City Council Minutes 1997 04 01 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

the intent to replace the Gateway Design Guidelines in the adoption of the CDDSG. Section 4 specifies that all commercial development would be required to comply with all requirement of the applicable commercial development design standards and guidelines. The CDDSG had been clarified to state that they apply to both retail and office development. Where there is a conflict between the CDDSG and the existing provisions, the more restrictive requirement shall apply. The ordinance changes the required notification distance of abutting property owners from 300' to 500', consistent with the existing Subdivision and Zoning Ordinances. Finally, the ordinance clarified that approval of a preliminary PUD plan does not create a vested property right to develop under the preliminary plan; rather, the approval entitles the developer to proceed with a final PUD application. Staff recommended that Section 7.5-a-2, concerning signage, be eliminated. The City Attorney briefed Wood just before the meeting concerning the final motions. The first motion would be to adopt amendments to Ordinance No. 1242, as proposed by staff on second reading. The second motion would adopt Ordinance No. 1242, as amended on second reading. Wood noted that Kohl and Company had submitted a letter reflecting their concerns with regard to Council's actions in the final draft of the Design Guidelines. Davidson called for public comments. Walter A. (Buzz) Koelbel, 5291 Yale Circle, Denver, Colorado, President ofKoelbel & Co., felt some of the restrictions start to affect some of the uses on the property that they had originally bargained for as it related to the annexation and the zoning of the property that they purchased from Homart. Also, they were concerned about competition. They felt if you become too restrictive, you are priced out of the market or it created an easier opportunity for them to decided to look in a different location. They are currently working with a 100,000+ s.f. user that cannot comply with the guidelines that are in place today. He wanted a memorandum (SEE ATTACHED) entered into the record that lists those items that remain unresolved and unacceptable and a letter (SEE ATTACHED) from their legal counsel, Larry Kueter. He pointed out that they are willing to work with the CDDSG with the ability to resolve the issues outlined in his attached memorandum. Steven Gittelman, 1331 - 17th Street, #602, Denver, Colorado, one of the managers of the HSG Louisville, Ltd. Liability Company, developer/subdivider of Parcel H (approximately 21 acres). Initially, when they got their preliminary development plan approved one of the subdivision requirements was that they install all of the perimeter landscaping and all the primary drives to the property. This had been completed and five different final development plans had come in for development for different portions of that property, leaving about six acres in three distinct separated parcels there. With all the roads and perimeter landscaping already in, a lot of constraints are set that are very limiting on what they can do on the final development on the balance of the property. He requested that Parcel H be exempted from these guidelines, if the ordinance passed. Becky Martin, 8252 Dudley Way, Denver, Colorado, representing Wol-Shing Shiao who is the owner of the 4.7 acre parcel between State Farm and Century Office Park, stated that their concern was that these guidelines, with the development that she is working on (Boston Market and Einstein Bagel), create standards that she was trying to meet or a prior purchaser of her parcel was trying to meet and