HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/16/1996
s
MINUTES OF MEETING
May 16, 1996
CITY' OF WHEAT RIDGE PLANNING COMMISSION
1. CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order
by Chairperson LANGDON at 7:30 p.m., on May 16, 1996 in the
Council Chambers of the Municipal Building, 7500 West 29th
Avenue., Wheat Ridge, Colorado.
2. ROLL CALL:
MEMBERS PRESENT:
Robert Eckhardt -
Harry Williams
Carolyn Griffith
Jay Rasplicka
Carl A. Cerveny -
George Langdon
Janice Thompson
Warren Johnson
EXCUSED ABSENCE
STAFF PRESENT:
EXCUSED ABSENCE
Glen Gidley, Director of
Planning & Development
Sandra Wiggins, Secretary
PUBLIC HEARING
The following is the official copy of Planning Commission minutes
for the Public Hearing of May 16, 1996. A copy of these minutes
is retained both in the office of the City Clerk and in the
Department of Planning and Development of the City of Wheat
Ridge.
• Planning Commission Minutes Page 2
May 16, 1996
3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
4. APPROVE TSE ORDER OF THE AGENDA
Commissioner WILLIAMS moved to approve the order of the agenda
for the meeting of May 16, 1996 as printed. Commissioner JOHNSON
seconded the motion. Motion carried 6-0.
5. APPROVAL OF MINiTTES
Commissioner WILLIAMS moved to approve the minutes for the
meeting of May 16, 1996 as printed. Commissioner RASPLICKA
seconded the motion. Motion carried 4-0, with Commissioners
GRIFFITH and THOMPSON abstaining.
6. PIIBLIC FORIIM (This is the time for anyone to speak on any
subject not appearing under Item 7 of the Public Hearing
section. of the agenda.)
No one had signed the roster, nor came forward to speak at that
time.
• 7. PIIBLIC BEARING
1. Case No. MS-96-4: An application by Richard Carpenter for
Michael Lynch for approval of a two-lot minor subdivision
with variances. Said property is located at 3707 and 3711
High Court.
Mr. Gidley began the staff report, asking if both property owners
were present. It was established that only one property owner,
Ms. Mowry, owner of 3707 High Court, was present.
Mr. Carpenter, the applicant, was present.
Mr. Gidley informed Commission of their options:
1. Commission could make tentative decision, notifying missing
property owner.
2. Commission could continue the case until missing property
owner could be present.
Normally, Mr. Gidley added, Commission would not hear a case if
the property owner is not present.
Ms_ Mowrv stated from the audience that she was the property
owner of 3707 High Court. The owner of the vacant lot south of
her was not present.
. Following discussion, it was consensus of Commission that
testimony would be heard. Following that, the public hearing
• Planning Commission Minutes Page 3
May 16, 1996
would be closed and request that the missing property owner be
present at our next meeting (June 6, 1996), when a decision will
be made.
Mr. Gidley proceeded with the staff report. Entered and accepted
by the Chairperson were the Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Ordinance,
Subdivision Regulations, case file, packet materials, exhibits
and slides.
Commissioner RASPLICKA asked if the setbacks were adequate.
Mr. Gidley answered that the setbacks on Lot 1 were adequate. A
nonconforming setback exists for a small structure which is not
affected by the plat. He elaborated. He added that there was
adequate space for a house to be built and meet setbacks.
Commissioner RASPLICKA noted that he thought the driveway was
much closer to the south property line.
Mr. Gidley agreed that it was close to the property line.
Commission THOMPSON stated the garage on Lot 1 looked closer than
• five feet from the property line.
Mr. Gidley stated the garage was not shown on the survey provided
to the City.
Commissioner THOMPSON asked what would happen with setbacks
should a house be built on the property.
Mr. Gidley stated that according to another survey, the garage is
about one and one-half feet from the proposed property line. A
five-foot setback is normally required.
Commissioner THOMPSON asked if another variance would be
required.
Mr. Gidley answered that if a house is built on the vacant
parcel, a eight and one-half foot setback would be required on
the north property line.
Commissioner WILLIAMS asked if the street was substandard.
Mr. Gidley stated the street was standard from the point that
there is existing curb and gutter, but substandard because it was
not fully dedicated. An additional five feet is being dedicated
by the plat, making the measurement 25 feet to centerline.
• Commissioner LANGDON asked about other substandard lots in the
area. What will happen to those substandard lots?
• Planning Commission Minutes Page 4
May 16, 1996
Mr, Gidley stated that the lot in question could be divided in
two, half sold to the property on the south and half to the
property on the north. This is rather common, he added. He
elaborated.
Commissioner RASPLICKA asked if a variance would have to be
granted to the side setback, which is only a foot and a half,
when it should be five feet.
Mr. Gidley answered that was a good point. If the other
variances are granted, he thought it would be best to grant a
variance to the side setback for the garage.
Commissioner THOMPSON asked how it was the Planning Commission
could hear a case that involved a case containing a lot line
which had been created illegally.
Mr. Gidley stated that applicant was attempting to make the lot
Line legal. He further stated that when the applicant applied
for a building permit, the permit was denied because of the
illegal lot line. Applicant, he explained, had appealed an
administrative decision. He elaborated.
. Commissioner RASPLICKA asked how long the house has been on the
property?
Mr. Gidley answered the house is old, probably at least it dates
to the 1940s.
Commissioner RASPLICKA asked if it always had been just the one
house on the entire parcel.
Mr. Gidley answered yes, it had.
Richard Caroenter, applicant, 7120 Routt Street, Arvada, was
sworn in. He apologized for the necessity of this hearing, but
explained he had been misled in 1987 when he purchased the
property as a HUD repossession. He was led to believe he could
build a house on the vacant portion of the property, since he was
told the lot was 135 feet deep. Unfortunately, the lot is
between 109 and 110 feet deep. Mr. Carpenter stated the legal
description had once included land in the street right-of-way.
He elaborated. Mr. Carpenter then addressed staff's comments
made in the staff report.
Commissioner JOHNSON stated he was confused and asked the
applicant, Mr. Carpenter, if he owned the vacant lot.
• Mr. Caroenter stated he sold the lot on January 2, 1996 to Scott
Wilson. He explained the agreement, stating he did not own the
land.
•
Planning Commission Minutes Page 5
May 16, 1996
Commissioner RASPLICKA asked if he divided the property in 1987.
Mr_ Caroenter Stated he did.
Commissioner RASPLICRA asked why the property line wasn't moved
to accommodate the side setback of five feet when the property
was divided?
M.r. Carnenter stated he could not answer that question, as he was
not versed in that type of thing. He added that it was done by
deed, by an improvement survey. The City was not consulted,
therefore he had no knowledge of the required setbacks.
Mr. Gidley asked the applicant if it would be possible to adjust
the lot line three and one-half feet to accommodate the required
setback, as Commissioner RASPLICKA suggested.
Mr_ Carpenter stated he did not think that would be a problem.
Commissioner RASPLICKA stated he believed that since Mr.
Carpenter purchased the property from HUD, he would have
recourse.
Mr, Ca.rngnY.er agreed that he believed he did have recourse.
Chairperson LANGDON asked Mr. Carpenter about the letter from
Security Title Guaranty Company in the staff report dated
November, 1991.
Mr_ Carpenter stated that the revised title commitment referred
to in the letter from Security Title Guaranty Company referenced
a bird coup at the rear of Lot 1 which encroached 16 feet onto
Lot 2. This structure was torn down. Additionally, there
remains two-inches of a concrete walk which still encroaches onto
Lot 2. He assured Commission that the title company would insure
with the 2-inch encroachment.
L. Del Piccolo, 611 Willowbrook Road, Silverthorne, Colorado, was
sworn in. Mr. Del Piccolo stated that he owned the property to
the south, along with his brother and sister. He added that the
house on the lot is occupied by his mother, who is quite elderly.
Mr. Del Piccolo referred to the letter he wrote and reiterated
his opposition regarding this request. He felt that since the
lot he owns is small and the subject lot is substandard, the
request should be denied.
Chairperson LANGDON asked Mr. Del PicCOle to provide his mother's
address.
Mr_ Del Piccolo stated the address was 3715 High Court.
• Planning Commission Minutes Page 6
May 16, 1996
Barbara Mowrv, 3707 High Court, was sworn in. Ms. Mowry stated
she was the new owner of 3707 High Court. She found out about
the requested subdivision by reading the posting sign and was
concerned that the only entrance to Lot 2 was through her
driveway. Ms. Mowry stated she was confused about the request
and wanted more information.
Commissioner RASPLICKA informed Ms. Mowry that if FHA approved
her loan and she had title insurance, there would be no problem
with ownership.
Chairperson LANGDON reiterated that staff had suggested that a
decision on this case be postponed - should the case be
continued?
Mr. Gidley stated that in order to allow Mr. Carpenter to sort
out his options, to talk with Mr. Wilson and Ms. Mowry and
perhaps the other property owner to the south, he suggested that
the public hearing be closed and then continue the case to the
next regular meeting, June 6, for the purpose of making a
• decision. Should the situation change between now and then,
staff would report any changes to Commission. Then, at the June
6 meeting either a statement from the property owner of 3711 High
Court would be available, or the property owner would be present.
At that time Commission could make a determination or, if there
was not adequate information available, continue the case to a
specific date.
Commissioner JOHNSON asked if there was a chance that the
applicant could sit down with adjacent property owners and work
out a solution?
Mr. Carpenter answered that he was willing to try.
Commissioner THOMPSON asked if the applicant would. provide a
corrected plat, since the plat provided did not show the garage?
Mr. Gidley stated that the garage on Lot 1 should be shown. He
added that options regarding the lot line could be discussed.
Chairperson LANGDON closed the public hearing regarding Case No.
MS-96-4 and asked for a motion to continue the case to the next
regular meeting, June 6, 1996.
Commissioner JOHNSON moved that Case No. MS-996-4 be continued to
June 6, 1996.
• Commissioner WILLIAMS seconded the motion. Motion carried 6-0.
• Planning Commission Minutes Page 7
May 16, 1996
2. Case Na. MS-96-5: An application by Daniel Schneider for
the Estate of Julia Marie Cobb for approval of a four-lot
minor subdivision for property located at 12345 West 38th
Avenue.
Mr. Gidley informed Commission that the address for this property
was out of sequence and would have to be changed. Mr. Gidley
presented the staff report. Entered into the record were the
Zoning Ordinance, Subdivision Regulations, case file, exhibits
and slides. Mr. Gidley informed Commission that the Parks and
Recreation Commission had met the previous night and discussed
the request. A 5 percent land dedication in lieu of fees was
recommended by the Parks and Recreation pursuant to this request.
Mr. Gidley did note plat would need revision prior to recording
showing a new tract along the north edge of the property, which
would be dedicated to the City of Wheat Ridge for parkland
purposes. This new tract would reduce the size of Lots 3 and 4
and Lot lines would have to be adjusted, in order to maintain the
one acre minimum. Applicant is requesting approval of the
request, whereby they would create a deed and present the deed to
the City together with a revised plat. The plat would then be
recorded and the deed would be taken to Council for approval.
• Commissioner RASPLICKA stated that it was his understanding that
the zoning would not be changed from Agricultural.
Mr. Gidley answered that was correct.
Commissioner THOMPSON asked if the turnaround required by the
Fire Department would be installed on Lot 4.
Mr. Gidley stated that was correct.
Commissioner THOMPSON asked when that would be designed.
Mr. Gidley answered that it would be designed when applicant
applied for a building permit for Lot 4. The permit application
would be referred to the Fire Department, who would work out a
design and location for the turnaround.
Commissioner THOMPSON asked if the turnaround would have to be.
installed even if the existing house was not demolished?
Mr. Gidley answered yes, because access is currently off the west
side and it will be relocated to the east side.
Commissioner THOMPSON asked if the applicant would put funds into
an escrow fund to cover costs of connecting to sanitation lines?
Mr. Gidley stated that the requirement would become a deed
restriction. With the sale of each lot, the title guaranty would
• Planning Commission Minutes Page 8
May 16, 1996
indicate an existing deed restriction. That way, any potential
buyer would know that sometime in the future he or she may be
required to connect to sanitation lines.
Commissioner RASPLICRA asked if it was good planning to leave the
Agricultural zoning.
Mr. Gidley noted that the proposed lots were fairly large. With
the large parcels the owner would be allowed to have large
animals, but they would have limitations, based on square footage
of the site. He elaborated. He added that the ultimate decision
to rezone or not to rezone rests with the applicant.
Chairperson LANGDON asked about the reconfiguration of the lots.
Mr. Gidley showed (on the overhead) optional lot lines once the
50 land dedication has been made. He elaborated.
Commissioner LANGDON asked how a permit for a septic system is
obtained?
Mr. Gidley answered that the sanitation district and County
• health department would make decisions regarding design involving
size of property, soil conditions, etc. The City would decide
whether the septic system would be allowed according to public
policy.
Discussion followed.
Louise 'Ititrner, 11256 West 38th Avenue was sworn in.
Mr. Gidley reminded Chair that the applicant should be heard
first .
Daniel Schneider, 2562 Taft Court was sworn in. Mr. Schneider
informed those present that he wanted to purchase the property in
question so that he could build a residence for himself as well
as three other homes. He noted it was possible to build 14
single-family lots on the property. Mr. Schneider stated that to
maintain the character of the area, he was requesting a four-lot
minor subdivision, making each lot greater than one acre. He
elaborated.
There were no questions from Commission.
Chairperson LANGDON asked who makes final decision on septic
system?
• Mr. Gidley answered that the City would.
• Planning Commission Minutes
May 16, 1996
Page 9
Louise Turner (previously sworn in) Mrs. Turner stated that the
applicant and all involved with the proposed development should
be commended. She stated she was grateful that the development
would maintain the "rural" character of the neighborhood. She
urged Planning Commission to approve the subdivision.
Doha Jenks, 11885 West 38th Avenue was sworn in. Mr. Jenks
stated he was an adjacent property owner and he was in favor of
the subdivision.
Commissioner WILLIAMS asked if all concerns regarding sanitation
would be covered under the building permit?
Mr. Gidley suggested that Commission stipulate in the motion any
condition(s) because it deals with public policy. He elaborated.
Commissioner THOMPSON asked if the City or County has a
requirement regarding the amount of land necessary in order to
have a septic system? Will the properties in question meet those
requirements?
Mr. Gidley stated that there was a one acre minimum according to
. Mr. Romberg with the sanitation district, however the one acre
minimum has some constraints having to do with the system design
and the type of soils on the property. He elaborated.
Commissioner THOMPSON asked if the one acre requirement had to be
open land, or could that include any structures?
Mr. Gidley stated the one acre could be the total area of
property, not necessarily an acre excluding the leech field.
Commissioner THOMPSON asked if the property had been tested to
see if the soil was leech field compatible?
Mr. Gidley stated he did not know if the proper tests had been
done, however, Mr. Schneider is a soils engineer. It was the
determination of Mr. Schneider and Mr. Romberg, that Lot 3 could
accommodate a leech field.
Commissioner JOHNSON thought it was up to the sanitation district
to design the system and make it work.
Mr. Gidley stated it should be stated on the face of the plat so
that it becomes a deed restriction, so that potential buyers
would know of the potential Cost.
Commissioner THOMPSON asked if the requirement is stated on the
• deed, is there a time limitation for connecting to the sanitation
district lines.
. Planning Commission Minutes
May 16, 1996
Page 10
Mr. Gidley stated he had never had to force someone to connect to
the sanitation district lines. He knew it could be done, but had
no knowledge of procedure or time limitation. He thought the
owner would have a reasonable time to connect; likely a year.
Discussion followed.
Mr. Schneider stated he wished clarification on something. He
asked if the 400 feet pertained if the sewer was in the public
right-of-way?
Mr. Gidley stated that he thought the rule was if the sewer main
was within 400 feet - it could be public right-of-way, or an
easement.
Commissioner RASPLICKA moved that Case No. MS-96-5, an
application by Daniel Schneider for the Estate of Julia Marie
Cobb for approval of a four-lot minor subdivision for property
located at 12345 West 38th Avenue, be approved for the following
reasons:
1. The proposed subdivision is consistent with the underlying
R-1 and A-2 zone districts.
2. All requirements of the Subdivision Regulations have been
met.
With the following conditions:
1. That the private drive be widened to 30 feet as designated
on the access easement; and
2. That the cul-de-sac must be properly designed to meet
building and fire department regulations; and
3. That the subdivision be reconfigured to accommodate the 5°s
park land dedication requirement; and
4. That it is acceptable to develop Lots 3 and 4 utilizing a
septic system (if approved), however those lots would be
required to connect to sanitary sewer should available lines
come within 400 feet and that this requirement be placed on
the property deed.
Commissioner JOHNSON seconded the motion. Motion carried 6-0.
Chairperson LANGDON called a short break at 9:32 p.m. Meeting
reconvened at 9:45 p.m.
3. Case No_ 2OA-96-2. Public hearing will be held on a
proposed amendment to the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws, Zoning
and Development Code, Section 26-5. Definitions, regarding
the definition of the term "STORY" relating to building
setback requirements.
• Planning Commission Minutes Page 11
May 16, 1996
Mr. Gidley presented the case. He passed out copies of the
existing definition of "STORY" in the Zoning Ordinance.
Commissioner WILLIAMS asked about the setback requirements.
Mr. Gidley explained it was based upon 12-foot increments.
Commissioner JOHNSON asked if the proposed regulation would be
the standard in all zone districts?
Mr. Gidley stated only those zone districts that use the term
"STORY" for the purpose of setbacks - usually the commercial and
high-density residential districts. He gave some examples.
Commissioner WILLIAMS moved that Case No. ZOA-96-2, a proposed
amendment to the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws, Zoning and Development
Code, Section 26-5. Definitions, regarding the definition of the
term "STORY" relating to building setback requirements be
forwarded to City Council with a recommendation for Approval as
per staff memo dated 5/9/96 regarding this case.
Commissioner JOHNSON seconded the motion. Motion carried 6-0.
. 4. Case No. ZOA-96-3: Public hearing will be held on a
proposed amendment to Wheat Ridge Code of Laws, Zoning and
Development Code, Section 26-33. Excavation and Deposit
Control.
Mr. Gidley presented the case. He noted that the proposed
amendment relates to changes to the 1994 Uniform Building Code
and to Chapter 5 of the Code of Laws that deals with licenses and
building activities. Mr. Gidley explained that some activities
relate to the Public Works Department and the issuance of fill
and excavation permits. He added that Council would discuss this
next Monday. He elaborated.
After discussion, several concerns were voiced and it was
consensus to continue this case to the first meeting July, which
would be July 18, 1996 (first Thursday is a holiday).
8. CLOSE THE PDBLIC HEARING
9. OLD BIISINESS
i0. NEW BIISINESS
11. DISCQSSION AND DECISION ITEMS
• 1. Commissioner RASPLICKA requested items to take to PWAC.
• Planning Commission Minutes Page 12
May 16, 1996
2. Mr. Gidley informed Commission of a workshop sponsored
by APA Colorado June 15, 1996 at the Arvada Center for
the Performing Arts. The subject will be Current,
Issues in Planning, a workshop for planning
commissioners and those who work with them.
Commissioners who are interested need to inform the
secretary.
3. The State APA Conference will be held in Colorado
Springs this September. The City pays for tuition,
lodging and meals.
4. City Council decisions:
• Overlay Zone ordinance died for lack of a second.
• Mass rezoning ordinance was approved with
modification
•
5. Mr. Gidley at the request of Chairperson LANGDON
explained quasi-judicial implications to those present.
12. COMMITTEE AND DEPARTMENT REPORTS
13. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, Commissioner WILLIAMS moved for
adjournment, Commissioner JOHNSON seconded the motion. Motion
carried 6-0. Meeting adjourned at 10:35 p.m.
~C~
Sandra Wiggins, etary
•