Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/19/1998CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE PLANNING COMMISSION Minutes of Meeting February 19, 1998 1. CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by Chair THOMPSON at 7:30 p.m.. on February 19, 1998 in the Council Chambers of the Municipal Building, 7500 West 29th Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado. 2. ROLL CALL: Members Present: Ann Brinkman Dean Gokey Jay Rasplicka Tom Shockley Nancy Snow (arrived at 8:12 p.m.) Gary Theander Harry Williams Janice Thompson STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Alan White, Ping. & Dev. Director Meredith Reckert, Senior Planner Nick Fisher, APEO Supervisor Barbara Delgadillo, Plug. Secretary Ann Lazzeri, Recording Secretary The following is the official set of Planning Commission minutes for the public hearing of February 19, 1998. A set 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. 4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA It was moved by Commissioner WILLIAMS and seconded by Commissioner RASPLICKA to approve the agenda as presented. Motion carried 7-0 with Commissioner SNOW absent. 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The minutes of the February 2, 1998 Wheat Ridge Planning Commission were presented for approval. Planning Commission Page I 02/19/98 Commissioner GOKEY requested a clarification to the minutes on page 4, fourth paragraph, concerning the statement that chemical drains would not impact surrounding wells. The statement should read "that if hard surfaces are used and a proper drainage system is installed in that complex, then the chemicals would not affect the ground water." Barbara Delgadillo, noted that item no. 4 in the first paragraph of page 5 should be amended to read: "The property would be difficult to develop under current zoning conditions." Commissioner THEANDER requested an amendment to the vote on approval of the minutes to reflect that he abstained from voting because he was not present at the meeting. It was moved by Commissioner WILLIAMS and seconded by Commissioner RASPLICKA to approve the minutes as amended. Motion carried 6-1 with Commissioner SHOCKLEY abstaining and Commissioner SNOW absent. 6. PUBLIC FORUM There was no one signed up to speak before the Commission. PUBLIC HEARING Chair THOMPSON declared the Public Hearing open. A. Three Mile Plan: Update and revision to the City's Comprehensive Plan addressing the area beyond the city's, current municipal limits. by adopting the North Plains Community Plan, Fairmount Subarea as prepared by Jefferson County. Alan White presented an overview of the case stating that the City is considering two annexations outside the existing boundaries of the City and that Colorado State statutes require each city to have a three-mile plan in place prior to undertaking any annexations. He noted that the current Comprehensive Plan and the update which has been under review over the past two years does not address the area outside the City's current boundaries. In order to have something in place, it is proposed that the Commission recommend adoption of the Jefferson County North Plains Community Plan, Fairmount Subarea which was completed in 1990. He further noted that since the State statutes are not clear on what should be contained in a Three Mile Plan nor do they specify requirements for levels of approval for adoption or public notice requirements, staff has decided to give public notice and hold a public hearing. Mr. White entered a map of the enclaves of unincorporated Jefferson County within the City into the record and distributed copies to members of the Commission. (Accepted by Chair THOMPSON.) Mr. White also entered into the record the North Plains Community Plan, Fairmount Subarea with a pack of materials and exhibits. (Accepted by Chair THOMPSON.) Planning Commission Page 2 02/19/98 Mr. White informed the Commission that petitions have been accepted for an annexation in one of the enclaves adjacent to W. 52nd Avenue and City Council has set a public hearing to consider those annexations in March, noting that the Three Mile Plan must be in place before considering those annexations. Mr. White informed the Commission that the Comprehensive Plan Review Committee unanimously approved a motion recommending adoption of this as the Three Mile Plan for the area as it pertains to three miles outside the Wheat Ridge boundaries with the following changes, and that staff recommends approval by the Planning Commission. 1) Add two enclaves overlooked by the County when the plan was developed. 2) Delete recreational vehicle storage and residential (up to 15 dwelling units per acre) from the recommended land uses in Area 20. Mr. White stated it would be the staff's recommendation to approve the plan. In response to Commissioner RASPLICKA's comment that this plan had previously been adopted, Mr. White explained that the City did adopt the Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan in 1988 or 1989 for the purpose of serving as a Three Mile Plan; however State statute requires adoption of a Three Mile Plan on an annual basis. Commissioner BRINKMAN asked the CPRC's reasoning for dropping the residential up to 15 dwelling units in Area 20. Mr. White responded that it had to do with the fact that there was much opposition when this was proposed several years ago and it was decided this was probably not a good recommended land use for the area. Mr. White read CR. 3112.105 which addresses requirements for annexation in response to Commissioner WILLIAMS' request for detailed explanation of the State statute requiring the three mile plan. Chair THOMPSON expressed concern that streets could still be widened if this plan were adopted. Mr. White and Ms. Reckert replied it would not prevent widening of streets. Commissioner. BRINKMAN asked if adopting the plan would give approval for all the suggested types of land uses listed for all these areas even though they are outside the three miles. Mr. White responded that the Fairmount Subarea is more closely aligned with the Three Mile Plan and that is why staff is suggesting that we limit it to the Fairmount Subarea and the enclaves. There was no response to Chair THOMPSON's request for individuals to speak to this issue. Planning Commission Page 3 02/19/98 It was moved by Commissioner BRINKMAN and seconded by Commissioner THEANDER to approve the Jefferson County North Plains Community Plan, Fairmount Subarea, and the section on enclaves as it pertains to the areas three miles from the existing boundary of Wheat Ridge with the following changes: (1) That recreational vehicle parks and residential (up to 15 dwelling units per acre) be removed from Area 20 which is listed as an in-fill area; and (2) to add the two areas that were forgotten by the Jefferson County Plan (off of 52nd Avenue) to the enclave exhibit; and that the motion be based upon recommendation and approval by the City Attorney. Following brief discussion, the motion carried by a vote of 7-0 with Commissioner SNOW absent. Chair THOMPSON declared the public hearing to be closed. It was moved by Commissioner THEANDER and seconded by Commissioner WILLIAMS to amend the agenda to move item 11 to the next order of business. The motion carried 7-0 with Commissioner SNOW absent. 11. Case No. ZOA-98-1 Review and discussion of the City of Wheat Ridge Animal Regulations Mr. White presented a brief history of this matter explaining that there have been some code enforcement issues concerning large animals which resulted in the Animal Control Commission suggesting changes to the animal regulations within the Code. He stated that as a result of City Council direction to staff to work on these changes, it was decided to set this date as a study session. Meredith Reckert introduced Susan Ellis, Supervisor of Code Enforcement Division, and Nick Fisher, Animal Control Supervisor. Ms. Reckert distributed to the Commission copies of a matrix showing large animal regulations in other metropolitan communities and then presented slides showing various large animal properties in the City of Wheat Ridge. These properties reflected a broad cross section of residential, agricultural and commercial zonings throughout the City. (Commissioner SNOW arrived at 8:12 p.m.) Ms. Ellis addressed enforcement challenges associated with animal regulations which included 9.000 square foot regulation. Ms. Ellis noted that in order to determine if the property meets lot size requirements it is necessary for the City to go by the Assessor's maps which aren't always accurate. She explained that a survey is necessary to accurately determine the square footage of a property; sometimes property surveys are not available. Manure and liquid waste. Ms. Ellis noted that these cases are presently prosecuted in criminal court which requires proof beyond a reasonable doubt and that three of these cases have been thrown out of Planning Commission Page 4 02/19/98 court because of the court's opinion that they do not belong in criminal court, but rather in civil court where cases can be decided on testimony. She also noted that manure accumulation and odor are two different problems and are very difficult to enforce. Pen, corral and fenced areas. Ms. Ellis stated that the Code contains some ambiguity in defining fences, corrals and structures such as barns. She added that there have only been three properties which cause problems and only five that have ever been cited. Three that were cited were adjacent to residential and concerned manure accumulation or odor. Commissioner BRINKMAN asked what procedures the City would take in a situation where a potential purchaser takes the word of a realtor that they can have horses and then a neighbor complains. Ms. Ellis replied that her office would check the size of the property according to their records and then request a survey from the owner to determine actual square footage and the number of animals they would be allowed. If there is insufficient space, the owner would be given 30 days to remove the animal, obtain a variance, etc.; and if they don't comply at that time, a summons to court is issued. She also noted that she has never had to issue a summons for this type issue in the past seven years. Commissioner WILLIAMS asked if property owners were allowed to board animals. Ms. Reckert explained that boarding is allowed in Agricultural Districts; however, in residential areas, it is assumed you own the animals on your property as an accessory use. In response to Commissioner THEANDER's question as to what constitutes the three major reasons for citing owners of large animals, Ms. Ellis replied they are (1) odor and manure accumulation; (2) corral setback issues; and (3) too many animals on the property. Commissioner GOKEY discussed whether or not some of these conditions could be cited as animal abuse cases. Ms. Ellis explained that animal control would be called in if abuse was suspected. Commissioner SNOW asked Ms. Ellis' opinion regarding whether or not the proposed changes in the ordinance would resolve code problems. Ms. Ellis replied that she believed the changes would present guidelines to follow such as how often a property owner needs to clean the animal areas. Commission SNOW asked for a comparison of the present ordinance with the suggested changes. Ms. Reckert replied that the suggested changes from the Animal Control Commission included a provision for no more than four animals per acre, a two week cleaning rule, pen and corral sizes, and clarification of fences and corrals vs. barns and other structures. She noted that a grandfather clause is included that would apply unless the property owner ceases owning a horse for more than sixty days. Commissioner BRINKMAN and Commissioner GOKEY discussed the minimum open lot area of 9,000 square feet for the first horse and 6,000 square feet for each additional horse. Planning Commission Page 5 02/19/98 Ms. Reckert stated that the animals do not have to have access to the entire area and that these requirements are consistent with the requirements of Jefferson County. Mr. White added that this requirement is to set forth a guideline for the number of animals allowed on a property. Mr. Fisher addressed the Commission stating that at the request of City Council, the Animal Control Commission conducted two or three public meetings with input from the Livestock Association regarding proposed changes to the ordinance. The Commission was recessed at 9:00 p.m.. and reconvened at 9:09 p.m. by Chair THOMPSON. Chair THOMPSON addressed a rumor that the City is trying to get rid of all large animals. She stated that this is a misconception and that the Commission is only interested in clarifying the existing ordinance. The following people addressed the Commission: Ann Osterlow - 3295 Independence Court Ms. Osterlow stated that she lives adjacent to a property with four horses on one acre and is concerned with the health issues related to the large number of flies that are attracted by manure accumulation. She indicated that she does not want to get rid of horses in Wheat Ridge, but only wants horse owners to keep their properties clean. Tim Osterlow - 3295 Independence Court Mr. Osterlow presented a video showing the large amount of flies swarming in the summer near their patio. He noted that the case was taken to court but thrown out because the code was too vague. He also stated that he does not object to property owners having horses, but wants the owners to be responsible to keep their property clean. He also suggested that if a horse owner does not comply with the City's request to clean up manure, that the City clean it up and charge the owner. He also distributed copies of a poster from the U.S. Department of Agriculture and a copy of an article from Encarta Encyclopedia describing health issues involved with flies. Bob Rock - 4300 Tabor Street Mr. Rock urged the Commission to continue allowing horses in Wheat Ridge; however, he agreed there may be a need for changes to the present ordinance. Warren McCoy - 3275 Dudley Street Mr. McCoy stated his opinion that horses should be allowed in the City; however, horse owners need to be responsible about taking care of the animals and cleaning up after them. Planning Commission Page 6 02/19/98 Don McDougal - 9815 West 37th Avenue Expressed concern that the City of Wheat Ridge is attempting to ban horses from the City and asked that the Commission not allow this to happen. Kevin Craig - 10615 West 46th Avenue Urged Commission to continue allowing horses within the City of Wheat Ridge. Dr. Rob Hilsenroth (no address given) Dr. Hilsemoth is a veterinarian and an advisor to the Animal Control Commission. He recommended that the City place the burden of proof on a home owner to prove they are complying with the area requirements. He also encouraged the Commission to look objectively at the issues and not confuse humane considerations with nuisance issues. He suggested trying the two-week cleanup rule with the use of photographs to suffice as evidence of whether the criteria has been met. He also expressed his opinion that it is much better to educate people on how to properly take care of their animals than to take them to court. He felt that the grandfather clause would prevent people from having to get rid of their animals as a result of the changes to the ordinance. In response to Commissioner GOKEY's question regarding penalties for violations, Ms. Ellis replied that an owner could be fined up to $999.00 for a violation. Commissioner SNOW asked if Ms. Ellis felt it was feasible for the city to clean up manure if owner does not comply with request to do so, much the same as is presently done with the weed ordinance Ms. Ellis replied that while weeds can be measured, manure cannot; and that cleaning the manure would require entering private property containing animals and would open the City to various lawsuits. Louise Turner - 11256 West 38th Avenue Ms. Turner, member of the Wheat Ridge Livestock Association and the Animal Control Commission, suggested that education along with the nuisance law would be vehicle to deal with these problems. She doesn't believe the answer is to get rid of the animals, but to take proper care of them. Commissioner WILLIAMS asked if the proposed changes would give Code Enforcement enough ammunition to take care of the few violators within the City. Ms. Turner stated that she would like an opinion from the judge or the city attorney as to whether or not the changes would take care of the problems. Chair THOMPSON asked if there were others present who would like to speak to this issue. Hearing no response, she stated that the individuals who spoke would be notified of future meetings and asked if there were others present who wished to be added to the notification list. Planning Commission Page 7 02/19/98 Commissioner THEANDER asked how other cities addressed the excrement issue. Ms. Reckert replied that most cities' codes were vague and referred to their nuisance laws which are similar to those of Wheat Ridge. Mr. White summarized the statements from the public, stating there seemed to be a sentiment that horse.property is a part of the lifestyle in Wheat Ridge and that the complaints seemed to be centered around the nuisance aspect. Mr. White suggested we take a look at the agricultural regulations and to have no restraints on the number of animals in these zones except when they are nonconforming lots in which case, the residential district requirements be applied. He commented that the two week cleaning rule sounds simple, but it might require hiring a full time person to keep track of who has cleaned in the past two weeks. Commissioner SNOW suggested that less cleaning should be required for fewer animals on large lots and more frequently on a small lot and in the summer. She stated her desire to hear an opinion from the court or city attorney as to whether or not this would solve the legal problems. Ms. Ellis commented that it has been her experience that three of the five citations she has issued in the past seven years have been personal neighborhood battles. Commissioner SNOW asked how many of these complaints have been a real problem over the past seven years to which Ms. Ellis replied that there has only been one. Mr. White requested to poll the Commission for a consensus as to whether or not it is desired to allow horses on residential and commercial properties. In response to Chair THOMPSON's poll, there was a consensus that horses be allowed in Wheat Ridge. Commissioner GOKEY commented that the property must be taken into account as to whether it is suited to having large animals. Chair THOMPSON commented that photos could be taken at the time the complaint is received and that the owner be informed that they have two weeks to clean it up and let them know that you will be back in two weeks to check for compliance. Ms. Ellis was not sure if the judge could determine from photos if the ordinance had been complied with. Chair THOMPSON asked if it was true that the burden of proof of square footage rested with the property owner. Ms. Ellis replied that it is up to the City to prove the lot size. Planning Commission Page 8 02/19/98 It was the consensus of the Commission that the city attorney's office review the ordinance as to (1) whether it is a good starting point; (2) removing the section containing manure issue to the nuisance ordinance; (3) a different standard for the ratio of animals to lot size; (4) look into the possibility of establishing horse equivalent units; (5) rewrite this section to make it easier to understand; and (6) review the nonconforming portions of the ordinance. Commissioner SNOW requested that the agricultural property issues be taken to the Agricultural Commission for their research and opinion. It was the direction of the Commission to staff that this matter come before the Commission the second meeting in April. 9. OLD BUSINESS None. 10. NEW BUSINESS Mr. White asked if the Commissioners wished to renew the subscription to the Planning Commissioner's Journal. The consensus of the Commission was to renew the subscription. Commissioner GOKEY asked if there was a nation-wide proportional land use book which could be used for guidelines. Mr. White responded that he would look into this. Commissioner SNOW moved and Commissioner BRINKMAN seconded that the meeting be adjourned. The motion carried 9-0. The meeting was adjourned at 10:55 p.m. Ann Lazzeri, Recordi S 9 retary Jae Thompson, Chair Planning Commission Page 9 02/19/98