Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12/18/1997 i MINUTES OF MEETING CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE PLANNING COMMISSION December 18, 1997 ~"~.<'~ 1. CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by Chairperson THOMPSON at 7:30 p.m., on December 18, 1997, in the Council Chambers of the Municipal Building, 7500 West 29th Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado. 2. ROLL CALL: MEMBERS PRESENT: Janice Thompson, Chairperson Anne Brinkman- Excused Absence Harry Williams Jay Rasplicka Thomas Shockley Nancy Snow Dean Gokey STAFF PRESENT: Alan White, Director Planning & Development Meredith Reckert, Senior Planner Jenifer Roche, Recording Secretary PUBLIC HEARING The following is the official copy of Planning Commission minutes for the Public Hearing held on December 18, 1997. 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. 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 4. APPROVE THE ORDER OF THE AGENDA (Items of new and old business may be recommended for placement on the agenda.) A motion was made by Commissioner SNOW, seconded by Commissioner RASPLICKA to approve the agenda. Motion carried 6-0 • 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A motion was made by Commissioner SNOW, second by Commissioner WILLIAMS to approve the Minutes of December 4, 1997, as amended. Motion passed 5-0 with Chairperson THOMPSON abstaining. 6. PUBLIC FORUM (This is the time for anyone to speak on any subject not appearing under Item 7 of the Public Hearing Section of the Agenda.) There was no one present to speak. 7. PUBLIC HEARING A. Case No. W7.-97-13: A request by Petroleum Concepts, LLC for Dwaine Richter for approval of a Planned Commercial Development final development plan and plat for property located 12851 W. 32nd Avenue. Ms. Reckert entered into the record the letters received from Applewood Valley Home • Association, Fairmount Improvement Association and Judith and Michael Forsha. Ms. Reckert stated that she did receive one more correspondence piece which was dropped off at the police dispatch. Ms. Reckert presented an overview of the case. She submitted for the record the case file, staff report, exhibits, and other related material. The property is within the City of Wheat Ridge, and all notification and posting requirements have been met, therefore, there is jurisdiction by Planning Commission to hear this case. The action requested is approval of a PCD final development plan and plat. The property is currently zoned PCD and the present land use is vacant and a restaurant. The applicant requested approval of a combined Commercial final development plan and a resubdivision plat for the portion of the property known as 70 West Business Center at 12851 W. 32nd Avenue. Within the overall planned development are an existing hotel and restaurant. The two separate actions, development plan and resubdivision, have been published with their own legal descriptions and will require sepazate motions, although they are being presented in the same report with one case number. The property was annexed into the City in 1975. At that time , an outline development plan was approved establishing uses and general designpazameters for the property. In 1984 the Country Cafe and La Quinta structures were reviewed and approved as a development plan and platting process. At the time of development plan approval, there was discussion with the Colorado Department of Transportation regazding traffic hazard due to the proximity of the Youngfield Service Road to the I-70 off-ramp. Because of that concern, the City of Wheat Ridge placed a deed restriction on the 70 West Business Center that no fiu-ther development could occur until the service road was relocated away from the off ramp. In 1991, the City's Public Works Department decided on the placement for the relocated frontage road. The final decision was made by City Council at a Public Heazing during June, 1991. The City agreed to build a 10' high sound attenuation wall to buffer the neighborhood to the west from the impact of the road relocation closer to the residences. Recently, the deeds for ownership were exchanged so that proper ownership of the new road and vacated right-of--way is in place. In 1946, the owner approached the City with a request for development plan and plat approval on all remaining vacant land within the Planned Development as case No. WZ-96-10. Case No. WZ-96-10 was recommended for approval with conditions by the Planning Commission at a public hearing held on October 3, 1996. The City Council denied the request at their October 28, 1996, public hearing in regard to the current submittal Ms. Reckert stated that staff concluded that all requirements for a Planned Commercial Development final development plan have been met. Staff further concludes that the proposal is consistent the underlying outline development plan and that it exceeds the standards in the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws for commercial development. Ms. Reckert stated that staff recommends approval with certain conditions for both development plan and resubdivision. Commissioner RASPLICKA asked if it was a requirement by the City for the applicant to put in the Welcome to Wheat Ridge sign. Ms. Reckert stated that the City asked the applicant to put the sign in and they agreed. Commissioner GOKEY asked a question regazding the joint access and if it will be established • during construction, should this case moves forward. Ms. Reckert answered yes. Chairperson THOMPSON asked if Ms, Reckert could go over comments and information given by Jefferson County. Ms. Reckert stated that Mr. Goebel needs to answer the questions regarding traffic. Commissioner SNOW asked if the landscaping and design had changed since the last proposal. Ms. Reckert answered yes, some changes have been made. Chairperson THOMPSON swore in Bob Goebel, Director of Public Works, City of Wheat Ridge. Commissioner SNOW asked Mr. Goebel for his comments regarding the access point. Mr. Goebel stated that all issues of access points have been reviewed. Commissioner SNOW asked about the lighting issue. Mr. Goebel stated that the person to direct questions regarding the lighting issue should be addressed by the developer's traffic engineer. Commissioner SNOW asked about the need for a traffic signal at 32nd and the I-70 Frontage Road. Mr. Goebel replied that it was not yet warranted. Commissioner GOKEY asked if there was a traffic report done. Ms. Goebel answered yes. Discussions continued regarding street widening projects. Chairperson THOMPSON s~rvore in the follor~~ing speakers: Dave Galloway, applicant, 5350 DTC Parkway, Englewood, 80111. Mr. Galloway displayed . charts to help explain the proposal. He also brought supplemental information for Planning ! ~- Commission and the audience to review. Mr. Galloway represents a company named PCL, which is a marketer of Conoco products. He stated that they are at this meeting for approval of a Planned Commercial Development final development plan and plat. Mr. Galloway pointed out that they do meet the criteria and requirements for this proposal. He then discussed the history of the gas industry. He further discussed the packet that was distributed to Planning Commission for review. He reiterated the discussion items from Ms. Reckert's's staff report and the aerial he brought for display. The applicant discussed the landscaping and stated that he felt that his proposal was on target and a good one because there is buffering between the residential area and there is sufficient landscaping. Mr. Galloway said that they will adhere to the recommendations that the "Welcome to Wheat Ridge Sign" follows the City's standards and that all additional signs will meet all the basic C-1 code regulations. He further discussed the lighting that the proposed project will provide. He stated that he will not use bright lights but instead he will use canopy lights that have a flat glow. The applicants intent is to do more of a modern light pattern and glow. Another point that he mentioned was that the entire development has been pushed as far east as possible, toward the highway. He mentioned the proposed station will operate 24 hours a day. In conclusion, Mr. Galloway reiterated that the proposed plan is nothing different than what is already allowed in a Commercial-One zone district. Commissioner GOKEY asked if the gas station is owned by Conoco? Mr. Galloway answered . no, it will be owned by PCL. Commissioner GOK,EY asked if the Conoco at Youngfield will be open or closed. Mr. Galloway answered, supposedly, it will be closed. Commissioner SNOW asked how many pumps are proposed. Mr. Galloway answered 5 multiple product gas pumps. Commissioner SNOW asked where he thought the customers would come from? Mr. Galloway stated that it would be the neighborhood and the people off the highway using the gas station. Commissioner SNOW inquired about Jefferson County's comments. Mr. Galloway explained the letter to the Planning Commission. Chairperson THOMPSON asked for Mr. Galloway to expand on comments from Jefferson County regarding layout. Mr. Galloway commented that he doesn't feel that the County is correct asking that the plan be "flip-flopped." He stated that the gas station is better positioned closer to the west then east next to the residential area. Commissioner SNOW asked if the building structure will increase in size if there is a drive thru added? Mr. Galloway replied, no, the structure will remain the same. Chairperson THOMPSON asked if the proposed gas station will eventually be a fast food restaurant? Mr. Galloway answered, no. Kathleen Kraeger, 1390 Stewart, Denver. She is a professional traffic engineer with the company Kraeger and Associates. She stated that she has 20 years traffic engineering . experience. She discussed the intersection at 32nd and frontage road. She recommended that the City staff monitor this particulaz intersection for an increase in traffic. Future traffic projections reveal that this intersection will eventually need to be warranted for a traffic signal. Ms. Kraeger explained the results of her traffic study. Ms. Kraeger explained that the traffic study included the proposal with a drive through section. Another point made was that the majority of future drive through customers will be station-users, so a fast food drive through should not contribute to an increase in traffic. The last point that she made was that the increase in traffic from the proposed gas station will generate less traffic then sit-down restaurant, bank or doctors office. Commissioner WILLIAMS asked what the initial traffic increase on 32nd and Frontage Road will be due to the proposed development. Ms. Kraeger answered that the traffic will increase by 7.5% during peak hours at 32nd and I-70 Frontage Road. Chairperson THOMPSON inquired about the traffic study being prepared in June, when the schools were closed for the summer. Ms. Kraeger answered yes, that the study was done in June, however, they did go back in November to re-evaluate when school was in session. Chairperson THOMPSON asked if a traffic signal would be a safety issue for the school children. Ms Kraeger answered yes, but a traffic signal at this intersection is not the only solution. Ms. Kraeger made a recommendation to Planning Commission regarding the light and stated that she felt the signal light was needed. Harold E. Gosse, 14600 Foothill Road., Wheat i2idge. He is a member of the Applewood Property Owners Association Board of Directors. He spoke on his opposition and discussed the history of the neighborhood and the proposed developments on the property located in the area. He felt there will be an increase in volume to the area and adding another light will not help. 12ichazd Wagner, 14310 Braun Road., Wheat Ridge. He has lived in this house for 30 years. Mr. Wagner stated he was opposed to the proposed project. Bill Farrell, 14399 Garden Circle, Applewood, Golden. He is the president of the Applewood Property Owners Association and is opposed. He stated that he was disappointed in the integrity of the applicants presentation. He asked if the staff could research the actual number of vehicular trips that already exist in the area because there aze conflicting numbers floating around. Mr. Farrell explained the reason for opposition is the negative impact to there area such as property values decreasing and the safety of the schoolchildren. Commissioner WILLIAMS asked Mr. Fazrell what type of development would the neighborhood recommend on the proposed location? Mr. Farrell suggested restaurants, clinics, doctors office's or motels which he felt would cause less traffic congestion then a gas station. Connie Mauldin, 3195 Zinnia Street, Golden. She represented 5 homes on this street. She stated • that she is opposed to the proposed project. The neighborhood concerns are the potential increase in traffic volume. Ms. Mauldin read a letter from her neighbor, Wendy Krasser, 3185 Xenon Street. Ms. Krasser conveyed in the letter her concerns with the traffic increase to the area. The overall consensus from the 5 homes that Ms. Krasser and Ms. Mauldin represented, expressed concern with the increase in homeless people, increase in crime and the unwanted increase in traffic to the area. Chairperson THOMPSON asked for Ms. Mauldin viewpoint on the intersection light signal. Ms. Mauldin felt that the traffic light is not needed but her husband feels it isn't. Commissioner GOKEY asked, how long has Ms. Mauldin owned her property? Ms. Mauldin answered, 16 years. Brad Brauer, 3238 Zinnia Ct., Golden. He is representing 29 homes and all of them aze opposed. He stated that a1129 homes would like to see a more arY..,r.:ate use for this particular parcel. The neighborhood feels the proposed development is a eyesore and will cause the property value to decrease. Another concern is that the quality of life will be quite different. The community expressed that they would like to see any other use then a gas station or fast food restaurant. Mr. Brauer stated that the community wanted to see the land developed. and produce revenue but reiterated they absolutely do not want a gas station or a fast food restaurant. • Commissioner SNOW asked if Mr Brauer checked with the Realtor to see what was to be developed on this property when he brought his home. Mr. Brauer answered, yes he did. Commissioner GOKEY asked Mr. Brauer when was his house built? Mr. Brauer replied 1960's. Sharon Yablon, 3020 Ellis Lane, Golden. She is currently a legislative representative for Maple Grove Elementary school and a legislative liaison of Wheat Ridge area for the PTA. She explained that there are two schools which she represents and the combined total of the two is 1300 students. She read a letter from the executive board of the Maple Grove Parent Teaching Association signed by 10 PTA board members explaining their opposition to the Conoco's proposed development. The letter expressed concern for the increased traffic the proposed development will bring and it will threaten the safety and quality of life for the students. The majority of the students walk, bike or aze driven to school. The letter conveyed that the traffic congestion is already a problem in the area. Chairperson THOMPSON asked what the PTA's viewpoint is on the on the proposed traffic signal being installed. Ms. Yablon said that they were opposed to the light because it will only cause additional problems. Chuck Hitt, 3239 Zinnia Ct.,Golden. He is at this meeting to present a letter from the the Principal, of the De'Evelyn Junior and Senior High-school. The letter conveyed opposition to the proposed development. The traffic congestion is a problem for the area especially at the peak . hours. The principle is concerned about the safety of the students and family members. Mr. Hitt stated that the proposed signal light installed will only be a temporary solution to a much bigger problem. David Snyder, 3240 Alkire, Golden. He has lived at this property for 12 years and is opposed to the proposed development. His biggest concern is with the potential traffic congestion to the azea. Norm Ross, 3145 Zinnia Street, Golden. He is opposed to the proposed development. He stated that he feared for his life with regard to the traffic congestion in the area. Brett Liming, 13785 Braun Road, Golden. He is a representative of the new homeowners. The concern of Mr. Liming is the character of the neighborhood is in jeopardy. He feels that the proposed development is too intense a use for this neighborhood and will cause too much traffic congestion. The final comments he made was that the quality of life and the property value will be impacted negatively. The following citizens are opposed to the proposed development at 12851 W. 32nd Avenue: Eugene Mauldin, 3195 Zinnia, Golden. . David Snyer, 3240 Alkire Ct.,Golden Warren Kelvee,2605 Crabbtree Ct., Golden. John and Sherry Benner, 3255 Braun Ct., Golden. Ken Niles, 3223 Braun Ct., Golden. Iris and Mike Fontera, 2928 Kendrick, Golden. Mike Coen, 13146 W. 33rd Avenue, Golden. Erin Haley, 14310 Foothill Road.., Golden. Mary Cook, 14310 Foothill Road.., Golden. Rebecca Minor, 3110 Gardenia St., Golden. Shirley Coen, 13146 W. 33rd Avenue, Golden. Eleanor Paske, 13795 Braun, Golden. Kathleen Kraeger, traffic engineer, spoke again regarding traffic issues. She stated she wanted to address a couple of concerns that seem to keep surfacing during the neighborhood testimony. The first issue she commented on was the proposed signal light at 32nd and Frontage Road. She explained that the proposed light will not add to the grid lock. The type of signal installed at this intersection will be what Engineers refer to as a "slave signal" and that this type of signal is capable of helping the signals in the area. The second issue of concern was the increased traffic congestion to the area. Ms. Kraeger reiterated that the other uses suggested by the neighborhood as acceptable such as medical office or a restaurant are going to bring "new trips" to the area. In her opinion, the gas station will bring less congestion to the area because the majority of the traffic is already "passing by" • i • • Commissioner GOKEY inquired about the Medical/Dental office and asked about the traffic generated from this use. Ms Kraeger explained that this is the number one trip generator for office uses. The important concept to understand is that the Medical/Dental office uses are all "planned trips" to the area. CorrimissionerGOKEY commented on the traffic congestion and pointed out that the schools have increased the traffic to the area by allowing open enrollment. Ms. Kraeger agreed that the open enrollment does cause additional traffic to the area. Chairperson THOMPSON asked about the hours of operation depending on the use(restaurant/Medical office). Ms. Kraeger explained that with aMedical/Dental office that the hours of operation would only be during the day. However, the hours of operations for a restaurant would vary but most likely it would be open late at night unless it was a Denny's or Village Inn. The hours of operation for the gas station would be 24 hours a day. Whether a restaurant has aliquor license would also make a difference on hours, citizen types and amounts of traffic. David Galloway, 5350 DPC Parkway, Englewood, 80111. Mr Galloway stated once again that the proposed development use was established many years ago and that the site plan does meet • all the requirements for the C-1 zone district, as well as, the criteria. Bill Fazrell, 14399 Garden Circle. He stated there is more to be considered then just the legalities. There is a moral issue to be reviewed. The community understands that the zoning and site plan criteria have been met but do not wish to be negatively impacted by this proposed plan. Mr. Farrell concluded his discussion by reiterating that he is adamantly opposed. Chairperson THOMPSON closed the public comment section of the Public Hearing. Discussion continued with the Planning Commission members. A motion was made by Commissioner WILLIAMS, seconded by Commissioner SHOCKLEY, for approval of Case No. WZ-97-13 a request for approval of a Planned Commercial Development final development plan for property located at 12851 West 32nd Avenue, be APPROVED for the following reasons: 1. It is consistent with the underlying outline development plan. 2. It is exceeds the City's standards for commercial development. 3. It meets all requirement for Planned Commercial Development final development plan. With the following conditions: 1. The "Welcome to Wheat Ridge" sign be modified to be consistent with the City's standard. 2. A 10' wide pedestrian/equestrian path be shown along the eastern property line of Lots 1,2 and 3 in the CDOT r-o-w and that the developer escrow funds to allow for future path construction when Lot 2 develops. Commissioner SNOW made a motion to add an additional condition which restricts the future addition of a drive through. Motion failed for lack of a second. Chairperson THOMPSON stated her reason for voting no is due to the negative impacts the proposal will have on the neighborhood. She also stated that she felt this is a excellent plan but there is too much opposition. Conunissioner SNOW explained her reasons for voting in favor. She stated that the zoning is Commercial-One and the proposal complies with the zoning district regulations. Commissioner SNOW did apologize for being unable to restrict drive through and the hours of operation. Motion carried 5-1 with Chairperson THOMPSON voting no. A motion was made by Commissioner WILLIAMS, seconded by Commissioner SNOW, for approval of a resubdivision plat for property plat at 12851 West 32nd Avenue, for the following • reasons: 1. It is required to accommodate the frontage road relocation and incorporate the vacated CDOTrfght-of--way into the project. 2. All requirements of the Subdivision Regulations have been met. With the following conditions: 1. All existing and proposed drainage easements be shown on the plat. 2. A sidewalk and signage easement shown along the radius at the intersections of West 32nd Avenue ands the frontage road.- Motion carried 6-0. Chairperson THOMPSON asked Mr. Goebel if the City will monitor the project to see if a, signal light is warranted. Mr. Goebel said yes that the City will review signal light installation warrant for the future. 8. CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING 9. OLD BUSINESS • The meeting schedule for January is as follows: A. January 8, 1998. B. January 15, 1998. 10. NEW BUSINESS 11. DISCIJSSION AND DECISION ITEMS 12. COMMITTEE AND DEPARTMENT REPORTS 13. ADJOURNMENT (~ Meeting was adjourned at 11:10 p.m. by consensus. / ~ ~~ jD_ , Je er o he, Recording Secretary • The next meeting will be held January 8, 1998.