Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/02/2000 ORlGINAL CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE PLANNING COMMISSION Minutes of Meeting March 2, 2000 1. CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by Vice Chair BRINKMAN at 7:30 p.m. on March 2,2000 in the Council Chambers ofthe Municipal Building, 7500 West 29th Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado. 2. ROLL CALL: Commission Members Present: Anne Brinkman Jerry Collins Paulette Cooper Dick Doyle Dean Gokey Don MacDougall (arrived at 7:40 p.m.) Nancy Snow Janice Thompson Staff Members Present: Alan White, Planning Director Meredith Reckert, Sr. Planner Greg Knudson, City Engineer Ann Lazzeri, Secretary 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The following is the official set of Planning Commission minutes for the public hearing of March 2, 2000. A set of these minutes is retained both in the office ofthe City Clerk and in the Department of Planning and Development of the City of Wheat Ridge. 4. APPROVAL OF ORDER OF THE AGENDA It was moved by Commissioner SNOW and seconded by Commissioner THOMPSON to approve the order ofthe agenda. The motion passed by a vote of 7-0 with Commissioner MACDOUGALL absent. 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES It was moved by Commissioner THOMPSON and seconded by Commissioner GOKEY that the minutes of February 17,2000 be approved as presented. The motion passed by a vote of 7-0 with Commissioner MACDOUGALL absent. 6. PUBLIC FORUM There was no one signed up to speak before the Commission on unscheduled matters. 7. PUBLIC HEARING (Chair MACDOUGALL arrived at 7:40 p.m.) A. Case No. CUP-OO-Ol: Application by Alpine Valley School for a conditional use permit to allow a private school with a .34 acre variance to the I-acre minimum lot size requirement for property zoned A-I and located at 4501 Parfet Street. Planning Conunission March 2, 2000 Page 1 The case was presented by Meredith Reckert. She reviewed the staff report and presented slides and overheads ofthe subject property. She entered all pertinent documents into the record and advised the Commission that there was jurisdiction to hear the case. In response to a question from Commissioner BRINKMAN, Ms. Reckert stated that the date of the neighborhood meeting referred to in the staffreport should be corrected to read January 26, 2000. Commissioner THOMPSON expressed concern that there could be an increase in traffic if the use changes from a church to a school that operates five days a week. She also questioned whether there would be adequate parking. Larry Welshon 2469 Kendall Street, Edgewater Mr. Welshon, representing the applicant, was sworn in by Chair MACDOUGALL. In regard to concerns expressed about traffic and parking issues, he explained that the school's schedule allows for students to arrive or leave at any time during the day. In addition, many parents car pool. All pick-ups and drop-offs will occur on the school's property. He stated that the plans for the school are to keep enrollment numbers small and agreed with staffs recommendation of a maximum of fifty students. He stated that new grass, trees and flowers will be installed, a play structure will be added in the back, and the yard will be fenced. In regard to staff s recommendation that a six-foot solid fence be erected along the northern property line, Mr. Welshon submitted a letter dated March 1,2000 from Lester Williams who is the property owner to the north of the building. Mr. Williams stated he had no objection to the proposed use; however he wished to leave the remaining six-foot steel wire fence in place. He did not desire a solid fence along his property line. The letter was made a part of the case file. Mr. Welshon also submitted a letter dated February 29, 2000 from Mr. Jack G. Atkinson, the adjacent property owner to the west. It was discovered that the present parking lot for the building encroaches one foot onto Mr. Atkinson's property. In his letter, Mr. Atkinson agreed to the school's use of this one foot of property; however, he does want to retain ownership of the piece. Mr. Atkinson's letter was made a part ofthe case file. Commissioner SNOW asked ifthere would be room for a drive-through if the one-foot encroachment is not considered. Mr. Welshon replied that the drive-through area does not involve that one-foot piece ofland. Chair MACDOUGALL questioned whether the outdoor exercise area was large enough to meet the needs of students. Mr. Welshon replied that since 60% of the students are elementary age, there would be ample room and, also the children will be using the exercise area at staggered times. The nearby park and greenbelt area will also be utilized occasionally. Commissioner THOMPSON expressed concern that the cap of fifty students could be increased in the future resulting in additional building space. Meredith Reckert stated that Page 2 Planning Commission March 2, 2000 any future requests for an increase would have to come before the Planning Commission. In addition, the CUP could also be granted specific to the Alpine Valley School. Commissioner GOKEY stated that he did not agree with the request for a six-foot solid fence along the northern property line since public schools do not have such requirements. He stated that the arrival and departure schedule, as described by Mr. Welshon, alleviated his concerns about increased traffic congestion. He was also in favor of placing a maximum enrollment of fifty students. In response to questions from Commissioner COOPER, Mr. Welshon stated that present enrollment consists of twenty students (60% elementary, 20% middle school and 20% high school.) in addition to six or seven staff members. He stated there will be occasional outings using staff or parental vehicles for transportation, and that high school students will usually be driving their own cars. In response to questions from Commissioner BRINKMAN, Mr. Welshon replied that the school is losing its lease for its present location and the plan is to relocate the school to the subject building. He also indicated that there will be no outside bells or public address system at the school, and that there will be no changes to the present outdoor lighting. Greg Grossman 9556 West 47th Avenue Mr. Grossman was sworn in by Chair MACDOUGALL. He stated that he was in favor of the application. He liked the idea of having the building vacant in the evenings. Barbara Newman 4430 Pierson Street Ms. Newman was sworn in by Chair MACDOUGALL. She stated that she was not opposed to the application; however, she expressed concern about the sight triangle at 45th and Parfet. She requested a four-way stop for that intersection. She also liked the idea of having the building vacant in the evenings. Commissioner THOMPSON asked ifthe city would investigate the visibility issues at this intersection. Greg Knudson stated that they would investigate the sight triangle as well as the feasibility of a four-way stop. He cautioned there may not be enough traffic volume to justify a four-way stop. Commissioner COLLINS commented that, due to changes in that neighborhood and traffic from nearby city shops, a two-way stop should be considered if a four-way stop is not justified. Greg Knudson stated traffic volumes in this area will also be investigated. Larry Welshon returned to the podium. He stated the eleven existing parking spaces will adequately meet their parking needs except for a couple of times a year during parent/student meetings. He stated they would be willing to stripe the parking area and request that parents and students do not park within the sight triangle. Planning Commission March 2, 2000 Page 3 Karen Heine 4650 Parfet Ms. Heine was not present at the meeting. She submitted a letter dated March 2, 2000 in which she expressed her opposition to the application because of traffic and noise concerns. Meredith Reckert read the letter in its entirety into the record. The letter was made part of the case file. Laurie Korte 4573 Everett Court Ms. Korte was sworn in by Chair MACDOUGALL. She stated she was in favor of the application. She stated that children will, with parental permission, occasionally walk through the neighborhood to the park, etc. Commissioner THOMPSON expressed concern about the safety of unaccompanied children walking through the greenbelt area during the school year. Charles Harris 14581 Garfield Mr. Harris was sworn in by Chair MACDOUGALL. Mr. Harris is pastor of the church which presently occupies the building. He stated the building size is approximately 7,000 square feet; the cornerstone on fellowship hall added after the sanctuary was built reads 1967. The sanctuary seats over 200 with additional classrooms. He stated that there is an irrigation well on the property. He felt that traffic congestion will decrease ifthe proposed use is granted. Because the church has outgrown this facility, there would be a need to increase Sunday services from one to three each Sunday. There are also activities on Wednesday, Friday and Sunday evenings involving anywhere from 30 to 60 teenagers some who drive their own cars. During the summer, teens use the facility almost every day of the week. Mark Greaves 11733 West 33rd Avenue Mr. Greaves was sworn in by Chair MACDOUGALL. He stated that he was in favor of the application and felt the school would be the best alternative of all uses possible for the building. B. C. Dougherty 4686 Parfet Street Mr. Dougherty indicated that he did not desire to speak to the issue. It was moved by Commissioner THOMPSON aud seconded by Commissioner DOYLE that a request to approve a lot width and lot area variance to allow a quasi-public use at 4501 Parfet Street, be approved for the following reasons: 1. This use has been existence for several years and has not proven to be problematic. 2. There is a unique circumstance due to the nonconforming lot. Planning Commission March 2, 2000 Page 4 Commissioner SNOW expressed concern about allowing expansion of anything on a lot that is too small, and indicated she would vote in favor of the motion only because she doesn't want to rezone agricultural property. The motion passed by a vote of 8-0. It was moved by Commissioner THOMPSON and seconded by Commissioner GOKEY that Case No. CUP-00-I0, a request for approval of a conditional use permit to allow a private school in an A-I zone district at 4501 Parfet Street be approved for the following reasons: 1. The proposed use would cause less of an impact than the existing use. 2. The proposed use would not cause as much impact on the neighborhood in the evening as the existing use. 3. The site improvements will enhance the overall appearance of the neighborhood. With the following conditions: 1. Future enrollment shall not exceed fifty students. 2. The conditional use permit is only for this school and is not to be with the property. 3. Parking along Parfet Street shall be improved in accordance with the public works department to improve the sight triangle, and striping for parallel parking only will be placed in the excess right of way in front of the school on Parfet Street. In response to a question from Commissioner DOYLE, Meredith Reckert stated that staff would be agreeable to withdraw their request for a six-foot solid fence in light of the letter received from Mr. Williams. Commissioners BRINKMAN and GOKEY strongly encouraged the applicant to install irrigation for the new plantings. Commissioner SNOW requested the following amendment to the motion: Add Condition No.4: That the school not open until the building has been sold and all church services have moved out. The amendment was accepted by Commissioners THOMPSON and GOKEY. The motion carried by a vote of 8-0. (A recess was called by Chair MACDOUGALL at 8:55 p.m. The meeting was reconvened at 9:05 p.m..) B. Case No's. WZ-99-14. MS-99-05 and PBG-99-02: Application by Kevin Finnegan to rezone a portion of property located at 4445 Parfet Street from Commercial-One to Residential-Three; a two-lot minor subdivision on 4445 Parfet and 11050 West 45th Page 5 Planning Commission March 2, 2000 A venue; and a planned building group plan with a variance to Section 26-30(N) on 4445 Parfet Street. This case was presented by Meredith Reckert. She reviewed the staff report and presented slides and overheads of the subject property. She entered all pertinent documents into the record and advised the Commission that there was jurisdiction to hear the case. In response to a question from Commissioner SNOW, Ms. Reckert stated that the deed for parcel A included the 30 feet which is presently zoned C-l. She further explained that staff requested the applicant to do a planned building group plan so that it could be recorded against the property. The applicant could not then build anything else without coming to the city and repealing the plan. Different zoning options were discussed with the applicant, and this is the plan he chose. In response to a question from Commissioner BRINKMAN, Meredith Reckert stated that Public Service Company has made no indication that they plan to bury any existing lines in this area. In response to a question from Commissioner BRINKMAN, Meredith Reckert stated that concern about low-income housing was expressed at the August, 1999 neighborhood meeting. Meredith Reckert explained that the applicant has reduced the density for his project from a multi-family building to duplexes. Commissioner THOMPSON expressed concern about access to the second story for the handicapped unit and questioned why the handicapped unit was the only unit without a garage. She also expressed concern that the Comprehensive Plan shows this area as single family. In response to a question from Commissioner THOMPSON, Ms. Reckert explained that a cul- de-sac design would limit the applicant to two lots which is the reason for the applicant's driveway configuration. However, if the variance is not granted, the applicant still has the option of constructing an apartment house. Kevin Finnegan 7720 West Phillips Avenue, Littleton Mr. Finnegan, the applicant, was sworn in by Chair MACDOUGALL. He briefly reviewed his applications and stated that his original proposal was to build a thirteen-unit, possibly one or two building, complex. The area beneath the power lines would have been a parking lot. However, upon advice from the planning department, he agreed to reduce the density from thirteen to ten units. Regarding the handicapped unit, he stated that unit was chosen because the power line easement cut into that area. He explained that the master bedroom and bathroom of the handicapped unit uses up to twelve feet of the garage area. The proposed garages are twelve feet wide which is not large enough for wheelchair access to a vehicle. He also stated that the plan presented tonight is the same as that discussed at the August, 1999 neighborhood meeting. Page 6 Planning Commission March 2, 2000 In response to a question from Commissioner THOMPSON, Mr. Finnegan stated he planned to sell the units individually for $120 per square foot or an approximate cost of $160- 170,000 per unit. The single family house planned for the other lot will be approximately 1600 to 1800 square feet upstairs and down and will also sell for $120 per square foot. In response to questions from Commissioner SNOW, Mr. Finnegan explained that property in front ofthe units will be the responsibility of the homeowners association and all of the property between each unit and behind each unit will be the responsibility of the individual homeowner. There would be a front facing fence between each unit and homeowners would have the option of erecting a fence between the units. Commissioner COOPER asked what the ADA (Americans With Disabilities Act) requirements are for a garage. Commissioner SNOW replied that there are no ADA requirements unless the unit is built in conjunction with state or local governments. Thomas Rossillon 9327 West Iowa, Lakewood Mr. Rossillon, engineer for the applicant, was sworn in by Chair MACDOUGALL. In response to concerns expressed by Commissioner GOKEY, he described elevations and drainage on the property. Commissioner COLLINS inquired about drainage. Mr. Rossillon explained that all water up to a five-year flood will be detained. Above that point, water will be released into a six-inch pipe that flows into the curb and gutter and across a cross-pan into an area with buried rip- rap located in city right-of-way. Greg Knudson stated that this plan was satisfactory with the city. In response to a question from Commissioner THOMPSON, Mr. Rossillon stated that he was not aware of any flooding history in this area. Barbara Newman 4430 Pierson Street Ms. Newman was sworn in by Chair MACDOUGALL. Ms. Newman stated her opposition to this proj ect and felt that one-story single family residences were more suited to the area. She also requested that a solid eight-foot fence be built between her property and the units to serve as buffering. She also expressed concern that this development will have an adverse impact on the intersection of 45th and Parfet. In response to a question from Commissioner SNOW, Ms. Newman stated that she has not experienced any drainage problems in her back yard. Commissioner COLLINS commented that trees in the backyards of the development might help to buffer the development from adjacent neighbors. Leland J. Fidal 4480 Pierson Street Mr. Fidal was sworn in by Chair MACDOUGALL. He stated his opposition to the Planning Connnission Page 7 March 2, 2000 application and also expressed concern about safety issues related to increased traffic congestion in the area. He would not be opposed to homes that fit in with the neighborhood. In regard to drainage, he stated that storm water runs to the east and south and not to the north, and that the water table in this area in the summer is only two feet below the ground. He stated there are power lines on his property along the fence line and asked how Public Service Company would be able to maintain these lines if this project is built five feet from his property line. He was also in favor ofthe eight-foot solid fence. He expressed concern that this proj ect is too high in density for such a small area. Commissioner SNOW asked if it would be helpful to have the power lines buried. Mr. Fidal replied that he would prefer that. Since the utility poles are located on his property, this would be a matter for Mr. Fidal to discuss with the Public Service Company. Commissioner BRINKMAN commented that, considering the price of these units, they could not be considered low-income housing. She also urged the neighbors to consider a more neighborly approach than to erect an eight-foot fence between the properties. In response to a question from Commissioner COLLINS, Mr. Fidal stated that the catch basin for storm drainage on Pierson Street is located in his front yard. Commissioner COLLINS suggested that the storm drain be run down to a connection at 44th; and if there are any water issues with the neighbors, the developer should pay the cost. In response to a question from Commissioner THOMPSON, Mr. Knudson stated that it was his opinion that the drainage plan was accurate and acceptable. Commissioner COOPER commented that it is inevitable that this piece of property is going to be developed and this plan is less of an impact than an apartment building. Regarding the single family residence, Commissioner GOKEY asked if the applicant would consider building a one story house. Mr. Finnegan stated that it would not work because of bedrock which would prevent the construction of a basement. He also pointed out that there are to be no windows on the west side of the house. Mike Ota 4420 Pierson Street Mr. Ota was sworn in by Chair MACDOUGALL. He expressed his opposition to the application because of the loss of privacy which will occur for his property. He stated that when he added onto his house, he chose to build a single story addition to stay with the character of the neighborhood and asked the applicant to also consider building single story units. He stated that he would be in favor of having the power lines buried so trees could be planted for a buffer. He was also in favor of the eight-foot fence. Commissioner THOMPSON stated that although she understood the neighbors concerns, the applicant does have the zoning to build the units as planned. The alternative is a higher density apartment building which could be ten feet higher than the proposed development. Planning Commission March 2, 2000 Page 8 Judy Martin 4485 Parfet Street Ms. Martin indicated her opposition on the public hearing roster, but was not present to speak. Charlotte Regrut 4440 Parfet Street Ms. Regrut was sworn in by Chair MACDOUGALL. She stated her opposition to the application. Denise Midraugh 4686 Parfet Street Ms. Midraugh was sworn in by Chair MACDOUGALL. She stated her opposition to the application because it will have a negative impact on the surrounding neighborhood. Commissioner SNOW reminded those present that Section 26-30(D) of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws prohibits the consolidation ofR-3 lots for the purpose of building multi- family units if the standards for building a single-family or duplex are met. Commissioner BRINKMAN asked the applicant ifhe would be willing to change to single story units. He replied that one-story buildings would not be feasible because it is not possible to build basements. She asked ifhe would consider using skylights or glass block in place of windows facing west. Mr. Finnegan replied that these two alternatives would be a possibility. Commissioner GOKEY commented that a certain amount of windows are required by the building code. Mr. Finnegan stated that he offered to sell a parcel to Mr. Fidal, but Mr. Fidal declined. In regard to the maintenance of Public Service lines, Mr. Finnegan stated that Public Service Company can access their lines through adj acent properties. It was moved by Commissioner COOPER and seconded by Commissioner DOYLE that Case No. WZ-99-14, a request for approval of a rezoning from R-3 and C-l to R-3 for property located at 4445 Parfet Street, be approved for the following reasons: 1. The proposed strip of C-l property cannot reasonably be developed under the existing conditions. 2. It is generally desirable to have zoning lines run with lot lines. Commissioner SNOW stated that she would vote against the motion for the following reasons: (I) even though this is a small piece of property, it does add at least one additional unit in density; (2) it is completely in opposition to the Comprehensive Plan for this area which was recently approved; (3) she objected to the fact that in making property lines and zoning match up, it always results in higher zoning; (4) it is not in keeping with the neighborhood, even though it is a small piece of property; and (5) the handicapped unit is the only unit without a garage. Planning Commission March 2, 2000 Page 9 Commissioner COLLINS indicated he would vote against the motion for the same reasons listed by Commissioner SNOW. Commissioner BRINKMAN requested the last sentence of item no. 3 on page 4 of the staff report which reads "The rezoning will not result in the creation of additional dwelling units" be removed. Commissioner THOMPSON expressed concern that, even though she does not like this plan, a higher density use could come in. The motion failed by a vote ofl to 7, with Commissioners BRINKMAN, COLLINS, COOPER, GOKEY, MACDOUGALL, SNOW and THOMPSON voting no. It was moved by Commissioner SNOW and seconded by Commissioner COOPER that the Cases MS-99-05 and PBG-99-02 be continued to an indefinite time to give the applicants opportunity to withdraw, redraw or appeal to the City Council. The motion passed by a vote of 8-0. Meredith Reckert stated that the hearings will be republished but the applicant will not be charged another fee. Commissioner BRINKMAN requested that when the minor subdivision is considered that the following issues should be addressed: (I) the homeowners association should support and maintain the detention pond; and (2) upstairs balconies should be disallowed. Commissioner SNOW requested that the city staff review the drainage problems expressed by the neighbors. 8. CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING Chair MACDOUGALL declared the public hearing closed. 9. OLD BUSINESS There was no old business to come before the Commission. 10. NEW BUSINESS There was no new business to come before the Commission. 11. COMMISSION REPORTS There were no Commission reports. 12. COMMITTEE AND DEPARTMENT REPORTS There were no committee or department reports. 13. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Commissioner SNOW and seconded by Commissioner GOKEY that the meeting be adjourned at 11:55 p.m. The motion carried by a vote 0 8-0. CLv Ann Lazzeri, Recording S cretary Planning Commission March 2, 2000 Page 10