Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/05/2003 CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE PLANNING COMMISSION Minutes of Meeting 0 RIG I N A L June 5, 2003 1. CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER The regular meeting of the Wheat Ridge Planning Commission was called to order by Chair McNAMEE at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers of the Municipal Building, 7500 West 29th Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado. 2. ROLL CALL Commission Members Present: Karen Berry Kimberly Davis John McMillin Marian McNamee Phil Plummer Michael Stites Paula Weisz Kevin Witt Staff Members Present: Alan White, Community Development Director Travis Crane, Planner Ann Lazzeri, Secretary Commission Members Absent: None 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Following is the official set of Planning Commission minutes for the public hearing of June 5, 2003. A set of these minutes is retained both in the office of the City Clerk and in the Community Development Department of the City of Wheat Ridge. 4. APPROVE ORDER OF AGENDA It was moved by Commissioner PLUMMER and seconded by Commissioner STITES to approve the order of the agenda. The motion passed 8-0. 5. APPROVE MINUTES Commissioner McMILLIN requested an amendment to paragraph 7 on page 3. The first sentence should read Commissioner DAVIS asked the size......rather than Commissioner McMILLIN. It was moved by Commissioner McMILLIN and seconded by Commissioner WEISZ to approve the minutes of May 15,2003 as amended. The motion passed 7-0 with Commissioner BERRY abstaining. Planning Commission June 5, 2003 Page I 6. PUBLIC FORUM There were none present to address the Commission during this portion of the meeting. 7. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Case No. ZOA-03-05: An ordinance amending portions of Chapter 26 ofthe Code of Laws of the City of Wheat Ridge concerning Family Foster Homes and Residential Group Homes. The case was presented by Alan White. He advised the Commission there was jurisdiction to hear the case and reviewed the staff report. Commissioner BERRY commented that the ordinance specifies the agency responsible for licensing group homes, but does not spell out the agencies responsible for licensing family foster homes and asked if the ordinance should include the licensing agencies for family foster homes. Alan White replied that the Commission could recommend approval with a condition that the city attorney review the matter to decide whether or not family foster home licensing agencies should be included in the ordinance. Commissioner McMILLIN pointed out that Arvada's ordinance states family foster homes are licensed by the State of Colorado for the County Department Human Services. Commissioner BERRY asked if she understood correctly that the ordinance only removes the limitation of four children in a foster home if they are not juvenile sex offenders, but if the children are juvenile sex offenders, there can be more than four. Alan White replied that this was correct. Chair McNAMEE asked if any individuals were present who wished to address this matter. The following individual responded. Don Peterson 9945 West 34th Drive Mr. Peterson was sworn in by Chair McNAMEE. He expressed concern that the ordinance would remove restrictions on the number of children allowed in a foster home as long as they are registered sex offenders. He suggested that wording from the court decision regarding registered sex offenders should be included in the ordinance. He also suggested that the ordinance clarify the definitions of foster homes versus group homes. Commissioner McMILLIN asked if there were any other stipulations in the code that limits the number of registered sex offenders in a foster or group home. Alan White replied that there were no other limits, but the licensing agency should able to exercise control over the number. Commissioner McMILLIN expressed concern that since family foster homes are allowed in all residential zone districts and group homes for children are allowed only under the special use process, the ordinance would allow homes for registered sex offenders to bypass the special use process. He expressed his discomfort with voting for an ordinance without further review of the Colorado Supreme Court case that is making this requirement of the city. Page 2 Planning Commission June 5, 2003 Commissioner BERRY stated that she would be more comfortable if she understood the State's defmitions of group homes and family foster homes. Commissioner WEISZ asked for clarification as to whether the Commission had to consider the group home definition at this time. Alan White replied that the court case in question only addresses family foster homes. Commissioner DAVIS commented that she felt family foster homes and group homes for children are interrelated due to the fact that the code states that five or more children constitute a group home. It was moved by Commissioner McMILLIN and seconded by Commissioner DAVIS to continue Case No. ZOA-03-05 until June 19,2003 when the city attorney will be available to provide further information to the Commission. The motion passed 8-0. B. Case No. ZOA-03-11: An ordinance amending Section 26-803 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws concerning Floodplain Control. The case was presented by Alan White. He advised the Commission there was jurisdiction to hear the case and reviewed the staff report. Commissioner BERRY expressed concern that the ordinance would adopt Lena Gulch and Lower Clear Creek floodplain plans from 1975 and 1981. People who were not in the floodplain at the time those plans were adopted could now find themselves in a floodplain. Alan White stated that the city has been enforcing the Lena Gulch and Lower Clear Creek plans all along and therefore the ordinance would simply formalize the practice the city has already been following. He stated that adoption of the revised FEMA flood insurance study and designations for Jefferson County must be completed by June 17,2003 in order for the city to participate in the National Flood Insurance Program. Commissioner DAVIS commented that one comprehensive floodplain map should be advantageous to homeowners. Chair McNAMEE asked if any individuals were present who wished to address this matter. There was no response. It was moved by Commissioner DAVIS and seconded by Commissioner PLUMMER that Case No. ZOA-03-11, a proposed amendment to Section 26-803 of Article VIII, Floodplain Control, of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws, be forwarded to City Council with a recommendation of approval for the following reasons: 1. The proposed legislation adopts the new study and flood insurance rate maps. 2. It will allow the City of Wheat Ridge to continue participating in the National Flood Insurance Program. Planning Commission June 5, 2003 Page 3 The motion passed 8-0. C. Case No. ZOA-03-09: An ordinance amending Chapter 26 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws pertaining to heights and setbacks for residential accessory structures and exceptions thereto. This case was presented by Alan White. He advised the Commission they had jurisdiction to hear the case. He reviewed the staff report and digital presentation which included a survey of regulations in effect for neighboring jurisdictions. Even though this case is a public hearing, staff requested discussion and direction in order to bring an ordinance to Planning Commission at the June 19th or July l7'h meetings. Discussion points included: . Decreased accessory building height needs to be considered. . Accessory structures should not overpower principal structures. . R-lA side setbacks for detached garages or carports should be changed to 10 feet. Rear setbacks for detached garages or carports in R-l C, which are the smallest lots in the city, should be changed to 5 feet to be consistent with other residential zones. . Lot coverage requirements should probably stay the same. . Larger lots could have larger setback requirements. . Shadowing from accessory structures onto neighboring lots needs to be considered. . Attached structures need to be more clearly defined. . Metal accessory structures over 120 square feet in residential areas could be prohibited. . Enforcing design standards for accessory structures would be very difficult. . One advantage of living in Wheat Ridge is that there are no covenants. . Wheat Ridge has a heritage of accessory structures (barns, for example) being larger than the primary structure. . Accessory structures can also make neighborhoods more flexible in providing, for example, living for elderly parents, rental income from the accessory structure, etc. . With RV parking and non-operative vehicle parking restrictions, the size of garages allowed needs to be considered in order to allow indoor storage for such vehicles. . Setback areas could be required to be unencumbered except for landscaping. . Definitions need to be established for garages and other accessory structures. Chair McNAMEE asked if there were individuals present who wished to address this case. The following individual responded: Don Peterson 9945 West 34th Drive Mr. Peterson was sworn in by Chair McNAMEE. He stated he was in favor of a minimum setback of 5 feet with increasing setbacks required in relation to the height of the accessory structure. He believed that setback regulations should take into account the neighbors' view of the sky. He favored lot coverage percentage requirements and unencumbered setbacks. Although people have the right to use their properties, consideration for neighbors' view should also be considered. Planning Commission June 5, 2003 Page 4 It was moved by Commissioner PLUMMER to continue Case No. ZOA-03-09 to a date uncertain and request staff to prepare an ordinance with the following recommendations for changes: 1. Change the side setbacks in the R-2A, R-3 and R-3A to 5 feet per story for one and two family structures. Maintain the existing interpretation of "building in line" so that the new setback requirements don't apply to pop-tops. 2. Reconcile the footnotes and figures in the tables for multi-family dwellings in the R-3 and R-3A districts by changing the side and rear setbacks to 15 feet for the first 2 stories plus 5 feet per story for structures above 2 stories. 3. Keep the setback exceptions in Section 26-611 as currently written, except add the following language to (b): "provided, however, that no encroachment into a side or rear yard is allowed in the NC, RC, C-l, C-2 or I zone districts when adjacent to a residentially zoned property." 4. Lower the maximum permitted height for sheds to 10 feet and for garages to 15 feet. Increase the side and rear setback such that if the shed or detached garage/carport is less than X feet in height, the setback is 5 feet; between X and Y feet in height, the setback is 10 feet; and over Y feet up to the maximum height, the setback is 15 feet. The height and setback requirements should be the same in all residential zone districts. 5. Limit the combined square footage of sheds and detached garages/carports to a percentage of the lot. The building coverage percentages should be similar to those of the City of Aurora. 6. Prohibit the use of metal buildings in excess of 120 square feet in residential zone districts. Commissioner McMILLIN seconded the motion with the understanding that the "X's" and "Y's" in No.4 and the definition of garages and other accessory structures will be determined at a later date. The motion passed 8-0. D. Case No. ZOA-03-10: An ordinance amending Section 26-103 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws concerning the submittal of applications subject to the site development review process. This cased was presented by Alan White. He advised the Commission there was jurisdiction to hear the case and reviewed the staff report. Commissioner McMILLIN commented that this amendment would give the city the same rights as a private real estate purchaser in regard to placing contingencies based upon approved zonmg. Chair McNAMEE asked if there were individuals present who wished to address this case. There was no response. Planning Commission June 5, 2003 Page 5 It was moved by Commissioner WEISZ and seconded by Commissioner PLUMMER to recommend approval of Case No. ZOA-03-10, an ordinance amending requirements for applications subject to the site development review process. The motion passed 8-0. 8. OLD BUSINESS I. Alan White reported the following City Council actions: . The city has settled the lawsuit with John Elway AutoNation and the final development plan was approved with modifications to lighting and clarification regarding groundwater pumping. . The SUP process was approved by City Council at its last meeting. Staffwill present a comparison ofthe old code and new code concerning special uses in the NC zone district for consideration by the Commission at a later date. . The Conservation Zone District located at 4650 Parfet was approved without the right-of-way vacation. 2. Commissioner McMILLIN asked for a status report on the replacement oftrees on the Phillips 66 property at 38th and Kipling. Alan White will look into this and report back to the Commission. Commissioner PLUMMER commented that the same situation exists at the kitchen shop at 41 st and Kipling. 3. Commissioner DAVIS commented that the minutes were improved in relation to outlining reasons for the Commission's decisions. 4. Commissioner WITT asked advice as to whether or not a Planning Commission member should participate in a neighborhood meeting in his or her district regarding rezonings. Alan White explained that the city attorney rendered an opinion that a Commissioner could attend a neighborhood meeting because, technically, the application is not yet in process. However, Mr. White advised against Commissioners attending the meeting because it could raise concerns with the neighbors and/or the applicant if and when the matter is heard before Planning Commission. 9. NEW BUSINESS . Alan White informed the Commission that nothing is scheduled for the July 3rd meeting. It was moved by Commissioner PLUMMER and seconded by Commissioner DAVIS that the July 3, 2003 Planning Commission meeting be canceled. The motion passed 8-0. 10. COMMISSION REPORTS There were no Commission reports. 11. COMMITTEE AND DEPARTMENT REPORTS There were no committee or department reports. Planning Commission June 5, 2003 Page 6 12. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Commissioner PLUMMER and seconded by Commissioner STITES to adjourn the meeting at 9:08 p.m. The motion passed 8-0. . /I) aM f1 /1 n...),.) A h /l'\..U . Marian McNAMEE, Chair ~~h Ann Lazzeri, Recording ec tary "---" Planning Commission June 5, 2003 Page 7