Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/02/2007 CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE PLANNING COMMISSION Minutes of Meeting August 2, 2007 ORIGINAL 1. CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER The regular meeting of the Wheat Ridge Planning Commission was called to order by Chair SCEZNEY at 7:02 p.m. in the City Council Chambers ofthe Municipal Building, 7500 West 29th Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado. 2. ROLL CALL OF MEMBERS Commission Members Present: Aune Brinkman Jim Chilvers Dick Matthews Davis Reinhart Jerry Scezney Cassie Spaniel Kim Stewart Commission Members Absent: John McMillin Staff Members Present: Sally Payne, Interim Community Development Director Meredith Reckert, Senior Plarmer Travis Crane, Plarmer II Aun Lazzeri, Secretary 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 4. APPROVE ORDER OF AGENDA It was moved by Commissioner STEWART and seconded by Commissioner SPANIEL to approve the order ofthe agenda. The motion passed 7-0. 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - July 19, 2007 It was moved by Commissioner MATTHEWS and seconded by Commissioner SPANIEL to approve the minutes of July 19, 2007 as presented. The motion passed 6-0 with Commissioner SCEZNEY abstaining and Commissioner McMILLIN absent. 6. PUBLIC FORUM (This is the time for any person to speak on any subject not appearing on the agenda.) Planning Connnission Minutes -1- August 2, 2007 7. PUBLIC HEARING Travis Crane informed the Commission that the applicant in the first case was not present. Therefore, it was moved by Commissioner BRINKMAN and seconded by Commissioner STEW ART to amend the agenda to hear the second, third and fourth items first. The motion passed unanimously. It was moved by Commissioner REINHART and seconded by Commissioner BRINKMAN to recess the meeting for five minutes. The motion passed unanimously. The meeting was recessed at 7:06 p.m. and reconvened at 7:12 p.m. Sally Payne informed the Commission that the applicant for the first case was present at this time. Therefore, it was moved by Commissioner BRINKMAN and seconded by Commissioner STEW ART to return to the original order of the agenda. The motion passed unanimously. A. Case No. MS-07-02: An application filed by Dale Brothers for approval of a two-lot minor subdivision plat for property zoned Residential-Two and located at 3661 Miller Street. The case was presented by Travis Crane. He entered all pertinent documents into the record and advised the Commission there was jurisdiction to hear the case. He reviewed the staff report and digital presentation. Staff recommended approval for reasons outlined in the staff report. Dale Brothers 9822 Chadwick Way Littleton, CO Mr. Brothers appeared as a representative of the owner of the subject property. He stated there are no plans to remove the existing brick house. He stated his belief that building a duplex on the property would greatly improve and enhance the property. Commissioner BRINKMAN asked Mr. Brothers ifthere were plans to demolish the two outbuildings ifthe application is approved. Mr. Brothers replied that they would definitely be removed. Rick Nobbe 11187 Chase Way, Westminster Mr. Knobbe appeared as the surveyor for the property. In response to a question from Commissioner REINHART, Mr. Nobbe stated that the south building is approximately 5 Yz to 6 feet from the southern property line and does not lie within the easements. Planning Connnission Minutes -2- August 2, 2007 In response to a question from Commissioner STEWART, Mr. Brothers stated that he would estimate there are forty to fifty percent duplexes in the area. Vice Chair CHILVERS asked to hear from members of the public at this time. Steve Miller 3595 Miller Street Mr. Miller agreed that the lot would be improved by a new structure but did not want to see a duplex built on the property. He disagreed with Mr. Brothers' statement that the area consists of forty to fifty percent duplexes. He stated that there is only one duplex on his street and there are no duplexes on the street directly to the west. There is a combination of duplexes and single family homes on the street directly to the east. Albert Perry 3645 Miller Mr. Perry stated that he believed the area would be better served by construction of a single family home rather than a duplex. He also stated that, in the past, the southern half of the property has experienced sewer problems. Meredith Johns 3585 Miller Street Ms. Johns stated her opposition to the construction of a duplex on the property. The street would look more uniform with a single family residence. A single family residence would also lessen the amount of rentals in the area. Fran Langdon 3570 Miller Street Ms. Langdon stated that she has lived on Miller Street for 45 years and that the area was originally zoned R-l. Miller Street got lumped into R-2 zoning when the city was incorporated. She also disagreed with Mr. Brothers' statement that the area consists of forty to fifty percent duplexes. She stated there are sewer problems on the property because there are only four feet rather than six feet of line, and the house directly across the street has a septic tank. She also expressed concern that there is the possibility that the existing brick house could be replaced with another duplex. She stated her belief that a single family home would blend in better with the neighborhood. Scott Palat 3641 Miller Mr. Palat expressed opposition to a duplex being built next door to his property. He stated his belief that a single family home would be of more financial benefit to the owner and developer than a duplex. Charles Burns 3520 Miller Planning Connnission Minutes -3- August 2, 2007 Mr. Bums expressed his opposition to construction of a duplex. He has lived in his home since 1958 and the area has always been considered a single family area. Dale Brothers returned to the podium. He stated that he may have been wrong about the percentage of duplexes in the area, however, there are many duplexes in the area. He stated that the three sewer lines coming from the existing house were scoped and no issues were found. He stated he would provide a copy ofthe report if necessary. He stated that the garage on the west portion of the lot would be removed. Both outbuildings would be removed. He stated his belief that the proposed duplex would not detract from property values of existing homes in the neighborhpod and he disagreed with Mr. Palat that a single family home would be of more benefit to the owner and developer than a duplex. In response to questions from Commissioner BRINKMAN, Mr. Brothers stated that the sewer lines were scoped as a part of standard due diligence. If problems were to occur, he would have to fix them in order to sell the units. He also stated that he is not aware of a high water table in the area. The existing home does have a basement and there are no signs of water damage. Commissioner STEWART asked if the intent was to sell the two units as separate residences? Mr. Bums replied that the individual cost per duplex will almost ensure they would be purchased as single family homes. Each unit will have a two car garages and there will be separate utilities. In response to a question from Commissioner CHIL VERS, Mr. Crane explained that, due to lot width, the existing home could not be converted to a duplex unless a variance were to be approved by the Board of Adjustment. There were no other individuals to speak. Commissioner BRINKMAN asked if present structures would be removed once the application is approved. Dale Brothers returned to the podium and stated that, due to asbestos shingles on the buildings, it will be necessary to have a company specializing in removal of asbestos to demolish the buildings. He stated the timing of demolition and construction would be directly related to the time the project is in the City's plarming and development stage. It was moved by Commissioner REINHART and seconded by Commissioner MATTHEWS to approve Case No. MS-07-02, a request for approval of a two-lot subdivision plat for property located at 3661 Miller Street, for the following reasons: 1. All requirements ofthe Subdivision Regulations have been met. 2. All required utility easements are being provided. Planning Connnission Minutes -4- August 2, 2007 3. Adequate infrastructure will be constructed with the development to serve the proposed use. The motion passed 6-1 with Commissioner BRINKMAN voting no and Commissioner McMILLIN absent. B. Case No. W A-07-04: An application filed by Crown Land Development for approval of a variance to the 500-foot maximum cul-de-sac length for property zoned Residential-One and located at approximately 3301 Quail Street. C. Case No. WS-07-01: An application filed by Crown Land Development for approval of an II-lot major subdivision plat for property zoned Residential-One and located at approximately 3301 Quail Street. D. Case No. WF-07-01: An application filed by Crown Land Development for approval of a Class I Flood Plain Special Exception Permit to allow street and other subdivision improvements in the Lena Gulch 100-year flood plain for property zoned Residential-One and located at approximately 3301 Quail Street. (Chair SCEZNEY disclosed that he lives adjacent to the property involved in these cases and therefore he would not hear the case. At this point, Chair SCEZNEY left the council chambers and Vice Chair CHILVERS conducted the remainder ofthe meeting.) Prior to presenting the case, Meredith Reckert distributed an addendum to the staff report to Commission members. The addendum related to staff recommendations made after the public works department completed its review of the cases. The results of that review were not available at the time the staff report was completed. The three cases were presented concurrently by Ms. Reckert. Each case would require a separate motion. 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 of all three cases for reasons, and with conditions, as outlined in the staff report and addendum. She advised the Commission that Case No. W A-07-04 and Case No. WF-07-01 would require five positive votes for approval in accordance with regulations for special waivers. Commissioner BRINKMAN asked the reason for the regulation that set cul-de- sac length at 500 feet. Ms. Reckert replied that she was not sure of the reasons, but it has been in the subdivision regulations since 1972 and probably relates to connectivity and emergency access. Planning Connnission Minutes - 5- August 2, 2007 Steve McKendry Steve McKendry, the applicant, addressed questions from the Commission. In regard to the cul-de-sac variance, he stated there are natural features which have necessitated longer cul-de-sacs in adjacent neighborhoods. The cul-de-sac is designed with a large bulb at the end to accommodate emergency vehicles. Drainage will include box culverts designed to handle a hundred-year flood event and will be done in harmony with existing trees. The floodplain exception is being requested only for the improvement ofthe roadways and sewer lines that are going into that section of the floodplain. Once roadways and sewer lines are constructed, the area will be reclaimed and seeded. A request will be made at a later date to improve Lena Gulch and will be consistent with the drainage study to show that it will improve the drainage. Once Lena Gulch is improved, application will be made to FEMA for a map revision that will re-establish the floodplain so the remaining three homes would not be in a floodplain. The proposed homes will be consistent with size and configuration ofthe lots. The natural grades will be adhered to as much as possible to eliminate the necessity of a lot of infill. Commissioner BRINKMAN asked about the proposed culvert. Mr. McKendry explained that the box culvert will be six feet high and eight feet wide and desigued to handle a hundred year storm. There will be a two-foot soldier wall to handle low flows. The area will be maintained by the homeowners association. There is an existing easement to the north end of the property which allows Urban Drainage to maintain that portion. Commissioner BRINKMAN asked if Mr. McKendry had actively worked with the neighbors to address concerns about the proposed development. Mr. McKendry stated that he held a neighborhood meeting and commented that much of the opposition was from people who would oppose anything developed on the site. Other than that, much of the opposition concerned traffic, especially as it relates to school traffic, existing trees and consideration for wildlife. He stated that the plan has been designed to accommodate those concerns. There are no plans to develop an area to the north of Lena Gulch in order to allow it to remain in a natural state. (Vice Chair CHIL VERS declared a recess at 8 :41 p.m. The meeting was reconvened at 8:48 p.m.) Vice Chair CHIL VERS asked to hear from members ofthe public. Louise Turner 11256 West 38th Avenue Planning Connnission Minutes -6 - August 2, 2007 Mrs. Turner and her husband own the property immediately north of the center section of the proposed development. She also owns half ofthe Williams wildlife preserve to the north and east. She commented that anyone who purchases floodplain land should expect to deal with resulting issues. Urban Drainage and the City of Wheat Ridge adopted a plan for Lena Gulch which provided for an open low-flow charmel to carry water at a slow rate. She objected to Mr. McKendry's plans to change the configuration of the charmel where constrictions would cause water to flow at a faster rate. She asked that the original plan for Lena Gulch not be violated. Commissioner BRINKMAN stated that Urban Drainage and the City are working in conjunction to adopt a new flood hazard delineation plan for Lena Gulch. This plan shows charmelization for Lena Gulch but not for this area. She asked Ms. Turner if chamlelization was a concern. Ms. Turner replied that any charmelization is of concern because it increases the rate of water flow. If the study is based on current conditions, it should be more restrictive than it is now because of the drastic enlargement of the Maple Grove Reservoir. Consolidated Mutual Water Department obtained permission to replace the fiber dams with steel gates to store an additional five feet of water. When this water is released, flooding occurs. Linda Gibbard 3415 Quail Street Ms. Gibbard stated that she was opposed to any development on this property. She expressed concern about the effect of development on wildlife habitat as well as safety for children in the culvert areas. Arthur Gibbard 3425 Quail Mr. Gibbard stated that he has lived in his home since 1977. He expressed concern about the effect on wildlife habitat. He was also concerned about the developer bringing in fill dirt. Mark Sares 3455 Quail Mr. Sares has lived at this address for five years. He expressed concern about the impact of increased traffic from the development. He did not believe that the impact of increased traffic from the Cabela's development has been taken into account for this area. He expressed concern about safety of his children with the proposed culverts that will run behind his house. There is also a safety issue with children who play on the school grounds near the water in the SUll1ll1er. He agreed with Louise Tumer's comments and requested that the low flow drainage for this area be retained. He would like to see a decision delayed until the new study is adopted. He commented that the 500-foot would not be necessary ifthe length of the road were shortened. This might necessitate the elimination of one Planning Commission Minutes -7 - August 2, 2007 or two houses for the developer, but it would pull the cul-de-sac away from Lena Gulch and allow the low flow drainage to remain. Caroline Green 11254 West 38th Avenue Ms. Green lives directly north ofthe subject property. She expressed concern about safety issues with fast moving water. She commented that while development is inevitable it must be done in a safe marmer. She expressed concern as to whether or not engineering had been thoroughly completed. She stated that she wasn't sure she could trust a developer and a homeowners association to determine what happens with her property. Nancy Snow 11155 West 40th Avenue Ms. Snow requested that, ifthe application is approved, park land dedication be required rather than cash in lieu of dedication. Ms. Reckert explained that the Parks Commission had already approved a requirement for cash in lieu of land dedication. Steve McKendry retunled to podium. He commented that it is important for a city to grow and there are needs of many people that need to be considered. He stated that he was not asking to be treated differently than any other developer. He commented that this meeting is not the time to consider floodplain issues. These will be considered at a meeting with solid engineering results and safety will be of utmost importance. The City, Urban Drainage and FEMA will be involved. In regard to Mr. Sares' concerns, the original engineering called for eleven feet of infill along the site to push the tributary out of its historic path. The design was changed to leave the tributary in its historic area to avoid infilling the area. Commissioner CHIL VERS asked ifMr. McKendry was concerned about school traffic in his subdivision. Mr. McKendry stated that a traffic count showed the traffic to be negligible. He met with the school to discuss these issues. In regard to the neighborhood meeting, Ms. Reckert commented that the developer chose to conduct a neighborhood meeting even though it was not required. Linda Gibbard retumed to the podium. She stated that the subject property would no longer be beautiful once houses are built on it. Caroline Green returned to the podium. She asked if the developer could be required to install buffer zones for the existing residents. Ms. Reckert explained that it is hard to put conditions on a subdivision plat. Technically, it is only necessary for the developer to meet the regulations of the subdivision regulations. Planning Conunission Minutes - 8- August 2, 2007 Vice Chair CHIL VERS asked if there were any other comments from the public. Hearing no response, he closed the public hearing portion of the meeting. Commissioner REINHART commented that he was comfortable with the drainage engineering. The improved drainage should provide more safety for children in the area than presently exists. It was moved by Commissioner BRINKMAN and seconded by Commissioner SPANIEL to approve Case No. W A-07-04, a request for approval of a cul-de-sac length variance for property located at approximately 3301 Quail Street, for the following reasons: 1. Staff has concluded that granting ofthe variance would not alter the character ofthe area. 2. There are several cul-de-sacs serving subdivisions in the vicinity which exceed 500 feet in length thereby setting precedents. 3. There are unique challenges with the property due to the pass- through tributary to Lena Gulch, existing utilities and grade changes which preclude alternate access designs. 4. Granting of the variance should not impair the amount of light and air to adjacent properties, increase congestion in the public streets or increase fire danger. With the following condition: 1. During construction, alternate access shall be provided by the 25-foot wide access easement through Lot 1 of Applewood Baptist Church Subdivision. The motion failed by a vote of 4-2 with Commissioners STEWART and MATTHEWS voting no and Commissioner McMILLIN absent. (This application required 5 affirmative votes for approval.) It was moved by Commissioner REINHART and seconded by Commissioner BRINKMAN to approve Case No. WS-07-01, a request for approval of an 11- lot major subdivision at approximately 3301 Quail Street, for the following reasons: 1. All lots meet or exceed the R-l development standards. 2. The developer has attempted to maintain the integrity of the natural features on the property. 3. The drainage report is approved. 4. With the exception of the street length, all requirements of the Subdivision Regulations have been met. Planning Connnission Minutes - 9- August 2, 2007 With the following conditions: 1. The existing and proposed floodplain lines shall be shown on page 2 of the document. 2. An area shall be reserved in a tract as future right-of-way to provide access to a potential future filing to the south. This reservation would be located in what is currently shown as Tract C where the boundary of Tract C intersects the proposed right-of-way for 33rd Drive. 3. The applicant shall resolve sanitary sewer service easement issues with Northwest Lakewood Sanitation prior to City Council public hearing. 4. Staffs recommended language regarding Tract A shall be added to the first page of the plat document. 5. Modifications to the Homeowners' Association Covenants shall be made prior to City Council public hearing. 6. An approved LOMR shall be required prior to any modification of the existing Lena Gulch drainage way and 100-year floodplain on the site. The motion passed 5-1 with Commissioner STEWART voting no and Commissioner McMILLIN absent. It was moved by Commissioner REINHART and seconded by Commissioner MATTHEWS to approve Case No. WF-07-01, a request for approval of a Class I special exception permit for construction of street and other public improvements in the Lena Gulch 100-year floodplain for property located at approximately 3301 Quail Street, for the following reasons: 1. The street construction will have negligible impacts on the existing floodplain. 2. There will be no adverse impact on adjacent property. 3. The floodplain administrator has reviewed and approved the Class I special exception study. With the following conditions: 1. Until the floodplain improvements and LOMR is approved, additional construction in the floodplain will require a Class II Floodplain exception. 2. No construction, including fences, shall be allowed within the existing limits of the Lena Gulch Access and Maintenance Easement. The motion failed by a vote of 3-3 with Commissioners STEWART, BRINKMAN and CHIL VERS voting no. (This application required 5 affirmative votes for approval.) Planning Connnission Minutes -10 - August 2, 2007 8. OTHER ITEMS There was no other business to come before the Commission. 9. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Commissioner REINHART and seconded by Commissioner STEWART to adjourn the meeting at 10:00 p.m. The motion passed unanimously. An~~ Secretary Planning Connnission Minutes -11 - August 2, 2007