HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/07/2003
CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE PLANNING COMMISSION
Minutes of Meeting 0 RIG I N AL
August 7, 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
Mary Austin, Planner
Ann Lazzeri, Secretary
3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Following is the official set of Planning Commission minutes for the public hearing of August 7, 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 WEISZ and seconded by Commissioner PLUMMER to
approve the order ofthe agenda. The motion passed 8-0.
5. APPROVE MINUTES
It was moved by Commissioner WEISZ and seconded by Commissioner STITES to
approve the minutes of July 17, 2003 as presented. The motion passed 6-0 with
Commissioners DAVIS and McMILLIN abstaining.
6. PUBLIC FORUM
There were none present to address the Commission during this portion of the meeting.
Page I
Planning Commission
August 7, 2003
7. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Case No. WZ-02-13 (continued from Julv 17. 2003): An application filed by Melody
Homes, Inc. for approval of a Planned Residential Development final development plan
for property located at 10285 Ridge Road.
B. Case No. WS-02-01 (continued from Julv 17. 2003): An application filed by Melody
Homes, Inc. for approval of a 38-lot subdivision plat for property located at 10285
Ridge Road.
It was moved by Commissioner DAVIS and seconded by Commissioner PLUMMER to
continue Case No. WZ-02-13 and Case No. WS-02-01 to the meeting of August 21, 2003.
The motion passed 8-0.
C. Case No. MS-03-04: An application filed by Todd Youngblood for approval of a two-
lot minor subdivision plat for property zoned Commercial-One and located at 4470
Wadsworth Boulevard.
This case was presented by Mary Austin. She entered all pertinent documents into the record
and advised the Commission there was jurisdiction to hear the case. She reviewed the staff
report and digital presentation. Staff recommended approval for reasons outlined in the staff
report.
In response to questions from Commissioner McMILLIN, Ms. Austin stated that, not knowing
what type of business would be located there, it would be very difficult to estimate possible
increase in traffic on W. 45th. Furthermore, primary access to the subject property could
potentially come from Wadsworth. The developer is looking at doing an access easement
across lot one as part of the purchase negotiations. Lot four will have a W. 45th Avenue
address.
Commissioner McNAMEE expressed concern about the curb cut onto W. 45th allowing traffic
to flow into the neighborhood and recommended left turn only. Ms. Austin stated that a
recommendation could be made to the traffic engineer. Depending on the use of the site, the
traffic engineer would decide whether or not a traffic study is warranted.
Todd Youngblood
4470 Wadsworth Boulevard
Mr. Youngblood, the applicant, was sworn in by Chair McNAMEE. He stated he had nothing
to add to the staff report as presented by Ms. Austin.
Jim Templeton
4551 Vance
Mr. Templeton was sworn in by Chair McNAMEE. He voiced concern about the possibility of
increased traffic on Vance. He would like to see traffic routed onto Wadsworth.
Page 2
Planning Commission
August 7, 2003
Commissioner BERRY asked if the present situation allowed access onto W. 4Sth as well as
Wadsworth. Ms. Austin replied that this was correct and this subdivision plat would not allow
any access that does not already exist.
It was moved by Commissioner STITES and seconded by Commissioner PLUMMER that
Case No. MS-03-04, a request for a two-lot minor subdivision plat for property located at
4470 Wadsworth Boulevard be approved for the following reasons:
1. All requirements ofthe city's subdivision regulations have been met.
2. The lots are of sufficient size to allow for development with C-1 zoning district
requirements.
3. All required utility easements are being provided.
4. The lots will have access from existing driveways with cross-access easements.
The motion passed 8-0.
D. 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.
Alan White presented this case. Planning Commission recommended on June Sth that staff
prepare an ordinance to address several setback issues and changes. The ordinance with those
changes was presented to the Commission for their consideration.
Chair McNAMEE suggested that the issue of setbacks for RV's be discussed when the RV
ordinance is brought back. There was a consensus ofthe Commission to defer the issue ofRV
setbacks.
Commissioner McMILLIN expressed concern about the proposed IS-foot height limit for
garages. This would only allow a maximum of nine feet for the garage door. He slated he
checked with two RV dealerships regarding heights ofRV's. One dealership said they did not
sell anything that would fit with a IO-foot garage door and the other said they sell one
conversion van that would fit with a IO-foot garage door. This proposal would prevent owners
from parking their RV's in a garage which presents a dilemma for them in light of the city's
ordinance requiring any more than one RV to be parked indoors.
Commissioner PLUMMER stated he would be in favor of adopting the ordinance as it is. If
circumstances warrant, citizens would still have the right to apply for a variance from the
ordinance.
Commissioner DAVIS commented that she would like to see homeowners have the ability to
pursue their own desires without undue duress and expense.
Commissioner McMILLIN slated that he believed homeowners should be able to build
accessory buildings at least half the height of the primary structure. The proposed height limits
would limit accessory structures to less than one third of the primary structure height. He
reviewed several photos he took of various examples of accessory structures in the city which
Page 3
Planning Commission
August 7, 2003
would be illegal under the proposed ordinance including a couple of barns. He also expressed
concern about imposing so many rules and regulations on property owners.
Commissioner BERRY asked what the height restriction would be for a barn. Mr. White stated
that barns in residential zones would fall under the accessory structure limits. However, barns
and other accessory structures in agricultural zones have a 3S-foot height limit.
Chair McNAMEE asked to hear from members of the public.
Richard Moreno
6671 West 26th Avenue
Mr. Moreno was sworn in by Chair McNAMEE. He commented that he recently built a IS-
foot high garage on his property with a 9- foot door that accommodates his 4-wheel drive
pickup. He previously lived in Denver and stated that Denver has a IS-foot height limitation
on accessory structures. He lives on property zoned R-I with a four-stall barn that is 19-20 feet
tall. There is a portion ofthe barn that has a 12-foot height. He asked ifhe could legally
extend the roofline to the end of the existing structure. Travis Crane replied that since the roof
line is already established, he could extend it to the end of the barn. He pointed out, however,
that if the barn were to be destroyed by the owner, it would have to be rebuilt under the
standards set forth in the ordinance.
Commissioner McMILLIN asked how many building permits for maximum height accessory
structures have been issued in the past five years. Travis Crane stated that he couldn't recall
receiving very many ofthese requests in the past few years.
Commissioner McMILLIN stated that he had no problem with the proposed setback regulations
for accessory structures which increase as the structure gets taller. He suggested that thought
be given to performance planning zoning that, for example, would sayan accessory structure
could not cast a shadow across a property for more than two hours on a winter day or not be so
large as to block a significant mountain view. He asked if this kind of planning were
defendable in court.
Alan White explained that it is defendable in court, but would take a lot of staff time to
administer. For example, site plans for the affected property as well as surrounding properties
would be required as well as completing studies such as shadow analysis. In answer to a
question from Commissioner McMILLIN, Mr. White stated that it would probably take less
time than going through the variance process.
Commissioner BERRY stated that she was familiar with some communities that use
performance planning. The requests are processed through an administrative review process.
While it takes less time than the variance process, it costs the same because of staff time
involved.
Commissioner McMILLIN suggested that, similar to special use permits, oversize garage
applications could be posted and, if no objections were received, it could be built. Alan White
commented that this would be a modification to the variance procedure. Presently, the charter
gives the Board of Adjustment solely the power to decide on height variances.
Planning Commission
August 7, 2003
Page 4
Commissioner STITES commented that this ordinance would protect homeowners who have
smaller lots. This ordinance would provide a starting place and variances would still be an
option.
Commissioner BERRY commented that 15 feet would cover most situations. It is difficult to
write regulations that protect the majority of citizens while giving ultimate flexibility and that is
the reason for variance procedures.
Commissioner WEISZ agreed with Commissioners STITES and BERRY.
Commissioner PLUMMER commented that this ordinance is reasonable and in line with other
communities in the area. It would protect 90% of the lots in Wheat Ridge that are less than
12,500 square feet. If someone wants to build a larger accessory structure, the variance
procedure is available.
Commissioner McMILLIN suggested that county records could be used in determining
building coverage percentages. He also asked why square foot limits were placed on accessory
structures in RI-B and RI-C. Mr. White explained it was because these were smaller lots.
It was moved by Commissioner PLUMMER that Case No. ZOA-03-09, Residential
Setbacks, be approved.
Commissioner McMILLIN asked what cost and time is involved in the variance procedures.
Travis Crane replied that the cost for a variance is $390 and takes anywhere from 4 to 6 weeks.
Commissioner WEISZ seconded the motion with the clarification that on page 4 of the
ordinance, minimum rear yard setbacks in the R-1C district will be changed from 10 feet
to 5 feet. This was acceptable to Commissioner PLUMMER.
Alan White requested that the ordinance also be amended in regard to all side and rear
yard setbacks for detached garages, carports and storage sheds. The present language
states the setbacks should be 5 feet if less than 7 feet in height, 10 feet if less than or equal
to 15 feet in height. He proposed that the ordinance read that setbacks should be 5 feet if
less than or equal to 7 feet in height, 10 feet if greater than 7 feet in height. This was
acceptable to Commissioners PLUMMER and WEISZ.
The motion passed 7-1 with Commissioner McMILLIN voting no.
8. OLD BUSINESS
. Commissioner McMILLIN commented that trees have been planted at the service station at
38th and Kipling.
9. NEW BUSINESS
. Commissioner McMILLIN expressed concern about the lighting and placement of the sign
Planning Commission
August 7, 2003
Page 5
for the new Starbucks at 38th and Kipling. Travis Crane stated that the sign meets all
aspects of the sign code.
10. COMMISSION REPORTS
There were no Commission reports.
11. COMMITTEE AND DEPARTMENT REPORTS
. Alan White informed the Commission that the city manager's report on the Planning
Commission was read at the last City Council meeting. He distributed copies of the report
and apologized that the Commissioners did not have a copy of the report before the Council
meeting. He also advised the Commission that he plans to meet with Chair McNAMEE to
discuss any areas where further training would be advisable. These areas could be
discussed at the next meeting.
12. ADJOURNMENT
It was moved by Commissioner PLUMMER and seconded by Commissioner STITES to
adjourn the meeting at 8:45 p.m. The motion passed unanimously.
njCWa/\ 1YlW~
Marian McNAMEE, Chair
A""~~
Planning Commission
August 7, 2003
Page 6