The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About02/09/1981 ~IrY LOUNCIL MINUTbS - --- ~~}'Y _Qf_a.~r]_~tl'Lt~n)_G}~_L__ ~ <2[,0 R_A DO o ~~l?!_~i:lEY_~'_~~~~ COlO~~~ The Lity council t1eetinq '.'Jas convened by thelajor at 7 30 p m councilmembers present Pat Aiello, Bill Bowman, Kent Davis, Ken Lewis, Larry Aerkl, and Kay Ore ~ary Jo Lavarra and Louise furner arrived at 7 33 P In Also present City Clerk, Carol Hampt; City Administrator, 'rom Palmer; Li ty Attorney, John Hayes; Department [leads Iluqh Brolvn, charles Stromberg, and Hodger Youn~; staff; and interested citizens t~_~i~12 by tlr Merkl for the approval ot t.he 'linutes ot January 26, 19~1; seconded by 1r Davis; carried 6-0 PUBLIC UJi1l1bNi' ~~~Eill, 1834 S Yank Court, Lakewood, a member of the Executive Board of the Jetferson Symphony, spoke as their Respresentative He stated that he was issuinCJ tormal invitations to the Government Night Symphony tor February 22, 1981 PHUCLAdAi'IU1< BY rHE "lAYOl-Z ----~---~--- ~~ ---'---~-~ ---~ "fl<Ei.. ElH't,hPIUSE vvEEK" februarv ~ - 14, 1981 1{a~~~"-es~_on 'Has present to receive the proclamation PUBLIL HEARINGS AND ORDINANCES ON SECOND READING ---~~ -~- ----_._--_._-----,------_._-~.----------~-----_._- --------- --_..- --- Item 1 Amendment to the Subdivision Regulations, Section 2 C 1, relating to division of a lot with a single structure thereon dr Stromberg stated that the purpose of this amendment was to create an exception to the Subdivision Regulations, so that a property owner with one buildinq could subdivide each unit with the associated land without going through the normal plattinq procedures ~~i:l_yn~__~~~ee, 4171 Everett Drive, spoke in favor of this amendment Motion by Mr Aiello tor the adoption or the amendment to Subdivision Regulations, Section 2 C 1 relating to division of a lot with a single structure thereon, with the deletion of the last sentence "In such case, the provisions of these regulations must be followed" as being superfluous; seconded by Mrs Turner; carried 7 in favor, 1 abstention, Mr Lewis, who had previously stated that he had been in the process of condominiumizing his apartments for some time and felt there was a conflict; this was agreed to unanimously by Louncil (The amendment to the subdivision regulations is as follows "e Any division ot a lot or parcel of land which has located upon it a sinqle main structure and wherein that structure and associated land is to be divided into separate ownership, and so long as required parKing and access to a pUblic street is guaranteed to each owner therein by direct access, or through recorded ingress/egress easements of at least 12 feet in width, or parking easements, as may be necessary The intent of this exception is to insure that the area and setback requirements of the zoning Ordinance tor structures are met, but to allow subsequent division of an individual structure and associated land into separate ownership ~he exception shall not apply whenever it is desired to sell off land for the purpose of creating a new Duildinq site ") Item :2 Council Bill No 55 - An Ordinance providing for the approval ot Rezoning from Residential-Three (R-3) to Restricted commercial Une (kC-l) for land located at approximately 69~0 ~est 38th Avenue, City of ~heat Ridge, County ot Jefferson, State of Colorado (frank Pourdad) (Case No WZ-80-31) Council Bill No 55 was introduced on second reading by lr Davis; title read by the ClerK clr Stromoerq gave the statf comments and recommendations FranK Pourdad, applicant, was present to answer questions Victor -Robert~~-J6-~-5 0uay, and James Hi tchell, 7005'~ 37th Ave , spoKe Ir;-oppos{tion notion by fIr -Oa-;:'Ts-thatCouncil Bill 55 (Urdinance 44U) be approved TQrthe tollo'ding reasons Planning Commission recommends approval, rezoning is not inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan, and the Rc-l zone may be a good buffer oetween the R-3 zOhing south ot the property; seconded by Mr Bowman; carried 7-1, with Mrs furner votinq No, stating that the circumstances to justify tne zoning do not exist and represents intrusion ot Commercial into Residential use cIry COUNCIL MI~UTE~ February ~, 1981 Page -2- Item 3 Council Bill clo 56 - An Ordinance providing for the approval of Rezoning from Restricted Commercial (R-C) to Commercial-One (C-l) for land located at approximately 11722 ~ 44th Avenue, city of ~heat Ridge, Lounty of Jefferson, State of Lolorado (Alvin L and Dennis L Hoefer) (Case No WZ-eO-25) Louncil Bill No 56 was introduced on second reading by 1r Lewis; title read by the clerK rlr Stromberg gave the staff comments anrl recommendations ~':'_I212etl~_Jl~P~, Attorney, 3460 S Sherman, was present representinq the applicants, Dennis Hoefer, 8361 Dudley Court, and Al Hoefer, 5460 Newland No one was present to speak in opposition ~otion by Mr Lewis for the approval of Council Bill 56 (urdinance 441) [oi:---the followin'l reasons Planning Commission recommends approval, the neighcorhood has changed since the Comprehensive Plan was adopted, and this zoning would not change the character of the neighborhood, also that a view obscuring fence be constructed around any area used for outside storaqe; seconded by Mr Aiello; carried 7-1, witn ~rs Turner voting No ORDINANCES UN FIRbT READING Item 4 Louncil Bill 57 - An urOlnance providing for the approval of Rezoning from Agricultural One (A-I) to Residential Three (R-3) with conditions for land located at approximately 11551 west 44th Avenue, Lity of wheat Ridge, County of Jefferson, State of Colorado (Lynn Fightmaster) (Case No ~Z-80-28) Louncil Bill 57 was introduced on tirst reading by Mr Merkl; title read by the Clerk Motion by Mr Merkl that Council Bill No 57 be approved on first reading, ordered published, public hearing be set for Monday, 1arch 9, 1981, at 7 3U p m in City Council Chambers, Municipal Building, and if approved on second reading, taKe effect 1 day after tinal publication; seconded by Mr Bowman; carried 8-0 DE CIS ION ~ ,-kE SO L ~~~QN S L_ AN D_JiS:tf'.-~<.!~i9_ Item 5 ConJ'ent ~genda A Approval ot time extension for development of Stage 2 of kichter PCD 3 Participation ln Phase II of the Municipal Self-Insurance Pool Study C Authorization to obtain appraisals for Lena Gulch Schedule II properties o Authorize Mayor to sign Amendment II to Agreement 80-2 1 and Amendment I to Agreement 80-6 7 with UDFCD as regards Lena Gulch Schedule II Motion by Mr Merkl that pr[nted; seconded by Mrs "Lewis" named in the Lena the Consent Agenda Ore; carried 8-0 Gulch Schedule II Items be approved as Mr Lewis stated that the Improvements is no relation CITY AETORNEY'S MATTERS 1 Mr Hayes stated he felt a policy needed to be drawn up re activities on Lity-owned property lie and Tom Palmer will work on this and bring it back to Lity Louncil at a later date 2 That he had distributed the Planning Commission l-Zules on Public Bearings and wondered if City Council would like to consider an amendment to their rules Consensus- that he work up something and bring it back to Council 3 The detinition tor "Mobility Handicapped" had been inadvertently left out of the Handicapped Parking Ordinance and a revision will be brought in for first reading soon cITY COUNCIL MI~UT~S February 9, 1981 Page -3- COUNCILMEMdERS' MATTERS !i!~ Turr:!~~ asked that 1) drawings that pertain to rezonlngs have the dimensions of properties shown on them and 2) if a rezoned property does not front on the street, the drawings show the distance tram the street 1rs Ore 1) brought up the letter received from the Edgewater Mayor reguest:lng a meeting i'layor suggested a later Study Session; and 2) the sentinel Editorial regardinq not beinq able to hear at Study Sessions; she suggested that they be held at the Glass Conference Room Mr Aiello felt that the subject of the Court could be worked on ln a policy manner oy the Administrator and then brought to Council Majority of Council however felt that they would prefer to discuss it at the Study Session and then draw up the policy after that time Mr Lewis asked that on the Handicapped Parking Ordinance previously referred-to, some size of parking spaces be deliniated Mr Davis said that he had read that 10untain Bell had been denied an lncrease and wondered if anything had been done regarding the previous request from CML for money to fight the increase and no money had been disbursed, as we had not received sufficient information to make a decision Meeting adjourned at 9 25 P m - .-;? / '///-ct'/ /p1"/'~j') L~_~L_C--cl~<< _~~_L: ~---JC-__ Carol F Hamp, City~Ierk CFH; chj; { APPEOVED 2/23/81