Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/29/1974 MINUTES August 29, 1974 The two hundred and fifty-fourth regular meeting of the Wheat Ridge City Council was called to order by Mayor Paul B. Abramson at 4355 Field Street at 7 35 p.m. Aldermen attending were Mary Jo Cavarra, Joseph Donaldson, Robert Howard, Calvin Hulsey, Larry Merkl and Louise Turner. Also attending were City Administrator John Jerman, City Attorney William Mc Carthy, City Clerk Elise Brougham, City Treasurer James Malone, staff and interested citizens. Motion by Alderman Turner "I move that the Minutes of August 15 and 16, 1974 not be read and that they be approved as written." Motion was seconded by Alderman Donaldson and passed 4-2. Aldermen Howard and Hulsey voted "nay." Motion by Alderman Turner "I move that approval of the Minutes of August 20, 1974 be postponed until next week." Motion was seconded by Alderman Donaldson and passed 5-1. Alderman Howard voted "nay." Public Comment was made by John Opie of 10235 West 33 Avenue, Chairman of the Board of Ad- justment questioned the action of Council in regards to the ~Iarvin Flood Plain Case which had changed the decision of the 30ard. He stated it was his understanding that if the Board denied a case it would stay denied, and if it approved a case, then Council could approve or deny it but not modify the decision. Mayor Abramson stated the new maps by Wright-McLaughlin showed the Marvin building no longer in the flood plain, and Mr. Opie stated that the Wright-McLaughlin report had recommended no more than 151 and Council had approved 20'. Alderman Cavarra stated that Council would only review these flood plain cases until the new maps are adapted. Alderman Turner stated that until Ordinance ~o. 108 is changed, the boundary of the flood plain is not changed, and requested that if other flood plain cases come before Council, it be an admini- strative function that the Board be notified. Louise Henderson of 2605 Fenton Street stated she was requesting that in next year's annual budget that the alley between Fenton and Gray Streets from 26 to 29 Avenues be paved. She presented a petition with 36 signatures on it. There was one letter of protest to this request which was distributed. Dwaine Richter of 2860 Berry Lane who was applicant for Rezoning Case WZ-74-18 requested that the hearing be delayed until his lawyer could be present later in the evening. Council agreed to this request. Hank Stites on behalf of the ~heat Ridge Chamber of Commerce presented a placque expressing appreciation crservice to resigning Mayor Paul Abramson. Bruce Gordon of 4490 Vance Street stated he had some new business that is not on the Agenda, and requested that it be heard immediately after the Council's decision on Rezoning Case WZ-74-15. Council agreed. Alderman Howard asked Mayor Abramson why he had ordered an investigation of his conduct regarding information the Mayor had received 12 months ago. ~layor Abramson said this was not a matter for public discussion, and would discuss it with Mr. Howard after the meeting. Alderman HulsBv said it was a public matter because it was in the paper. Mayor Abramson stated it is a duty required of the Mayor by statute and the investigation was dane, and is a "dead issue" and it should not have been brought to the attention of the paper. Decision an Case MS-73-13, a minor subdivision located at Reed Street and West 31 and 32 Avenues was scheduled. Mr. Jerman requested that this be delayed at least one week so that the staff may complete the material requested by Council. Mr. Larrv Thomas stated he had done a survey and the plan presented had shown a 12.5/ grade for the bridge MINUTES - August 29, 1974 - Continued -2- and his survey had shawn 18%, and this needed~ be worked out. Mr. Moss requested that he be able to comment on the objections. MOtIon by Alderman Turner "I mOV8 that th8 decision on Case M5-73-13 be delayed one week and as material becomes available from engineering which included a review of bridge drawings that it be given to Council and Mr. Moss." Motion was seconded by Alderman Donaldson, and passed 4-2. Aldermen Howard and Hulsey voted "nay." Decision on Rezoning Case WZ-74-15 at the corner of Vance Street and West 45 Avenue from Residential-Two to Restricted-Commercial-one was scheduled. A traffic count done by the City showing 1,510 average daily traffic at West 45 east of Wadsworth, and 1,574 on Vance north of 44 Avenue was given, and a drainage report on the area was distributed. Mr. Thomas of the engineering department stated he felt there would be no drainage problem if the developer takes care of the developed runoff, and in answer to a question, he stated developed runoff of residential would be less. Motion by Alderman Howard "I would move that Rezoning Case WZ-74-15 from Residential-Two to Restricted-Commercial-one be denied for the following reasons The residents and property owners in the immediate area unanimously oppose this rezoning. 2. By previous action of the Wheat Ridge City Council the character of the residential neighborhood was maintained and continued by the denial of commercial use of the property located at 4495 Vance which is immediately adjoining on two sides of the property being considered in Case WZ-74-15." Motion was seconded by Alderman Hulsey. Motion to Amend by Alderman Turner "I move to amend the Motion to include that the future Land Use Plan is in error as it applies at this location, and is presently undergoing revision, and also that the land can be developed within its existing zoning which would be the highest and best use of the land." Motion was seconded by Alderman Donaldson and passed 6-0. Question was called on the Amended Motion and passed 6-0. Mr. Bruce Gordon of 4490 Vance commended the Council on their decision, gave a special thanks to Alderman Hulsey regarding his statement that the land should be for a park, and presented petitions with 1,036 signatures urging Council to condemn the area at the southeast corner of 45 Avenue and Vance for parkland. Motion by Alderman Hulsey "I move that the Parks and Recreation Commission and also the Planning Commission begin procedure in acquiring this land for a park, and that application be filed by the City with the Jeffo Open Space Committee." Motion was seconded by Alderman Donaldson and passed 6-0. Motion was made by Alderman Merkl for a ten minute break and was seconded by Alderman Turner and passed 4-2. Aldermen Cavarra and Donaldson voted "nay." Motion by Alderman Donaldson "I move tha the Council authorize the City Administrator to proceed with plans to allow the city employees to join the City ~ Arvada Credit Union, and in the event that the Wheat Ridge employees do join said credit union tha~ the treasurer be authorized to make payroll deductions for purchasing shares in the credit union or loan repayments." Motion was seconded by Alderman Merkl and passed 6-0. Final Development Plan of Rezoninq Case WZ-74-09 was location is approximately 660 feet west of Wadsworth and 39 Avenues, and the preliminary plan for Planned zoning had been approved by Council July 11, 1974. George and Esther Cook. scheduled. The between West 38 Commercial Development The applicants are Dennis Wigert of the Planning Dept. stated 1. The Land Use Plan recommends commercial development for the location in question. 2. The parcel fronts on a collector Sreet as defined in the Major Thoroughfare Plan. HINUTES - August 29, 1974 - Continued -3- 3. The parcel does not fall within the designated flood plain area. 4. The location is presentlv vacant. 5. The Planning Dept. recommended approval because The Land Use Plan recommends commercial, the eastern half of the area is already zoned Restricted-Commercial, the proposed use would not generate sig- nificant traffic congestion or noise, and the proposed use would provide an excellent buffer between the residential areas to the north and west and the commercial uses to the east. 6. Planning Commission recommended approval of the final plan with the fallowing stipulations There be a crash gate instead of a chain, and planting plans be submitted to the Planning Department. Larry Thomas, City Engineer had approved the drainage plan and grading. Mr. Wigert stated the drainage plan shows it will flow toward the center of the development with collector ponds, and that only the historical runoff would go to 39 Avenue. He stated the contours and grade were an the Preliminary Plan which was approved. William Dawn, attorney far the applicant stated the only change is a crash gate instead of a chain. Council questioned the grade which had been made on the land, and that at the previous hearing the developer had stated there would be low profile buildings with no elevations above the neighboring roofs. Mr. Tomlison, contract dev aoper of the land stated, in answer to a question that the level of the buildings when completed would not be significantly different from the neighborhood, and that the elevation change is possibly 1 foot, and that from 38 to 39 Avenue is a difference of 9 feet. Mr. Wiqert stated that the final plan is in compliance with the preliminary plan. Speaking in Opposition: Mr. Lester Shinn of 7824 West 39 Avenue stated his property adjoins the NE corner of the property, and the problem is on the NE and NW carner which have been raised, and his property is now about 4 feet lower and the dirt is at his window level. He also asked if there is a fence on the east and west side, and Mr. Wigert ans~ered it shows plants and trees. Mayor Abramson asked if the 4' grade was shown an the Preliminary Plan, and Alderman Turner stated the testimony given at the preliminary hearing had been different and a drainage plan was never shawn. Lany Thomas stated the preliminary plan shows pads far the building are raised 3 to 4 feet. Mr. Shinn requested that drainage does not flow toward his PDperty and Mr. Wiqert stated that all water flawing to the NE carner will be channelized in a swail or ditch an the applicant's property to 39 Avenue to the north, and will not flow into Mr. Shinn's property. Mr. Glen Pearce of 7900 West 39 Avenue stated the property at the rear of his house was raised 3 to 4 feet above his yard and that 20 feet from his property line will be a bUilding. It was painted out that the plan did not shaw the pad at the NW corner to be raised, and it was determined that the Building Dept. checks elevations. Mr. Thomlison stated he is willing to lower the height of the NW corner if the drainage plan would be approved. Mr. Thomas stated it could be done to almost level, within 1 or 2 feet. Alderman Hulsey stated the ground needed to be brought down to the levels approved an the Preliminary Plan, and Mr. Dawn stated there had been no intent to vary from the preliminary plan. Motion by Alderman Merkl "I move for approval of Rezoning Case WZ-74-09 Final Development Plan for the fallOWing reasons it was recommended by our Planning Department and Planning Commission, and it meets and does not change from the Preliminary Development Plan." Motion was seconded by Alderman Donaldson. It was clarified that the crash gate is an the final plan. MINUTES - August 29, 1974 - Continued -4- Aldermen Turner and Cavarra stated they were opposed because the use was too intense, the parking is inadequate and will effect the surrounding neighbors, and there was a misunderstanding of the elevation of the buildings. Alderman Howard questioned if there wa3 a commitment of the property owner to lack the crash gate. Mr. Dawn, attorney made a statement far Mr. Thomlison - "On behalf of the applicant, we will make a statement that the applicant, heirs, executors, administrators, or assigns, or transferees will be responsible far maintaining the closure and lacking of the crash gate." Question was called and passed 4-2. Aldermen Cavarra and Turner voted "nay." Resolution No. 334 authorizing appropriation adjustment for the purchase of the building at 10900 West 44 Avenue from the General Fund by a special meeting held on August 16, 1974 was introduced by Alderman Merkl and was read. Motion by Alderman Donaldson "I move that Resolution No. 334 be adopted." Motion was seconded by Alderman Hulsey. Motion to Amend by Alderman Turner "I move that Resolution No. 334 be amended to include the statement (Before the last paragraph) 'BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that none of the changes approved shall be construed to change the total appropriation as filed with the Division of Local Government.'" Motion was seconded by Alderman Cavarra and passed 5-1. Alderman Howard voted "nay." Question was called on the Amend Motion and passed 5-1. Alderman Howard voted "nay." Resolution No. 335 authorizing appropriation adjustment for the purchase of the building at 10900 West 44 Avenue from Revenue Sharing Fund by a special meeting held on August 16, 1974 was introduced by Alderman Donaldson and was read with the addition of the above mentioned statement. Motion by Alderman Turner "I move tha'; ResolLJfi.on No. 335 be adopted." Motion was seconded by Alderman Merkl and passed 5-1. Alderman Howard voted "nay." Resolution No. 336 returning invested funds to the Revenue Sharing Fund was introduced by Alderman Cavarra and was read. Motion by Alderman Merkl "I move that Resolution No. 336 be adopted." Motion was seconded by Alderman Donaldson and passed 6-0. Resol~ion No. 337 returning invested funds to the General Fund was introduced by Alderman Donaldson and was read. Motion by Alderman TurrEr "I move that Resolution No. 337 be adopted." Motion was seconded by Alderman Donaldson and passed 6-0. Resolution No. 33B authorizing employees of the Public Works and Park And Recreation Departments to assist the fire department in case of major fire. Fire Chief Jack Willis stated the duties would not include actual fire fighting, but would be managing barricades, traffic control etc., and that any person under the Fire Chief is covered through fire department compensation. Motion by Alderman Merkl "I move that Resolution No. 338 be adapted." Motion was seconded by Alderman Donaldson and passed 6-0. Resolution No. 339 authorizing the execution of an agreement with the Colorado Division of Highways for the reimbursement to the City of the casts of installation, operation, and amintenance of traffic control devices located on portions of the State Highway System with the City of Wheat Ridge, was introduced by Alderman Cavarra and was read. MINU ITS - August 29, 1974 - Con finued -5- Motion by Alderman Donaldson "T move that Resolution No. 339 be adopted." Motion was seconded by Alderman Cavarra and passed 6-0. Ordinance No. 159 amending Ordinance No. 20 the junk ordinance, was scheduled far second reading. Motion by Alderman Donaldson "I move that Ordinance No. 159 be removed from the table." Motion was seconded by Alderman Hulsey and passed 4-2. Aldermen Howard and Turner voted "nay." Motion by Alderman Cavarra "I move that Ordinance No. 159 be sent back for revision to just include references for junk vehicles and put it on next week's study session." ~~otion WQS selIJlded by Alderman Donaldson and tied 3-3. A~ermen Howard, Hulsey and Merkl voted "nay." Mayor Abramson voted "nay" and MOTION WAS DEFEATED 4-3. Alderman Merkl recommended that enforcement OF the ordinance be done only upon citizen complaint. City Attorney McCarthy stated that Ordinance No. 159 amends Ordirance ~:o. 20 ard Ordinance 20 allows for notices, and Ordinance ":0. 159 allows for prosecution and both can be done, that Ordinance 20 is difficult to enforce because it is vague, and Section 19 and 20 of Ordinance No. 159 would solve the prosecuting problems, and that anything useful is not included as a nuisance. Speakinq in Favor were Louise Henderson of 2505 Fenton who stated she had been a member of the Clean Sweep Commif,tee and the city is covered with trash. Amos Leaf of 2845 Chase stated the city had a junk car problem, and that in court the people win instead of the City. Motion by Alderman Howard "I move that Ordinance No. 159 introduced by Alderman Merkl be passed on second reading and be published and posted." Motion was seconded by Alderman Merkl. Motion to Amend by Alderman Turner "I move that under Section 14 _ in the title delete 'rubbish and debris' and delete (a) and (c) and renumber (b) as (a)." Motion was seconded by Alderman Donaldson. Motion to Amend the Amendment by Alderman Turner "I move that (a) be deleted and that (b) and (c) be renumbered (a) and (b)." The second agreed to the amendment. Question was called ond tied 3-3, and MOT10PJ DI~D. Question was called on original Motion and WAS DEFEATED 2-4. Aldermen Hulsey, Turner, Cavarra and Donaldson voted "nay." The Denver Reqional Council of Governments had sent notification of their recommendation for approval of the Federal LEAA grant of $151,575. for the Burglary Tactical Unit for 10,'1/74 to 12/31/75. Alderman Howard requested that before Council gives final approval, that someone from the Criminal Justice Advisory Committee and the Chief of Police explain the program so far and that thlli be scheduled for two weeks. Report on the availabilit~ of [EA funds until March 31, 1975 available to the City was brought up. Until that date there would be 100% funding, and the City was not obligated to hire the people permanently afterwards. Motion by Alderman Turner "I the Study Session (9/5/74.)" and passed 5-0. move I;hat this matter be deferred until Motion was seconded by Alderman Cavarra Mr. Jerman City Administrator, presented the procedure for selection of position of Director of Community Development and Director of Parks and Recreation, and invited the Co~ncil to attend, and that the Personnel Committee would screen to 7 or 8 applicants each, and there would be panels of qualified people for oral boards, and on September 15 and 18 the City Administrator would make his recommendations to Council and , Council would decide on September 19, 1974 at an executive Session. MINUTES - August 29, 1974 - Continued -6- A memorandum from the Urban Drainage and Flood Control District regarding the Sloans Lake D ainage Stud$ had been distributed, and it stated that Wheat Ridge's share was 1,534.00 for the engineering and that ather projects would not be begun until this was completed. The City's money is in the 1974 Budget. The bids received an the gravel at Prospect Park had been reCeived and the price of the high bidder, Western Paving, was $52,500.UO far off-site crushing. Alderman Hulsey stated this would take two years far extraction, ahd the City would lase a park far two years, and that this showed that Brannan had not been making an enormous profit. Motion by Alderman Hulsey "I move that the City renogotiates with Brannan to see if they will reconsider their proposal an the Park Concept at Prospect Park." Motion was seconded by Alderman Merkl. It was clarified that the rezoning they had desired would be entirely separate. Question was called and passed 6-0. Mr. Jerman stated a possible solution of the property at 35 Avenue and Owens regarding the ditch that was recommended to be left open by Wright-McLaughlin, was that it be left open and the rest of the property be developed, and also the pond at the corner will have to be determined whether the City should buy it and keep it open. Alderman Turner stated there is another problem of the 3D' high dirt and debris an one of the lots, and that this is a flood retention area. Discussion fallowed as to who is responsible to determine whether they are in the flood plain or not - the applicant or the City. Mr. Jerman stated that the Planning Department should determine this. Motion by Alderman Donaldson "I move that the City Administrator be authorized to negotiate with the owners of the property at 35 Avenue and Owens." Motion was seconded by Alderman Turner and passed 6-0. Motion by Alde~man Merkl adjournment at 11 DO p.m." passed 6-0. "I move we suspend or Rules pertaining to Motion was seconded by Alderman ~arra and Motion by Alderman Cavarra "I move that the public address system in Council Chambers be charged to Account 244 at a total cast of $858.56." Motion was seconded by Alderman Donaldson. Motion to Amend by Alderman Hulsey "I move that the City additional mixer and three mare mikes to be charged to the Motion was seconded by Alderman Donaldson and passed 4-2. Howard and Merkl voted "nay." buy one same account." Aldermen Question was called an Amended Motion and passed 4-2. Aldermen Howard and Merkl voted "nay." Mr. Jerman stated the Band Issue Projects should be referred to the Planning Commission far their input. 5 million in projects would be far drainage, and 2 million far streets. Council agreed to this except far Alderman Turner who voted "nay." Mr. Jerman stated that he had issued a Memo far a freeze far filling all vacant positions as a precautionary move far the balance of the year due to the status of the budget. City Attorney McCarthy reported that the Johnson Park lawsuit is being appealed by the nephew who is trying to gain back the park from the City, to the Colorado Court of Appeals. Alderman Merkl commented he thought the City was making a "terrible" trend, that wherever there was apposition to a zoning the City makes the area a park. City Treasurer James ~alone gave the Budget and Appropriations Report for the month of July 31 1974 - 62 1% has been received, and56% has been expended. He also gave the Police Pension Fund Semi-Annual Report. The fund balance is $178,940.80 MINUTES - August 29, 1974 - Continued -7- Rezoning Case WZ-74-18 was scheduled far Public Hearing. The applicant Dwaine Richter was requesting rezoning at 1-70 and West 32 Avenue from Residential-One-A and Agricultural-One to Planned Commercial Development which was an area recently annexed to the City by Ordinance 152. Dennis Wiqert of the Planntg Department stated 1. The parcel is not in the Flood Plain. 2. The parcel is presently vacant. 3. The applicant has submitted an outline development plan. A decision must be rendered concerning rezoning to PCD. Intensive scrutiny of the plan should occur at the Preliminary Development phase. 4. The State Geologist determined it is not feasible for gravel. 5. The proposed uses described in the developer's statement are generally consistent with Commercial-One zoning. 6. An irrigation ditch traversing the property will be relocated to fiilow along the west property line. This area will be planted, and with the surplus water, dense vegetation will grow providing a buffer effect for the residential area to the west. 7. Several design alternatives have been discussed with the developer. Depending upon uses approved, the appropriate overall design will be incorporated in the Preliminary Plan. 8. The Planning Dept. recommends approval because the Land Use Plan does not cover this area, and it recommends commercial because of its proximity to 1-70, and Planned Commercial Development will insure optimum uses and design. 9. Planning Commission recommended approval. 10. There is a problem at the intersection of 32 Ave. & 1-70. 11. The developer made a list of proposed uses which the Planning Commission modified, and the developer has agreed to the list which is attached to the Minutes. 12. Compatibility with the neighborhood to the west can be resolved at the preliminary stage by appropriate design. Mr. Martin Miller, attorney for the applicant stated 1. He apologized for being late. 2 The property must be rezoned within 90 days from the effective date of the ordinance pertaining to annexation. 3. At a later time, the proposed final uses can be reviewed. 4. He verified that the area was properly posted and published. 5. They presented exhibits of maps showing the elevations, boundaries, perimeter landscape plan, and 1 lot next to the houses as landscaped. 6. He questioned Mr. Richter the applicant, and he stated that a soil test had been done and that the land was not feasible for gravel ex- traction. 7. A noise level study had been done showing that the area was unsuitable for residential. 8. Coors has filed a plan Showing industrial use in the surrounding area, and that first Coors will mine for gravel which will be brought out along a service road along Mr. Richter's property. 9. Mr. Richter stated that the area can't be used for residential due to the noise of the traffic, and the fact of the indJstrial zoning. 10. He had a letter from Attorney Louis Bruna representing the people apposing the case previously, stating motel and restaurant use would be acceptable if the applicant proceeded through Jefferson County as there was basic distrust for the City of Wheat Ridge. 11. Mr. Richter admitted there is a definite traffic problem ~t 32 Avenue intersection, and it needs to be signalized. The County had attempted to widen the street by putting in Sidewalks and the homeowners had objected. 12. Mr. Richter stated that the uses he had listed were in the Commercial-One range, and that they are subject to the development plan, and that the list presented is what he will abide by. MINUTES - August 29, 1974 - Continued -8- Speakinq in Opposition were stated he Alan Demuth, attorney who represented homeowners of the Applewood Gardens area, and that he had the support of the Applewood Homeowners Assoc. He stated 1. It is a statutory right that adjoining landowners have an interest in their neighborhood. 2. The area surrounding the land in question is a prime residential area, and if commercial goes in the property value decreases, neighborhood chang~ 3. He presented exhibits with Exhibit A being Jeffco Planning Map 14 showing to the north is R-1, West is R-1-A, South is A-2, East is A-2 and that west of 1-70 there is no commercial, and that since then there has been the Coors plan development, and a residential change on 4/11/74 from A-2 to R-1-A. 4. The Coors plat shows that all of the A-2 land is left with the same acreage, and the industrial land use is in land already designated for that, and that it did not in fact change the basic zoning, and that there will be a special use given to remove the gravel, and con- sequently the land will be used for water storage. 5. 1-70 forms a natural boundary and barrier with the logical place to create a change of use. To create a Planned Commercial Development is in fact creating a new commercial area in a residential area. 6. The area is not going to become industrial, and the gravel removal process will take 2 years. 7. At present there is a traffic problem, and he recommended that a traffic study be performed before the concept of C-1 zoning is adopted, and thatlt~~ frontage road traffic will be increased. 8. He prese~tea ff5m Jefferson Co. Schools which stated the children have a traffic-pedestrian problem. 9. The applicant's landscaping does not show the depth, and it peters out. 10. The proposed uses include an inside warehou~which would not be aesthetic, a~d could be 5 stories, fast food services create policing problems, and are a collecting center for teenagers. 11. TtB use proposed is too intense for t he area. 12. He presented Exhibit E a subdivision plat of Applewood Gardens which showed when subdivided into R-1-A zoning that 1-70 was going to be put in. 13. Exhibit F - protective covenants of Applewood Gardens which stated are for single family residences in the area. A covenant is a promise, and to encourage another use is not ethically or morally right. 14. He felt the residents and the applicant could come to some conclusion if reasonable use is presented, and that he felt they would not be opposed to some commercial use. 15. The letter read from Mr. Bruno was inflammatory. 16 He felt the applicant had not complied with the outline development plan because some streets show on the plat but not on his plan. The uses given are broad, and are not "up to the spirit" of an outline development plan intention. He asked if there was a viable plan, and urged Council not to delude themselves, that if they grant C-1 uses they "cannot back off too eaSily." 17. At present there are houses being constructed within two blocks of the area which are next to 1-70. 18. If this is granted, it may show that if a developer waits long enough, he can get more intense use. Mr. Demuth presented petitions in opposition adjoining the property, and the City staff was asked to verify that the petitions would require the 3/4 majority vote rule for passage by Council. 1. He also presented aditional petitions in opposition with 1022 signatures. He called Mr. Bill Russel to testify who circulated the petitions and was over the other circulators who stated that it was explained to each person and that they had an opportunity to read it, and that in his opinion there was very strong feeling opposing any commercial development in a residential area. -9- MINUTES - August 29, 1974 - Continued Mr. Martin Miller objected to the petitions stating the zoning change doesn't state uses, and that it was totally misrepresented. Some members of Council stated that had received phone calls from citizens objecting to the manner the petitions were presented with very limited and improper information. Mr. Demuth, in answer to a question stated that one of his clients was Gary Holbruck, that he was paid by the Applewood Defense Fund, and represented approximately 14 people in the fund. He also answered that 3 of the 10 acres were included in the protective covenants. He stated the Jefferson Ca. long range plan showed lowest density residential in 1961, in 1973 showed a small area planned development and the rest of the area residential with 2-4 units. Speaking in Opposition were Marvin Ingo of 13177 West 33 Avenue, Golden who stated when bought his house, he knew 1-70 would be there, but not commercial. The letter astounded him, there was no demonstrated need for commercial. Mary Dodder of 3239 Xenon, Golden stated the objection to widening 32 Avenue was traffic Coors is not going to mine off all the golf course but will leave 9 holes, she would like the names of the people who objected to the handling of the petitions, and that the letter from Mr. Bruno was the wishes of only two people. Conrad Becker of 2121 Wadsworth Cwho owned the shopping center just east of 1-70) stated that he had commercial area presently that is vacant, that there is commercial uses waiting to be developed, that 1-70 is a buffer, and that the people are opposed. Wess Chrispelle of 14355 West 30 Avenue, President of the Applewood Homeowners Assoc stated the letter had been written without the knowledge of the Assoc. That they supported R-C and R-C-1 and some motel use, and that they want a good type of controlled commercial development, and that they hadn't been able to get any idea from Mr. Richter on what he had in mind on two previous meetings. Mayor Abramson asked the applicant, Mr. Richter, if at the preliminary stage they would sit down with the opponents to find out what they want. Mr. Miller stated they would be willing to discuss their proposal with the residents, but that they shouldn't have the entire say. It had been stated by Mr. Richter warehouse use had been deleted. In summary, Mr. Demuth stated 1. The nature of Commercial-One uses in themselves are so intense they may be impossible to be compatible with a residential area. 2. He recommended a planned development with Restricted-Commercial or ReBtricted-Commercial-One uses. 3. The applicant will create a, island of commercial in a sea of residential. 4. The letter being brought up showed vindictiveness. 5. He asked the Council to ask their constituents if they would want commercial in their back yards aid the answer would be "no." The hearing was closed. City Attorney McCarthy stated the 3/4 majority vote rule does apply. Motion by Alderman Turner "I move we approve the OutliR~X~!~RmQ~th the uses that are proposed in this written statement with one exception which is 11.b. Small recreational vehicles, motor homes boat and travel and trailer sales and service excluding heavy equipment,Cwhich will be delete~ for the following reasons the propert~ is 19c9ted at a. major intersection of 1-70 the Planning DBpart~~h~~MB ~~aRR~~gr~b~~ission has recommended approval." Motion was seconded by Alderman Merkl, and passed 6-0. Mrs. Turner stated that the uses provided are for as many Restricted-Commercial and Restricted-Commercial-One uses and Commercial- One and that she felt this provided ample opportunity for all parties concerned to determine a proper plan that is suitable visually, architect- urall y etc. MINUTES - August 29, 1974 - Continued -10- Motion by Alderman i"lerkl "I move that Robert Blair be made a member of the Board of Adjustment" Motion was seconded by Alderman Donaldson and passed 6-0 It was announced that there was a vacancy for Alternate on the Board of Adjustment and the press was requested to advertise the vacancy Meeting was adjourned at 2 45 A M EXECUTIVE SESSION A decision on acquisition of property at 38th Avenue and Depew for park/open space purposes was requested by Mr Jerman on the Agenda The Council met in Executive Session following the regular meeting on August 29, 1974, to consider the acquisition of property at 38th and Depew for park and/or open space purposes The City Administrator re- rorted that both the Park and Recreation Commission and the THK Consultant Heport recommended that this parcel be acquired by the City The City Administrator also submitted information concerning professional appraisals complet~d on the property for the City and for the owner. The City appraisal showed a value of $103,000 and the owner's appraisal indicated a value of $180,000 for the 4.89 acres. The City Administrator explained that he had met with the owner and that the owner had stated his final asking price was $118,000. After further discussion, Council took an informal vote on the matter and the decision was to abandon any further efforts to acquire the property and the Council directed the City Administrator to so inform the owner. The informal vote was 4-2 against acquisition with both Councilmen of Ward II in which the property is located voting "nay" Meeting was adjourned at 3 00 A M '1 ) /~/ APP ROVED / y':';7Y~ I I / CASE NO. WZ-74-18 DWAINE RICHTER E (I~-e MINUTES - Page 11 8-29-74 1~ The following uses were recommended by Planning Commission 1. Business and professional office or medical and dental clinics. 2. Veterinary hospitals (small animal). 3. Service establishments as listed below a. Barber shops b. Watch and jewelry repair c. News and/or confectionary stands d. Beauty shops e. Pharmaci es f. Pick-up stations for laundry or dry cleaning g. Other similar uses 4. Post offices and banks, loan and finance companies. 5. Public, parochial and private schools (including private, vocational trade or porfessional schools), colleges, universities, pre- schools and day nurseries (Including those uses commonly accepted as necessary thereto when located on the same premises). 6. Community buildings, Y.M.C.A.'s, Y.W.C.A.ns, churches, libraries, parks, museums, aquariums and art galleries. 7. Parking of augomobiles of clients, patients, patrons, or customers of the accupants of adjacent commercial districts. 8. Restaurants when contained within professional buildings. 9. Other similar uses. 10. Stores for retail trade as listed below a. Business offices and agencies. b. Locksmith shops. c. 3.2 fermented malt beverages package outlets. d. Opticians, optical stores. e. Electronic equipment sales and service. f. Laundry (all types). g. Hobby shops. h. Newspaper office and blueprinting establishments. i. Rental agencies (excluding heavy equipment etc.) ], J 1r'~>"l.J_;'J ,LL 4; iLl' ~l~ MINUTES - Page 12- 8-23-74 ~ j. Other similar uses. 11. Stores for retail trade as listed below a. Restaurants, drive-in restaurants, ice cream sales and similar related uses. b. Small recreational vehicles, motor homes, boat and travel trailer sales and service excluding heavy equipment. c. Resort hotel or motel for transient occupancy. There shall be one thousand (1,000) square feet of gross lot area for each unit. d. Antique shops. e. Apparel shops. f. Applinace sales, outlets and service including incidental repairing on premises. g. Bakery shops employing not more than twelve (12) persons on the premises. h. Department stores. i. Electrical equipment and supplies sales and service with no outside storage. j. Florist shops. k. Retail food stores. Retail furniture stores. Hardware stores. Health clinics. Retail paint stores. Plumbing and heating sales and service with no outside 1. m. n. o. p. storage. q. r. s. t. u. v. w. x. Shoe repair shops. Retail shoe stores. Theaters (excluding drive-in). Variety stores. Creamery and mild distribution station. Dying and cleaning shops. Automotive parts sales. Other similar uses. 12. 3.2 fermented malt beverage package outlets, package liquor stores, lounges, night clubs, private clubs and bars.