Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/15/1996 MIa~u'ix.S OF MEETING August 15, 1996 CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE PLANNING COMMISSION • 1. CALL TBH MEETING TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by Chairperson LANGDON at 7:30 p.m., on August 15, 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 EXCUSED ABSENCE STAFF PRESENT: Glen Gidley, Director of Planning & Development Meredith Reckert, Planner Bob Goebel, Director of Public Works Sandra Wiggins, Secretary PUSLIC BEARING The following is the official copy of Planning Commission minutes for the Public Hearing of August 15, 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 August 15, 1996 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 4. APPROVE TSE ORDER OF THE AGENDA Commissioner CERVENY moved to approve the order of the agenda for the meeting of August 15, 1996 as printed. Commissioner WILLIAMS seconded the motion. Motion carried 6-0. 5. APPROVAL OF MINIITES Commissioner WILLIAMS moved to approve the minutes for the meeting of August 1, 1996 as printed. Commissioner RASPLICKA seconded the motion. Motion carried 5-0 with Commissioner JOHNSON abstaining. 6. PIIBLIC FORIIbi (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. PIISLIC HEARING 1. Case No. MS-9Fi-7 :, An application by Lawrence Gill for approval of a two-lot minor subdivision on Residential- Two zoned land located at 6000 West 32nd Avenue. Meredith Reckert presented the staff report, which included slides. Entered and accepted into the record were the Zoning Ordinance, Subdivision Regulations, case file and packet materials. Commission had no questions at that time for Staff. Lawrence (;ilk,, 6000 West 32nd Avenue was sworn in. Mr. Gill stated he was requesting the subdivision so that he could deed to his daughter the second residence on the property. Felix Poletto, 5925 W 32nd Avenue was sworn in. Mr. Poletto stated he represented the Sons of Italy Lodge at 5925 West 32nd Avenue and wanted to know if a two-lot minor subdivision would include another residence. • Chairperson LANGDON stated no, it would not. . Planning Commission Minutes August 15, 1996 Page 3 Commissioner ECKHARDT moved that Case No. MS-96-7, a request for a two-lot minor subdivision for property located at 6000 West 32nd Avenue be approved for the following reasons: 1. A subdivision is required to create the two parcels. 2. All requirements of the Subdivision Regulations have been met. With the following condition: 1. Tract 'A' be shown as being hereby dedicated for right-of-- way purposes. Commissioner WILLIAMS seconded the motion. Motion carried 6-0. 2. Case No, WZ-96-10; An application by Dwaine R. Richter for approval of a Planned Commercial Development combined final development plan with sign variances and subdivision plat. Said property is located at 12851 West 32nd Avenue. Meredith Reckert presented the staff report. Entered and accepted into the record were the Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Ordinance, Subdivision Regulations, case file, packet materials and exhibits. Commissioner ECSunArT asked if all the proposed land uses had already been approved? Ms. Reckert answered yes, that was true. Commissioner ECKHARDT was concerned that the architectural rendering of the duplex showed exit/entrance onto West 32nd Avenue. Ms. Reckert stated staff would not recommend any additional curb cuts onto West 32nd Avenue. She added for that lot the only access should be to Zinnia Court. Commissioner CERVENY asked Ms. Reckert what date the land uses had been approved on this parcel? Ms. Reckert answered that the original annexation occurred in 1974. Chairperson LANGDON asked Ms. Reckert for a list of the items requiring correction. Ms. Reckert stated the list was extensive. She added that rather than itemizing everything, she had laid out the general items in . Planning Commission Minutes Page 4 August 15, 1996 the staff report, but under conditions of approval, she had noted "all comments need to be addressed". She suggested that Commission be specific when making motions. Commissioner CERVENY asked Ms. Reckert about the recommendation from staff that Planning Commission continue this case to a date specific to make their decision. He noted that two Commissioners were unable to attend the meeting, and asked if their absence_ would preclude them from participation when a decision is made on this case? Ms. Reckert answered that the two absent Commissioners could listen to the tapes to familiarize themselves with the issues. Ron HoisinQton, Planner with CRH Development Specialists, 3000 Youngfield, Suite 285, Lakewood, was sworn in. He asked if it was possible to maintain the schedule with City Council on September 23, since staff has recommended continuation? Mr. Gidley stated that would be Planning Commission's call. However, he did recommend that prior to Commission making a decision on this case, items requiring correction or resolution be taken care of. However, should Commission make a recommendation to City Council, the recommendation include a stipulation that all matters of concern be resolved prior to scheduling the case before City Council. Mr_ Hoisinat~n stated it was their desire to stay on schedule and promised to do whatever possible to alleviate problems. He went over the items noted in the staff report on page 3, bringing those present up-to-date. There were no questions from Commission at that time. Diane Davi.P~ legal representative with Faegre & Benson, 370 17th Street, Suite 2500, Denver 80202 was sworn in. Ms. Davies handed out copies of a Stipulation for Settlement and Dismissal and read a prepared statement into the record. Ms. Davies stated that because of the agreement entered into by the City and Mr. Richter, a sign variance was not needed. Commission had no questions for Ms. Davies at that time. Chairperson LANGDON asked Commission if City Attorney Gerald Dahl had comments he would like to make regarding Ms. Davies' statement. rerald Dahl, City Attorney stated he disagreed with Ms. Davies • comments regarding the Stipulation for Settlement and Dismissal as the document does not mention sign height or size, the only • Planning Commission Minutes Page 5 August 15, 1996 thing it does is establish the number of signs allowed. He elaborated. Ms. Davies reiterated her belief that the current Sign Code did not limit the number of 50-foot signs. Mr. Dahl stated that the Stipulation doesn't mention the old Sign Code or the new Sign Code. The Sign Code is mentioned only in the new Sign Code. Ms. Davies, he felt, was "asking" the Stipulation to do more work than it was intended to do. Dwaine Richter, 6565 S Syracuse Way, Englewood CO 80111. Mr. Richter stated that it was his intent when he signed the Stipulation for Settlement and Dismissal was that the freestanding signs referenced were 50-foot signs. He elaborated. Commission had no questions at that time. Alex Ariniello. 1889 York Street, Denver CO 80202 was sworn in. Mr. Ariniello stated his firm had prepared a traffic impact analysis report. He went over the plan and explained the need for additional curb cuts. • There were no questions from Commission at that time. Mr. Hoisinaton stated that a detailed letter had been submitted to Public Works Department concerning the plat and necessary corrections. Bill Smitham. 3248 Zennia Court was sworn in. Mr. Smitham stated he was concerned about the proposed service station and its' close proximity to his home. He informed Commission that to his knowledge the station would be open for business 24 hours daily. He had safety concerns for his home and family and stated his opposition to the service station. He asked if the existing wall could be extended to West 32nd Avenue. He elaborated. Chairperson LANGDON asked Ms. Reckert if she could project on the screen the appropriate slide. Ms. Reckert after checking with Mr. Goebel, she thought an extension could be done, still maintaining sight triangle regulations. Mr. Smitham stated he thought his request was not unreasonable. Connie Mauldin, 3195 Zinnia Street was sworn in. Ms. Mauldin pointed out the location of her home. The front of her home • faces Zinnia Street. Ms. Mauldin stated she had two requests: Add several large evergreen trees across the front in order to create a buffer. • Planning Commission Minutes Page 6 August 15, 1996 Ms. Reckert asked Ms. Maulkin to point out where she wanted the evergreen trees to be placed. Ms. Mauldin did so. She added that her second request was to move the freestanding signs away from West 32nd Avenue and relocate them toward the back of the site. She could understand why the directory sign needed to be closer to 32nd. Ms. Mauldin stated she had a problem with school children who throw trash into the ditch that runs along 32nd Avenue. She stated it is a constant maintenance problem to her. She feared the trash problem would increase with the development. Chairperson LANGDON asked if Ms. Mauldin lived within the City Limits? Mr. Gidley answered that the City boundary jogs around a bit in that area. Mr. Goebel stated that the City boundary is the south right-of- way line for 32nd Avenue. He added Ms. Mauldin's property was not within the City of Wheat Ridge, but the roadside ditch was a part of the City right-of-way. • Commissioner CERVENY asked Ms. Mauldin how long she had resided at that location? Ms. Mauldin answered 15 and one-half years. Harold Gosse. 14600 Foothills Road, was sworn in. Mr. Gosse stated that he lived about two miles from the property in question. He had concerns about increased traffic and felt it would further impact an already bad situation. He elaborated. Commissioner ECKHARDT informed Mr. Gosse that Planning Commission could do very little, if anything, at this time since land uses had been-determined previously. He stated he did not like the whole plan and that traffic would, indeed, get worse. Mr. Gosse stated his concern was with the intensity of the plan. He felt that traffic flow within the proposed development would be a problem, as well. Shirley Coen 13146 West 32nd Avenue, was sworn in. Ms. Coen had a letter from a neighbor, who was unable to attend, which she requested be made a part of the record. She stated she was concerned about the number of signs requested. Steve Barnhill, 13149 West 33rd Avenue, was sworn in. Mr. . Barnhill requested that the opening in the sound barrier wall be closed for safety reasons. He elaborated and pointed out the area he was referring to on the slide screen. . Planning Commission Minutes Page 7 August 15, 1996 Chairperson LANGDON asked why the opening in the sound barrier wall was left. Mr. Gidley thought it was left open to access a fire hydrant. Mr. Barnhill had taken a petition around his neighborhood getting signatures of those in agreement that the opening in the sound barrier should be closed. He wanted the petition made a part of the record. Bruce West, 13200 West 32nd Avenue was sworn in. Mr. West was representing Devlon Junior/Senior High School. He suggested that trash receptacles be placed in the area of the problem mentioned by Ms. Mauldin and they, at the school, would encourage students to use them. Chairperson LANGDON asked Mr. West what his position was with the school. Mr. West answered he was assistant principal. Commissioner RASPLICKA asked what the name of the school was. • Mr. West answered the name was Devlon, a Jefferson County district-wide option school. Norm Ross, 3145 Zinnia Street was sworn in. He pointed out his home on the location map projected. Mr. Ross thanked the City for building the wall. He pointed out the location of his request for a similar wall to be built, with appropriate landscaping. Mr. Ross stated he was opposed to the gas station; felt there were too few parking spaces; he thought there were too many curb cuts; wanted to see the traffic study; and had concern with the proposed location for the bike path. He wanted to know if the entire area could be rezoned. He elaborated. Commissioner CERVENY asked Mr. Ross when he moved into the area? Mr. Ross, answered he'd lived there since 1981. Commissioner CERVENY asked if the current zoning was in place at that time? Mr. Gidley noted that when the parcel was annexed into the City of Wheat Ridge in 1974 it was rezoned to Planned Commercial Development. Commissioner ECKHARDT asked if Mr. Gidley knew what the zoning • had been prior to the time the City of Wheat Ridge annexed it? • Planning Commission Minutes August 15, 1996 Page 8 Mr. Gidley stated that a large portion of it, but not all of it, was zoned residential, as there was a platted subdivision on about half of it. Mr. Ross stated he had pictures of horses grazing on the property and thought it had been zoned Agricultural. Commissioner CERVENY stated he thought it would benefit the developer to consider existing traffic problems, as it could ease the difficulty entering and exiting the proposed development. Mr. Gidley reiterated to Commission that specific design standards that protect the public interest could be required on the development. He elaborated. Mr. Ross appealed to Mr. Richter to listen to the comments being made and revise the plan accordingly. Bill Salter-3475 Xoungfield Service Road was sworn in. Mr. Salter gave a brief history of the area, as he had lived at that location 57 years. He stated his appreciation for the 12-foot wall installation and added that the storage facility would • attract undesirables and wanted a 12-foot wall installed to protect the neighborhood. Rene Dienhuis 3229 Zinnia Court was sworn in. Mr. Diephuis was not opposed to business, but was hopeful that Mr. Richter would look for ways to ease the existing traffic problems. He told of his difficulties getting onto 32nd Avenue and added he wanted the 12-foot wall extended to 32nd Avenue and explained why. Commissioner ECKHARDT stated he had listened to the many different comments made and summarized his thoughts regarding those comments. Mr. Ri_rhrar asked for an opportunity for rebuttal. Chairperson LANGDON stated he would get that opportunity. Mr. Gidley suggested an opportunity for rebuttal, then allow time for discussion. Once the public hearing is closed, Commission could discuss the case. Mr. Hoisinaton read down the various comments and concerns made by neighbors of the proposed development and stated efforts made and to be-made to resolve those issues. Two major contributing factors to the traffic problems in the area he stated, was the poorly designed interchange and, the lack of a right turn lane • off from Highway 58 going west bound on Interstate 70. He elaborated. • Planning Commission Minutes Page 9 August 15, 1996 Dwaine Richter spoke about the various concerns and comments voiced by neighbors of the proposed development. He stated he had made the revisions to the plat requested by staff. He asked Commission for approval. Mr. Gidley stated it was not his intent to recommend that a similar wall, of similar height (12, 10 or b feet) be installed along West 32nd Avenue. A wall of 36 to 48 inches is the type of wall that could provide some protection from lights, vehicles, etc. He noted an example of recent development that utilized such a wall. Chairperson LANGDON closed the public hearing and asked the Commission for discussion. Commissioner CERVENY suggested discussion and any recapping be done prior to when a decision is made on this case. He asked if Planning Commission made a decision on September 5, would there be ample time for City Council to hear it on the 23rd? Mr. Gidley answered there was no way possible the Public Works Department would have time to review the changes made to the • plat, provide a full analysis to Planning and submit that information in time to be heard by City Council by September 23rd. Commissioner CERVENY was hopeful that it could be resolved as timely as possible. Mr. Gidley agreed. Commissioner CERVENY asked what schedule could be reasonably met? Mr. Gidley suggested that our regular me. held instead on Wednesday, September 18, the APA Conference in Colorado Springs. could review and report by September 18. could then go before Council sometime in 14th. sting September 19 be due to a conflict with He thought Public Works More than likely, it October, probably the Chairperson LANGDON asked Mr. Goebel if that schedule would work for him. Mr. Goebel stated it would depend on the. quality and timeliness of the developer's submittals. He added he had not seen a final drainage study. Jefferson County Transportation and Highways had not yet responded. He elaborated. He stated his department would do their best. • Commissioner ECKHP.RDT asked if Planning Commission could schedule a special meeting on September 12? • Planning Commission Minutes Page 10 August 15, 1996 Mr. Gidley answered a Board of Adjustment meeting is scheduled for that night. Commissioner ECKHARDT asked if the meeting could be scheduled-for a different time. Mr. Gidley stated a special meeting could be called for the purpose of making a decision. Commissioner ECKHARDT asked if Commission made their decision at a special meeting, could then the case go before Council? Mr. Gidley stated that the case would not be scheduled before City Council until final decision is made and all outstanding requirements have been. complied with. He elaborated. Council has made it clear that they do not want projects coming to them with-long lists of outstanding issues. Mr. Gidley stated he wished to modify staff recommendations based upon-information he had heard that night. 1. Recommend that the applicant be responsible for extending • the wall, as currently constructed, in the areas indicated in blue on the transparency projected overhead. 2. Recommend that additional 60 feet of wall ten feet high (reduced to 48th inches high at edge of property), be extended in-the same character and quality. 3. Recommend a short wall (to 48 inches) or berm be installed above the elevation of the crown of West 32nd Avenue be incorporated into the area indicated on the transparency. Upright, large landscaping should be added as well. Mr. Gidley spoke of the importance of receiving the necessary documents in a timely manner, He £elt that the number of curb cuts on the plan was unnecessary. He pointed out one that was, in his opinion, dangerous. He noted other safety concerns regarding curb cuts. Mr. Gidley suggested an alternate bike path. He added that those were the major issues and staff would like to see those issues, plus the "technical issues" resolved prior to scheduling a public hearing before City Council. He gave examples of those numerous unresolved issues. He elaborated. Ms. Reckert stated there were additional items staff would like to see addressed, based on comments from the neighborhood. • 1. Extend the high wall to the north around the rest of the property; • Planning Commission Minutes Page 11 August 15, 1996 2. Extension to the south to 32nd Avenue; 3. Addition of a wall or berm or combination along West 32nd Avenue in front of main activity areas; and 4. Stressing the need for a final drainage report, so that staff knows that everything will work. Commissioner WILLIAMS stated he thought there were far too many unresolved issues to be settled between staff and the developer before Commission can-make a decision. Commissioner RASPLICKA asked if the opening could be closed or does it have to remain open for legal reasons? Mr. Gidley stated he thought Mr. Richter was accurate relative to the existence of a hydrant on the opposite aide of the fence. He elaborated. Commissioner RASPLICKA thought it strange to build a big wall and leave a hole in it. . Mr. Goebel stated there are ways to get through a solid masonry wall to gain access to a fire hydrant. He elaborated. Mr. Gidley reiterated that a special meeting could be held, so long as a date, time and place specific is given. Gerald Dahl recommended that the proper procedure would be to close the public hearing, and continue that hearing for action to a date, time and place specific. Chairperson LANGDON stated that Commission's job was to listen, and make a recommendation to City Council. He elaborated. He stated a motion was in order. Discussion followed. Mr. Gidley suggested to continue for action to September 18, 1996 at 7:30 p.m. in Council Chambers. Should the applicant not provide necessary documents in time to proceed at that time, the matter could be continued to a later date. He elaborated. Commissioner ECKHARDT moved to continue for action Case No. WZ- 96-10 to a special meeting to be held September 18, 1996 at 7:30 p.m. in City Council Chambers. Commissioner CERVENY seconded the motion. Motion carried 6-0. • . Planning Commission Minutes Page 12 August 15, 1996 Commissioner ECKHARDT moved that a resolution be drafted by that date (September 18, 1996) listing the recommended changes to the plan made previously by staff. Commissioner RASPLICRA seconded the motion. Discussion followed. Motion carried 5-0, Commissioner JOHNSON was absent from the room at that time. Chairperson LANGDON called a short recess at 10:26 p.m. Meeting reconvened at 10:36 p.m. 3. Case No. ZOA-96-9: An amendment to the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws, Zoning Code, Section 26-30 (P) pertaining to Group Homes for Handicapped, Developmentally Disabled, Elderly Persons and Children. Gerald Dahl stated that, in view of the hour, and since the case was published and posted, and the fact that no one was present to testify, he suggested that this case be continued to the next • regular meeting, September 5, 1996. He suggested that the case be re-published for notification purposes. Commissioner ECKHARDT moved that Case No. ZOA-96-9 be continued to September 5, 1996. Commissioner RASPLICKA seconded the motion. Motion carried 6-0. 8. CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING 9. OLD BUSINESS 10. NEW BUSINESS 11. DISCUSSION AND DECISION ITEMS 12. COMMITTEE AND DEPARTMENT REPORTS 13. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Commissioner JOHNSON moved for adjournment. Commission RASPLICKA seconded the motion. Motion carried 6-0. The meeting adjourned at 10:49 p.m. • Sandra Wiggins ~ecretary