Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/10/1972 --- MINUTES February 10, 1972 The one hundred and forty-sixth regular meeting of the Wheat Ridge City Council was called to order by Mayor Albert E. Anderson at 7 30 P m at 7390 West 38 Avenue. Aldermen attending were Jack Bramble, Joseph Donaldson, Robert Howard and Ray Pepe. Aldermen Paul Abramson and Calvin Hulsey were absent Also attending were Mayor Anderson, City Attorney Maurice Fox, Deputy City Clerk Elise McMillen, staff personnel, applicants for zoning cases and their attorneys, and approximately 50 to 75 interested citizens. Preliminary Hearing for the transfer of the 3-way liquor license for Dutch Pantry Restaurant was held Attorney Lionel Dunievitz was present and stated that applicant Joseph T. Lombardi was also present. Motion by Alderman Howard "I move that the Public Hearing for the transfer of the liquor license for Dutch Pantry Restaurant be set for March 23, 1972." Motion was seconded by Alderman Donaldson and passed 4-0 Aldermen Abramson and Hulsey were absent. WZ-71-35 Rezoning Case was heard. The requested changes were from Agricultural-One to Restricted-~ommercial and to Residential-Two. Applicant was represented by Mr. Francis McGinn, real estate broker, and Mrs. Angeline Michalo was present. She stated that her husband, George Michalo was absent due to illness. The address for the rezoning request is at 44 Avenue and Owens Street. Robert Barr of the Planning Department said the property had been properly published and posted and that the following factors should be considered 1. The land use plan sho~ low density residential for both parcels (0-7 units per acre.) 2. Residential-Two request lies within 0-7 units/acre but Restricted- Commercial does not lie within land use plan. 3. Restricted-Commercial is appropriate in that commercial does in fact lie adjacent and across although vacant. 4 A subdivision plat has been filsd for this site and therefore lower the area actually being zoned and utilized 5 Additional ROW to be obtained by plat. 6. Request does not lie within flood plain. 7. Planning Department recommends approval He also stated by unanimous vote of the Planning Commission the following Motion was made "That Case No WZ-71-35 from Agricultural-One to Restricted- Commercial and Residential-Two, that meaning Lots 1 and 12 would be Restricted-Commercial and Lots 2-~ would be Residential-Two, be recommended for approval." He stated the final plat for Owens Park Subdivision will be on the Agenda next week for this location. Mr Francis McGinn, real estate broker, spoke on behalf of the applicant. He stated that the area involved is 5 acres with 10 two-family sites planned and 2 commercial sites He said a street is planned to run down the center of tBe.land He said this is the highest and best use of the land, and it is~~8~d to a contractor for development Gary Leuman of 4350 Parfet stated he was in favor of the Residential-Two zoning and had some reservations about the Restricted-Commercial. Mr. Gerald Birney of 10660West 46 Avenue representing the Fruitdale Association stated he had no basic objections, but had some reservations. Mr. Stuart Adams of 4311 Oak whose property is east of the property in question states Me had no objections .., 1 r " I'..- / ~ -2- Motion by Alderman Bramble "I move that Rezoning Case WZ-71-35 be studied for one week and a decision be rendered on February 17, 1972 at 7 3D p.m in these chambers." Motion was seconded by Alderman Donaldson and passed 4-0 with Aldermen Hulsey and Abramson absent WZ-7o-3D Rezoning Case came up for final hearing. The area involved is at Miller street north of West 44 Avenue and the requested change is from Agricultural-One to Planned Unit Development. The purpose is for apartment development and approximate area is 19 7 acres. The pre- liminary plan had been presented to Council on February 11, 1971 and the applicant at that time was Robert Mugele. The land had been sub- sequently sold and the present applicant was Godwin-Bevers The preliminary plan had been approved by Council on February 25, 1971 by a vote of 4-3. Robert Barr of the Planning Department said the following letters regarding various services available had been written Arvada Fire Department which stated access as shown is acceptable for fire protection. Jefferson County R-1 School District which stated their master plan showed low density for this area and the consequent high density proposal was over their student estimates and that at present the schools were at maximum capacity or over their capacity Fruitdale Sanitation District stating they could serve the south ~ of the property and that Clear Creek Gardens Sanitation District should be contacted for a Connectors Agreement for total service Consolidated Mutual Water Co. requesting that the company service the whole area involved. He also stated the follOWing factors should be considered 1. The Comprehensive Plan shows this area to be low density 2. The pattern of growth to the East is high density. 3 The zoning in this area would be compatible with the area subject to street dedications and other changes. 4 If the above can be accomplished, the Planning Department recommends approval. The Planning Commission at the Preliminary Hearing made the following Motion "That Case No WZ-7o-30 be denied on the basis that it would put too heavy a load of traffic on 44 Avenue, schools won't take it as there are no school facilities for more children, and 384 apartments in that amount of space is not compatible in that area." The Planning Commission made the follOWing Motion at the final hearing "That Case No. WZ-7o-30 has met the criteria set forth by the City Council but I wish to recommend denial of this zoning venture due to the fact that this would cause an overload of public services, traffic and schools and we feel it is not in keeping with good zoning to grant it." Attorney David Haun representing the applicant stated the following That he is representing the former owner and the present owner, Godwin-Bevers, That at the Preliminary Hearing, it was recommended that the road problem be worked out, That according to Ordinance, the duty of Council tonight is to determine whether the final plan substantially complies with the original plan at the Preliminary Hearing and that he feels it does. David Barber, architect, representing the applicant, of 29 E. Bijou St , Colorado Springs stated the follOWing That the only change in the plans is that the road through the development has been made to "tie in 44 Avenue to 47 Avenue", This has been made for better access for fire trucks etc., This road is to be constructed by the developer, It is planned to be 50 feet and could be private or dedicated. Ruling by City Attorney Fox and Mayor Anderson stated that the issue to be considered tonight is whether the final plan presented tonight is in substantial compliance with the previously approved preliminary plan. - ~ -3- The following people appeared in opposition Mr. Defider of 10625 West 47 Place who stated that the existing facilities are not adequate for the increase in traffic, and that the exit on Miller Street, off the frontage road and the intersection are not adequate for the increased traffic. Mr. John Schlenger of 5110 Simms stated that the legal technicalities are not important compared to what the effect on the neighborhood would be with that many apartments, that the schools are inadequate, that Council is supposed to be the voice of the people and that they are disregarding the people. Mr. Gerald Birney of 10660 West 48 Avenue stated that Council had a duty to the citizens of the City to correct any previous error they may have made. Mr. Ron Ganskow of 4695 Miller Street stated he felt that the City Council would take his feelings and the other people's wishes present into consideration, that he wished to present a petition with 19 names on it from the people who lived strictly on Miller Street and who would "have to look at or live with" this apartment complex and who were opposed to the development. He also stated that there would be a hazard to pedestrians because there are no sidewalks in his neighborhood, that this would overcrowd the schools, cause a traffic hazard and that he was against high density development. The Chair (Mayor Anderson) ruled that the petition will be admissable as it relates to the previous ruling. Mr Ivan Hawn of 4900 Robb speaking on behalf of the Fruitdale Association stated the following That it is "outrageous" if the only issue to be considered here is the configuration of bUildings etc., That on the plan the drainage goes to the east and that there is only a twelve inch pipe to accomodate the run-.off there, That a once in 10 year frequency rainfall would require a 30 inch pipe, and that the present drain would emit 5-7 cubic feet per second, but would receive 1~h cubic feet of water per second, consequently, this is badly planned and inadequate, and That he would like to present a petition signed by 298 homeowners in opposition. The Chair accepted the petition based on the same reason as previously stated. Mr. Mike Ritz of 5115 Swadley asked for clarification on the legal semantics of the purpose of the hearing tonight and the ruling was repeated. Mr. Paul Ross of 10620 West 46 Avenue stated he saw the signs posted announcing the hearing tonight but didn't remember seeing them a year ago for the previoU6 hearing. It was stated that pictures were taken and on file of the previous signs. He stated since the first hearing was a year ago that the people should have a chance to be heard again. Mr. Gary Leuman of 4350 Parfet stated that he had been present at the prior hearing, that the 1% acre for road purposes is 8% of the area, and with the increased area allowed for the road no redeeming green space has been provided for, thus the final plan doesn't comply with the land use intensity. Alderman Howard asked for a show of hands if they were present from the follOWing areas East side of Miller Street - no one present. Immediately north of property - no one present - Mrs. Bernice Ross of 10620 West 46 Avenue stated there was only one house at that location West of property on West 44 Avenue - M~~Gaughey of 4595 Kipling was present. ,) -4- Attorney David Haun's summary stated the following That he had talked to Mr. McGaughey and that he had favored approval of the final plan, That in the original plan a roadparallel was planned and the only difference is that now a road goes through the property and the traffic use remains the same on both plans, That the drainage is designed to handle a 50 year flood, and the 12 inch drain will restrict the flow of water, That this is the applicants' sixth public hearing, In regards to the 8% of the land used for a road, at the preliminary hearing the Council requested the provision of such a road, that the only addition in roadways is the driveway across the property making the total area of 1% acres for road use and is not an addition of 1% acres. Mr. Hawn stated the following in summary That he questioned that a 50 year flood could be accomodated with the present drainage, That there is a potential traffic problem and has remained the same on both plans, and That the feeling in opposition in "running very high." Motion by Alderman advisement for two February 24, 1972 " Pepe "I move that Case WZ-7o-3D be taken under weeks and a decision be rendered at 7 3D p.m on Motion was seconded by Alderman Bramble and passed 4-0. WZ-71-33 Rezoning Case was heard. Applicants are George C. and Virginia S. Lentz and the request is from Residential-One to Residential-Two at 3710 Miller Court for a two-family dwelling. Robert Barr of the Planning Department stated the follOWing 1. The Land Use Plan shows low density residential for this parcel (0-7 units per acre). 2. Parcel does not lie in Flood 3. Zoning request as a district Plan. A variance would be required to dwelling. 4. No dwelling unit may be placed on parcel in present zoning district (Residential-One). 5. Zoning request is compatible with surrounding area and use proposed would cause a proper development of uses to exist. 6. Planning Department would recommend approval. Plain District. lies within bounds allow construction of Land Use of a two-family He also stated the following Motion was made by the Planning Commission "That Case No. WZ-71-33 be approved with the understanding that the final approval of Residential-One to Residential-Two for the purpose of duplexes with a variance being granted by the variance Board because it is the best use of the land, curb and gutter would be put in which would enhance the area and it would not be continuous down-grading of the area." Applicant George Lentz of 8700 West 35 Avenue was present and stated the follOWing That there is a neighboring 9 unit apartment on Miller Court, That they have had the property for sale for 7 years and that no builder will build a single-family residence because there is a shortage of 750 feet to meet the requirements, That a duplex with off-street parking would be built, That the neighbors that he talked to thinks this would be an im- provement, That the land is surrounded by developed land and the lot is vacant and in weeds. No opposition appeared. Motion by Alderman Donaldson "I move that we take Case WZ-71-33 under advisement for one week and render a decision on February 17, 1972." Motion was seconded by Alderman Howard and passed 4-0. -5- Motion by Alderman Bramble "I move that Council reappoint Herbert Schillereff as an Alternate on the Board of Adjustment for a term ending on February 11, 1975." Motion was seconded by Alderman Donaldson and passed 4-0. Motion by Alderman Howard "I move that Glen Taylor be appointed as official representative of the City IT Wheat Ridge to both the Urban Drainage and the Solid Waste Disposal Committees of the Denver Regional Council of Governments" Motion was seconded by Alderman Donaldson and passed 4-0. Ordinance No. 104, pertaining to a street vacation was brought up for second reading. The title was read. Motion by Alderman Pepe "I move that the Clerk dispense with the reading of the remainder of the Ordinance with the title having been read." Motion was seconded by Alderman Bramble and passed 4-0. Motion by Alderman Pepe "I move that Ordinance No. 104 (Pertaining to amendment of street vacation Ordinance No. 86) be passed on second reading and be published and posted." Motion was seconded by Alderman Howard and passed 4-0. Ordinance No. 105 was brought up for second reading which pertains to the salary of judge, City Engineer and Recreation Supervisor. The Ordinance was read. Attorney Fox stated that the Ordinance should be amended so that the pay may be retroactive and the emergency clause needed to be incorporated. Motion by Alderman Bramble "I move that Ordinance No. 105 be amended as follows Delete Sections 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 7 and add the follOWing sections 'Section 1. The Fee to be paid the Police Magistrate, or Municipal Judge, of the City shall be $660.00 (Six hundred sixty and no/100ths dollars) per month, said fee to be paid semi-monthly. Section 2. The fee to be paid the City Engineer shall be $110.00 (One hundred ten and no/10oths dollars) per month, payable semi-monthly. Section 3. There shall be no additional fee paid to the City Superintendent of Water. Section 4. There shall be no additional fee paid to the City Superin- tendent of Sewers. Section 5. There shall be no additional fee paid to the City Street Supervisor. Section 7. This Ordinance shall be retroactive to the date of January 10, 1972. Section 8. Emergency Clause. The provisions of this Ordinance are necessary for the public safety and the orderly payment of salaries to personnel affected. Section 9. Effective Date This Ordinance shall take effect and be in force five (5) days after publication following final passage providing it shall have been passed by an affirmative vote of three-fourths of the members of the City Council, otherwise, said ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after publication following final passage.'" Motion was seconded by Alderman Pepe and passed 4-0. Motion by Alderman Howard "I move that in Sections 1 and 2 the 'semi-monthly' be stricken and the words 'monthly' be inserted." was seconded by Alderman Donaldson and passed 4-0. words Motion Motion by Alderman Pepe "I move that Ordinance No. 105 be passed as amended on second reading and be published and posted." Motion was seconded by Alderman Howard and passed 4-0. Motion by Alderman Bramble "I Move that Council ratify the contract between the City of Wheat Ridge and City Attorney Maurice F. Fox for the year 1972." Motion was seconded by Alderman Donaldson and passed 4-0. Said contract is filed with the Minutes. Meeting was adjourned at 10 20 p.m. ,L -7'-- ,..L />"- "_ f {( ( - 'ftlise . / / I / /' / / .. f_ I McMillen, 6eputy \City Clerk " j CON T R ACT WHEREAS, the City of Wheat Ridge, desires to retain Maurice F Fox, as City Attorney, and WHEREAS, Maurice F Fox, has expressed a desire to continue his practise as City Attorney for the City of Wheat Ridge, State of Colorado NOW THEREFORE, the parties hereto agree as follows The Ci ty of Wheat Ri dge s ha 11 pay the Ci ty Attorney the sum of $715 00 (Seven Hundred and Fifteen and no/looths Dollars) per month, as a retainer fee 2 The City shall pay the City Attorney a fee of $440 00 (Four hundred Forty and No/100ths Dollars) per month, as the Prosecution fee for the Municipal Court work for the City of Wheat Ridge 3 The City of Wheat Ridge shall pay the City Attorney, a fee of $22 00 (Twenty Two and No/100ths Dollars) per hour, for all services rendered, preparatory work, trial, and other necessary efforts concerning litigation in which the City of Wheat Ridge is made a party 4 This contract and agreement shall be retroactive to the date of January 1, 1972 -~TrL t-.-hsx - MAURICE F FOX, CITY ATTORNEY / III I ( ! )/Ll~" J ,_ L ALBERT E ANDERSON I I / ell J{L 1 ~, MAYOR