|
|
|
 |
7 P.M. July 8, 2002
ITEM 1 - CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Burkholder called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Lakewood Civic Center South, 480 South Allison Parkway, Lakewood, Colorado.
ITEM 2 - ROLL CALL
Those present were: Mayor Steve Burkholder, Presiding
Tom Booher
Ray Elliott
Jackie Herbst
Bob Murphy
Jean Saum
Debbie Koop
Mike Stevens
Cheryl Wise
Barb Martin
Absent: Carol Kesselman
Others in attendance: Mike Rock, City Manager
Roger Noonan, City Attorney
Full and timely notice of this City Council meeting had been given and a quorum was present.
ITEM 3 - PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The Pledge of Allegiance was recited.
ITEM 4 - PRESENTATION - DRCOG Awards
Clear Creek County Commissioner Bob Poiret, a member of the Denver Regional
Council of Government (DRCOG), congratulated Lakewood on receiving two first
place awards from DRCOG, which awards local governments and their employees
for innovations in serving citizens. He stated Lakewood earned first place in
the Public-Private Partnership category for the Lakewood's City Commons Mixed-use
Development. Additionally, Lakewood captured first place in the Productivity
Improvement category for the process-mapping project. Mr. Poiret stated that
at the DRCOG awards dinner in April, Deputy Director of Community Planning and
Development, Rebecca Clark, and Investigations Chief Al Young, were recognized
for their effort with these projects. He presented two plaques to Mayor Burkholder
in honor of the winning projects.
ITEM 5 - PRESENTATION - LAKEWOOD LEGACY FOUNDATION
Eileen Schurman awarded a grant to the Lakewood Police Department for "Operation Keg." She stated the program helps create awareness for reducing alcohol consumption among teenagers. She presented the grant in the amount of $5,000 to Division Chief Clarene Shelly.
Chief Shelly explained that the program has been in operation for some time. She stated the City has been able to find ways to fund the program each year. It is essentially to assist police officers in providing some prevention in terms of teen alcohol use and abuse. She stated it has been very effective in the past and appreciated the Legacy's willingness to provide the dollars to continue the program.
ITEM 6 - PUBLIC COMMENT
Newt Vaughn, 8663 W. Hawaii Dr., Lakewood, CO stated he was a recent graduate
of the Lakewood Citizens Police Academy and found it a rewarding experience.
He stated he had been on five ride-alongs with the Lakewood Police Department,
Colorado State Patrol, and the Jefferson County Sheriff's Department. Manpower
is at a shortage in the departments. Mr. Vaughn stated he observed a fatal accident
that was the result of speeding. He stated that people need to slow down and
recommended doubling the fines for speeders on residential streets.
Sandy Kunzer, 4969 S. Laredo Pass, Sierra Vista, AZ stated he was coming forward
as an outsider and wanted to offer a few comments. He stated Lakewood has a
long history of good mutual cooperation with DRCOG. Mr. Kunzer suggested that
Lakewood prevail upon DRCOG to facilitate the standardization of watering schedules
throughout the Metro Area. He also congratulated Mr. Ron Ritschard for bringing
the City website into the 21st century. He stated the new design makes it a
lot easier for older residents to keep track of what is going on in the City.
John Fox, 1133 S. Eaton St., Lakewood, CO stated his concern for the lack of public access to open space in Belmar Park when there are special ticketed events held and fences are placed across the walking areas. He stated he attended two open houses that were held by the Heritage Center last month and that he did talk with Nina Johnson, the Manager of the Cultural Center, on both occasions. He stated he suggested to Ms. Johnson that since the map indicated that all of the Heritage Center is contained within the walkways, just prevent the vendors from using the walkways. Mr. Fox stated Ms. Johnson told him there were a couple of obstacles to that proposal. One is the vendors would like to get as close to Wadsworth as possible so that they have visibility from Wadsworth. The second issue is the contract language does not prevent the vendors or anyone else from spreading out and using both sides of the walkway. He stated a simple solution would be to prevent the vendors from using the walkways.
Gary Maxfield, 8965 W. 20th Ave, Lakewood, CO stated he has been trying for eight years to get the City's attention. Thanks to Ms. Koop and Mr. Murphy, things are finally starting to be accomplished on 20th Avenue. A gentleman helped him calibrate his radar gun; his gun was 3 miles an hour slow. He stated he wanted to thank the Police Department; they have been really giving out the tickets lately. Mr. Maxfield stated on the 3rd there was another accident on the street corner, while he was in front of his home. He stated a car swerved and rear ended another car and almost ran him down. He stated things are starting to calm down in the neighborhood. He stated he received another 30 signatures towards the government grant. He stated he wanted to thank Debbie and Bob for their efforts in coming out to his house and personally getting in contact with him. He has faith in them with these issues. The neighbors are really impressed with the help the Police Department is giving them.
Arthur Gardner, 1995 Garland, Lakewood, CO stated he watched the last City Council meeting and he said City Council could have been nicer to Mr. Maxfield at the end of his comments. He stated some statistics, there are 8,000 cars going down 20th Avenue per day, 50% are speeding, that's 4000 cars or 1,456,000 per year. There were 55 tickets issued last year. He stated those statistics were not acceptable. More tickets need to be issued.
Councilman Murphy stated he appreciated Mr. Maxfield's positive reinforcement; it is helpful to the Police Department, Community Resources, Public Works and everyone else that is trying to help alleviate the problems. He stated the statistic of 55 summons from all of last year was mentioned, that is how many tickets were issued in the first five months of 2002, 51 to be exact, so we are way ahead of our statistics from last year. Mr. Murphy stated they have formulated a 12-point plan with Gary's help and the contribution of a lot of department heads. The City is on its way to accomplishing nine of those twelve points. With everyone's help, there will be some improvements made.
Lorna Fox, 1133 S. Eaton St, Lakewood, CO, stated she looked at the City Council minutes for the April 8th meeting where Council voted to reinstate the contract for the architect for the Visitors Center at the Belmar Heritage Center. She stated the City Manager did say he would pass the Council's comments to the HCAC so they could arrange some sort of public forum and the citizens' input could be received. There were two open houses on the Belmar Park and Heritage Center issues. The plans for the Visitor Center and Heritage Center were presented. She stated there was not a forum for public input, but it was an information forum. Ms. Fox urged Council to revisit the issue of having some sort of open exchange of ideas where citizens, not just the HCAC, can give information and input about the park and the buildings that are currently there and plan to be there.
City Manager Mike Rock stated he wanted to address a couple of comments mentioned about the Heritage Center. He stated that in regards to special events they require a certain amount of compromise and inconvenience for everyone involved. He stated that the City would try to minimize those inconveniences to other park users. He stated that contracts have already been signed for this year's events and they did provide for access along the sidewalks. Mr. Rock stated the City would continue to look at that in future contracts and try to minimize the use of sidewalks and the inconvenience to others. He stated he did not want to promise such inconveniences would not occur. It is a community-gathering place. Some inconveniences will occur. Regarding the Heritage Center Master Plan, he stated that the Council did reconfirm its commitment to the Plan in March. It was stated that HCAC would hold some type of open house activity, but it was never the intent to open a debate over the Master Plan. In fact, the Council made it clear that they had adopted the Master Plan previously and they were sticking to the Master Plan and would continue to implement the Plan. The Visitors Center is the next major project and will begin construction this fall and be completed in 2003, with all the funding coming from grants.
Mayor Burkholder stated that this Council's commitment has been to parks and open space. When the City incorporated there were approximately 140 acres of parks and open space. Today there is over 7,100 acres. The City has added approximately 80 acres over the last couple of years. The commitment is still there and the city will continue to add as much open space as the dollars will allow. There are approximately 49 acres of open space per 1,000 people. There is four times the national average. Mayor Burkholder stated that the City is committed to open space.
CONSENT AGENDA - The following items from the Consent Agenda were read into the record by the City Clerk.
ITEM 7 - RESOLUTION 2002-44 AUTHORIZING AN AMENDMENT TO THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT FOR THE JUVENILE ASSESSMENT CENTER
ITEM 8 - ORDINANCE O-2002-23 REZONING LAND LOCATED AT 12303 WEST DAKOTA AVENUE, CITY OF LAKEWOOD, COLORADO
ITEM 9 - RESOLUTION 2002-24 AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE, SALE AND DELIVERY OF THE CITY OF LAKEWOOD, COLORADO $6,000,000 DEVELOPMENT REVENUE BONDS (CARMEL OAKS PROJECT), SERIES 2002, THE EXECUTION AND DELIVERY BY THE CITY OF A TRUST INDENTURE, A LOAN AGREEMENT WITH CARMEL OAKS OF LAKEWOOD, AND THE BONDS, APPROVING A NOTE, MORTGAGE AND CLOSING DOCUMENTS RELATED TO THE BONDS, AND AUTHORIZING OFFICIALS OF THE CITY TO DO ALL OTHER THINGS NECESSARY OR ADVISABLE WITH RESPECT TO THE ISSUANCE OF THE BONDS
ITEM 10 - ACCEPTING MINUTES OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Regular City Council Meeting June 10, 2002
Regular City Council Meeting June 24, 2002
ITEM 11 - ACCEPTING MINUTES OF BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
Lakewood Planning Commission Meeting May 1, 2002
Lakewood Planning Commission Meeting May 15, 2002
Lakewood Liquor and Fermented
Malt Beverage Licensing Authority May 23, 2002
Councilwoman Wise made a motion to approve the Council minutes; to accept the minutes of Boards and Commissions; and ordered all ordinances introduced on first reading to be published in the Lakewood Sentinel with public hearing set for the dates included in the ordinance; and ordered the adoption of resolutions, all of which were included in the Consent Agenda items introduced into the record by the City Clerk. The motion was seconded by Councilman Elliott.
Vote: 10 Ayes. 0 Nays. The motion carried.
ITEM 12 - ORDINANCE O-2002-19 - AUTHORIZING THE CONVEYANCE OF A QUIT CLAIM DEED FOR 20 FEET OF PROPERTY SOUTH OF 8405 W. ALAMEDA AVENUE IN EXCHANGE FOR A QUIT CLAIM DEED FROM THE PROPERTY OWNER FOR THE 30 FEET NORTH OF THE SECTION LINE ADJACENT TO THE SAME PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE SOUTHEAST ONE-QUARTER OF SECTION 10, TOWNSHIP 4 SOUTH, RANGE 69 WEST OF THE 6TH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, CITY OF LAKEWOOD, COUNTY OF JEFFERSON, STATE OF COLORADO
Councilwoman Wise made a motion to adopt Ordinance O-2002-19. It was seconded by Councilman Elliott. Vote: 10 Ayes. 0 Nays. The motion carried.
ITEM 13 - ORDINANCE O-2002-20 - AMENDING SECTION 1.26 BY ADDING A SECTION 1.26.030 OF THE LAKEWOOD MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING REVIEW AND USE FEES FOR REQUESTS FOR LICENSE AGREEMENTS, EASEMENTS AND OTHER USES OF CITY PROPERTY
Councilwoman Wise made a motion to adopt Ordinance O-2002-20. It was seconded by Councilman Elliott.
Vote: 9 Ayes. 1 Nay (Booher). The motion carried.
ITEM 14 - ORDINANCE O-2002-21 - ORDINANCE TO ZONE LAND LOCATED AT 903 SHERIDAN BOULEVARD, CITY OF LAKEWOOD, COLORADO
Edward Boyle, 7111 W. Alameda Ave, Lakewood, CO stated he was the Chief Operating Officer for Katchen & Co. His firm has been developing and managing property in Lakewood since 1962. They are a small firm that is well known in the community and they take pride in Lakewood and how their projects impact the community. Since April of 1997, they have been working with the owners of 903 Sheridan Blvd. to maximize its potential, other than vacant land. These efforts have taken 31 months of marketing as office space to no avail. At that time, they approached City staff to have the ability to possibly make an alternate use for this parcel of land. In October of 1999, Katchen & Co went into contract with the owners of this parcel to try to get rezoning to allow for condominiums and it was contingent on getting the rezoning approved. On December 29, 2000, a formal application for an ODP on Las Estrellas Condominiums was submitted. It then went to surveying and designing. On June 8, 2000, a neighborhood meeting was held. At that time many concerns were raised and Katchen & Co tried everything in their ability to take and address these issues. We met with the Two Creeks HOA in August of 2000, and did a presentation for them. At that time, we were under the understanding that they would give tentative support to this proposal and unfortunately, support was revoked later because of threats from some of the neighbors to the association's members. Efforts were continued and went to a preplanning submittal in December of 2000. In January 2001 comments were received back from staff. In February 2001, as well as again in May 2001, we resubmitted our application with changes. The project has continued to change in shape to adapt to the interpretation of City staff, the Comprehensive Plan, and multiple plans that impact this parcel. Final review by the Planning Commission was on May 15, 2000, and during that meeting the same issues were raised again. Katchen & Co. feels that the residents have not been appeased by all the changes that we have made and there were multiple other issues raised at that meeting which were addressed in the letter where we had requested the appeal of the Planning Commission vote. That was dated June 3, 2002. We are respectfully requesting that Council reconsider this application for rezoning, recognizing that Las Estrellas is an opportunity to provide affordable housing in Lakewood and an opportunity to be proactive in preventing urban sprawl and an opportunity to improve the Sheridan Corridor and an opportunity to create a beautiful gateway to the Two Creeks Neighborhood. I respectfully ask that you reconsider the rezoning of 903 Sheridan and approve the proposal.
Dru Siley, Project Manager, stated that staff would like to make a brief presentation to clarify the questions that arose during the Planning Commission hearing and elaborate on some of the issues for development of this property. He showed some photographs of the property to help orient City Council with the subject property. There are three development plans governing this proposed rezoning: the Lakewood Comprehensive Plan, the Sheridan Blvd. Strategic Plan, and the Mulholm Neighborhood Plan. The staff's opinion of the proposed development is that it is in substantial conformance with the Comprehensive Plan criteria. He elaborated on the criteria, stating that the property is located in the appropriate location along the Sheridan Blvd. arterial corridor. The proposal serves as a transition-zoned district between the lower density neighborhood to the south and west and the adjacent higher density residential properties to the north and west. The property is located on Sheridan Blvd. which is on a major transportation corridor and is served by RTD. Public improvement would be constructed as part of the development. That would include curb, gutter, and a 5' wide sidewalk along Sheridan Blvd. and West 9th Ave. The nearest park is Mountair Park, approximately 2,200 feet away. However, a green space activity center approximately 3,500 s.f. in size is being designated in the northwest corner of the subject site. The property is located 2,000 feet from the nearest community commercial node at 6th Ave. & Sheridan Blvd. Additional goods and services are provided by a smaller commercial node at 10th Ave. & Sheridan Blvd. The property is located on the northwest corner of 9th Ave. and Sheridan Blvd. The proposed development will have drive access to 9th Ave., which leads to Sheridan Blvd. and Sheridan Blvd. is an arterial street. The staff feels this proposal is in substantial conformance with the Comprehensive Plan.
Mr. Siley continued by stating that the proposed development conforms to goals of the Sheridan Development Plan. The elements included are to stop the deterioration of Sheridan Blvd, beautify the area, clean up trash and debris, identify cohesive mix of land uses appropriate to the corridor, address safety concerns with traffic along Sheridan, and implement more landscaping along the corridor. It is staff's opinion that the proposal protects and buffers the adjacent neighborhood and meets the intent of the Strategic Plan. This development will enhance the corridor by providing landscaping along Sheridan Blvd., architecture that is compatible with the surrounding properties, and public improvements that will add pedestrian access and safety. Also, a site lay out that will respect the future addition of a deceleration lane along Sheridan that will improve traffic safety along the corridor.
Mr. Siley stated that the proposed development meets the intent of the Mulholm Plan. It improves and maintains the quality of the properties in the area. Currently, the site is vacant and contains debris and is somewhat overgrown. The proposed development would serve to improve the current condition. It would limit encroachment of certain commercial and higher density residential development. This is not an encroachment of higher density residential as proposed, as it is an edged condition to the neighborhood. It is staff's opinion that it would serve the intent of the Mulholm Plan by its location and compatibility to the surrounding densities. It would create a better control of traffic in the area. The proposed development is adding curb, gutter and sidewalk, as well as a deceleration lane that will improve traffic conditions, as well as pedestrian safety in the area. Additionally, the proposed development would generate fewer vehicular trips a day than if developed under current office zoning. This is not low-income housing that is being proposed, it is affordable housing, which is currently in shortage in Lakewood. The proposed development is a "for purchase" and not a rental circumstance and can provide an opportunity to fulfill this goal of the Mulholm Plan.
Dru Siley addressed issues regarding a memo dated July 3rd that was sent to City Council. During the Planning Commission hearing, an issue was raised that initial notification of all persons was given within a 500' radius and all neighborhood associations within a 1,000' radius of the subject site. The proposal was in conformance with the Planning Commission hearing. The applicant, Mr. Boyle, signed an affidavit attesting that he mailed those notices and the signs were properly placed. For the City Council public hearing, the notification issue was revisited. The property management staff reviewed the notification list and updated it, if necessary. Again, all persons were notified within the 500' radius and all neighborhood associations within the 1,000' radius. The site was posted and within a few days of it being posted, those signs were removed by unknown persons. Four additional signs were provided to the applicant. The second set put in place was also removed by unknown persons. The third set of signs is currently in place on the site. The impact of the proposed development to the school system was also mentioned in the memo to Council. Dru Siley stated he spoke to Kathy Tully of the school district and was told that the development would not negatively effect adjacent schools since they are not at a maximum capacity. In speaking with Kathy Tully today, the schools are at a stable, if not a declining enrollment and would welcome additional students. In regards to the police reports filed involving the adjacent property to the north, Tiffany Square, that is Section 8 housing and it is rental property. There has been a history of a number of police reports in the last couple of years. There have been approximately 120 reports filed on that property. He stated staff would like to make clear that what is being proposed is a completely different sort of development. It is much lower density, it is an individual ownership type of property and it is a high quality type of architecture, and will be individually owned and maintained by an HOA.
Public Comments:
Carl Mayer, 5202 W. 9th Ave, Lakewood, CO stated he lives right across the street
from this development. He stated he was in agreement with the Planning Commission
feeling that it is not a good idea. Mr. Mayer stated he has lived there for
30 years and it is a dangerous high-speed street. Mr. Mayer stated people go
terribly fast down there. He stated children have to have a place to play and
if they go out on Sheridan they are going to be killed. He stated he did know
about the schools, but he heard some conflicting reports that the schools are
over crowded. Mr. Mayer stated there is more noise and would be even more noise.
He stated the trucks would block access to his property.
Celia Greenman, 935 Fenton, Lakewood, CO stated she lives a few blocks from the proposed subdivision and her comments are in regards to traffic. She stated Sheridan is a really busy street and she doesn't know how many times she has seen accidents on Sheridan. She stated she has called Pubic Works and tried to do something at 10th and Sheridan and finally got some satisfaction when they put in turn lanes at 10th. She stated there was no light at 9th, so she is not sure that a deceleration lane will actually help. She stated the turn lane is so narrow so it is very dangerous there.
Susan McConnell, 895 Benton, Lakewood, CO stated she was a board member of the Two Creeks Neighborhood Assoc. and she attended the Planning Commission meeting. She stated the neighborhood stand is one of rejecting the rezoning of 903 Sheridan. She stated she has been a resident of Two Creeks for 22 years and they have consistently rejected high-density housing. They have not rejected reasonable development. She stated at 9th and Depew, they are building 10 homes in a 2.5+ acre plot, which they support. Sixteen condos in less than a 1-acre plot is unacceptable. She asked Council to please help them in supporting the Mulholm Plan, the Sheridan Plan, Lakewood Comprehensive Plan, the West Corridor Frame Work Plan, and the Planning Commission in rejecting this land use.
Bob Fisher, 880 Benton, Lakewood, CO stated he was there to oppose the rezoning of 903 Sheridan. He is a member of the Two Creeks Neighborhood Board. He stated he was a Colorado native, a resident of Lakewood for 34 years, and a Two Creeks resident for 25 yrs. He stated Katchen & Co. and Mr. Ed Boyle requested to have a meeting with the Two Creeks Neighborhood Association and that meeting took place on June 8, 2000. There has been no attempt by Mr. Boyle or Katchen & Co. to talk to any of the board members or residents of the Two Creek area about the property for over two years. The Planning Commission questioned why we circulated the petitions over the entire Two Creeks area rather than in the immediate area of property in question. The second petition was only circulated from 8th to 10th Ave on Benton, Chase and Depew and to the homes directly across the street from 903 Sheridan in Lakewood. He stated he had gathered 75 signatures opposing the rezoning. He stated the proposed rezoning from office to multi-family is not going to benefit the City of Lakewood. There is virtually no tax base for residential property. He stated that, generally, residential buildings like this cost the city more than they ever bring in because of police and fire protection. He stated they don't have sidewalks, curbs and gutters and they are very happy without them. Mr. Fisher stated there is not enough on-site parking.
Kim Baker, 885 Benton St, Lakewood, CO stated she attended the Planning Commission meeting. Mr. Boyle would like us to believe the number of proposed units was reduced in response to the neighborhood objections, when actually it was to conform to the Lakewood building codes. She stated the landscaping flies in the face of the current water restriction proposed by Consolidated Mutual Water Company. She stated she did not want them to apply for a special dispensation to maintain new sod when all of the neighborhood's grass is dead. She stated she has taught at Mulholm and Stein Elementary and now at Creighton Middle School. Ms. Baker stated it is true that enrollment is down in Jefferson County based on all the movement in Douglas County. It is not down in the Mulholm Neighborhood. She stated the research shows lower class size increases achievement. We need more classrooms; there is no room for more classrooms. She stated there is not empty classrooms in Mulholm at this time. It is mandated by Jefferson County that they have a class size under 24, preferable under 20. She stated right now her son is in 4th grade and is going to school with 24 in his class. She stated she would like Council to please honor the Planning Commission and veto this plan.
Deb Jones, 7020 W. 13th Lakewood, CO stated she attended the Planning Commission meeting and wrote a letter. She stated she is one of the Co-Chairs of the Two Creeks Neighborhood. She stated she is concerned with the continued lack of communication that her neighborhood has had with Mr. Boyle and Katchen & Co. Ms. Jones stated that the neighborhood has been supportive of issues similar to this project. They are very aware that it takes a lot of communication and many hours of work. She stated that Katchen & Co. has shown little interest in becoming a partner with the neighborhood, and feels if the developer is so alienated, then there is little hope of having their buyers in this project's homeowners association join in collectively finding solutions to the problems they deal within the neighborhood. Ms. Jones asked Council to deny this request.
Walt Gobbert, 945 Fenton, Lakewood, CO stated when he built his house at 945 Fenton Street 30 years ago, 60 feet of property was needed for a single residence and 100 feet to build a double. Mr. Gobbert stated today they are trying to jam all this housing into a small area and it becomes high density. He asked for rejection of the proposal.
Warren Reams, 899 24 ½ Road, Grand Junction, CO stated he was in favor of the rezoning of the property. He stated he moved to 903 Sheridan Blvd. in 1928, when he was 8 yrs old. He stated when they moved onto it, it was a farm and that was consistent with the entire area. There were small farms, little homes, and lower middle class people. He stated he could not recall one incident of what might be perceived as an improvement or a change to the character of that neighborhood that was not the subject of resistance. Mr. Reams stated that when Sheridan Blvd. was two lanes and they wanted to make it four lanes, there was belly aching about it simply because of the fact that four lanes means more traffic, more congestion and they did not want that to happen. Then, when his dad and the neighbors, including Jack Brown, the Commissioner at the time, put together the paving on 9th Ave, you could hear the screaming from everywhere, "you are ruining our quality of life". He stated when there was talk about the change to schools or additional schools, it was a raise of taxes, we can't have that going on, we don't have that kind of money, we object to it. He stated his brother and he bought that property from their father's estate in 1977 and they worked it for 5 years. He stated they concluded to sell it and they put it up for sale in 1983 and it has been on the market for 16 years and they got only one contract for a convenience store and it failed because of zoning.
Dwight Reams, 110 Billington Dr, Holdenville, OK stated he was born and raised in the 903 Sheridan area. He stated they have been working on improvement in this area since 1977 and have had nothing. He stated when he and his brother purchased the property, it supported six to eight families. They tore down the houses and cleared the property. It has been their intent to improve the property and Lakewood.
Jean Marie Carson, 1015 Jay St., Lakewood, CO, stated she has lived in Lakewood for 25 years and in the Mulholm Area or Two Creeks Area for 7 years. She stated the Principal may feel there are openings in this school and has taken Denver children to increase the federal funding. She stated her son graduated from sixth grade and there had been 33 students in his class. The desks were so close that the teacher could barely fit between them. She stated she saw the students so environmentally deprived. More than half of them have special needs because they were not environmentally or socially stimulated before they came to school. She is not for this development because she does not feel there is a need for any more transient students in the system.
Rod Bowser, 840 Benton, Lakewood, CO stated he owned the property at 840 Benton, and was born and raised at that property. He stated he had issues with the traffic, the school, and such tight knit apartments. Mr. Bowser stated they looked like apartments and will probably look just like the apartments down the road. He stated he has watched his neighborhood go downhill in the last 30-40 years. He opposed the development.
Linda Marses, 800 Benton st, Lakewood, CO, stated she has not heard anything about the traffic that will be sent north up Benton St. She stated there is no light, except at 10th in that entire area, anyone going north has to come down 9th west, north on Benton, down to 10th and east to the light. That creates traffic problems for the school and the entire neighborhood. It is already congested trying to get north out of that area.
Loretta Hart, 880 Gray, Lakewood, CO stated they have already made the multi-family dwellings for the neighborhood. The Planning Commission has already stated the problems they have had with the adjacent property. She stated they have a neighborhood that is yearning to be revitalized and by granting this proposal, it would be degrading the positive growth going on at this time.
Sharon Vincent, 1311 Salisbury, Lakewood, CO, stated she has a few rental properties in the neighborhood. She stated there seems to be very many people willing to help us without listening to our input. There have been many, many nice properties in our neighborhood that we have been fighting with that have been allowed to be degraded, devalued, have been turned into lower income housing, and multi-family dwellings. She stated they would welcome the developer here to redevelop those properties
Councilman Murphy stated that the Planning Commission did deny this request last month with specific findings. The final vote was 5 to 1. He stated nothing in this proposal has changed since that vote was made. He stated, like the Planning Commission, he was disappointed that the Mulholm Plan was not included in the initial staff report. Councilman Murphy stated he had a couple of observations in regards to the proximity to open space and shopping. He stated the Planning Commission did not mention them in their findings, but did mention them in the staff report. The City's Comprehensive Plan asks that the development be within 1,300 feet of a park. This is within 2,200 feet. What has been done to make up for that is to include a 3,500 square foot recreation area. If you do the arithmetic, the number of people that might be living at that complex, 3-4 per unit, that is about 56 square feet per person, an 8x7 area. If the requirements beyond the Comp Plan are going to be stretched, it should be a little closer. He stated that if this was 2,200 feet from Bear Creek Greenbelt or Green Mountain Open Space, he might feel differently, but there is very little parkland in northeast Lakewood, 3,500 sq ft is not parkland. Councilman Murphy stated the shopping requirements have also been stretched. They are to be 1,300 feet for development of this density and they are at 2,000 feet from a node. What is being described at 6th and Sheridan, that includes a nightclub, a crematorium, a couple of gas stations, and a storage center. He stated that it is really not a neighborhood-serving node in his opinion. If the requirements are going to be stretched, it should be a little more valid. He stated he wanted to address long-range vision vs. enabling. Sometimes in a city that is built-out, we are reduced to a position of enabling as opposed to long range planning. We have a vision in the Mulholm Plan that shows that particular property to be commercial or retail. Councilman Murphy stated that he did not think the City should be taking a parcel out of the middle of that and making a temporary decision to residential. That is enabling, not long range planning.
Councilwoman Koop stated the citizens worked together with the City and put in their volunteer time to set a neighborhood plan in motion. The City Council adopted that plan. The citizens have a right to expect Council to listen to what that plan says. The Mulholm Plan does say what the neighborhood wants and what is best for the neighborhood and she would like to see that followed as best as possible. She asked how hard the City had tried to get commercial or trade along the corridor there instead of rezoning. She also asked what the priority of the Mulholm Plan was over the Sheridan Plan or the Comprehensive Plan.
Dru Siley stated the current market is zero market for office. Metro wide, the office market is between zero and minus zero and office use along that corridor is among the least attractive and least competitive. He stated he didn't think it would be realistic to expect offices along that corridor. There is a reason the property has been on the market for 16 years without any contracts. He stated there is simply no market for office and technical trade is a little more complicated. Staff is certainly looking long term at how to create technical and trade opportunities in the community, but again, the Sheridan Corridor is not going to be at the top of the list for technical trade organizations either. He stated that in reviewing the proposal, staff did factor in the Mulholm Plan and did frequently reference it with correspondence to Mr. Boyle. However, in writing the staff proposal, the Sheridan Corridor Plan was the overriding document that actually governs the direction of this rezoning.
Councilman Stevens stated he would like to thank all the neighbors for coming here tonight, prior to getting elected to City Council, he was pretty much known as the neighborhood radical. He stated as a neighborhood activist, often times what he looked at is what would be a win-win situation, what would be the worst-case scenario, what was the impact going to be. He stated looking through the material and looking at the location, he had to question why you would fight a 16 unit project when you could have the possibility of having an office complex which would generate much more traffic during pique times when your kids would be attempting to go to school and create a lot more safety issues. He stated with an office complex or a convenience store, the operations of business wouldn't necessarily end at 5:00, 6:30 or even 11:00 pm. Your neighborhood plan is pretty clear when it comes to the commercial. Councilman Stevens stated his question was what did the neighborhood really want. He stated he read the Mulholm Plan. It talked about the residents who worked on this plan would like to see single-family environment preserved throughout the areas, recognizing that higher densities are permitted on certain properties according to Lakewood zoning ordinance. It goes on to say that one of the goals is to limit the encroachment of certain commercial and high density residential development, create a buffer in transitional design areas to be implemented as properties redeveloped as higher density development and lower density, and single family uses. Councilman Stevens stated that he thought the property the neighborhood is contesting really does fall into these categories. He stated the plan goes into much greater detail where it says current zoning patterns allow for commercial and industrial properties to locate and expand into areas that are immediately adjacent to residential areas. Ultimately, residents would like to see the properties inside the area go toward residential or community-serving purposes with commercial and industrial uses limited to the arterial roadways that frame the area. However, specifically, the steering committee recommended future development of personal services such as dry cleaners, small convenient-orientated grocery markets, day care centers, hair salons and family-oriented establishments. He stated it was clear to him that the people putting the plan together were not looking for that type of development in this location. Councilman Stevens stated he would support the denial of this. He cautioned the neighborhood that denial of this development may open the door to something that may not be as good as this when it comes to commercial or other type of use. He stated that the neighborhood has been asked how they want their neighborhood to look and he is willing to honor their wishes. He stated they may get what they wished for.
Councilwoman Wise stated she thought it was very unfair to sit up on Council and not listen to what the neighborhoods want, especially when they have gone through the effort of putting a plan in place. She stated she has repeatedly witnessed the cooperation of the Two Creeks neighborhood. She stated they are very articulate and knowledgeable and has found them very reasonable and thoughtful to deal with over the last three years she has been on Council. She stated she would be supporting the denial of the ordinance.
Councilman Elliott asked to get clarification about a previous rezoning of this property as was mentioned earlier.
Planner Sue Piercy stated she was not aware of any other applications in the recent past for rezoning of the property.
Councilman Elliott stated he wanted the neighborhood to look at where they would be if they owned this piece of property and what they would want done on this piece of property. He stated he definitely wanted to caution the neighborhood that if this rezoning does not go through tonight, he didn't want them to have the expectation that the property is going to sit idle just because it has for so many years. As it is currently zoned, an office building could go in and they could get far worse than what is being proposed for this site. He stated he does have some concerns about their willingness to accept anything on that property. He stated that part of Sheridan is not real attractive in any way, shape or form, and what is going on there could have a far worse impact on the neighborhood than what this development would.
Councilwoman Saum asked if Mr. Boyle could describe the units and how large they would be.
Mr. Boyle stated he had a watercolor drawing of the project and showed it to
Council. He stated the property was zoned for a three-story office at the corner
of 9th and Sheridan. At that corner the buildings would be slightly higher than
three stories because an office building would have a flat roof and these would
have a pitched roof to make them more compatible with the neighborhood. He stated
that on the west side of the property they have designed only two-story buildings
to allow them to reduce the density. Mr. Boyle stated the units on the west
corner would have three loft units. They would be one-bedroom type units with
an open floor plan and a large balcony. He stated there would be no patios,
only balconies. Mr. Boyle stated some of the end cap units would be two bedrooms
without a study or dining area and there would be other
2- bedroom units with the possibility of having one room as a bonus room for
a study or a dining area. They are all two bedroom, two bath units. He stated
the two bedrooms with the bonus room would be about 1,200 square feet and the
two bedrooms would be 1,000 square feet and the lofts would be slightly larger
than 1,000 square feet. He stated the design was to shield the parking from
general pedestrian and car traffic through the area and shield the playground
area. This type of layout would be creating a buffer zone and less encroachment.
Mr. Boyle stated the playground area would be for use by all residents. It would
include barbeque grills and picnic benches. Mr. Boyle stated they were looking
at people who would be moving from an apartment into their first home and those
empty nesters who are selling their homes and want a comparable lifestyle but
in a setting that would reduce the responsibilities of homeownership. He stated
they were trying to market them at $140,000, slightly under the average home
which is at $150,000.
Councilman Elliott asked if they had considered reducing the density down even further.
Mr. Boyle stated they had discussed it but because of economic issues, it was not feasible. He stated they were required by CDOT to put in the deceleration lane, also required to pay impact fees for parks and schools. He stated with a lower density they would be trying to sell a $200,000 product.
Councilwoman Martin stated she is an advocate for affordable housing. However, the objections here are what are heard everywhere. There will be more traffic and more children no matter. That is a given with any project. She asked how the deceleration lane would help the project.
Mr. Boyle stated the deceleration lane would be for southbound people wanting to turn onto 9th Ave. It allows them to move into that lane and slow down to turn the corner, heading west on 9th Ave.
Councilwoman Martin stated she did not notice that much traffic on Sheridan going south. She stated there would certainly be a problem with the access to the property. She stated we all deal with it no matter where we live, that is a fact of life. Ms. Martin does appreciate the neighborhood organization; she knows many people there and how hard they worked to put this up. She stated she feels this development will be an improvement to the neighborhood.
Councilwoman Saum stated she does not like the way it looks now and just doesn't want to see it continuing like that. She stated it is neither fair nor right to compare this to apartments. Apartments are entirely different; these are rental units and are certainly transitory. She stated that homeownership encourages stability. This area needs stability and improvement. There is a need for affordable housing in the City and this addresses that need. She stated according to the information they got from Jefferson County Schools, this proposal would add seven students to Mulholm, two to the middle school and two to the senior high school; a total of 11 students. Councilwoman Saum stated that based on her observations, she would be voting against the denial.
Councilman Elliott stated in reference to Kathy Tully's memo, the proposed developments estimated cost of classroom facility to the students anticipated from this development would be $188,000. He asked if that's how much this development would pay in school impact fees to help cover their costs.
Dru Siley stated the school impact fee is a per unit fee.
Councilman Murphy stated the total would be about $12,000, about $750 per unit, that would be required to the school district.
Councilman Elliott stated that Mulholm enrollment numbers for 10/1/01 show Mulholm would have capacity. But when you get into the Wheat Ridge Middle School, or the Jefferson High School, they are at the point where they have more students than the current capacity of those schools. Even though we are only going to add a few more students, these schools are currently beyond the capacity and are projected to be beyond capacity.
Councilman Stevens stated it is not going to overtax the schools to any great degree. He stated going back to the impact of the traffic generated from this development, the possible traffic that would be generated from other uses can cause a problem. You are going to have times when peak times are going to be bad. He stated this could have been a salvable plan if the neighborhood and the developer could have gotten together. He stated that honoring the Mulholm Plan and the wishes of the neighborhood is critical and Council needs to abide by that. He stated he thought the developer could have perhaps persuaded the neighborhood this was in their best interest.
Councilwoman Wise asked if there was a legal distinction between a condo and a town home.
City Attorney Roger Noonan stated in a town home development, the owner actually purchases the building and the land underneath. In a condominium all you own is air rights, you own nothing in terms of the building and you are a member of a condo association. The association is responsible for the walls, halls, roof, and everything. The association owns the common ground and the ground under the buildings as well. There is a difference in terms of ownership, responsibilities and how it is managed. He stated these would be condominiums.
Councilman Elliott stated that by looking at the Comprehensive Plan and the requirements for this type of density in the Plan, he stated going against the Comprehensive Plan would not be prudent and he would support denial of the proposal.
Councilman Murphy stated the reason we have those spatial standards in the
Comprehensive Plan is to provide a certain quality of life that people move
to Lakewood to expect. The Plan is to be close to green space and shopping.
He stated he is supporting the motion to deny.
Mayor Burkholder stated the applicant has been extremely active in Lakewood,
a very good neighbor with their developments throughout the area, primarily
in the commercial area. He stated they did comply with what they were required
to do, really only hold one meeting. He stated he wanted to congratulate the
civility of this meeting, how the neighbors were precise in how they presented
their case. He stated he is voting for the denial.
Councilwoman Martin asked the City Attorney, according to Roberts Rules of Order should there be a negative motion made and can he explain how they vote.
Roger Noonan stated typically he advises the Council to have positive motions but there is no legal requirement that it has to be, so the motion is in order. He stated to vote yes on this is to deny the ordinance, to vote no would be to support rezoning the property.
Councilwoman Wise made a motion to deny approval of Ordinance O-2002-21. It was seconded by Councilman Elliott. Vote: 9 Ayes. 1 Nay (Saum). The motion carried.
ITEM 15 - ORDINANCE O-2002-22 - AUTHORIZING THE CONVEYANCE OF A 320 ACRE PARCEL OF LAND TO JEFFERSON COUNTY, AUTHORIZING THE ACCEPTANCE OF A COMMISSIONERS DEED WITH A REVERSIONARY INTEREST CLAUSE FOR THE SAME PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE SOUTH ONE HALF OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 4 SOUTH, RANGE 70 WEST OF THE 6TH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, CITY OF LAKEWOOD, COUNTY OF JEFFERSON, STATE OF COLORADO
Councilwoman Wise made a motion to adopt Ordinance O-2002-22. It was seconded by Councilman Elliott. Vote: 10 Ayes. 0 Nays. The motion carried.
ITEM 16 - GENERAL BUSINESS
A. Motion to accept the Petition for the Organization of the One Horse Business Improvement District and set a public hearing date for August 12, 2002 at 7:00 p.m.
Councilwoman Wise made a motion to accept the Petition for the Organization of the One Horse Business Improvement District and set a public hearing for August 12, 2002 at 7:00 p.m. It was seconded by Councilman Elliott. Vote: 10 Ayes. 0 Nays. The motion carried.
ITEM 17 - REPORTS
Mayor Burkholder stated a week ago today, City Council toured the Public Works Shops and congratulated the people in Public Works for the unsung job that they do.
He complimented the citizens for being responsible over the 4th of July, stating only 5 citations were issued in the City for problems with fireworks.
Councilman Elliott stated it was nice to not have all the fireworks going off past midnight. I think people took the fire concerns to heart and it was appreciated.
He thanked the Lakewood Sentinel for their picture of him golfing at the Homestead.
Councilwoman Saum stated Carmel Oaks ground breaking would take place tomorrow
at 6263 W. Jewell. It is part of the White Fence Farm Development and is a retirement
community.
Councilwoman Koop stated the O'Kane Park Neighborhood Association's 2nd Annual
Pet Fair is scheduled for Saturday, July 20th from 9-11 a.m.. She thanked Lakewood
Animal Control and Petsmart for their sponsorship. She invited the community
to attend and to please call her with any questions regarding the fair.
Councilman Stevens stated the Screening Committee is scheduled to meet on Thursday,
6:00 p.m,. to interview for Boards and Commissions. He asked his fellow Council
members to please r.s.v.p.
Councilwoman Martin stated Edgewater had an excellent fireworks show on July 3rd and thanked them for having the display.
Councilman Murphy congratulated the Public Works Department. Over the last few weeks much of north Lakewood had been repaved, the disruption was somewhat painful during the process, but it is beautiful now.
City Manager Mike Rock reported that there was an incident of a City employee who had misused a City credit card. He stated that when we found out about that we immediately instituted a number of things; we instituted a full investigation involving the Police Dept. We issued a press release notifying all the press outlets that this situation occurred. That has always been our approach if any activity occurs within the City, especially criminal activity, we want to be sure to let the media know and through the media let the public know that the incident has occurred and what our response to that incident is. The individual involved is no longer an employee of the City of Lakewood. We're still investigating and we will be seeking both criminal prosecution and restitution. Also looking at our chain of command, that at every level every supervisor appropriately reviews expenditures. Mr. Rock stated Council had received a memo that summarized the way the credit card program works. It stated it is a great system and is used by a number of employees. The majority of those employees have a $500 limit on the card and some individuals at higher levels have higher limits. It is a system that avoids a lot of wasted time and paperwork and allows employees to make purchases that people need to make in the field to keep their jobs going. Additional safeguards have been put in place over the past couple of weeks including mandatory attendance by all cardholders of a credit card procedure-training course. Mr. Rock stated that the City wants to learn from this incident and make sure it doesn't happen again.
ITEM 18 - ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before the Council, Mayor Burkholder
adjourned at the meeting at 9:25 p.m.
Submitted by:
Margy Greer, City Clerk
 |
||
Americans with Disability Act (ADA) Notice |
||
