Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/02/2000 ORIGINAL CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE PLANNING COMMISSION Minutes of Meeting November 2, 2000 1. CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Chair MacDOUGALL at 7:30 p.m., November 2, 2000, in the City Council Chambers of the Municipal Building, 7500 West 29th Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado. 2. ROLL CALL Commission Members Present: J eITY Co llins Paulette Cooper Dick Doyle Dean Gokey Don MacDougall Marian McNamee Nancy Snow Janice Thompson Staff Members Present: Alan White, Planning Director Gerald Dahl, City Attorney Meredith Reckert, Sf. Planner Mary Austin, Planner Bob Goebel, Public Works Director Greg Knudson, City Engineer Darin Morgan, Codes Administrator/Building Official Mike Garcia, Development Review Engineer Ann Lazzeri, Secretary 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The following is the official set of Planning Commission minutes for the public hearing of November 2,2000. 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. APPROVAL OF ORDER OF THE AGENDA It was moved by Commissioner SNOW and seconded by Commissioner GOKEY to approve the order of the agenda as presented. The motion passed unanimously. Planning Commission November 2,2000 Page 1 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES It was moved by Commissioner SNOW and seconded by Commissioner COLLINS to approve the minutes of October 19, 2000 as presented. The motion passed unanimously with Commissioners GOKEY and MacDOUGALL abstaining. 6. PUBLIC FORUM There was no one to appear before the Commission. 7. PUBLIC HEARING A. Case No. MS-00-06: An application by Fran Schneider for approval of two-lot minor subdivision for property zoned Industrial (I) and located at 4730 Independence Street. This case was presented by Mary Austin. She reviewed the staff report, presented slides and overheads of the subject property. All pertinent documents were entered into the record and she advised the Commission they had jurisdiction to hear the case. Staff recommended approval of the application. In response to a question from Commissioner SNOW regarding proposed access into the property from West 1-70 Frontage Road South, Ms. Austin stated that an applicant doesn't typically pursue access from the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) until they have approval of a subdivision plat. Greg Knudson commented that it is very likely CDOT would approve an access from the frontage road. Commissioner THOMPSON expressed concern about industrial zoning being adjacent to residential zoning and asked if access onto Independence would still be allowed if access is approved from the frontage road. Mike Garcia explained that if the access is granted, a three- quarter movement would be in effect on Independence which would prevent traffic from . turning south out of the development onto Independence Street. Fran Schneider 504 Maple Street, Golden Mr. Schneider, the applicant, was sworn in by Chair MacDOUGALL. He stated the three- quarter access on Independence Street would present no problem for the development. An office complex is planned for the development as heavy industrial development at this site would probably not work due to the residential nature of the neighborhood. Morgan Montgomery 9441 West 47th Avenue Mr. Montgomery was sworn in by Chair MacDOUGALL. He spoke in favor of the application. The subject land is presently a vacant weedy lot and, therefore, he felt the development would improve the neighborhood. He stated there is no semi traffic using Independence Street at this time. Planning Commission November 2, 2000 Page 2 Ted Carl 4725 Independence St. Mr. Carl was sworn in by Chair MacDOUGALL. Mr. Carl is general manager of a firm which is located adjacent to the subject property. He spoke in favor of the application and felt it would be an improvement to the neighborhood. It was moved by Commissioner DOYLE and seconded by Commissioner COLLINS that Case No. MS-00-06, a request for a two-lot minor subdivision for property located at 4730 Independence Street be APPROVED for the following reasons: 1. The requirements of the City's Subdivision Regulations have been met. 2 The existing structure on lot 1 meets the lot coverage and setback requirements of the Industrial zoning district. Commissioner SNOW offered an amendment to add the following condition: 1. No left turns will be allowed out of the site onto Independence. The amendment was accepted by Commissioners DOYLE and COLLINS and the motion passed unanimously. B. Case No. WS-OO-Ol: An application by Applewood Building Company, Inc. for approval of ten-lot major subdivision (preliminary and final subdivision plat) for property zoned Residential-One (R-I) and located at 9737 West 32nd Avenue with a variance to Section 4-B-5 of the Subdivision Regulations pertaining to the maximum length of a cul-de-sac. This case was presented by Meredith Reckert. She reviewed the staff report, presented slides and overheads of the subject property. She noted that the proposed cul-de-sac is 623-feet in length instead of 632 feet as stated in the staff report. All pertinent documents were entered into the record and she advised the Commission they had jurisdiction to hear the case. Staff has concluded that while the requirements specified in the subdivision regulations have been met for the preliminary and final plat documents, the supporting technical information and documents requested by the city Public Works and Building Departments have not been submitted. Because of the severe slope of the property, staff concluded that this additional information is crucial not only for the welfare of potential buyers but for adjacent property owners as well and suggested that the Commission had the options of (I) continuing the hearing and requesting additional information, or (2) denial of the request. Commissioner THOMPSON referred to the preliminary plat that outlines the garage but does not indicate the garage should be removed. Ms. Reckert stated this would be noted on the plat. Planning Commission November 2, 2000 Page 3 In response to a question from Commissioner SNOW, Ms. Reckert stated that a homeowners association would be required to maintain landscaping along 32nd Avenue right-of-way, detention pond and the access easement to the detention pond. In response to a question from Commissioner COLLINS regarding the detention pond, Mike . Garcia explained that it would contain a 100-year-storm and release at historic flows. Negotiations are in process between the developer and the Rocky Mountain Ditch Company regarding release of storm water into the ditch. Commissioner McNAMEE expressed concern about snow removal on the proposed street which will have a very steep incline. Bob Goebel explained that snow removal criteria provides for streets with steep slopes to be at the fourth level of plowing. In answer to a question from Commissioner THOMPSON, Mike Garcia stated that the city has not been made aware of any drainage issues in the existing neighborhood. David Schneider 3331 Oak Street Mr. Schneider, the applicant, was sworn in by Chair MacDOUGALL. He read a statement regarding his position. He stated that there is not a "level playing field" because he believes that city rules and regulations are left up to how a particular employee interprets the rules on a particular day. He disagreed with the staff report that certain items were not provided. He stated that he did provide the items; however, they were not in the format the city desired. He stated that these items have been in the city's possession for three days prior to this meeting. He disagreed that the slope of the street was" severe." At the steepest point, the grade is seven percent. Current drainage plan is at 80% of historic water runoff with the release rate of27%. This would present a significant improvement to the Rocky Mountain Ditch and all others downstream. A real estate appraiser did an extensive report on this property in March for the owners prior to Mr. Schneider's purchase of the property. This report indicated that there are no drainage problems associated with the property. He stated that he did not request a rezone and obtained an easement so that a pump station would not be required and aesthetics of property would not be jeopardized. In regard to the variance, Mr. Schneider stated that conversion of the property to residential development is the only way that the property can return a reasonable yield on investment. The property is unique because of the great depth of the property and there is no other access to a public street; therefore a cul-de-sac is necessary. The 500-foot length standard would require the northern lots to be designed as flag lots with private drives attached to the end of the cul-de- sac. This design would not be in the best interest of the city, the homeowners or the fire department. The proposed length of the cul-de-sac would have no impact on other properties in the same zoning category. The hardship is a result of the unique depth and slope of the property. Granting of the variance should have no impact on persons with disabilities. It would benefit the neighborhood by the development and related tax base. The proposed street Planning Commission November 2, 2000 Page 4 would provide better access to the Rocky Mountain Ditch which could be a public liability if it is not readily accessible to emergency equipment. In conclusion, Mr. Schneider stated that he had met and exceeded all requirements specified in subdivision regulations for preliminary and final plat documents and would build a quality subdivision that Wheat Ridge would be proud of. Commissioner SNOW commented that the city staffs frmction is to provide information to the Commission to aid in the decision making process and advised Mr. Schneider that it is not helpful to spend so much time attacking the staff. Dennis Beamis 6998 Robb Street, Arvada Mr. Beamis, engineer for the applicant, was sworn in by Chair MacDOUGALL. He stated that his firm prepared a final drainage report which has been reviewed by Rocky Mountain Ditch and city staff. One ofthe city's requirements was that it would be necessary to get approval from Rocky Mountain Ditch before the city would approve the plan. He stated that conceptual approval of the plan has been received from the ditch company. The planned release will be 27% ofthe historic release rate. He stated that the street grade is 7%, far short ofthe 8% limitation by the city. In answer to a question from Commissioner COLLINS as to how the water would flow to the retention ditch, Mr. Beamis stated there would be a piping system as well as the use of swales. Commissioner THOMPSON asked who would be responsible for maintaining the drainage systems. Mr. Beamis replied it would be the responsibility of the homeowners association and that the drainage system should be cleaned when sediments become apparent. Commissioner SNOW asked what the water depth would be in the detention pond. Mr. Beamis replied that it would be approximately five feet deep for a 24-48 hour period during a IOO-year storm. A IO-year storm would be approximately three feet deep, draining within 10-12 hours. Five year storm water would be retained in the underground detention. Chair MacDOUGALL expressed concern that flooding of the Rocky Mountain Ditch would cause problems for the lots on the north side of the ditch on 34th Avenue. Mr. Beamis said the drainage design would reduce the volume of water flowing into the ditch. Commissioner THOMPSON asked how the proposed subdivision compared with the subdivision on Jellison in regard to topography and grading. Mr. Beamis stated they would be very comparable. Commissioner SNOW asked if building footprints have been submitted to the city. Mr. Beamis replied that these had not been requested by the city. He stated that finished floor elevations Planning Commission November 2,2000 Page 5 were submitted with original plans. Plans showing foundation elevations were submitted Monday prior to this meeting. There are no plans to have retaining walls for any of the houses. In response to a question from Commissioner McNAMEE, Mr. Beamis stated there is no unstable land in the subject area. Staff also indicated they were not aware of any unstable land. Wade Isham 3690 Estes Street Mr. Isham, representing Rocky Mountain Ditch (RMD), was sworn in by Chair MacDOUGALL. He stated that Rocky Mountain Ditch has only conceptually agreed to the reduction in flow and there is not yet an agreement with the developer to accept the runoff. There are many issues to be considered including soils tests, etc. This is an irrigation ditch and the company has no interest in running a storm sewer system for any development or city. In response to a question from Commissioner SNOW, Mr. Isham replied that RMD does not want the city to look to them for any storm sewer provisions for any development or city streets. The ditch is already over-capacity which is resulting in downstream flooding. Negotiations are underway to have some of this water removed from the ditch. In response to a question from Commissioner GOKEY, Alan White explained that if the developer is unable to reach an agreement with the ditch company regarding drainage issues, alternatives will need to be explored. Drainage is a critical component of a subdivision plan. Commissioner THOMPSON expressed concern that homeowners below the proposed development could have problems with higher water tables as a result of seepage of storm water. (Chair MacDOUGALL declared a recess at 9:27 p.m. The meeting was reconvened at 9:40 p.m.) Bob Goebel summarized the city's position regarding drainage. As far as drainage goes, the concern of the city is the grading between the lots because ofthe steep slope of the land and the relative difference between the finished floor elevations. There is an average difference in finished floors of about seven feet. The developer has indicated they will build walk -outs or garden level structures, but there is no requirement for them to do so. Staff has to consider worst case scenario which is the approximate seven foot elevation difference between homes. Staff has no concern with overlot drainage, swales in back and detention below. Commissioner THOMPSON asked if fewer developed lots would mitigate the drainage issues. Mr. Goebel replied that any reduction in impermeable surfaces would reduce the amount of runoff. Planning Commission November 2, 2000 Page 6 Gerald Dahl explained that the developer must satisfY the city's drainage requirements regardless of an agreement with the ditch company. The question is whether or not the Commission feels they have adequate information to make a decision. He advised that any continuance should be a continuance of the hearing rather than just continuing it for action to give opportunity for more testimony. Hermina Goldfarb 3333 Independence Street Ms. Goldfarb was sworn in by Chair MacDOUGALL. She has lived at this address for 41 years and testified there have been many flooding problems in the area and the area ofthe proposed development is wet most of the time. She expressed concern that the development will cause more runoff into her neighborhood. John Gammon 3305 Independence Court Mr. Gammon was sworn in by Chair MacDOUGALL. He has lived at this address for 8 years. He expressed concern that the development would increase drainage into his property which already experiences many drainage problems. Stephen Dee 9524 S. Devon Court, Highlands Ranch Mr. Dee was sworn in by Chair MacDOUGALL. He is the technical engineer for the developer. His comments were based on a visual survey of the property the day before the meeting. He has not, as yet, performed soils testing. Regarding slope stability and ground water seepage, he stated the steepest slope is approximately 7% which is fairly shallow and he did not believe it would present any stability problems. Regarding ground water seepage, he stated there would be overland flow going down the development to Rocky Mountain Ditch. During the dry season, there will be an exfiltration of water from the ditch into adjacent soil. During winter or extreme storms, the water would percolate down into the surface and flow toward the ditch. This water will not generally rise up on the opposite side ofthe ditch to affect the residences there. Commissioner GOKEY asked Mr. Dee's opinion about the possibility of building walkout basements or basements if the water table is high in this area. Mr. Dee replied that this would depend upon the permeability of the soil. In regard to a question from Commissioner THOMPSON, Darin Morgan explained that each individual lot, when developed, will require soils testing which includes percolation testing. Dave Oldham 3232 Jellison Mr. Oldham was sworn in by Chair MacDOUGALL. He purchased his home three years ago and is aware of three homes on Jellison that flood occasionally. There are three swampy areas Planning Commission November 2,2000 Page 7 on the adjacent property and he expressed concern about more drainage coming onto his . property. He expressed further concern about maintenance ofthe detention pond. He stated that he is a homebuilder and would not build on the property without doing a lot of subexcavafion and installing proper drainage systems. He also expressed concern about the steep slope of the street in regard to icy winter conditions. Panl Hargrave 3224 Jellison Mr. Hargrave was sworn in by Chair MacDOUGALL. In addition to the drainage issues, he expressed concern about additional traffic onto 32nd Street. It would be difficult to turn left out of the development's cul-de-sac during early morning school traffic. He has lived in the neighborhood for 23 years and believes the proposed development area could almost be classified as a wetlands area. He does not experience water in his basement due to French drains which were installed at the time of construction. Other neighbors do experience flooding, however. John Anthony 3244 Jellison Mr. Anthony was sworn in by Chair MacDOUGALL. He testified that he is a certified professional hydrologist. In his opinion, there is an elevated water table in the area. He has a sump pump in his house which runs frequently. He expressed concern that drainage from the development could add to the elevation of the water table in the area. He also referred to the Clean Water Act which prohibits the co-mingling of untreated storm water drainage and agricultural water. Bob Goebel commented that the Clean Water Act requirements would not apply to cities under 100,000 until sometime around 2003. David Schneider returned to the podium and produced a letter from the Army Corps of Engineers stating their determination that there are no wetlands on the subject site. The letter was made a part of the case file. Bob Eisinger 3395 Independence Court Mr. Eisinger has lived in the area 15 years. He spoke in favor of the application. His home has a basement and is adjacent to the Rocky Mountain Ditch at the lowest point of the subdivision. He testified that his sump pump has only gone into operation once during this IS years. He stated that the water which drains mid-way from 32nd Avenue down Independence flows directly into the Rocky Mountain Ditch. He also stated that he has provided a sewer easement across his property for the proposed development and that no water was encountered in the digging of the sewer line in August of this year. Planning Commission November 2,2000 Page 8 Dennis Beamis returned to the podium. In regard to groundwater issues, he stated each lot will be addressed on an individual lot basis as earlier indicated by Darin Morgan. There will be an individual grading plan for each lot. The houses will also have perimeter drains around them to keep the foundations dry. Drainage from the development would go into the piping system or into swales to keep the water from going into the adjacent neighborhoods. He stated the present drainage plan was designed with input from the ditch company. He believed the infiltration from the proposed detention pond would be minimal as compared to the existing ditch. Commissioner GOKEY asked which lots would have the option of having walk-out basements. Mr. Beamis replied that lot 7 would be the only walk-out. Lots 3 through 6 and 8 through 10 could possibly be garden level. In response to a question from Commissioner SNOW, Alan White explained that the length of the cul-de-sac affects the design of the subdivision. It would be an option for the Commission to take action on the variance at this meeting. Meredith Reckert commented that the drainage plan would have to be revised again ifthe request for variance is denied. It was moved by Commissioner SNOW and seconded by Commissioner GOKEY that the request for approval of a 123-foot cul-de-sac variance on R-l zoned property located at 9737 West 32nd Avenue be recommended for APPROVAL; however, that it not go to City Conncil until the remainder of the subdivision has completed the Planning Commission process. Commissioner COLLINS stated that he would not support the motion because there is not enough information at this time in regard to drainage issues. The motion failed by a vote of 5 to 3 with Commissioners COLLINS, COOPER and DOYLE voting opposed. (A motion to approve a variance would reqnire a super- majority of 6 affirmative votes.) Commissioner COOPER indicated that she voted against the motion for the same reason stated by Commissioner COLLINS. Commissioner SNOW suggested that it might be appropriate to reconsider the motion regarding the variance because she should have made a motion to continue. Commissioner COOPER moved and Commissioner GOKEY seconded to reconsider the motion on the variance. The motion passed unanimously. Commissioner SNOW moved and Commissioner THOMPSON seconded that the request for approval of a 123-foot cul-de-sac variance on R-l zoned property located at 9737 West 32nd Avenue be continued to a date uncertain. The motion passed unanimously. Planning Commission November 2, 2000 Page 9 Commissioner SNOW moved and Commissioner THOMPSON seconded that request for approval of a ten-lot preliminary subdivision plat for Residential-One zoned property located at 9737 West 32nd Avenue be continued to a date uncertain with the following additional information to be provided by the applicant: 1. A plan showing the individual lot building pad grades and elevations. 2. A cross section drawing of the subdivision showing how the individual lots will be graded. 3. Information about the formation of a homeowners association to carry out responsibilities of maintenance of Tract A and the landscaping. 4. Approval by and agreement with the Rocky Mountain Ditch Company that the drainage plan is acceptable or an aIternative plan as approved by the Public Works Department. 5. Any other information as requested in the memorandums from the Planning, Building and Public Works Departments contained in the Planning Commission packet. 6. Information to address how drainage is conveyed at the rear oflots. Commissioner SNOW moved and Commissioner COOPER seconded that the request for approval of a ten-lot final subdivision plat for Residential-One zoned property located at 9737 West 32nd Avenue be continued to a date uncertain with the following additional information to be provided by the applicant: The motion passed unanimously. 1. A plan showing the individual lot building pad grades and elevations. 2. A cross section drawing of the subdivision showing how the individual lots will be graded. 3. Information about the formation of a homeowners association to carry out responsibilities of maintenance of Tract A and the landscaping. 4. Approval by and agreement with the Rocky Mountain Ditch Company that the drainage plan is acceptable or an alternative plan as approved by the Public Works Department. 5. Any other information as requested in the memorandums from the Planning, Building and Public Works Departments contained in the Planning Commission packet. 6. Information to address how drainage is conveyed at the rear of lots. The motion passed unanimously. 8. CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING Chair MacDOUGALL declared the public hearing closed. Planning Commission November 2, 2000 Page 10 9. OLD BUSINESS There was no old business to come before the Commission. 10. NEW BUSINESS A. Meetin!! Schedules for Remainder of the Year - There was a consensus of the Commission to hold a study session in addition to the regular meeting on November 16. The purpose of the study session will be to discuss the recently updated zoning code. 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 McNAMEE to adjourn the meeting at 11:26 p.m. The motion passed unanimously. ~~ . Ann Lazzeri, ReCO~y o Planning Commission November 2, 2000 Page 11