Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/16/2001 ORIGINAL CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE PLANNING COMMISSION Minutes of Meeting August 16, 2001 1. CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Chair McNAMEE at 7:30 p.m., August 16,2001, in the City Council Chambers ofthe Municipal Building, 7500 West 29th Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado. 2. ROLL CALL Commission Members Present: Anne Brinkman Jerry Collins Paulette Cooper Marian McNamee Nancy Snow Paula Weisz Janice Thompson Commission Members Absent: Mark Miller (resigned) Staff Members Present: Alan White, Planning Director Ann Lazzeri, Secretary 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The following is the official set of Planning Commission minutes for the public hearing of August 16, 2001. A set 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. 4. APPROVE ORDER OF AGENDA It was moved by Commissioner SNOW and seconded by Commissioner COOPER to amend the agenda to include discussion of the Fightmaster property. The motion passed 7-0. 5. APPROVE MINUTES It was moved by Commissioner SNOW and seconded by Commissioner WEISZ to approve the minutes of July 19,2001. The motion passed 6-0 with Commissioner THOMPSON abstaining. 6. PUBLIC FORUM There was no one to appear before the Commission Planning Commission Angust 16, 200 I Page 1 7. PUBLIC HEARING A. Case No. ZOA-OI-02: - An ordinance amending Sections 26-205, 26-206, 26- 207,26-208,26-209,26-210,26-211,26-212 and 26-611 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws pertaining to required setbacks for residential structures and exceptions thereto. Commissioner SNOW commented that the 5-foot setback should apply to all residential zones and not commercial zones. Alan White explained that it is covered in Section 26- 611. Commissioner WEISZ commented that Section 26-611 doesn't state whether it pertains to residential or commercial. Alan White asked if it was their intent to change Section 26-611 to differentiate between residential and commercial. Alan White referred to the staff report where he outlined some of the difficulties the inspectors are going to have in the field, especially with the eaves. Alan stated that eaves are typically not shown on plans submitted for building permits. He also stated that staff can make people start showing them, but it is going to be hard to measure in the field and staff is not going to know until the roof framing goes on. If they are at that point in construction and they are off in their measurements, then they will need to fix it or ask for a variance. Commissioner SNOW asked if there was anything on the building permit that would give somebody the idea that they don't have to show some parts of the building. She also asked how it is harder for the building inspector to measure from a window seat than from a wall. Alan answered that generally they will show those types of details, but changes may occur as construction happens. Commissioner BRINKMAN asked for clarification on how a footprint is defined. Alan White answered that it is basically the outside of the wall. For example: a deck is considered part of the footprint and needs to be shown on plans. The Commissioner asked why the footprint couldn't be expanded to the outside measurement of the building versus the foundation. Alan answered, that generally those features are shown, decks, bay windows, a poured concrete slab patio, and fireplaces that extend out. The issue is measuring an eave out in the field. The exception is 30 inches; standard construction is 1-2 feet. Commissioner COLLINS commented that when purchasing a home, it is square footage you are buying. He noted that he was against changing it (setbacks) before. Planning Commission August 16, 200 I Page 2 Commissioner THOMPSON asked ifthis ordinance would cause patios, decks, bay windows, etc., to be too close like the homes located at 38th & Kipling (Cambridge) that are within feet of each other. She stated that as much distance as possible needs to be maintained between structures including eaves. She also asked if there is any way the ordinance could be written that no portion of the building shall encroach within the setback. It makes no difference if it is a bay window, a chimney, an eave, etc. Alan White commented that Cambridge was unique for the fact that it was a 100-lot subdivision and those will be rare in the City due to the lack of large vacant parcels. Staff is dealing with individual builders and sometimes citizens who are acting as their own contractor. He also predicted that with this ordinance we should expect a lot of variance cases. Commissioner THOMPSON stated that if we have a setback then nothing should encroach in that setback and maybe we need to have a larger setback. Alan White commented that not permitting a row of bricks to encroach into a setback only an inch or two is ridiculous. Commissioner COOPER asked whether setbacks was a considerable issue or not. Alan White replied that direction was given by Council when they adopted Chapter 26 (Zoning Code). The Commissioner then asked how did the problem come to them (Council). Alan White replied that it was brought up at the hearing that residential setbacks needed to be looked at and changes needed to be made. Wheat Ridge United Neighbors made that recommendation at the hearing. Alan White asked if the intent was that on every side yard setback that is listed in the charts to replace what is there with 5 feet per story. In R-IA, as it is written now, you have to have 15 feet total side yard setback with a minimum of 5 feet on one side. You can split that up to have 7 Y, feet on each side or 5 feet on one and 10 feet on the other. If you use the 5 feet per story and somebody puts up a one-story building, you are lessening the setback to a total of 10 feet rather than IS feet. Commissioner SNOW suggested that they needed to narrow down what zone districts it should apply to. Commissioner COLLINS stated that the issue seems to be having a two-story building built next to a one-story building with only 5 feet between and the two-story dwarfing or overpowering the one-story and blocking it of light and air. Or three stories. Commissioner BRINKMAN suggested adding a footnote stating that for new construction,S feet per additional story with all stories meeting the farthest required Planning Commission August 16, 200 I Page 3 setback and the language would read with the footprint starting on the farthest setback. Footnote D would still apply; but for every story after the first story setback, an additional 5 feet would apply to the original setback and the house footprint must be fixed at the farthest setback from the property. Alan White asked for clarification. After further discussion, Commissioner BRINKMAN suggested adding 5 feet total for every additional story, so that one side stays fixed while the other side moves in 5 feet for each additional story. Commissioner COLLINS suggested the City of Denver's method of using bulk plane where you can go from either property line 5 feet then use a 45 degree angle for 2nd or 3,d stories for the setback. Commissioner SNOW commented the setback may need to be different for every zone district. For example: for a one-story building, the combined side yard setback is 15 feet with no less 5 feet on one side and 10 feet on the other; in the event of a two-story, no less than 10 feet on anyone side. In the event of a three-story, no less than 15 feet. There is no change to first story. Alan White commented that ifthere is a 20-foot separation between houses, what does it matter if a bay window extends 6 inches into the setback. Louise Turner 11256 W. 38th Ave. Commissioner MCNAMEE reminded Ms. Turner that she was sworn in from the last meeting. Ms. Turner requested on behalf of Wheat Ridge United Neighborhoods that space be kept between and around buildings which adds to the quality of life. This was requested many times during the Comprehensive Plan that people wanted to preserve the "openness" that had been characteristic of Wheat Ridge and it included the space between buildings, the enforcement of setbacks, and bringing setbacks back into conformance with the plan recommendations. The motion recommended is in all zone districts regarding side and rear yard setbacks for single family homes and duplexes for which there is no such provision now, the stated setbacks apply to the first story and there should be an additional 5 feet setback per additional story. The challenge is to keep this reasonable space between the buildings without infringing on the individual existing owner's property rights; therefore, this shall apply to all new construction and "scrape- offs". It could also be made to apply to the purchase of existing property after the passing of this ordinance. Regarding the exceptions to building setbacks (Sec. 26-611), she asked that items 1-4 be deleted and replaced with the following wording: "building setbacks shall be measured at right angles from the property line to the outermost wall or extending architectural feature with the exception of the roof. Other encroachments into Planning Commission August 16, 200 I Page 4 required setback areas shall not be permitted except by a variance granted by the Board of Adjustment. " Commissioner SNOW suggested adding to the language under "Building Setbacks" Sec. 26-611 that after such encroachment (by fireplace, bay window, porch or patios, etc.), the setback cannot be less than 5 feet. Commissioner THOMPSON commented that she considered porches, patios and decks to be living areas while a fireplace chimney is not; and she did not believe any living space should be closer than 5 feet. She also commented that a large bay window could also be considered a living space. Commissioner SNOW stated that a chimney encroachment would decrease the amount of space between houses and could cause fires from flying sparks. Alan White stated that fire code requires that chimneys be no closer than 3 feet. Alan White asked for clarification regarding rear yard setbacks in relation to adding stories. (Chair McNAMEE declared a recess at 8:55 p.m. The meeting was reconvened at 9:10 p.m.) It was moved by Commissioner SNOW and seconded by Commissioner THOMPSON that in all residential zone districts which do not now have larger setback requirements then the following applies: no two-story residential structure will be any closer than ten (J 0) feet to either a side or rear yard property line and no three-story residential structure will be any closer than fifteen (J 5) feet to either a side or rear yard property line. The motion passed unanimously. There was discussion about discrepancies between the chart and the footnotes for R - 3 and R-3A zone districts. It was moved by Commissioner SNOW and seconded by Commissioner THOMPSON that in the R-3 zone district the chart match the language in footnote A to provide that side and rear yard setbacks shall be fifteen (J 5) feet for the first two stories and an additional five (5) feet for each additional story over two stories. The motion passed unanimously. It was moved by Commissioner COOPER and seconded by Commissioner SNOW that in the R-3A zone district that the chart match the language in footnote A to provide that side Planning Commission August 16, 2001 Page 5 and rear yard setbacks shall be fifteen feet for the first two stories and an additional five feet for each additional story over two stories. The motion passed unanimously. B. Case No. ZOA-OI-03 - An ordinance amending Section 26-1004 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws pertaining to violations ofthe Zoning and Development Code. Alan White presented the staff report for this case. Commissioner SNOW suggested that no. I and no. 2 be combined and reference be made to "approval or denial." Commissioner BRINKMAN requested clarification of wording to make it understood that the applicant must abide by the decision of the authority having final jurisdiction in the case. Commissioner THOMPSON requested that a typo be corrected in item no. 7 to read "....structures or land is contrary to........." Commissioner SNOW requested that construction without acquiring a building permit should be addressed. Commissioner THOMPSON questioned whether or not changing the character of a waterway, such as a wetland area, is addressed. Alan White suggested that under no. 3, wording should be added that would say "as approved by the planning and development department or the public works department" in regard to grading permits, fill permits, etc. The Class I flood plain permit should also be under public works. Commissioner WEISZ suggested that toward the end of no. 7, it should read "subparagraphs 1 through 6." Alan White suggested that the sentence beginning, "The Director of Planning and Development is authorized......" should be listed as paragraph C. Also "provisions, standards or requirements" should be included in all subparagraphs. It was moved by Commissioner SNOW and seconded by Commissioner WEISZ, that since many changes have been made during this meeting that could not be encompassed in a clear motion at this time, this matter be continued to the meeting of September 6, 2001, in order for the staff to prepare a rewritten ordinance. The motion passed unanimously. Planning Commission August 16,2001 Page 6 8. OLD BUSINESS Fightmaster Propertv on 44th Avenue - Commissioner SNOW expressed concern that, should this property sell, the city might be denied access through that property. She asked that the city attorney look into this matter. 9. NEW BUSINESS There was no new business to come before the Commission. 10. COMMISSION REPORTS There were no commission reports. 11. COMMITTEE AND DEPARTMENT REPORTS AP A Conference - Alan White announced that the AP A Conference will be held in September and asked if there were any Commissioners who would like to attend. Commissioners SNOW and McNAMEE indicated they would be interested in attending. There was discussion regarding a conflict with a Planning Commission meeting scheduled for the same time. Alan White will check to see which staff members are planning to attend the conference. 12. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Commissioner COLLINS and seconded by Commissioner SNOW to adjourn the meeting at 10:00 p.m. (LA"' ~~PA) Ann Lazzeri, Recording S r ary t~au () ^ IY\O...AA /N2 C Marian McNAMEE, Chair Planning Commission August 16, 2001 Page 7