _ ✓(i5) Licuo. stores. Z 00 0 R( ✓(19) Madical and dental oTces, clinics or !abc -atones. . .s ✓(22) Ot.ices: general business and oro,essiona-' otTices. ✓i23) ?arking of automobiles of clients. patients and patrons of occupants o adjacent ccm. mercial dlstrirs. •b~. .V•Jy._ ;mila: uses. e rants. drive-in rescr•"a.i' , icc crew.-. (25) P.s- sales an' sir. lay related Y_s. i26! Rooming (27) Schools, pub G chial and private iin eluding pri • .e, voca ra trade or proles. sional s •.ools), colleges, •:.ive.sities, pry scho and day nurseries h,. udiag those c _s commonly accepted as , cessa. ✓ (2S) Sen-ice establishments as listed below: Is. ip) Blueprinting, photostatic copying, and se-:ic•:s: other similar reprod.:ctiort however, not including large publishing audio: book binding estab lishmen, (C1 txte.^1n2tOr S. (e) hair, nail and cosmetic ser~lces. (0 Interior decorating shops. (g) Laundries and dry cleaning (shopsi. (h) Locksmith shoos. (i) Shoe repair fshopsl. (j) Studio :or professional work or teaching of fine a.:s, photography, music, drama or dance. - - (k) Tailoring, d: cs;m=k ng or clothing al tera,;0n shops. (1) Uoroiste. Shoos. (m) \t'axa and je%vei:y repair fshops::. x(30) Stores for retail trade as listed be!o~: < Zooo i (a) Antique stores. Aopa.cl and accessor: stores (d) .r , galleries or stuc:es. (e) Automotive pa ,s and supplies sales. (9 BaLkeries, retail. (6) Bicycle stores.. qR~ (i) Book stores and newsstands. 0) Butcher shops and food lockers, but not including food processing. G.) Business machine or computer s ares. (1) Camera and photographic service and supply stores. (m) Candy, nut and confectionery stores. 4r.- -'F (o) Dairy products stores. (p) Deliaaess?ns. n_. (ti Elec:rical and supplies and ser.-.cc, but not including contractCrs swragc va:d s. (u) coral slops. Ca.__.. 5L'ap1iCS stores. 230 rove4c Or 50u•-eni. x) Gi :O - - ~'i : Y ' _ _ _ . g noise, Cores. -24. ' ^o.,. : ^ OC;dCC: s:0:ate? 0: _a.. 0' i5 rot r_ardocs ✓ (aa) Hobby and Cra:L stores. ;0 C,._ c'a l.h and c=;2CV Ci Su:: OL'.^.C:..~ > per; through de= gee of fire or zxpicsier.. ✓(dd) Jew'elrv stores. ✓(ee) Lcathergoods and lugeage stores. i✓(M Liquor stores (sale by package). stores; provided, tha' enclosed storage of anv serials shall be SCrCen r view from adja0ert n700- ✓(ii) Locksmith shops. ✓ (j) mcat, poultry or seafood stores. service x ✓(k_k) Motorcycle sales and -1) Music stores. m) Newsstands (for the sale of nc-vSPa pcrs, magazines, etc.). ✓(nnI Notions stores. .(oa) O(?lce supply (storesi. ✓po) Optical stores. n' (ss) Picture framing (shopsl. (u) Shoe stores. ✓ (w) Sporting goods stores. ✓(w.v) Stationery stores. i (xx) Television, radio, small anoliance re' pair and. service (shopsl. (yy) Tobacco stores. ✓ (zz) Toy stores. ✓(aaal Video rentals. s _ i ..•O. _ , .d_ Y..... ✓ (32! Theatres (excluding drive-ins). ✓(33; Any similar use which, in the 0pinion cf the zoning administrator, or upon 301cai or his decision, of the board of adjustmcn:. would be compatible in character and im pact with other uses in the district, w'ocld be consistent with the intent of L`.iis dis ;riff, and which would not be objcni0rab!c N., t; 231 ;;Kra, c Sec. 26-23. Commercial-Two District (C-2) (A) Intent end Purpose: This district is stag lisncd to provide for a:•:as with a wide range of commercial !and uses which include orrice, gem cra! business, more intensive rcLaii sales, w-nolc- salc businesses, and Iigh: manufact',:ring. Thisdis- ...ct generally dcocnds on the cntirz r_g:on for the markeL area. (o) A building con: actor s scn'icc <hnp anc storage yard inc'cn to an oG:ce1S^0- room principal ux T is would include c pcr,ters, painters, oofers, eleciricians. plumbe.s,heating dai.:conditioningco:.' tractors. and Simi! - ss which do no: •_s., hca••-: equipment t e business. L_ i1C n.-: . C'+e r. d0 nave ~'C.^ JCS, I5, machine-- used i the b iness stored u;cr. the premises, :her ins c or outside. anal ^.cre some stain wor may occur upcn the premises. outsides rage seas s.`._= be sce-_ned om ,iew fro adjacent erties and s ects by a six-f L opaque w,li or fence. S eking of mate•;als and suP pGs shall of exceed. the heig: tof the fen:z. Additiona y, for uses which in •o1vC custom work an or fabrication upon t. e premises. no sing machinc shall cxc d five (51 ho: scp 'er ar.d provided that n excessive noise, vibration, dust, emissio of heat. g1ar•.2 -adiation, smoke or fumes _c y:a duc , tJ the crcn: that it is da- Icrocs. no, udous or a nuisance to the re, nabic e, ro,ment of use of adjacent prope:t Cs. 131 Pcrmiued Prinrpc.' Uscs: NO buddin or Lind shall be used and no buildi::~ sit ail be hC--Q l= p> Nu 15 less r.:-:•cr.n. C--'._._... or a OE !0110'w n; _ses: Dis::ic: s "pz:m:aed principal uses... ,Senner.L 02 on houses. (3) 1'(3) al veterinary hospita s and d' •icz (5) sznicc and ma ntcnaacc nJps. , i:z sees and reca;lpi. r..u-dr . -u Lo and lh-duty t: jcL ccr.g. •C:ail shops, tune.u. s, pholstery shoos., !u rtes Cl, n:a) : mCCCj rep a:1G0i!. and raridinany' s_c-. ima_~il for se.icc, cpair o: to Lruc. - 'a&_prs or cmitrailc-s, outside storage p ovisior.s set fon:. section ( ;(3) her f. 1733 232 n~ sales, service, rental and storage. ^ct Lo cu-side storage and display o. ' s: ns set Corh in subsection (C)(3) he (9; C.e -y and milk distribution !0) Dying nd cleaning shoos. ii 1) Farr., ee omens sales, sen ice -td 5to:age, suDjecC to utside storage an display pro- %isions set -th in subsecti . (C)(3) hereof. !2; Government o cuasi-goy rnmental build. ings and office , fire ations, or public utility buildings, vhe a outside storage or repair facilities ar anned subject to out- side storage oroyis' s set forth in subsec- tion (C)(3) hereof. i i 3) Homes for the fed, nur ng homes and con- e ega.e = 1 ornes. d delivery stat ns. !151 mng and/or light i. dustrial oo- crre operation of an) ne (1) ma- chot exceed five (5) ho sepo,- cr. exy industrial operation sted in antion of this chaptcr, su 'ect to ice /Lil'on(CO)Ohereof. oue provisions sec for:: in -ub- se hereof. X11 .1 Shops for custom work or for malting arti- L ZOOO ties, materials or commodities to be sold at l e retail on the premises, and where no sing machine exceeds rive (S) horsepower; and provided, that no excessive noise, vibra. Lion, dust, emission of heat, glare, radia. tion, smoke or fumes are produced to the extent that it is dangerous, hazardous or a nuisance to the reasonable enjoyment or use of adjacent properties, subject to outside storage provisions set forth in subsection (C)(3) hereof. r1St Theatres (including drive-ins!. i10i \lini-wa:chouses for inside storage. ✓ !'3o! Wholesa!e businesses. % ood.•o:king or ca-lpentrv shoos for the •naki^g of artic!es for sale upon the prem, 1 )0 is_s. sr:h as cab;,' or cus:o^ fu:niturc: 7 CpyldeC. rcI%eVe:, Ln_: no ex:essiv? no:5?. ?^.55;0.^. ~;3tion, smoke o: (eras &:e p: educed :o the ex-tehc that it i5 d_.gerous. h-ardous, or a nuisance to the re?: nable enjo)'nent o: use of adjacent p:operies. Any slm[!- use which, in t:^.a opinion o the coning administrator. o: upon apoe l of his decision, of the board of adjustr..en:, would be compatible in character and i.m. pact wt L: other uses in the district. v gold be consistent with the intent of this dis- L-iCt, and which would not be objectionable :o nearby proper:: by reason of odor. dust. fumes, gas. noise. radiation. heat,gta:e. b,ation, L.a:71c generation, p: -king ncecs, outdoor storage or use, or is rot hazardous to the health and safety of surrounding areas through dinsger of fire or explosion. 233 WHE- Pll CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Imo' ^ -,-AN ' m CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO 7500 W. 29th Avenue, Municipal Building November 25. 1996 00 The Regular City Council was called to order by Mayor Wilde at 7:00 p.m. Councilmembers present: Teri Dalbec, Jerry DiTullio, Don Eafanti, Jean Fields, Janelle Shaver, Ken Siler, Tony Solano, and Claudia Worth. Also present: Deputy City Clerk, Christa Jones; City Treasurer, Jim Malone; City Administrator, Robert Middaugh; City Attorney, Gerald Dahl; Director of Parks & Recreation, Gary Wardle; Director of Planning, Glen Gidley; Chief of Police, Jack Hurst; Director of Public Works, Bob Goebel; staff; and interested citizens. CITIZENS' RIGHT TO SPEAK Raeben and Bing Sellers, 10332 Federal Blvd., asked that their sidewalk construction project at 3445 Simms Street be approved. Tex Junker, 4615 Swadley Street, asked that Council put up signs saying "No Trucks Beyond This Point", because they still have problems with trucks going down their street. Motion by Mrs. Shaver to add an Agenda Item 9. A. to direct Mr. Dahl to write an Ordinance on first reading, regarding parking requirements; seconded by Mr. Solano; carried 8-0. PUBLIC HEARINGS AND ORDINANCES ON SECOND READING Item 1. Council Bill 49 - An Ordinance amending Section 26-6 (D) of the Code of Laws of the City of Wheat Ridge, Colorado, relating to Variance Criteria. Council Bill 49 was introduced on second reading by Mr. DiTullio; title read by the Clerk; Ordinance No. 1055 assigned. 234 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: November 25, 1996 Page -2- Mr. Dahl suggested that the Ordinance be amended to add criteria 10 and to omit from the Ordinance the other 9 criteria. Motion by Mr. DiTullio for the adoption of Council Bill 49 (Ordinance 1055) and to include Mr. Dahl's suggestions; seconded by Mr. Eafanti; carried 7-1 with Mrs. Dalbec voting no. Item 2. Council Bill 48 - An Ordinance repealing Article I of Chapter 26, Section 26-30 (R) and re-enacting Article I of Chapter 26, Section 26-30 (R), of the Code of Laws of the City of Wheat Ridge, Colorado, concerning provisions for trash storage screening. Council Bill 48 was introduced on second reading by Mr. Siler; title read by the Clerk; Ordinance. No. 1056 assigned. Motion by Mr. Siler for the adoption of Council Bill 49 (Ordinance 1056); seconded by Mrs. Dalbec; carried 7-1 with Mr. DiTullio voting no. Item 3. Application by James R. and Corrine Slotnick for approval of a Planned Commercial Development final development plan and plat on property located at 4549 Tabor Street. (Case No. WZ-96-11) Item 3 was introduced by Mr. DiTullio; title read by the Clerk Mike Bray, architect for the project, was sworn in by the Mayor; showed overhead transparencies of the project, pointed out the trees that would be saved, explained what materials would be used for the building. Motion by Mrs. Dalbec to postpone this Item until the December 2, 1996 meeting so that Council can be provided with a readable copy of the Outline Development Plan with the criteria, and Drainage Plan; seconded by Mrs. Worth; carried 5-3 with Councilmembers Siler, Solano, and DiTullio voting no. Item 4. Council Bill 51 - An Ordinance amending the Code of Laws of the City of Wheat Ridge Zoning Code relating to fences, walls, and obstructions to view. Council Bill 51 was introduced on second reading by Mrs. Fields; title read by the Clerk; Ordinance No. 1057 assigned. 235 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: November 25, 1996 Page -3- Glen Gidley was sworn in by the Mayor and explained the fence height as seen from the street. Sworn in by the Mayor were: Joyce Harrelson and Melanie Brown. They spoke in favor of fences that protect properties and also homeowners; fences don't cause accidents, careless drivers do. Motion by Mrs. Fields for the adoption of Council Bill 51 (Ordinance No. 1057); seconded by Mrs. Worth. Motion by Mrs. Dalbec to delete (9); seconded by Mrs. Worth; tied 4-4 with Councilmembers Eafanti, Dalbec, Worth and Shaver voting yes. Mayor Wilde broke the tie by voting no; Motion failed 5-4. Motion by Mr. Siler to amend paragraph (9), page 2 with the verbiage as shown in Mr. Middaugh's memo to substitute paragraphs (9) (a) and (b) in place of paragraph (9); seconded by Mr. DiTullio; carried 8-0. Motion by Mr. DiTullio to amend Section (1) to exclude woven wire, and chain link fence; seconded by Mr. Solano; carried 6-2 with Mrs. Worth and Mrs. Dalbec voting no. Motion by Mr. Solano to amend Section (1) (2) (a) to strike and approved open type fences in excess of forty-two (42) inches; seconded by Mr. Siler; tied 4-4 with Councilmembers Siler, Dalbec, Worth, and Solano voting yes. Mayor Wilde broke the tie by voting yes. Motion carried 5-4. Original Motion as amended carried 8-0. Item 5. Council Bill 52 - An Ordinance providing for the approval of rezoning from Commercial-One (C-1) to Residential-Two (R-2) and Residential-One C (R-1 C) properties generally located along West 29th Avenue between Sheridan Blvd. on the east, and Fenton Street on the west, City of Wheat Ridge, State of Colorado. (To be continued to December 16, 1996) Council Bill 52 was introduced by Mr. DiTullio; title read by the Clerk. Motion by Mr. DiTullio for continuance of Council Bill 52 to December 16, 1996, so that required public notice is achieved; seconded by Mr. Solano; carried 8-0. 236 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: November 25, 1996 Page -4- Motion by Mrs. Worth to go to Executive Session under Section 5.7 (b) (2) Personnel Matters of the Charter; seconded by Mr. Siler; carried 6-2 with Mr. Solano and Mr. DiTullio voting no. EXECUTIVE SESSION WAS HELD. ORDINANCES ON FIRST READING Item 6. Council Bill 53 - An Ordinance providing for the approval of rezoning from Residential-One and Agricultural-Two to Residential-One A District on land located at 12345 West 38th Avenue, City of Wheat Ridge, County of Jefferson, State of Colorado. (Case No. WZ-96-15) (Daniel and Sherri Schneider) Council Bill 53 was introduced on first reading by Mr. Siler; title read by the Clerk. Motion by Mr. Siler that Council Bill 53 be approved on first reading, ordered published, public hearing be set for Monday, December 16, 1996 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. Eafanti; carried 5-3 with Councilmembers Solano, Shaver, and DiTullio voting no. Item 7. Council Bill 54 - An Ordinance amending Chapter 22 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws, concerning Sales and Use Tax. Council Bill 54 was introduced on first reading by Mr. Siler; title read by the Clerk. Motion by Mr. Siler that Council Bill 54 be approved on first reading, ordered published, public hearing be set for Monday, December 16, 1996 at 7:00 p.m. in City Council Chambers, Municipal Building, and if approved on second reading, take effect January 1, 1997; seconded by Mrs. Dalbec; carried 8-0. Item 8. Council Bill 55 - An Ordinance establishing the position of City Historian. Council Bill 55 was introduced on first reading by Mrs. Fields; title read by the Clerk. Motion by Mrs. Fields that Council Bill 55 be approved on first reading, ordered published, public hearing be set for Monday, December 16, 1996 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. Siler; carried 8-0. 237 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: November 25, 1996 Page -5- DECISIONS RESOLUTIONS. AND MOTIONS Item 9. A. Motion by Mrs. Shaver that Mr. Dahl write an Ordinance for first readinE to be brought in at the next meeting regarding Section 26-31 (D) (1) (d) of the Zoning Code to change "fifteen (15) percent of gross floor area" to ten (10) percent. To change Section (E) instead of "zoning administrator" to Planning Commission and City Council; seconded by Mrs. Dalbec; carried 8-0. Item 9. Resolution 1564 - findings for Case No. WZ-96-10, 70 West Business Center Planned Commercial Development Final Plan at 12851 West 32nd Avenue. Motion by Mr. Solano to move this back one Agenda Item to allow Mr. Dahl and Mr. Gidley to determine whether the applicant would have to wait one year to re-submit his application if this case is denied; seconded by Mrs. Dalbec; carried 7-1 with Mr. DiTullio voting no. Item 10. Resolution 1565 - condemnation of parcel of land at 11361 West 44th Avenue (Baugh property). Resolution 1565 was introduced by Mr. Solano; title read by the Clerk. Tom Sloan, 6428 Newcombe Street, Arvada, owner of 11361 West 44th Avenue, asked that he be allowed to develop his property; offered the log cabin to the City of Wheat Ridge. Claudia Callas, 8701 West 38th Avenue, stated that she had read two letters into the record on February 28, 1994, one from CSU Center for the stabilization and reuse of important structures and one from the Jeffco Historical Commission. She re-read these letters. She spoke in favor of restoring the Baugh property and the log cabin. Paul Anderson, 4610 Queen Court, feels that the impact of this development would greatly impact the wildlife and the people in the area; it is already a congested area and this would overburden the populace of Wheat Ridge. Billie Taylor, 4709 Robb Street, implored Council to consider any plan to develop that property; it is a lovely historic site, it is a charming house; save the property and the house. Terrey Young, 6428 Newcombe Street, Arvada, asked that this property not be condemned and that it be allowed to be developed. 238 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: November 25, 1996 Page -6- Kent Young, 11280 West 46th Avenue, lives 2 blocks from this property, moved here because of the open spaces, prefers to see a park on the property rather than a development. Nancy Anderson, 4600 Queen Court, lives 2 blocks from this property; urged Council to evaluate what we might let go if this property is developed; development means more traffic and more people. Dave DiGiacomo, 4505 Robb Street, attorney for Mr. Sloan, lives across the street from the property, spoke in favor of the development. Motion by Mr. Solano that Resolution 1565 be postponed until such time as staff has an opportunity to meet with the owner of the property at 11361 West 44th Avenue, to determine if a negotiated acquisition of the property is possible in lieu of condemnation of the entire parcel and ask that this be placed as an Emergency Meeting on Wednesday, December 18, 1996 at 6:00 p.m.; prior to that meeting Council hold a Study Session with Mr. Sloan present to be apprised of the negotiations; seconded by Mr. Siler; carried 7-1 with Mrs. Shaver voting no. Motion by Mrs. Dalbec to suspend the Rules and go past 11:00 p.m. and finish the agenda tonight; seconded by Mrs. Worth; failed 5-3 with Councilmembers Siler, Fields, and Solano voting no. (This needs a 6 vote super majority to pass) Motion by Mrs. Dalbec to finish the Consent Agenda and expenditures and Item 9 and that we postpone the rest of it to the next regular meeting on December 2; seconded by Mrs. Shaver; failed 4-4 with Councilmembers Eafanti, Dalbec, Worth and Shaver voting yes. Motion by Mr. Solano to complete Agenda Item 9. and then adjourn; seconded by Mr. Siler; carried 8-0. 239 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: November 25, 1996 Page -7- Item 9. Resolution 1564 - findings for Case No. WZ-96-10, 70 West Business Center Planned Commercial Development Final Plan at 12851 West 32nd Avenue. Mr. Dahl stated that the Charter provides that after this decision reapplication cannot be made for 12 months, if it is the same or substantially the same application. Motion by Mrs. Dalbec for approval of Resolution 1564; seconded by Mr. Solano; carried 8-0. Motion by Mrs. Dalbec to adjourn; seconded by Mr. Eafanti; carried 8-0. Meeting adjourned at 11:10 p.m. f Christa Jones, Deput ity Clerk December 2, 1996 The continued City Council meeting from November 25, 1996 was called to order by Mayor Wilde at 7:00 p.m. Councilmembers present: Teri Dalbec, Jerry DiTullio, Don Eafanti, Jean Fields, Janelle Shaver, Ken Siler, Tony Solano, and Claudia Worth. Also present: City Clerk, Wanda Sang; City Treasurer, Jim Malone; City Administrator, Robert Middaugh, City Attorney, Gerald Dahl; Director of Planning, Glen Gidley; Director of Parks, Gary Wardle; Director of Public Works, Bob Gobel; staff and interested citizens. APPROVAL OF MINUTES of November 18, 1996 Motion by Mr. Eafanti for the approval of the Minutes of November 18, 1996, seconded by Mrs. Dalbec. Motion carried 8-0. PUBLIC HEARING AND ORDINANCES ON SECOND READING (CON'T FROM 111181961 Item 3. Application by James R. and Corrine Slotnick for approval of a Planned Commercial Development final development plan and plat on property located at 4549 Tabor Street. (Case No. WZ-96-11) Continued Business. Mr. Gidley continued his presentation and. answered questions. Speaking in favor and sworn in by the Mayor were; Wilber W. Sieck and Jim 240 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: November 25, 1996 Page -8- S lotnick(applicant). Speaking in opposition and swom in by the Mayor was Kim Stewart. Jim Nolan, drainage expert for the applicant, spoke regarding drainage issues. Motion by Mr. DiTullio for approval of Planned Commercial Development final development plan for property located at 4549 Tabor Street for the following reasons: 1. The proposal is consistent with the approved outline development plan. 2. All requirement for a final development plan have been met. Motion seconded by Mr. Solano. Motion by Mrs. Dalbec for an amendment to final development plan as stated in the outline _ development plan which states that in no instance shall uses be allowed which require the following or display the following characteristics; warehousing, outside storage, noise, odor or vibration discernable outside of the building. Use of semi-tractor trailers on the property as a regular course of business; seconded by Mrs. Worth; failed 3-5 with Mrs. Dalbec, Mrs. Worth and Mrs. Shaver voting yes. Motion by Mrs. Shaver for an amendment to final development plan as stated in the outline development plan which states that in no instance shall uses be allowed which require the following or display the following characteristics; warehousing, outside storage, noise, odor or vibration discernable outside of the building. Use of semi-tractor trailers on the property as a regular course of business. Occasional deliveries as experienced in the course of any business excepted; seconded by Mr. Solano; carried 7-1 with Mrs. Worth voting no. Motion by Mrs. Dalbec for an amendment to the final development plan to state, Office/Warehouse with shop related storage or office/warehouse with work area and related storage; seconded by Mr. Solano; carried 8-0. Motion by Mrs. Worth for an amendment to the final development plan that the architect find a turn around place within the parking area for semi trucks; seconded by Mrs. Dalbec; carried 5-3 with Mr. Eafanti, Mr. Siler and Mr. Solano voting no. Original Motion with amendments carried 7-1 with Mrs. Worth voting no 241 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: November 25, 1996 Page -9- Motion by Mr. DiTullio that the request for a final plat for property located at 4549 Tabor Street be approved for the following reasons: 1. A plat is required as part of the final development plan process. 2. All requirements of the Subdivision Regulations have been met. Seconded by Mr. Solano; carried 7-1 with Mrs. Worth voting no. DECISIONS, RESOLUTIONS. AND MOTIONS Item 11. Resolution 1566 - condemnation of property at 7174 West 38th Avenue. Resolution 1566 was introduced by Mr. DiTullio; Clerk read title and summary. Mr. Middaugh was sworn in by the Mayor and explained the details regarding this property and answered questions. Motion by Mr. DiTullio for adoption of Resolution 1566; seconded by Mrs. Fields; carried 8-0. Item 12. Reappointment of Geoff Wodell to EDARC; appointment of Lloyd A. Donnelly to EDARC. Motion by Mr. Siler to ratify the reappointment of Geoff Wodell, for District IV, to EDARC, term ending November 2001, pursuant to Ordinance 709, dated January 16, 1987; seconded by Mr. Eafanti; failed 3-5; with Mr. Siler, Mr. Eafanti and Mr. Solano voting yes. Mr. DiTullio voted no because after researching Mr. Wodell's attendance record, he found that Mr. Wodell had missed 70% of the meetings in 1996. Motion by Mr. Siler to ratify the appointment of Lloyd A. Donnelly, for District I, to EDARC, term ending November 2000, pursuant to Ordinance 709, dated January 16, 1987; seconded by Mr. Eafanti; carried 8-0. 242 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: November 25, 1996 Page -10'-- Item 13. Selection of Council President and Mayor pro tem. Motion by Mr. Eafanti to appoint Ken Siler for Council President; seconded by Mr. Solano; motion failed 3-5 with Mr. Eafanti, Mr. Siler and Mr. Solano voting yes. Motion by Teri Dalbec that Claudia Worth be the Council President; seconded by Mrs. Shaver; carried 5-3 with Mrs. Fields, Mr. Solano and Mr. DiTullio voting no. Motion by Don Eafanti to appoint Ken Siler for Mayor pro tem; seconded by Mr. Solano; failed 3-5 with Mr. Eafanti, Mr. Siler and Mr. Solano voting yes. Motion by Claudia Worth that Jean Fields be the Mayor pro tem; seconded by Mr. Siler carried 8-0. Item 14. Approval of Expenditure Items. Motion by Mrs. Worth that the attached purchases be approved in the amounts indicated and that all costs be charged to the account shown on the purchase order report. I further move that the funds for these purchases be encumbered for the length of time required to receive the purchased items which expressly allows for the expenditure of funds in 1997 for this purchase in accordance with Ordinance #787, 1989 Series; seconded by Mr. Solano carried 8-0. Item 15. CONSENT AGENDA: A. Resolution 1569 - levying general property taxes for year of 1996, to help defray the costs of government for the City of Wheat Ridge, Colorado, for the 1997 budget year. B. Site Lease Agreement with Western PCS III License Corporation. C. Resolution 1567 - amending IAG to include the addition of Westminster, Morrison, and Mountain View to become members of Table Mountain Animal Center. 243 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: November 25, 1996 Page -11- D. Bid Award RFB #96-41 - Carpeting and Installation E. Bid Award RFB #96-43 - Swimming Pool Cover. F. Bid Award RFB #96-42 - 1996 Concrete Rehabilitation Program, Phase III G. Bid Award RFB #96-17 - 1996 Miscellaneous Drainage Project. H. Resolution 1568 - setting forth investment policy and guidelines for investment of City Funds by the City Treasurer and rescinding Resolution 1132. Motion by Mr. Siler for approval of the Consent Agenda Items A, C, D, E, F and G as printed; seconded by Mr. Dalbec; carried 8-0. Mrs. Worth asked to pull Item H and Mr. Solano asked to pull Item B. Mr. Middaugh noted a typographical error on Item D, page 2, Dept/Acct # 30-610-833 should read #30 -610-811. B. Mrs. Worth introduced Item B; Site Lease Agreement with Western PCS III License Corporation. Kent Becker, Real Estate Manager for Western PCS, was present and answered questions regarding panel/tower antennas. Mrs. Dalbec moved to postpone Item B until Special Use Permit comes forward; seconded by Mrs. Worth; carried 7-1 with Mr. Solano voting no. H. Mrs. Worth moved for approval of Item H with the request that Foothills Bank be added to the list of banks; seconded by Mr. Solano; carried 8-0. ' Motion by Mr. Solano to reconsider Council Bill 51; seconded by Mrs. Dalbec; carried 8-0. Motion by Mr. Solano to pass Council Bill 51, Ordinance 1057, with an Amendment to allow a 6 foot open fence in the sight triangle; seconded by Mrs. Worth; carried 6-2 with Mr. Eafanti and Mr. Siler voting no. 244 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: November 25, 1996 Page -12- ORDINANCES ON FIRST READING (December 2, 1996 Agenda) Item 1. Council Bill 56 - An Ordinance concerning the regulation of vehicles and traffic in the City of Wheat Ridge. Council Bill 56 was introduced on first reading by Mrs. Dalbec who also read the title. Motion by Mrs. Dalbec that Council Bill 56 be approved on first reading, ordered published, public hearing be set for Monday, January 13, 1997 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. DiTullio; carried 8-0. DECISIONS, RESOLUTIONS. AND MOTIONS Item 2. Resolution 1570 - authorizing additional compensation to Wheat Ridge Marketplace. Resolution 1570 was introduced by Mrs. Worth who also read the title and summary. Ann Pitinga, Executive Director of EDARC, was present and spoke on this item. / Gordon Hinshaw, 4045 Upham, was present and updated Council on this issue. Motion by Mrs. Worth to postpone Resolution 1570 until the 1st meeting in January; seconded by Mrs. Shaver, carried 7-1 with Mr. Eafanti voting no. Item 3. Bid Awards RFB #96-46 and #96-47- Municipal Court Computers & Software. Mr. Middaugh reported on the Bids and answered Councilmembers questions 245 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: November 25, 1996 Page -13- Motion by Mrs. Dalbec that the computer equipment and software be purchased from the various designated vendors in the amount of their Bids totaling Seventy Six Thousand Four Hundred Eighty Seven Dollars and Fifty Cents($76,487.50) and further moved that a contingency in the amount of Seven Thousand Five Hundred Dollars ($7,500.00) be established and further moved that the City Manager be authorized to issue change orders up to the total contract and contingency amount and that the total cost of this project of Eighty Three Thousand Nine Hundred Eighty Seven Dollars and Fifty Cents($83,987.50) be charged to the various funds and accounts as detailed in the Purchasing Agents Memorandum and further moved that the funds be encumbered for the length of the Project which expressly allows the expenditure of finds in 1997 for this Project in accordance with Ordinance #787, 1989 Series and further moved that Windows 95 be purchased for Client User PC's if possible; seconded by Mr. Solano; carried 8-0. Item 4. Approval of Expenditure Items. Motion by Mrs. Worth to approve Item 4; seconded by Mrs. Dalbec; carried 8-0. Item 5. Veterans Memorial Gazebo Design Contract. Motion by Mrs. Fields for Mundus Landscape Architecture be awarded a contract to prepare the final drawing and construction documents for the Veterans Memorial Gazebo in the amount of $1,892.50 and all costs be charged to account 34-603-862; seconded by Mrs. Dalbec; carried 8-0. Item 6. Discussion of West entry design for City Hall. Motion by Mr. DiTullio to postpone Item 6 until a January Study Session; seconded by Mr. Siler; carried 7-1, with Mr. Solano voting no. , 246 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: November 25, 1996 Page -14- Item 7. Playground Construction for 36th & Upham. Motion by Mrs. Fields for approval of the construction of the playground at the 0.4 acres of land located at 36th & Upham per the request from Jefferson County Housing Authority anc further moved that the Mayor be authorized to sign the letter requesting the 1994 CDBG Funds from Jefferson County in the amount of $8,882.00 for this project and the CDBG Funds will be placed in the Park Land Dedication Fund and the Park Land Dedication Fund be amended accordingly and should read 1997 CDBG Fund in the amount of $12,000.00; seconded by Mr. Solano; carried 8-0. Item 8. Furniture and Remodeling of second floor(RFQ #010-96) Motion by Mrs. Dalbec that the second floor furniture and remodeling project be awarded to the various vendors in an amount not to exceed $154,753.01 be charged to the Capital Improvement Fund account number 30-610-811, City Hall Improvements and further moved that the funds be encumbered for the length of the Project which expressly allows the expenditure of funds in 1997 for this Project in accordance with Ordinance #787, 1999 Series; seconded by Mr. Eafanti; carried 8-0. Item 9. Bid Award RFB#96-44 - 1996 Traffic Signal Improvement Program, West 44th Avenue and Field Street. Motion by Mrs. Worth that the 1996 Traffic Signal Improvement Program, West 44th Avenue & Field Street (RFB #96-44) be awarded to Sturgeon Electric Company, Inc. in the amount of their bid of $83,254.00 and further moved that a 2% incentive bonus in the amount of $1665.00 be established; that a contingency account in the amount of $8,326.00 be established; $81,000.00 be transferred from the Capital Improvement Fund Balance to account number 30-304-800-843, Traffic Signal Replacement. 247 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: November 25, 1996 Page -15- I further move that the equipment needed for the traffic signal be purchased directly from the recommended vendors in the amount of their quotes totaling $59,307.00; that the Director of Public Works be authorized to issue change orders up to the total contract, direct purchase, and contingency amount and that the total cost of this project of $152,561.00 be charged to the Capital Improvement Fund account number 30-304-843, Traffic Signal Replacement; that the funds be encumbered for the length of the Project which expressly allows the expenditure of funds in 1997 for this Project in accordance with Ordinance #787, 1989 Series; seconded by Mrs. Dalbec; carried 8-0. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S MATTERS Mr. Middaugh gave an update on the Copa Cabana Site. Motion by Mrs. Dalbec for staff to notify Council of meetings on the Teen Center in the event Councilmembers want to attend; seconded by Mrs. Shaver; carried 8-0. CITY ATTORNEY'S MATTERS Mr. Dahl gave litigation update. Consensus to hold an Executive Session following the December 18, 1996 meeting; carried 8-0. Mr. Dahl introduced an IGA Amendment regarding Jefferson County Task Force. Motion by Mr. Siler to approve the Amendment to the IGA between the Cities of Arvada, Lakewood, Wheat Ridge and Golden to include the City of Westminster and to amend paragraph 3.3(C) to read as follows; Officers assigned to the Task Force shall be assigned on a full time basis and shall be subject to supervision of the supervisory and command personnel assigned to the task force regardless of which party assigns the supervisors or officers to the task force; seconded by Mrs. Dalbec; carried 8-0. 248 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: November 25, 1996 Page -16- ELECTED OFFICIALS MATTERS Mr. Solano requested a memorandum on the status on 48th Avenue. Mr. DiTullio moved that Mr. Middaugh schedule a joint meeting with Council, Lutheran staff and City staff to discuss the Joint Venture for the Recreation Building in January; seconded Mrs. Dalbec; carried 8-0. Motion by Mr. Siler for adjournment; seconded by Mrs. Dalbec; carried 8-0. Meeting adjourned at 10:55 p.m. Wanda Sang, City ClerK~. APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL ON DECEMBER 16, 1996 BY A VOTE OF 7 TO 0 Claudia Worth, Council President 249 11/19/96 16:33:12 EI6ETFA% 4.00->CITY OF YEEBT RIDGE EightFA% RESOLUTION 1564 BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, STATE OF COLORADO CASE NO. WZ-96-10 IN RE THE APPLICATION OF DWAINE RICHTER FOR APPROVAL OF A FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND PLAT FOR THE 70 WEST BUSINESS CENTER - PLANNED COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT LOCATED AT 12851 WEST 32ND AVENUE FINDINGS AND DECISION Page 002 This matter coming on forbearing upon the application of Dwaine Richter for approval of a Final Development Plan and Plat for the 70 West Business Center - Planned Commercial Development located at 12851 West 32nd Avenue (hereinafter the "Application"), the Wheat Ridge City Council, acting pursuant to Wheat Ridge Code of Laws § 26-25, adopts the following findings and decision: 1. The Application wasfiled on July 9,1996. On September 18,1996,the Wheat Ridge Planning Commission held a public hearing on the Application. That hearing was continued to October 3, 1996, at which time the Planning Commission voted to recommend approval of the Application, with conditions. 2. The public notices required by law having been published, and the public hearing having been conducted, the City Council has jurisdiction to hear and decide the case. 3. On October 28,1996, the City Council held a public hearing on the Application. Evidence was taken in the form of documents and testimony from the applicant, City staff, and from other witnesses, including a number of homeowners in the immediate vicinity of the proposed development. 4. On October28,1996, atthe conclusion of the public hearing on the Application, the City Council voted to deny the Application and to direct that findings be prepared in support of that action for their consideration. 5. The City Council hereby enters itsfindings and decision denying the Application by Dwaine Richter for approval of a Final Development Plan and Plat for the 70 West Business Center - Planned Commercial Development located at 12851 West 32nd Avenue, for the following reasons: a. The uses proposed for areas C and D on the proposed Final Plan and Plat are not sufficiently defined as required by Wheat Ridge Code of Laws § 26-25(V)(B)(3)(0, and are also not sufficiently spocific so asto insure compatibility with adjacent land uses, as required by Wheat Ridge Code of Laws, 26-25(11). GED\8302T189781.1 250 11/19/96 16:33:49 RIGRTFAX 4.80->CIT4 OF UUMT RIDGE RightFAX Page 883 b. The potential uses for Area E are so unspecific as to prevent meaningful review of the compatibility of the development with adjacent land uses, as required by Wheat Ridge Code of Laws § 26-25(ll)(A). o. The absence of a ten-foot high soreen wall or other appropriate buffering device extending north from the existing screen wall to connect with the existing east-west screen wall around Area E contributes to the incompatibility of the development with adjacent residential uses. d. The proposed use of Area D for twenty-four hour businesses, including a fast food restaurant and twenty-four hour automobile service station, renders those areas incompatible with adjacent residential uses, as required by Wheat Ridge Code of Laws, 26-25(11) and (IV)(A). e. The height and location of signs such that additional light will be shed on established residential neighborhoods to the west, render the Application incompatible with those adjacent uses, asrequired by Wheat Ridge Code of Laws, 26-25(11), and does not comply with the Wheat Ridge Sign Code at § 26-410(e). regarding height of freestanding signs. f. The proposed development of a commercial building on the portion of Area C, shown as Lot 5 and containing 1,250 square feet for such uses is incompatible with the residential uses immediately to the west, and, in addition, relies upon a design which places the required parking for such commercial uses within use Area C, designated "a buffer and landscape area." Such areas may not be devoted to such uses. This renders that aspect of the Application inconsistent with Wheat Ridge Code of Laws § 26-25(il)(E)(7). g. The areas and dimensions of portions of the subject property devoted to individual uses have changed significantly since approval of the Outline Development Plan in 1975, such that the assumptions relied upon in granting Outline Development Plan approval may no longer be valid. h. The Application fails to adequately mitigate the overall intrusive impacts of the proposed development, including light, odor and noise. Based upon testimony in the record, the Application as filed does not comply with the standards established at Wheat Ridge Code of Laws § 26-25(Ip• WHEREFORE, the Application is denied for the reasons set forth above. ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Wheat Ridge, this 25 day of November, 1996, by a vote of in favor and against. * Mayor did not sign this Resolution DAN WILDE, MAYOR 6_A5302T10373 L 1 -2- 251 11/19/96 16:3420 EIGETFAX 4.88->CIT4 OF WEAT EIDGE SightFAX Page 884 ATTEST: WANDA SANG, CITY CLERK APPROS OFORM: GERALD. DAHL, CITY ATTORNEY GM15302A189781.1 3 252 Dwaine R. Richter v. City of Wheat Ridge, et al. 96CV2691 Certified Record Volume 7 12/05/90 THU 10:04 F.1% 905 208 0215 GORSUCH RIRGIS X1011 DISTRICT J COURT J ~s t - LINTY, STATE OF COLORADO Case No. 9L)F L J. ((J1 , Division ~.1., IWo r } ~ :B TI CN1f COMPLAINT •iso_ DWAINE R. RICHTER AND VIRGINIA L. RICHTER,. dba 70 i T BtRNESS CENTER, p Plaintiffs, rIV v. CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, a municipal corporation of the State of Colorado; CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, the governing body of the City of Wheat Ridge; DAN WILDE, in his official capacity as the Mayor of the City of Wheat 'Ridge; VANCE.EDWARDS, JEAN D. PIELDSI DONALD R. EAFANTI, RAE JEAN BERM, KEN SILER, TONY SOLkNO, DENNIS HALL, and CLAUDIA WORTH, in their official capacities as present members of the City council of the city of Wheat Ridge, Defendants. For their Complaint, Plaintiffs Dwaine R. Richter and Virginia L. Richter, dba 70 West Business center (hereinafter "the Richters") allege as follows: I PARTIES 1. Plaintiffs Dwaine R. Richter and•Virgittjj~. L. Richter are residents and taxpayers of the City of Wheat Ridge in Jefferson County, Colorado. "Their residential address is 11668 W. 39th Place, Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80033. Plaintiffs conduct business under the tradename.70 West Business Center. 2. Detendant City of Wheat Ridge (hereinafter the "City") is a home rule municipal corporation of the State of Colorado. 3. Defi'-A.ndant City Council of the City, of Wheat Ridge (hereinafter the-"City Council") is the governing body•of the City of Wheat Ridge, and`is empowered with the responsibility to make decisions regarding, and to approve contracts entered into. by, the City of Wheat Ridge. 4. Defendant Dan Wilde is the present Mayor of the City. This suit is against Mayor Wilde in his official capacity as the Mayor of the city. PLAINTIPPS EXHIBIT 1 001 12/05/00 THU 10:04 Fe1I 303 208 0215 GORSUCH KIRGIS 5. Defendants Vance Edwards, Jean D. Fields, Donald R. Eafanti, Rae Jean Behm, Ken siler, Tony Solano, Dennis Hall, and Claudia Worth are all present members of the City Council. This suit is against defendants in their official capacities as present members of the city council. II. GENERAL ALLEGATIONS el 012 6. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference the allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through 5 of this Complaint as if set forth in full herein. r 7. Between 1969 and 1971, Plaintiffs purchased certain property consisting of approximately to acres, generally located at the northwest corner of I-70 and 32nd Avenue in Jefferson County. 8. On-or about April 11, 1974, the city annexed the 10-acre parcel.. 9. On or about June 20, 1975, the city approved an Outline Development Plan under the name of 70 west Business. .Center•for the 10-acre parcel, which Plan allowed for commerciad. development thereon. 10. In January of 1984, Plaintiffs sold approximately 2.93 acres of the 10-acre parcel (otherwise known as Lot 1) to the La Quinta Motor Inn. 11. On June 21, 1988 Plaintiffs sold_an additional parcel of approximately .275 acres (otherwise known as Lot 5) to Sam `Barnhill. Plaintiffs retained the remaining 6.8 acres for development purposes. (Plaintiffs' remaining property of 6.8 acres shall hereinafter beyreferred to 'as the "Property'!)... 12.. The Property is bounded on its east side by the Youngfield Service Road (hereinafter the "Road"), which•,runscparallel to and approximately.50••feat from the westbound I-70 off-ramp: (See the map- attached as Exhibit A and incorporated herein). 13. The Road is used both by passenger vehicles and by heavy trucks travelling to and from the Jefferson County-sand and gravel plant north of the Property. 14. Sometime around May of 1984, the,Colorado Department of Highways (now the Colorado Department of Transportation and hereinafter "CDOT") identified the• close proximity of the intersection of the Road and 32nd Avenue--'and the, intersection of the westbound I-70 off-ramp and 32nd Avenue as a traffic hazard. 15. At the same time, CDOT mandated as a permanent.solution to the traffic hazard, the relocation of the Road so it- would join - 2 - 002 12/05/00 THU 10:05 FAX 303 208 0215 GORSUCH RIRGIS 32nd Avenue farther to the west, away from the intersection of the 1-70 off-ramp and 32nd Avenue. 16. Subsequently CDOT notified the City that unless the relocation of the Road was accomplished within 5 years, -DOT would allow only right-in and right-out turns at the Road. 17. CDOT thereafter reaffirmed its requirement of either relocating the Road or allowing only right-in and right-out turns in a letter to the City dated June 24, 1991. 18. In late 1984 or 1985, as a temporary solution only, CDOT installed a complex, coordinated traffic signal system at the two intersections referenced in paragraph 14 above, which system is still in existence. 19. The City and CDOT agreed that if the Road were relocated in accordance with CDOT's position, the Road would have to be relocated through some portion of the Property owned by the Plaintiffs. Q 013 20. All interested parties agreed that if myr were to allow only right-in and right-out turns at the. Road and 32nd Avenue, gravel trucks travelling south on the Road from the aggregate plant would be forced to travel into a residential neighborhood west of the Property in order to turn around and head in the opposite direction. 21. Pursuant to a Final Plat officially recorded on August 13, 1984, the 70 West Business Center was subdivided into Lots 1-7. The La Quinta Motor Inn, as mentioned in paragraph 12, retained ownership of Lot 1. Lot 5 was subsequently sold to Sam Barnhill as mentioned in paragraph 13 above. The Plaintiffs thereafter retained ownership of all remaining lots. 22. On July. 9, 1984, the City approved development of Lot 1 and a portion 'of' Lot 2 of the 70 West Business Center. (Hereinafter the "Phase I Parcel"). 23. As a specific condition •to its approval of the Phase I Parcel, the City imposed a restriction on the development of Lot 3 of the Property. 24. This restriction provided, in pertinent part, "there is no development on Lot 3 until such time as the developer, the City of Wheat Ridge, and the State Highway Department complete negotiations for the relocation of the Service Road as required -by the wheat Ridge City Council hearing of July 9, 1984." 25. This restriction was duly recorded against Lot 3 on August 13, 1984, at Reception No. 84076367 at the Clerk and Recorder Office in Jefferson County. - 3 - 003 12/05/00 THU 10:05 FAX 309 268 0215 GORSUCH SIRGIS 2014 26. The foregoing recorded restriction effectively precludes development on all undeveloped parts of the Property. 27. On December 2, 1986, Ric Minetgr, Director of Public Works for the City, explained in.a letter to CDOT the city's official position regarding the traffic hazards identified by CDOT and referred to in paragraph 14 above. According to Mr. Minetqr, the City's official position was that "the current location of the Youngfield Service Road in relation to the I-70 westbound exit ramp is unacceptable in the long term." 28. On December 10, 1990, at a City Council meeting, the City - Council resolved to begin the design and engineering work needed to r relocate the Road. . 29. In order to obtain the design and engineering work necessary to relocate the Road, Plaintiffs were compelled to pay the engineering costs for the relocation project. 30. Plaintiffs did in fact subsequently pay the engineering costs for the relocation project, at a cost to themselves in excess of $10,000.. 31. On June 24, 1991, the City Council at a meeting voted 5-1 to approve the relocation project for the Road. 32. In anticipation of the city actually relocating the Road, the City did budget;and appropriate monies for the cost of its relocation and construction for fiscal year 1992. 33. On April 26, 1993, the City Council approved Resolution 1348 authorizing the Mayor and the City Clerk to execute an agreement with CDOT and the Plaintiffs (hereinafter the "Agreement") to relocate and construct the Road. A copy of said Resolution is attached.hereto as Exhibit B and incorporated herein by reference-. 34. said Resolution specifically stated.that it was "in the city's best interest to enter into" the Agreement. 35. On April. 281 1993 the Agreement calling for the relocation and construction of the Road was fully executed by the City, the CDOT and the Plaintiffs. (A copy of the Agreement is attached as Exhibit C and incorporated herein by referenced). 36. The Agreement was approved and adopted by the City in full compliance with all applicable laws, ordinances and charter provisions. As such, said Agreement is a binding and enforceable written contract among the City, the Plaintiffs, and CDOT. 37. Paragraph 13 of the Agreement required the City to tike all necessary steps to construct the Road "expeditiously." - 4 - 004 ':05/lib YHU 10:0J FAI JGo 1256 0215 GO1:sUcli 1:11_%Gl5 38. Paragraph 14 of the Agreement required the City to execute and deliver to the Plaintiffs no later than 30 days after the signing of the Agreement, a document for recordation which would explain to the public that the development restrictions against Lot 3 had been removed. 39. Paragraph 15 of the Agreement required the city to give CDOT certain documentation evidencing that the land on which the Road presently sits (hereinafter "Parcel C") was not necessary for continued use as a public highway and, therefore, could be abandoned, conveyed and deeded to the Plaintiffs. 40. Paragraph 10 of the Agreement required CDOT to transfer + Parcel C to the Plaintiffs. 41. Paragraph-11 of the Agreement required CDOT to approve and assist in the physical construction of the Road. 42. Paragraph 12 of the Agreement required CDOT to transfer the ownership of the traffic signal equipment from the existing intersection of the Road and 32nd Avenue to the City. 43. The Agreement required the Plaintiffs to do the following: (a) convey a strip of land running down the-'western border of the Property (hereinafter "Parcel A") to the city for the-purpose of building the relocated Road, and (b) accept' Parcel C as full consideration for the conveyance of Parcel A.' 44. The Agreement•did not require' anything further of the Plaintiffs. 45. Since executing the Agreement, Plaintiffs have been ready, willing, and able to fulfill each and every obligation imposed by the terms of the Agreement. 46. On or about August 11, 199T; the city filed a Petition in Condemnation- (hereinafter the "Petition") 'against the La QuinEa Motor Inns, Inc: docketed as Casa No., 93'CV'159V. The purpose of this condemnation case was to acquire a portion of the right-of-way necessary for. the relocation of the Road.- 47. The City alleged in paragraph 6 of the Petition that the relocation of the Road was a public use. 48. Subsequent to the City's approval and execution of the Agreement, pursuant to paragraph 13 thereof, the City prepared and published certain bid packages for the--construction of the relocated Road. As a result, the city received bids from various contractors for the project. - 5 - 005 12/05/98 TCU 10:08 FAX 303 298 0215 GORSUCH RIRGIS m Old 49. According to the minutes of the City, on September 27, 1993, the city, in executive session, rejected all pending construction bids for the relocation project. 50. On or'about October 27, 1993 Plaintiffs received a letter from the City Administrator, Mr. Robert C. Middaugh, informing Plaintiffs of a scheduled meeting to discuss certain "disagreements" arising out of the relocation of'the Road. Said letter also informed Plaintiffs that the City anticipated the need for several additional meetings on the relocation issue. 51. The terms and, conditions of the Agreement were unambiguous, and no further discussions or meetings were necessary r to implement the city's contractual obligation to relocate and construct the Road. 52. On November 3, 1993 plaintiffs responded to Mr. Middaugh's letter of October 27, 1993. In said response Plaintiffs reminded the city of the existing Agreement and of the City's legal duty to fulfill and abide by all of its, obligations in connection with the relocation of the Road. 53. In the November 3, 1993 letter Plaintiffs also expressed their concern that the construction season was drawing to an end and the construction project had not yet begun. 54: On or about November 3, 1993, counsel for the City and the La Quinta Motor Inn filed a Motion and-Stipulation for Stay in the aforedescribed condemnation case in which'counsel requested a stay of the condemnation action through January 3, 1994. 55. Counsel for the City further represented in the Motion and Stay "that on September 27, 1993 the City, had postponed the approval of a•construction contract to build the Road . . , for 90 days to allow for negotiations* which may result in no road being constructed on the lands of the Defendant."' 56. Under information and belief,,. it is Plaintiffs' understanding .that the aforedescribed condemnation case was dismissed effective June 7, 1994. 57. Through various contacts between Plaintiffs and Defendants, Plaintiffs have been informed that the City does not intend to abide by its obligations to construct and relocate the Road in accordance with the written Agreement of the parties. 58. By letter dated June 6,. 1994 Defendants informed Plaintiffs -in writing of the City's decision not to relocate the Road. - 6 - 006 12/05/90 7JU 10:06 FAX 306 208 0215 GORSUCH HIRGIS 59. Defendants' offer as an explanation of their decision that it is no longer in the best interest of the City to abide by its obligation to relocate the Road as contained in the Agreement. 60. The City and the city Council have received pressure from homeowners living outside of the city limits as well as the owner of the La Quinta Motel, not to relocate the Road pursuant to the Agreement. ' 61. As of this date, the city has not relocated the Road or taken any steps to do so. 62. As of this date, the City' has not republished a bid r package since rejecting pending construction. bids in September 1993. 63. As of this date, under information and belief, the City has not removed the recorded development restrictions against the Propertyi•,or given Plaintiffs the appropriate documentation attesting to this fact for recordation. 64. This Complaint has been filed alleging among other claims for relief that the City has breached its contract. with Plaintiffs, that the City is estopped from changing its-•decision to relocate the Road, and that the City's actions constitute a taking or inverse condemnation of Plaintiffs' Property. III. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF FIkST CLAIM FOR RELIEF (Breach of Contract) 65. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference the allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through 64 of this Complaint as if set forth in full. herein.. 66. On•Apri•l 26y• 1993 the City entered into a binding and enforceable Agreement- with Plaintiffs. In the Agreement, the city bound itself to perform certain. acts. 67-. The City has materially breached all of its contractual obligations to the Richters including, but not limited to: A. Its obligation to relocate the Road pursuant to paragraph 1 of the Agreement; B. Its obligation to accept a bid for construction of the relocated Road pursuant to paragraph 13 of the Agreement; C. Its obligation to construct the'Road expeditiously so as to be open to traffic during the 1993 - 7 a017 007 12/05/00 THU 10:07 FAX 903 208 0215 GORSUCH HIRGIS ~~'•S construction season pursuant to paragraph 13 of the Agreement; D. Its obligation to remove development restrictions on the Property pursuant to paragraph 14 of the -Agreement or to provide Plaintiffs with the documentation needed to do so; and E. 'Its obligation to construct a sound barrier pursuant to paragraph 3 of the Agreement. 68. As a direct and proximate result of the City's breach, the Richters have suffered the following damages: . F A. Engineering, architectural, planning and administrative fees in excess of $32,000; and B. Loss of value for the use and development of their Property in excess of $500,000. 69. In addition to the foregoing damages, the Plaintiffs are entitled to attorney's fees, costs of this proceeding, costs of expert witness fees, interest on any judgment, and further relief as this court deems appropriate under the circumstances. 70. Any defense of this action by Defendants in light of the blatant breach they have committed is frivolous and groundless, thus entitling Plaintiffs to their reasonable attorney fees and costs pursuant to C.R.S. 5'13-17-101, at seq. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs pray this honorable Court to enter judgment in favor of Plaintiffs and against Defendants on their breach of contract claims, and also award Plaintiffs all of their appropriate damages in an amount to be determined at trial, including, but not limited to, their court costs, expert witness fees, interest, legal costs and fees and all other relief which the Court deems'appropriate.. SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF (Estoppel/Detrimental Reliance/Specific Performance) 71. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference the allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through 70 of this Complaint as if set forth in full herein. 72. Defendants made promises and representations to Plaintiffs, which included among other things: (a) that the City would relocate and construct the Road; (b) that the city would take steps expeditiously to have the' relocated Road open to traffic during the 1993 construction season; and (c) that the City would - 8 - 008 12/05/90. THU 10:07 FLY 303 298 0215 GORSUCH %IRGIS U019 remove recorded development restrictions from the Property or provide Plaintiffs with the documentation to do so. 73. Defendants should reasonably have expected that the foregoing promises and representations would induce action or forbearance on the part of the Plaintiffs. 74. Defendants, promises and representations did in fact induce action or forbearance on the part of Plaintiffs inasmuch as Plaintiffs relied to their detriment on the explicit, written promises and representations of Defendants that the Road would be relocated expeditiously and that the City would remove development ' r restrictions from the Property. 75. Relying upon the City's repeated assurances that it would relocate the Road, and its eventual written agreement to do so, Plaintiffs incurred numerous land planning, construction, engineering, architectural, administrative and legal fees and costs. 76. Plaintiffs also engaged in detailed discussions and planning sessions with various third parties interested in developing the Property based upon the relocation of the Road. 77. Plaintiffs have spent a large amount of money and time, which amounts shall be determined at trial, to expedite the Road relocation. This money and time has been spent for naught, as the Property remains undeveloped and undevelopable and the Road remains in its original location. 78. Plaintiffs are entitled to specific performance of the Agreement. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs pray this honorable Court to enter an order estopping Defendants from reneging on their obligations under the Agreement, ordering the Defendants to specifically perform all of their obligations and responsibilities under the terms of the Agreement, (including their responsibility to relocate the Road) and awarding to Plaintiffs any and all damages to be proven at trial, Court costs, expert witness fees, interest, legal costs and fees, and other relief which the Court deems just and appropriate. 9 - 009 12/05/90 1'HU 10:08 FAX 903 298 0215 GORSUCH %IRGIS U020 THIRD CLAIM FOR RELIEF (Inverse condemnation) 79. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference the allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through 78 of this Complaint as if set forth in full'herein.• 80. Plaintiffs, as ownera:of_the Property, haverertain rights to use and'develop''the*Property. 81. The Plaintiffs' rights to deyelop the Property constitute prcjperty,rights that•'cannot. be taken away.without the payment of just compensation:` r• 82. pecause the Property is composed of the land directly on the corrar._of I-70 and 32nd Avenue; it isi:::but for the, development restrictions„ a .grime"-and' valuable, location .:foe-,Qpmmercial development.;._ =r: 83. The Property is, in tact;"one of only a few undeveloped sites remaining on. the westbound I-70 off-ramp, east of the mountains: v._ 84. At present, the Plaintiffs are not•re6eiliinq'3'ny income from the use•~oV- Lot 3 except.,fo;r A. minimal rental received intermittdhtly tb°use•'it for the sale. of trees.' 85. The Property has: been adversely,impacted,by, the recorded .,restrictions imposed by-the City ~fW,more. -than ten years. 86. A cloud Has beeii`plEced• on the title of the Property because of the city's restriction on development, to the detriment of. the_1?4aintiffs' and their-Use of theYVroperty. .87. Unti•]r.,thq, City breached the Agreement, Plaintiffs were under-_the impression that all partiaa;'including the city were ready, willing and able to work towards the relocation of the Road so that the restrictions could be removed. 88. By reason of the Defendants' faibur-e' to 'relocate the Road and to remove restrictions' on the Property, the Defendants have effectively denied the Plaintiffs all economically viable use of thdix land:".such actions constitute an inverse condemnation and a tak4ng,•0--a•-prvperty right, which rights cannot be taken without payment'o! just" compensation. 89. The Plaintiffs here,in,have suffered-damages both different in kind and degree than those suffered by the'.gepeY6379nblic, which damages are the direct result of Defendants'-'fallurA"to relocate the Road and to remove restrictions on ttie -properey.: •-:i 10 - 010 12/05/06 THU 10:03 FAX 305 206 0215 GMSUCH %IRGIS 2021 90. Without the relocation of the Road and the removal of development restrictions, the plaintiffs' highest and best use of the Property has been destroyed, as has been the Property's reasonable, logical, profitable, and most productive use. 91. Without the relocation of the Road and the removal of the development restrictions, the Property is virtually without economic benefit and the Plaintiffs' distinct investment expectations have been totally frustrated. 92. Precluding the development of Plaintiffs' Property by the imposition of and the recording of the aforementioned restriction advances no legitimate local or state land use or zoning interests. 'y 93. Furthermore, when imposing the aforementioned restriction on the development of the Plaintiffs' Property, the City had absolutely no hearings nor made any -findings that. such a restriction was reasonably related to or in furtherance of legitimate local or state land use interests. 94. In Colorado the same rules apply in inverse condemnation cases as in direct condemnation cases. 95. The Defendants have the power of eminent domain but despite the fact that their actions in failing to relocate the Road and failing to remove development restrictions on the Property constitute a taking of the Plaintiffs' inherent right to use the Property, * 'the Defendants have refused to exercise their condemnation authority.. 96. Under all of the foregoing circumstances, the failure of the Defendants to relocate the Road and to remove development restrictions on the Property, and the failure of the Defendants to otherwise comply with the contractual rights of the Plaintiffs as provided in the Agreement, and the Defendants' decision to instead succumb to political pressure to leave the Road in its existing location--and thereby prevent any form of development of the Property without the payment of just compensation by a public body which has the power of eminent domain but refuses to exercise that power, are all contrary -to Article II, Section 15; Article II, Section 25; Article II, Section 6; and Article II, Section 3 of the State of Colorado Constitution and are contrary to the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution. 97.• Although damages for this inverse condemnation will be established at 'trial, at this .juncture, Plaintiffs have suffered damages for the taking of their property rights in excess of $1,000,000. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs pray that this -honorable Court enter judgment in favor of Plaintiffs and against 'Defendants on their inverse condemnation claim and for the amount of just compensation - 11- 011 12/05/00 TIIU 10:09 FAX 909 298 0215 GORSUCH HIRGIS @j 022 due the Plaintiffs as a result of the taking of their right to develop the Property, plus interest, costs of this proceeding, attorneys' fees, costs of expert witness fees and such other and further relief as this court deems appropriate under the circumstances. The Plaintiffs request that the amount of just compensation due to them be determined by a commission of three freeholders appointed by this court pursuant to the provisions of C.R.S. $ 38-1-101. FOURTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF (Illegal Expenditures Under Section 20 of Article X, Colorado constitution) 98. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference the allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through 97 of this Complaint as if set forth in.full herein. 99. Defendants have committed unlawful acts in breaching their Agreement with Plaintiffs and in their taking of Plaintiffs' property without just compensation. 100. City revenues, in an amount to be proved at trial. but which include compensation paid to the city attorney and other employees, have been expended in furtherance of Defendants' unlawful acts. 101. An unlawful act is an illegal act. 102. Subsection (1). of Section 20 of Article X of the Colorado Constitution provides, in pertinent part, that "(r)evenues . spent illegally since four full fiscal years before a suit is filed --shall be refunded with lot annual simple interest from the time of the initial conduct." WHEREPORS', plaintiffs pray that this Courtorder Defendants to refund--the total"imount of city revenues-spent in furtherance of their' breach'of7-dontract and unlawful taking of Plaintiffs' property, with ten percent annual simple interest, from the date of the illegal conduct in accordance with the provisions of Section 20(1) of Article X of the Colorado Constitution. - 12 - 012 12/05/90 TIN 10:09 FAX 909 208 0215 GORSUCH KIRGIS U023 DATED this _ day of August, 1994. Respectfully submitted, FAEGRE 8 BENSON Y; Joseph M. Montano, 13695 Leslie A. Fields, 111232 2500 Republic Plaza 370 - 17th Street r Denver, Colorado 80202-4004 (303) 592-5900 Susan E. Burch, 18669 P.O. Box 18617 Denver, Colorado 80218 (303) 698-9545 Attorneys for Plaintiffs Plaintiffs' Addresses:;; 11665 W. 39th Place Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80033. PEEOI830.NR5 - 13 - 013 12/05/90 THU 10:09 FAX 903 298 0215 GORSUCH RIRGIS EXHIBIT A S N O LL Cp O U - O } • j' N •J ~ m x x ° O N W O N G Q EjJ ? a $ z= NW U Q u) r W J W ° n4 CL z J Maio a co tTl z ~O LL ° W ° ~Q } N S;W ~i - 0 ` Cp W y U r , 7 Y Q ~ 0_s; s J- I • f 1 , L ~ ~f r fl I t •f • ~ Ali P7S ~ i i Tis~ s oQ r ~ ' 1 i ~ ~ s 1 1 i I I I 'j t 1 t t 7 i~ t Hl •'I }tie i q i~ •j3 j t e !I , fir! ~ ~t u, r S j 2 .4~ i , 1 1 5 t •f a024 014 12/05/90 TH-J 10:10 F,LI 905 288 0215 GORSUCH RIRGIS JIN 23 '94 12:45?r1 W41L XM ETC *1e45 EXHIBIT B RSS0LU7m Np. tlSp sort" of 199 7ITL97 ASSO "ZON APtROYINV ZWWR00VELMM NTAL AMCERRM Or "MATZO', AM D101INS AND VIR01l1IA RZCWM, OeA 70 WUr lI1tsum cm"sa WHO At, Section 14.2 of the FAW4 Jule Charter of the City pf cheat Ridge requires that all intorgoverw4ntai r s49r"4 nts ' tered into W the City ba epprewd by re*oluticni the etteoon , it to In the City's beat interact to Mter Into' of TYanappr{a~torNr yl knows y theCOlorado Department •kiOhOr# the-City of M11sat Ridge, and Color Dweine It. Virginia L. r-ownara Qbe 70 Pest suilft$* Oenterl and a a".3 oonetiuc 'Gf =oa4ra7 noatp01 +•va -vowt 13, foand r the directly vest'of Z-70 on prop" ourrantly owned by 1t, Dwainj Riohtarj Wit the Ci s ps iY RsfOLYiD Err the city Council of tea of Wheat RidQa, Oplgr!Oo, aq•901 Olaf wheat RidQt, (ki2aapp ' tMSV OoIf-betow am 8004,y the City of Tsenap0ttatim e" ova'" mw a lucht tw,dof e• •70 Mset'suai+»aa CrataEy ta'A+rpasni+.' ~m tw-inaee asld =A4 rat lea aa~0 City; -7.7- •!S! tutborised to ezecuts D0liR AM sRiOLVip;.thlS ML day ct Amu,- im. all. MteAa• fagQl C CierlC . , ' 015 12/05/00 TIM 10:10 F.A.% 305 208 0215 GORSUCH RIRGIS EXHIBIT C AGREEMENT .This Agreement is made between and among the Colorado Depart- ment of Transportation, formerly known as the Colorado Department of Highways, the City of Wheat Ridge; Colorado, and Dwaine R. and Virginia L. Richter-Owners dba 70 West Business Center. RECITALS 1. The Colorado Department of Transportation, as the Colo- rado Department of Highways, after acquiring certain parcels of IVland En'"I967, designed and constructed both the off-ramp on the west side of I-70 intersecting with West 32nd Avenue, in the city of Wheat Ridge, and the West Frontage Road of 1-70 North of West 32nd Avenue, under Project I 70-3 (43) 271. 2. The Colorado Department of Transportation and the City of Wheat Ridge agree for improved-traffic flow and safety it is necessary that the southerly intersection of the West Frontage Road be relocated westerly from the existing intersection with West 32nd Avenue, which is immediately proximate to the inter- section of the off-ramp with West 32nd Avenue. 3. The City of Wheat Ridge, in cooperation with the Colo- rado Department of Transportation (formerly the Colorado Depart- ment of Highways), placed a restriction on the plat of 70 West Business Center that no development on. Lot 3 would take place until negotiations for the relocation of the West Frontage-Road were completed among the three parties to this agreement. This restriction was placed upon the plat on or about July 9, 1984- 4. The land occupied by 70 West Business Center and the West Frontage Road, insofar as it pertains to this agreement, were annexed into the city of Wheat Ridge on or about April 11, 1974. 5. The land known as 70 West Business-Center was zoned as a planned commercial district with certain specified uses with an approved outlined development plan on or about June 2U, 1975. 6. In recognition of the traffic concerns, the Colorado Department of Transportation, the City of Wheat Ridge and 70 West Business Center wish to provide for the acquisition of prop- erty, to design, construct, operate and maintain a relocated por- tion of the West Frontage Road. -1- x025 016 12/05/00 T3U 10:11 FAX 303 208 0215 GORSUCH KIRGIS Z027 in consideration of the intent of the three parties, each party agrees with each of the other parties, and all agree among each other, with the agreements each contingent upon the other, as follows: 1. The City of Wheat Ridge agrees to construct a relocat- ed Youngfield service Road (otherwise known as the West Frontage Road) as shown on attached drawings and legal descriptions known as Parcel A and Parcel B. These attachments are made a part here- of as though fully set forth. •p' 2. The City of Wheat Ridge agrees to take the relocated portion of the West Frontage. Road onto the City street system. The City of Wheat Ridge will 'undertake all jurisdiction, includ- ing safety, maintenance and repair, and other concerns in respect to the relocated portion of this roadway. 3. The City of Wheat Ridge will install a noise barrier in place of.the existing visual protection -fence on the berm run- ning in a north-south direction on the west property line of 70 West Business Center at its own cost. The City shall be respon- sible for damage, if any, done to the existing sprinkler system installed by 70 West Business Center for the maintenance of grass and other foliage, as required by the City of Wheat Ridge. 70 West Business Center shall maintain the said noise barrier. 70 West Business Center shall grant the City of Wheat Ridge the appropriate rights to enter upon the property to install the said noise barrier. 4. The City of Wheat Ridge shall give full opportunity to 70 West Business Center to review and approve the design of the sound barrier, which approval shall not be unreasonably with ~r held. a~ g : ci,c ~ i~awenr o€ -main eenanca, by 5. The City of Wheat Ridge currently has in effect both an Enhanced' Sales Tax Incentive Program ("ESTIP"') and a Business Development Zone ("BDZ") provision as separate parts of its Sales and Use Tax ordinance. The City cgrees to consider in good faith any application by the Richters or their successors for inclusion in either program for the purpose of allowing the Richtera or their successors to share in "enhanced sales tax" and/or "expect- ed incremental future sales and use tax revenue", as those terms are now, or as they may in the future be, defined. Any monies so received by the Richters or their successors pursuant to an agreement approved under eitner or Doth of such programs may be -2- 017 12/05/90 To 10:11 FdI 303 298 0215 GORSUCH HIRGIS Z028 applied to the costs incurred, if any, by' the Richters or their successors, in installing (when applicable MUTCD warrants are met) signalization of the intersection between the relocated Youngfield service Road and West 32nd Avenue, and the relocation of any or all utilities (including gas, electric, water, sewer and telephone) and utility lines and facilities presently situate upon or within the property described as the 70 West Business Center. Nothing contained in this paragraph shall limit the Richters or their successors from applying for permission to make additional uses of any funds agreed to be shared by the City under either the "ESTIP" or "BDZ" programs. 6. 70 West Business center shall relinquish and convey to the City of wheat Ridge its right, title and interest to Parcel A for the purpose of constructing, maintaining and op- erating the 'relocated Youngfield Service Road prior to the'City signing a contract for construction of the said relocated Young- field Service Rga4..• 7. 70 West Business Center has supplied, at its own ex- pense, construction drawings for the construction of the described relocated Youngfield Service Road. The City of Wheat Ridge shall shall supply to 70 West'Business Center its officially approved construction drawings for review prior to bid. 8. 70 West Business Center shall accept as consideration, together with the consideration of the mutual promises otherwise contained herein, that portion of the existing Youngfield Service Road which is known as Parcel C in the attachment to this agree- ,.1 ment. 9. The Colarado.nepartment of Transportation,asir~ the ey Highway Commissioq.,shall consider Parcel C. to,beIabandoned when the relocated Youngfield Service Road, as shown in Parcels A and 0, is completed; and title ia'to be transferred to the adjacent land owner which is agreed to be Dwaine R. and Virginia L. Richter as Fee Owners of 70- West Business Center, no later than thirty (30) days subsequent to the opening of the relocated'Youngfield Service Road to traffic. The transfer of title to Parcel C shall n be by deed, a*+4 tt=ecd=rama epartment_-0f 1 l~y~/ v4`r ego-sa ifl ..property. ion_term / 10. The Colorado Department of 'transportation shall propose ' the necessary resolutions and docuiuents to the Transportation Commission for the approval process necessary to transfer Parcel C to 70 West Business Center. -3- 018 12/05/00 TTLJ 10:12 FAX 000 298 0215 GORSUCH %IRGIS 11. The Colorado Department of Transportation shall review, where necessary, the construction drawings and shall cooperate with, and give reasonable assistance required to, the City of wheat Ridge in respect to the construction of the relocated Youngfield Service Road. 12. The Colorado Department of Transportation shall transfer such traffic signalization equipment as is available at the inter- section of the existing West Frontage Road and West off-ramp of 1-70, and West 32nd Avenue, to the City of Wheat Ridge. y 13. Upon the signature of all parties to this agreement, the City of Wheat Ridge shall forthwith initiate and move forward, consistent with its own ordinances and procedures, to prepare and publish a bid package for the construction of the relocated West Frontage Road on the alignment in accordance with the exist- ing and outstanding resolutions of the City Council of the City of Wheat Ridge providing for funding of this construction and providing for the alignment of the relocated West Frontage Road. The City of Wheat Ridge shall further process all necessary steps to construct the described relocated West Frontage Road expeditiously so that the road may be open to traffic during the 1993 construction season. 14. The City of Wheat Ridge shall execute and furnish to 70 West Business Center so that it may record with the Clerk and Recorder of Jefferson.County a document describing to the public that the restriction on development of Lot 3 on 70 West Business Center, recorded at Book 79, Page 47, of the records o'f Jefferson County, REC No. 84076366, dated August 13, 1984, has been removed. The aforesaid document signifying the removal of the described restriction shall be executed and delivered to 70 West Business Center no later than thirty (30) days after the signing of this agreement. 15. The City of Wheat Ridge will give the Colorado Depart- ment of Transportation the necessary documentation that the prop- erty known as Parcel C is not necessary for use as a public high- way, is within the City boundaries, and will not be placed upon the City street system and, therefore, should be abandoned and conveyed and deeded to the adjacent land owners of 70 West Busi- ness Center. 1G. That curb cuts on the relocated Youngfield service Road shall exist as shown on the construction drawings, and shall be constructed within the City of Wheat Ridge construction project for the relocated Youngfleld Service Road. The aforesaid curb -4- Q 029 019 12/03/00 TIN 10:12 M 909 288 0215 GOi.SUCH RIRGIS QJ 090 cuts iaay be adjusted, at the sole expense of the property owner, at the time of the filing of any final development plan for de- velopment on 70 West Business Center upon approval by the City of Wheat Ridge which approval shall not unreasonably be wlthheld. approvedasJ to form: John E. ayes City A orney City o Wheat Ridge Colorado attest: ~I 19`j ~r( Wanda sang City Clerk City of Wheat Ridge Colorado Department of Transportation State of Colora- HY, L Robert L. Clevenger, Chief Engineer Timothy J .,SWKs, Chief Clerk . -5- City of heat Ridge, Colorado by ~o. V. L✓ Ray J. ger, mayor city of Wheat Ridge Colorado Department of Transportation State of Colorado by ~/CGrkX 70 West Business Cen by Dwa re R. RiChte by /ni V rai is L. Richter' 020 12/05/90 TIN 10:13 FAX 303 290 0215 e GORSUCH HIRGIS PARCEL „A„ (PROPOSED RIGHT-OF-WAY) 25J7 Or P ee t -PST P: les~~ \ ~.iOp Sr Sf[ M74, t4, C \ LQT 1 I r \t-] OO it- OC L 1A I y 3r 4f lg i I 01' 39. R S 41' Qfl • co a- 113.30 I / / WEST 70 I zz' BUSINESS CENTER I a I / , I I' I w • ' ° I LOT 2 I a LOT 7 I tq I~ / I A 18 / I 100 50 CU'M1L' 1"-100' Pmcff,;6 41 0.J.6 nc OT - N - 7S JO' i S6,3T3. 3r IY [ L ' 501]r '/1732' 1 I 1Y / v, 50.11' I LOT 3 I a " I I 3p I • • - 23 30' 0~ R r7y250P R - 190.ar ( y~ ~1i21z Jx' If C I 1onl'131z u ~Y / o~ - ~o.1r I M w {T ITT.0e" s ov ar If C 2,.26• - / / I aT S473 E - 36505 IT l L 23.72 I 36.69' p~oF. 24626'SY C / R ~p ~ / S 6P U' W y VIESC ajARTFR CORNER PARCEL "A ;EC. 29, T,a S.,R.69 W-. 61H P.4- WEST 32nd AVENUE T- _ _ _ _ ' I F I Q031 64 36" OT v J7a0' =::7FRASIER ENGINEERING CO. ENGINEERS do SURVEYORS I I 10J0[~«ca wain woW~ii7 Z' (361) 731-9131 %~7O.0C\0IRCM 1 2 I 10-0I-91 N :-7W 1Z 021 12/05/00 THU 10:13 F1.L 303 208 0215 GORSUCH HIRGIS PARCEL 'A' (PROPOSED RIGHT-0F-WAY FROM RICHTER) DESCRIPTION A strip of land situated in, over and across lots 7 and 2, 70 West Business Center, City of Wheat Ridge, County of Jefferson, State of Colorado, described as follows' Beginning at a point on the south line of said lot 7 whence the southwest comer thereof hears S. 890 43' 30' W. a distance of 100.87 feet and whence the west quarter comer of 4cdipe49rT. 3 S.,R. 69 W., of the 6th P.M. tears S. 860 14' 07' W. a distance of 661.68 feet; 1. Thence S. 89o 43' 30' W. along the south line of said lot 7, a distance of 46.13 feet to a point of nontangent curve; 2. Thence northeasterly along a nontangent curve to the left having a radius of 26.50 feet and a antral angle of 54a 32' 10' an are distance of 25.22 feet, the chord of which tears N. 260 28' 53' E. a distance of 24.28 fed, to a point of tangent; 3. Thence N. 00o 47' 12' W. a distance of 27.08 feet, to a point of curve; 4. Thence along a curve to the left having a central angle of 23o 30' 00' and a radius of 190.00 feet an arc distance of 77.93 feet, the chord of which bears N. 12o,321 12' W. a distance of 77.38 fed, to a point of tangent;: 5. Thence N. 24o 17' 12' W. a distance of 36.97 feet, to a point of curve; 6. Thence along a curve to the right i::. ing a antral angle of 23o 30' 00' and a radius of 125.00 feet an are distance of 51.27 fed, the chord of which bears N 12a 32' 12' W. a distance of 50.91 feet, to'a point of tangent, 7. Thence N. 00c 47' 12' W. a distance of 280.46 fed, to a point of curve; 8. Thence along a curve to the right having a central angle of 86o 46' 52' and a radius of 125.00 feet an arc distance of 189.33 feet, the chord of which bears N. 420 36' 14' E. a distance of 171.74 feet, to a point of reverse, nontangent curve on die northerly line of said lot 7; 9. Thence southeasterly along the northerly line of lot 7 and lot 2 along a nontangent curve to the left having a central angle of 290 52' 08' and a radius of 175.00 feet an arc distance of 91.23 fed, the chord of which bears S. 75o 24' 56' E. a distance of 90.20 fed to a point of tangent; 2032 022 northeast corner of said lot 2; 11. Thence S. 000 30' 00' E. continuing along the boundary of said lot 2 a distance of 17.60 feet; 12. Thence S. 89o 38' 00' W. continuing along the boundary of said lot 2 a distance of 32.80 fcet; 13. Thence S. Oho 31' 00' W. continuing along the boundary of said lot 2 a distance of 7.95 feet; %14. Thence S. 890 39' 00' W. parallel with and 25.50 feet south of the north line of said lot 2 a distance of 225.60 feet; 15. Thence S. 00o 21' 00' E. a distance of 1.60 foot to a point of hontangent curve; 16. Thence southwesterly along a nontangent curve to the left having a radius of 85.00 feet and a central angle of 83o 37' 42" an arc distance of 124.06 feet, the chord of which bears S. 410 01. 39' W. a distance of 113.34 feet, to a point of tangent; . 17. Thence S. 000 47' 12' E. a distance of 270.39 feet, to a point of curve; 18. Thence along a curve to the left having a antral angle of 23o 30' 00' and a radius of 75.00 feet an art; distance of 30.76 fed, the chord of which bears S. 120,32' 12' E. a distance of 3055 feet,. to a point of tangent; : M-Thence S. 240 17' 12' E. a distance of 85.97 fat, to a point of curve; 20. Thence along a curve to the right having a central angle of 230 30' 00' and a radius of 125.00 feet an arc distance of 51.27 feet, the chord of which bears S. 12o 32' 12' E. a distance of 50.91 fed, to a point of tangent; 21. Thence S. 00o 47' 12' 1~ a distance of 21.76 fat; '22. Thence S. 42° 54' 31' E. a distance of 38.69 feet, to a point on the south line of said lot 7; 23. Thence S. 89o 43' 30' W. along the south line of said lot 7 a distance of 50.95 fat, to the point of beginning; o: 023 12/05/00 TO 10:14 FAX 309 208 0215 GORSUCH %IRGIS The parcel described aboiczontains 41,282 square feet, or 0.948 acre, more or less. Bearings are based on the plat of 70 West Business Center. Prepared by: Frasier Engineering Company October 22. 1991 Revised April 3, 1992 Job No. 3902-013 ZOS4 024 12/05/90 THU 10:14 FA% 303 298 0215 GMUCH HIRGIS PARCEL "B" {PROPOSED RICI'1'1'-01P-WAY} dgo." w i r, m E LOT I N ~r31 1r E S s oQ 2r our c t.or ~ er ar o?1• tm.ir I ---r J ~~p iTL 'tY' /f♦ i ' srlor c~43 K- / O-001 / f so I ~ I / svu: r.2ov - I ~ 1 I WEST 70 , i BUSINIISS CEDFI'Ea I ~ I I / i ° 1 ' 1 / I U I V LOT 2 I 5 I LOT 7/ / I f I / I I I A I ~ , ~ / 1 I .a I-------i w I I I z ID / I I LOT 3 .L j i % ` f • I ` I ~ 'I I f Z035 P.O. B. PARCEL "B" -t 51 OVAMER CORNER SE': 29. 1-3 S.•R.69 W.. B1H P.U. rVGSr 32nd AVENUE In I I COMASIER ENGINEERING CO. I z I ENGINEERS & SURVEYORS Z 10773 C 1 WAM Stf1E 207 I I a, IMo1oto s W231 1-77-V, -70.'12 1025 12/05/90 THU 10:14 FAX 303 298 0215 GORSUCH %IRGIS 11036 PARCEL '13' (PROPOSED RiO1R'-OF-WAY FROM LA QUINN Dmcmirrm A strip of land situated In, over and across dlot 1, escribed follows Center, city of Wheat Ridge, County of Jefferson, State of Colorado, . Beginning at.tile , of comer of said lot I whenoe- die west quarter comer S. 560 30' 14'' W. a durance of IM80 Section-29, 'Iy 3 S.,R. 69 W, 1. Thence S. 890 39' 00' W. along Lite south line of said lot 1 a distance of 180.12 feet, to a point of curve; 2. Tlhencc continuing along said south line along a curve to the right having dhow of s of 175.00 feet and a central angle of 290 52' 08' an arc distance of 91.23 feet, which bears N. 75o 24' 56' W. a distance of 90.20 feet to a point of nontangent, broken curve 3. Tlience easterly along a nontangent curve to the right having a radius of 125.00 feet and a central angle of 03o 39' 20' an arc distance of 7.98 feet, die chord of which bees N. 870 49' 20' E. a distance of 7.97 feet; 4. Thence S. 000 21' 00' E- a distance. of 1.00 foot; 5, "j-hence N. 890 39' 00' E. parallel with and 22.50 fed nordl of the south line of said lot 1 a disiance of 214.05 feet; 6. Thence N. 490 54' 17' a a distance of 58.65 feet, to a point on the east line of Said lot 1; 7. Tlumee S. 000 30' 00' In,. along the east line of said lot 1 a d'rsWicc of 60.00 fee .lo the point of beginning; The parcel described above contains 6,211 square feet, or 0.143 acre, more or less. Bearings are based on tike plat of 70 West Business Center prepared by: Frasier Engineering Company October 22, 1991 Revised February 20, 1992 Job No 3902-013 026 12/05/96 THU 10:14 FAX 303 298 0215 GORSUCH %IRGIS PARCEL- (EXISTING HIGHWAY RIGHT-OF-WAY) LOT I sac i s a9. 79. 0& a '0o I I I So I SC/LL, C-1w I 70 WEST BUSIN SS CENTER I I I i. I I LOT 2 I I I LOT 7 V I I I • ` ` $I LOT 3 U03T w jr ow w Pia CE s. C 51 7 K //o/ //a/ I ~ s ar • 3C + ' sa• / 9•.31 ~ / ~ 09' 9 ` ~ ~ ~ . • ~9_46 ~ ' - P.O.B as u 3v E 290• ~ ~ PARCEL _C' r'EST OUARTER CORNER SEC. 20; T.3 S..R.69 W.. 6TH P.M. WEST 32110 AVENUE E- ~ • I a I • 1 I ~FRASIER ENGINEERING G0. I ¢ i ENC•INEERS x SURVEYORS '0.773 r /WN•'~. surtC 107 z ' UClMR. COLOA•00 W231 L7 (303) 73'-915' 170WSC\P• =C N '0-21-9' 027 1 I 12/05/98 THU 10:15 FAX 305 298 0215 GORSUCH KIRGIS PARCEL 'C'. (EXISTING HIGHWAY RIGHT-OF-WAY) DESCRIPTION A parcel of land situated in the northwest quarter of Section 29, T.3 S., R. 69 W. of the 6th P.M., County of Jefferson, State of Colorado, described as follows: Q 038 Beginning at the southeast comer of lot 7, 70 West business Center, whence the West quartet comer of said Section 29 tzars S. 860.331 43' W. a distance of 724.88 feet; Y .1. Thence N. 890 43"• 30' E. a distance of 29.00 feet; 2. Thence N. 790 09' 50` E. a distance-of 194.52 feet; 3. Thence N. 060 31' 00' E. parallel with and 76.67 feet cast of the east line of lots 2 and 3 of said 70 West Business Center, a distance of 559.64 fed, to a point on the extension of the north line of said lot 2; 4. Thence S. 890 39' 00' W. along the said extension of lot 2 a distinct of 25.00 feet; 5. Thence S. 000 21' 00' E. a distance of 25.50 feet; 6. Thence S. 890 39'00* W. parallel with and 25.50 feet south of the said extension a distance of 55.30 feet, to a point on the east line of said lot 2; 7. Thence S. 060 31' 00' W. along the east line of said lots 2 and 3 a distance of 539.55 feet, to the southeast corner of said lot 3; 8. Thence S. 890 43' 30" W. along the south line of said lot 3 a distance of 142.60 feet, to the southwest comer of said lot 3; 9. Thence S.004 47' 15' E. along the east line of said lot 7 a distance of 30.00 fed, to the point of beginning; The parcel described above codtalns 45,176 square feet,' Or 1.037 acre, more or less. Bearings are based on the plat of 70 West Business Center. Prepared by: Frasier Engineering Company October 22, 1991 Job No. 3902-013 Rev. March 11, 1992 028 12/05/98 THU 10:15 FAI 903 298 0215 GORSUCH HIRGIS r B DISTRICT COURT, JEFFERSON COUNTY, STATE OF COLORADO Civil Action No. 94 CV 1586, Division 1 STIPULATION FOR SETTLEMENT AND DISMISSAL DWAINE R. RICHTER, dba 70 WEST BUSINESS CENTER, Plaintiff, V. CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, a municipal corporation of the State of Colorado, CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, the governing body of the City of Wheat Ridge, DAN WILDE, in his official capacity as the Mayor of the City o Wheat Ridge, VANCE EDWARDS, JEAN D. FIELDS, DONALD R. EAFANTI, RAE JEAN BERM, KEN SILER, TONY SOLANO, DENNIS•HAILL, and CLAUDIA WORTH, in their official capacities as members of the City Council of the City of Wheat Ridge, Defendants. COME NOW the Plaintiff, Dwaine R, Richter (hereinafter hRichter"), and Defendants, City of Wheat Ridge, the city council of the City of Wheat Ridge, Dan Wilde, Vance Edwards, Jean D. Fields, Donald R. Eafanti, Rae Jean Bohm, Ken Siler, Tony Solano, Dennis Sall and Claudia Worth (hereinafter *Wheat •Ridge•), by and through'their respective counsel, and stipulate to settlement and' dismissal of this case with prejudice of Plaintiff's complaint based on the following agreements and stipulations: . 1. The parties shall perform all actions required by the Agreement dated April 28, 1993, and attached as Exhibit c to Richter's Coinplaint. These actions include, -but are not limited to, the following:.. a. Richter shall grant an irrevocable right of entry to Wheat Ridge for the property described as Parcel A (and attached as part of Exhibit 'A to this Stipulation) upon signature of this Stipulation by the City of Wheat Ridge. b. Wheat Ridge shall promptly construct the Relocated Youngfield Service Road on Parcel A. The PLAINTIFF'S. 1m\3]a]]\1]1912.1 EXHIBIT . 2 2039 029 12/05/98 THU 10:24 FAX 900 298 0215 GORSUCH HIRGIS 1 (0040 parties acknowledge that Wheat Ridge advertised the construction project for the construction of the Relocated Youngfield Service Road on November 9, 1995. Wheat Ridge shall award the contract for the construction of the Relocated Youngfield Service Road on or about December 11, 1995. It is anticipated that construction time will be 60 working days, excluding weather delays. C. Upon completion of the Relocated Youngfield Service Road, Wheat Ridge shall request that the Colorado Department of Transportation abandon the right-of-way for the old Youngfield Service Road (described as Parcel C and the legal description of which is attached as part of Exhibit A to this Stipulation) and convey Parcel C to Richter. d. Upon conveyance of the abandoned right-of-way by the Colorado Department of Transportation to Richter, Richter shall execute a special warranty deed conveying Parcel A to Wheat Ridge. Richter agrees to accept Parcel C as full compensation for the conveyance to Wheat Ridge of Parcel A. e. Wheat Ridge shall construct•a noise barrier on the berm rumnt„g in a north-south direction on the west property line of the Richter Property. Richter shall grant Wheat Ridge temporary easements necessary for the'construction of the noise barrier. Richter shall have the right to review and approve the plans for the noise barrier, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld. Upon completion of the noise barrier, maintenance of the noise barrier shall become -the responsibility of Richter. 2. Wheat Ridge shall initiate a rezoning of Parcel C from its current agricultural zone to a commercial zone compatible with the Richter property upon receiving from-the owner of Parcel C a statement of no objection to the rezoning. Wheat Ridge will accept an application for amendment of the Richter PCD which includes Parcel d and will process the rezoning of Parcel C simultaneously with the process and review of the amendment to the Richter PCD. 3. Wheat Ridge shall relocate at its own expense the Lee, Stewart & Eakins Ditch. 4. Wheat Ridge acknowledges that Richter has incurred expenses related to the design and construction of the Relocated Youngfield Service Road. wheat Ridge agrees to pay, and Richter no.wanW,si~.i - -2- 030 12/05/90 THU 10:24 FAI 309 298 0215 GORSUCH %IRGIS h i agrees to accept, the sum of $50,000.00, payable upon approval of an Order for Dismissal with Prejudice by the Court, in full satisfaction of all claims, expenses, costs and attorneys fees related to this litigation. 5. Wheat Ridge shall install a traffic signal at the intersection of the Relocated Youngfield Service Road and West 32nd Avenue at its expense at such time as traffic studies indicate that a traffic signal is warranted. 6. Wheat Ridge shall acquire by riegotiati:on or otherwise all encumbrances restricting the Richter PCD including that portion of the Richter PCD included in Parcel A. 7. On July 9, 1984, Wheat Ridge approved a Combined Preliminary & Final Development Plan for the Richter PCD, known as the "I-70 West Business Center" (hereinafter "Development Plan"). The Development Plan describes.an area encompassed by Lots 2, 3, and 7. The Development Plan includes a Signage Final Development Plan on Sheet 5 of 6, which allows a freestanding ' sign on each of Lots 2, 3, and 7. A freestanding sign has been constructed on Lot 2. The parties anticipate that as a result of the construction of the Relocated Youngfield. service Road on Parcel A and the conveyance to Richter of the abandoned Youngfield Service Road (Parcel C) that Richter will replat the area covered by Lots 2,3, and 7 of the Richter PCD and seek to amend the Development Plan. In the event Richter seeks to replat the Richter PCD and to amend the Development Plan, Wheat Ridge acknowledges that the approval of the Development Plan in 1984 entitles Richter to construct two additional freestanding signs in the area encompassed by Lots 2, 3, and 7 on the amended Development Plan as well as the previously approved sign on Lot 6 and the two*Center Identification Signs as approved in the Development Plan. Notwithstanding any provisions in this paragraph, Richter may apply to Wheat Ridge for additional signs consistent with the provisions of the Wheat Ridge Sign Code. 8. Wheat Ridge agrees to waive any claim it may have. for costs or attorneys fees in this action. 9. The parties do hereby also agree and stipulate that this Stipulation for Settlement and Dismissal shall become an Order of the Court with the -same force and effect as if it had been entered as an Order of this court. 10. The parties agree and stipulate that the Court be requested to dismiss this action with prejudice, each side to pay its own attorneys' fees. ~\s~orr\~7sss.i -3 - Z041 031 12/05/98 THU 10:25 FAI 903 298 0215 1 3 GORSUCH KIRGIS 1 WHEREFORE the parties move this Court to dismiss Richter's Complaint with Prejudice. DATED this day of November, 1995. Respectfully submitted, GORSUCH KIRGIS L.L.C. By: lN~ Malcolm M. Mu ay, #7249 1401 17th Street, Suite 110 Post Office Box 17180 (80217 Denver, Colorado 80202' Telephone: (303) 299-8900 ATTORNEYS FOR WHEAT RIDGE DEFENDANTS APPROVED: FAEGRE & BENSON L.L.P. 1 -I' bvi ine R. Rich a osep M. Montano, #3695 d/b/a 70 West ue ness Center aslie A. Fields,. #11232 2 0, Republic Plaza 370 17th Street Denver, CO. 80202-4004 Telephone: (303) 593-9000 -4- r0042 032 12/05/98 THU 10:25 FAI 303 298 0215 GORSUCH %IRGIS a PARCEL A A strip of land situated in, over and across Lots 2 and 7, of 7o WEST BUSINESS CENTER as recorded on August 13, 1984 at Book 79 Page 48 (reception number 84076366) of the official records of the County of Jefferson, State of Colorado. U043 Said strip lying in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 29, Township 3 South, Range 69 West of the 6th Principal. Meridian, City of Wheat Ridge, County of Jefferson, State of Colorado, being described as: Beginning at the. West 1/4 corner of said Section 29; thence along the South. line of said NW 1/4, S 89029116" E a distance of 601.78 feet; thence N 0030144" W a distance of 40 feet to the TRUE POINT of BEGnCaNG •(TPOB). Said TPOB being on the North ROW LINE OF W. 32ND Avenue and the South line of said Lot 7. 1. Thence N 46051153" E a distance of 32.02 feet; 2. Thence N 160146" W a distance of 27.08 feet, to a point of curve; 3. Thence along a curve to the left having a central angle of.23030.000, a radius of.190.00 feet and an arc length of 77.93 feet, the chord of which bears N 12045146" W a distance of 77.38 feet to a point of tangent; 4. Thence N 24030145" W a distance of 36.97 feet to a point of curve; 5. Thence along a curve to the right having a central angle of 2303010011, a radius of 125.00 feet, an are length of 51.27. feet, the.chord'of which bears N 12045145" W a distance of 50.91 feet to a point of tangent] 6. Thence N 1000148" W a distance of 279.47 feet to a point of curve; 7. Thence along a curve tb the right having a central angle of, 87030146,", a radius of 125.00 feet, and an arc length of 190.92 feet, the chord of which bears N 42044135" E a 'distance of 172.90 feet, to a point of reverse, non- tangent curve on the northerly line of raid Lot 71 8. Thence Southeasterly along the Northerly lines: of Lot.2 and Lot 7 along a non-tangent curve to the left having a central angle of 29415157"., a.radius of 175.00•feet, and an arc length of 89.39 feet; the chord of which'bears S 75056136". E a distance of 68.42 -feet to- a point of tangent; e~\»s»W"au.i 033 12/05/98 THU 10:25 FAI 309 298 0215 GORSUCH RIRGIS y 9. Thence N 89025'24" E along the North line of said Lot 2 a distance of 180.12 feet to the Northeast corner of Lot 2; 10. Thence 0043136" E along the East line of said Lot 2 a distance of 17.60 feet; 11. Thence S 89024'24" W a distance of 32.80 feet; 12. Thence S 6017124" W 7.95 feet; 13. Thence S 89025124" W a distance of 215.53 feet to a point of curve; 14. Thence along a curve to the left having a central angle of 90025111", a radius of 85.00 feet, and an arc length of 134.17 feet, the chord of which bears S 44012118' W a distance of 120.67 feet to a point of tangent; 15. Thence S 1°00'48" E a distance of 271.39 feet to a point of curve; 16. Thence along a curve to the left having a central angle of 23030100", a radius of 75.00 feet, and an arc length of 30.76 feet, the chord of which bears S 12045'48" E a distance of 30.55 feet to a point-of tangent; 17. Thence S.24030'45" E a distance of'85.97 feet to a point of curve; 18. Thence along a curve to the right having a central'angle of 23030100",'a radius of 125.00 feet, and an arc length of- 51.27 feet, the chord of which bears S 12045'45° E a distance of 50.91 feet to a point of tangent; 19. Thence S 1000146" E a distance of 21.94 feeta_' 20. Thence S 43408107" E a distance of 38.41 feet to the south line of said Lot 7; • 21. Thence S 89628'38' W along the said south line 109.51 feet to the TPOB. BaCE2TS ANY PORTION .OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED LAND FALLING IN COLORADO DEPARTMENT-OF TRANSPORTATION RIGHT-OF-WAY.- The above described parcel contains 41,268 ccjuare feet, or 0.9474 acres more or less. 12 044 034 12/05/98 THU 10:28 FAI 309 298 0215 GORSUCH HIRGIS f NOTE: All bearings are relative to one mother and are based on the bearing of the South line of the NW 1/4 of said Section 29 being S 89029'16" W. ~basiWnu.i QJ 045 035 12/05/98 THU 10:28 FAI 903 298 0215 GORSUCH %IRGIS PARCEL C A strip of land situated adjacent to and East of Lots 2 and 3, of 70 WEST BUSINESS CENTER as recorded on August 13, 1984, at Book 79 Page 48 (reception number 84076366) of the official records of the County of Jefferson; State of Colorado. -.Said strip lying in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 29, Township 3 South, Range 69 West of the 6th Principal meridian, City of Wheat Ridge, County of Jefferson, State of Colorado, being described as parts of those parcels of land deeded to the Colorado Department of Transportation by documents recorded at the County of Jefferson, State of Colorado at Book 1902 at Page 545, Book.1963 at Page 584, Book 1954 Page 396, and Book 1992 at page 586, and further described as: Beginning at the West 1/4 Corner of said section 29, thence N 89029116" E along the South line of said NW 1/4 a distance of 724.64 feet, thence N 0430'44" W perpendicular to said South line of said NW 1/4 a distance of 40.02 feet to a point. Said point being the Southeast corner of Lot 7 of 70 West Business Center and the TRUE POINT- OF BEdnor= (POB). Thence along the North and West lines of the land deeded to the Colorado Department bf Transportation the following five courses: 1. N 1°1150• W a distance of 29:98 feet 2. N 89028'55 • E a distance of 142.60 feet 3. N 6016'25" E a distance of 161.04 feet 4. N 6616'50" E a distance of 201.41 feet- 5. N 5052138" E a distance of 176.82 feet Thence, N 89025127• E a distance of 56.70 feet, Thence, N 00341370 W a distance of 25.50 feet, Thence, N 89925'24• B a distance of 23.34 feet Thence southerly parallel with and 76.67 feet East of the West lines 'of the land deeded to the Colorado Department of Highways the following three courses: 1. S 50521380 W a distance of 211.43 feet 2., S 6016150' W a distance of 201.68 feet 3. S 6916'25" W a distance of 151.99 feet to a pout 40 feet North of the South line of said NW 1/4, Thence S 80°29'58" W a distance 'of 191.89 feet, Thence S 89°29'16"•W a distance of 30-feet- tar the-POB. Q046 036 12/05/96 THU 10:28 FAX '303 298 0215 GORSUCH %IRGIS 047 The said strip of land contains 45,659 square feet or 1.0438 acres, more or less. NOTE: All bearings are relative to one another and are based on the bearing of the South line of the NW 1/4 of said Section 29 being S 89029,16" W. !W4\39f04W4214.1 037 12/05/98 THU 10:27 FAX 309 298 0215 GORSUCH KIRGIS • S4-14-1995 1150 Gorsuch Klryls L.L.C. 30- 298 @15 P.0e2i M2 DISTRICT COURT, JEFFERSON COUNTY, STATE OY CULI iLNLX) Civil Action No. 94 CV 1586, Division 1 ORDER APPROVING STIP=TION FOR SHMEblLti° T AMID DISMISSAL DWAINE R. RTCH'TER; d/b/a 70 WEST BUSINESS CENTER, Plaintiff, v. CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, a municipal corporation of the State of Colorado; CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, the governing body of the City of Wheat Ridge; DAN WILDS, in his official capacity as the Mayor of the City of wheat Ridge; and VANCS EDI4ARDS, JEAN D, FIELDS, DONALD R. EAFANTI, RAE JEAN BERM, KW SILER, TONY SOLANO, OENNIS BALL, and CLAUDIA WORTH, in their official capacities as members of the city Council of the city of Wheat Ridge, Respondents. THIS MATTER having come before this Court upon the Stipulation for Settlement and Dismissal entered into by the parties on November 21,, 1995, and subsequently filed with this Court; and THE COURT, having considered such Stipulation, deea hereby approve the same and make it an Order of this Court frith' the same force and effect as if it had been entered as an Order of this -Court in the first instance. ' IT IS TEM MtTHBR ORDER of this Court that this case'is hereby dismiesed with prejudice with each side to pay its own costs and attorneys' fees. ; D= IN COURT this u day of n , 1995. BY TBE COURT: Rh4N37 %%31W4.1 PLAINTIFFS DC11161T 3 rgwrylr, Nleto ` yzt ict CLunjadp District Court Judge TOTAL P.e02 Q048 038