HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/01/2007
ORIGINAL
CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE PLANNING COMMISSION
Minutes of Meeting
March 1, 2007
1. CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER
The regular meeting of the Wheat Ridge Planning Commission was called to
order by Chair WESLEY 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:
Anne Brinkman
Jim Chilvers
John McMillin
Phil Plummer
J eITY Scezney
Kim Stewart
Scott Wesley
Commission Members Absent:
Cassie Spaniel
Staff Members Present:
Meredith Reckert, Senior Planner
Sally Payne, Senior Planner
Ann Lazzeri, Recording Secretary
3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
4. APPROVE THE ORDER OF THE AGENDA
It was moved by Commissioner PLUMMER and seconded by Commissioner
STEWART to approve the order ofthe agenda. The motion passed
unanimously.
5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - February 15, 2007
It was moved by Commissioner PLUMMER and seconded by Commissioner
STEWART to approve the minutes of February 15, 2007. The motion passed
unaniInonsly.
6. PUBLIC FORUM (This is the time for any person to speak on any subject
not appearing on the agenda.)
There was no one present to address the Commission at this time.
Planning Commission
March I, 2007
-1-
7. PUBLIC HEARING
A. Case No. WPA-06-03: (continued from February 1, 2007) Resolution
No. 01-2007, adopting the Wadsworth Corridor Subarea Plan
Sally Payne reviewed the revised Wadsworth Corridor Subarea Plan. She entered
into the record two letters in support of the Plan. One letter was from Kim
Calomino with Home Builders Association; Kim is also on the WR2020 Board.
The second letter was from Frances Langdon of3570 Miller Street.
Commissioner McMILLIN stated while he liked the concept of the frontage
roads, he expressed concern about placing access at intersections as the preferred
plan. He commented that state law actually prohibits changing lanes in an
intersection. Sally Payne explained that it was not the intent to present this option
as a preferred option out of the three. CDOT did not indicate that any of the three
options were impossible but would require further study to work out the details.
Commissioner McMILLIN stated that he was nncomfortable with this part of the
plan. The frontage road concept is a novel innovation but it needs to be proven
that it will work. If access doesn't work, the frontage roads won't work.
Commissioner CHIL VERS commented that it would be up to traffic engineers to
make these decisions. At this point, the frontage roads are an idea and not an
engineered design.
Commissioner SCEZNEY stated that he still had concerns with the intersections,
not knowing what the traffic impact would be on adjacent neighborhoods, or
plans for buffering for neighborhoods. There needs to be commonalities in
landscaping patterns and other issues. On the other hand, he stated he was aware
of the impact of the economic development vision for city. He believed the plan
is a good starting point in easing traffic congestion on Wadsworth.
Commissioner BRINKMAN noted that 34th Avenue should be changed to 34th
Place on pages 9 and 12 of the document. She wanted confirmation about the
overlay district on No.8, page 19. Sally Payne will check on this. Commissioner
BRINKMAN stated that citizens in her district have expressed concern about the
width of Wadsworth and didn't think this plan should address density.
Commissioner STEW ART expressed concern about high density, parking issues,
and cost to the city. She stated that there needs to be protection for citizens who
have invested in this area. She was concerned about tax exempt funding,
population increase, the possible use of condemnation, and basic infrastructure
costs that would be borne by the city. She also commented that many times plans
are pushed to the point that citizens become weary, give up and just accept them.
Commissioner McMILLIN commented that density is not always the enemy but
needs to be watched carefully. He also expressed concern about the concept of
Planning Commission
March 1, 2007
-2-
painted medians in terms of pedestrian safety and proposed raised medians where
not impractical. He commented that moving the light at Three Acre Lane to 41 st
would be of great benefit to traffic flow and suggested that initiative be taken to
expedite the move even before the widening of Wadsworth.
Chair WESLEY asked to hear from members of the public.
Debbie Fidrich
7737 West 46th Avenue
Miss Fidrich stated that her residence is right in the middle of the plan and
expressed concern that if she planned to sell her house she would have to declare
that it is located in the subarea plan. She stated that the widening would not affect
her; however, she was concerned about the possible high density development
that could displace her residence. She stated that her house was not affected by
the comprehensive plan, but expressed concern that the subarea plan supersedes
the comprehensive plan. She asked if a plan was in place for residents in her
situation.
Sally Payne explained that the plan is a land use advisory document that would
give direction for those who want to redevelop their property.
In response to a question from Commissioner McMILLIN, Sally Payne stated that
the number of residences that could possibly be affected has not been determined
at this time. She was not aware of any present plans for rezoning any of this
property.
Commissioner McMILLIN asked what the reason was for extending medium to
high density back to Yukon and Yarrow. Sally Payne stated that it was basically
for getting a certain number of units into a certain space. This was a
recommendation from the consultant as well as attendees at a public meeting.
Thomas Slattery
6869 W. 32nd Avenue
Mr. Slattery stated that he served on the 1999 Comprehensive Plan Committee
and as Chairman of the Economic Development and Revitalization Commission
for the Town Center development. The Safeway Marketplace Development and
improvements at Times Square prove that high density is not necessary to bring
quality businesses to the city. He further stated that every Comprehensive Plan
has clearly stated that its primary objective is to preserve the low density
character of the city. The 1999 Comprehensive Plan provided for area
development plans including the Wadsworth corridor, however the intent was not
to have these plans undo the intent ofthe Compehensive Plan. He expressed
concern that there was no map showing the impact to adjacent properties and
believed that this should have been one ofthe first things addressed in the plan.
He agreed that the Wadsworth corridor is not presently attractive, however it is
home to businesses providing needed services to the community and these
Planning Commission
March 1, 2007
-3-
businesses should be the primary consideration in planning rather than a
speculative concept of massive redevelopment. He commented that it is
improper, ifnot illegal, for the city to adopt a plan in conflict with the city charter.
He did not believe it was realistic to believe people would purchase
condominiums that abut a major highway. He commented that several years ago
the Einarson property on Kipling was found to be unsuitable for residential use.
High density results in more rental units. He believed the proposed plan would
discourage people from stopping to shop because it would be too congested. He
believed local plans should be in place to restrain CDOT from causing adverse
impacts on the communities. This plan would adversely affect the corridor by
providing a I 62-foot right-of-way that would not fit in with current urban fabric.
He suggested the entire proposal needs to be thoroughly revised before
consideration of adoption.
In response to a suggestion from Commissioner BRINKMAN, Sally Payne stated
that the map showing properties in blue that would be impacted by the plan would
be added back to the plan.
Commissioner WESLEY recalled that the Commission had wanted to remove
from the plan any references to changing the charter. Commissioner McMILLIN
commented that approval of this plan would indicate that the city is in favor of
changing the charter.
Commissioner STEWART stated that she believed it was important to listen to
the citizens who have indicated they don't want higher density and increase in
height limits. This would open the door for the same thing to happen in other
subareas. She did not believe higher densities would make the city unique.
Commissioner McMILLIN commented that while he believed there is freedom to
go beyond code requirements because this is a regulatory rather than quasi-
judicial matter, he didn't believe there is enough positive evidence to support the
density and height issues. Further, there is not support from the community to
change the charter.
Commissioner WESLEY commented that he understands that CDOT has the final
decision regarding the width of Wadsworth, but this plan indicates to CDOT how
the city would like to see things happen.
In response to a comment from Commissioner PLUMMER, Meredith Reckert
stated that the Planned Mixed Use District regulations and the Subarea Plan
would not preclude each other. Commissioner PLUMMER said that he didn't see
evidence that members ofthe community want to deviate from the density
allowance in the PMUD zone district.
Roger Loecher
4599 Carr Street
Planning Commission
March 1, 2007
-4-
Mr. Loecher spoke in opposition to the plan which he believed to be a dream that
the city cannot pay for in the form of cash dollars. The $14 million the state has
promised in eight to twelve years would probably only pay for resurfacing
Wadsworth. He expressed concern about land loss that would be experienced by
property owners. He noted that his family has already given up substantial
amounts of retail space for right-of-way. He did not believe the uniqueness ofthe
proj ect would necessarily result in increased sales tax. He expressed concern
about noise if residences are built adjacent to Wadsworth. He commented that
CDOT only wants three lanes, or 72 feet, for widening. He wondered who would
be responsible for paying for landscaping and watering in medians if 162 feet is
allowed. He asked that the plan be reconsidered.
Louise Turner
11256 W. 38th Avenue
Ms. Turner spoke in opposition and commented that adequate public notice was
not given for meetings about the plan. She stated that she didn't know about the
five meetings. There should have been full-page spreads in the paper and
publicized in the same manner as the Wheat Ridge 2020 Plan. She wondered why
a plan would even be considered that would add even more rentals to the city.
The City of Wheat Ridge already has a unique identity of suburban living and
doesn't need a new identity. She read from a newspaper article regarding new
urbanism and projects that have been done with public money that prevent private
developers from competing. These projects emphasize high density rather than
suburban living. She was opposed to l2-foot sidewalks. She expressed concern
that the plan would totally change the commercial identity in Wheat Ridge. There
should be an overlay in the plan to show what it would do to existing businesses.
She also wondered what the proposed 162 foot widening the entire length of
Wadsworth through the city would do to the city's municipal building. She
believed there should have been accurate population projections, cost projections,
some indication if there is available water and some interest in preservation and
quality oflife. She requested Commissioners to vote against the plan.
Commissioner McMILLIN suggested that perhaps 162 feet is not necessary for
the entire length of Wadsworth but only in the portion where the frontage roads
are proposed. He would be in favor of having Wadsworth six lanes the length of
Wheat Ridge with the wider portion only where frontage roads are proposed.
Commissioner STEWART stated that she would be in favor of six lanes the entire
length of Wadsworth rather than 162 feet for the entire length.
Kevin Hood
Mr. Hood, president of Wheat Ridge 2020 and chair of the Parks and Recreation
Commission, spoke in support ofthe plan. He stated that he feels very strongly
about maintaining the character ofthe city. One thing to keep in mind is that
Wadsworth does not presently support family living or reflect the suburban
Planning Commission
March 1, 2007
-5-
character ofthe city. In fact, Wadsworth is a black eye for a terrific city and is in
serious need of revamping.
In response to concerns expressed by Commissioner PLUMMER that Wheat
Ridge 2020 has been advocating a decrease in high density residential units, Mr.
Hood commented that there is no intent to have high density throughout the city.
Commissioner PLUMMER referred to comparisons with Bel Mar in Lakewood
and noted that the residential units are not right next to Wadsworth.
Commissioner STEWART commented that she would like to know the
occupancy rates for developments like Bel Mar and parts of Arvada. She
expressed concern that the market may become flooded with high density rental
properties.
Chair WESLEY asked ifthere were others who wished to address the
Commission. Hearing no response, he closed the public hearing portion ofthe
meeting.
(The meeting was recessed from 8:48 p.m. to 8:55 p.m.)
Commissioner McMILLIN commented that while he agrees with the vision, he
sees too many holes in the plan to approve it at this time.
Commissioner STEWART stated her concern with increased density as many of
the citizens have voiced over the time that she has lived here. This plan would
over-saturate the area with rental units. She also stated she couldn't support the
plan where it talks about changing the charter. She would support six lanes with
them possibly being widened through the town center area. She expressed
concern about commercial development being separated by a six-lane highway.
Commissioner WESLEY agreed that improvements need to be made to the area,
but the subarea plan needs to be retooled to address issues stated during the
meeting. While the subarea plan is a guidance tool, an overlay showing the
impact to existing businesses is necessary to let people know up front what is
going to happen.
It was moved by Commissioner McMILLIN and seconded by Commissioner
STEWART to deny recommendation of Case No. WP A -06-03 for the
following reasons:
1. There has been no attempt at qnantifying or identifying impacts to
existing residential and commercial properties.
2. The frontage roads, while they could be attractive and beneficial, are
without local precedent. It's unproven within this report how they
will work, or ifthey will work. They are a critical component, without
which this plan really cannot work.
Planning Commission
March 1, 2007
-6-
3. Added density is unsupported beyond the current PMUD limits and
unsupported by public testimony. Density over 21 units per acre is
contrary to the charter.
4. Without prejudice against new urbanism development, its success is
tenuous when dissected by such a major highway as Wadsworth.
Commissioner CHIL VERS commented that he did not see separation of shopping
areas by Wadsworth as a problem. They would be separate shopping areas. He
did not visualize pedestrians crossing from one side to the other. He also
commented that if the frontage roads would not work, it would be revealed in the
design process. He believed that density needs to stay as set forth in the current
zoning code. Redeveloping single family homes is paramount in revitalizing
Wheat Ridge. The Wadsworth corridor through Wheat Ridge is slowly slipping
and he stated he would support the plan with the exception of increasing the
density.
The motion for denial passed 4-3 with Commissioners BRINKMAN,
CHIL VERS and SCEZNEY voting no and Commissioner SPANIEL absent.
It was moved by Commissioner McMILLIN and seconded by Commissioner
BRINKMAN to state the following resolution.
1. The Planning Commission endorses an expedited study of relocating
the traffic signal at Three Acre Lane to 41st Avenue to be initiated by
the city. If the study reveals that traffic flow would be improved, the
traffic signal should be relocated from Three Acre Lane to 41st
Avenue.
2. The Planning Commission endorses two sets of three through-lanes of
traffic on Wadsworth from the north to the south city limits.
3. The Planning Commission endorses further study of frontage roads
and endorses those frontage roads where it can be shown to improve
pedestrian movement and viability of local businesses, particularly
between 38th and 44th Avenues, and where it can be demonstrated to
be feasible with ingress and egress solutions.
The motion passed 7-0 with Commissioner SPANIEL absent.
8. OTHER ITEMS
A. Election of Officers
Meredith Reckert announced that City Council has appointed Phil
Plummer to the Building Advisory Board and Scott Wesley to the Parks
and Recreation Commission. She expressed appreciation to Phil and Scott
for their service to the Planning Commission.
Planning Commission
March 1, 2007
-7-
There was a consensus of the Commission to continue election of new
officers to the next meeting until new Commission members are on board.
B. DRCOG Training - March 10, 2007
Meredith Reckert announced that DRCOG in conjunction with the Rocky
Mountain Land Use Institute will be conducting a session for Planning
Commissioners next Saturday, March 10. She asked Commissioners to let
her know as soon as possible if they would like to attend.
9. ADJOURNMENT
Prior to adjournment, Scott Wesley expressed appreciation to the staff and
Commission during his tenure on Planning Commission.
Phil Plummer also thanked fellow Commissioners and stated that he has enjoyed
serving on the Planning Commission.
Commissioner CHIL VERS stated that he has learned a lot from Scott Wesley and
Phil Plummer and has come to respect their points of view.
It was moved by Commissioner PLUMMER and seconded by Commissioner
STEWART to adjourn the meeting at 9:23 p.m.
.' I ~7
f" ,yV
(~' /0oV 0~ ~
Ann Lazzeri, Recording ecretary
Planning Commission
March 1,2007
-8-