HomeMy WebLinkAboutCouncil Packet 08/23/2010
City Council Minutes of August 9, 2010 1 CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO August 9, 2010 Mayor DiTullio called the Regular City Council Meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Council Members present:
Karen Adams, Karen Berry, Joseph DeMott, Joyce Jay, Tracy Langworthy, Davis Reinhart, Wanda Sang, and Mike Stites. Also present: City Clerk, Michael Snow; City Treasurer, Larry Schulz;
City Manager, Patrick Goff; City Attorney, Gerald Dahl; Director of Community Development, Kenneth Johnstone; Director of Public Works, Tim Paranto; Director of Parks and Recreation,
Joyce Manwaring; Police Chief, Dan Brennan; Interim Director of Administrative Services, Heather Geyer; Senior Planner, Meredith Reckert; Planner, Sara Showalter; staff; and interested
citizens. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF July 26, 2010 Motion by Mr. Stites for approval of the Minutes of July 26, 2010; seconded by Mrs. Sang; carried 7-0-1 with Council Member Berry abstaining
due to her absence on July 26, 2010. PROCLAMATIONS AND CEREMONIES Proclamation for Annual Carnation Festival Week, August 14-21, 2010 CITIZENS' RIGHT TO SPEAK Motion by Mr. Reinhart
to wave the Council Rules on time limits for Citizen Comments on the matters of the Citizen's Exploratory Committee Report; seconded by Mrs. Jay; carried 8-0. Ron Abo and Moe Keller
spoke on behalf of the Citizen's Exploratory Committee (CEC), reporting their findings and recommendations on the five forms of municipal government studied over the nine weeks the committee
convened (report included in this packet). The committee's recommendation to the City Council is to continue operating under the current form of government with a proposed Charter Amendment
providing for the Mayor to continue being elected at large but as a member of City Council with full voting privileges and no veto or executive authority. Nancy Snow encouraged all citizens
to read the Committee's full report. She contended that the committee's recommendations imply citizens should vote no on the two current citizen-initiated charter changes and that Council
should refer a third charter amendment to the November ballot that would directly conflict with them. Mrs. Snow also emphasized that the committee was formed by only particular members
of the
City Council Minutes of August 9, 2010 2 Council and was clearly intended to oppose the citizen petitions without the Council as a whole participating in its formation. Based on the
confusing nature of a ballot containing multiple, conflicting questions, Mrs. Snow asked Council to consider letting the two existing citizen-initiated ballot questions be answered alone
on the November ballot instead of referring a third one that would only confuse voters. Motion by Mr. Reinhart to wave Council Rules on time limits for citizen comments to allow Dick
Matthews to speak on behalf of the citizen petitions; seconded by Mr. DeMott; carried 8-0. Dick Matthews spoke on behalf of the petition proponents, presenting a summary of their recommendations
in favor of the two Charter Amendments, which include one changing the Form of Government, the other providing the Mayor veto power over the City Budget. City Clerk Michael Snow announced
that as of the afternoon of August 9th , 2010, both citizen-initiated Charter Amendment Amendment petitions had been certified as sufficient. Cheryl Wise expressed her dismay that the
report of the CEC on the various forms of government has been turned into a recommendation for Council to refer another ballot question which conflicts with the citizen-initiated charter
amendments. She urged voters to read the report and to take the time to understand the implications of each ballot measure before voting. Bill Mahar, a consultant with LiveWell Wheat
Ridge, urged Council to approve Phase 2 of the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan and believes the Plan will breed good economic development and better health in the community. He also
urged Council to consider funding in next year's Budget to construct a priority route identified in the Plan. Kim Calamino expressed disappointment that the CEC recommendations have
been posed as statements against the two citizen initiated Charter Amendments rather than a public education tool as it was intended. She believes citizens can discern the implications
of conflicting ballot questions should Council refer another based on the CEC recommendations. Ted Hyde is a community planner and spoke in support of the Council's consideration of
Phase 2 of the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan, citing social, physical and economic benefits to a community with established walking and bicycling infrastructure. Greg Seabart also
encouraged the Council to support the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan.
City Council Minutes of August 9, 2010 3 Public Input on 2011 Budget: Mayor DiTullio opened the Public Hearing. No citizens were present to speak. Mayor DiTullio closed the Public Hearing.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA Motion by Mr. Reinhart to add as Agenda Item 8, Resolution 44-2010 authorizing an Intergovernmental Agreement with the County of Jefferson regarding the Administration
of the respective duties concerning the conduct of the Coordinated Election to be held on November 2, 2010; I further move to add as Agenda Item 9 a Motion to Set the Ballot Titles for
CitizenInitiated Charter Amendments; seconded by Mrs. Sang; carried 8-0. 1. CONSENT AGENDA A. Resolution 39-2010 -approving an Intergovernmental Agreement between the Jefferson County
Department of Health and Environment and the City of Wheat Ridge for cooperative Mosquito Management Program in an amount not-toexceed $8,197.50. B. Resolution 40-2010 authorizing submittal
of the application for a 2011 Special Opportunity Grant to the State Board of the Great Great Outdoors Colorado for the construction of a Skateboard Park in Discovery Park. C. Resolution
42-2010 -amending the fiscal year 2010 General Fund Budget to reflect the approval of a supplemental budget appropriation in the amount of $7,206.84 to the Department of Treasury Internal
Revenue Service (IRS) for the payment of 2008 Employment Tax Examination Liability. D. Resolution 43-2010 -supporting the Denver Regional Council of Governments (DRCOG) Comprehensive
Joint Application to the US Department of Housing and Urban Development Sustainable Communities Regional Planning Grant Program. E. Motion to approve renewal of RFP-07-32 Towing and
Impound Services to Connelly's Towing, Inc.
City Council Minutes of August 9, 2010 4 F. Motion to approve Award SOQ-10-03 On-Call Architectural, Engineering, and related Consulting/Design Services. Consent Agenda was introduced
and read by Mrs. Langworthy. Motion by Mrs. Langworthy for approval of the Consent Agenda; seconded by Mr. Reinhart; carried 8-0. PUBLIC HEARINGS AND ORDINANCES ON SECOND READING 2.
Council Bill 14-2010 -amending Articles II and VI of Chapter 26 concerning Accessory Buildings on properties with Commercial or Industrial Zoning. Mayor DiTullio opened the public hearing.
Council Bill 14-2010 was introduced on second reading by Council Member DeMott. City Clerk Michael Snow assigned Ordinance No. 1468. Ms. Showalter presented the staff report. Mayor DiTullio
closed the public hearing. Motion by Mr. DeMott to approve Council Bill 14-2010 (Ordinance 1468) on second reading and that it take effect 15 days after final publication; seconded by
Mrs. Sang; carried 8-0. 3.A. Resolution 37-2010 -making certain findings of fact regarding the proposed annexation of two remnant parcels of right-of-way located in the east half of
Section 16, Township 3 south, Range 69 west of the Sixth Principal Meridian, County of Jefferson, State of Colorado. (Case No. ANX-1 0-02/City of Wheat Ridge. 3.B. Council Bill 12-2010
-An Ordinance approving the Annexation of two remnant parcels of right-of-way located in the East Half of Section 16, Township 3 South, Range 69 West of the Sixth Principal Meridian,
County of Jefferson, State of Colorado. (Case No. ANX-1 0-02/City of Wheat Ridge) Resolution 37-2010 and Council Bill 12-2010 were introduced by Council Member Stites. City Clerk Michael
Snow assigned Ordinance No. 1469 to Council Bill 12-2010. Mayor DiTullio opened the public hearing. Mrs. Reckert presented the staff report.
City Council Minutes of August 9, 2010 5 Mayor DiTullio closed the public hearing. Motion by Mr. Stites to approve Resolution 37-2010; seconded by Mrs. Langworthy; carried 8-0. Motion
by Mr. Stites to approve Council Bill 12-2010 (Ordinance 1469) on second reading, and that it take effect upon recordation of the annexation ordinance and map of the area annexed with
the Jefferson County Clerk and Recorder as provided by C.R.S. 31-113; seconded by Mrs. Langworthy; carried 8-0. 4. Public Hearing considering: (1) a motion establishing a Business Development
Zone to be known as the Senior Resource Center (SRC) Business Development Zone and (2) approving an Agreement to participate in said Zone in conjunction therewith. Mayor DiTullio opened
the public hearing. Item 4 was introduced by Council Member Berry. Mr. Johnstone presented the staff report. Dave Bandimere and his family have six residential properties in the vicinity
of the SRC area and supports the SRC being designated a Business Development Zone. John Zebaba president of the SRC, spoke in favor of the designation of the area as a Business Development
Zone and the extensive investments made to the project and the City of Wheat Ridge. Bob Timm urged Council to approve the maximum amount of Use Fees waiver for the Business Development
Zone. Mayor DiTullio closed the public hearing. Motion by Ms. Berry to designate Lot 1, Block 1, Senior Resource Center Subdivision Plat a Business Development Zone pursuant to Code
Section 22, Division 5; seconded by Mr. Reinhart; carried 8-0. Motion by Ms. Berry to approve an Agreement to Participate with the Seniors' Resource Center under the terms of the City's
Business Development Zone Program and set the amount of the refund of the eligible fees and taxes at 50 percent; seconded by Mr. Reinhart; Substitute motion by Mr. DeMott to approve
an Agreement to Participate with the Seniors' Resource Center under the terms of the City's Business Development Zone
City Council Minutes of August 9, 2010 6 Program and set the amount of the refund of the eligible fees and taxes at 100%; seconded by Mrs. Sang; carried 6-2 with Council Members Berry
and Reinhart voting No. SUbstitute Motion carried 6-2 with Council Members Berry and Reinhart voting No. 5. Resolution 38-2010 -approving a 28-lot Consolidation Plat on property zoned
R-1 C located at 3227 Chase Street. (Case No. WS-10-01/Seniors' Resource Center) Resolution 38-2010 was introduced by Council Member Berry. Mayor DiTullio opened the public hearing.
Mrs. Reckert presented the staff report. Mayor DiTullio closed the public hearing. Motion by Ms. Berry to approve Resolution 38-2010; seconded by Mr. Reinhart; carried 8-0. DECISIONS,
RESOLUTIONS, AND MOTIONS 6. Resolution 41-2010 -submitting a Ballot Question to the Registered Electors of the City, concerning City Wide Residential Trash Removal. Resolution 41-2010
was introduced by Council Member DeMott. Motion by Mr. DeMott to approve Resolution 41-2010; seconded by by Mrs. Sang; carried 8-0. 7. Motion to approve Bicycle and Pedestrian Master
Plan, Phase 2. Motion by Mrs. Langworthy to approve the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan Phase 2 Study; seconded by Mr. DeMott; carried 8-0.
City Council Minutes of August 9, 2010 7 8. Resolution 44-2010 -Authorizing the appropriate city officials to execute an Intergovernmental Agreement by and between the County of Jefferson,
State of Colorado, and the City of Wheat Ridge, Colorado, Regarding the administration of their respective duties concerning the conduct of the coordinated election to be held on November
2,2010. Resolution 44-2010 was introduced by Council Member Reinhart. Motion by Mr. Reinhart to approve Resolution 44-2010; seconded by Mrs. Langworthy; carried 8-0. 9. Motion to Set
Ballot Titles for Two Citizen-Initiated Charter Amendment questions. Mr. Dahl provided Council a memo outlining Council's obligations in light of the Clerk's certification of two petitions
to initiate Charter Amendment questions for the November 2, 2010 ballot (amended to this packet). Motion by Mrs. Sang to set the ballot titles for the citizen-initiated Charter Amendments
as set forth in Mr. Dahl's memo; seconded by Mr. DeMott; Motion by Mrs. Jay to amend the Form of Government Ballot Title to read: Shall the Home Rule Charter of the City of Wheat Ridge,
Colorado, be amended to provide for a Mayor-Council-Administrator form of government, and in connection therewith, providing that the executive power be vested in a Mayor who is elected
at large and who appoints a City Administrator to administer the daily affairs of the City, the administrator's salary to be recommended by the Mayor and ratified by the Council, and
making conforming changes to the Charter? Motion to amend seconded by Ms. Berry; carried 8-0. Main motion carried as amended 8-0.
City Council Minutes of August 9,2010 8 ELECTED OFFICIALS' MATTERS City Clerk Michael Snow reminded citizens that Tuesday, August 10th is Election Day. This is an all-mail-ballot election.
No polling place voting will take place. Voters who have not received a mail-in ballot should contact the Jefferson County Elections Department at 303-271-8111. Mail-in ballots may be
deposited in the ballot box at the City Clerk's Office between 7am and 7pm on Election Day. Mayor DiTullio asked the audience for a moment of silence in honor of Petty Officer 2nd Class
Justin McNeley, 30, of Wheat Ridge who was killed in action in Afghanistan. A moment of silence was held. Ms. Berry announced that the City of Wheat Ridge has been awarded a $624,000
competitive grant from DRCOG for the construction of a multi-use trail to be constructed along Wadsworth from 26th Avenue to 32nd Avenue. The grant requires the City provide $156,000
in local match, which includes the cost of staff time for designing the project. ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 9:12p.m. Michael Snow, City Clerk APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL ON JULY 12,
2010 BY A VOTE OF __ to Davis Reinhart, Mayor pro tem The preceding Minutes were prepared according to §47 of Robert's Rules of Order, i.e. they contain a record of what was done at
the meeting, not what was said by the members. Recordings and DVD's of the meetings are available for listening or viewing in the City Clerk's Office, as well as copies of Ordinances
and Resolutions.
City of "Wheat~dge ITEM NO: lA. DATE: August 23, 2010 REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION TITLE: MOTION TO APPROVE AWARD OF RFP-IO-24 ARMED GUARD SERVICES TO G4S SECURE SOLUTIONS USA, INC.
o PUBLIC HEARING [8J BIDS/MOTIONS o RESOLUTIONS QUASI-JUDICIAL: o ORDINANCES FOR 1sT READING o ORDINANCES FOR 2ND READING o YES ~a~1:1u~ Municipal Court Presidi u ge ISSUE: An armed
guard screens all persons appearing in the Municipal Court through a metal detector prior to entry into the courtroom. The guard maintains order in the courtroom while court is in session
and deters entry of weapons or prohibits banned items from entry into the courtroom. The guard maintains control and overall security for the protection of the court staffand general
public, deters crime, and may assist court staff with general matters as needed. PRIOR ACTION: Armed Guard Services have been provided by AM-Gard, Inc. since 2002 at a rate effective
in September, 2006 of $20.95/hour. On Jlme 30, 2010, nine proposals were received. Proposals were reviewed and ranked. Four companies were interviewed on July 30, 2010. References were
checked for the leading company. The selected company was G4S Secure Solutions USA, Inc., of Aurora, Colorado, based on their rate structure, qualifications and experience, references
and previous experience providing security for other municipal courts. FINANCIAL IMPACT: The funds for the Armed Guard Services are budgeted in the Outside Personnel Services line item,
account number 01-109-600-640, for which $26,400 was budgeted in the 20 I 0 Municipal Court Budget. V:IFormslCAFtemplate
Council Action Form August 23, 20 I 0 page•2A I BACKGROUND: Since 1997, the Municipal Court has contracted the services ofan armed guard through a private security company. The armed
guard services are utilized for an estimated 1,160 hours annually. The hours may vary slightly year to year depending on the finalization of the annual court schedule. RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends, based on rate structure, qualifications and experience, references and previous work with other municipal courts, approval ofthe contract award to G4S Secure Solutions
USA, Inc., to provide armed guard services for the Municipal Court. The term for this agreement is for one year, with the option to renew for four additional one-year periods, at the
sole discretion of the City. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to approve the award ofRFP-10-24, Armed Guard Services to G4S Secure Solutions USA, Inc., in accordance with the rate structure
stipulated in their proposal, with an hourly rate of $20.72, to be paid from account number 0 I-I 09-09-600-640. The Agreement may be renewed without further Council approval pending
acceptable performance and no increase in the rate structure. " Or: "I move to deny the award of RFP-I 0-24, Armed Guard Services to G4S Secure Solutions USA, Inc. , Aurora, Colorado
for the following reason(s) " REPORT PREPARED BY: Kersten Armstrong, Court Administrator Christopher D. Randall, Presiding Judge Linda Trimble, Purchasing Agent A TT ACHMENTS: I. Bid
Tabulation Sheet
PROJECT: RFP·10·24 ARMED GUARD SERVICES BID DUE DATEITlME: 06/30110 .. ..... # r City of -g::;r Whea.t Ri9ge . AMERICAN PATRIOT FIRSTUNE VENDOR AM-GUARD SECURITY SECURITY LOCATION LAKE'M)OD
CA SPRINGS " . .• I!~ "I' ~ :'"'" HI. ·~:l~:"to: " , SIGNATURE PAGE NO YES YES ACCEPTS VISA NO YES NO ILLEGAL ALIEN COMPLIANCE NO YES YES QUALIFICATIONS OF THE FIRM YES YES YES EXPERIENCE
YES YES YES CURRENT WORKLOAD, APPROACH YES YES YES FEE SCHEDULE YES YES YES HOURLY RATE 21 .33 20.12 22.00 KINGDOM CA I'~ ''c.' " ,-' .... , YES NO YES YES YES YES YES 21 .43 NORTH ATLANTIC
VENDOR MS LOCATION . ' t, .. ,:~ ~.~"" I"';", II loll YES SIGNATURE PAGE NO ACCEPTS VISA YES ILLEGAL ALIEN COMPLIANCE YES QUALIFICATIONS OF THE FIRM YES EXPERIENCE YES CURRENT WORKLOAD.
APPROACH YES FEE SCHEDULE 18.90 HOURLY RATE REQUESTED 8V:COURTS OPENED BY: AMY VANOER MEER, PURCHASING TECHNICIAN WlTNESSEO BY: UNOA TRIMBLE, PURCHASING AGENT OLYMPIC SOS l'AIIN CITY
WACKENHUT SECURITY SECURITY SECURITY SERVICES WA NJ DENVER AURORA " " ,. 1" ' " YES YES YES YES NO SEE BID NO YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES
YES YES YES 22.35 18.00 20.18 20.72 ....C GI E .c u ..I..V <
" . .' _ . City of ? WheatR.L.dge ITEM NO: Ie. DATE: August 23, 2010 REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION TITLE: RESOLUTION NO. 46-2010 -A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2010 GENERAL
FUND BUDGET TO REFLECT THE APPROVAL OF A SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET APPROPRIATION IN THE AMOUNT OF $2,620 FOR THE 2009/2010 JEFFERSON COUNTY DOG LICENSE FUND RECONCILIATION. D PUBLIC HEARING
D BIDSIMOTIONS ~ RESOLUTIONS Quasi-judicial: cbiefof~e ISSUE: DYES D ORDINANCES FOR 1ST READING D ORDINANCES FOR 2ND READING ~ NO jJ~I ... M4 City Manager The police department is requesting
that the fiscal year 20 I 0 General Fund Budget be amended to reflect a supplemental budget appropriation in the amount of$2,620 to account #01-203-700-721 to cover the costs of the
2009/2010 Jefferson County Dog License Fund Reconciliation. PRIOR ACTION: The City of Wheat Ridge has participated in the Jefferson County Dog License Fund since June 2007 through an
Intergovernmental Agreement with the cities of Arvada, Golden, Lakewood, Westminster, and Jefferson Jefferson County. BACKGROUND: In 2007, the City of Wheat Ridge joined an Intergovernmental
Agreement to participate in a county-wide dog licensing program to assist in identifying and reuniting dog owners and their dogs and to provide an additional revenue source to assist
in providing operations and future capital improvements to the Foothills Animal Shelter (FAS) as it works to meet the growing
Council Action Form -Dog License Reconciliation August 23, 20 10 Page 2 .el I animal control needs of the area. The benefit for cities participating in licensing is to keep future assessments
paid to the animal center consistent with future population and growth rates within each city and the county. Jefferson County has required a licensing of dogs in unincorporated Jefferson
County since 1994 and has found the licensing programming to be of great assistance to their animal control function. Jefferson County maintains and administers the licensing program
and database for all jurisdictions within the county. Per the lGA, the City agreed to reconcile the difference between the actual amount collected from license fees from June 1, 2009
to June 30, 20 I 0 and the amount owed, based on a 20% compliance rate of the estimated dog population within the City of Wheat Ridge. The actual amount collected was $25,770, which
is less than the owed amount of$33,390. The police department had budgeted $5,000 in anticipation of additional funds owed, however, due to the compliance rate, an additional $2,260
is due. FINANCIAL IMP ACT: The financial impact to the City is an additional $2,620 to meet the Intergovernmental Agreement. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends Council approval of the
resolution. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to approve Resolution No. 46-20 I 0, a resolution amending the fiscal year 2010 General Fund Budget to reflect the approval of a supplemental
budget appropriation in the amount of $2,620 for the 200912010 Jefferson County Dog License Fund reconciliation." Or, "I move to table indefinitely Resolution No. 46-2010, a resolution
amending the fiscal year 2010 General Fund Budget to reflect the approval of a supplemental budget for the Jefferson County Dog License Fund reconciliation for the following reasons:
" REPORT PREPARED BY: Jim Lorentz, Division Commander ATTACHMENTS: I. Resolution No. 46-2010 2. 2009/20 I 0 Dog License Compliance and Revenue Report 3. Invoice 2009/2010 Dog License
Fund Reconciliation
Reconciliation TITLE: CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO RESOLUTION 46 Series of 2010 A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2010 GENERAL FUND BUDGET TO REFLECT THE APPROVAL OF A SUPPLEMENTAL
BUDGET APPROPRIATION IN THE AMOUNT OF $2,620 FOR THE 2009/2010 JEFFERSON COUNTY DOG LICENSE FUND RECONCILIATION WHEREAS, the City Council recognizes the Jefferson County dog licensing
program to be an important way to assist in identifying and reuniting dog owners and their dogs; and WHEREAS, the provide an additional revenue source to assist in providing operations
and future capital improvements to the Foothills Animal Shelter (FAS) as it works to meet the growing animal control needs of the area; and WHEREAS, the Wheat Ridge Charter requires
that amendments to the budget be effected by the City Council adopting a Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Wheat Ridge, Colorado, as follows:
1. The City Council approves the payment for the 2009/2010 Jefferson County Dog License Fund Reconciliation. 2. The City Council authorizes the transfer of $2,620 from the General Fund
undesignated reserves to account 01-203-700-721 and amending the 2010 fiscal year budget accordingly. DONE AND RESOLVED THIS 23rd day of August 2010. Jerry DiTullio, Mayor ATTEST: Michael
D. Snow, City Clerk Attachment 1
· ~ . DI n :::T 3 . CD :I .. II) ColumnA ColumnB Jurisdiction Households # Dog Owning Households (.433 x total households) Arvada 43,891 19,005 Golden 7759 3,360 Uninc. Jeffco 76,019
32,916 Lakewood 65,797 28490 Westminster 43,998 19051 Wheat Ridge cl5,120 -6,547 200912010 Dog License Compliance and Revenue Report July 1, 2009 to June 30, 2010 Column C Column D Column
E ColumnF Column G Total Dogs Actual Actual # of Licenses # of Licenses by Licenses Compliance @20% Above (+) or Jwisdiction Issued by Rate Compliance Under (-) (1.7 dog/dogs Jurisdiction
(Col D/CoI C) Rate 20% per dog owning household) 32,309 6,666 21% 6,461 T205 5,712 1029 18% 1,142 -113 55957 14,744 27% 11,091 +3,653 48,433 7,115 15% 9,686 -2,571 32387 5697 18% 6,477
-780 11,130 -cl,718 --15% 2,226 -508 Column H Column I Column J Spayed Rate Amount Actual of License Owed (+) or Amount Fee for Additional Collected Current Amount July 1, 2009 Period
Contributed to June 30, to Fund (-) 2010 (Col G • coi H) (Col D • Col H) SIS -$3,075 $99,990 SIS +$1695 $15435 $15 -$54,795 $221 ,160 $15 +$38,565 5106,725 $15 +S11700 $85,455 $15 +$7620
$25770 Column A -Data Source: 2007 Population and Household Estimates (publishad October of 2008), Colorado State Demography Office Column B & C -Data Source: 2007 U.S. Pet Ownership
and Demographic Sourcebook. American Veterinary Medical Association Total Revenue Cas per IGA formula abovel $554,535 Less Administrative Costs (acrual)' $109,109 Plus Payments $59,580
Plus Additional RevenueNnaltered Dogs $91,571 Fund Contribution for 2009-2010 $596,577 • Actual Administrative Costs Expense Detail Julv 1 2009 -December 31 2009 January 1 2010 -June
30, 2010 Salaries and Benefits (2 FTEs) $41,355 $41,264 Office/License Supplies 53,855 $1 190 Postage 510267 $11 178 Total $55,477 $53,632 Grand Total: $109,109 Administrative costs
for the 201012011 license year are estimated to increase by 4% from the 2009/2010 year for an estimated expense of$113,473 due mostly to and expected increase in postal increases. We
wiU continue to work on ways to mitigate administrative costs. Prepared by Carla Zinanti, Animal Control Manager Jefferson County Sheriff's Office July 16, 2010 I
~JEFFERSON ~SHEruFF INVOICE JEFFERSON COUNTY SHERIFPS OFFICE AnN: BUSINESS OFFICE 200 JEFFERSON COUNTY PARl<mAY GOLDEN, CO 80401-2697 PHONE: (303) 271-5311 FAX: (303) 271-5357 Customer:
EIN # 84-6000774 WHEAT RIDGE POLICE DEPARTMENT 7500 W 29TH AVE WHEAT RIDGE CO 80033 Date Number Type Item Due Date Remark Date: Account: 07/30/10 1071965 Invoice No.: 37249 Page: 1 Amount
07/30/10 37249 Invoice 001 08/29/10 DOG LICENSE FUND PAYMENT 7,620.00 2009/2010 DOG LICENSE FUND RECONCILIATION. SEE ATTACHED ANNUAL COMPLIANCE AND REVENUE REPORT. Total Amount Invoiced
7,620.00 Balance Due 7,620.00 ' .' PLEASE DETACH AND SEND THIS STUB WITH REMITTANCE Invoice Date: 07/30/10 . Due Date: 08129/10 WHEAT RIDGE POLICE DEPARTMENT MAKE CHECK PAYABLE TO: .
JEFFERSON COUNTY SHERIFF'S: OFFicE REMIT CHECKS TO: JEFFERSON COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE ATTN: BUSINESS OFFICE 200 JEFFERSON COUNTY PARKWAY GOLDEN, CO 80401-2697 PHONE: (303) 271-5311 FAX:
(303) 271 -5357 Account: 1071965 TERMS: , . Invoi~ : 37249 Amount: 7,620.00 GENERAL FUND
, . • CIty of ? WheatRL..dge ITEM NO: I.t. DATE: August 23, 20 I 0 REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION TITLE: RESOLUTION NO. 47-2010 -A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2010 POLICE INVESTIGATIONS
SEIZURE FUND BUDGET TO REFLECT THE APPROVAL OF A SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET APPROPRIATION IN THE AMOUNT OF $4,480.35 FOR THE PURCHASE OF POLICE EQUIPMENT o PUBLIC HEARING o BIDS/MOTIONS ~ RESOLUTIONS
QUASI-JUDICIAL: ISSUE: o ORDINANCES FOR 1ST READING o ORDINANCES FOR 2ND READING DYES City Manager The Police Department has $3,500 budgeted for replacement of T ASERS in the 20 I 0
Budget. TASER International is offering a program whereby the older TASER M26 models can be traded in for $150, and that trade-in value used toward the purchase of the current model
T ASER X26. The Police Department currently has 12 of the older M26 models, which were scheduled for replacement over the next few years. The total replacement cost for tltis equipment
is $7,980.35. In order to take advantage of the trade-in program and replace the older M26 Model T ASERS, the Police Investigations Seizure Fund Board approved a $4,480.35 expenditure
from the Police Investigations Seizure Fund. PRIOR ACTION: No prior actions have occurred. FINANCIAL IMPACT: Funds in the Police Investigations Seizure Fund come from State and Federal
seizures and forfeitures related to law enforcement activities.
Council Action Form August 23, 20 10 Pagi 2 . ...!) . , BACKGROUND: The Police Investigations Seizure Fund, referred to as Fund 17, contains all proceeds from seizures and forfeitures
of property pursuant to State and Federal laws. These funds are required by law to be placed in a separate fund and used solely by the Police Department for purposes other than normal
operating needs. There was $25,000 budgeted in Fund 17 for 20 I 0 and that money has been expended on other projects. In
order to take advantage ofthis offer from TASER International, the Police Department is requesting a supplemental budget appropriation to Fund 17 in the amount of $4,480.35. The purchase
of police equipment is an approved use within the State and Federal asset forfeiture guidelines. The Police Investigations Seizure Fund Board, consisting of Chief Brennan, Councilmember
Mike Stites and District Attorney Scott Storey has approved the use of these dollars for this purchase. RECOMMENDATIONS: "[ move to approve Resolution No. 47-2010, a resolution amending
the Fiscal Year 2010 Police Investigations Seizure Fund Budget to reflect the approval of a supplemental budget appropriation in the amount of$4,480.35 for the purchase of police equipment."
Or, "I move to postpone indefmitely Resolution No. 47-2010, a resolution amending the Police Investigations Seizure Fund Budget to reflect the approval of a supplemental budget appropriation
in the amount of$4,480.35 for the purchase of police equipment for the following reason(s) " REPORT PREPARED BY: Dave Pickett, Lieutenant Daniel Brennan, Chief of Police A TT ACHMENTS:
I. Resolution No. 47-2010 2. Memorandum -Seizure Fund Request, June 14,2010 3. Memorandum -Seizure Fund Request, June 11 , 2010
TITLE: CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO RESOLUTION 47 Series of 2010 A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2010 POLICE INVESTIGATIONS SEIZURE FUND BUDGET TO REFLECT THE APPROVAL OF A SUPPLEMENTAL
BUDGET APPROPRIATION IN THE AMOUNT OF $4,480.35 FOR THE PURCHASE OF POLICE EQUIPMENT WHEREAS, the Police Department has $3,500 budgeted for the annual replacement of five TASER M26 units
in account 01-211-600-611 ; and WHEREAS, TASER International is offering a program whereby the older TASER M26 models can be traded in for $150, and that trade-in value used toward the
purchase of the current TASER X26 model; and WHEREAS, the Police Department desires to replace a total of twelve of the older M26 models, which were scheduled for replacement over the
next few years for a total cost of $7,980.35; and WHEREAS, the Police Department is requesting a supplemental budget appropriation in the amount of $4,480.35 to the Police Investigations
Seizure Fund, Fund 17; and WHEREAS, the Wheat Ridge Charter requires that amendments to the budget be effected by the City Council adopting a Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED
by the City Council of the City of Wheat Ridge, Colorado, as follows: 1. The City Council authorizes the transfer of $4,480.35 to the Police Investigations Seizure Fund, Fund 17 from
Police Investigation Seizure Fund undesignated fund balance and amending the 2010 fiscal year budget accordingly. DONE AND RESOLVED THIS 23rd day of August 2010. Jerry DiTullio, Mayor
ATTEST: Michael D. Snow, City Clerk Attachment 1
;?rl! If!?:"'-I dfl/IJ +1/6 (I'. /1 77c((d • , < .' _ ' City of '~Wheat~ge ~OLlCE DEPARTMENT Memorandum TO: Seizure Fund Committee THROUGH: Daniel Brennan, Chief of Police FROM: Dave
Pickett, Lieutenant Investigations Bureau DATE: June 14, 2010 SUBJECT: Seizure Fund Request -Additional TASER Units T ASER international is offering a promotional sale. The terms of
the promotion are that T ASER will reduce the price of an X26 T ASER by $150, provided the Department is upgrading M26 TASERs to X26 TASERs. The Department cUlTently has 13 M26 TASERs
in addition to the X26 model. These T ASERs are no longer suitable for our T ASER program. We have begun researching donating them to a department that wants to start a T ASER program,
but cannot afford to do so. Departments must take advantage of this promotion before June 30, 20 10. In 20 I 0, $3,500 was budgeted for TASER replacement. This is an annual expenditure
that is used to keep the supply of T ASERs at a usable level. The current price of a T ASER is $820. Less the $150 trade in, the price goes to $670. With the budgeted $3,500, the total
needed to upgrade the ten M26 TASERs to X26 TASERs is $5,210. Paliicipating in tltis program would allow the Department to receive $150 for each of its M26 TASERs, and to fulfill its
T ASER stock through 2012. It should be noted that we would not put the extra X26 T ASERs into the program immediately; and the TASER walTantee does not begin until the TASER is put
in service. This means that the T ASERs we use to maintain the program for 20 II and 2012 will have walTantees beginning in those years respectively. The Seizure Fund's CUlTent balance
containing State forfeitures is $5,998.48; and the Seizure Fund containing Federal forfeitures cUlTently has $82,363.59. 1 recommend that Seizure Fund money in the amount of $5,300 be
allocated to fund the conversion of 13 unusable M26 T ASERs to 13 X26 T ASERs which will support our TASER program for 20 I 0, 20 II and 2012. APPROVED LJ~~ Waniel . ennan Cltief of
Police Comments: DATE ~/~ ~/~ NOT APPROVED Daniel G. Brennan Chief of Police ----------------------------------------------------Attachment 2
Seizure Fund Request -Additional TASER Units June 14, 2010 Page 2 DATE Mike Stites I~ II '-+010 If) Wheat Ridge Councilmember NOT APPROVED Mike Stites Wheat Ridge Counci 1m ember Comments:
__________________________ _ APPROVED Scott Storey, District Attorney Jefferson County I S1 Judicial District DATE NOT APPROVED Scott Storey, District Attorney Jefferson County I S1
Judicial District Comments: __________________________ _
05/15/2010 14:01 3032715943 06J;~/<~ : 0 08' 42 FAX 3032320792 ADMINISTRATION WR POLICE 2320792 Seizure Fund Request -Additional TASER Units June 14, 2010 Page 2 DATE NOT APPROVED Mike
Stites Id 1'-I(<40}() Mike Stites Wheat Ridge Councilmember Wheat Ridgo Councilmember Corruneo~: __________________________________________________ __ DATE NOT APPROVED f.,-I 0-10 Scott
Storey, District Attorney PAGE 04/04 /jj] 003/003 J eifer.on County 1" Judicial District Conunents: __________________________________________________ _
Lit\ III ~WhCaL)~ gc -! \' I I t .\ I I i I '.I ! <-.: Memorandum TO: Seizure Fund Committee TI-IROUCH: Chain of Command FROM: Dave Pickett, LieUlenantft4'J Investigations Bureau DATE:
Juncll , 2010 SUBJECT: Seizure Fund Request -Additional TASER Units. TASER intclll ati onal is offcring a promotio nal sa lc. Thc term s o rthe promo ti on are that TASER will reduce
the price of an X26 TASER by $ 150 prov ided the departmcnt is upgrading M26 TASERs to X26 TAS ERs. The depa rtm cnt currently has 13 M26 TASERs in s urplu s. These TASERs a re no longer
s uit able lor our TAS ER program and lVe had begun rcsearc hing giving them away to a depatimc ntth at want ed to s ta rt a TASER program but could no t a ffo rd to do so. De partme
nts mus t take ad vantage of this promoti on befo re .I une 30th, 20 I o. $3500 was budgeted in 20 10 fo r TAS ER replacement. This is an annual ex pe nditure th at is used to keep the
supply ofT AS ERs at a usa ble Icvcl. The current pt-iee of a T ASER is $820. Less the $ 150 trade in, the price goes to $670. With the budgeted $3500, the total needed to upgrade the
ten M26 TAS ERs to X26 TASERs is $52 10. Parti c ipating in this program would a llow the departm ent to get $ 150 for each of its M26 T ASERs and to set its TASER stock thro ugh 20
12. It sho uld be notcdtha! wc would not put the ex tra X26 TASERs into the program immedi ate ly and the TASER warrantee does not begin until the TASER is put in scrviee. This mea ns
that the TAS ERs we use to maintain the program for 20 II and 2 01 2 will have warrantees beginning in those yeas respecti vely. The Seiz ure Fund containing state fo rfe itures currently
has $5998.48 and the Seiz ure Fund cont a ining fede ral to rfe itures currently has $82, 363 .59. I recommend th at Sei zurc Fund money in th e all10 unt of$5300 be a ll ocated to fund
the con vers ion o f 13 unusa ble M26 TAS ERs to 13 X26 TASERs whi ch will suppo rt our TASER program fo r 20 I 0, 20 I I and 201 2. Attachment 3
Seizure Fund Request i\dditional T/\ SER Units Junell ,2010 Page # 2 Comments: -rJ1i.J I :> APPROVED D nicl G. Brennan Chi ef of Po lice DATE r-f;.f //0 i NOT RECOMMENDED .I illl Lorentz,
Comm<lnckr Support Services Di vision DISAPPROVED Daniel G. Brenn an Chief or Police
, . _ ' City of J?"Wheat~dge ITEMNO:~ DATE: August 23, 2010 REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION TITLE: RESOLUTION NO. 48-2010 -A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2010 GENERAL FUND BUDGET
TO REFLECT THE APPROVAL OF A SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET APPROPRIATION IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,850 FOR THE RENEWAL OF THE WRTV8 SCHEDULING SOFTWARE o PUBLIC HEARING o BIDSIMOTIONS I:8J RESOLUTIONS
QUASI-JUDICIAL: ISSUE: o ORDINANCES FOR 1sT READING o ORDINANCES FOR 2ND READING DYES I:8J NO ~ QllliuJdo1~ The City uses a software program provided by D.Co. Marketing, Inc., to schedule
the programming on WRTV8. The City's contract with D.Co. Marketing, Inc. runs from September 1, 2010 to August 31 , 2011. In order to continue to provide scheduling capability, staff
is requesting approval ofa supplemental budget appropriation in the amount of$I,850. The supplemental budget appropriation consists of transferring a total of$1 ,850 in Public Education
Government (pEG) Fee revenues from the General Fund. PRIOR ACTION: City Council approves funding for the license renewal of the scheduling software for WRTV8 annually. FINANCIAL IMPACT:
The requested amount of the supplemental budget appropriation is $1 ,850 for the renewal of the WRTV8 scheduling software. V:IForms\CAFtemplate
Council Action Form August 23, 20 I 0 Page ~ ~ U " I BACKGROUND: Per the City's franchise agreement with Comcast, PEG fee revenues may only be utilized to support equipment, software
and maintenance associated with the operation of WTV8. PEG fee revenues cannot be co-mingled with other General Fund revenues and the purpose of the funding is solely to support WRTV8
operations (not to include staff salaries or the purchase of programming). Additionally, staff tracks the balance of PEG fee funding. The current balance of available PEG fee funds is
$177,064.39. This total includes the 20 I 0 first and second quarter PEG fee payments. PEG fee revenues have averaged approximately $42,000 per year. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends
that City Council approve the supplemental budget request. Funding for the software renewal is not budgeted in the General Operating budget since PEG fee funding can be utilized for
this WRTV8 service. RECOMMENDED MOTION: " I move to approve Resolution No. 48-20 I 0, a resolution amending the Fiscal Year 20 I 0 General Fund Budget to reflect the approval of a supplemental
budget appropriation in the amount of $1,850 for the renewal of the WRTV8 scheduling software." Or, "[ move to postpone indefinitely Resolution No. 48-2010, a resolution amending the
Fiscal Year 20 I 0 General Fund Budget to reflect the approval of a supplemental budget appropriation in the amount of $1,850 for the renewal of the WRTV8 scheduling software for the
following reason(s) " REPORT PREPARED BY: Heather Geyer, Interim Administrative Services Director A TT ACHMENTS: 1. Resolution No. 48-20 I 0 2. D.Co. Marketing, Inc. Invoice for WRTV8
Scheduling Software Renewal
CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO RESOLUTION NO. 48 Series of 2010 TITLE: A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2010 GENERAL FUND BUDGET TO REFLECT THE APPROVAL OF A SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET
APPROPRIATION IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,850.00 FOR THE RENEWAL OF THE SCHEDULING SOFTWARE FOR THE WRTV8 WHEREAS, the City Council recognizes the WRTVS as an important communication tool in
informing the community about City programming and services; and WHEREAS, the use of PEG Fees can only be utilized for equipment, software and maintenance needed for operating Channel
S; and WHEREAS, the Wheat Ridge Charter requires that amendments to the budget be effected by the City Council adopting a Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council
of the City of Wheat Ridge, Colorado, as follows: A. The City Council authorizes the Renewal of the Scheduling Software for WRTVS. B. The City Council authorizes the transfer of $1,S50
from the General Fund undesignated reserves to account 01-111-700-755 and amending the 2010 fiscal year year budget accordingly. DONE AND RESOLVED this 23'd day of August 2010. Jerry
DiTullio, Mayor ATIEST: Michael D. Snow, City Clerk Attachment 1
Bill To D.Co Marketing, Inc. 27665 Forbes Road Suite #6 Laguna Niguel, CA 92677 City of Wheatridge 7500 W. 29th Avenue Attn: Accounts Payable Whealridge, CO 80033 USA P.O. No. Terms
Due Date Upon Receipt 6/28/2010 Item Descriplion , .. Rep '. ~ . Ship To City of Whe.tridge 7500 W. 29th Avenue Attn: Accounts Payable Whe.tridge, CO 80033 USA IOO-lss Date 6/28120 10
Account # Ship Date Ship Via 7/1120 10 Qty Rate Backordered SML-ARF ShowMaker Annual License. Covers from I 1.850.00 September I. 20 I 0 to August 31, 20 II. Subtotal Sales Tax (0_0%)
Total Payments/Credits Balance Due Phone # Fax# E-mail Web Site (949)367-1700 (949) 367-1734 annemarie@d-co.com www.d-co.com Attachment 2 Invoice Invoice # 16299 Project Amount 0 1,850.00T
$1.850.00 $0.00 $1,850.00 $0.00 $1 ,850.00
• _ City of ? WheatRl...dge ITEM NO: I.~ DATE: August 23, 20 I 0 REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION TITLE: MOTION APPROVING PAYMENT TO MURRAY DAHL KUECHENMEISTER & RENAUD, LLP FOR JULY
2010 LEGAL SERVICES IN THE AMOUNT OF $20,264 D PUBLIC HEARING ~ BIDS/MOTIONS D RESOLUTIONS D ORDINANCES FOR 1ST READING D ORDINANCES FOR 2 ND READING QUASI-JUDICIAL: D YES --.<7 L{~~7£
City Attorney ISSUE: Request to approve the July 31, 2010 invoices for legal services received from Murray Dahl Kuechenmeister & Renaud, LLP (MDKR). The MDKR services for the month of
July exceed the $15,000 limit on manager-approved expenditures; thus requiring Council approval. FINANCIAL IMP ACT: MDKR is within the estimated budget for legal services as projected
in the 2010 budget. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends approval of the invoices RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to approve the July 31 , 2010 invoice for legal services to Murray Dahl Kuechenmeister
& Renaud, LLP in the amount of $20,264." Or, V:IFormslCAFtemplate
Council Action Form August 23,20 10 Page 2. ~. j "I move to table indefinitely the approval of the July 31,2010 invoice for legal services to Murray Dahl Kuechenmeister & Renaud, LLP
for the following reason(s) " REPORT PREPARED & REVIEWD BY: Gerald Dahl, City Attorney Patrick Goff, City Manager ATTACHMENTS: I. Invoice Summary
Murray Dahl Kuec/,enmeister & Renaud LLP Attorneys at Law 1530 16th Street, Suite 200 Denver, CO 80202 Ph: 303-493-6670 Fax:303-477-0965 City of Wheat Ridge 7500 West 29th Ave. Wheat
Ridge, CO 80033 Attention: City Manager Matter Description Fees 53027 City Attorney: General $19,899.25 53027.14 38th Ave. Business Disl. $0.00 53027.15 Denver West Travel Ctr $0.00
53027.17 1-70 Dev. -Cabela's $0.00 53027.18 Pugliese Claim $0.00 53027.2 Municipal Court $165.00 53027.3 Personnel & Litigation $106.25 53027.6 WRURA $0.00 53027.9 Housing Authority
$0.00 Totals: $20,170.50 Attachment 1 luI 31, 2010 Dishs Total $93.50 $19,992.75 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $165.00 $0.00 $106.25 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $93.50
$20,264.00
_ City of ? WheatRt..dge ITEMNO:~ DATE: August 23, 20 I 0 REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION TITLE: COUNCIL BILL NO. 15-2010 -AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ARTICLE I OF CHAPTER 26 CONCERNING THE
PROVISION FOR CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL IN THE ZONE CHANGE PROCESS [8J PUBLIC HEARING o BIDS/MOTIONS o RESOLUTIONS o ORDINANCES FOR 1ST READING (07/26/2010) [8J ORDINANCES FOR 2ND READING
(08/2312010) QUASI-JUDICIALI J 0 YES 0_ A p ~: < 'fc;;mmunity Develr pme'nt Director City Manager ISSUE: The attached ordinance proposes an amendment to the zoning code to establish
a provision for conditions of approval during the zone change process. Currently, the zone change process provided for in Section 26-112 (private rezoning) recognizes recommendations
from the Planning Commission and approvals by City Council for only approval or denial of a request. The proposed language will allow for approval with conditions. In order to legitimize
an approval with conditions during the zone change process, there should be enabling legislation included in the code of laws. The Planning Commission recommended approval of this amendment
at a public hearing held on July 15, 2010. There were no suggested conditions of approval. PRIOR ACTION: None FINANCIAL IMPACT: There could be negative financial impacts to the City
in respect to litigation if a zone change is approved with conditions when there is no enabling legislation in the code.
Council Action Form-Case No. ZOA-10-04 August 23, 2010 Page 2 ~.l BACKGROUND: Section 26-112 lays out the process for private zone change requests. The process described in the code
allows for recommendations of approval or denial by the Planning Commission and final action by City Council for approval or denial. There is no mention of allowing approval of a request
with conditions. [n order to allow approval with conditions, there should be a basis in the code of laws. This anlendment was initiated based on the recommendation of the City Attorney.
RECOMMENDATION: Approve the legislation as proposed. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to approve Council Bill No. 15-20 I 0, a proposed amendment to Article I, Chapter 26, of the zoning and
development code regarding conditions of approval for zone change requests, on second reading and that it take effect 15 days after publication." Or, "I move to postpone indefinitely
Council Bill No. 15-2010, a proposed amendment to Article I, Chapter 26, of the zoning and development code regarding conditions of approval for zone change requests, for the following
reason(s) " REPORT PREPARED BY: Meredith Reckert, Senior Planner Kenneth Johnstone, Community Development Director A TT ACHMENTS: I. Council Bill No. 15-20 I 0 2. Dahl memo dated July
23, 2010 3. Planning Commission minutes
CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER TRACY LANGWORTHY ' Council Bill No. 15 Ordinance No . ....,.-, __ _ Seriesof2010 TITLE: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ARTICLE I OF
CHAPTER 26 OF THE WHEAT RIDGE CODE OF LAWS CONCERNING THE PROVISION FOR CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL IN THE ZONE CHANGE PROCESS WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Wheat Ridge is authorized
by the Home Rule Charter and the Colorado Constitution and statutes to enact and enforce ordinances for the preservation of the public health, safety and welfare; and WHEREAS, in the
exercise of this authority, the City Council has previously enacted Article I of Chapter 26 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws (the "Code"), concerning zone changes; and WHEREAS, the Council
finds and determines that provisions must be in place to allow approval with conditions during the zone change process. NOW THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO: Section 1. Section 26-112 of the Code is amended to read: Sec. 26-112. Private rezoning. A. Purpose. A change of any zone district as shown on the official zoning
map is permitted only when it is consistent with the goals and policies of the Wheat Ridge Comprehensive Plan and promotes the general welfare of the community. If a proposed amendment
is not consistent with the comprehensive plan, then the request may only be approved if the applicant demonstrates that the request is justified because of changed or changing conditions
in the particular area or in the city in general, or the rezone is necessary to correct a manifest error in the existing zone classification. A manifest error may include, but may not
be limited to, one (1) or more of the following: 1. Mapping errors, including incorrect boundary location or incorrect zone designation, or 2. Ordinance errors, including incorrect zone
designation, legal description error or typographical errors. The final decision on a change of zone expressly rests in the exercise of the discretion of the city council Attachment
1
and all applicants are advised there is no right to a change of zone of property. E. Planning commission review. The planning commission shall hear and consider any evidence or statement
presented by the applicant, city staff, or by any person in attendance at the hearing. The planning commission shall then make a recommendation to city council to approve, approve with
conditions, or deny the application, basing its recommendation upon the facts presented in the public hearing in consideration of the criteria for review as specified above. F. City
council review. City council shall review and decide upon all requests for change of zone, upon recommendation of the planning commission for approval, approval with conditions, or for
denial. Change of zone may only be approved by passage of an ordinance following the city's standard ordinance adoption procedures. Notice of public hearing shall be by publication,
letter and site posting in the manner provided in section 26-109 hereof. City council, in addition to to consideration of the planning commission record, shall hear additional evidence
and testimony presented and either approve, approve with conditions, or deny the ordinance. City council shall base its decision upon all evidence presented, with due consideration of
the criteria for review. Section 2. Safety Clause: The City of Wheat Ridge hereby finds, determines, and declares that this Ordinance is promulgated under the general police power of
the City of Wheat Ridge, that it is promulgated for the health, safety and welfare of the public and that this Ordinance is necessary for the preservation of health and safety and for
the protection of public convenience and welfare. The City Council further determines that the Ordinance bears a rational relation to the proper legislative object sought to be attained.
Section 3. Severability: Conflicting Ordinances Repealed. If any section, subsection or clause of this Ordinance shall be deemed to be unconstitutional or otherwise invalid, the validity
of the remaining sections, subsections and clauses shall not be affected thereby. All other ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this Ordinance are hereby
repealed. Section 4. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect fifteen (15) days after final publication, as provided by Section 5.11 of the Charter.
INTRODUCED, READ, AND ADOPTED on first reading by a vote of 7 to o on the 26th day of July, 2010, ordered published in full in a newspaper of general circulation in the City of Wheat
Ridge and Public Hearing and consideration on final passage set for August 23, 2010, at 7:00 o'clock p.m., in the Council Chambers, 7500 West 29th Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado. READ,
ADOPTED AND ORDERED PUBLISHED on second and final reading by a vote of to , this 23rd day of August, 2010. SIGNED by the Mayor on this _ __ day of _____ _ , 2010. ATIEST: Michael Snow,
City Clerk First Publication: July 29,2010 Second Publication: Wheat Ridge Transcript Effective Date: Jerry DiTullio, Mayor Approved As To Form Gerald E. Dahl, City Attorney
MURRAY ~!:~~DA~L KUIiiO;C~IE:NMILI~TIiiO;R RC;::NAUD LLP MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and Council FROM: Gerald E. Dahl, City Attorney DATE: July 23, 2010 RE: Ordinance permitting conditions
on rezoning applications I recommend approval of the attached Ordinance which amends Section 26-112 of the Code of Laws to permit conditions on the approval of rezoning applications.
The Wheat Ridge Code of Laws, at Section 26-112, addresses private rezoning. This procedure is used for "straight" rezoning applications as well as for approval and amendment of planned
development applications (See, Code Section 26-301 .8). The private rezoning procedure limits the scope of the Planning Commission's recommendation to the City Council on rezoning to
approval or denial. See, Section 26-112.E. Similarly, Section 26-112.F restricts the Council's authority to act on private rezonings to approval or denial. Neither subsection contemplates
approval with conditions. While conditions on the rezoning applications are not common, they have been imposed on rezonings in Wheat Ridge in the past, and it is to be anticipated that
the Planning Commission will want to recommend, and the Council will want to impose, such conditions in the future. This is particularly true for infill and redevelopment applications.
As an inner ring suburb municipality, these applications are more common in Wheat Ridge than in other jurisdictions. The Colorado courts have upheld the imposition of site-specific conditions
on rezoning in some limited circumstances, but typically where the underlying municipal code contemplated conditions. See, Kings Mill Homeowners Association Inc. v. City of Westminster,
557 P.2d 1186 (Colo.1976), and Citv of Colorado Springs v. Smartt, 620 P.2d 1060 (Colo.1980). Attachment 2
The Colorado Supreme Court has also held that in order to exercise a specific authority inherent in the zoning power, the local government must provide in its own regulations for that
exercise, sufficient to place others on notice of the scope of the requirement. The leading case in Colorado on this point is Beaver Meadows v. Board of Countv Commissioners, 709 P.2d
928 (Colo.1985). In Beaver Meadows the Supreme Court held that while Larimer County had the inherent authority to require certain road improvements as a condition of a PUD approval,
it had not detailed the basis for those requirements in its land-use regulations, and therefore the attempted condition was void. As Council is aware, all rezonings for commercial purposes
must be processed as planned developments. While Code Section 26-302 of the planned development district regulations does state that requirements for, among other things, density in
a planned development district may be "more or less restrictive" than other districts, the reference to the approval procedure in Code Section 26-112 appears to limit the Council's role
to approval or denial of the application as presented, without any conditions. It is for this reason, and in order to be able to more easily defend Council-imposed conditions on rezonings
generally, that I recommend approval of the attached ordinance.
Commissioner BUCKNAM stated that he was initially concemed about the northwest part of the consolidation because there is a significant amount of green space there. But in light of the
fact that there is an access issue in terms of public safety conceming access for fue trucks, he is satisfied with the plat. Commissioner DWYER stated that he could find no reason not
to approve the plat, but he would hope SRC would do a better job of communicating with neighbors. Tbe motion carried 7-0. B. Case No. ZOA-JO-04: An ordinance amending Article I of Chapter
26 conceming the provision for conditions of approval in the zone change process. Gerald Dahl addressed concems expressed by Commissioner DWYER. The code, as presently written, only
gives Planning Commission and City Council power to approve or deny a zone change request. In the past, there have been occasions where approvals have been given with conditions. Those
conditiollS run the risk that there is not a code base to support it. The question then becomes whether the conditions are enforceable. The condition can be enforceable if the applicant
consents to it. This ordinance was drafted to clarify conditions of approval during a zone change process. Commissioner DWYER agreed with language. However, since Planning Commission
would be enabled to impose conditions under the new ordinance, he asked what protection from the risk of litigation would lie provided. Mr. Dahl explained that the first line of defense
is the staff report that recqmmends approval with conditions and reasons for the conditions. The second line of defense is the Planning Commission placing conditions which are backed
up by the code. The third line of defense is the city attomey's task to examine Plarming Commission recommendations before they go before CounciL Chair MA TrHEWS asked to hear from the
public. Hearing no response, he closed the public hearing. It was moved by Commissioner DWYER and seconded by Commissioner BUCKNAM to recommend approval or Case No. ZOA-10-04, a proposed
ordinance amending Section 26-112 (private rezoning) concerning conditions of approval during the zooe change process. . The motion carried 7-0. ([he meeting was recessed from 8: 19
p.m. to 8:30 p.m.) Planning Commission Minutes 5 July 15,2010 Attachment 3 /. I,. I ,! ! I
_ City of p Wheat RL-dge ITEMNO: ~ DATE: August 23 , 2010 REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION TITLE: COUNCIL BILL NO. 16-2010 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 26 CONCERNING THE CREATION OF
MIXED USE ZONE DISTRICTS (CASE NO. ZOA-09-07) o PUBLIC HEARING o BIDS/MOTIONS
o RESOLUTIONS QUASI-JUDICIAL: \ l r: ommuDlty Develop ISSUE: IZI ORDINANCES FOR I ST READING (08/23/2010) o ORDINANCES FOR 2ND READING (09/13/2010) o YES It City Manager Several of the
City's adopted plans, including Envision Wheat Ridge, call for the redevelopment of key commercial corridors with high-quality, mixed use development. The current zoning code makes attaining
this goal difficult. Existing zone districts either prohibit or greatly restrict mixed land uses on the same site, leaving a planned development (PO) zone as the only option for most
potential mixed use developments. The proposed ordinance creates new mixed use zone districts that encourage mixed use development and do not require the applicant to complete the PO
process, which can be timely and unpredictable. The new mixed use zone districts are designed to allow a wide range of land uses, encourage quality design, and enable higher density
development for targeted commercial corridors as well as the future transit-oriented development (TOO) at the Ward Road commuter rail station. Sites with the new mixed use zoning would
be subject to an administrative review process that removes the uncertainty and lengthy timeline that is associated with PDs. The proposed ordinance is intended to bolster the City's
economic development goals by incentivizing redevelopment along important commercial corridors. It promotes mixed use, pedestrian-friendly development that will create quality destinations
and enhance the image of Wheat Ridge. ZOA-09-07 Mixed Use Zoning
Council Action Form August 23, 20 I 0 Page 2 F' . -PRIOR ACTION: Staff originally briefed City Council on the new ordinance at study sessions in December of 2009, as well as February
and June in 20 I O. Staff held multiple study sessions with Planning Commission in 20 I 0 regarding the new mixed use code. Planning Commission recommended approval of the proposed ordinance
at a Public Hearing on August 5, 2010. Meeting minutes from the Planning Commission Public Hearing will be included with the ordinance for second reading. FINANCIAL IMPACT: The proposed
ordinance is not expected to have a direct financial impact on the City. However, the new mixed use zones are intended to encourage redevelopment, promote a diverse and resilient tax
base, and create quality places that will attract residents and employers to Wheat Ridge. BACKGROUND: Many of City'S adopted plans, including Envision Wheat Ridge, the Wadsworth Corridor
Subarea Plan, the Northwest Subarea Plan, and the Neighborhood Revitalization Strategy, recommend higher-density, mixed use development at strategic locations. The comprehensive plan,
Envision Wheat Ridge, identifies several areas in the City for mixed use redevelopment and identifies the creation of mixed use zone districts as a high-priority implementation step.
Current Code The only provisions in the current zoning code for mixed use are the Planned Mixed Use District (PMUD), as well as limited allowances for residential uses on commercially-zoned
property. Most sites proposing significant mixed use redevelopment must rezone to PMUD through the planned development process, which requires rezoning and a site-specific development
plan. This presents challenges to new mixed use development since the process is lengthy, unpredictable, and can be expensive. In order for a mixed use project to materialize, a developer
must undertake a minimum 6 month rezoning process without certainty of the outcome, while in the process developing a plan that may have limited flexibility to evolve through time since
planned developments are site specific. Base mixed use zoning would streamline the process by establishing general development parameters -allowed uses, setbacks, building heights, etc.
-without prescribing a site plan level of detail. Comparable Jurisdictions Several jurisdictions in the Denver metro area, including Lakewood, Aurora, and Longmont, have already adopted
mixed use zoning codes. For some municipalities, the mixed use zoning is focused on transit-oriented development (TOD) areas around future light rail stations. Many jurisdictions also
have mixed use zone districts that are targeted for commercial corridors, downtown areas, and main streets. The trend in most cities is to create mixed use districts that incentivize
or encourage mixed uses -without requiring mixed use -and to create an adm inistrative review process for new development within these districts. Staff researched mixed
Council Action Form August 23, 20 I 0 Page 3 use zoning ordinances in over 10 jurisdictions as part of the project, and also consulted model mixed use ordinances from communities throughout
the U.S . Process In creating the new mixed use zone districts, staff engaged a variety of stakeholders. The following is a brief summary of the process and the different methods used
to gain input on the mixed use code. Property Owner Input Beginning in January of2010, staff met with property owners in priority areas where the City could potentially initiate legislative
rezonings to the new mixed use districts. At each meeting, staff distributed surveys and received valuable comments from participants that helped shape the proposed ordinance. The four
geographic areas where staff engaged property owners are: • Wadsworth between 38th and 44th Avenues (intended for the MU-C district) • Kipling north of 44th Avenue (intended for the
MU-C district and MU-C Interstate sub-district) • The Northwest Subarea/Ward Road Station TOD (intended for the MU-C TOD subdistrict) • 38th Avenue between Sheridan and Wadsworth (intended
for the MU-N district) Mixed Use Zoning Technical Task Force The intent is to create a code that sets high standards for pedestrian-friendly development but that also contains enough
flexibility to respond to market conditions and entice redevelopment. To this end, staff created a technical task force of eight members -including developers, designers, property owners,
and real estate brokers -who provided input on each of the three drafts of the code. The task force held three meetings with staff and provided valuable insight on every aspect of the
code's content. Several of the members have direct experience either fmancing, designing, or developing mixed use projects in the Denver area and were able to offer the much-needed perspective
oftypical "end-users" of the new mixed use ordinance. Public Outreach Significant public outreach started in February 20 I 0 with the launch of a website dedicated to the project (www.wrmixeduse.com)
. Visitors to the site (over 400 since its start) are able to engage in several interactive features, including: • A survey that asks for input on important content in the mixed use
code, such as appropriate building height and allowable auto-oriented uses • A community photo journal • Drafts of the code (3 separate drafts were released for public review throughout
the spring of 20 10) Efforts to engage residents and business owners in Wheat Ridge al so included two articles in the Connections newsletter, a Top of Hour Feature on Channel 8, an
article in the Denver
Council Action Form August 23 , 2010 Page 4 Post's Your Hub, and a city-wide open house on May 12'h This open house, held after release of Draft 2 to receive input in advance of the
last draft of the code, drew over 30 attendees. Staff received comments and distributed surveys with questions about each of the 4 districts/sub-districts in the new code. Some of the
most valuable input received at the open house pertained to residential transitions. Staff increased buffering requirements and building height transitions near existing residential
uses (single-and two-family only) based on this input. RECOMMENDATIONS: The following provides a summary of the major content items included in the proposed ordinance. Mixed Use Districts
The proposed mixed use code focuses on two mixed use districts: I. Mixed Use Commercial (MU-C): intended for major commercial corridors and at employment activity centers, this district
promotes medium-to high-density mixed use development and allows for a wide range of commercial uses, as well as retail, residential, and civic uses. 2. Mixed Use Neighborhood (MU-N):
intended for neighborhood commercial corridors, this district promotes medium-density mixed use development and allows for a range of neighborhood-serving commercial uses, as well as
retail, residential and civic uses. The ordinance also contains two MU-C sub-districts, which were tailored for specific geographic areas that have unique design and use considerations:
I. MU-C Transit-Oriented Development Sub-district (MU-C TOD): this sub-district is intended for areas within It, mile of major transit stations. While it generally follows the MU-C framework,
it is specifically designed to support transit ridership and pedestrianfriendly design that supports connections to transit. 2. MU-C interstate Sub-district (MU-C Interstate): this sub-district
is intended for properties on major commercial corridors within roughly 500 feet of 1-70. This subdistrict tailors land uses and site design standards to complement direct proximity
to to the highway. Generally, the MU-C district (and its two sub-districts) is intended for areas that were exempted from the City Charter height and density restrictions in the fall
of2009. The MU-N district would apply to areas that were not exempted from these restrictions. Building Height and Density The ordinance regulates scale of development through building
height limits, open space requirements, setback requirements, and bulk-plane strategies. Thus no maximum residential densities are established. Allowable building heights are based on
the desire to encourage denser development, as well as input received from surveys distributed at meetings and on the project website.
Council Action Form August 23, 20 I 0 Page 6 • 4-story building height: any portion of a building within 100' feet of an existing single-family or two-family use, except where separated
by an arterial or collector, will have a maximum height of 4 stories, or 62 feet, whichever is more restrictive. Auto-Oriented Uses The mixed use code is intended to balance the vision
for walkable, compact development with existing market conditions. The approach is to allow most auto-oriented uses as conditional uses, which require a conditional use permit issued
through an administrative review to address site design issues. Gas stations and drive-through uses also have separation limits to ensure that such uses do not dominate important corridors.
There is a slightly more restrictive approach for the TOO sub-district and the MU-N districts, where pedestrian-friendly design is of particular importance. The following table summarizes
how some of the most common auto-oriented uses are treated in the proposed ordinance. The separation requirements would not apply to existing uses or to master planned mixed use development.
Auto-Oriented Uses Use MU-C MU-C Interstate MU-CTOD MU-N Car repair (only with Conditional Permitted Use Conditional Use Conditional Use indoor storage) Use Car sales (indoor onlyno
outdoor display) Permitted Use Permitted Use Conditional Use Conditional Use Conditional Conditional Use Gas Stations Use with 1000' Conditional Use Not Permitted with 1000' separation
separation Conditional Conditional Use Conditional Use Drive-up Uses, not fast-Use with 500' Permitted Use with 500' with 500' food separation separation separation Conditional Conditional
Use Conditional Use Drive-up Uses, fastfood Use with 500' Permitted Use with 500' with 500' separation separation separation Development Review Process and Neighborhood Input An important
goal of the new mixed use code is to provide a clear, predictable, and streamlined development review process. Once a property is rezoned to a mixed use district, which would require
public hearings, the review process is administrative. Development proposals would be evaluated for compliance with the standards in the code and approved or denied by staff based on
this review. Most sites would be subject to the site plan review process found in the existing
Council Action Form August 23, 20 I 0 Page 7 code. Sites 10 acres or larger, or developments with more than one phase, would require a concept plan prior to the site plan review. The
concept plan, which includes proposed ci rculation, land use patterns, and building pads, would need to be approved prior to any specific site plan application. For sites that are particularly
large (10 acres or more) and likely to have a large impact on the surrounding area, the following public input process would be required: • A neighborhood meeting prior to submittal
of the concept plan for anyone within 600 feet of the property • A public notification period, after a site plan is submitted, in which anyone within 300 feet of the property receives
written notice and may submit comments related to the proposed design. There would also be a notice placed on the property regarding this notification period. The intent of the public
notification period is to afford the public the opportunity to review the proposed plans and raise any concerns or recommendations specific to the development proposal. Nonconforming
Properties lfproperty is rezoned to the one of the proposed mixed use districts, there are several design requirements in the code -such as build-to requirements -that could make a structure
nonconforming. In addition, some uses that legally existed under the previous zoning for a property could become a nonconforming use if that use is not permitted under the new code.
Most auto-oriented and light industrial uses are proposed as conditional uses the code, which would not result in a nonconforming use. Any conditional use in the new code, such as a
drivethrough, would be considered a conforming use but would need to go through the conditional use permit review if it wanted to expand. The issue of nonconforming properties is especially
important in light of the possibility for legislative (City-initiated) rezonings. Based on input from property owners, the proposed ordinance allows a fairly high level of flexibility
for properties that could become nonconforming under the new code. The draft code incorporates the following approach to nonconforming properties: Nonconforming structures -may remain
in perpetuity and can expand by an unlimited amount, provided the nonconformity is not made any worse. New additions should be compliant with the standards in the new code. Nonconforming
lIses -may remain in perpetuity and may expand up to 25% of the current floor area. The proposed ordinance also includes changes to the existing code language pertaining to nonconforming
structures, which are summarized in the following section.
Council Action Form August 23, 20 I 0 Page 8 Amendments to Existing Sections in Chapter 26 In order for the mixed use code to be successfully integrated into Chapter 26, several existing
sections of the code need to be amended. The recommended amendments, which are incorporated into the ordinance, are summarized as follows: • Sections on Pre-Application Conferences and
Site Plan Review Process amended to update required submittal items • Development Review Chart amended to include the new concept plan review and conditional use permit review, two processes
that will be unique to mixed use districts • Private rezoning language amended to clarify that a private rezoning to any mixed use district will not require the planned development process
• Planned Building Group (PBG) and building lot language amended to allow more than one primary building on a lot within a mixed use district • Sign code amended to clarify that master
sign plans may pertain to mixed use development and to include mixed use districts in in the commercial/industrial sign table • Nonconforming language modified so that: The period in
which a nonconforming use may be inactive is extended from 60 days to 12 months so that property owners have more time to fill a vacant space Nonconforming buildings and uses have the
ability to rebuild if damaged by an act of god such as a fire, storm, or flood • Section 10 of the ordinance amends the recently adopted procedure allowing signs in public rights-of-way,
restricting the appeal of denial of such permits to the district court rather than the Board of Adjustment. This change is suggested on the advice of the City Attorney. The Board of
Adjustment criteria for granting a variance (hardship, etc.) are not compatible with the (new) requirements for signs in rights-of-way. Further, it is inappropriate for the Board of
Adjustment to have authority to grant use of public property. Policy Goals The proposed code amendment advances many of the City's goals, including the redevelopment of priority areas
with high-quality, mixed use development. The creation of straight mixed use zoning is a priority implementation step recommended in the City's Comprehensive Plan, Envision Wheal Ridge,
and is also recommended in other important documents such as the Neighborhood Revitalization Strategy (NRS) and the recently-approved Economic Development Strategic Plan. The mixed use
zoning ordinance supports economic development and sustainable growth within Wheat Ridge by: • Creating a more predictable and timely review process for mixed use development • Encouraging
a diverse and balanced mix of land uses throughout the City • lncentivizing mixed use and compact development patterns that support alternative modes of transportation • Promoting quality
places that will attract strong households to live, shop, and dine in
Council Action Form August 23, 20 I 0 Page 9 Wheat Ridge • Maintaining the character of existing residential neighborhoods RECOMMENDED MOTION: "r move to approve Council Bill No. 16-2010,
Case No. ZOA-09-07, an ordinance amending Chapter 26 of the Code of Laws concerning the creation of mixed use zone districts, on first reading, order it published, public hearing set
for Monday, September 13th at 7 p.m. in City Council Chambers, and that it take effect 15 days after final publication" Or, "r move to indefinitely postpone Council Bill No. 16-2010,
Case No. ZOA-09-07, an ordinance amending Chapter 26 of the Code of Laws concerning the creation of mixed use zone districts for the following reason(s) " REPORT PREPARED BY: Sarah Showalter,
Planner II Kenneth Johnstone, Community Development Director ATTACHMENTS: l. Council Bill No. 16-20 I 0
CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER ________________ COUNCIL BILL NO. 16 ORDINANCE NO. __________ Series 2010 TITLE: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 26 CONCERNING
THE CREATION OF MIXED USE ZONE DISTRICTS WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Wheat Ridge is authorized by the Home Rule Charter and the Colorado Constitution and statutes to enact
and enforce ordinances for the preservation of the public health, safety and welfare; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Wheat Ridge finds that the proposed amendments provide
a useful tool for encouraging high-quality, mixed-use development within the City; NOW THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO: Section 1: Chapter
26 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws is hereby amended by the addition of a new Article XI, entitled “Mixed Use Zone Districts,” to read in its entirety as follows: ARTICLE XI. MIXED USE
ZONE DISTRICTS Sec. 26-1101. Purpose A. The purpose of the Mixed Use Commercial (MU-C) and Mixed Use Neighborhood (MUN) Zone Districts is to create a flexible approach to land uses and
enhance the character of Wheat Ridge’s commercial corridors and centers by promoting development that: 1. Creates a balanced mix of land uses; 2. Supports a sustainable and resilient
local economy; 3. Provides unique places for people to live, work, shop, and play; 4. Improves the public realm through high quality design; 5. Promotes use by pedestrians, bicyclists,
and transit users, in addition to automobiles; 6. Encourages active lifestyles; and 7. Maintains the character and integrity of adjacent residential neighborhoods. Sec. 26-1102. Districts
Established A. Mixed Use Commercial (MU-C) Zone District: This district, generally located along major commercial corridors and at community and employment activity centers, is established
to encourage medium to high density mixed use development. In addition to residential and civic uses, it allows for a wide range of commercial and retail uses. 1
1. MU-C Transit Oriented Development Sub-district (MU-C TOD): This sub-district is intended for areas within 1/2 mile of fixed guideway rail stations, including light rail and commuter
rail. It follows the MU-C framework but is specifically designed to allow densities that support transit ridership and to encourage land uses and building form that enhance connections
to transit. 2. MU-C Interstate Sub-district (MU-C Interstate): this sub-district is intended for properties that are generally within 500 feet of Interstate-70 and that are located on
a commercial corridor with direct access to Interstate-70. It follows the MU-C framework but is intended for highway-adjacent sites that may require variation in design or land use due
to direct proximity to the interstate. B. Mixed Use Neighborhood (MU-N): This district, generally located along neighborhood main streets and at neighborhood commercial centers, is established
to encourage medium density mixed use development. In addition to residential and civic uses, it allows for a more limited range of neighborhood-serving commercial and retail uses. Sec.
26-1103. Applicability A. All standards and requirements within Article XI shall apply to: 1. Site development; 2. Expansion of existing structures by more than 15 percent of the gross
floor area. B. Legal nonconforming uses: Where a use lawfully existed at the time of rezoning of the subject property to any mixed use district within this Article, and which is not
a permitted use at that time under Section 26-1111 Permitted Uses, such nonconforming use may continue to operate and exist, subject to Section 26-120.C.6, subject to the following.
1. A structure containing a nonconforming use may expand its gross floor area by a maximum of 25 percent without requiring a change to a conforming use. 2. No use that lawfully existed
at the time of rezoning of the subject property to any mixed use district shall be deemed a nonconforming use due to the requirement for a conditional use permit. However, if an existing
use is is designated as a conditional use in Section 26-1111, any expansion of that use shall require a conditional use permit (per Section 26-1118). 3. No use that lawfully existed
at the time of rezoning of the subject property to any mixed use district shall be deemed a nonconforming use due to the separation requirements established in Section 26-1111. C. Legal
nonconforming structures: Where a structure lawfully existed at the time of rezoning of the subject property to any mixed use district, and which would not be allowed by the provisions
within this Article because of either building placement or orientation, building design, parking placement or design, parking requirements, or site and vehicular access, such structure
may continue to exist and may be enlarged, altered or added to provided that the alteration or addition does not increase the nonconformity. 1. Any new addition or expansion to a nonconforming
structure shall comply with all provisions within this Article, where practical. The Community Development Director shall determine if there is a requirement that cannot be practically
met. Such determination may be appealed to the Board of Adjustment. 2
D. Wherever provisions within this Article conflict with other Articles in Chapter 26, the provisions within Article XI shall apply. E. Where standards for the MU-C TOD and MU-C Interstate
sub-districts are not specifically stated, MU-C standards shall apply. F. The illustrations that appear in this Article are for illustrative purposes only. Sec. 26-1104. Building Height
A. Principle: Taller buildings allow for a range of uses within one structure and encourage a compact form of development that is focused on pedestrian connections. Buildings with a
similar range in height help to define the street wall and create an architectural identity for a corridor or area. B. The following table establishes required building heights. Whatever
measurement is more restrictive --maximum stories or maximum feet --shall apply. Building Height Requirements MU-C MU-C Interstate MU-C TOD MU-N Minimum height 20’ 20’ 20’ none Maximum
height Mixed use building 6 stories (90’) 8 stories (118’) 8 stories (118’) see C. below Single use building 4 stories (62’) 6 stories (90’) 6 stories (90’) C. In the MU-N district,
any building containing a residential use shall have a maximum height of 35 feet. All other buildings shall have a maximum height of 50 feet. D. Where there is conflict regarding maximum
building heights between this section and the City Charter, the maximums established in the City Charter shall apply. E. A parapet wall may be utilized to meet the minimum height requirement.
F. For buildings over 75 feet in height, see section 26-1106.G, Upper Story Stepbacks. G. Any portion of a building that is within 100 feet of a residentially or agriculturally zoned
lot that has a single-or two-family residential use shall not exceed a height of 4 stories or 62 feet, whichever is more restrictive. The 100 foot distance shall be measured from the
nearest property line of the residentially or agriculturally zoned lot. This requirement shall not apply where an arterial or collector street separates the building from the residential
use. Sec. 26-1105. Building Placement and Orientation A. Principle: In order to activate streets and enhance the pedestrian experience, buildings are encouraged to be placed close to
the street and oriented toward the public realm. B. Public Entrances: All buildings are encouraged to have at least one public entry that faces the primary or secondary street. 1. Within
the MU-N sub-district, each building shall have at least one main public entry that faces the primary street or a public space adjacent to the building. For corner lots with more than
one street frontage, the public entry may be oriented toward the corner. 3
2. In all districts, for development sites with more than one structure, those buildings that do not directly front a street shall have at least one primary entrance that adjoins a pedestrian
walk. The primary entrance should be connected to the street by a walkway that is clearly defined and separated from parking areas. C. Building Setbacks: Setbacks establish the minimum
distance between a building façade and the nearest property line (Figure 1). The following table establishes minimum side and rear setback requirements for all structures in the MU-C
and MU-N districts. Front setbacks are not required; instead, build-to areas established in section 26-1105.F encourage buildings to be built close to the street. Building Setbacks MU-C
MU-N Minimum Side Setback 0’ 0’ Minimum Rear Setback 5’ 5’ Where abutting a residentially or agriculturally zoned lot that contains a single-or twofamily residential use (see § 26-1106.H
Residential Transitions): Minimum Side and Rear Setback: 1-2 story building 10’ 10’ Minimum Side and Rear Setback: 3 story building 15’ 15’ Minimum Side and Rear Setback: 4 story building
and higher 20’ 20’ D. Right-of-Way Encroachments: architectural elements attached to the building façade may encroach into the right-of-way up to 3 feet at the ground floor, and up to
5 feet at upper levels, subject to an approved right-of-way use permit through the Department of Public Works. Such encroachments may include window planter boxes, eaves, balconies,
projecting wall signs, canopies, and awnings Figure 1: Setbacks and Build-To Area A: Build-To Area: building may be anywhere within this area, and is required to fill at least part of
it. B: Side Setback: building may not encroach into this area. C: Rear Setback: building may not encroach into this area. 4
E. Build-To Areas: Build-to areas are intended to bring building façades toward the street. A build-to area requires that a minimum portion of each development site’s street frontage
is occupied by a building, encouraging an active and interesting street frontage. The following table establishes build-to requirements for each district. Build-To AreasMU-C MU-N Primary
Street Frontage Build-To Area 0’ – 20’ 0’ – 12’ Linear portion of build-to area that must
contain building facade (minimum) See Figures 2 and 3 50% 60% Secondary Street Frontage Build-To Area 0’ – 20’ 0’ – 12’ Linear portion of build-to area that must contain building facade
(minimum) See Figures 2 and 3 30% 30% 1. In certain instances, where the provided primary street build-to exceeds the minimum requirement, the required secondary street build-to may
be reduced by an equal or lesser amount, subject to approval by the Community Development Director. Figure 2: Build-To Area for Development Site with One Building Both images in this
figure illustrate the same site from different views. In this case, 50% of the build-to area along the primary and secondary streets is occupied by a building. 5
2. For a development site with more than one building, not all buildings must meet the build-to requirement, as long as those buildings closest to the street fulfill the requirements
set forth in the table above (Figure 3). Figure 3: Build-To Area for Development Site with Multiple Buildings The required primary and secondary street build-to areas may be fulfilled
by more than one building. Build-to requirements only apply to those buildings closest to the street. 3. For a development site with more than one building, build-to requirements may
be met by a future phase. In such cases, the parcel(s) of any future building(s) required to meet the build-to requirement must be platted and recorded prior to issuance of a building
permit for the first phase of development. 4. Gas stations may meet build-to requirements through one or any combination of the following two elements: (1) Structure within the build-to
area; (2) Canopy within the build-to area (Figures 4 and 5). Gas stations must also provide a screen wall, 30 to 42 inches in height, for 100 percent of the primary and secondary street
frontage, excluding access points and where portions of the building are within the build-to area. The screen wall shall be a continuous masonry wall constructed of stone, brick, or
split-face concrete block, or a combination masonry pier and decorative iron railing. There shall be a minimum 4-foot wide landscape buffer between the screen wall and property line.
Figure 4: Gas station buildto option The building and the canopy over the gas pumps are both utilized to meet build-to requirements. 6
Figure 5: Gas station buildto option The canopy over the gas pumps meets the build-to requirements and the building is setback from the street. Sec. 26-1106. Building Design A. Principle:
Quality architecture is a vital component to creating a unique sense of “place.” Creative design that pays careful attention to the building’s contribution to the public realm – through
massing, form, materials, and its relationship to the street – is encouraged. B. Façade Design and Articulation 1. All façades of a building shall provide a level of finished architectural
quality and be designed to human scale. Each façade shall contain at least one change in color or texture. Additional detail should be incorporated into the façade design by the use
of at least three of the following methods: Reveals Belt courses Cornices Expression of a structural or architectural bay Articulation of windows and doorways, which may include
sills, mullions, or pilasters that create a three dimensional expression Change in material 2. All façades of a building that face a street or a public space shall have at least one
variation in plane depth of at least 1 foot for every 50 linear feet of the length of the façade. All other façades shall have one variation in plane depth of at least 1 foot for every
100 linear feet of the length of the façade. Any portion of a façade that is a glass curtain wall shall be exempted from this requirement. 3. Non-permanent features such as canopies
and awnings will not qualify as variation. Plane depth variation may be accomplished through elements such as: 7
Recessed entries Porticos Upper level stepbacks Dormers Offsets in the general plane of the façade, including columns, pilasters, protruding bays, reveals, fins, ribs, balconies,
cornices or eaves 4. The primary entrance of a building shall be emphasized through at least two of the following architectural elements: Changes in wall plane or building massing
Differentiation in material and/or color Higher level of detail Enhanced lighting C. Materials 1. Only primary building materials shall be used for all façades. Primary building
materials include, but are not limited to: Brick Stone Architectural pre-cast concrete Synthetic brick and masonry materials Hard coat stucco Integral textured colored concrete
block Terra-cotta Architectural metal panels 2. Materials that are not allowed include, but are not limited to: Plywood paneling Vinyl and aluminum siding Un-articulated large
format concrete panels 3. Exterior Insulating Finishing System (EIFS) may be used as an accent material subject to the following restrictions: EIFS must have a textured finish EIFS
may not be utilized below the height of 8 feet on any building façade The total amount of EIFS may not exceed 25 percent per building façade The allowable amount of EIFS may be consolidated
on a façade(s) that does not face a street or public space provided that the total amount of EIFS, calculated cumulatively for the entire building, does not exceed 25 percent 4. Material
variation: All building façades that face a street or public space shall have at least one change in material for each 10 feet (and portion thereof) of wall height. A change in material
must be at least 12 inches in height. Masonry patterns, such as headers or rowlocks, can count as a change of material. Windows, canopies, and doorways will not count as a change in
material. 8
D. Ground Floor Transparency 1. Retail uses: the façade facing the primary street frontage shall be at least 60 percent transparent. All other façades facing a street or public space
shall be at least 30 percent transparent. 2. All other non-residential uses (excluding retail): the façade facing the primary street frontage shall be at least 40 percent transparent.
All other façades facing a street or public space shall be at least 25 percent transparent. 3. Transparency shall be calculated as the percentage of clear, non-reflective glass within
the area between 3 feet and 8 feet above the first floor finished elevation. 4. Transparent doors and window mullions shall count as part of the transparent area. Structural elements
and opaque or reflective glass shall not count toward the transparency requirement, except that up to 20 percent of the transparency requirement for any one façade may be fulfilled by
spandrel glass. 5. Glass display cases may count toward the transparency requirement only if they give the appearance of windows, are at least 18 inches deep, and are maintained with
items of interest, including window display graphics. 6. For retail uses, windows at the ground floor shall be at least 5 feet high. E. Drive-throughs and Drive-ups 1. Drive-up windows:
Where drive-throughs and drive-ups are allowed (see section 26-1111, Permitted Uses), the drive-up window shall be placed at the side or rear of a building and shall not be located at
street corners. 2. Number of drive-up lanes: the following table specifies the maximum number of drive-up lanes allowed by district and sub-district: Maximum Number of Drive-Up Lanes
Allowed MU-C MU-C Interstate MU-C TOD MU-N Max drive-up lanes 3 no limit 1 1 3. Location of drive-up lanes: Drive-up lanes between the building and the street are discouraged. Within
the MU-N District and MU-C TOD Sub-district, the drive-up lane shall not be located between the building and the primary street. (Figure 6) 4. Screening of drive-up lanes: Any drive-up
lane that is visible from a street or public space shall incorporate the following screening elements: A screen wall, at least 36 inches in height, with materials that are consistent
with the primary building. The screen wall must meet the sight-triangle requirements in section 26-603. A landscaped buffer, at least 4 feet in width, between the property line and
the screen wall. (Figure 7) Where there is more than one drive-up lane, canopies or other structural elements shall be used for further screening. These screening elements shall be
compatible with the architectural qualities of the main building, including materials, form, scale, and color. 9
5. Screening of drive-up lanes adjacent to residentially or agriculturally zoned lots with a residential use: the landscape buffer and screening requirements for parking lots adjacent
to residential uses, per section 26-1107.C.2, shall apply. 6. The drive-through stacking requirements in section 26-501.E.10 shall not apply. Figure 6: Drive-up Lane Location Within
the MU-N district and MU-C TOD sub-district, the drive-up lane may not be located between the building and the primary street. Figure 7: Drivethrough Screening Where a drive-up lane
is visible from the street, a minimum 36” high screen wall and 4’ wide landscape buffer are required. F. Screening – Loading, Service Areas, and Utilities 1. All loading docks, utility
structures, and other service areas associated with a building shall be fully screened from view by walls or fences. (Figure 8) 2. Screening elements shall be composed of materials consistent
with the primary building. Wood and vinyl fences shall not be allowed as screening materials. Screen walls and fences over 10 feet in length shall be bordered by a 4 foot wide landscape
buffer. 3. Trash enclosures shall be compatible with the building design and materials and screened with full wall enclosures. Such enclosures may not be located between the building
façade and the street. 4. All screening elements shall be at least as tall as the object (e.g. trash enclosure, loading dock, or utility structure) being screened. 10
5. Rooftop equipment shall be screened by parapets or enclosures. Screening elements shall be composed of forms, materials, and colors that are compatible with the architectural qualities
of the building, including materials, scale, form, and color. 6. Wherever possible, exterior utility boxes and above-ground utility installations shall be located to the side or rear
of buildings, and not visible from the street. Figure 8: Screening Loading docks, service areas, and utility structures must be screened by walls or fences that are consistent with the
primary building materials. G. Upper Story Stepbacks 1. For buildings taller than 75 feet, an upper level stepback is required for any façade that faces a street or a public space. For
such façades, the portion of the façade over 75 feet in height must stepback at least 10 feet from the outer edge of the first story. (Figure 9) 2. Terraces and unenclosed balconies
may extend up to 8 feet into the required upper level stepback area. Figure 9: Upper Story Stepback Stepback For building facades over 75’ in height that face a street or public space,
any portion of the facade over 75’ in height must step back at least 10.’ H. Residential Transitions 1. Landscaped Buffers: where new development abuts a residentially or agriculturally
zoned lot that contains a single-or two-family residential use, the required setbacks in section 26-1105.D shall apply. The required setback area shall be landscaped with grass and trees
and/or shrubs. 11
2. Upper story stepbacks: The following upper story stepbacks shall be required for any building in a mixed use district that abuts a residentially or agriculturally zoned lot that contains
a single-or two-family residential use. The required stepbacks shall apply to any façade, side or rear, that faces the lot with the residential use. (Figure 10) Residential Transition
-Required Upper Story Stepbacks MU-C MU-N Minimum Setback -stories 1-2 (see § 26-1105.C) 1-2 story building 10’ 10’ 3 story building 15’ 15’ 4 story building and higher 20’ 20’ Minimum
Stepback -stories 3-4 5’ per story 5’ per story Minimum Stepback -stories 4 and above 25’ 25’ 3. Terraces and unenclosed balconies may extend up to 8 feet into the required upper level
stepback area. Figure 10: Residential Transition -Upper Story Stepbacks Any structure that abuts a lot with a residential structure 35’ in height or less must stepback at least 5’ per
story for stories 2-4, with a total stepback of 25’. Sec. 26-1107. Off-Street Parking Placement and Design A. Principle: Streets are more vibrant and interesting to pedestrians if they
are lined with buildings and active uses. Surface parking should be located behind buildings, toward the interior of lots, and should be screened from view from adjacent streets. Structured
parking should be placed to minimize impacts on surrounding development and be designed to be compatible – in terms of form, materials, and architectural style – with adjacent development.
B. Surface Parking Placement: Parking areas shall be located to the rear or side of the building. For development sites with more than one building, parking is not allowed in front of
the building(s) closest to the street, but is allowed in front of permitted buildings interior to the development site. (Figure 11) 12
Figure 11: Off-street Parking Location for Development Site with Multiple Buildings. Parking must be to the rear or side of buildings closest to the street, but is permitted in front
of buildings interior to the site. C. Surface Parking Buffers and Screening: 1. Where a surface parking lot directly abuts a street or public space, one or more of the following screening
elements shall be used: Minimum 5-foot wide landscape buffer with grass, or groundcover plantings, and trees located a minimum of 30 feet on center. The landscape buffer may also contain
perennials and shrubs. A vertical screening device, 30 to 46 inches in height. The screening device may be a continuous masonry wall constructed of stone, brick, or split-face concrete
block, a combination masonry pier and decorative iron railing, or any other decorative and durable screening device that is consistent with the materials of the primary building. Wood,
chain link and vinyl picket fencing shall not be permitted. The screen must meet the sight sight triangle requirements in section 26-603. Where a parking lot’s frontage along the street
or public space is greater than 20 linear feet, no more than 30 percent of the screening requirement may be fulfilled by a landscape buffer. 2. Where a surface parking lot boundary abuts
a residentially or agriculturally zoned lot with a residential use, a landscape buffer of 6 feet from said lot boundary shall be required. Along the boundary of the lot with a residential
use, a 6-foot high viewobscuring fence, decorative wall or landscaped hedge with a natural height of 6 feet shall be provided. In addition, grass or other ground cover and trees and/or
shrubs shall be planted within the landscape buffer. (Figure 12) 13
Figure 12: Parking Lots Adjacent to Residential Use Such parking areas require a minimum 6’ landscaped buffer and screen wall between the parking area and residential use D. Surface
Parking Design 1. Parking areas shall meet the requirements for the design of off-street parking – including surfacing, landscaping, lighting, and space/aisle dimensions – stated within
section 26-501.E.5., section 26-501.E.6, section 26-501.E.7 and section 26-501.E.11 2. Parking lots that utilize permeable paving are encouraged. 3. Parking areas over 20,000 square
feet shall contain a well-defined pedestrian walk, whether by change in paving material or landscaping, that connects the parking area to the adjacent street and the building(s) on site.
E. Parking Structure Design 1. Parking garage design should be compatible with adjacent buildings in terms of form, massing, scale, materials, and façade articulation. 2. Spandrel panels
or opaque screening systems, such as louvers, at least 36 inches in height shall be used to screen screen vehicles from view on all levels. 3. Any parking garage façade that is visible
from public view shall be orthogonal in composition and so that ramping systems are not visible. (Figure 13) 4. Wherever possible, especially for parking garage façades that face a public
street, the ground floor of the parking structure should incorporate retail, commercial, or other nonresidential uses to help activate the street. 5. Any ground-level façade of a parking
garage that is visible from the street and does not provide retail, commercial, or other active ground floor uses shall include at least 2 of the following design features: Façade
articulation through change in vertical plane or a change in building material The use of windows or false windows defined by frames, lintels, or sills Integration of multiple building
entrances Buffering along the street edge with landscaping, street trees, green walls, or trellises with vines 14
Figure 13: Parking Garage Design The image on top illustrates a garage facade with an expressed ramping system, which is not allowed. The image below illustrates the same garage with
a facade that is orthogonal, with all floors at 90 degree angles. Sec. 26-1108. Site Circulation and Vehicular Access A. Principle: Access and circulation for automobiles should be designed
to minimize the number of curb cuts, increase connectivity, and encourage shared access points from streets so that disruptions to the pedestrian environment are minimized. B. Block
sizes: where new public or private streets are proposed, blocks with a perimeter of 1600-1800 feet are encouraged and shall not be greater than 2,000 feet in perimeter. C. Curb cuts:
for new development along existing streets, where a curb cut already exists, the number of curb cuts to the site shall not be increased. Where possible, existing curb cuts should be
consolidated. 1. Wherever possible, vehicular access to a site or building shall occur through an alley, rather than by a curb cut from the street. 2. Where an alley is not available,
curb cuts along the secondary street, rather than the primary street, are encouraged. D. Vehicular entrances: vehicular entrances to buildings and parking garages that contain a ramp
shall be screened from view of the street or adjacent public space. Where a vehicular entrance or ramp directly abuts a pedestrian walk, appropriate cautionary 15
signed shall be used to alert pedestrians of the presence of vehicles and to inform drivers that pedestrians have the priority. Sec. 26-1109. Parking Requirements A. Principle: Large
areas of free parking encourage automobile use and detract from the land available for high quality development. Strategies to utilize parking areas effectively – such as shared parking
and parking structures – are highly encouraged. Especially within areas adjacent to transit services, reduced parking requirements encourage transit and other modes alternative to the
automobile. B. The following table specifies the number of parking spaces required by general use group. Use Group Minimum Required Parking Maximum Allowed Parking Hospital 1 space per
bed 2 spaces per bed Light Industrial 1 space per 1,000 square feet 5 spaces per 1,000 square feet Lodging – hotels, motels, extended stay, bed and breakfast 1 space per 2 rooms 1.5
spaces per room Office/bank 2 spaces per 1,000 square feet 5 spaces per 1,000 square feet Place of worship 1 space per each 5 seats 1 space per seat Residential 1 space per unit 2.5
spaces per unit Restaurant 4 spaces per 1,000 square feet 10 spaces per 1,000 square feet MU-C and MU-C Interstate may have a maximum of 12 spaces per 1,000 square feet Retail 3 spaces
per 1,000 square feet 5 spaces per 1,000 square feet MU-C and MU-C Interstate may have a maximum of 7 spaces per 1,000 square feet Theater 1 space per 5 seats 1 space per 2 seats All
other uses Uses not specifically listed above shall submit a parking analysis as part of development review for approval by the Community Development Director Note: square feet is measured
as gross floor area C. On-street parking: on-street parking spaces directly abutting the use may count toward the total number of required parking spaces. D. Off-site parking: parking
requirements may be met off-site, up to a walking distance of 1,000 feet via a publicly accessible route from the use, subject to an off-site parking agreement. The publicly accessible
route must be approved by the Community Development Director. The off-site parking agreement must be submitted for approval by 16
the Community Development Director and, once approved, recorded against all properties subject to the agreement. E. Shared parking: shared parking is permitted and encouraged. Shared
parking shall be approved subject to the review and approval of a shared parking study citing ULI accepted shared parking ratios, as may be amended. F. Transit parking reductions: properties
within the MU-C TOD sub-district may reduce minimum parking requirements by 20 percent. G. Incentive for structured parking: Except within the MU-N district, a building that incorporates
underground or structured parking qualifies for the higher building heights allowed for mixed use buildings in the Building Height Requirements Table in section 26-1104.B, even if that
building is not mixed use. For a development site with a freestanding parking garage, the additional building height may be applied to a building within the development site that is
served by the parking structure. This height bonus shall not apply for parking structures that that contain parking at the ground floor without at least one non-residential ground floor
use. H. Accessible parking shall be provided in accordance with section 26-501.E.9 I. Off-street loading shall be provided in accordance with section 26-501.E.8 J. Bicycle parking 1.
For non-residential development, or portion thereof, bicycle parking spaces shall be required at a rate of 1 bicycle parking space for every 20 automobile parking spaces. No non-residential
development shall provide less than 4 bicycle parking spaces. 2. For residential development, or portion thereof, bicycle parking spaces shall be required at a rate of 1 bicycle parking
space for every 10 units. No multifamily residential development shall provide less than 3 bicycle parking spaces. 3. Parking for bicycles shall be provided on site. Bicycle parking
areas shall be welllighted and located not more than 50 feet from the primary building entrance. Bicycle parking for residential uses is encouraged to be sheltered and secured. Sec.
26-1110. 1110. Open Space Requirements A. Principle: Parks, plazas, squares and other forms of public spaces play an important role in the quality of a place. Landscaped and hardscaped
areas contribute to the public realm by providing places for people to gather, relax, and recreate. B. Open space required: the following table sets forth the minimum amount of open
space required, measured as a percentage of the net development site area (total site area less public right-of-way). Minimum Required Open Space MU-C MU-N Mixed Use Development 10%
10% Single Use Development 15% 15% C. Aggregated open space: open space may be aggregated into larger parks, plazas, and squares for one development site, rather than calculated per
parcel, subject to approval 17
by the Community Development Director. In such cases, the parcel(s) required to meet any open space requirement must be identified and noted on the approved site plan on file in the
Community Development Department. D. Minimum landscaping: at least 35 percent of the required open space area shall be composed of landscaped materials, including trees. E. Usable open
space: For all development sites, at least 75 percent of the required open space must be usable open space. 1. Usable open space includes open space which, by its configuration, size,
and design, can be used for passive or active recreation. 2. Usable open space includes plazas, parks, outdoor dining areas, courtyards and green roofs. Required buffers or parking lot
landscaping shall not qualify as usable open space. 3. Land with a slope steeper than 1 foot (vertical) in 3 feet (horizontal) shall not qualify as usable open space. 4. Drainage ways,
ponds, and other areas required for stormwater quality or detention may qualify as usable open space if such areas are designed for passive or active use and are landscaped with grass,
shrubs, and/or trees. A list of recommended plants for stormwater detention areas is available through the Public Works Department. F. Land planted for food production, including community
gardens, shall qualify as open space, but not as usable open space. G. Streetscaping: all new development, including expansions of an existing structure by 50 percent or more of the
floor area, shall meet the requirements in the City of Wheat Ridge Streetscape and Architectural Design Manual. H. Maintenance: the developer, its successor and/or the property owners
shall be responsible for regular weeding, irrigating, fertilizing, pruning, or other maintenance of all plantings as needed in order the ensure the survival of any required landscaping.
The City may require the removal and replacement of such landscaping where dead, diseased, or damaged landscaping is found. All property owners/occupants shall be responsible for the
maintenance of landscaping within the portion of the public right-ofway between the back of the curb or street pavement and adjacent private property. I. The requirements of section
26-502 shall not apply within any mixed use zone. Sec. 26-1111. Permitted Uses A. Principle: the mixed use zone districts emphasize building form, rather than permitted uses. A range
of uses is permitted to promote mixed use development. B. Permitted and special uses are shown in the following table. This table, and not the table in section 26-204, shall apply for
all of the mixed use zone districts. Uses not listed shall be deemed excluded. 1. The Community Development Director has the authority to determine that a use not specifically listed
should be so permitted or allowed on the basis of it being similar to a listed use, compatible in character and impact with uses in the zone district, consistent with the intent of the
district, and which would not be 18
objectionable to nearby property by reason of odor, dust, fumes, gas, noise, radiation, heat, glare, vibration, traffic generation, parking needs, outdoor storage or use, or is not hazardous
to the health and safety of surrounding areas through danger of fire or explosion. The Director’s decision may be appealed to the Board of Adjustment as an interpretation request. Permitted
Uses Use Group MU-C MU-C Interstate MU-C TOD MU-N Residential Assisted living facility P P P P Dwelling, single detached NP NP NP P Dwelling, single attached P P P P Dwelling, duplex
P NP NP P Dwelling, multiple P P P P Dwelling, live/work P P P P Foster care home NP NP NP P Residential group home P P P P Public, Civic, and Institutional Community buildings and cultural
facilities, including libraries, museums, and art galleries P P P P Hospital C C C NP Parks, open space, playgrounds, and plazas P P P P Place of worship P P P P Public uses and buildings
P P P P Recreation facilities, indoor and outdoor P P P P Schools, public and private; colleges, universities, and trade schools P P P P Utilities, major NP NP NP NP Utilities, minor
P P P P Transit stations, public or private C C C C Commercial Services and Retail Adult entertainment NP NP NP NP Animal daycare, indoor with no outdoor runs or pens P P P P Bail bonds
(per §26-634) C C NP NP 19
Permitted Uses Use Group MU-C MU-C MU-C TOD MU-N Interstate Banks and financial institutions, no drive-through or drive-up P P P P Banks and financial institutions, with drive-through
or drive-up C P C C Bars, taverns, and night clubs P P P P Bed and breakfast P P P P Car washes NP C NP NP Day care center, child and adult P P P P Drive-up or drive-through uses (per
§26-1106.E) C P C C Eating establishment, sit down P P P P Eating establishment, drivethrough or drive-up C P C C Fast food eating establishment, drive-through or drive-up C P C C Motor
fueling stations C C NP C Motor vehicles sales, outdoor display NP NP NP NP Motor vehicle sales, indoor display P P C C Outdoor storage NP NP NP NP Pawn brokers NP NP NP NP Personal
services P P P P Photocopying and printing P P P P Recreation facilities, commercial P P P P Repair, rental and servicing of automobiles, no outdoor storage C P C C Retail sales – up
to 20,000 gsf for one tenant space P P P P Retail sales – up to 60,000 gsf for one tenant space P P C C C Retail
sales – over 60,000 gsf for one tenant space C C NP NP 20
Permitted Uses Use Group MU-C MU-C MU-C TOD MU-N Interstate Veterinary clinics and hospitals, no outdoor runs or pens P P P P Hospitality and Entertainment Art studios and galleries
P P P P Hotels, motels, and extended stay lodging P P P P Studios, including art, music, dance, television and radio broadcasting stations P P P P Theaters P P P P Office and Industrial
Medical and dental clinics P P P P Offices P P P P Office-warehouse, no outdoor storage C C C NP Outdoor storage NP NP NP NP Restricted light industrial C C C NP Wholesale C C C C Ancillary
Uses Parking facilities P P P P Temporary Uses Special events, including festivals and farmers markets P P P P Key: P = Permitted C = Conditional Use (see § 26-1117) NP = Not Permitted
C. Separation requirements for drive-through/drive-up uses: Where drive-through and driveup uses are permitted in the Permitted Use Table (section 26-1111.B) the following separation
requirements shall apply. These separation requirements shall not apply in the MU-C Interstate Sub-district and shall not apply to any mixed use development that has an approved concept
plan (per section 26-1116). 1. There shall be a minimum 500 foot separation between fast food eating establishments with a drive-through, measured radially from any fast food drivethrough
use, including existing uses, regardless of zone district. 2. There shall be a minimum 500 foot separation between all other drivethrough/drive-up uses, including pharmacies, banks,
and non-fast food eating establishments with a drive-up window, measured radially from any drivethrough/drive-up use, including existing uses, regardless of zone district. 21
3. Minimum separation requirements shall only apply to properties that did not have a legal, operating drive-through/drive-up use at the time of rezoning to a mixed use zone district.
D. Separation requirements for motor fueling stations: Where motor fueling stations are permitted in the Permitted Use Table (section 26-1111.B), the following separation requirements
shall apply. These separation requirements shall not apply in the MU-C Interstate Sub-district and shall not apply to any mixed use development that has an approved concept plan (per
section 26-1116). 1. There shall be a minimum 1000 foot separation between motor fueling stations, measured radially from any motor fueling station, including existing uses, regardless
of zone district. 2. Minimum separation requirements shall only apply to properties that did not have a legal, operating fueling station use at the time of rezoning to a mixed use zone
district. Sec. 26-1112. Requirements for Mixed Use Development A. Principle: Buildings and development sites that contain a mix of uses are strongly encouraged. Large development sites
represent an important opportunity for creating quality mixed use developments that will enhance the local economy. B. Except within the MU-N District and MU-C TOD Sub-district, for
development sites over 5 acres and subject to new construction, at least 50 percent of the proposed total square footage at the ground floor level shall contain non-residential uses.
Sec. 26-1113. Signs A. Principle: Signage should complement building and site design and be strategically located to minimize the impact of advertising on the public realm. Signs should
be oriented toward and scaled to the pedestrian. B. All signage shall comply with Chapter 26, Article VII except as modified below: 1. No roof signs are allowed. 2. Wall signs placed
on a vertical architectural element or above a pedestrian entrance may extend above the roof deck by up to 10 feet. This provision shall not apply to mansard roofs. 3. Except within
the MU-C Interstate sub-sub-district, new pole signs shall not be allowed. 4. Monument signs shall not exceed 7 feet in height, measured from the finished grade of the nearest adjacent
pedestrian walk. The base of the monument sign shall be consistent with the materials of the building to which it is associated. 5. Changeable copy signs, flashing signs, and LED electronic
signs shall not be permitted in the MU-N district or the MU-C TOD Sub-district. 6. In the MU-N district, illuminated signs are encouraged to be turned off when businesses are not in
operation. 22
Sec. 26-1114. Exterior Lighting A. Principle: Outdoor lighting should provide safety for pedestrians and reduce glare onto adjacent properties and into the night sky. B. All exterior
lighting shall comply with section 26-503. C. Pedestrian walks internal to a site shall be lit with full cutoff lighting fixtures no more than 12 feet high. Sec. 26-1115. Site Plan Review
A. All site development within the Mixed Use Zone Districts shall be subject to the site plan review process outlined in section 26-111. B. All site plan applications shall be reviewed
for consistency with all standards within this Article and with any applicable concept plan that has been approved for the subject property. C. All approved site plans shall be kept
on file in the Community Development Department. D. Under certain circumstances, subject to approval by the Community Development Director and to be determined at the required pre-application
meeting, site plan review applications may be processed simultaneously with building permit applications. Sec. 26-1116. Concept Plan Review A. For sites 10 acres in size or more, and
for any phased site development, a concept plan application for the entire development site shall be submitted and approved by the Community Development Director prior to any site plan
application(s). B. Prior to submittal of the concept plan, the applicant must complete a pre-application conference per the requirements in section 26-104. C. For sites 10 acres in size
or more, a neighborhood meeting shall be required prior to submittal of the concept plan application. The applicant shall notify all property owners within 600 feet of the development
site and follow the neighborhood meeting requirements per Section 26-109.A.1. D. After the pre-application conference and after the neighborhood meeting, if required, the concept plan
application may be submitted to the Community Development Department for review. The concept plan application shall include the appropriate number of copies, to be determined at the
pre-application conference, and shall include the following information: 1. The concept plan shall be prepared in a 24x36 inch format 2. Vicinity map 3. The boundary of the entire development
site 4. Scale and north arrow 5. Date of map preparation and name and address of person who prepared the map 6. Proposed circulation concepts, including roads, right-of-way, access points,
and sidewalks 7. Proposed building pads and preliminary land use concepts 8. Location of 100 year flood plain, if applicable 23
9. Adjoining property lot lines, building access, parking, so that development compatibility can be determined E. Upon receipt of the concept plan application, the Community Development
Department shall review the application and refer the application to affected public agencies for review and comment, if applicable. F. Public comment period: For sites 10 acres in size
or more, upon submittal of the concept plan application, the applicant shall notify adjacent property owners that the application is available on file at the Community Development Department
for review, in a manner required for neighborhood meetings, subject to Section 26-109.A.1. Public comments related to the proposed concept plan may be submitted to the Community Development
Department within 15 days of the original date of notification. 1. During the same 15-day notification period, the applicant shall also post a sign on all public street frontages at
the development site notifying the public that the concept plan is available for review review and public comment at the Community Development Department. G. The approved concept plan
shall be recorded with Jefferson County Clerk and Recorder’s Office and kept on file with the Community Development Department. H. Amendments to a recorded concept plan will be required
to follow the same review process as the initial concept plan application. Sec. 26-1117. Administrative Adjustment Process A. The Community Development Director may approve minor adjustments
to some standards within this Article. Administrative adjustments are intended to relieve unnecessary hardship in complying with the strict letter of this Article, especially in cases
where unique site or building characteristics exist. B. In order to relieve unnecessary hardship, the Community Development Director may grant administrative adjustments to the following
standards to the extent shown in the table below: Allowed Administrative Adjustments Standard Maximum Allowable Administrative Adjustment Building setback requirements (section 26-1105.C)
10 % Build-to requirements (section 26-1105.E) 10 % Transparency requirements (section 26-1106.D) 10% Block size requirement (section 26-1108.B) 10% Maximum number of drive-up lanes
(section 26-1106.E) One additional drive-up lane Minimum parking requirements (section 26-1109.B) 25% fewer parking spaces than required 24
C. Any proposed variances from the requirements within this Article that do not fall within the table of allowed administrative adjustments shall be required to follow the process for
“Variances of more than fifty (50) percent,” specified in section 26-115.C.3, regardless of whether the request is greater than 50 percent of the applicable development standard. Sec.
26-1118. Conditional Use Permits A. Conditional Uses: Any use with a “C” in the permitted use table in section 26-1111 shall only be allowed if reviewed and approved by the Community
Development Department pursuant to the standards set forth below. 1. Pre-Application Meeting: prior to submittal of a conditional use permit application, the applicant shall attend a
pre-application conference, as described in section 26-104. 2. Conditional Use Permit Application: conditional use permit applications shall be submitted only after a pre-application
meeting. All applications shall be submitted to the Community Development Department. Applications shall conform to the submittal requirements established by the Community Development
Department. 3. Conditional Use Permit Criteria: the following criteria shall be used in evaluating each application. a. The compatibility of the proposed use with the Comprehensive Plan;
b. The compatibility of the proposed use with existing and proposed adjacent uses, in terms of scale, site design, and operating characteristics (including traffic generation, lighting,
noise, and hours of operation); c. The ability to mitigate adverse and undesirable impacts to the surrounding area, including but not limited to visual impacts, air emissions, noise,
vibrations, glare, heat, odors, water pollution, and other nuisance effects; d. Amount of traffic generated and capacity and design of roadways to handle anticipated traffic; e. The
incorporation and integration of architectural and landscape features to mitigate impacts from the proposed use. 4. Conditional Use Permit Approval: the Community Development Director
shall have the authority to approve or deny any conditional use permit application. In approving the application, the Community Development Director may place conditions necessary to
meet the criteria outlined in section 26-1118.A.3 above. 5. A decision by the Community Development Director to deny a conditional use permit application or any conditions on approval
imposed by the Community Development Director may be appealed to the Board of Adjustment in the same manner as administrative variances pursuant to section 26-115.C.2. 6. Time Limit
on Conditional Use Permits: For any applicant to exercise the right to develop a conditional use, a certificate of occupancy for development of the conditional use must be issued within
three years of the date of approval. 25
Sec. 26-1119. Definitions Except as expressly modified below, the definitions in section 26-123 shall apply. The following modified and additional definitions shall apply to the mixed
use zone districts only. Alley: a public or private thoroughfare which gives secondary means of public access to abutting properties or buildings. Assisted living facility: a residential
facility with a combination of residential living units, with or without individual kitchen facilities, and group living facilities such as common kitchen, eating area, patio and/or
recreational area. The facility is used for the care of the infirm or aged, or the rehabilitation of injured individuals, where medical attention in the form of skilled or intermediate
nursing care is provided as a continual or intermittent benefit. Animal daycare facility: a facility licensed by the State of Colorado where animals may be groomed, trained, exercised,
and socialized, but not kept or boarded overnight, bred, sold, or let for hire. Development site: an area of land, which may contain more than one parcel, that is subject to proposed
site development. Drive-through or drive-up uses: uses at which an occupant of a vehicle may make use of the service or business without leaving their vehicle. Driveway: a thoroughfare
for vehicles providing access from a public or private street or alley to a dwelling unit or to a parking area serving structures or facilities. Dwelling, duplex: a building designed
for occupancy by two (2) single family households living in two (2) separate dwelling units attached by one or more common walls. Dwelling, live/work: a combination of residential occupancy
and commercial activity located within a dwelling unit. Typical commercial activities may include home offices, craft work, art studios, jewelry making, and similar activities. Dwelling,
single detached: a single dwelling unit in a single building not attached to other buildings other than those accessory to the dwelling. Dwelling, single attached: three or more dwelling
units where each unit is attached to other units by party walls, and where habitable spaces of different units are arranged side-by-side, rather than a stacked configuration. Façade:
the face, or outside wall, of a building. 26
Fast food eating establishment: an eating/drinking establishment whose principal business is the sale of pre-prepared or rapidly prepared food to the customer in a ready-toconsume state
for consumption either within the restaurant building or off-premises, and whose principal method of operation includes (1) the sale of all foods and beverages, even those served for
consumption on-premises, in paper, plastic, or other disposable containers; or (2) service of food and beverages directly to a customer in a motor vehicle. Fixed guideway rail station:
the station for a fixed guideway system, which is a transportation system that can only operate on its own guideway constructed for that purpose. This includes heavy rail, light rail,
and commuter rail systems. Form: the three dimensional shape and structure of a building. Hard Coat Stucco: a mixture of cement or lime, sand and water, applied in one or more coats.
Does not include synthetic versions of stucco such as Exterior Insulation and Finish System (EIFS). Hardscape: exterior ground surface areas covered with concrete, pavers, brick, stone
or a similar surface and not intended for vehicular use. Human scale: proportions of elements that relate to the size of a human body. LED/electronic sign: a sign that displays information
that is illuminated by light emitting diodes (LED’s), fiber optics, light bulbs, or other electric illumination devices. Mixed use development: a building or development site containing
at least two different use groups in the Permitted Use Table, section 26-1111. Office-warehouse: a use that combines office and storage for goods, wares, and merchandise, including distribution
functions that may require off-street loading. Open space: an outdoor, unenclosed area designed and accessible for outdoor recreation, pedestrian access, or passive leisure use. May
be landscaped or hardscaped. Does not include roads, parking areas, driveways, or other areas intended for vehicular travel. Pedestrian walk: a paved surface expressly intended for pedestrian
use. Includes public and private sidewalks. Personal services: establishments primarily engaged in providing services involving the care of a person and his or her personal goods or
apparel. Personal services usually include the following: laundry (cleaning and pressing); linen supply, diaper service, beauty shops, barbershops, shoe repair, and similar uses. 27
Pole sign: a sign that is affixed or mounted on a freestanding wood or metal pole and anchored in the ground. Place of worship: an establishment that is primarily used a place where
persons regularly assemble for religious worship. This term includes uses such as churches, synagogues, temples, or mosques. Primary street: the street toward which building entrances,
pedestrian features, and site amenities are oriented, and along which service, loading, and parking uses are discouraged. Each building shall have a defined primary street that is approved
by the Community Development Director. Primary street frontage: the property line of a parcel or development site which is directly adjacent to and parallel to the primary street. Public
realm: all areas to which the public has access, including streets, sidewalks, rightsof-ways, parks, plazas, and other publicly accessible open spaces. Public space: a physical space
accessible to the public, including sidewalks, rights-of-ways, parks, and plazas. Restricted light industrial use: specialized non-nuisance type activities that would permit the assembly,
manufacturing, or packaging of products from previously prepared material, such as cloth, plastic, metal, paper, leather, precious or semiprecious stones. The manufacture or assembly
of electronic instruments and devices is also permitted. Such uses include research and development facilities. Secondary street frontage: The property line perpendicular to the primary
street frontage. The secondary street frontage is only applicable for lots with more than one street frontage. Single use development: a building or development site containing land
uses that fall under the same use group in the Permitted Use Table, section 26-1111. Site development: All construction and improvements on any parcel, lot, or tract of property within
the city and on any structure (other than normal maintenance or repair allowed for nonconforming uses), including but not limited to substantial clearing, grading, filling or excavation,
streets and roads, drainage, utilities, parking lots and structures, landscaping, building, building additions or alterations, parking lot lights, street lights, signs and erection or
moving of structures. Site development also includes all those activities listed under “approvals sought” in the review process chart, section 26-106. The community development department
shall have authority to determine whether an activity constitutes site development within the meaning of each section. Such determination may be appealed to the Board of Adjustment.
28
Street: a public or private thoroughfare for vehicular traffic, other than an alley or driveway. Streetscape: The sidewalk, landscaping, and other improvements typically located in the
right-of-way between the curb and the property line. In some cases, streetscapes may be adjacent to a private street or within easements adjacent to the right-of-way. Street wall: The
cumulative effect of adjacent buildings facing onto and providing a consistent edge to a street. Transit station: mass transit stations, including bus or rail terminals/stations or depots.
Usable open space: open space which, by its configuration, size, and design, can be used for passive or active recreation. Usable open space includes plazas, parks, outdoor dining areas,
courtyards, and green roofs. Required buffers and parking lot landscaping shall not qualify as usable open space. Land with a slope steeper than 1 foot (vertical) in 3 feet (horizontal)
shall not qualify as usable open space. Utilities, major: generating plants, electrical substations, switching buildings, refuse collection or disposal facilities, water reservoirs,
water or wastewater treatment plans, and similar scale facilities that have relatively great potential for aesthetic and/or environmental impacts than minor utility facilities. Utilities,
minor: Water, sewer and gas mains; cable, electric and telephone distribution lines, substations, and/or switching facilities; gas regulator stations; public lift or pumping stations
for domestic water and sewer service; photovoltaic panels or wind powered electric generators, and similar facilities of public agencies or utilities. Minor utility facilities generally
do not have employees on-site, and services may be publicly or privately provided. Wholesale sales: sales of goods in large quantities for resale by retailers. Window display graphics:
artistic graphic displays that are mounted within a window or glass panel, that contain no text, and that are not utilized as commercial signage. 29
Section 2: Section 26-104 of the Code is amended to read: Sec. 26-104. Preapplication conference. Prior to the formal submittal of any request for approval to proceed with site development,
an informal preapplication conference shall be held between the applicant and the community development department staff. This conference will serve to acquaint the applicant with the
requirements of this chapter and to allow staff to become familiar with the applicant's development intent and design philosophy. A schematic site plan and building concept drawings
will aid in discussion at this conference; however applicants are encouraged not to prepare detailed designs which might require extensive revision as a result of the preapplication
conference. An applicant should bring the following information in a brief summary: General project concept and information, including the location of the project and a written description
of the proposal. Specific uses proposed, and intensity of use proposed (floor area and parking demand). Proposed construction timing. General concepts concerning building size
and exterior materials and site plan concepts. An exterior materials package including roof material and color, wall treatment, glass and glazing. Site plan concepts including site
organization, landscaping, irrigation, grading, lighting and signs. A site plan drawing depicting the location of existing and proposed buildings, the location of property lines, setback
lines, and build-to lines, circulation concepts, landscaping, the location of loading areas, and the location and size of all parking areas, lighting, and signs. (Ord. No. 2001-1215,
§ 1, 2-26-01; Ord. No. 1288, §§ 1, 2, 5-12-03) Section 3: Section 26-106 of the Code is amended to read: Sec. 26-106. Review process chart. TABLE INSET: Approval Requested Pre-Application
Final Staff Neighborhood Staff PC CC BOA URPC Notes Site Plan 4X A A § 26-111 Mixed Use Concept Plan X 5X A § 26-1116 Mixed Use Conditional Use Permit X A § 26-1118 Major Subdivision
X H H URA § 26-404.C 30
Approval Requested Pre-Application Final Staff Neighborhood Staff PC CC BOA URPC Notes Minor Subdivision (w/dedications) X H H URA § 26-404.B Minor Subdivision (w/o dedications) X H
URA Appeal to CC § 26-404.B Minor Plat Correction, Amendment, Revision X A § 26-409 Lot Line Adjustment X A § 26-410 Consolidation Plat (w/dedication) X H H URA 1 § 26-404.D Consolidation
Plat (w/o dedication) 4X A URA § 26-117 Planned Development: Outline Development Plan (ODP) X X H H URA 2 ART III Planned Development: Final Development Plan (FDP) X A URA ART III Planned
Development: Outline Development Plan Amendment X X H H URA 2 ART III Planned Development: Final Development Plan Amendment X A URA ART III Rezoning, Private X X H H URA 2 § 26-112 Rezoning,
City X H H URA 2 § 26-113 Special Use X X A H URA § 26-114 Appeal to CC Variance--Administrative A A Appeal to BOA § 26-115.C Variance--Nonadministrative H URA § 26-115.C Temporary Permit
H A § 26-115.D Interpretation A Appeal to BOA § 26-115.E 31
Approval Requested Pre-Application Final Staff Neighborhood Staff PC CC BOA URPC Notes Administrative Adjustments to the Official Zoning Map A Appeal to CC § 26-119.E Historic Designation
H URA ART IX Planned Bldg. Group 4X A H A 3 § 26-116 Floodplain Permit--Class I A § 26-806 Floodplain Permit--Class II 4X H § 26-806 Right-of-way Vacation X H H URA § 26-118 1 If five
or fewer parcels, minor subdivision process applies. If more than five parcels, major subdivision process applies. 2 Right of protest applies: Section 26-112.F 3 If four or more buildings
are proposed, then Planning Commission review is required. 4 A pre-application may not be required based on the complexity of the project. 5 Neighborhood meetings for mixed use concept
plan applications are required only for sites of 10 acres in size or larger Key: PC: Planning commission CC: City council BOA: Board of adjustment X: Meeting required H: Public hearing
required A: Administrative review URPC: Urban Renweal Plan compliance required: If "A" is noted, administrative review; if "URA" is noted, review by Wheat Ridge Urban Renewal Authority
is required --see section 26-226. (Ord. No. 2001-1215, § 1, 2-26-01; Ord. No. 1244, § 1, 2-11-02; Ord. No. 1251, § 1, 6-10-02; Ord. No. 1291, § 2, 5-27-03; Ord. No. 1316, § 2, 1-12-04;
Ord. No. 1352, § 5, 9-26-05; Ord. No. 1383, § 7, 5-14-07; Ord. No. 1430, § 4, 2-23-09) Section 4: Section 26-111 of the Code is amended to read: Sec. 26-111. Site plan review. A. Application.
The requirements of this section apply to site development on property for which the use proposed is a use by right, is other than a single-family dwelling or one-duplex dwelling, and
for which subdivision or planned development district approval is not sought. The requirements for site plans required in planned development zone districts are found in those district
regulations. This section establishes the purpose, graphic and informational requirements for site development plans review required in instances other than planned development districts,
including all site development within any mixed use zone district established in Article 11. 32
B. Purpose. This plan The site plan review process provides site relationship and architectural information for decisionmakers to consider in deciding upon applications for use and development.
It is intended to illustrate site design elements, architectural character and consideration of engineering issues to the extent that the potential character and possible impacts are
more clearly definable. It can provide the basis for building permit review, certificate of occupancy review, and future zoning enforcement. The plan will be part of the case file and
record. C. Preapplication conference. Prior to any building permit or site plan application, the applicant must participate in a preapplication conference, as described in section 26-104.
D. Site plan application requirements. All applications shall include at a minimum the following information. Additional information may be requested by the community development department
or the public works department at the preapplication conference. C. Plan requirements. 1. Site plan. 1. a. The site plan shall be prepared in a 24 × 36-inch format. 2. b. Vicinity map.
3. c. The boundary of the site described in bearings and distances and existing and proposed lot lines. 4. d. Legal description of the site matching the certified survey. 5. e. Signed
surveyor's certification. 6. f. Scale and north arrow. 7. g. Date of map preparation and name and address of person who prepared map. 8. h. Location of 100-year floodplain, if applicable.
9. i. Existing and proposed contours at two-foot intervals. 10. j. Location of all existing and proposed: a. (1) Fences, walls or screen plantings and their type and height; b. (2) Exterior
lighting, location, height and type; c. (3) Signs, including type, height and size; d. (4) Open space, L landscaping and special buffers, including type and coverage; e. (5) Parking
and loading areas, handicap parking areas; f. (6) Easements and rights-of-way; g. (7) Drainage ways, pond areas, ditches, irrigation canals, lakes and streams, if applicable; h. h. (8)
Buildings to be developed or retained on the site, including possible use, height, size, floor area, setback dimensions and type of construction; i. (9) Existing and proposed
streets, both adjacent and within the site, including names, widths, location of centerlines, acceleration/deceleration lanes; j. (10) Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, bike paths; k. (11)
Location of trash containers and method of screening, if any; l. (12) Areas to be used for outside work areas, storage or display and method of screening, if any. 11. k. Adjoining property
lot lines, buildings, access, parking, so that development compatibility can be determined. 12. l. Other information which shall be in written or tabular form, including: 33
a. (1) Statement of proposed zoning and any conditions; b. (2) Statement of proposed uses; c. (3) Site data (numeric and percentage) in tabular form, including: Total area of property,
gross and net; Building coverage; Landscape coverage; Total lot coverage by all structures and paving; Number of parking spaces required and provided; Gross floor area; and
Number of residential units and density (if applicable). 13. Dated signature of approval of director of community development or designee. 14. m. In addition to the information included
on the site plan document, the following supportive information may be required: a. (1) Drainage plan; b. (2) Elevations and perspective drawings; c. (3) Traffic impact report. 2. Architectural
Elevations. a. Architectural elevations shall be prepared in a 24x36 inch format; b. Detailed elevations for each façade of proposed building(s), clearly labeled; c. Notes indicating
all proposed materials and colors; d. Depictions and labeling of all transparent areas; areas; e. Labeled dimensions of building height, floor-to-floor heights, and building width; f.
Elevations for any accessory appurtenance such as trash enclosures, with materials clearly labeled. 3. Landscape Plan a. The landscape plan shall be prepared in a 24x36 inch format;
b. Location and dimensions of all open space areas, including minimum required usable open space for site development within a mixed use zone district; c. Proposed materials for all
landscaped and hardscaped areas; d. Location and type of all trees and other plantings; e. Schedule of proposed plantings; f. Table showing open space or landscape area required and
provided. (Ord. No. 2001-1215, § 1, 2-26-01; Ord. No. 1288, §§ 1, 2, 5-12-03) Section 5: Section 26-112 of the Code is amended to read: Sec. 26-112. Private rezoning. A. Purpose. A change
of any zone district as shown on the official zoning map is permitted only when it is consistent with the goals and policies of the Wheat Ridge Comprehensive Plan and promotes the general
welfare of the community. If a proposed 34
amendment is not consistent with the comprehensive plan, then the request may only be approved if the applicant demonstrates that the request is justified because of changed or changing
conditions in the particular area or in the city in general, or the rezone is necessary to correct a manifest error in the existing zone classification. A manifest error may include,
but may not be limited to, one (1) or more of the following: 1. Mapping errors, including incorrect boundary location or incorrect zone designation, or 2. Ordinance errors, including
incorrect zone designation, legal description error or typographical errors. The final decision on a change of zone expressly rests in the exercise of the discretion of the city council
and all applicants are advised there is no right to a change of zone of property. B. Applicability. The requirements of this section shall be applicable throughout the boundaries of
the City of Wheat Ridge and to any areas that are proposed to be annexed to the city where one (1) of the following is proposed: 1. Change of zone of a parcel of land from one (1) zone
district classification to another zone district. 2. Changing of the conditions of an existing zone district where those conditions were specifically established by a previous rezoning
ordinance. 3. Changes to a planned development preliminary or final development plan, including density (units per acre), intensity (floor area ratio), an increase or change of uses,
or other changes which constitute a substantial change in character of development as determined by the director of community development. 4. In the event an applicant for site development
or rezoning, other than within or to a mixed use zone district, owns adjacent property which, taken together with the property which is the subject of the application totals more than
one (1) acre, the applicant must process the application as a planned development under article III. . . . (Ord. No. 2001-1215, § 1, 2-26-01; Ord. No. 1288, §§ 1, 2, 5-12-03; Ord. No.
1299, § 2, 7-14-14-03; Ord. No. 1352, § 2, 9-26-05; Ord. No. 1383, § 2, 5-14-2007) Section 6: Section 26-116 of the Code is amended to read: Sec. 26-116. Planned building groups (PBG).
A. Purpose. The primary purpose of this provision is to allow flexibility and diversification in the location of structures and the design and land use of a lot held under single or
common ownership by permitting more than one (1) main structure to be constructed thereon. It promotes better overall utilization of a building site by promoting improved vehicular and
pedestrian circulation and access, more efficient layout of 35
parking and a better overall landscape and architectural design scheme for the total site, while at the same time ensuring adequate standards relating to public health, safety, welfare
and convenience in the use and occupancy of buildings and facilities in planning building groups. B. Scope and limitations. The procedures and provisions set forth in this section shall
be applicable to all zone districts except planned development zone districts and mixed use zone districts, as those district regulations provide for multiple main structures on a lot
under different procedures and provisions. It is not intended for this provision to be used to circumvent the requirements of the zoning ordinance for lot perimeter setbacks, lot size,
lot coverage, residential density or any other provisions of the zoning ordinance except the requirement that only one (1) main building is permitted on one (1) lot. It also shall not
be construed to waive any provisions of the subdivision regulations. Any subsequent division of a lot developed in accordance with the provisions set forth herein shall be required to
meet all subdivision requirements. C. Application procedures. All applications for planned building groups shall be filed with the department of community development by the owner of
the entire land area to be included and shall be accompanied by the fee set forth in Appendix A (which is on file and available for inspection in the office of the city clerk), adequate
proof of ownership, a certified survey of the parcel, and a site plan under section 26-111. All applications shall be reviewed by the department of community development for completeness
and, if found to be complete, shall be transmitted to any other agency which might be affected. Any such agency may transmit comments and recommendations to the department of community
development. The director of community development and/or the planning commission shall consider such agency comments and recommendations when establishing necessary conditions and limitations
when acting upon applications. . . . (Ord. No. 2001-1215, § 1, 2-26-01; Ord. No. 1288, §§ 1, 2, 5-12-03; Ord. No. 1352, § 3, 9-26-05; Ord. No. 1383, § 5, 5-14-07) Section 7: Section
26-120 of the Code is amended to read: Sec. 26-120. Nonconforming lots, uses and structures. A. Scope and intent: 1. Within the districts created by the adoption of this zoning code,
or by the adoption of amendments, there may exist lots, structures or uses of land and structures which were legal prior to the time of the adoption or amendment of this chapter but
which are now prohibited or regulated. It is the intent of this chapter to permit these nonconformities to continue until they are voluntarily removed, or until they are amortized, but
not to encourage their survival. It is further intended that these nonconformities will not be enlarged, expanded, or extended, nor will they be used as grounds for adding other uses
or structures prohibited in the district. In cases 36
where a nonconformity constitutes an eminent public safety hazard or threat, the nonconforming situation may be ordered corrected or removed. 2. Any building or structure for which a
building permit has been issued or a use of land or structure for which a use permit has been granted prior to the effective date of enactment or amendment of this chapter which created
the nonconformity may be completed and used in accordance with the plans, specifications and permit on which the building or use permit was granted, if construction in the case of a
building, or occupancy in the case of use, is commenced within sixty (60) days after the issuance of the permit and diligently carried to completion or occupancy. B. Nonconforming lots
of record: In any district in which single-family dwellings are permitted, a single-family residence and customary accessory buildings may be erected on any single lot of record, provided
that the lot is in separate ownership and not of continuous frontage with other lots under the same ownership. This provision shall apply even though the lot fails to meet the requirements
of the district in which it is located for area, width, or both; provided, however, that the requirements of the district for minimum yard dimensions and lot coverage shall be met. If
two (2) or more lots or combinations of lots and portions of lots with continuous frontage in single ownership are of record, and part or all of the lots do not meet the requirements
of the district in which they are located as to minimum area or frontage or both, the lands shall be considered to be an undivided parcel and no portion of the parcel shall be sold or
used in a manner which diminishes compliance with minimum lot width and area requirements. C. Nonconforming structures and uses. Where a structure or use lawfully existed at the time
of the adoption or amendment of this chapter which could not be built or maintained under the current requirements of this chapter because of lot area, lot coverage, required yards or
the location of the structure on the lot, such structure or use may be continued so long as it remains otherwise lawful, subject to the following. 1. Any one-or two-family dwelling structure
or customary accessory structures may be enlarged, altered or added to provided that all lot coverage requirements of the zoning district in which the structure is located are met, and
provided that the enlargement, alteration or addition does not increase the extent of nonconforming setbacks by encroaching beyond the existing setback line. In instances of corner lots,
no enlargement, alteration or addition shall be permitted to encroach within the minimum sight distance triangle as set forth in subsection 26-603B. In addition, no enlargement, alteration
or addition which extends within the nonconforming area shall result in the development of any additional dwelling units. 2. If any structure or nonconforming portion thereof is demolished
or reconstructed by the owner to an extent of more than fifty (50) percent of its replacement cost, it shall not be reconstructed except in conformity with the applicable provisions
of this chapter. 37
3. If any structure should for any reason be moved from its location at the time of adoption or amendment of this chapter, it shall conform to the provisions of the district in which
it is located after it is moved. 4. No existing structure devoted to a use not permitted by this chapter in the district in which located shall be enlarged, extended, constructed, reconstructed,
moved or structurally altered except in changing the use of the structure to a use permitted in the district in which it is located. 5. Any nonconforming use may be extended throughout
any part of the building which was designed or arranged for such use at the time of adoption or amendment of this chapter, but no such use shall be extended to occupy any land outside
such building. In addition, no such use shall be extended to any portion of the property outside of any building which was not used for said nonconforming use at the time of the adoption
or amendment of this chapter creating said nonconforming use. 6. Whenever any nonconforming use of a structure, or land, or a structure and land in combination is discontinued for twelve
(12) consecutive months sixty (60) consecutive days or six (6) months during any three-year period (except when government action impedes access to the property) the structure, or structure
and premises in combination shall not thereafter be devoted to a use not permitted in the district in which is located. Nonconforming residential structures and uses are exempt from
the provisions of this subparagraph. Rezoning or special use permit applications for properties which are nonconforming uses at the time of application, and where these applications
are intended to bring the nonconforming use into use conformance, shall not be charged application fees or be required to reimburse the city for direct expenses related to the application
review process. 7. Setback encroachments for accessory buildings may be allowed where the principal structure encroaches into required setbacks in accordance with section 26-625. 8.
A nonconforming structure, or a structure that contains a nonconforming use, that has been involuntarily damaged, in whole or in part, by fire, flood, wind or other calamity may be restored
to its original size and scope, provided such work is in compliance with all technical codes adopted under Chapter 5, article 3 of this Code. Restoration work shall commence within six
months of the damage occurring and shall be completed within 12 months of the date on which the restoration commenced. 9. No use or structure originally nonconforming which is rendered
conforming may be returned to its nonconforming use or form. D. Repairs and maintenance: On any nonconforming structure or portion of a structure containing a nonconforming use, work
may be done during any one (1) year period on ordinary repairs, or on repair and replacement of nonbearing wall fixtures, wiring or 38
plumbing; provided that the cubic content existing when it became nonconforming is not increased. If a nonconforming structure or portion of a structure devoted to a nonconforming use
becomes physically unsafe or unlawful due to lack of repairs and maintenance, and it is declared by the director of community development to be unsafe or unlawful by reason of physical
condition, it shall not thereafter be restored, rebuilt or repaired except in conformity with the regulations of the district in which it is located. Nothing in this chapter shall be
deemed to prevent the strengthening or restoring to a safe condition of any building or part thereof declared to be unsafe by any official charged with protection of the public safety.
E. Exceptions: 1. Government actions. Whenever the City of Wheat Ridge or the State of Colorado shall, through a purchase, condemnation or a required dedication of land for street widening
or extension purposes, cause any lot, structure or use maintained upon that lot to become nonconforming in the areas of setback, area of lot, or parking and landscape requirements, the
existing lot, structure or use, which would otherwise become nonconforming, shall be considered conforming, subject to the following: a. The nonconformity that was created by street
right-of-way widening or extension was not anticipated by adopted plans which were in effect as of the date of commencement of the original construction or use; and b. Any nonconformity
other than those created by the above-described governmental action, and which existed prior to the date of the governmental action, shall be considered a nonconformity which is subject
to the remaining provisions of this section. 2. Variances and waivers. Any lot or structure which is granted a variance or waiver in accordance with section 26-115 shall not be deemed
a nonconforming lot or structure. 3. Private roadways. Dwellings or other structures existing in the City of Wheat Ridge on private roads or legally recorded easements shall not be considered
to be nonconforming by virtue of such cases. F. Miscellaneous nonconformities: Existing uses and/or developed lands which are nonconforming due to ingress/egress, landscaping, parking,
signage or public improvements may be continued notwithstanding the provisions of subsections C. and D., above; provided, however, that any reconstruction, enlargement or addition meets
the specific nonconforming provisions related to the particular nonconformity as specified in the appropriate section. (See section 26-501 for parking and ingress/egress; section 26-502
for landscaping; article VII for signs; and section 26-110 for public improvements.) (Ord. No. 2001-1215, § 1, 2-26-01; Ord. No. 1288, §§ 1, 2, 5-12-03; Ord. No. 1448, § 1, 8-24-09)
39
Section 8: Section 26-301 of the Code is amended to read: Sec. 26-301. Scope and application. A. There is hereby created a Planned Development District to further promote the public
health, safety and general welfare by permitting greater flexibility and innovation in land development based upon a comprehensive, integrated plan. For the purpose of ensuring maximum
flexibility of this district, the district is divided into the following planned development zone district categories, based on the primary land use of a proposed development plan or
portion thereof: 1. Planned Residential Development--PRD. 2. Planned Commercial Development--PCD. 3. Planned Industrial Development--PID. 4. Planned Hospital Development--PHD. 5. Planned
Mixed Used Development--PMUD. By creating the above zone district categories, the city council recognizes that these zone district categories may exist singly or in combination within
any approved planned development. B. On and after the effective date of this chapter as set forth in section 26-1003, all applications for private rezoning under section 26-112 for properties
in excess of one (1) acre (for rezoning to residential or industrial zones), and all applications for private rezoning to any commercial district, with the exception of a rezoning to
any mixed use district, shall be required to request rezoning to one (1) of the listed planned development zone district categories. The procedure for review of any planned development
application shall be that for private rezoning at section 26-112. A Planned Development District may be approved for any single use or any combination of uses; provided, that the intent
and purposes of this section are met, and that the general health, safety and welfare of the community are advanced through its approval. This section shall apply to: 1. Any new application
for a rezoning to a Planned Development District. 2. Any application for amendment to an existing planned development zone district. . . . (Ord. No. 2001-1215, § 1, 2-26-01; Ord. No.
1319, 1319, § 1, 4-12-04) Section 9: Section 26-610 of the Code is amended to read: Sec. 26-610. Building lots. Every building or structure hereafter erected within the city shall be
located on a lot, as defined herein, and in no instance shall there be more than one (1) main building on one (1) lot except as permitted within a Planned Development District, within
a mixed use district, or as permitted as a planned building group (PBG). (Ord. No. 2001-1215, § 1, 2-26-01) 40
Section 10: Section 26-708 of the Code is amended to read: Sec. 26-708. Miscellaneous provisions. . . . E. Master sign plan. 1. The planning commission may approve a master sign plan
for any existing or proposed commercial, mixed use, or industrial development of at least two (2) acres or more in size which is under unified control either by ownership, legal association
or leasehold. 2. The intent and purpose is to encourage well-planned and designed signage within a large multiple building or multiple use complex which expresses unification and integration
by elements of architectural style, size, color, placement and lighting while at the same time allowing for reasonable individual business identification. An additional purpose is to
encourage the elimination of existing nonconforming signs. The planning commission may grant as a bonus for well-designed plans additional signs and/or up to a fifty (50) percent increase
in maximum square footage for each sign, and/or may permit signs in locations other than normally permitted, based upon a finding that the proposed master sign plan substantially meets
the intent and purpose of this subsection relating to unification and integration of signage. 3. Once approved at a public hearing by planning commission, all master sign plans shall
be recorded with the Jefferson County Recorder's Office and shall constitute a covenant and must be complied with by all owners, proprietors, lessees or assigns, whether current or future.
No substantial variation from the plan shall be permitted without planning commission approval. Noticing requirements for a master sign plan process shall follow the procedures outlined
in section 26-109. F. Signs in the right-of-way. 1. The community development director and public works director may jointly approve freestanding signs which are otherwise permitted
to advertise a property, to be located in the public right-of-way immediately adjacent to that property, subject to all of the following criteria: a. there are no viable alternative
locations on the subject property; b. the sign is for a property with commercial or mixed use zoning; c. the sign will be within right-of-way that is immediately adjacent to the subject
property; d. the sign is not in the right-of-way of a state highway; e. there are no immediate plans for widening the street as identified in the 5-year Capital Investment Program (CIP)
or planning documents; f. the sign is not for a site being completely redeveloped with new construction, in which case the proposed design should incorporate the sign on site; g. no
underground utilities, except for electricity, exist in the proposed location for the sign; h. the sign does not obstruct the sidewalk or vehicular traffic; 41
i. the sign complies with sight distance triangle requirements per section 26-603.B; j. the sign is not located in the landscape buffer or amenity zone located between the back of curb
and the sidewalk; k. the sign is not a pole sign; and l. the sign must exclusively advertise or identify the business or operation located only on the immediately adjacent property for
which sign is permitted. 2. Signs that meet the above criteria shall obtain a sign permit through the community development department and a right-of-way use permit through the department
of public works. 3. Notwithstanding Section 26-115, the decision of the community development director and public works director to grant or deny a permit under this subsection F shall
be the final decision of the City, appealable only to the district court. G. Signs in Mixed Use Zone Districts. Signs in any mixed use zone district must also comply with requirements
in section 26-113. (Ord. No. 2001-1215, § 1, 2-26-01; Ord. No. 1396, § 1, 7-23-07) Section 11: Section 26-710 of the Code is amended to read: Sec. 26-710. Commercial, industrial and
mixed use zone districts sign standards chart. TABLE INSET: TABLE 1. SIGN STANDARDS IN COMMERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL AND MIXED USE DISTRICTS (NC, RC, C-1, C-2, I, MU-C, MU-C TOD, MU-C Interstate,
MU-N) . . . (Ord. No. 2001-1215, § 1, 2-26-01; Ord. No. 1396, § 1, 7-23-07) Section 12: Safety Clause. The City Council hereby finds, determines, and declares that this Ordinance is
promulgated under the general police power of the City of Wheat Ridge, that it is promulgated for the health, safety and welfare of the public and that this Ordinance is necessary for
the preservation of health and safety and for the protection of public convenience and welfare. The City Council further determines that the Ordinance bears a rational relation to the
proper legislative object sought to be attained. 42
43 Section 13: Severability; Conflicting Ordinances Repealed. If any section, subsection or clause of the ordinance shall be deemed to be unconstitutional or otherwise invalid, the validity
of the remaining sections, subsections and clauses shall not be affected thereby. All other ordinances or parts of the ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance are
hereby repealed. Section 14: Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect fifteen days after final publication, as provided by Section 5.11 of the Charter. INTRODUCED, READ, AND
ADOPTED on first reading, ordered it published with Public Hearing and consideration of final passage set for Monday, September 13th, 2010 at 7:00 p.m., in the Council Chambers, 7500
West 29th Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado, and that it takes effect 15 days after final publication READ, ADOPTED AND ORDERED PUBLISHED on second and final reading by a vote of _____ to
____, this 13th day of September, 2010. SIGNED by the Mayor on this ______ day of _________________, 2010. _____________________________________ Jerry DiTullio, Mayor ATTEST: ________________________
________ Michael Snow, City Clerk Approved As To Form ______________________________________ Gerald E. Dahl, City Attorney First Publication: ____________________________ Second Publication:
_________________________ Wheat Ridge Transcript: ______________________ Effective Date: ______________________________
_ City of ?Wheat~dge ITEM NO: "l. DATE: August 23,2010 REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION TITLE: RESOLUTION NO. 45-2010 -A RESOLUTION APPROVING A SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET APPROPRIATION IN THE
AMOUNT OF $65,000 FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONDUCTING A TRAFFIC STUDY AND ROADWAY DESIGN ANALYSIS FOR 38TH AVENUE IN CONJUNCTION WITH DEVELOPMENT OF A 38TH A VENUE CORRIDOR PLAN D PUBLIC HEARING
D BIDS/MOTIONS ~ RESOLUTIONS Community De elop ISSUE: D ORDINANCES FOR 1 ST READfNG D ORDINANCES FOR 2ND READING YES CIty Manager Thirty-eighth (38th) Avenue between Sheridan and Wadsworth
is one of five high priority areas for reinvestment and revitalization in Envision Wheal Ridge, the City's Comp,rehensive Plan. That plan recommended the City develop a more specific
corridor plan for 38t 1 Avenue. The corridor is also a high priority investment area in the City's Economic Development Strategic Plan. WR2020's strategic plan places a high priority
on 38th Avenue. In late 2009 they commissioned a market study and revitalization assessment of of 38th Avenue from the Department of Local Affairs (DOLA) and Downtown Colorado Inc. (DCI).
The final report recommended developing a more detailed vision and corridor plan, as well as consideration for potential modifications to the street that might decrease the automotive
emphasis it currently has. To properly develop a realistic corridor vision and plan for 38th Avenue, it is important to establish a clear vision. A large part oflhat vision will be the
design character and use of the street itself and how it relates back to the private properties. In order to consider alternative designs, it is I·\rnllnril A r l inn t='nrrnc:\,)lll
(\ rmmril A rtinn l='(\rrn c:\ I nfHl,,) 1. r A 1='1. 2th A"". <:::tllrh , h"rln ... t <;)nn .-In ...
Supplemental Budget Request for 38th Avenue August 23, 20 I 0 Page 2, ... • necessary to conduct a traffic study and roadway design analysis utilizing an outside traffic consultant to
conduct these analyses. Staff has estimated the work will cost $65,000. PRIOR ACTION: City Council was briefed on April 5 regarding 38"t Avenue and the DOLAlDCI Report and recommendations.
At that time, City Council directed staff from WR2020 and the City to come back with a more targeted action plan and more specifically a scope of work for the Corridor Plan. Staff presented
a scope of work for the subarea plan at the August 2 study session, including a request for Council to consider a supplemental budget for the traffic and roadway analysis. FINANCIAL
IMPACT: The $65,000 supplemental budget appropriation being requested would need to be transferred from the general fund reserves. BACKGROUND: The SOW for a 38th Ave. Corridor Plan is
attached. The SOW begins with an analysis of current conditions and existing plans and studies including the development of a Potential for Change Map as recommended in the CRP report.
The Potential for Change Map would combine data to help identify those areas
with factors most favorable for redevelopment. This data analysis can be done by staff and possibly an unpaid intern from the University of Colorado Denver graduate programs. The community
participation process for the plan would be defined by a group made up of City staff, WR2020, LiveWell Wheat Ridge (LWWR) and a consultant. LWWR has provided a grant in the amount of$12,250
to hire a consultant to undertake community input sessions to obtain feedback from the public about how they would like to see 38th Ave. redevelop, and also to provide information about
LWWR goals of healthy eating and active living. Three community sessions are planned which will act as the public input for the corridor plan. A key component of the community sessions
will be developing a vision for the corridor looking at desired land uses, urban design, architectural character, branding and the role of the street and streetscape. Another component
of community participation would be the formation of a Corridor Plan Stakeholder Committee, made up of property owners, business owners, residents and other community stakeholders to
assist with development of the Plan. The Committee would be formed by the City in conjunction with WR2020. The corridor plan elements will include Market Strategy, Land Use, Traffic
Analysis and Roadway Design, and Urban Design. The Market Strategy can be completed by staff and WR2020 using the CRP report, Envision Wheat Ridge data and a market analysis done by
Leland Associates for Renewal Wheat Ridge. In addition, the Land Use and Urban Design elements can also be completed by staff using already completed documents and possible assistance
from an intern. A recommendation of the CRP report was possibly altering (reducing) the number of lanes in certain portions of the corridor in order to incorporate bicycle and pedestrian
faciliti es, on-street
Supplemental Budget Request for 38'h Avenue August 23, 2010 Page 3 parking and landscaping. In order for this to be seriously considered, in-depth traffic data collection and traffic
analysis would need to be done in addition to roadway design feasibility studies. Public Works recommends that a transportation consultant be hired to complete these studies. The Traffic
Analysis and Roadway Design is a critical component of the corridor plan since the roadway design will directly impact land use and urban design decisions along the corridor. The Public
Works Department has estimated approximately $65,000 would be needed to hire a consultant to complete the needed studies for the corridor. This includes $30,000 for a Traffic Feasibility
Study and $35,000 for a Roadway Design Feasibility Study. If the $65,000 is approved for the transportation studies, the community input sessions and transportation studies would be
combined in a Request for Proposal to hire one consultant to undertake both aspects of the planning work. This would be the most effective approach in providing continuity through the
roadway studies, community input sessions and visioning. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff is requesting approval of the supplemental budget appropriation in order to give proper consideration
to the possibility of modi lYing the street design and/or use of38'h Avenue between roughly Sheridan and Wadsworth. The cost of that analysis is estimated at $65,000. If approved by
City Council, staff would develop an RFP and solicit consultant services to support both the corridor plan effort and the traffic and engineering analysis. Resolution No. 45-2010 would
authorize a supplemental budget appropriation. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to approve Resolution No. 45-2010, a resolution amending the Fiscal Year 2010 General Fund budget to reflect
the approval of a supplemental budget appropriation of $65,000 to be used for a traffic study and roadway design analysis on 38'h Avenue." Or, "I move to deny Resolution No. 45-2010,
a resolution amending the Fiscal Year 2010 General Fund budget to reflect the approval of a supplemental budget appropriation of $65,000 to be used for a traffic study and roadway design
analysis on 38'h Avenue for the following reason(s) " REPORT PREPARED BY: Kenneth Johnstone, Director of Community Development A TT ACHMENTS: I. Resolution No. 45-2010 2. Draft Scope
of Work
CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO RESOLUTION NO. 45 Seriesof2010 TITLE: A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2010 GENERAL FUND BUDGET TO REFLECT THE APPROVAL OF A SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET APPROPRIATION
FOR A 38TH AVENUE TRAFFIC STUDY AND ROADWAY DESIGN ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS IN THE AMOUNT OF $65,000 WHEREAS, the City's Comprehensive Plan, Envision Wheat Ridge and Economic Development
Strategic Plan place high priority on economic development and redevelopment on the 38th Avenue Corridor from Sheridan to Wadsworth; and WHEREAS, Envision Wheat Ridge recommends that
a more detailed Corridor Subarea Plan be developed by the City for this strategic corridor; and WHEREAS, the City has received a $12.500 grant from LiveWell Wheat Ridge to assist in
the public outreach and visioning portion of the subarea plan development process; and WHEREAS, the possibility of modifying the roadway design to achieve other urban design goals and
to provide higher levels of service for other travel modes will be considered as part of the corridor planning process; and WHEREAS, the analysis of the roadway design requires more
technical traffic and engineering analysis that requires the City to contract for external traffic engineering services in the amount of $65,000; and WHEREAS, said funds were not included
in the 2010 General Fund Budget. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Wheat Ridge, Colorado, as follows: A. The City of Wheat Ridge fiscal year 2010 General
Fund Budget be amended accordingly, specifically transferring a total of $65,000.00 from General Fund unreserved fund balance into account #01-123-700-750 (Community Development, Long
Range Planning, Professional Services). DONE AND RESOLVED THIS 23'd Day of August 2010. Jerry DiTullio, Mayor ATTEST: Michael Snow, City Clerk Attachment 1
38TH AVE. CORRIDOR PLAN SCOPE OF WORK DRAFT CORRIDOR PLAN TASKS: (responsibilities/source) 1. Analysis of Current conditions and existing plans and studies (including Neighborhood Revitalization
Strategy, Envision Wheat Ridge, Urban Renewal Plan, CRPIDOLA Report, Leland market study) Responsible: Staff, consultant to review results, possible intern Existing plans/documents/surveys.
Issues identification/SWOT analysis. Inventory mapping/data gathering. Define planning arealresidentialline. Corridor profile. Develop Potential for Change Map: GIS Based -inputs to
be included: Ownership Parcel Size Vacancies Building assessment Improvement to land value ratios Location at major intersection Access to public amenities 2. Define Community Participation
Plan Responsible: Staff, LiveWell Wheat Ridge, WR2020, consultant IdentifY Stakeholders and develop project mailing list. Appoint Corridor Plan Stakeholder Committee. Conduct of three
community input sessions. Meet with Stakeholder Committee to assist in development of corridor vision and development of corridor plan elements. Provide regular updates on planning process
and recommendations to Planning Commission and City Council. Conduct public hearings before Planning Commission and City Council to adopt Corridor Plan. 3. Project Kick Off and Community
Outreach Responsible: Consultant for community input sessions 4. Define Corridor Future Vision and Goals as first step in development of Corridor Plan Responsible: Consultant through
community input sessions Utilize existing recent planning documents as starting point and Potential for Change Map. Facilitate 3 community input sessions to refine corridor vision, including:
desired urban design and architectural character, desired land uses, Attachment 2 1
unique image or branding characteristics the role of the street and streetscape in defining the vision Prepare draft vision statement and vision plan and goals s. Prepare Corridor Plan
Responsible: City Staff and possible intern Corridor Plan Elements to include: Vision and Goals (Consultant through community input sessions) Market Strategy/Economic Restructuring (Staff
and WR2020) • Review of CRP report and Leland market data to understand potential market capture • Identify desired market sectors to be targeted in the corridor • Identify incentive
tools appropriate to entice targeted market sectors • Identify organizational entities necessary to achieve vision • Develop marketing plan Land Use (internal WR staff through CRP Report/Leland
study) • Existing land use patterns • Existing zoning • Present trends • Future desired development • Interface/transition with residential • Housing options • Identify Catalyst Nodes
from Potential for Change Map Traffic Analysis and Roadway Design (Traffic consultant if if additional funds approved) • 38th Ave. existing section analysis. • Analysis of existing private
property access points. • Traffic analysis of the impact of reducing lanes on adjacent corridors. • Traffic volumes. • Development of recommended street section. • Streetscape recommendations.
• Implementation recommendations, both full implementation and phased approach. Speci fic Traffic Feasibility Study items ($30,000 for consultant if approved) • Collect AM and PM peak
hour turning movement counts at the street intersections. • Estimate 2035 turning movement counts using the DRCOG travel demand model for a four-lane and a three-lane facility. • Project
the alternate routes and volumes of traffic diverted from 38th Ave. with a three-lane facility. • Determine if alternative routes identified above can accommodate the additional traffic.
• Program a Synchro network to analyze existing and 2035 traffic operations relative to levels of service. 2
• Identify intersections that will require turn lanes with the three-lane facility. Specific Design Feasibility Study ($35,000 for consultant if approved) • Identify RTD bus pull-out
locations. • Determine locations of possible on-street parking. • Develop alternatives for curb and gutter re-location (no re-location, relocate north or south curb, adjust both curb
lines). • Prepare conceptual design of curb and gutter re-location. • Identify the re-located curb ramp locations at all intersections. • Pre-design the connection of existing sidewalks
to new intersection curb ramps. • Pre-design the property driveway extensions to the new curb and gutter. • Investigate possible re-locations of traffic signal poles, including installation
of remote pedestrian push buttons and longer mast arms. • Locate possible landscape areas. • Develop preliminary cost estimates Urban Design (Staff and possible intern, WR2020) • Streetscape
• Vacant properties/windows • Public spaces • Signage 6. Develop Implementation Plan Responsible: Staff and WR2020 7. Adoption of Subarea Plan 3
• City of J?" Wheat R.L..dge TTEMNO:~ DATE: August 23,2010 REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION TITLE: MOTION TO INCLUDE FUNDING FOR A LOCAL MATCH FOR A FEDERAL TRANSPORTATION PLANNING GRANT
APPLICATION IN THE 2011 BUDGET AS PART OF THE WADSWORTH CORRIDOR COALITION D PUBLIC HEARING ~ BIDS/MOTIONS D RESOLUTIONS QUASI-JUDICIAL: ISSUE: D ORDINANCES FOR I ST READING D ORDINANCES
FOR 2ND READING D YES Stafffrom cities abutting Wadsworth Boulevard as well as RTD and CDOT staff have met twice over the summer to discuss the future of this important roadway. The
City of Arvada initiated the meetings at the direction of their City Council, which has placed a high priority on studying the future of Wadsworth. The group has been meeting under the
name of the Wadsworth Corridor Coalition. One of the primary motivations of forming the group has been to pursue federal planning grant funding that could be used to study long range
transportation and land use options for the corridor. Specifically, the group has been preparing to to submit for a TIGER 11 Planning Grant. This federal grant program is intended to
fund projects that promote sustainable development that link transportation and land use and provide more livable communities. The grant application requires a commitment for a 20% local
match. The match can be met with either in-kind resources such as staff time or cash outlays. Tfthe grant were received, the local match would be needed in 2011. Exactly how the local
match would be shared among the partner agencies and municipalities is still being determined. However, in order to submit a valid application, the partners need to provide formal written
commitment to a minimum level of funding. Local match for TIGER /I Transportation Planning Grant
Council Action Form August 23 , 2010 Page 2 ~ .C' PRIOR ACTION: Staff has previously provided a very general update to City Council regarding the initial meetings of the Wadsworth Corridor
Coalition. Staff has not previously discussed the need for local match funding for the pending federal grant application. FINANCIAL IMPACT: Staff is requesting funding at a level not
to exceed $40,000 to he included in the 2011 budget. BACKGROUND: Wadsworth Boulevard (SH 121) stretches 25 miles from US 36 in Westminster to C470 in unincorporated Jefferson County.
The Regional Transportation District (RTD) currently provides bus service on Wadsworth. The corridor is identified as an "Enhanced Transit Corridor" in the Denver Regional Council of
Governments (DRCOG) 2035 Regional Transportation Plan. The corridor also links 4 transit lines that are planned and funded in the RTD FasTracks program: 1) West Corridor light rail;
2) Gold Line commuter rail ; 3) Northwest Rail commuter rail; and 4) US36 Bus Rapid Transit. Exactly what additional transit option would be appropriate for the long term future of Wadsworth
has not been determined. The City of Arvada recently initiated a series of meeting with transportation and planning staffs from the Cities of Arvada, Wheat Ridge, Westminster and Lakewood,
the Counties of Broomfield and Jefferson, the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT), RTD and LiveWell Wheat Ridge. The group is being referred to as the Wadsworth Corridor Coalition
and is modeled loosely after the US36 Coalition, which has been a longstanding coalition of jurisdictions along that highway, that have been successful in collaborating and jointly lobbying
for transportation funding at a regional, state and federal level. The purpose of the Wadsworth Corridor Coalition would be to seek funding to study and ultimately build a multi-modal
transportation solution for Wadsworth. The intent is that the transportation solution supports a more sustainable and livable land use vision. This purpose aligns with Wheat Ridge's
long term vision to redevelop Wadsworth as a more walkable, sustainable, mixed use corridor, with multi-modal transportation options. The short term goal of the Coalition is to submit
an application for a federal transportation planning grant in the amount of $2,500,000 to study long term transportation (including transit) and land use options for the corridor. Some
City Council members for the City of Arvada have specifically expressed an interest in studying the feasibility of Streetcar technology for the corridor; however, that would be just
one of several transit options that would be considered in the proposed study. Given the amount of money available and being requested and the significant length of the corridor, the
level of detail in the study would not rise to the level of a federal Environmental Assessment (EA). However, the proposal is to study the corridor under the federal rules for a Planning
and Environmental Linkages (PEL) process. The PEL process is officially recognized by applicable federal agencies as a first step in a future EA. What that means is that the work done
during the proposed PEL process would be the starting point for an EA and would make the EA process simpler.
Council Action Fonn August 23, 2010 Page 3 The uncertainty of the future of Wadsworth has long been a detriment to reinvestment in the corridor, particularly in Wheat Ridge where no
state or federally approved study of the corridor has ever been completed. Issues pertaining to future bicycle and pedestrian systems, transit options, right of way width, etc. have
been unknown and it has been challenging to plan for the future with that uncertainty. The opportunity to enhance transit options on Wadsworth is particularly interesting to the extent
that it would provide Wheat Ridge residents and businesses significantly better access to the FasTracks transit program, providing linkages to the West Corridor, Gold Line, US36 BRT
and Northwest Rail. RECOMMENDATIONS: City Council recently provided direction to Staff not to budget for a $500,000 local match to complete an EA on the portion of Wadsworth through
Wheat Ridge. The EA had been funded in the DRCOG TIP, but required the City commit to a $500,000 local match for the federal funds to be made available. Council's direction, in part,
was based on a concern that the state and federal funding to build the roadway was too uncertain. Staff respects that direction and we have kept this in mind as we have participated
in the Coalition meetings that Arvada initiated. The grant being pursued includes a total local match of$500,000, which is intended to be shared by the participating jurisdictions and
agencies. The match can be met with either cash or in-kind resources. The specifics of who and how much will be provided is still being determined. Arvada has already committed CIP funding
to provide an unspecified local match. RTD has committed to providing in-kind transportation modeling. Jefferson County has committed to $11 ,000 of in-kind staff resources. Commitments
from other partners are yet to be detennined. One possible way to calculate an appropriate local match would be to pro-rate the local match based on the length of Wadsworth through each
jurisdiction. While that methodology has not been agreed upon amongst the partners, using it, would create an approximate $40,000 local match requirement for Wheat Ridge. Because the
grant application requires that the partners are specific in indicating the type of match and the amount of the match, staff is recommending including a not to exceed amount of $40,000
in the 20 I I budget. Another option would be to only commit to staff time as an in-kind match. Staff estimates this would amount to approximately $ I 0,000. There may be concern that
at that level of funding, the coalition may not be successful in reaching the minimum $500,000 local match requirement. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to authorize the City Manager to include
$40,000 in funding in the 20 II budget to be allocated to a local match for a TIGER II Transportation Planning Grant and authorize him to communicate that funding commitment to the federal
agencies through the grant application process." Or, "I move to deny funding for the Wadsworth Corridor Tiger II Transportation Planning Grant for the following reason(s) "
Council Action Form August 23, 20 I 0 Page 4 REPORT PREPARED BY: Kenneth Johnstone, Community Development Director ATTACHMENTS: I. Department of Transportation Notice of Funding Availability
for TIGER II Planning Grants.
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT AND DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION IDocket No, FR-S4lS-N-121 Notice of Fnnding Availability for the Department of Honsing and Urban Development's
Community Challenge Planning Grants and the Department of Transportation's TIGER II Planning Grants AGENCY: Office ofSnstainable Housing and Communities, Office of the Deputy Secretmy,
HUD; and Office o f the Secretaty, DOT, ACTION: Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA). SUMMARY: This notice announces the availability of nlllding and requests proposals for tbe Department
of Housing and Urban Development's ("HUD's") Community Chall engc Planning Grants ("Community Challenge Plmming Grants") in conjunction with a portion of the Department of Transportation's
("DOT's") NationallnfrastlUcture Investments Grants that ca n be used for transportation planning grants. On December 16,2009, the President signed the Conso lidated Appropriations Act,
20 I 0 (Public Law 111 -11 7) that provided $40 million for HUD's Community Challenge Challenge Plmming Grants and up to $35 million for DOT's transportation plalming grants to be awarded
as pal1 of the NationallnfrastlUcture Investments program. The National Infrastrucnlre Investments program is similar, but not identical to, the Transportation Investment Generating
Economic Recovery, or ''TIGER Discretionary Grant Program." Because of the similarity in program strucnll'e, DOT is referring to the grants for National Infrastructure Investments under
the FY 20 I 0 Appropriations Act as "TIGER II Discretionmy Grants" and the transportation planning grants as "TIGER II Plamllng Grants." HUD's $40 million COnUTIUlllty Challenge Plamung
Grant Program will foster reform Attachment 1
2 and reduce barri ers to achi eving affordable, economi ca ll y vital, and sustainable communities. Such effo.1s may inc lude amending or repl ac ing local master plans, zoning codes,
and building codes, ei ther on a jurisdiction-wide bas is or in a specific neighborhood, district, corridor, or secto r to promote mixed-use development, affordable housing, the reuse
of older buildings and structures for new purposes, and similar ac ti vities with the goal of promoting susta inability at the local or neighborhood level. HUD's Community Challenge
Plmming Grant Program also supports the development of affordable hous ing through the development and adoption of inc lus iona.y zoning ordinances and other ac ti vities such as acqui
sition of land for affordable hous ing proj ects. The Community Challenge Pl anning Grant Program di ffers [rom HUD's Susta inable Communities Regional Planning Grant Program, a $ 100
million program a lso crea ted in the FY2010 Appropriations Act. While the latter program is designed to support regional planning efforts, the Conullunity Chall enge Planning Grant
Program focuses on indi vidual jurisdictions and more localized plalUung. HUD will publi sh a separate NOFA for the Sustainable COllununities Regional Planning Grant Program. DOT is
authorized to use up to $35 million of the funds ava il able for TIGER II Discretionary Grants for TIGER II Pla.ming Grants to fund the planning, preparation, or design of surface transportati
on projects that would be eligible for funding under the TIGER II Discretionmy Grant program. DOT and HUD ha ve decided to issue this NOFA jointly in order to better align transportation,
housing, economic development, and land use plalUling and to improve linkages between DOT and H'UD's programs. HUD's funding is des igned to target hous ing, eco nomic development, and
land use plalUli.ng strategies that will increase the e ffi c iency and e ffectiveness
ofa related transportat ion project being plmmed. Therefo re, DOT and HUD be lieve th is joint e[[o rt has the potenti a l to encourage and reward more holis ti c planning effo rts that
resu lt in bclter projects being built with Federal doll ars. The effort is a lso co ns istent with the Obama Administrati on·s priority on removing artific ial ba rri ers between Federal
programs and barriers to State and loca l govcnunentallevel innovation. On April 26, 20 I 0 (75 FR 2 1695), DOT published an interim notice announcing the availability of funding for
TIG ER II Discretionary Grants. Because the TIGER II Discretionary Grant program is a new program, the interim notice requested comments on the proposed selection criteri a and guidance
for awarding TIGER 11 Discretionary Grants. In the interim noti ce, DOT spec ifically requested comments on its intelllion to conduct a multi-agency evaluati on and award process with
HUD for the Community Cha llenge Pl anning Grants and the TIGER II Plmming Grants. DOT indicated that this multi-agency approach for the plan ning grants would be co nsistent with DOT
and HUD's participation in the' 'Partnership for Sustainable Communities" with the U.S. Enviromnental Pro tection Agency ("EPA") to help American families in all communities-ru ra l,
suburban and urban-ga in belter access to affordable hous ing, more transportation options, lower transportation costs, and a cleaner environment. HUD and DOT have cons idered the comments
that were submilted in acco rdance with the interim notice aod dec ided to co nduct a multi-agency evaluation and award process. The deta ils of this multi-agency planning grant program,
including infollllati on about e ligibility, selection criteri a, and prc-application and appli cation requirements are included in this joint notice. The fin al notice for the TIGER
II Discretionary Grant program (the "TIGER II Discreti onary Grant NOFA") was published on June 1,20 10 (75 FR 30460). Interes ted parties are encouraged to review the TIGER II Discretionary
Grant NO FA for more information about 3
4 that program. DA TES: Pre-a pplications are due by [INSERT 30 DAYS AFTER PUBLICATION DATE], at 5 p.m. EDT, and applica tions must be submitted by August 23, 20 I 0, at 5 p.m. EDT.
Only pre-applications received and appli cations received through Grants.gov will be deemed properly fil ed. Instructi ons for submitting pre-applications and applications are inc luded
in Section VI. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For fu rther infonnation concellling tbis notice pl ease contact the TIGER II Disc reti onary Grant program manager via email at TIGERIIGrants@dot.gov,
or ca ll Robert Mariner at 202-366-89 14 (this is not a to ll-free number). A TOO is ava ilable for indi viduals who are dea f or hearing impaired, at 202-366-3993 (this is not a toll-free
number). In addition, DOT will regularly post answers to ques tions and requests for c larifi ca ti ons on DOrs webs ite at http://www.dot. govlrecovely /ostiTIG ERII. Questions regarding
HUD"s Community Challenge Pl anning Grant Program should be directed to sustainablccommunitics(rOhud.gov or may be submitted through the www.hud.gov/s ustaillability website. HUD"s contact
perso n is Zule ika K . Morales-Romero, Office of Susta inable Housing and Communities, 45 1 Scventh Street SW, Washington, DC 2041 0-3000, telephone number 202-402-7683 (this is not
a toll-free number) facs imile 202-708-0465, or ema il: zu leika.k.moralesCa:hud.gov. For the hearing-or speech-impaiTed, contact the above telephone number via TTY by dia ling the toll-free
Federal Information Relay Service at 1-800-877-8339. Table of Contents Overview Information Full Text Announcement I. Funding OppOltunity Description
II. Award Information Ill. Eligibility Information IV. Threshold Requirements V. Application Review Information VI. Application and Submission lnfonnation VII. Award Administration Information
VIII. Other Information OVERVIEW INFORMATION A. Federal Agency Name: Office of Sustainable Housing and Communities, Office of the Deputy Secretmy, HUD; and Office of the Secretary, DOT.
B. Funding Opportunity Title: Community Challenge and Transportation Planning Grants. C. Fuuding Opportunity Number: The funding opportunity number is FR-S41S-N-12. Community Challenge
and Transp0l1ation Planning Grant. The OMB Approval Number is 2501 -0025. D. Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number: The Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) numbers
for the HUD Community Challenge and DOT TIGER II Planning Grant are 14.704 and 20.933, respectively. E. Additional Overview Information: I. Background a. TIGER II Planning Grants On
Febll.lary 17,2009, the President signed the American RecovelY and Reinvestment Act of2009 (Public Law 111-05) (Recovery Act), which appropriated $1.5 billion of 5
6 di screti onary gra nt funds to be awarded by DOT for ca pital in vestments in surface tran sportation infrastructure. DOT refers to these grants as Gra nts for Transportation Investment
Genera ting Economic RecovelY or "TIGER DiscretionalY Grants:· DOT soli ci ted app lications for TIGER Di sc retionary Grants through a notice of funding availability published in the
Federal Regi ster on June 17, 2009 (74 FR 28775) (an interim notice was publi shed on May 18, 2009 (74 FR 23226)). Appli cations for TIGER DiscretionalY Grants were due on September
15, 2009, and DOT received more than 1,400 applications with ti.mding requests totaling almost $60 billion. Funding for 51 projects was announced on February 17,20 I O. On December 16,2009,
the President signcdthe Fi scal Year (FY) 20 10 Consolidated Appropriations Act, which appropriated $600 million to DOT for National Infrastructure Investments using language
that is similar, but not identical to, the language in the Recovery Act authorizing the TIGER Discretionary Grants. DOT is referring to the grants for National Infrastructure Investments
as TIGER 11 Discretionary Grants. The FY 20 10 Appropriations Act permits DOT to use up to $35 million of the funds available for TIGER II Discretionary Grants for TIGER 11 Planning
Grants. The TIGER II Di scretionary Grant NOFA was published on June 1,20 I 0 (75 FR 30460), and awards will be announced at the same time as awards made under this NOFA. b. Community
Challenge Planning Grants. The FY 20 I 0 Appropriations Act also appropriated $40 million to HUD to establish a Community Challenge Planning Grant Program "to foster reform and reduce
barriers to achieve affordable, economically vital, and sustainable communities" The Community Challenge Plarming Grant Program differs from HUD·s Sustainable Communities Regional Plarming
Grant Program, a $ 100 million program also created in the FY 20 I 0 Appropriations Act. While the
latter program is designed to support regional pl aJUling effo rts, the Community Challenge Plann ing Grant Program focuses on ind ividual j uri sd icti ons and morc loca lized planning.
HUD will publi sh a sepa rate NOFA fo r the Sustai nab le Communities Regio nal Plann ing Grant Program. 2, Available Funds, Up to $75 million, including $40 million for Community Chall
enge Planning Grants and up to $35 million for TIGER II Planning Grants. 3, Funding Categories, Given the range of planning activities that potential appl icants are trying to accomplish,
DOT and HUD will support a variety of eligible acti vit ies spelled out in Secti on III.C I.a-c. 4, Authority, The program was authori zed by the Conso lidatcd Appropria tions Act, 20
I 0 (Public Law 111-11 7, approved December 16,2009). 5, Application of HUD's General Section, All applicants accessing resources ava il able through HUD's Community Challenge Planning
Grants are subj ect to the requirements of the General Section to HUD's FY 20 10 NOFAs for di scretionary programs. Applica nts for such grants should care fully review the requirements
described in this NO FA and HUD's General Section. HUD's General Secti on is not applica ble to applica nts access ing reso urces ava ilable through TIGER II Pia LUling Grants. FULL
TEXT ANNOUNCEMENT I. FUNDING OPPORTUNITY DESCRIPTION: This notice announccs DOT's and HUD's 7 intention to o ffer funding through a competition made available as a NOFA undcr its Community
Challenge and TIGER II PlmUling Grants.
A. The Partnership for Sustainable Communities. This NO FA is being initiated in close coordination between DOT, HLJD and the EPA, through the Partnership for Sustainab le Communities
(the Partnership). The Partnership was conce ived to coordinate Federal hOllsing, transportation and ellvironmen tal investments, protect public hea lth and the envirolunent, promote
eq uitable dcvelopment, and help address the cha llenges of climate change. Recogni zing the fundamental role that public investment plays in acllieving these outcomes, the Administration
charged three agencies whose programs most directly impact the physical form ofcommunities-HUD, DOT, and EPA-to lead the way in reshaping the role of the Federal government in helping
communities obtain the capacity to embrace a more sustainable future. 8 One of the first acts of the Partn ership was to agree to a set o f six ··Livability Princ ipl es'· to govem the
work of the Partnership and [or each of the tlu·ee agencies to strive to incorporate illtO their policies and funding programs to the degree possible. In addition, each agency has clear
and defined roles: HUD will take the lead in funding, evaluating, and supporting integrated regional planning for sustainable development, and will in vest ill sustainable housing and
cOl1ununity deve lopment efforts. DOT will focus on building the capacity of transportation agencies to integrate their planning and in vestments into broader plans and actions that
promote sustainable development, and investing in transportation infrastructure that direc tly supports sustainable development and livab le communities. EPA will providc tcelmi ca l
assistance to conununities and Statcs to help them implement sustainable community strategies, and develop environmental sustainability metrics and practices. The tlu·ee agencies have
made a commitment to coordinate activities, integrate funding requirements, and adopt a common set of perfollllance mctrics for lise by grantees.
B. Program Goals I. To be ller align Federal programs to support the building or projec ts that rurther the six Li vability Principles (listed in rating ractor I below). 2. To remove
artificial or bureaucratic barriers among Federal programs and create a morc coordinated point or co ntact for State and loca l governments building irmovative projects that coordinate
housing, economic developmcnt, transportati on, and environmental policies and goals. II. AWARD INFORMATION 9 A. Award Size. For both Community Challenge PlalUling Grants and TIGER II
Planning Grants, there is no minimum grant size, but the maximum grant size is $3 million. B. Type of Awards. All awards will be made in the fonn of Cooperative Agreemellts. HUD and
DOT anticipate having substantial involvement in the work being conducted under this award to ensure the purposes o rthe grant program are being ca lTi ed out and that entit ies are
rollowing through on their commitments. This includes making progress in meeting establi shed perrorn1ance perrorn1ance metrics, and ensuring consistency in projec ts in pa rticipating
jurisdictions that are runded through other HUD, DOT, and EPA programs so that they are implemented in a manner consistent with the Li vability Principl es. C. Period of Performance.
The period o r perrormance shall not exceed 36 months rrom the date the funds are obliga ted. All funds awarded must be obligated by September 30, 20 12. D. Statutory Distributional
Requirements Only Applicable to TIGER II Funds. This joint notice was developed and is being publi shed in conj unction with the TIG ER \I Discretionary Grants NOFA. The selection process
ror TIGER \I Planning Grants will be conducted in pa rallel
10 with the se lection process for TIGER II Di sc retionary Grants, and awards of TIGER II Planning Grants are subj ect to several distributional requirements under the FY 20 I 0 Approp,iations
Act. These requirements do not apply to HUD Community Challenge Planning Grants. First, no more than 25 percent of the fi.lIlds made available for TI G ER II Di scretionary Grants (or
$ 150 million), including any funding used for TIGER II Planning Grants, may be awarded to projects in a s ingle State. Additiona lly, not less than $ 140 million of the funds provided
for TIGER II DiscretionalY Grants, including TIGER 11 Plmming Grants, is to be used for proj ects loca ted in rural areas. For purposes of this notice, DOT is generally defining ·'rural
area" as any area not in an Urbanized Area, as such term is de fin ed by the Census Bureau' and will consider a project to be in a rural area if a ll or the majority o f a project is
located in a rural area. Finall y, on awarding TIGER II Discretionary Grants, including TIGER II Pl anning Grants, DOT must take measurcs to ensure an equitable geographic di stribution
of grant fund s, an appropri ate balance in addressing the needs of urban and rural areas, and investment in a va riety of transportation modes. TIGER II DiscretionalY Grants, including
TIGER n Planning Grants, may be used for up to 80 percent of the costs of a project; however, applica tions will be more competitive to the extent they include s il,'11ificant non-Federal
financial contributions. The minimum and maximum grant sizes establi shed by the FY 20 I 0 Appropriations Act for TIGER II Discreti onalY Grants do not apply to TIG ER [J Planning Grants.
I For the 2000 Census, the Census Bureau defi ned an Urbanized Area (UA) as an area that consists of densely settled territory that contains 50,000 or more people. Updated lists of UAs
are avai lable on the Census Bureau website. Urban Clusters (UCs) wi ll be considered rura l areas for pu rposes of lhis NOF A.
11 III. ELIGIBILITY INFORMATION A. Eligible Applicants. State and local govelllments, including U.S. territories, tri bal governments, tran sit agencies, port authoriti es, metropolitan
planning organi za tions (M POs), oth er political subdi vis ions o f State or loca l govemments, and multi-S tate or multijuri sdictional groUpIngs. B. Cost Sharing or Leveraging Resources.
For those seeking TIGER II Planning Grants, a 20 percent match is required. DOT will cons ider any non-Federal funds as a local matc h for purposes of this program, whether such funds
are contributed by the public sector (S ta te or local) or the pri vate sector. However, DOT will not consider funds already ex pended as a local match. The 20 percent matching requirement
does not apply to projects in rural areas. For those seeking HUD Community Chall enge Planning Grants, applicants must provide 20 percent of the requested funding amount in leveraged
resources in the form of cash and/or verified in-kind co ntributions or a combination of these sources. In-kind contri butions may be in the form of staff time, donated materia ls, or
services. All assistance provided to meet this requirement must be identifi ed by their dollar equi va lent based upon accepted sa lary or regional doll ar va lues. Cash conllibutions
may come from any co mbination of local, state and/or Federal fund s, and/or pri vate and philantlu-opic co ntributions dedicated to the express purposes of this proposal. Applicants
will receive credit lo r leveraging or matching resources greater than 20 percent of the requested amolUlt as described in Rating Factor 4. I [ an applicant does not include the minimum
20 percent leveraged or matched resources with its appropria te supporting documentation, that applica tion will be considered ineligible.
12 C. Other Requirements I. Eligible Activities. [n order to ex pl ain the va riety o f activities eligible for fund;ng under th is joint notice, the acti vities are descri bed in three
groupings: 3. TIGER II Plullllillg Grallts: Acti vities related to the plann ing, prepa rati on, or design of surface transportation proj ects, including, but not limited to: (I ) Highway
or bridge projects eligible under Title 23, United States Code; (2) Public transportation projects eligible under Chapter 53 of Title 49, United Sta tes Code; (3) Passenger and freight
rail transportation projects; and (4) Port infrastmcture investments. b. COllllllullity Clwl/ellge Plullll illg Grallts: Acti vities related to the following: ( I) Development of master
plans or comprehensive plans that promote affordable housing co-loca ted andlor well-connected with retail and business development and disco urage development not aligned with sustainable
transportation plans or disaster Initigation analyses; (2) Development and impl ementation of loca l, co rridor or district plans and strategies that promote livability and sustainability
(see the Livability Principles in Section V); (3) Revisions to zoning codes, ordinances, building standards, or other laws to remove barri ers and promote sustainable and mixed-use development
and to overcome the effects of impediments to fair housing choice in local zoning codes and other land use laws, including form-based codes and inciu sioD3IY zo ning ordinances to promote
access ible, permanentl y affordab le housing that reduces racial and poverty hous ing concentration and expands fa ir housing choice fo r low-income minoriti es;
13 (4) Revis ions to buil ding codes to promote th e energy-effic ien t rehabilitation ofoldcr structures in order to create a ffordable and hea lthy hous ing; (5) Strategies for creating
or preserving a ffo rdable housing fo r low-, velY low-, and ex tremely low-income families or indi viduals in mixed-income, mixed-use neighborhoods a long an ex isting or plmmed trans
it co rridor; (6) Strategies to bring additional affordable hous ing to areas that have few affordable hous ing opportunities and are close to suburban job clusters; and (7) Pl anning,
establishing, and mainta ining acq ui sition funds andlor land banks for development, redevelopment, and revitali zati on that reserve property for the development of a ffordable housing
within the context of sustainable development c. Combillatioll of TIGER Il Plallllillg Grallt ami Commullity CI1£II/ellge Plallllillg Grallt activities. There are a va riety of projects
that may include eligible acti vities under both the TIGER II Pl anning Grants and the Community Cha ll enge Planning Grants programs. Rather than have applicants proceed through two
separate grant application procedures, this joint NO FA is intended to create one point of entry to Federal resources to support related components of a s ingle projcct. To illustrate
the possible combination of acti viti es, plcase co nsider the fo llowing examples: ( I) Planning ac tivities related to the development of a particul ar transportation corridor or regional
transp0l1ation system, that promotes mi xed-lise, trans it-oriented development with an a ffordable housing componcnt. (2) Pl anning activities re lated to the development o f a fre
ight co rridor that seeks to reduce confli cts with res id cntial areas and with passcnger and non motori zcd traffic. In this type o f project, DOT mi ght fund the transportati on planning
acti vities a long the
14 corridor, and HUD may fund changes in the zo ning code to support appropriate siting of freight facilities and route the freight traffic around lawn centers, residential areas, and
scbools. (3) Developing expanded public transportati on optio ns, including accessible public transportation and para-transit services for indi vidual s with di sabilities, to allow
individuals to live in diverse, high opportunity neighborhoods and communities and to commute to areas with greater employment and ed ucational opportunities. DOT and HUD are expecting
to award the TIGER [[ Planning Grants and the Conl.lllllnity Challenge Planning Grants for planning acti vities that ultimately lead to the development of proj ects that integrate transportati
on, housing and economic development components. DOT and HUD plan to make joint awards, where appropriate. However, we also expect DOT to make awards for TIGER II Plarll1ing Grant act
ivities alone and for HUD to make awards for Community Challenge Plarming Grants alone. Applicants may apply for funding [rom only TIGER II Planning Grants or from only Community Challenge
Planning Grants. To the extent that an application has a project that has linked activities and would benefit from funding and associated activities in both DOT and HUD's programs, applicants
should indicate that in their application and the agencies may both award fi.mding to the proj ect, with DOT and HUD each awarding its funds for the eligible activities under its own
respective program. However, only one application per project will be accepted (see Threshold Requirements, Scction IV.C.). IV, TI-UlliSHOLO REQUIREMENTS Evaluation teams from DOT and
HLJD will review each pre-applica tion that is received on or prior to the Pre-Application Deadline and will be responsible for analyzing whether the pre-application sati s fies the
following key tlu'eshold req uirements:
A. The project and the applicant are eligib le for funding ullder the TIGER II Planning Gra nt or Community Challenge Planning Grant program; and 15 B. Local leveraging, or matching
funds arc committed to support 20 percent or more of the costs of the transportation planning activities to be fund ed; this req uirement is not applicable to transportation planning
projects located in rural areas. C. Only one application per proj ect will be accepted for review. An applicant that submits more than one application per project may have some or a
ll of the submissions deemed ine ligible. D. Reso lution of Outstanding Civil Rights Matters for Applicants for HUD Funding. If you, the applicant: I. have received a charge from HUD
co ncerning a systemic violation of the Fair Housing Act or a cause determination from a substantially equivalent state or loca l fair hOllsing agency conccmillg a systemic violation
of a substantially eq ui va lent state or local fair hOllsing law proscribing discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, national orig in, disability or familial status; 2.
are a defendant in a Fair Housing Act lawsuit filed by the Depa rtment of Jus tice al leging a pattern or practice of di scrimination pursuant to 42 U.S.c. 3614(a); 3. have received
a letter of findings identifying systemic noncompliance under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, or Section 109 of the Hous ing
and Community Dcvelopment Act of 1974; 4. have received a calise determination from a substantially equi va lent state or loca l fair housing agency concerning a systemic violation of
provisions of a state or local law proscribing discrimination in housing based on sexual orientation or gender identity; or 5. have received a cause determination li'om a substantially
equi valent s tate or local fair housi ng
agency concerning a systemic violation of a slate or local law proscribing discrimination in housing based on lawful so urce of income; and 16 a. The charge, cause detennination, lawsuit,
or letter of findings referenced in subparagraphs (I), (2), (3), (4), or (5) above has not been resolved to HUO's sa ti s fa ction befo re the application deadlin e, then you, the applicant,
arc ineligible for funding. HUO will determine ifactions to resolve the charge, cause determination, lawsuit, or letter offindings taken before the application deadline are sufficient
to resolve the matter. b. Examples of actions that would nonnally be considered suffic ient to reso lve the matter include, but are not limited to: c. Current compliance with a voluntary
compliance agreement signed by all the parties; (I) Current compliance with a HUD-approved conc iliation agreement signed by all the parties; (2) Current compliance with a conciliation
agreement signed by all the parties and approved by the State or local administrative agency with jurisdicti on over the matter; (3) CllITent compliance with a consent order or consent
decree; or (4) Current compliance with a final judicial ruling or administrative ruling or decision. V. APPLICATION REVIEW INFORMATION A. Criteria. I. Rating Factor I-Purpose and Outcomes
(35 points): An applicant"s score on this rating factor will be based on a clear statement of the existing cond ition that the proposed project is intended to address and the proposed
project's alignment with the six "Livability Principles."
Applicants that dcmonstrate that their project aligns well with the Livability Principles and a re consistent withJ1ny ex isting region wide plans that cons ider transportation, economic
development, housing, water, and other infrastructure needs and in vestments will receive a higher score. The Livability Principles are as follows: 17 a. Provide More Tramportation Choices.
Develop sa fe, reliable and affordable transpo rtation choices to decrease household transportation costs, reduce energy consumption and dependence on foreign oil, improve air quality,
reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and promote public health. b. Promote eqllitable, a!Jordable hOllsillg. Expand loca tion-and energy-effi cient housing choices for people of all ages,
incomes, races, and ethnicities to increase mobility and lower the combined cost of housing and transportation. c. Enhal/ce Economic Competitiveness. Improve economic competitiveness
through reliable and timely access to employment centers, ed ucational opportunities, services and other basic needs by workers, as well as expanded business access to markets. d. SlIpport
Existing Communities. Target Federal funding toward existing communitiesthrough strategies like transit oriented, mixed-use development, and land recycling-to increase community revitali
zati on and the effi ciency of public works investments and sa feguard rural landsca pes. e. Coordinate Policies and Leverage Ill vestmellt. Align Federal policies and funding to remove
barriers to collaboration, leverage funding, and increase the accountability and effecti veness of all levels of goverrunent to plan for future growth, including making smart energy
choices such as locally generated renewable energy. f. Value Communities and Neighborhoods. Enhance the unique characteri stics of all communities by in vesting in healthy, safe, and
walkable neighborhoods-rural, urban, or suburban.
18 In order for points to be awarded, applica nts sha ll a lso prov ide data to support outcomes of the proposed project claimed in the application. Based on the projcct being proposed,
the applicant shall identi ty the Li vabili ty Princip le(s) that will be addressed and detail how lhat success will be documented. For example, if the proposed program intends to expand
the presence o f eq uitabl e, affordable housing, the applicant should provide data to support this claim. As there is a wide range of projects that ca n be supported thro ugh this notice,
not every project is expected to address all six Livability Princi pl es. Points will be awarded based on the extent to which the proposed project furthers the spec ifically identified
princip les supported with data. The applicant is required to clea rly identi fy the benefits or outcomes of its proposed program. Because this application seeks support to develop a
plan for a specific project, all of the outcomes will not be realized during the duration of of the grant period. Rather, applicants will be evaluated on their ability to iden tity the
outcomes they seek to achieve, the clarity with which they articulate the elements of th ei r plan that will help achieve those outcomes, and the specificity of the benclunarks that
they establi sh to measure progress toward a completed product that guides all of the necessruy work. Applicants that receive awards will be ex pected to report on the progress of the
project and outcomes reali zed at the mid-way point and at the end of the term of the grant. Where outcomes have been rea lized, they should be detailed and backed with data. For projects
that must go to co nstru ction for many bene fits to be realized, benclunarks will focus more on the progress of plan development, any changes in the scope of the work that occur during
the plalming process, and how those changes mi ght impact the antic ipated outcomes.
19 For proj ects that must go to construction for bencfits to be rea li zed, benchmarks will focus more on the progrcss of plan development, any changes in scope that occur, and how
those changes might impact the anti cipated outcomes. DOT and HUD recogni ze that each project is unique. As stich, the agencies arc allowing s ignificant latitude to the applicant to
set the des ired outcomes that will result from implementation of the project. DOT and HUD have identiti ed six possibl e outcomes, listed below, from which each applicant must select
a minimum of two outcomes that it must pursuc and rep0l1 on during its period of pcrfonnallcc. a. Tra vel changes, slIch as changes in mode share or vehicle miles traveled per capita.
b. Impact on affordability and accessibility, including the supply of a ffordable housing units, houschold transportation costs, or proportion of low-and very-low income households within
a 30-minute transit commute of major employment centers. c. Economic development, including infill development or recycled parcels of land or pri vate sector in vestment along a proj
ect or corridor. d. Improvemcnt to the state of repair of infrastructure. e. Environmental benefits, such as greenhouse gas or criteria po llutants emiss ions, oil consumption and recreational
areas or open space preserved. f. Increased partic ipation and dec ision-making in developing and implementing a plan, code, deve lopment strategy, or project by populations traditiona
lly marginalized in public planning processes. 2. Rating Factor 2-Work Plan (35 points): An applicant"s score on this rating fa ctor will be based on how well the application addresses
the quality and cost effecti veness of the proposed
work plan. Applicants must develop a work plan that incl udes speciric dclivcrables, and measurable, time-phased objectives for each major activ ity. 20 This factor also addresses the
performance metrics that will be used to measure the success of the proposed acti vi ties. For a proposed project to achicve results, expected outcomes and outputs must be clea rly derincd,
and eva luation must take place to ensure that those outcomes and outputs are met. Outcomes are the ultimate objectives of a proj ect, and outputs are the interim activities or products
that lead to the achievement of those objectives. To track progress toward the outputs and outcomes, a project must be evaluated based upon performance measures. Performance measures
should be obj ecti vely quantifiable, and allow one to assess the degree of actual achievement against the cxpccted outputs and outcomes. Applications that demonstrate how outputs and
outcomes are fully defined and eas ily measured will receive a higher score. The applicant's budgct proposal should thoroughly cstimate all applicable costs (direct, indirect, and administrative),
and be presented in a clear and coherent fOIl11al. The applicant must thoroughly document and justify all budget ca tegori es, costs, and all major tasks, for the applicant, sub-recipients,
joint venture participants, or other contributing reso urces to the projecl. 3, Rating Factor 3-Leveraging and Collaboration (15 points): An applicant's score on this rating tactor will
be based on how well the application demonstrates the proj ect's ability to obtain other community, local, State, pri va te, and Federal support, as applicable, and resources that ca
n be combined with DOT and HUD program resources to achieve program objectives. Resources may include cash or in-kind contributions of services, equipment, or supplies allocated to the
proposed program. In evaluating this factor, HUD and DOT will consider the extent to which the applicant has establi shed working paI1nerships with other entities to get
additional resourccs or commitmcnts to increase the effectiveness of the proposed program acti viti es. 21 When eva luating this factor, HUD and DOT will take into acco unt two consid
cra ti ons: the amount o f resources levcraged or matched that exceeds the required 20 perce nt, and per ca pita income in the applica ble juri sdi ction relative to the metropolitan
average. Data must be prov ided for the indica tor when responding to this rating factor. The 20 percent of leveraged or matched resources that are a threshold requirement will not count
as po ints toward this ra ting factor. To sco re points in this ra ting fac tor, resources may be provided by govemmental ent iti es, public or pri vate organiza tions, and other entiti
es. Other resources from the pri va te sector or othcr sources committed to the program that exceed the required 20 percent leveraged or matched reso urces will be given ex tra weight
for this rating factor. The applica nt should provide supporting documentation of a ll committed fund s. Please reter to Section VI., Application and Submiss ion, for more deta il s.
4. Rating Factor 4-Capacity (15 points): An applica nt's sco re on this rating fac tor will be based on how well the applica tion demonstra tes the appl icant"s capacity to successfully
implement the proposed acti vities in a time ly manner. The applicant will prov ide specific examples of previous proj ects s imilar to the proposed effort that demonstrate its capac
ity to implement the proposed work plan. DOT and HUD will give priority to applications that demonstrate the prior experience to bring this type o f project(s) that is the subj ect of
the planning acti vities to completion. Priorit y will a lso be given to appli cations that demonstra te strong collaboration among a broad range of participants, incl uding public,
pri va te and nonprofit entities. The applicant shall designate the staff that is antic ipated to manage the proposed proj ect,
22 as well as other staffanticipatcd to co ntribute to the projcct's completion. Ratings undcr this factor are based on the capacity or the applicant's organi zation, and its team, as
applicable, and should include an assessment
of the capac ity of sub-contractors, co nsultants, sub-recip ients, community-based organizations, and any other entities that are part o f the project application, as applicable. Applicants
should be prepared to initiate eligib le activities within 120 days of the effective date of the grant award. DOT and HUD reserve the right to tenninate the grant if sufficient persOlUlel
or qualified experts are not retained within these 120 days. In rating this fa ctor, DOT and HUD will consider, among other factors, the extent to whi ch the application demonstrates
that the applicant has an adequate number of key staff or the ability to procure individuals with the knowledge and recent experience in the proposed activity. All applicants for HUD
funding are subj ect to the requirem ents to Affirmatively Flllther Fair Housing. HUD will award additional points to applicants that prioritize additional measures to advance civil
rights, such as Executive Order 12898, Federal Actions to Address EnvirolUnental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations, and Executive Order 13166, Improving Access
to Services for Perso ns with Limited English Profic iency. Applicants should indicate if, and describe how, the following policy priorities will be addressed: (I) Capacity Building
and Knowledge Sharing and (2) Expand Cross-Cutting Policy Knowledge. One po int will be awarded for each policy priority. Identify spccific acti vities, outputs and outcomes that further
these po licy priorities over the period of perfonnance. a. Capacity Building and Knowledge Sharing HUD recognizes that success ful program impl ementation can only OCcur in partnership
with effectively prepared grantees. It is there fore criti cal to strengthen the ca pacity of each
23 consortium by developing partnerships that will advance the objectives of proposed programs. HUD·s Strategic Plan emphasizes the importance of strengthening the capaci ty of state
and local partners to implement HUD programs, participate in dec ision-making C1nci planning processes, and coordinate on cross-programmatic, pla ce-ba sed approaches through grant making
and technical assistance. To receive policy priority points, applica nts are cx pcctcdto dcscribc how they will achieve the following outcomes: (I) I ncrease the skills and technical
expertise of partner organizations to manage feeleral awards, provide solid financia l management, and perform program performance assessment and evaluation. The applicant must describe
the methods that will be used to achieve this outcome. Examples include in-service trainings, online information provi sion (e.g ., webinars, pod casts, etc.), and structured observation
o f best practiccs. According to the proposcd methods, the applicant should identify the anticipatcd outputs (e.g., number of people trained, number of training events, volume of cas
ily accessible training materials for targeted capaci ties, etc.) during the 3-ycar period of pCrfOlll1ance. (2) Share knowledge among partners so that key personnel respo nsible for
grant implementation coordinate cross-prog rammatic, placed-based approaches. The applicant must describe the outreach mcthods that will be used to achieve thi s outcome. Examples include
establishing regular partner dialogues, and structured peer exchange. According to the proposed methods, the applica nt should establi sh and specify the anticipated outputs (e.g., number
of meetings, web postings, number of palticipating partners, total staff exposed to new learning and promising practice, number of briefings, issuance of monthly fact sheets, etc.) during
the 3-year period of performance. HUD wi ll work with grantees to support knowledge sharing and ilmovation by disseminating best practices,
24 encourag ing peer learni ng, publishing data analysis and research, and helping to incubate and test new ideas. b. Expand Cross-Cutting Policy Knowledge Broadening the use of successful
models to other communi tics rcqui res definitive ev idence o f which po li c ies work and how, and a plan for publ ic dissemination of this information. To achieve nlll points, the
applica nt must indica te what data they andlor pa rtner organizations will collect on outcomes for the defined target area (e.g., changes in commuting time, improved hea lth outcomes,
VMT measures, etc.). The grantee must document a plan to engage crediblc policy resca rchers to ass ist in the analys is of that data in order to measure policy impact, and clari fy
the ex tent of data that wi ll be made ava ilable to those researchers through a data-sharing agreement. ( I) For household-level data, this may be an agreement with a uni vers ity or
other policy research group that regularly produces peer-reviewed resea rch publicati ons. (2) For parcel-related data, this agreement may be wi th a regional planning, non-profit, or
government agency that provides consolidated local data on a regular bas is to the public for free. The applicant should specifica lly desc ribe how they intend to di sseminate po licy
lessons leamed during the planning process to a di verse rangc of potential audiences, incl ud ing policymakers, other regional consorti a, and interested community leadership. The coll
ect ion
25 method and specific data e lements wi ll not be prescribed by HUD, but may be determ ined by the appl ica nt. The appli cant must establi sh and provide the anti cipated outputs within
the period of perfo rm ance. Examples include the number of po licy publications, number of resca rch studies, anti cipated di stribution of findings, etc. B. Evaluation and Selection
Process I. Rating and Ranking Evaluation teams made up ofa representative from DOT, HUD, and EPA in iti ally will evaluate each application as to how well it scores against th e "Rating
Factors" ident i fied below, and will ass ign it a score on a sca le o f 1-1 00. The scoring system will not determine the specific proj ects that will be selected for funding; rather,
the scoring system will be used to generate a list of highly recommended proj ects. The highly recommended projects will then be forwarded to a senio r-level review team for review,
and the senior level rev iew team will make fund ing recommendations to the Secretaries of DOT and HUD, based on how the projec t perfonned under the four rating factors, how eac h proj
ect addresses the Program Goa ls identi fied in Secti on I.B, and statutOlY distributional consid erations required in the National Infrastructure In vestm ents provision of the FY 20
I 0 Conso lidatcd Appropriations Act for thc DOT Planning Gra nts. The review teams will include senior-Icvel representatives from the three Partnership for Sustainable COlllmunities
agencies: DOT, HUD, and EPA. VI. APPLICATION AND SUBMISSION INFORMATION A. Address to Request Application Package. Applicatiolls are al'ailahle Oil the Federal I\'ehsite l\'\Vw.Crall
ts.gol'. To find this fundin g opportuni ty at Grants.gov, go to
26 htlp: //w\Vw.grants,I.!Ov/applicantsi find grant opportunities.jsp at the w\\w.Gran ts.gov websi te, whe re you can sea rch by agency and/or perform a Basic Search. Additi ona l information
on applying through Grants.gov is available Vv\\"\\ .l!rants.go\'. B. Content and Form of Application Submission. Applica nts eligible to apply undcr this NOF i\ are to follow the submission
requirements described below: I. Pre-Application. Unless otherwise indicated in this joint notice, applicants should submit preapplications and applications in accordance with the procedures
spec ified in the TIGER II Discretionary Grant NOFA. To submit an application, please access vvww .dot. gov/rccoverv.iostitigc ri i/indcx. html or \\. \vw . hud.gov/sustainabi I ity.
Pre-applications must be submitted by the Pre-Application Deadline, which is [INSERT 30 DA YS AFTER PUBLICATION DATE], at 5 p.m. EDT. The pre-application system will be hostcd by DOT,
on behalf of DOT and lrun, and will open no later than June 23 , 20 I 0, to allow prospcctive applicants to submit pre-applications. Final applications must be submitted tlu'ough Grants.gov
by the Application Deadline, which is August 23, 20 I 0, at 5 p.m. EDT. The Grants.gov "Apply" fun ction will open on July 30, 2010, allowing applicants to submit applications. While
appli ca nts are encouraged to submit pre-applications in advance of the Pre-Application Deadline, pre-applications will not be reviewed until after the Pre-Applica tion Deadlinc. Similarly,
while applicants arc encouragcd to submit applications in advance of the Application Deadline, applications will not bc evaluated until after the Application Deadline. Awards will not
be macle until after September 15,20 I 0. To apply for funding through Grants.gov, applicants must be properly registered. Complete instructions on how to register ancl submit applications
can bc found at www.grants.gov. Please be aware that the registrati on process usually takes 2-4 weeks and must
27 be complcted before an application can be submittcd. Ifintercsted parties experience difficulties at any point during the registration or application process, please call the to ll
frce Grants.gov Customer Support Hotlin e at 1-800-5 18-4726, Monday to Friday from 7 a.m. to 9 p.m. EDT. Applicants must submit a pre-a pplica tion as Stage I, which qualities applicants
to submit an application in Stage 2. An application submitted during Stage 2 that docs not correl ate with a properly completed Stage I pre-application will not be considered. 2. Contcnts
of Pre-Applications An app lica nt for a TIGER II Planning Grant or a Community Challenge Pl anning Grant should provide in its pre-application form , a ll of the infollnation req uested
below in its pre-application form. DOT and HUD reserve the right to ask any app li ca nt to supplement the data in its pre-application but expect pre-applications to be complete upon
submiss ion. Appli ca nts must complete the pre-appli cation form and submit it electronica ll y on or prior to the Pre-Application Deadline, in accordance with the in structions specified
at www.dOl. govlrecovery/ostIT IG ERII. The pre-application fOlln must include the following information: a. Name of appl icant (if the application is to be submitted by more than one
entity, a lead applicant must be identified); b. Applicant's DUNS (Data Universal Numbering System) number; c. Type of applicant (State govelllment, local government, U.S. territory,
Tribal government, transit agency, port authority, metropolitan planning organiza tion, or other unit of govenlll1 ent) ~ d. State(s) where the project is located; c. County(s) where
the project is located; f. Ci ty(s) where the project is located; g. Zip code(s) where the project is loca ted;
h. Proj ect titl e (descripti ve); i. Project ty pe: specify e ligible acti vities pro poscd for funding, such as transporta tion planning ac ti vity, site area plan, corr idor plan,
land assembly or acquisition, elc.; j. Project descripti on: describe the proj ect in plain English terms that would be genera lly understood by the public, us ing no more than 50 words;
thi s should be pure ly desc ripti ve, not a discuss ion of the project's benefits, background, or a lignment with the select ion criteria in this description; I<. Total cost of the
project; I. Total amount of TIGER II Plmming Grant and Community Challenge Plmming Grant funds requ ested; m. Contaclname, telephone number, email address, and physical address of the
applicant; II. Type of jurisdiction where the proj ect is located (urban or rural ); and o. An assurance that local matching fund s are committed to support 20 percent or more of any
transportation pla llning acti vities to be fi.md ed. (This requirement does not apply to proj ects loca ted in rural areas). 28 3. Applications. An appli cati on fo r a TIGER II Planning
Grant or a Community Challenge Planning Grant should incl ude all o rthe information requested below. DOT and HUD reserve the ri ght to ask any applicant to supplement the data in its
application, but expect appli cati ons to be complete upon submiss ion. a. Standard Form SF-424, Application for Federal Assistance. Please see ww\\'07.gra nt s.gov/assets/SF4~41nstructions.pdf
for instructions on how to complete the SF-424, which is part of the standard Grants.gov submission. Additional cla rifying guidance and Frequently Asked Qucstions (FAQs) to assist applicants
in completing the SF-424 will be
ava ilabl e at \\\\\\.dllt.gm rCC(l\crv oSLTIGERII by July 30, 20 10, when the ··Apply·· function within Grants.gov opens to accept applica ti ons under this not ice. 29 b. In Responding
to the First and Second Rating Factor. (Attachment to SF-424). A TIGER II Planning Grant and HUD Community Challenge Grant application must include information required lor DOT and HUD
to assess each of the rating factors spec ifi ed in Scction III (Application Review and Ratillg Factors). Applicants are encouraged to demonstrate the respons iveness of a project to
any and all of the rating factors with the most re leva nt infonnation that applicants can providc, rcga rdless of whether such information has been spccifica lly requestcd, or identi
fied, in this notice. In order to fulfill the requirements of the first rating facto r, an applicant must: (I) Submit a narrative describing how the applicant will use the funding so
ught to achieve its desired outcomes and how the desired outcomes support the six Livability Princ iples. The nalTati ve should also state the problems or barri ers the project seeks
to address, why they are an impediment to promoting a more sustainable future for the applicant community, and th e outcomes the proj ect seeks to achieve. (2) Submit data supporting
any assertions made about the ex pected outcomes, as well as the nature and the extent of the problems or ban·iers the proj ect seeks to remove. In responding to the second rating fa
ctor, applicants must provide a narrative to di scuss their project outcomes, outputs, and performance measures. Applicants should also identify important milestones (e.g., the end ofspecilic
phases in a multi phase proj ect) , which should also be clearly indi cated in the proposal tim eline. Applicants should also identify potential obstacles in meeting outcomes and outputs
and related perfollllance measures and discuss steps they would take to rcspond to these obstacles. Finally, applicants should describe how project evaluation
30 information will be obtained, documented, and reported. Appli ca nts should submit a work plan that incl udes thc following: (I) Proposed Activities. Briefly describe the overa ll
activity you propose to undertake, inc luding any coord inated components that wi ll not be directly funded under the TIGER II PlaIming Grant Program or the Community Challenge PlaIming
Grant Program. Describe the regional or loca l s ignificance of the project and whether it is a part of a comprehensive regional plan. Include public outreach and participation activities,
including minority and di sadvantaged popu lations. (2) Uses of Funds/Budgct. Indi cate how you will use the grant funds you are seeking by providing a list or table showing the amount
o f funds budgeted for each acti vity you will undertake to achieve your desired result. Indicate the entity responsible for each use and activity, including any elected bodies or bodies
appoi nted by e lccted officials. Specify administrative costs. (3) Project Completi on Schedule. Brie fly describe the project compl et ion schedule, including milestones in each month
for the criti cal management actions for you and allY other entity whose cooperation or assistance is necessa ry to achieve your desired result, including the end dates of each required
action and your ex pected metrics and results. (4) Performance Measures. List the perfonnance measures you wi ll use to evaluate tbe success of your project or activity, as well as the
benclunarks you expect to reach during the tenn of the grant and a time line for reaching them. c. In Responding to the Third Rating Factor. Applicants will not receive full points if
they do not submit evidence of a finn commitment and the appropriate use of leveraged or matched resources under the grant program. Such evidence must be provided in the form of letters
of firm
31 commitment, memoranda of uncicrslanciing, or other signed agreements to participate from those entities identified as partners in the application. Each letter of commitment, mcmorandum
of understanding, or agreement to participate should include the organization's name, the proposed level o f commitmcnt, and the orga nization·s respons ibilities as they relate to the
proposed proj ect. The commitment must be signed and dated by an o nicial of the organi zat ion Icga lly able to make commitments on behal f of the orga ni za tion. Applicants should
describe how they will ensure that commitments to sub-grantees will be honored and executed, contingent upon an award from DOT or HUD. (I) Applicants must support each source of contributions,
cash or in-kind, both for the requircd minimum and additional amounts, by a letter of commitmcnt fi·OJl1 the contributing entity, whether a publi c or private so urce. The Ictter Illust
desc ribe the contributed resources that you will use in the program and their des ignated purposc. Staff in-kind contributions should be given a monetary va lue based on the local market
value of the staff skills. If you do not provide letters from contributors spccifying details and the amount of the actual contributions, those contributions will not bc counted. d.
In Responding to the FOllrth Rating Factor. DOT and HUD will consider how the applicant entity is organized and how it will fun ction in implemcnting the grant. The application should
include a description of the leadership responsibilities and proccdurcs for allocating resources, setting goals, and settling disputes. It should also include an explanation of the capac
ity and relevant, recent experience o f the applicant entity. The application should also include a description of the applicant's ex perience in outreach effOJ1s invol ving low-income
persons, particularly those living in revitalization areas where funds are proposed to be used, res idents of public housing, minorities, socially and economically disadva ntaged indi
vidual s,
32 non-Engli sh speaking perso ns, and persons with disabiliti es. Applica nts should demonstrate that they either have suffi cient personncl or the ab ility to procure qualified experts
or profess ionals, with the knowledge, s kills, and abil ities with relevant ex peri ence to ca rry out the proposed acti vity. Contact infonnation is requested as part of the SF-424.
This information will bc used in order to inform parties of the selection of projects for fl 111ding, as well as to contact parties in the event additional information is needed. c.
Page Limit. Appli cations should be limited to a total of 15 pages. HUD and DOT will not refer to websites for information pertinent to the narrative response. All app lications should
include a detailed description of the proposed proj ect and geospatial da ta for the project. including a map of the area to be planned and where other work will occur. C. Submission
Dates and Times. All pre-applications IllUst be submitted in accordance with the instlllctions specified at www.dot.govlrecovery/ostIT IG ERII. The pre-app licat ion system will be hosted
by DOT, on behalf of DOT and HUD. Final applications must be submitted electronically through Grants.gov. Pre-applications are due by [INSERT 30 DAYS AFTER PUBLICATION DATE], at 5 p.m.
EDT, and appli cations must be submitted by August 23, 20 I 0, at 5 p.m. EDT. D. Funding Restrictions. Appli cants should also be aware that DOT is accepting applica tions for capital
expenditures assoc iated with surface transportation projects in the TIGER II Disc retionaty Grant notice (Docket No. DOT-OST-20 10-0076). As pa rt of that program, applicants may request
planning funds assoc iated with their capital request. If DOT awards planning funding to an applicant to the TIGER [] Disc retionaty Grant program, the funding available through this
notice will be lessened by that amount. FUl1her, DOT has the option to use
less than the $35 million permitted in the statute and may do so based on distrib ut ional req uirements or the need to fund highly recommended capital grant appl ica tions. VII. AWARD
ADMINISTRATION INFORMATION A. Award Notices 33 \. Applicants Selected for Award. Projects selec ted for a TIGER II Planning Grant will be administered by one of DOrs modal administrations,
pursuant to a grant agreement between the TIGER II Planning Grallt rec ipient and the DOT modal administration. HUD awardees will be required to negotiate a final statement of work and
will enter into a Cooperative Agreement with HUD. The Cooperative Agreement will also co ntain an agreed upon Logic Model identi fy ing spec ific acti vities and perfonnance criteria
to be reported aga inst over a period of time. HUD grantees must meet the requirements conta ined in the General Section to HUD's FY 20 10 Funding Notices. 2. Adjustment of Funding,
DOT and HUD reserve the right to fund less than the full amount requested in an appLication based on the ava il ability of fund s, geographic di vers ity, and to ensure that the maximum
number of grants may be made. 3. HUD grant rec ipicnts must comply with applicable Federal requirements, inc luding co mpliance with tbe Fair Housing and Civil Ri ghts Laws applicable
to a ll Federal awards. B. Administrative and National Policy Requirements. \. Environmental Requirements, All appli cants that are proposing to use grant funds for land acqui sition
must comply with HUD's environmenta l procedures. In accordance with 24 CFR 50. 19( b)( I), (9), aod (16), all other eligible acti vities assisted by HUD funds under this NOF A are categorically
excluded from environmental review under the National Environmental Policy Act o f 1969 and are not subj ect to environmenta l review under the re lated laws and authorities.
34 For applica nts requesting gram funds for transportation pl anning, NEPA is not typi ca lly triggered (and even if triggered, categorical exclusions typically exist). However, ifa
ny projects planned with lunding under this NOFA move to the constructi on phase and federal li.mds are later sought for construc tion, all appropriate NEPA analyses will need to be
completed prior to any federal expenditures. Und er HUD's envirolllnental procedures, for those applications involving land acquis ition activities requiring environmenta l review, the
notification of award to a selected applicant will constitute a preliminary approval by HUD, subj ect to the completi on of an environmental review of the proposed site(s), and the execution
by HUD and the recipient of a Grant Agreement. Se lection for participation (preliminary appro val) does not constinlte approval of the proposed site(s). Each proposal will be subj ect
to a HUD enviro lllnental review, in accordance with 24 CFR part 50, and the proposal may be modifi ed or the proposed s ites rejected as a result o rthat review. Submiss ion o f an
application involving a project requiring an envirollinenta l rev iew will constitute an assurance that the applicant shall assist HUD in compl ying with 24 CFR part 50 and sha ll :
I) Supply B UD with all availabl e, relevant information necessary for HUD to perfonn for each property any en viJ"Olllllental review required by 24 CFR part 50; 2) Carry out mitigating
measures required by HUD or select alternate elig ible property; and 3) Not acquire, rehabilitate, demolish, convert, lease, repair, or construct property, nor commit or expend HUD or
local funds for these program activities with respect to any eligible property, until HUD approval of the property is recei ved.
35 For assista nce, contact the HUD Environmental Review Officer in the HUD Field Office serv1I1g your area. Contact information is requestcd as part of the SF-424. DOT will use this
information to infoll1l parties ofDOrs decision regarding se lection of projects, as well as to co ntact panies in the event that DOT needs additional information about an applica tion.
2. Administrative and Indirect Cost Requirements. For reference to the Administrative Cost requirements and Indirect cost rcquirements, please see OMS Circulars A-2 1, A-87, and A-122,
as applica bl e. C. Reporting Requirements. HUD Award Agreements wi ll include the terms and conditions of the award including thc reporting requirements. \. Final Work Plan and Logic
Model. Final work plan and completed Logic Model are due 60 days after the effective date of the gra nt agreement. See the General Section for detailed information on the use of the
" Master" eLogic Model. 2. Successful applicants will be required to submit bi-alUlUal and final program reports according to the requirements of the award agreement. Your bi-annual
and final report must include a completed Logic Model, form HUD-960 10, approved and incorporated into yOlll' award agreement, showing specific outputs and outcome results against those
proposed and accepted as part of your approved grant agreement. 3. Financial repo rting requirements include, but are not limited to, the submission of the financial status report, SF-425,
bi-a nnuall y. VIU. OTHER INFORMATION A. Compliance with Fair Housing and Civil Rights Laws and Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing for Community Challenge Planning Grant Applicants
36 Fair Housing and Civil Rights Laws: I. With the exception of Federa lly recognized Indian tribes and their instrumcnta liti es, app li ca nts and their sub-rcc ipi cnts must comply
with a ll applicable fa ir housing and civil ri ghts requircments in 24 CFR 5. 105 (a), including, but not limited to, th c Fair Hous ing Act, Title VI of the Civil Ri ghts Act o f 1964,
and the Rehabilitation Act o f 1973. 2. If you are a federally recognized Indi an tribe, you must comply with the nondi sc rimination provis ions cnumerated at 24 CFR 1000.12, as applicablc.
Sce the General Secti on for ('Uliher instructions on this requirement. 3. Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing: Section 808(e)(5) of the Fa ir Hous ing Act imposes a duty on HUD to
a ffirm ati vely furth er the purposes o rthe Fa ir Housing Act in its housing and urban development programs. This obligation furth er applies generally to recipi ents o f HUD fi.lI1d
s, including those awarded and announced under HUD' s FY 20 I 0 funding notices. Your application must include a di scussion on how your proposed plans affirmati vely furth er fair housing;
applications that include specific acti vities and outcomes that address this requirement will be rated higher. Applicants for Community Cha ll enge Planning Grants that are tribal governments
are not subj ect to the a rfil111ati ve ly fUl1h ering fair housing submission requirement in the General Section. B. Additional Environmental Requirements. A Finding of No Signifi cant
Impact (FONSI) with respect to the environment has been made for this NOFA in acco rdance with HUD regulati ons at 24 CFR part 50, which implement section 102(2)(C) of the National Environmental
Po licy Act o f 1969 (42 U.S.c. 4332(2)(C)). The FONS] is available for public
37 illSPl!CliOIl betweell 8 a.lll. and 5 p.m. weekdays ill the Rcgulatioll:-' Divi..,ioll. Office or C; c ll~r~ll Co u",e!. Departmenl ur Ilm"ing and Urban De\"c loplllelll. 45 1 Se\'elllh
Sireel. SW. Ruom 10176. Washinglun. DC 2()-I IO·0500, Due 10 securily me,,,urcs allhe HUD He'l(lquart e rs bui lding. an advance appoinllllenilu revie" Ihe rONSllllusl be scheduled by
calling Ihe . Divi sion al 2m· 70S·]OSS (Ihis is nol a lul l· rree Illll1lher). Shaun Dunavan. Secrelary Deparllllelll of Housi ng and Urban Developmenl [Docket No. FR·5415·N·121
't""... . -_ ~ CIty of ?Wheat~ge ITEMNO:~ DATE: August 23, 2010 REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION TITLE: RESOLUTION NO. 49-2010 -A RESOLUTION GIVING NOTICE AND CALL FOR A SPECIAL MUNICIPAL
ELECTION TO BE HELD NOVEMBER 2ND, 2010 o PUBLIC HEARING o BIDSIMOTIONS ~ RESOLUTIONS QUASI-JUDICIAL: o ORDINANCES FOR I ST READING o ORDINANCES FOR 2 ND READING ~ YES o NO ~~ ,Q~a1~"
City Clerk SUMMARY: This resolution gives notice of and calls for a special municipal election on November 2, 20 I 0, to coincide with the general election on that date. The election
will be coordinated with Jefferson County. The election is required to accommodate two citizen-initiated charter amendments and one Council-referred ballot question. DISCUSSION: The
Home Rule Charter calls for a Municipal Election in every
odd-year to coincide with the elected terms for the Offices of the Mayor, Clerk, Treasurer and Council. Municipal Elections are not held in the City of Wheat Ridge in even-numbered years
unless a Special Election is called. In such cases, Charter Section 2.2 gives the Council the authority to call such Special Election Two citizen-initiated petitions for amendments to
the Charter have been certified as sufficient by me, and the Council has set ballot titles for the same. The petitions request an election on November 2, 2010. The City Council has also
referred a ballot question on a trash franchise to the electorate of the City of Wheat Ridge at the time of the November 2, 20 I 0 General Election. V:IFormslCAFtemplate
Council Action Form August 23, 20 I 0 Page 2 Pursuant to Charter Section 16.8, when there is a proposed amendment to the City Charter, the Council must also publish notice and call of
an election on those questions, which will be accomplished by the publication of this Resolution. The City is required to call a Special Election during any year other than the normal
November election date if questions are initiated or referred outside of that schedule. The Charter requires a Special Municipal Election to be called and published no less than 60 days
before the Election day: Friday, September 3, 2010. The August 23, 2010 Regular City Council Meeting is the last scheduled meeting of the Council before this date. PRIOR ACTION: None
FINANCIAL IMPACT: The City has resolved to conduct this election as a Coordinated Election with the County of Jefferson. In the lOA with the Jefferson County Clerk & Recorder, the City
has agreed to pay the relative additional costs determined and billed by the County to conduct the coordinated election for the City of Wheat Ridge. The Office of the City Clerk estimates
the cost of this year's November coordinated election with Jefferson county to be approximately $12,500, including the additional cost of conducting a Special Election with the above
mentioned Wheat Ridge questions. The City Clerk's 2010 Budget for this is $13 ,500. For this reason, we do not anticipate that an additional budget appropriation will be required to
cover the costs of this election. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "\ move to approve Resolution 49-20 I 0, a resolution giving notice and call for a special municipal election to be held November
2, 2010." Or, "I move to deny the approval of Resolution 49-20 10, for the following reasons: ____ " REPORT PREPARED BY: Michael Snow, City Clerk ATTACHMENTS: I. Resolution 49-2010
CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO RESOLUTION NO. 49 Series of 2010 A RESOLUTION GIVING NOTICE OF AND CALLING FOR A SPECIAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD NOVEMBER 2, 2010 WHEREAS, the Home
Rule Charter for the City of Wheat Ridge, Section 2.2 requires that a special election shall be called by resolution or ordinance of the City Council not less than 60 days in advance
of such special election; and WHEREAS, Section 16.8 of the City Charter further provides that when there are proposed changes to the City Charter, the Council must publish notice of
and call an election thereon; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to give notice of and call a special election to be held on the same date as the general election: November 2, 2010.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE: Section 1. Special Election Called Pursuant to the Wheat Ridge City Charter Sections 2.2 and 16.8, the City
hereby gives notice of and calls a Special Municipal Election to be held November 2, 2010 for the purpose of referring the Ballot Questions set forth in Section 2 to the voters of the
City in the manner set forth below: • Date: November 2, 2010 • Polls Open: 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. • Qualifications of persons entitled to vote: 18 years of age, registered to vote, resident
of the City for at least thirty (30) days prior to the election . • Polling places: Clear Creek Church, 10555 W 44th Ave Crossroads Church of Denver, 9725 W. 50th Ave Holy Cross Lutheran
Church 4500 Wadsworth Blvd Kullerstrand Elem. School, 12225 W 38th Ave Manning School, 13200 W 32nd Ave Pennington Elem. School, 4645 Independence St Prospect Valley Elem. School, 3400
Pierson St Sons of Italy, 5925 W 32nd Ave Vivian Elem. School, 10500 W 25th Ave Wheat Ridge City Hall, 7500 W 29th Ave Wheat Ridge Middle School, 7101 W 38th Ave Wheat Ridge Presbyterian
Church, 9180 W 38th Ave Wheat Ridge Recreation Ctr. , 4005 Kipling St -1-
Wilmore-Davis Elem., 7975 W 41st Ave Section 2. Ballot Questions Referred to Voters The purpose of the election is to place the Ballot Questions set forth below before the registered
electors of the City: Ballot Question 1. SHALL THE HOME RULE CHARTER OF THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO, BE AMENDED TO PROVIDE FOR A MAYOR-COUNCILADMINISTRATOR FORM OF GOVERNMENT,
AND IN CONNECTION THEREWITH, PROVIDING THAT THE EXECUTIVE POWER BE VESTED IN A MAYOR WHO IS ELECTED AT LARGE AND WHO APPOINTS A CITY ADMINISTRATOR TO ADMINISTER THE DAILY AFFAIRS OF
THE CITY, WITH THE ADMINISTRATOR'S SALARY TO BE RECOMMENDED BY THE MAYOR AND RATIFIED BY THE CITY COUNCIL, AND MAKING CONFORMING CHANGES TO THE CHARTER? Full text of amendment: Amend
the Wheat Ridge Home Rule Charter as follows: PREFATORY SYNOPSIS (Paragraph 3) The charter provides for the MAYOR-COUNCIL-ADMINISTRATOR a COIm6il MaAa§or form of government. THE EXECUTIVE
POWER IS VESTED IN A MAYOR WHO IS ELECTED AT LARGE AND WHO APPOINTS A CITY ADMINISTRATOR TO EFFICIENTLY ADMINISTER THE DAILY AFFAIRS OF THE CITY. The mayor presides over council meetings
and possesses the power of veto. The mayor shall be the recognized head of the city government for all legal and ceremonial purposes and shall be the conservator of the peace. (Paragraph
4) The city council is established as the policy-making legislative body of the city. The council consists of eight (8) members with two (2) members elected from each of four (4) districts.
The council shall appoint citizens to all boards and commissions on an equal representation basis. TAO City CouA6il also aJ3J3oiAts a City MaAa§or to Flm tAO Elaily affairs of tAO City.
-2-
CHAPTER I. GENERAL PROVISIONS Section 1.4. Form of government. The municipal government provided by this Charter shall be known as the "MAYOR-COUNCIL-ADMINISTRATOR" "CouAsil MaAager
government." (See Diagram) ---'~"'-yo"'r ! I Wheat Ridge Electorat. I Chief Executive t-----+----Officer r I Boards and Commission. City council Department Heads "--_Ci_tY_At_to_ro_o_Y--..J1
LI_"""_iC_i_pa_l_""_d_g_O ...J City 'l'r ••• urer City Clerk CHAPTER III. MAYOR AND ADMINISTRATION Section 3.2. Power and duties of the mayor. (Paragraph 2) The mayor shall be the chief
elected AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE officer of the city. HE/SHE SHALL APPOINT, IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 3.4, A CITY ADMINISTRATOR TO EFFICIENTLY ADMINISTER THE DAY-TO-DAY AFFAIRS OF THE CITY.
The mayor shall be responsible for the efficient administration of all affairs of the city placed in M; HIS/HER charge AND ASSURING THAT THE CITY ADMINISTRATOR EFFICIENTLY PERFORMS HIS/HER
DUTIES AS PROVIDED BY THIS CHARTER. The mayor shall serve as a liaison between the city council and the city administration, including, but not limited to, attendance at meetings and
special events involving the city administration. Section 3.4. City ADMINISTRATOR maAager The city maAager ADMINISTRATOR shall be the chief administrative officer of the city. The SOUAsil
MAYOR, BY majority 'late of all memBers, shall appoint a city maAager ADMINISTRATOR who shall serve at the pleasure of the -3-
cel,jAcil MAYOR, without definite term and at a salary RECOMMENDED BY THE MAYOR AND RATIFIED filEeG by the council. The cel,jAcil MAYOR shall appoint a city maAager ADMINISTRATOR within
a reasonable time after a vacancy exists in the position . During the period of any vacancy or extended absence in the office of city maAager ADMINISTRATOR, the ce~Acil MAYOR shall appoint
an acting city maAager ADMINISTRATOR. The city maAager ADMINISTRATOR may appoint an employee of the city as acting city ADMINISTRATOR during the temporary absence (not to exceed thirty
(30) days) of the city maAager ADMINISTRATOR. Any acting city maAager ADMINISTRATOR shall have all of the responsibilities, duties, and authority of the city maAager ADMINISTRATOR. P~rs~aAt
te Charter sectieA 17.7, the city aelmiAistrater serviAg ~peA the effective elate ef this sectieA J.4, as ameAeleel, shall se e1eemeel te have seeA appeiAteel city maAager as previeleel
heresy. The city MaAager ADMINISTRATOR shall be appointed BY THE MAYOR with regard to fitness, competency, training, and experience in professional urban administration. At the time
of fIis HIS/HER appointment, the city MaAager ADMINISTRATOR need not be a resident of the city, but during fIis HIS/HER tenure in office ~ HE/SHE shall reside withffi IN the city WITHIN
ONE YEAR OF HIS/HER APPOINTMENT. No mayor shall be appointed city MaAager ADMINISTRATOR during or within one (1) year after the termination of fIis HIS/HER elected term AS MAYOR. The
city MaAager ADMINISTRATOR is responsible to the Ce~Acil MAYOR for the EFFICIENT operation of the city and may be dismissed by Rim HIM/HER should the ce~Acil MAYOR she~leI it determine
that such removal is in the best interest of the city. e1ismissal ef the city maAager shall se sy a majerity vete ef all memsers ef the ce~Acil. The Ce~Acil MAYOR shall assure that the
city MaAager ADMINISTRATOR performs fIis HIS/HER duties as provided by this Charter. The duties of the city MaAager ADMINISTRATOR shall include but not be limited to the following :
(a) unchanged (b) Hire, suspend, transfer and remove city department heads, who serve under the jurisdiction, and at the will of the city MaAager ADMINISTRATOR. (c) -(I) unchanged Section
3.6. Relationship of CITY ADMINISTRATION aelmiAistrative service to Ce~Acil THE MAYOR. -4-
The city Manager ADMINISTRATOR shall be held accountable to the Ge~nsil MAYOR for fHs HIS/HER actions and those of fHs HIS/HER subordinates. Section 4.9. Relationship to aaministrati\'e
servise CITY ADMINISTRATION. No member of the council shall dictate the appointment or duties of any department head or employee of the city, except as expressly provided in this Charter.
The council and its members shall deal with the administrative service of the city solely through the city Manager ADMINISTRATOR, and neither the council nor its members shall give orders
or reprimands to any employee or subordinate of the city Manager ADMINISTRATOR. THE CITY ADMINISTRATOR SHALL BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE TO THE MAYOR FOR HIS/HER ACTIONS AND THOSE OF HIS/HER
SUBORDINATES. The council retains the prerogative of requiring the city Manager ADMINISTRATOR to make verbal or written reports of ffis-HIS/HER activities, those of fHs HIS/HER subordinates
and the aaministrati'/e servise CITY ADMINISTRATION under his charge, not in conflict with other provisions of this Charter. CONFORMING CHANGES In addition to the above changes, strike
all references to "city manager" and insert "city administrator" throughout the Charter including, but not limited to, the following Charter sections: Section 5.7(b)(2); Section 16 11(d),(I)
Ballot Question 2. SHALL THE HOME RULE CHARTER OF THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO, BE AMENDED TO PROVIDE FOR A MAYOR VETO OF THE CITY ANNUAL BUDGET, AND IN CONNECTION THEREWITH, PROVIDING
THAT THE MAYOR MAY VETO THE ENTIRE BUDGET OR PARTIALLY VETO THE BUDGET BY CITY DEPARTMENT(S) AND/OR FUND(S) AND ALLOWING THE VETO TO BE OVERRRIDEN BY THREE-FOURTHS OF THE ENTIRE CITY
COUNCIL AND MAKING CONFORMING CHANGES TO THE CHARTER? Full text of amendment: Amend the Wheat Ridge Home Rule Charter as follows: Section 3.2. Power and duties of the mayor. (Paragraph
4) The mayor shall have the power to veto any ordinance OR BUDGET passed by the council in accordance with the procedure set forth in section 5.14 of this Charter. The mayor shall also
preside over city council meetings. -5-
CHAPTER I. COUNCIL PROCEDURE AND LEGISLATION Section 5.14. Veto by mayor. The mayor shall have the power to veto any ordinance OR BUDGET passed by the council subject to the following:
(a) -(e) unchanged; insert new item (f) to read: (F) THE MAYOR MAY VETO THE ENTIRE BUDGET OR PARTIALLY VETO THE BUDGET BY CITY DEPARTMENT(S) AND/OR FUND(S) CHAPTER XVI. MISCELLANEOUS
LEGAL PROVISIONS Sec. 16.11 . Definitions. Insert new definition at (h) to read : (H) BUDGET. THE ANNUAL CITY BUDGET FOR THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE. Renumber remaining definitions as appropriate.
Ballot Question 3. SHALL THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO BE AUTHORIZED TO ENTER INTO A FRANCHISE OR FRANCHISES FOR CITY WIDE RESIDENTIAL TRASH REMOVAL, INCLUDING
RECYCLING AND A SENIOR DISCOUNT, FOR SINGLE FAMILY AND DUPLEX ZONE DISTRICTS? Section 3. Effective date; publication. This Resolution shall be effective upon passage. The City Council
hereby orders this Resolution published pursuant to City Charter Section 16.8. DONE AND RESOLVED THIS 23rd day of August, 2010. Jerry DiTullio, Mayor ATTEST: Michael Snow, City Clerk