Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/03/2005 CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE PLANNING COMMISSION Minutes of Meeting February 3, 2005 ORIGINAL 1. CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER The regular meeting of the Wheat Ridge Planning Commission was called to order by Chair Plummer 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: John McMillin Phil Plummer Jerry Scezney Kim Stewart Scott Wesley Kevin Witt Commission Members Absent: Jim Chilvers Staff Members Present: Alan White, Community Development Director Meredith Reckert, Senior Planner Kathy Field, Administrative Assistant 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Following is the official set of Planning Commission minutes for the public hearing of February 3, 2005. 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 McMILLIN and seconded by Commissioner WESLEY to approve the agenda as presented. The motion passed 6-0 with Commissioner CIDL VERS absent. 5. APPROVE MINUTES - January 20, 2005 It was moved by Commissioner WESLEY and seconded by Commissioner McMILLIN to approve the minutes of January 20, 2005. The motion passed 4-0 with Commissioners STEWART and WITT abstaining and Commissioner CHIL VERS absent. Planning Commission February 3,2005 Page 1 6. PUBLIC FORUM There were none present who wished to address the Commission during this portion ofthe meeting. 7. PUBLIC HEARING A. Case No. WZ-04-06(A): An application filed by 70 West Business Center, LLC for approval of an outline development plan for properties located at 3230, 3270, 3291 & 3300 Youngfield Service Road and property located at approximately 13001 W. 32nd Avenue. B. Case No. WZ-04-06(B): An application filed by 70 West Business Center, LLC for approval of a final development plan for properties located at 3270 and 3291 Youngfield Service Road and approximately 13001 & 13051 W. 32nd Avenue. C. Case No. MS-04-08: An application filed by 70 West Business Center, LLC for approval of a final plat for property located at 3270 and 3291 Y oungfield Service Road. All three cases were presented by Meredith Reckert. She entered all pertinent documents into the record and advised the Commission there was jurisdiction to hear the cases. Ms. Reckert reviewed the staffreport and digital presentation. Staff recommended approval of the applications for reasons outlined in the staff report. Following questions by the Commission, the applicant addressed the Commission. Dwaine Richter 4505 S. Yosemite, Denver Mr. Richter is the owner and manager of70 West Business Center. He agreed to the condition suggested by staff to construct a ten foot fence on the northern boundary of Lot 3, Block 2. However, he requested that the time limit for fence construction be extended from one month to six months in order to see if development to the north occurs. If it does, he may choose not to develop the duplex lot and keep it as open space and develop it as an entrance to the commercial area. He further stated that his development would improve the vacant land and increase tax revenue to the city. Arthur Wise 24928 Genesee Trail Road Mr. Wise is the planner and architect for the project. He reviewed the outline development plan and elevations for the development. A car wash is planned with two automatic car bays and four self-wash bays (three for cars and one for RV's). There would be also be a small office and equipment area. There will be no RV dump stations, but only a bay for washing RV's. Architecture will be similar to surrounding development. In answer to a question from Commissioner SCEZNEY, Mr. Wise stated that any rooftop equipment will be screened. There will also be four low-noise vacuum units. Planning Commission February 3, 2005 Page 2 Diane Davies 1700 Lincoln Street, #3200 Wells Fargo Center, Denver Ms. Davies is the 'attorney for the applicant. In regard to the cross-access easement issue, she stated that her client is not opposed to language which would allow blanket cross-access easement among the three lots (the two in this application and the Good Times lot) to allow access to the Y oungfield Service Road. He does not want to layout a specific alternate access route at this time, however, because the service road will most likely be expanded which would necessitate reconfiguration of access routes and circulation within the center. Widening of the service road is not necessary for this development but would be widened to accommodate development to the north. She also expressed concern about a condition for right-in, right-out access on the existing joint access to the south because of a reciprocal access agreement between Conoco and 70 West Business Center. The applicant cannot bind Conoco to a right- in, right-out access as part of his application. However, the applicant would have no objection to right-in, right-out access if Conoco agrees to it. She also requested a future traffic signal to allow full movement access to this development if development to the north occurs and the service road is widened. Closing of the center access point would be satisfactory provided a traffic signal is installed. The applicant is in agreement to the northwesterly access drive cut lying within Lot I being removed and replaced with City standard curb, gutter and sidewalk. However, if this is done, the applicant does not believe it is necessary to design and construct additional travel lanes and/or an acceleration/deceleration lane across the frontage of Lots I and 3 for this project. Commissioner WESLEY referred to Mr. Richter's request for an 8-year build-out with options to extend for an additional 4 years and asked if he intended to take that long to complete his development. Mr. Richter stated that he plans to build immediately. He explained that he has owned the property for 30 years and development has frequently been delayed by litigation and economic conditions. His request was influenced by past experiences. Commissioner WESLEY referred to Mr. Richter's earlier statement that all retail users for his market area have been swallowed up by Colorado Mills and he has been unable to sign any retail users in this area since 1999, and asked if he was actively searching for people to occupy these buildings. Mr. Richter replied that he has searched for other users and commented that the proposed development to the north will further swallow up any available retail tenants. Commissioner McMILLIN asked if the Y oungfield Service Road would be primary access to the proposed Cabela's development to north. Alan White stated that the road would be one of three accesses and most likely would carry the most traffic. Commissioner McMILLIN asked why there was a need for an acceleration/deceleration lane coming in and out of the Conoco. Mr. White replied that it is more the need for an additional lane than an acel/decellane, especially if the north entrance is closed. Colleen Leclaire 3278 Zinnia Ct. Ms. Leclaire opposed the application and expressed concern about increased traffic and noise from this development. She already hears traffic noise from 1-70. There was discussion about Planning Commission February 3, 2005 Page 3 using evergreen trees for buffering in the 50-foot landscape buffer between the car wash and the street and adjacent to the brick screening wall. Bill Smitham 3248 Zinnia Ct. Mr. Smitham stated that he was not opposed to the car wash but would like to see the operation closed from midnight to 6:00 a.m. He also asked that the applicant be given one month to erect the fence and not be given a time extension. He also expressed opposition to the applicant's plans for some temporary uses such as Christmas tree stands or produce stands. Ms. Reckert explained that the temporary uses would be restricted to the rear portion and the interior portion ofthe development and not allowed on the entrance lot. He also requested that any signage be located on the "business side" of the street (east side of the 320d Avenue/Youngfield Service Road intersection. Mr. Wise stated that the 13-foot sign would be placed outside the sight triangle and would only be erected if the service road is widened. His understanding is that, in addition to widening the service road, a lane would be added to 320d A venue which would eliminate the existing sign and the proposal is to move the sign to the other side of the service road. Connie Mauldin 3195 Zinnia Ct. Ms. Mauldin opposed the car wash because it would increase traffic coming from the service road to 32od. She also objected to lights from a 24-hour operation. The lights from the Conoco already intrude on her home. She asked that the illuminated sign be removed from the back of the building. Further, she didn't believe there was a need for another car wash because there are two other service station car washes in the area. She also stated that she has talked with three different business owners who would like to locate there but said they couldn't deal with the applicant. Commissioner McMILLIN advised Ms. Mauldin that City Council will be considering a new lighting ordinance that might address some of her concerns. Commissioner McMILLIN asked if the 24-hour operation could be eliminated. Ms. Reckert explained that this could be restricted in the outline development plan. Steve Schaller 3239 Zinnia Ct. Mr. Schaller stated that he didn't believe a car wash would generate much sales tax as opposed to retail. He would like to see retail use for the property. Mr. Richter approached the podium to explain that the City of Wheat Ridge collects sales tax on the gross receipts of a car wash. Commissioner WESLEY asked if the applicant had done any research regarding the amount of business that would be taken away from the existing car washes in the area. Mr. Richter stated that an extensive demographic study showed that there is a need for this type of car wash. The closest self-service car wash is over two miles away. He also commented that the car washes Planning Commission February 3, 2005 Page 4 referred to by Commissioner WESLEY are automatic car washes attached to service stations and one-bay car washes will not accommodate today's market. Commissioner WESLEY asked if the applicant would be amenable to reducing the hours of operation for the car wash. Mr. Richter stated he would not agree to this condition because it cannot be shut down. There are no doors on the bays. He stated that he had a contract with Grease Monkey to build a facility on the property. The neighbors were opposed to a Grease Monkey but agreed to having a 24-hour car wash instead. Commissioner WESLEY commented that he didn't think notes from neighborhood meetings indicated neighbors wanted 24-hour wash. Ms. Reckert explained that some ofthe neighbors were opposed to a 24-hour wash. Mr. Richter stated that he believed there was a consensus to trade the automobile service use for a 24-hour wash. James Horne 3381 Alkire Ct. Mr. Horne expressed concern about increased traffic. He expressed concern about noise from water pumps, decrease in neighborhood water pressure and discharge of water into the city's sewage system. Mr. Wise stated that they are looking into recycling and possibly into preheating water using solar heat. There should be minimal noise from the pumps which will be vibration isolated. The building will be solid masonry which will also buffer equipment sounds. The applicant will work with mechanical engineers to make sure neighborhood water pressure is not affected. Richard Wood 3340 Alkire Ct. Mr. Wood expressed concern about traffic. Karen Wood 3340 Alkire Ct. Ms. Wood is in favor of the development because there are other uses which would be more detrimental. She expressed concern about noise and asked if signs could be posted at the car wash to require patrons to decrease volume on their radios and "boom boxes." Bill Smitham returned to the podium to ask if, under current land use regulations, Mr. Richter would have been allowed to build a Jiffy Lube. Ms. Reckert explained that he couldn't have, however, that was a use he wanted to add in at the neighborhood meeting but deleted it as a concession to the neighborhood. There being no others present to address the case, Chair PLUMMER closed the public hearing. Chair PLUMMER stated that he would vote in favor of the application because he believed the property owner has a right to develop his property, and the car wash would not be a detriment to neighbors and should not create a great increase in traffic. Lighting and signing could be eliminated on the west elevations and be confined to face the south and east. Evergreens could also be planted to help with buffering. Planning Commission February 3, 2005 Page 5 Commissioner WESLEY stated that he would vote against the application. He considered the important issue to be that this property is zoned Planned Commercial Development and that it was his opinion that the application only meets two zone change criteria out of eight. He didn't believe a car wash fits in with the Comprehensive Plan nor would it benefit the city. Commissioner STEW ART expressed concern about water and conservation. She encouraged the applicant to install a recycling system. She was in favor of eliminating the temporary uses and planting evergreen trees in the buffer zone. She stated that she understood neighbors' concerns and, while she didn't know ifthis was absolutely the best use of the property, she didn't know of any other solution. Commissioner SCEZNEY acknowledged that the Applewood area is very special. However, he planned to vote for the application because of the overall impact of future development to the north. Attempts can be made to address lighting through the proposed new lighting code. He also believed it would be difficult to restrict this development to less than a 24-hour operation when the Conoco station operates on a 24-hour basis. He agreed that planting on the west side would be beneficial. Commissioner McMILLIN commented that an application doesn't have to meet all criteria in order to have a zone change. He stated that he would vote in favor of the application and commented that the real issues confronting this neighborhood will be coming up in a few months from now. He also applauded the applicant for considering the use of solar heat. It was moved by Commissioner WESLEY to recommend DENIAL for Case No. WZ-04- 06, a request for approval of an amended Outline Development Plan for property located at 3230 Youngfield Service Road, 3270 Youngfield Service Road, 3291 Youngfield Service Road, 3300 Youngfield Service Road and 13001 W. 32nd Avenue for the following reasons: 1. The applicant has failed to adequately address that a zone change would be a benefit for the city. 2. The applicant has not shown any hardship. The motion died for lack of a second. It was moved by Commissioner McMILLIN and seconded by Commissioner STEWART to recommend APPROVAL of Case No. WZ-04-06(A), a request for approval of an amended Outline Developmen! Plan for property located at 3230 Y oungfield Service Road, 3270 Youngfield Service Road, 3291 Youngfield Service Road, 3300 Youngfield Service Road and 13001 W. 32nd Avenue for the following reasons: 1. The proposed amendment is consistent with uses in the C-l zone district. 2. The proposed development standards will accommodate the widening of Y oungfield Service Road beyond its current width. 3. All requirements for an Outline Development Plan have been met. Planning Commission February 3, 2005 Page 6 Commissioner STEW ART offered a friendly amendment to add a condition to eliminate the use of temporary uses such as produce and bedding plant sales. The amendment was accepted by Commissioner McMILLIN. Commissioner STEWART offered a friendly amendment to require the applicant to use a water recycling system for the car wash. The amendment was accepted by Commissioner McMILLIN. The motion passed 5-1 with Commissioner WESLEY voting no and Commissioner CHIL VERS absent. It was moved by Commissioner McMILLIN and seconded by Commissioner STEWART to recommend APPROVAL of Case No.WZ-04-06(B), a request for approval of a Final Development Plan for properties located at 3270 Youngfield Service Road, 3291 Youngfield Service Road, 13001 W. 32nd Avenue and 13501 W. 32nd Avenue for the following reasons: 1. The proposed car wash will have minimal impact in light of the existing commercial already in the development. 2. The Final Development Plan is consistent with the standards set forth in the approved Outline Development Plan for the site. 3. Adequate provisions are made for accommodation of future widening of Y oungfield Service Road. With the following conditions: 1. The 10 foot high fence on the northern boundary of Lot 3, Block 2 (duplex lot) must be constructed within two months of Final Development Plan approval by City Council. 2. A row of evergreens of at least 2-inch caliper shall be planted along the wall to the west of the Y oungfield Service Road at a distance between trunks that, at maturity, the trees will grow together and grow to the top of the neighborhood buffering wall. 3. Prior to the widening of Y oungfield Service Road, a north-south running cross access easement be obtained across 3230 Youngfield Service Road to connect Lot 1,70 West Business Center Subdivision Filing No.4 with Lot 3,70 West Business Center Subdivision Filing No.2. 4. The following language be placed on the Final Development Plan prior to recording: At such time as the Y oungfield Service Road is to be widened from its existing width of 34 feet flow line to flow line, the City may impose the following restrictions upon the current owner(s) of Lots 1 and 3, 70 West Business Center Subdivision Filing No.4: Planning Commission February 3, 2005 Page 7 1. The southwesterly access shall be restricted to a right-in, right-out movement for the 25' cross-access easement, of which 13 feet lies within Lot 3,70 West Business Center Subdivision Filing No.4 and 12 feet lies within Lot 3,70 West Business Center Subdivision Filing No.2. 2. The northwesterly access drive cut lying within Lot 1, 70 West Business Center Subdivision Filing No.4, shall be removed and replaced with City of Wheat Ridge standard curb, gutter, and sidewalk. The motion passed 5-1 with Commissioner WESLEY voting no and Commissioner CIDL VERS absent. It was moved by Commissioner WESLEY and seconded by Commissioner STEWART to APPROVE Case No. MS-04-08, a request for a two-lot re-subdivision plat for property located at 3270 Youngfield Service Road and 3291 Youngfield Service Road for the following reasons: 1. All regulations and standards of Article IV of the Code of Laws have been met. With the following condition: 1. A blanket cross access easement be required. The motion passed 6-0 with Commissioner CHIL VERS absent. Commissioner WESLEY expressed appreciation to members ofthe community who attended and participated in the hearing. 8. OLD BUSINESS In response to a request from Commissioner McMILLIN, Alan White reported on the status of the sign code and lighting code. City Council will schedule both matters for a future study session. Commissioner McMILLIN suggested that members ofthe Planning Commission attend the study session and that a field trip to look at lighting situations in the city also be included as part of the study session. 9. NEW BUSINESS Chair PLUMMER asked about the status ofthe proposed Cabela's development. Alan White stated that some information is available and will be posted on the City's website. He cautioned Commissioners that discussing this information would be considered ex parte contact. 10. COMMISSION REPORTS There were no commission reports. Planning Commission February 3, 2005 Page 8 11. COMMITTEE AND DEPARTMENT REPORTS There were no committee and department reports. 12. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Commissioner WESLEY and seconded by Commissioner STEW ART to adjourn th mee 'ng at 9:47 p.m. The motion passed unanimously. /) ~' /1 t~ " ~~~dtA_-J Ann Lazzeri, Recording ec tary Planning Commission February 3, 2005 Page 9