Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-16-19- City of � WheatRid e - PLANNING COMMISSION Minutes of Meeting May 16, 2019 1. CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Chair OHM at 7:02 p.m. in the City Council Chambers of the Municipal Building, 7500 West 291h Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado. 2. ROLL CALL OF MEMBERS Commission Members Present: Melissa Antol Will Kerns Daniel Larson Janet Leo Scott Ohm Richard Peterson Jahi Simbai Vivian Vos Commission Members Absent: Staff Members Present: Lauren Mikulak, Planning Manager Scott Cutler, Planner II Zareen Tasneem, Planner I Dave Brossman, Development Review Engineer Tammy Odean, Recording Secretary 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 4. APPROVE ORDER OF THE AGENDA It was moved by Commissioner LEO and seconded by Commissioner PETERSON to approve the order of the agenda. Motion carried 8-0. 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES — April 4, 2019 It was moved by Commissioner LEO and seconded by Commissioner LARSON to approve the minutes of April 4, 2019, as written. Motion carried 7-0-1 with Commissioner KERNS abstaining. Planning Commission Minutes May 16, 2019 6. PUBLIC FORUM (This is the time for any person to speak on any subject not appearing on the agenda.) No one wished to speak at this time. 7. PUBLIC HEARING A. Case No. MS -18-07: An application filed by Ames Partners, LLC for approval of a minor subdivision located at 33rd Avenue and Ames Street. Mr. Cutler gave a short presentation regarding the Minor Subdivision and the application. He entered into the record the contents of the case file, packet materials, the zoning ordinance, and the contents of the digital presentation. He stated the public notice and posting requirements have been met, therefore the Planning Commission has jurisdiction to hear this case. Commissioner VOS asked why this case was not heard with the previous two cases (the ODP and SDP). Mr. Cutler explained that this plat simply tracked a little behind. He added the Planning Commission is the final decision on a Minor Subdivision because it includes 5 or less lots. Commissioner VOS asked if there are fees for police and fire service, similar to fees in lieu of parkland dedication for new residential development. Ms. Mikulak informed the Commission that there are no impact fees assessed for emergency services. She explained that parkland fees and streetscape fees are impact fees and these fees are commissioned by City Council. Some communities have traffic and storm water impact fees, but Wheat Ridge does not. Jay Feaster, Applicant 19239 W 53rd Loop, Golden Mr. Feaster explained that the City requires 25% of project be set aside for landscaping but they have proposed 42% of the property will be landscaped. It was moved by Commissioner SIMBAI and seconded by Commissioner LEO to recommend APPROVAL of Case No. MS -18-07, a request for approval of a minor subdivision on property located at the northeast corner of W. 33rd Avenue and Ames Street, for the following reasons: 1. All requirements of the subdivision regulations (Article IV) of the zoning and development code have been met. 2. All agencies can provide services to the property with improvements installed at the developer's expense. Planning Commission Minutes -2— May 2— May 16, 2019 With the following conditions: 1. Prior to recordation, the applicant shall pay the required fees -in -lieu of parkland dedication. 2. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall enter into a subdivision improvement agreement and shall provide homeowner's association covenants for review and approval by staff. Motion passed 8-0. B. Case No. ZOA-19-01: An ordinance amending Chapter 26 of the Code of Laws concerning the regulation of animal -related facilities. Ms. Tasneem gave a short presentation regarding the ordinance. She entered into the record the contents of the case file, packet materials, the zoning ordinance, and the contents of the digital presentation. She stated the public notice and posting requirements have been met, therefore the Planning Commission has jurisdiction to hear this case. Commissioner PETERSON asked if the 15 animals outside under supervision is also State law. Ms. Tasneem said it is a ratio established by State law. Commissioner PETERSON made a comment that he does not think the word additional needs to be used in sections B and C of the proposed supplementary regulations because it is contradicting. Ms. Mikulak explained the word additional can be struck from sections B and C in the ordinance as long as staff and business owners understand where they should be looking for the regulations that apply and that could be a condition of approval in the motion. Commissioner ANTOL asked what the demand for this ordinance has been, with regards to outside dog runs. Ms. Tasneem said a few requests primarily in the C-1 zone district have been persistent. Commissioner ANTOL asked about staff s research into what other municipalities have experienced with outdoor runs in commercial zonings adjacent to residential zone districts. Planning Commission Minutes -3— May 3— May 16, 2019 Ms. Tasneem explained that Edgewater currently has no animal daycares; Golden has one; Arvada has animal daycares primarily in its industrial zone districts; Denver allows animal daycares in commercial districts but with restrictions; and Lakewood allows animal daycares with stipulations. Commissioner ANTOL inquired, of the two requests, how many are adjacent to residential districts and asked what distance is required between the commercial property and residential property for an animal daycare's outside runs. Ms. Tasneem said one of the request backs -up to a residential property and the distance is approximately 20 feet. Ms. Mikulak added that the reason the ordinance proposes animal daycares as a Special Use Permit is because each property is different and can be looked at case by case through the SUP process. Commissioner ANTOL also asked what the maximum number of animals can be if the gross floor area for a kennel is 25% for overnight stays. Ms. Mikulak explained that it will vary because state law dictates the size of the cage based on the size of the animal. The 25% threshold is intended to express what is use is accessory to the primary function. Commissioner LARSON asked how the daycare is defined and if it allows overnight boarding. Ms. Tasneem mentioned staff is trying to clarify the definitions and uses in the commercial zone districts to allow overnight boarding only as an accessory use in animal daycares. Commissioner VOS wondered why a Special Use Permits for animal daycares are not across the board in all zone districts to make it easier to look at, especially due to the noise of barking. Ms. Mikulak explained that the City's animal related uses have been functioning well and the direction City Council has given staff is not to be more restrictive where these uses are already permitted in agricultural and industrial zone districts, but to add this use in a limited way in commercial zone districts. She added that staff is trying to balance this more permissive approach with the potential impact to the surrounding area. Commissioner VOS asked if the neighbors could complain about a noise nuisance. Ms. Mikulak said if the noise is frequent, habitual and unprovoked, then Code Enforcement can get involved in an animal noise complaint. Planning Commission Minutes -4— May 4— May 16, 2019 Commissioner VOS asked if animal daycares will be subject to State licensing. Ms. Tasneem said yes it is regulated by the State of Colorado's Pet Animal Care and Facilities Act (PACFA). Commissioner LEO wanted clarification on which zone districts animal daycares are allowed in with outside runs and the hours of operation. Ms. Mikulak explained that any animal use that has an outdoor component is allowed in A-1, A-2, C-1, and C-2 with a Special Use Permit. If adjacent to residentially used or zoned properties, then setbacks will apply. She also explained that outdoor play yards could operate from dawn until dusk. Commissioner OHM asked if there can be an outdoor dog park in a residential area. Ms. Mikulak said yes, but not as a commercial business. Commissioner OHM then asked what type of material can be used for outdoor runs. Ms. Mikulak said it can vary, but it has to be sturdy and meet operational standards and the run needs to be screened. Details like this will be included in the SUP and looked at through that process. Commissioner OHM mentioned he would like to see set hours of operation for the outdoor runs instead of dawn to dusk. Commissioner PETERSON said he thinks set hours are unnecessary because the times in which animals will be dropped off at the daycare will be around the time people go to work and come home from work. Commissioner OHM suggested that set times be only for the outdoor runs. Ms. Mikulak added that the benefit of an SUP is that conditions can be added to it, such as restrictive hours for animals in outdoor runs. She reminded the Commissioners that this ordinance is a baseline regulation and more conditions could be added if there was a context -specific concern with an SUP application. There continued to be more discussion on hours of operation, which districts will require SUPS, and the proposed regulatory framework changes. Commissioner SIMBAI asked about the process for an ordinance. Ms. Mikulak explained that after tonight there will be first reading at City Council which will set the public hearing and will be effective 15 days after the public Planning Commission Minutes -5— May 5— May 16, 2019 hearing if it is approved by City Council. She added that any amendments in tonight's motion will be communicated to City Council. Also, any robust discussions by Planning Commission will be communicated to City Council as well, even if an amendment is not added to the motion. Commissioner PETERSON asked how it is decided if a business is a kennel with overnight stay or an animal daycare. Ms. Mikulak and Ms. Tasneem explained animal daycares in C-1 and C-2 would only be allowed to have overnight boarding as an accessory use, up to 25% of their gross floor area. Staff will ask a business owner to submit a letter describing their operations, and then staff will determine the land use category in which the operation falls. Julie McClain, Business Owner 3335 Zephyr Court Ms. McClain explained that restricting the hours of operations for the outdoor play yards to 7am-7pm is reasonable. She also said most dog owners don't ask to check in their dogs before 6:30am. Ms. McClain also said she agrees with the SUP process and its nice each business is looked at individually. Commissioner LARSON asked Ms. McClain to identify the business with which she is associated. Ms. McClain said Zen Doggie Den. It was moved by Commissioner LARSON and seconded by Commissioner PETERSON to recommend approval of the proposed ordinance amending Chapter 26 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws concerning the regulation of animal -related facilities. A friendly amendment was made to strike the word additional from the first sentence of section B and also strike the word additional from the first sentence of section C in the supplemental regulations. There was discussion of an edit regarding hours of operation. It was moved by Commissioner KERNS and seconded by Commissioner LEO to amend the hours of operation for outdoor runs from dawn to dusk to lam to 7pm. Motion denied 3-5 with PETERSON, ANTOL, VOS, SIMBAI and LARSON denying. Chair OHM called for a vote on the main motion. Motion carried 8-0. Planning Commission Minutes -6— May 6— May 16, 2019 8. OLD BUSINESS Ms. Mikulak mentioned the NRS document is in its final stages of being drafted and is tentatively scheduled to be presented to City Council at a Study Session on June 3`d. If it is adopted as an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan then Planning Commission will see it again otherwise it will be adopted as a general guiding document. 9. NEW BUSINESS Commissioner VOS described her attendance at other City and Council Meetings, and asked if it was appropriate given her role as a Commissioner and the potential exposure to Quasi -Judicial case discussions. Ms. Mikulak explained that being Planning Commissioner she does not need to live in a bubble, but some private citizen rights have been given up, like attending a Neighborhood Meeting for a potential Land Use Case. She added City Council meetings can be watched at a later date, not live; although Study Session meetings can be attended or viewed in real time because active quasi-judicial cases would not be discussed in a study session format. Ms. Mikulak said that if any of the Commissioners have any questions they should call staff and ask them. She said it is always good to use caution. Commissioner Larson asked how changes can be made to and ordinance. Ms. Mikulak said the Commissioners or a member from the community would have to talk to their City Council Members about a code amendment and it would have to be initiated by City Council. Commissioner VOS asked if the public can view the Quasi -Judicial spreadsheet the Commissioners receive. Ms. Mikulak explained no, although the information on it is public information, it is not to be discussed with the public. An interactive map on the city's website provides the same information for public consumption. Ms. Mikulak then mentioned the next meeting will be June 6 and the agenda will be full. 10. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Commissioner VOS and seconded by Commissioner LEO to adjourn the meeting at 8:51 p.m. Motion carried 8-0. C e Dan Larson, Vice Chair Planning Commission Minutes May 16, 2019 Tammy Odea Recording Secretary -7—