|
|
|
 |
PUBLIC HEARING
January 15, 2003 MINUTES
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT
Charles Choi, Chairman
Tom Quinn
Ed Peterson
Wilmae "Bunny" Malm
Bill Marino
Andrea Hollen
Ken Lloyd
STAFF PRESENT
Frank Gray, Director of Community Planning and Development
Roger Noonan, City Attorney
Vince Harris, Manager of Development Review and Enforcement
Chad Minor, Senior Planner
Sue Piercy, Senior Planner
Kara Mueller, Planner I
Jay Hutchison, City Engineer
Allen Albers, Principal Traffic Engineer
Dieter Magin, Civil Engineer III
Tina Dill, Planner I
Elaine Rosedahl, Secretary to the Lakewood Planning Commission
____________________________________________________________________________________
The following are the minutes of the January 15, 2003 Lakewood Planning Commission
Public hearing. A permanent set of these minutes is retained in the office of
the City Clerk and a tape recording is located in the department of Community
Planning and Development, City of Lakewood.
____________________________________________________________________________________
INDEX PAGE
RZ-01-002 West Virginia Subdivision 2
5955 W. Virginia Avenue
RZ-02-008 Fenton Car Wash 13
1400 Fenton Street
The roll having been called, Chairman Choi declared a quorum and the following
business was
conducted.
2. CASE NO. RZ-01-002 REZONING
CASE NO PA-02-003 PRELIMINARY MAP
West Virginia Subdivision
5855-5955 W. Virginia Avenue
Rezone from 1-R (Large Lot Residential) to PD (Planned Development) for 17 Single Family lots
TIM NELSON, Manhard Consulting, LTD, 8232 E. Park Meadows Dr., Littleton, representing Cayman Homes, Inc., introduced the development team and reviewed their request. He then made himself and team available for questions from the Commission.
KARA MUELLER, entered into the record the Comprehensive Plan, Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance, South Alameda Area Plan, staff report and slides. She then reviewed her staff report and asked Planning Commission to approve this rezoning and preliminary map.
NANCY WELCH, 424 So. Eaton St., was concerned with water, traffic and children. Ms. Welch likes low density and although the houses will be very nice wondered how the applicant got approval for water to this new development. She did not want more houses built in this area since the traffic on Virginia is already very busy, and the children are all over this street. Fire trucks also use Virginia when answering calls at the senior home on Eaton, and she was amazed that staff could take pictures of Virginia Street with no cars visible. Ms. Welch said her basement already gets flooded and with this development she will get flooded more.
SHEILA HARPER, 5630 W. Dakota, wanted to know if the sanitary sewer line will be tied into her sewer line since the line is very small. She confirmed what Ms. Welsh testified about storm drainage and traffic.
JOHN HOLZWARTH, 5805 W. Virginia Ave., asked the Commission to put themselves on West Virginia with large lot homes, and this proposal calls for the homes to be as close as six-feet between houses. The proposal depicts traffic entering and exiting on Virginia Street and he suggested the development exit onto Harlan Street not Virginia Street. Mr. Holzwarth ended by saying the people at this meeting do not want this development.
SUSAN PAX, 5740 W. Virginia Ave., wanted to know why her detailed letter written to Kara was not mentioned, and was concerned with the elementary school one-half-a-block away. She said the developer wants to jam homes close together where the rest of the neighborhood has large lots.
JOE OBERLY, 490 So. Harlan St., said the traffic on Harlan has grown and grown over the years. He said people cut across his property to take a short cut. There is traffic already coming from the new development on Depew, the police do not monitor the traffic, and people speed on Virginia and Harlan. Mr. Oberly did not want this new development in this neighborhood.
VANESSA NUNEZ, 5950 W. Virginia Ave., a student at Deane Elementary School,
said she walks to and from school every morning and afternoon. She said she
has difficulty walking home because of the
traffic, and when it snows the slick roads are hard to get past, therefore,
if there are more cars it will be even more difficult for students to get home.
She asked the Commission to go and look at the street where she has to walk.
KARA MUELLER answered the question regarding water taps by saying that Consolidated Mutual Water and all utilities agencies did give confirmation they will be able to provide services to these lots.
TIM NELSON added, the question regarding where the sewer will be tapped will be off South Fenton Street to an existing easement on Lot 1, going then to Fenton Avenue. The City Engineers and the jurisdiction for the sewer line said it is sized correctly to handle this development.
KARA MUELLER said regarding the question of side setbacks, they will be five-feet, therefore, there will be at least ten-feet between the homes.
ALLEN ALBERS, Traffic Engineer for the City of Lakewood, said the number of trips generated by the 16 new houses would be about 150 per day, where there are currently 900 trips per day on Virginia. There are two peek hours, one in the morning and the other in the afternoon. The morning happens to coincide when Dean Elementary students are walking to school and during that rush hour there would be 10 to 12 vehicles coming out of this subdivision. The evening rush hour does not coincide with the school schedule and this subdivision would generate 15 to 16 trips at that time.
COMMISSIONER PETERSON wanted to know if there are future plans in the works to improve Virginia Avenue?
ALLEN ALBERS said there are no current plans. Two years ago staff looked at the possibility of sidewalks on one side of the street, however, Virginia ranked about 40th in potential projects.
COMMISSIONER PETERSON wanted to know how much of this site falls within the Jefferson Gardens Neighborhood Plan?
SUE PIERCY said a portion of this is proposal is adjacent to the Jefferson Gardens Plan, however, this site falls within the South Alameda Plan.
COMMISSIONER MALM remembered the Jefferson Gardens Plan does not allow sidewalks.
KARA MUELLER agreed, the Jefferson Gardens Plan calls for the rural streetscape to remain in the neighborhood, however, the South Alameda Plan calls for public improvements.
JAY HUTCHISON, City Engineer, added the City did have a sidewalk program in the past funded through the Capital Improvement Program, and that program expired for lack of revenue. The good news is that before that program expired, one sidewalk in the Deane Elementary area was constructed on the west side of Harlan Street completing the walk from Alameda to Exposition. There are no plans for additional sidewalks.
COMMISSIONER LLOYD wanted to know why sidewalks along Virginia were not required from the developer for this project?
JAY HUTCHISON said City Council adopted policies some years ago which listed improvements a developer would have to construct. On the street inside the development, sidewalks would have to be built to current standards which would be a detached sidewalk around that street. On Virginia there are no existing sidewalks to connect to the east or to the west, with two properties on the west before reaching Harlan Street. The sidewalk would float by itself and not solve any problems.
COMMISSIONER LLOYD thought an opportunity was missed and wondered if there could be a fee-in-lieu for future sidewalks.
JAY HUTCHISON said it is the City's general tendency to not take fee-in-lieu, but rather, to go ahead and get improvements built immediately if there is an expectation the improvements will be productive over time. In this case with properties to the east and west already developed there is no expectation the City will be able to fund additional sidewalks, and there will be no further development to the east or west adjacent to Virginia on the north side that would construct sidewalks.
COMMISSIONER MARINO asked what drainage improvements are to be made by the developer?
JAY HUTCHISON said the storm sewer connection from the detention pond to the northeast.
COMMISSIONER QUINN wanted to know if the drainage report was reviewed by engineering staff, and if so, what conclusions were drawn?
DIETER MAGIN, Civil Engineer for the City, said he reviewed the preliminary drainage report, and it requires a detention pond that throttles the release rate off site so that it does not cause additional problems down stream.
COMMISSIONER QUINN asked if the drainage would go to the gulch on the north side of the property?
DIETER MAGIN answered, that is correct.
COMMISSIONER QUINN wanted to know how the historic rate is calculated?
DIETER MAGIN said it is calculated with nothing built on the land such as concrete, or asphalt roofs.
COMMISSIONER QUINN wanted the flood plain issues addressed?
DIETER MAGIN said the flood plain runs along the north side of the property and goes from west to the east with 360 CFS running down during the 100-year storm. The majority of that is taken by a 54-inch RCP pipe that lies beneath the Martischang property and drains past this site to an open ditch to the east.
COMMISSIONER QUINN wanted to know if there have been any flood events in this area?
DIETER MAGIN thought there have been down closer to Eaton St., as the water is swiftly conveyed back behind the Martischang property, however, to the east the culverts that cross Eaton impede some of the water to back up and flow over the top of the road way.
COMMISSIONER QUINN asked if he was aware of basement flooding in this area?
DIETER MAGIN said the flood plain was not mapped when some of the homes were constructed in the past.
COMMISSIONER QUINN referred to the staff report where it states the finished floor elevations would be one foot above the adjacent 100-year surface elevation?
DIETER MAGIN answered yes, that is in compliance with the City's Ordinance.
COMMISSIONER QUINN asked if one-foot above the water surface elevation is considered adequate to protect property?
DIETER MAGIN said that qualification has been adopted by the City and is believed to be adequate.
COMMISSIONER HOLLEN wanted to know the rational for restricting basement construction for lots eight through twelve.
DIETER MAGIN said the rational deals in part with the detention pond since standing water has a greater potential to infiltrate around the contiguous foundations. In addition, there is a tendency to have higher ground water along a gulch area. Also, the people will be receiving "Certificates of Elevations" so they will not have to pay flood insurance on those properties, meaning, their lowest habitable floor elevation will have to be one-foot above the flood plain.
COMMISSIONER PETERSON asked if there is any provision for lining the pond?
DIETER MAGIN said no, staff tries to get infiltration on a pond to improve water quality before it leaves a site.
COMMISSIONER PETERSON wanted to know if infiltration will effect lot one of the adjacent subdivision, and has there been a soils report?
DIETER MAGIN was not sure where the home sits in relation to the pond. He said
there has been a
Geological Study, however, this is only a preliminary drainage report. The indicators
are that this is clay type soil which is less conducive to transmitting water
through the soil.
COMMISSIONER MALM asked if there is any concentration of bentonite in this area?
DIETER MAGIN did not know.
COMMISSIONER PETERSON asked what the volumes are in the detention pond?
DIETER MAGIN said there are two volumes the City requires; one for the minor storm, and one for the major storm. The pond volume major storm is .28 acre/feet, the release rate is 4 CFS during the 100-year storm and the release rate for a minor storm or 5-year storm is .8 CFS which is monitored by the outfall structure at the corner of the pond. Water quality is improved by flattening the bottom of the pond and with the controlled release.
COMMISSIONER LLOYD noticed over two-years have passed since the neighborhood meeting and wanted to know if any changes occurred in that time?
KARA MUELLER said in the beginning the applicant asked for 17-lots, however, the structure of the lots and actual layout has changed. The density remained the same, however, this is a simpler layout, and they acquired another acre, making it a three-and-a-half acre site. There were two neighborhood meetings in 2000 and the Martindale Neighborhood Association registered with the city in 2002, with the South Alameda Area Plan adopted around that time. It was referred back to the neighborhood in October November to let the neighbors know it was still an active application. This application went through several case managers and engineers.
TIM NELSON added, they had several engineers which also delayed this project. The last Engineer simplified the plan and redesigned the road layout.
COMMISSIONER QUINN wanted to know if a geotechnical study has been done on this property?
TIM NELSON said there has been an extensive soil study, however, all those details get worked out during final engineering, and no bentonite has been found. He added the bottom of the detention pond is higher than the parking lot to the north, therefore, the water table is far below.
COMMISSIONER LLOYD wanted to know, under the current zoning, what would be the number of units allowed?
KARA MUELLER said it would be a density of approximately three-units per acre under the current zoning of 1-R.
SUE PIERCY added, depending on the configuration of the detention pond and
how the road would
work, she thought they could get nine to 12-units.
COMMISSIONER QUINN asked, because of it being the worse drought in recorded history, what would happen if Denver imposes additional water restrictions?
SUE PIERCY answered, the City is currently working on a water-wise landscaping brochure for projects coming into the City, and at this time the water district says they can serve this property. Staff will anticipate Xeriscaping in the final landscape, site plan design.
COMMISSIONER QUINN asked if water-wise criteria are established would that become part of the ODP for the property?
SUE PIERCY said it would become part of Article 15, which each property goes through to get a building permit.
COMMISSIONER HOLLEN wanted to know the potential for cutting a road through to Harlan?
TIM NELSON replied, this developer does not control any property abutting Harlan, with the exception of a 15-foot sliver fronting on Harlan. He was concerned that if they did achieve such an objective it would encourage cut-thru traffic, and the City discourages such designs.
COMMISSIONER HOLLEN wanted to know the target market, and the price they expect the homes to sell for, directing that profile toward affordability?
TIM NELSON said Cayman Homes is known throughout the community for developing an affordable product, and the value of these homes will be consistent throughout the neighborhood.
CRAIG WALSH, 9707 So. Red Oaks Dr., thought they would sell between $175,000 to $210,000 since some have basements and some do not.
COMMISSIONER MARINO wanted to assure Susan Pax that her letter was reviewed by this Commission, as it was included in the packet.
JOHN HOLZWARTH said he received the notice for this hearing ten days prior to this date, and that does not give a lot of time to organize ones thoughts, especially since the written statement has to be submitted ten days prior to the public hearing.
KARA MUELLER said the notification letter was mailed 15-days prior to the hearing which meets the requirement, and the applicant has certified they mailed the notification letter.
COMMISSIONER MARINO wanted to know the average surrounding lot size?
KARA MUELLER thought the lots would have to be at least 12,500 square feet, but did not personally measure the lots.
COMMISSIONER MARINO asked if the prior proposal to build 12-units was the proposal prior to the additional acre being added?
KARA MUELLER replied, there never was a submittal for 12-units, that question came from Ms. Pax asking how many homes could fit on the site without rezoning.
COMMISSIONER QUINN asked how many units per acre does it have to be to be considered low density?
KARA MUELLER said it would have to be under eight units per acre.
COMMISSIONER HOLLEN asked how many neighborhood meetings were held for this project, and how the developer addressed pedestrian safety especially for school children?
KARA MUELLER said she has not been the project manager for the entire submittal time, however, she believes there were two meetings.
CRAIG WALSH said Cayman Homes goes into areas in order to be cooperative, and the issue of children came up at the neighborhood meeting. There has to be dedicated right-of-way on all the properties where sidewalks could be built, and in this case, the sidewalk would run from their property to Harlan Street. They do not own all properties along West Virginia Avenue up to South Harlan Street.
COMMISSIONER LLOYD asked if those effected property owners would not grant right-of-way?
CRAIG WALSH said there was no follow-up by the City regarding the issue.
SUE PIERCY added, the sidewalk would have been entirely voluntary, as staff could not require sidewalks based on the comments by Jay Hutchison.
COMMISSIONER PETERSON asked if the 3-R lots to the east, in Virginia Heights, are fairly large?
KARA MUELLER said they are fairly large with duplexes. The required minimum lot size for a duplex is 12,000 square feet.
COMMISSIONER PETERSON asked how many units could be developed if this were to be a request for 2-R zoning and not a PUD?
KARA MUELLER said the lot sizes are over the minimum requirement for 2-R, and the only difference between this PD and the 2-R is the width requirement on some of the lots, therefore, she thought they would lose one lot.
COMMISSIONER PETERSON wondered why no research was done to ask the property owners if they would agree to improvements such as sidewalks?
KARA MUELLER said she found nothing in the case files to indicate that the applicant had pursued constructing voluntary public improvements along Virginia Street to Harlan Street.
COMMISSIONER PETERSON asked what the current traffic classification is for Virginia?
ALLEN ALBERS said Virginia could handle more than 900 trips in a day, and thought it would be at level service (A).
COMMISSIONER QUINN asked if there are any inconsistencies with regard to this project as compared to the Comprehensive Plan?
SUE PIERCY said this project is consistent with both the Comprehensive Plan and the South Alameda Plan.
COMMISSIONER QUINN asked if it would be possible to insert a condition requiring the applicant to comply with water-wise or Xeriscape guidelines?
SUE PIERCY said absolutely, and that could be a condition as part of the recommendation
as long as the applicant agrees.
CRAIG WALSH said they would have done that kind of landscaping anyway.
COMMISSIONER LLOYD, based on the testimony at this hearing, the findings in the staff report, moved Planning Commission recommend City Council approve Rezoning Case No. RZ-01-002, subject to the conditions in the staff report, plus the condition to use Xeriscaping making it a requirement of the Official Development Plan. SECOND by COMMISSIONER MALM.
COMMISSIONER MARINO thought the water issue was addressed, although the neighbors should be asked to see if they would grant a right-of-way for voluntary sidewalks. Drainage issues were addressed and thought it comes down to the character of the neighborhood. In looking at surrounding zoning, and the low density, thought he could support this application.
COMMISSIONER MALM thanked Vanessa Nunez for coming to this meeting and expressing herself in front of this Commission.
COMMISSIONER LLOYD was troubled with having the neighborhood meeting two years
ago, and then
the neighbors getting a notification letter ten days prior to this hearing.
He was concerned because the developer offered to make improvements, but the
offer was not followed upon.
COMMISSIONER PETERSON agreed, as this area needs help with public improvements and was frustrated with the process as well. He was troubled with this application going on for two years without another neighborhood meeting closer to the time of the public hearing. He said he could find no reason to deny this under the current Comprehensive Plan, however, there has been an established land use pattern within this area, but it does not sufficiently address the integrity with the established residential area. He did not like the detention pond in its proposed location without sufficient soil information it could do harm downstream. He said he has great reservations with this plan, however, he will probably support this rezoning.
COMMISSIONER HOLLEN was concerned with the drainage, lack of information on site geology, soils analysis, and impact on the properties to the east; these reasons were strong enough for her not to support this plan.
COMMISSIONER QUINN was also concerned with the drainage and wanted to know in what way was the information regarding drainage not adequate?
COMMISSIONER PETERSON referred to the preliminary map where the bottom of the pond is basically 54 X 38-feet, sitting at a 38-foot contour. The existing contours show a drop off immediately to the north of the property that goes into the drainage area, and a flood way is designated in that area. The out falls indicate this will be piped to an RC pipe, and was concerned if this is releasing water over a 40 hour period that gives a lot of time for the water to go to its natural flow to the east. There is a structure on lot one of the adjoining subdivision, and holding water that long on this site would have an impact. He was aware these questions would be addressed at platting.
DIETER MAGIN added, the purpose of the non-basements was to keep this above the 100-year flood plain, and to get the future owners certified so they don't have to pay for flood insurance.
CHAIRMAN CHOI said this is a rezoning case, and the next case is the preliminary map. In spite of the fact these plans were submitted concurrently the zoning issue is the one the Commission will vote on, and then consider the issues regarding the actual plan.
COMMISSIONER HOLLEN was concerned if one were to approve rezoning there is implicit approval of the Preliminary Map because it is a planned development. She referred to the Comprehensive Plan where it prohibits under, residential development, paragraph two, any development that might present geologic soils drainage hazards. She did not feel the Commission has sufficient information to make that determination.
COMMISSIONER PETERSON could not come to that conclusion from the Comprehensive
Plan.
COMMISSIONER HOLLEN referred to paragraph 2(f) under Residential Development, page 42, where it says to prohibit residential development where geologic soils or flood hazards exist, unless they are remedied. She thought the interlocking of this provision with the fact this is a rezoning case on a planned development, and as part of the approval of the rezoning the decision cannot be severed from the preliminary map itself.
COMMISSIONER PETERSON referred to item (g) Compatibility with Surrounding Uses?
COMMISSIONER HOLLEN said that would as well, and circulation ties into Article 15 which has a lot to say about circulation in discouraging cul-de-sacs, mitigating the risk of cut-thru traffic, and not through closure but through traffic calming. She did not know the point in the process where the concerns about soils and drainage are addressed, but saw problems with the homes to the east.
CHAIRMAN CHOI said both cases are under consideration and serve as settings for airing those concerns.
Motion denied by a 4-3 vote (Choi, Peterson, Hollen, and Malm nay).
SUE PIERCY said because the motion for the rezoning was denied, she asked the Planning Commission to table the Preliminary Map case pending the applicant's opportunity to appeal this case to the City Council.
COMMISSIONER LLOYD asked how long the applicant has to appeal to City Council?
SUE PEIRCY said the applicant has to submit a letter within 30 days to appeal this decision to the Lakewood City Council, and then it has to go before the City Council within six months.
VINCE HARRIS added, the Ordinance specifically states that the hearing before City Council has to happen within six-months, and at this point in time the applicant has 30-days to appeal that decision by providing a response to the Secretary to the Planning Commission if they want to proceed forward to the City Council. The four Planning Commissioners will need to make findings as to why the motion did not pass for the record, and to be included in with the motion.
COMMISSIONER PETERSON moved Preliminary Map Case No. PA-02-003 be tabled. SECOND by COMMISSIONER HOLLEN.
Motion passed by a 7-0 vote to table Case Number PA-02-003 the Preliminary
Map.
VINCE HARRIS asked the Planning Commissioner's who voted against this rezoning
to state their findings for their nay vote, and to place those findings in the
motion.
"COMMISSIONER MALM my reasons for voting against this proposal is based primarily on a safety factor. I feel that unless there are additional improvements made in this neighborhood to protect the children who use this street, as far as Dean Elementary is concerned, I think the existing situation places the children at risk. I am familiar with the area and I have looked at this street and find it to be unsatisfactory as it exists. To put any additional traffic on there, which we can contemplate will happen, I think only exasperates the situation, that is not healthy and safe for those children. I have some serious problems with the drainage issue and I think those were seriously and pretty well blanket covered by my fellow Commissioners, and I would concur with everything that they have said. I think the drainage issues and the geotechnical examination of the soils in this area are rather sketchy and leave kind of a blank spot for me. I cannot really decide it is appropriate as presented, and those are my reasons Mr. Chairman."
"COMMISSIONER PETERSON my reasons for voting against this have to do with
our Comprehensive Plan under the Residential Land Use section, would be Article
II under goals, which would be residential compatibility. I do not find that
this particular application is in conformity with Item E, the Development Adjacent
to a Floodplain, a Site Plan, should use the
floodplain features as an open space amenity. The back side of Lots 8, 9, 10,
and 11 are adjacent to a floodplain and I don't believe they used the site for
an amenity. Likewise prohibit a residential development where a geological soils
or flood hazard exists, unless they are adequately remedied. I don't believe
the testimony was presented, at least to my satisfaction, that the potential
for geological and other hazards were effectively addressed, considering that
this was a PUD application rather than a strict rezoning. The last one would
be Item (G) 'Integrate and insure compatibility with surrounding uses in terms
of height while design, scale, setbacks, buffering, landscaping, circulation
evidenced by the site plan,' and thought there are circulation problems and
I don't believe the lots themselves, as designed in the PUD application, are
in conformance with lot designs that are currently existing in the area in the
Virginia Heights Subdivision which lies directly to the east and in the uplatted
area that lies directly to the west. Those are my reasons for voting against
this."
"COMMISSIONER HOLLEN to recap some of the points we covered in our discussion, I voted no primarily because of paragraph 2(f), Residential Compatibility, in the residential use section of the Comprehensive Plan, because in voting for this rezoning we would in effect be approving the ODP. I am concerned that that plan does not adequately identify or analyze much less remedy these potential hazards, especially for adjacent lots to the east, my primary area of concern."
"CHAIRMAN CHOI its very difficult to come up with something new when the
rest of the Commissioners have been so comprehensive, and I have nothing new.
My reason for denying, for voting against approving this particular scheme,
has to do pretty much with the sum total of the residential compatibility issue,
that segment of our Comprehensive Plan. By way of specific example the question
and answer sequence regarding the susceptibility of water infiltration from
the detention area or the retention area, having mitigated on site to the adjoining
lots, by ………….
(could not be heard) basements was in and of itself a very clear statement that
you recognize the RZ-01-002 AND PA-02-003 danger. Our Engineering Department
recognizes that infiltration is part and parcel of this scheme, lateral infiltration.
I take that into account when I look at the property not only adjacent, but
down stream where infiltration will flow initially in any event. Lot number
one on South Harlan Street - South Fenton Street cul-de-sac, although that resident
was not here to speak for himself, or I didn't hear him, that exemplifies the
incompatibility statement; in that, demonstrates recognition of site conditions
against which internally the project mitegates its own lots, does not the adjoining
one, and therefore, for me very seriously puts to the test the compatibility
issue, and to other degrees as well the other (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) and (g)
and all that. You know, I just wanted to point that out as a major example to
me as to what really tipped it for me that said, no, we are not being compatible
here. So there is my reason."
2. CASE NO. RZ-02-008 REZONE
FENTON CAR WASH
1400 Fenton Street
Rezone existing legal non-conforming car wash from the 4-R (Medium Density Attached Residential) zone district to the PD (Planned Development) zone district for the purpose of legalizing the existing use and for the potential future expansion of the existing car wash
RICHARD MILLER, 143 Union Blvd., introduced the applicant and gave a brief history of the property and added, since Mr. Al-Anazi purchased the property in 1999 there have been constant upgrades in the making of this successful business. Mr. Miller then made himself and the applicant available for questions from the Commission.
KARA MUELLER entered into the record the Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Ordinance, West Colfax Revitalization Plan, Molholm Area Plan, staff report and slides. She then reviewed her staff report and asked Planning Commission to approve this rezoning.
KAREN IRVIN, 1407 Chase St., supported the applicant and said he has been a wonderful addition to the neighborhood. She pointed to the surrounding residential homes and wanted the residential setbacks protected. She was concerned that the proposed bay furthest to the west violates the residential setback and wanted a plan that would comply with the existing setback criteria. Ms. Irvin said they are excited with the rest of the plan and look forward to the future upgrades.
TOM TERAN, 1401 Eaton St., said the applicant keeps a clean place and is a nice guy.
JAMES VINCENT, 1411 Fenton St., thought the whole neighborhood looks better because of what this applicant has already done.
COMMISSIONER MALM wanted to know how far into the residential setback the west
bay extends?
KARA MUELLER pointed to the map that showed the 28-foot residential setback required along a local street when there are no curb/gutter improvements, and as in this case setbacks are typically measured from the edge of asphalt. Approximately two-thirds or seven to eight-feet of the proposed bay extends into the residential setback. This use is, however, a commercial use and the commercial setback of 20-feet would be more appropriate.
COMMISSIONER PETERSON referred to page 4 of 5 on the ODP landscaping plan, and wanted to know how the landscaping would be installed if no curb and gutter is required along the right-of-way?
KARA MUELLER said Article 15 would apply, however, public improvements such as sidewalks are not required with this proposal.
SUE PIERCY added, staff would work with the applicant to install the appropriate type of edging to help insure compliance with the Article 15 Site Plan requirements, and allow the landscape materials to be properly maintained.
COMMISSIONER PETERSON wanted to see a building envelope.
KARA MUELLER answered, staff could make that a requirement.
COMMISSIONER LLOYD referred to page 2 of the ODP, wanted to know the front, rear and side setbacks, and how it fits with what is written on page two?
KARA MUELLER said the minimum setback from the front lot line would be ten-feet, however, it is measured from the lot line, which along with the required perimeter landscape area, adds up to approximately twenty-feet to edge of asphalt, which is the standard setback for commercial uses of this size and type.
COMMISSIONER HOLLEN said she was impressed with how well the business was maintained, however, while on a site visit two customers were blaring their car stereo's, therefore, she wanted to know how the noise will be addressed?
KHALED SAAD AL-ANAZI, 5004 W. 92nd Ave., Westminister, did not think he could eliminate the noise completely, but thought it could be kept down with an attendant on duty during most of the operating hours.
COMMISSIONER MARINO, based on the staff report and testimony at this hearing, moved Planning Commission recommend City Council approve Rezoning Case No. RZ-02-008, subject to the one condition in the staff report, with the inclusion noting the building footprint on the plan, plus including a maximum noise requirement on the ODP. SECOND by COMMISSIONER PETERSON.
COMMISSIONER PETERSON suggested using the current existing decibel level under the City Ordinance as the standard.
SUE PIERCY added, staff would reference the Noise Ordinance in the Municipal Code.
COMMISSIONER MARINO thought this application performs well for this neighborhood as well as respecting the neighbors.
Motion passed by a unanimous vote 7-0.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
COMMISSIONER MALM moved to approve the Minutes of December 18, 2002. SECOND by COMMISSIONER MARINO.
Motion passed by a 5-0 vote .
GENERAL BUSINESS
Election of Planning Commission officers for 2003.
Chair:
COMMISSIONER LLOYD nominated COMMISSIONER MALM for Chairman. SECOND by HOLLEN.
Motion approved by a 7-0 vote.
Vice Chair:
CHARIMAN CHOI nominated COMMISSIONER QUINN for Vice Chair. SECOND by COMMISSIONER MARINO.
Motion approved by a 7-0 vote.
Secretary:
COMMISSIONER PETERSON nominated COMMISSIONER MARINO for Secretary. SECOND by COMMISSIONER MALM.
Motion approved by a 7-0 vote.
COMMISSIONER COMMENTS
COMMISSIONER MARINO said he has been working on the National Media Relations Committee for more than a year in positioning the APA Conference in Denver. He said he received a note from Washington asking the City if they want to put forward any specific issues which the City can assign an expert speaker to, and to include that in the press materials. He asked for suggestions for a person to work through the list of issues, and potentially some site visits for some of the media tours they are arranging.
FRANK GRAY said there are three people in the City that are active, and they are Vince Harris, Roger Wadnal and Becky Clark, and suggested he contact any of the above mentioned
COMMISSIONER PETERSON thanked Chairman Choi for his leadership in 2002 especially for keeping the Commission on track while working on the Comprehensive Plan, as well as all his work behind the scenes.
COMMISSIONER MARINO also thanked Chairman Choi for educating him on the planning process.
COMMISSION agreed and all thanked Chairman Choi.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no other business to come before the Lakewood Planning Commission, the public hearing of January 15, 2003 was adjourned at 10:47 p.m.
Elaine Rosedahl, Secretary to
the Planning Commission
 |
||
Americans with Disability Act (ADA) Notice |
||
