HomeMy WebLinkAboutCouncil Packet 09/13/2010CITY COUNCIL AGENDA: September 13, 2010 Page -2-
B. Resolution 54-2010 -amending the Fiscal Year 2010 General Fund Budget to reflect
the approval of a Supplemental Budget Appropriation for additional contract building
inspections related to damage from the July 20, 2009 storm to Building Code Services
International in the amount of $30 ,600 .
C . Motion approving payment to Murray Dahl Kuechenmeister & Renauld , LLP for Legal
Service Fees incurred in August 2010 in the amount of $17 ,193.93.
PUBLIC HEARINGS AND ORDINANCES ON SECOND READING
2 . Council Bill 16-2010 -amending Chapter 26 of the Code of Laws concerning the
creation of Mixed Use Zone Districts (Case No . ZOA-09-07).
DECISIONS, RESOLUTIONS, AND MOTIONS
3 . Resolution 52-2010 -opposing Proposition 101 and Amendments 60 and 61 and asking
voters to educate themselves on the devastating impact these measures will have on the
ability of their Governmental Agencies to provide essential services and programs .
4. Resolution 53-2010 -authorizing assignment to the Colorado Housing and Finance
Authority of a Private Activity Bond allocation of the City of Wheat Ridge pursuant to the
Colorado Private Activity Bond Ceiling Allocation Act.
CITY MANAGER'S MATTERS
CITY ATTORNEY'S MATTERS
ELECTED OFFICIALS' MATTERS
ADJOURNMENT
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. Mr. Matthews contends that the two Charter Amendments provide a better
check and balance of government power, less bureaucracy within Council and Staff,
and returns our City to the more efficient Mayor-Council-Administrator form of
government. Mr. Matthews further claimed that over 2,000 citizens of Wheat Ridge
signed the petitions to initiate these amendments for the November election, including
two Mayors of Wheat Ridge, and several former and current City Council members.
City Clerk Michael Snow announced that as of the afternoon of August 9th , 2010, both
citizen-initiated Charter Amendment petitions had been certified as sufficient.
Cheryl Wise expressed her belief that citizens do not have the time, the energy or the
interest to read and understand issues of their government in depth and as such, they
are dependent on their elected officials to put forth thoughtful information from which
they can make decisions. The CEC was formed by the City Council for this purpose.
Ms. Wise is confused by hearing that the CEC did not provide the education and the
schooling on the various forms of government. She was in agreement with the
statements of Nancy Snow and 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 would conflict with the citizen-initiated charter
amendment for a Mayor-Council-Administrator form of government. She believes that
citizens and businesses need to rely on their government and is concerned that the City
of Wheat Ridge Charter seems as easy to change as most Ordinances. She urged
voters to read the CEC report and to take the time to understand the implications of
each ballot measure before voting. Ms. Wise is resentful that information that was
presented under the CEC presentation on the ballot initiative perhaps wasn't completely
accurate and there's no other opportunity to debate or present elsewhere or otherwise.
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.
City Council Minutes of August 9, 2010 3
Kim Calomino thanked the CEC board members for their contributions and to the
Council Members that formed the committee. She further expressed disappointment
and dismay that the CEC recommendations and education presented have been
portrayed as statements against the two citizen initiated Charter Amendments rather
than a public education tool as it was intended. She believes that, given the major
implications in the proposed Charter amendment to change the city's form of
government, it was the right thing for the Council to form this committee in order to
provide the community thoughtful information on what those changes would portend.
She resents the implication that she and other citizens cannot discern the differences
and conflicting matters of three separate issues on the ballot and urged Council to vest
the citizens with that ability should Council refer another ballot question 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.
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 Citizen-
Initiated Charter Amendments; seconded by Mrs. Sang; carried 8-0.
City Council Minutes of August 9, 2010 4
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-to-
exceed $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 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.
F. Motion to approve Award SOQ-1 0-03 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.
City Council Minutes of August 9,2010 5
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-10-02/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.
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.
City Council Minutes of August 9 ,2010 6
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
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 .
City Council Minutes of August 9, 2010 7
5. Resolution 38-2010 -approving a 28-lot Consolidation Plat on property zoned R-
1 C located at 3227 Chase Street.
(Case No. WS-1 0-01 /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 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.
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.
City Council Minutes of August 9, 2010 8
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 9
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 2 nd
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 32 nd Avenue. The grant requires the City provide
$156,000 in local match , which includes the cost of staff time for designing the project.
ADJOURNMENT
MeeJ=ned 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.
C ity Counc i l Min utes of August 23 ,20 10 2
CITIZENS' RIGHT TO SPEAK
Ginger Hartup of Lakewood spoke on behalf of Second W ind , a Teen Su ici de
Prevention organization , which serves the entire Denver metro area . Second Wi nd is
now the largest mental health provider to teens in the Denver area and hosts t he largest
teen suicide prevention event in the nation . The annual Walk , Bike & Run Even t to
raise funds for this cause will be held on September 19 t h , 2010 at the Jeffco
Fairgrounds. Citizens of all ages interested in participating may visit and register at
www.swfdm .com .
Jane Kissel of Wheat Ridge spoke on the matter of dumpster regulations in Wheat
Ridge , which she contends is restrictive of residential owners using a dumpster because
the maximum 1.5 cubic meter-sized dumpsters are no longer available . She also
contends that if she is required to screen the view of a dumpster at her home , the sam e
requirements should be enforced on the apartment complex next to he r home.
Motion by Mr. Stites to direct staff to investigate the avai lab i lity of the required dumpste r
sizes and to revisit the related ordinance at a futu re Study Session ; seconded by M rs .
Sang ; carried 8-0 .
Erika Severson of Wheat Ridge expressed concerns about a flier that was distributed
to her home in Wheat Ridge that does not supply any identification of who distributed it
and therefore lacks credibility . Council Member Joyce Jay informed Ms . Severson that
she had distributed the fliers in her neighborhood . Ms . Severson then pointed out that
Wheat Ridge is misspelled on the flier and that she feels its message is very negatively
framed and not professional or appropriate .
Lloyd Levy of Wheat Ridge yielded his three minutes to Kim Calomino .
Kim Calomino commended Council for forming the C itizens Exploratory Committee
(CEC) which represents Wheat Ridge citizens and businesses . She contends the CEC
was not charged with researching the merits of the citizen initiated Charter
Amendments , but rather to assess the various forms of local government and
commended the CEC members for their hard work in doing so. She believes the CEC
report provides citizens valuable information about the various forms of government and
made a plea to Council and citizens to stop personal attacks and misinformation on the
committee and its recommendations . Further, she urged her District 4 Council
Members to provide citizens the choices on the ballot in what form of government are
best for the City by referring to the ballot the charter amendment recommended by the
CEC.
Scott Read of Wheat Ridge asked Council if they consider Wheat Ridge a Sanctuary
City, based on the recent events involving the 18-year old assailant in the Robert
Wallace case.
City Counci l Minutes of August 23 ,2010 3
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Motion by Mrs . Adams to move Item 6 on the agenda to Item 7 a nd add as Item 6 :
Discussion of Recommendations of Citizens ' Exploratory Committee (CEC ); seconded
by Council Members Berry and Langworthy ; carried 5-3 w ith Council Members St ites ,
DeMott and Sang voting No .
1. CONSENT AGENDA
A. Motion to approve award RFP-10 -24 Armed Guard Services to G4S Secure
Solutions USA, Inc .
B . Resolution 46-2010 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 Reconciliation.
C . Resolution 47-2010 -amending the Fiscal year 2010 Pol ice 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.
D. Resolution 48-2010 -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 .
E. Motion to approve payment to Murray Dahl Kuechenmeister & Renaud , LLP fo r
July 2010 Legal Serv ices in the amount of $20 ,264 .
Consent Agenda was introduced and read by Mrs . Langworthy .
Motion by Mrs . Langworthy for approval of the Consent Agenda ; seconded by Mrs .
Adams ; carried 8-0 .
PUBLIC HEARINGS AND ORDINANCES ON SECOND READING
2 . Council Bill 15-2010 -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 .
Mayor DiTullio opened the public hearing.
Council Bill 15-2010 was introduced on second reading by Council Member
Langworthy . City Clerk Michael Snow assigned Ordinance No. 1470 .
No citizens were present to speak.
City Council Minutes of August 23,2010 4
Mayor DiTullio closed the public hearing .
Motion by Mrs. Langworthy to approve Council Bill 15-2010 (Ordinance 1470) on
second reading and that it take effect 15 days after final publication ; seconded by
Mr. Reinhart ; carried 8-0 .
ORDINANCES ON FIRST READING
3. Council Bill 16-2010 -amending Chapter 26 of the Code of Laws concerning the
creation of Mixed Use lone Districts (Case No . lOA-09-07).
Council Bill 16-2010 was introduced on first reading by Council Member Stites.
Motion by Mr. Stites to approve Council Bill 16-2010 on first reading, order it published ,
public hearing set for Monday, September 13 , 2010 at 7 :00 p.m . in the City Council
Chambers , and that it take effect 15 days after final publication; seconded by Mrs .
Sang; carried 8-0 .
DECISIONS, RESOLUTIONS, AND MOTIONS
4 . Resolution 45-2010 -approving a Supplemental Budget Appropriation in the
amount of $65 ,000 for the purpose of conducting a Traffic Study and Roadway
Design Analysis for 38 th Avenue in conjunction with Development of a 38 th
Avenue Corridor Plan .
Resolution 45-2010 was introduced by Council Member Jay.
Motion by Mrs. Jay to approve Resolution 45-2010 ; seconded by Mrs . Sang ;
Motion by Mr. DeMott to amend Resolution 45-2010 to reflect the approval of a
supplemental budget appropriation of $52,000 to WR2020 to continue their already
progressing studies of 38 th Ave., and $13,000 to the Wheat Ridge Business District for
additional grant money; failed for lack of a second .
Motion by Mr. Reinhart to amend Resolution 45-2010 to reduce the budget
appropriation to $50,000 , of which $30,000 be allocated to the Traffic Impact Study and
$20,000 for Roadway Design Feasibility; seconded by Mrs . Sang; carried 6-2 with
Council Members Stites and DeMott voting No .
Motion carried as amended 6-2 with Council Members Stites and DeMott voting No .
City Council Minutes of August 23,2010 5
5 . 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 .
Motion by Ms . Berry to approve the funding for a local match for a Federal
Transportation Planning Grant Application in the 2011 Budget as part of the Wadsworth
Corridor Coalition; seconded by Mrs. Adams; carried 6-2 with Council Members DeMott
and Sang voting No .
6 . Discussion on Citizens' Exploratory Committee (CEC) recommendations .
Council Member Adams introduced the topic of discussion.
Staff was asked to draft a letter thanking the CEC members for their efforts and
contributions on the committee .
7 . Resolution 49-2010 -Giving notice of and calling for a Special Municipal Election
to be held November 2 ,2010 .
Resolution 49-2010 was introduced by Council Member Mr. DeMott.
Motion by Mr. DeMott to approve Resolution 49-2010 ; seconded by Mrs . Sang; carried
8-0.
CITY MANAGER'S MATTERS
Mr. Goff announced the Annual Citizens Civic Academy will take place this fall.
Applications are being accepted now and can be found on the City's website.
ELECTED OFFICIALS' MATTERS
City Clerk Michael Snow informed Council and citizens that three Wheat Ridge ballot
questions will appear on the November 2 nd , 2010 special election ballot in the following
order and with the following numbering :
Ballot Question 2A: Approval for the City of Wheat Ridge to enter into a Franchise
agreement for Trash and Recycling services
Ballot Question 300: A Charter Amendment granting the Mayor the power to veto the
City Budget.
Ballot Question 301: A Charter Amendment providing for a Mayor-Council-Manager
form of government.
Ms. Berry provided information to residents with excess garden produce about
Veggietrader.com and encouraged participation in swapping vegetables from private
garden produce or donation of their excess garden produce to the Jeffco Action Center
City Council Minutes of August 23 ,2010 6
through jeffcoac.org or to the residents at Highlands Apartments in Wheat Ridge.
Further information will be available on the City's website .
Motion by Ms. Berry to direct the City Attorney to draft a Resolution to put a ballot
Question forth to voters to form a Charter Commission, to hold a special meeting on
August 30 th , 2010 for its consideration and to reconsider Resolution 49-2010 if that
Resolution passes; seconded by Mrs . Langworthy ; failed 1-7 with Ms. Berry voting Yes .
Motion by Mrs . Langworthy to discuss the matter of forming a Charter Commission at a
future Study Session; seconded by Mrs . Sang ; carried 5-3 with Council Members Stites,
DeMott and Reinhart voting No .
ADJOURNMENT
Meeting adjourned at 9:33pm
Michael Snow , City Clerk
APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL ON SEPTEMBER 13 ,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.
From:Nancy Snow
To:Michael Snow
Subject:Comments on the City Budget
Date:Monday, September 13, 2010 6:21:38 PM
Because I am unable to come to the Council meeting tonight to speak on next year’s budget, I ask that
the following comments be entered into the record.
One: Regardless of the results of the November election on the issue of changing the current form of
city government, I would like the express my opinion that this City does not need a city manager/ or
administrator making over $125,000 a year AND an Assistant City Manager/Administrator also making
about the same amount of salary. This is a small city which has changed only slightly in size since its
incorporation, and one professional city manager or administrator—whatever the title—is sufficient.
Two: Please refrain from any more expenditures for consultants. The amount spent for consultants in
the past two years is excessive.
SBA fo r WRTV8 Scheduling Software
September 13 ,2 010
Page 2
PRIOR ACTION:
None
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
The requested amount of the supplemental budget appropriation is $2 ,750 for the replacement of
the Digi play server for WRTVS.
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 WTVS. 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). 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. The balance following this expenditure will be $174,304.39 .
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends that City Council approve the supplemental budget request. Funding for the
server replacement was not anticipated and is not included in the general operating budget.
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
"I move to approve Resolution No. 51-20 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
$2 ,760 for the replacement of the Digi play server for WRTVS."
Or ,
"[ move to postpone indefinitely Resolution No . 51-2010, a resolution amending the Fiscal Year
2010 General Fund Budget to reflect the approval of a supplemental budget appropriation in the
amount of$2,760 for the replacement of the Digi play server for WRTVS for the following
reason(s) "
REPORT PREPARED BY:
Heather Geyer, Interim Administrative Services Director
A TT ACHMENTS:
I. Resolution No. 5[-2010
2. D.Co. Marketing, Inc. Invoice for replacement of the Digi play server
CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO
RESOLUTION NO. 51
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 $2,760 FOR THE REPLACEMENT OF THE DIGI
PLAY SERVER FORWRTV8
WHEREAS, the City Council recognizes WRTV8 as an important communication
tool in informing the community about City programming and services ; and
WHEREAS , the use of Public Education Government (PEG) Fee revenue can
only be utilized for equipment, software and maintenance needed for operating Channel
8 ; 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 replacement of the Digi play server.
B. The City Council authorizes the transfer of $2,760 from the General Fund
undesignated reserves to account 01-117 -800 -899 and approves
amending the 2010 fiscal year budget accordingly.
DONE AND RESOLVED this 13 th day of September 2010.
Jerry DiTullio , Mayor
ATTEST:
Michael D. Snow, City Clerk
Attachment 1
SBA for Contract Building Inspecti ons
Se ptember 13 , 20 10
Page 2
PRIOR ACTION:
City Council has previously approved budget supplements in the amount of $120 ,000 on August
24,2009, $56 ,550 on December 14 ,2009 and $20 ,000 on February 22nd, 2010.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
As noted , the approved 20 I 0 General Fund Budget did not anticipate this amount of need for
contract inspection services. [n addition to the previous storm related inspection budget
supplements approved by City Council for $120,000 on August 24 ,2009 , $56 ,550 on December
14,2009, and $20,000 on February 22,2010, an additional supplemental budget appropriation is
requested in the amount of $30 ,600. It should be noted that the roof permits issued since the
storm have also generated in excess of $900,000 in building permit fees, which are covering the
costs associated with these additional contract services . There are adequate funds in the General
Fund unreserved fund balance to meet this request .
BACKGROUND:
City staff is only partially able to meet the significant additional demand that continues to be
created from the additional roof inspections. Over the past several months , we issued between
75 and 100 new roof permits per month . Staff estimates that they can perform approximately
fifty percent of those 1,700 + additional inspections. In addition to the increased inspection
volume , a part-time building inspector position is currently vacant. The City has an existing
contract for on-call inspection services with Building Code Services International (BCSI). The
contract cost per inspection is $30 to the City . Based on our estimated need for contract building
inspections for the balance of 20 I 0, we are requesting an additional budget of $30 ,600 , which
would fund 1,020 inspections .
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff is recommending approval of the supplemental budget appropriation in order to maintain
the same level of customer service in providing building inspection services, including next day
inspections. If the supplemental appropriation were not approved, next day inspections would
likely have to be discontinued and a backlog of inspections would occur.
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
"I move to approve Resolution No. 54-2010 -A resolution amending the Fiscal Year 2010
General Fund Budget to reflect the approval of a supplemental budget appropriation for contract
building inspection services to Building Code Services International in the amount of$30,600."
Or,
"I move to postpone indefinitely Resolution No. 54-20 I 0 -A resolution amending the Fiscal
Year 20 I 0 General Fund Budget to reflect the approval of a supplemental budget appropriation
for contract building inspection services to Code Consultants International in the amount of
$30 ,600, for the following reason(s) "
SBA for Con t ract Building In spections
Septe mb er 13 ,2010
Page 3
REPORT PREPAREDAND REVIEWED BY:
John Schumacher, Chief Building Official
Ken Johnstone, Community Development Director
ATTACHMENTS:
I. Resolution No . 54-20 I 0
CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO
RESOLUTION NO . 54
Series 2010
TITLE: A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2010
GENERAL FUND BUDGET TO REFLECT THE APPROVAL OF
A SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET APPROPRIATION FOR
ADDITIONAL CONTRACT BUILDING INSPECTIONS RELATED
TO DAMAGE FROM THE JULY 20, 2009 STORM TO BUILDING
CODE SERVICES INTERNATIONAL IN THE AMOUNT OF
$30,600
WHEREAS, the weather event on the evening of July 20, 2009 resulted in
significant damage to numerous buildings in the City of Wheat Ridge; and
WHEREAS, the repair to the damaged buildings necessitate property
owners receive building permits and said building permits require the City to
perform specific building inspections to verify compliance with applicable
municipal code requirements for construction; and
WHEREAS, roofs require a minimum of one and in some cases additional
inspections and the City estimates the need to use our contract firm to perform
approximately 1,000 additional inspections in the 2010 calendar year ; and
WHEREAS, the City has a contract with Building Code Services
International to conduct inspection on behalf of the City at a cost of $30 per
inspection.
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 $30,600 .00
from General Fund unreserved fund balance into account #01-122-
700-704 (Building Division Contractual Services).
DONE AND RESOLVED THIS 13th Day of September 2010 .
Jerry DiTullio, Mayor
ATTEST:
Michael D. Snow, City Clerk
Attachment 1
August Legal Fees
August 23, 20 I 0
Page 2
"I move to deny the approval of the August 31, 20 I 0 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:
1. August 20 I 0 Invoice Summary
Murray Dahl Kuechenmeister & 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
53027 City Attorney: General
53027.3 Personnel & Liti ga ti on
53027 .6 WRURA
Tota ls :
Attachment 1
Fees
$16 ,242.75
$84 .75
$206.25
$16,533.75
Disbs
$660.18
$0 .00
$0 .00
$660 .1 8
Aug 31, 2010
Total
$16,902.93
$84.75
$206.25
$17 ,193.93
Creation of Mixed Use Zone Districts
September 13, 20 I 0
Page 2
PRlOR ACTION:
Staff originally briefed City Council on the new ordinance at study sessions in December of
2009, as well as February and June in 2010. A first reading of the ordinance occ urred on August
23 ,2010 .
Staff held multiple study sessions with Planning Commission in 2010 regarding th e 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 are
attached.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
The proposed ordinance is not expected to have a direct financial impact on the C ity . However,
the new mixed use zones are intended to encourage redeve lopment, 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 us e redevelopment and
identifies the creation of mixed use zone district s as a high-priority implementation step .
Current Code
The only provisions in the current zoning code for mixed use development are the Planned
Mixed Use District (PMUD), as well as limited allowances for residential uses on commercially-
zo ned property . Most sites proposing significant mixed use redevelopment must rezo ne to
PMUD through the planned development process, which requires rezoning and a site-speci fic
development plan . This presents challenges to new mixed use development since the process is
lengthy , unpredictable, and can be expensive. [n 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 zo nin g is
focused on transit-oriented development (TOD) areas around future light rail stations. Many
jurisdictions also have mixed use zo ne districts that are targeted for commercial corridors,
downtown areas, and main streets. The trend in most cities is to create mixed use di stricts that
incentivize or encourage mixed use s -without requiring mixed use -and to create an
administrative review process for new development within these di stricts. Staff researc hed mi xed
Creation of Mixed Use Zone Districts
September 13,2010
Page 3
use zo ning 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 of 20 I 0, staff met with property owners in priority areas where the City
could potentially initiate legislative re zonings to the new mixed use districts . At each
meeting , staff distributed surveys and received valuable comments from participants that
he lped shape the proposed ordinance. The four geographic areas where staff engaged
property owners are:
• Wadsworth between 38 th and 44th Ave nue s (intended for the MU-C district)
• Kipling north of 44th Avenue (intended for the MU-C district and MU-C Interst ate
sub-district)
• The Northwest Subarea/Ward Road Station TOO (intended for the MU-C TOO sub-
district)
• 38 th 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 me mbers have direct
experience either financing, designing , or developing mixed use projects in th e Denver area
and were able to offer the much-needed perspective of typical "end-users" of th e new mixed
use ordinance.
Public Outreach
Significant public outreach started in February 2010 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 of201O)
Effo rts to engage residents and business owners in Wheat Ridge also included two articles in
the Connections newsletter, a Top of Hour Feature on Channel 8, an article in the Denver
Creation of Mixed Use Zone Districts
September 13, 20 I 0
Page 4
Post's Your Hub, and a city-wide open house on May 12th. 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 a bout eac h 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 us e di s tricts:
I. Mixed Use Co mm ercial (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 , reside ntial a nd civic uses.
The ordinance also contains two MU-C sub-districts, which were tailored for s pecific geographic
areas that have unique design and use considerations:
I. MU-C Transit-Oriented Deve lopm en t S ub-district (MU-C TOD): this sub-district is
intended for areas within liz mile of major transit stations. While it generally follows th e
MU-C framework , it is specifically des igned to support transit riders hip and pe destrian-
friendly 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 sub-
district tailors land uses and site design standards to complement direct proximity 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. T he MU-N district
would apply to areas that were not exempted from these restrictions.
Building Height and Density
The ordinance regulates scale of deve lopm ent through building height limits , open space
requirements, setback requirements, and bulk-plane strategies. Thus no m ax imum residential
den s ities are established. Allowabl e building heights are based on the desire to encourage dens e r
development, as well as input received from surveys distributed at meetings and on the project
website.
C reati on of Mixed Use Zone D istricts
Septe mb er 13,2010
P age 6
• 4-story building heig ht : any portion o f a building within 100 ' feet o f an ex istin g
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 , whicheve r 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 use s 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 TOD sub-district and the MU-N districts, where pedestrian-friendly des ign is of particular
importance.
The following table summari zes how some of the most common auto-oriented uses are treated in
the proposed ordinance. The separation requirements would not apply to existing use s o r 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 only-
no 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, fast-
Use with 500' Permitted Use with 500' with 500'
food
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 st aff based on
this review. Most sites would be subject to th e site plan review proce ss found in the ex isting
Creation of M ixed Use Zone D istricts
Se ptemb er 13,2010
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 circulation,
land use patterns, and building pads, would need to be approved pri or to any specific s ite 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 withi n 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 revi ew the
proposed plans and raise any concerns or recommendations specific to the development
proposal.
Nonconforming Properties
If property 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 a s conditional uses in the code , which
would not result in a nonconforming use. Any conditional use in the new code, such as a drive-
through , would be considered a conforming use but would need to go through the conditiona l 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 uses -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 .
Creation of Mixed Use Zone Districts
September 13,2010
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 the commerciaVindustrial 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
• Incentivizing 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
Creation of Mixed Use Zone Districts
September 13,2010
Page 9
Wheat Ridge
• Maintaining the character of existing residential neighborhoods
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
"I 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 second
reading and that it take effect 15 days after final publication"
Or,
"I 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 foUowing reason(s) "
REPORT PREPARED BY:
Sarah Showalter, Planner II
Kenneth Johnstone , Community Development Director
A TT ACHMENTS:
1. Council Bill No . 16-20 I 0
2. Meeting Notes from Planning Commission Public Hearing on August 5, 20 10
CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO
INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER STITES
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 (MU-
N) 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 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 two-
family 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 Areas
MU-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 build-
to option
The building and the
canopy over the gas
pumps are both utilized to
meet build-to
requirements.
6
Figure 5: Gas station build-
to 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: Drive-
through 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
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 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 view-
obscuring 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 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 free-
standing 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 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 well-
lighted 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. 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-of-
way 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
MU-C Use Group 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, drive-
through 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
Retail sales – over 60,000 gsf
for one tenant space C C NP NP
20
Permitted Uses
MU-C Use Group 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 drive-
up 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 drive-
through use, including existing uses, regardless of zone district.
2. There shall be a minimum 500 foot separation between all other drive-
through/drive-up uses, including pharmacies, banks, and non-fast food eating
establishments with a drive-up window, measured radially from any drive-
through/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-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 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-to-
consume 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, rights-
of-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:
Pre-Application Final Approval Requested
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
Pre-Application Final Approval Requested
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--Non-
administrative H URA § 26-115.C
Temporary Permit H A § 26-115.D
Interpretation A
Appeal to BOA §
26-115.E
31
Pre-Application Final Approval Requested
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. (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;
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,
7-14-03; 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, § 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 by a vote of 8 to 0 on
this 23rd day of August, 2010, ordered 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: August 26, 2010
Second Publication: _________________________
Wheat Ridge Transcript
Effective Date: ______________________________
,,~./,~
....... City of ~Wheat~ge
PLANNING COMMISSION
Minutes of Meeting
August 5, 2010
1. CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order by Chair MATTHEWS at 7:00 p.m. in the City
Council Chambers of the Municipal Building, 7500 West 29 th Avenue, Wheat
Ridge, Colorado.
2. ROLL CALL OF MEMBERS
Commission Members Present:
Commission Members Absent:
Staff Members Present:
3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Alan Bucknam
John Dwyer
Dean Gokey
Dick Matthews
George Pond
Alme Brinkman
Marc Dietrick
Steve Timms
Ken Johnstone, Community
Development Director
Sarah Showalter, Planner II
Aim Lazzeri, Recording Secretary
4. APPROVE THE ORDER OF THE AGENDA
It was moved by Commissioner GOKEY and seconded by Commissioner
DWYER to approve the order of the agenda . The motion carried 5-0.
5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES -July 15,2010
It was moved by Commissioner DWYER and seconded by Commissioner
BUCKNAM to approve the minutes of July 15, 2010 as presented. The
motion carried 4-0 with Commissioner GOKEY abstaining.
6. PUBLIC FORUM (This is the time for any person to speak on any subject not
appearing on the agenda. Public comments may be limited to 3 minutes)
Planning Commission Minutes I
Attachment 2
August 5,2010
There were no individuals present who wished to address the Commission at this
time.
7. PUBLIC HEARING
A. Case No. ZOA-09-07: An ordinance amending Chapter 26 concerning
the creation of mixed use zone districts.
The case was presented by Sarah Showalter. She entered all pertinent documents
into the record and advised the Commission there was jurisdiction to hear the
case. She also entered into the record a letter to the Planning Commission from
Britta Fisher, Executive Director of Wheat Ridge 2020, expressing support for the
proposed ordinance .
Commissioner MATTHEWS expressed appreciation to staff and the Mixed Use
Task Force for the thorough, energetic and knowledgeable process involved in
formulating the ordinance. He asked if the new zoning would mesh with the 38'h
Avenue Sub-area Plan. Ms. Showalter replied that this was the intent.
Chair MATTHEWS opened the public hearing.
Bill Mahar
Live Well Wheat Ridge
Mr. Mahar spoke in favor of the ordinance and commended city staff on the
process that resulted in the ordinance. He believed the ordinance meets the
mission of Live Well Wheat Ridge by fostering a more walkable and more active
environment.
TcdHeyd
Mr. Heyd, a resident of Wheat Ridge who has been practicing urban planning for
the last ten years, spoke in favor of the ordinance. He stated that he enjoyed
working on the process through Live Well Wheat Ridge. He believed the
ordinance provides Wheat Ridge with great opportunity for vitality (both
economic and health benefits), social interaction, equity through mixed housing
stock, and environmental benefits from the ability to walk to places rather than
always using the automobile .
Bruce McLennan
SEM Architects
Mr. McLennan spoke in favor of the ordinance. He served on the Technical Task
Force with others from the real estate and architectural and design community to
provide input into drafting the ordinance. He believed the ordinance encourages
mixed use without squashing creativity. It also allows for market forces and
reasonably addresses existing uses . He commended city staff on the process
followed in drafting the ordinance.
Planning Commission Minutes 2 August 5, 2010
Commissioner DWYER asked Mr. McLennan if he believed there is a more
reasonable approach to nonconfonning uses. Mr. McLennan replied that the Task
Force discussed various scenarios that could occur with nonconfonning uses and
he is satisfied with the conclusions contained in the ordinance.
Chair MATTHEWS asked if there were others present who wished to address the
Commission. Hearing no response, he closed the public hearing.
Commissioner GOKEY commented that the ordinance contains a lot of
infonnation and regulations that could show pitfalls once it is put into practice.
That said, he did not think it was a bad document. He hoped that staff will have
the flexibility to interface with contractors and developers to make equitable
decisions. He commented that setbacks for commercial development from
residential is more restrictive than what already exists and could present a pitfall
for developers. He also expressed concem about promoting pedestrian-friendly
businesses next to a highway. This could cause problems for businesses in the
inner part of Wheat Ridge who depend on automobile use.
Commissioner DWYER commented that he was in favor of the more restrictive
setbacks next to residential uses set forth in the ordinance. Auto oriented
businesses could use a di fferent zoning and not worry about the pedestrian
friendly aspect of mixed use. While he would not vote against the ordinance, he
reiterated his concems about mixed use zoning that doesn't require mixed use.
He expressed COllcem that it would basically leave us open to no zoning.
Commissioner BUCKNAM stated that while he shares the concem about mixed
use not being required, he was in favor of the ordinance. The outreach to
neighbors adjacent to affected areas has been commendable. He liked the more
restrictive setbacks for commercial from residential. The walkability aspect
creates a more complete neighborhood around mixed use development and
provides destinations for nearby communities. Adhering to Charter restrictions
for building height in the MU-N district, intended for 38 th Avenue, will retain the
City's character.
Commissioner POND added his appreciation for the tremendous amount of time
spent by city staff and the Task Force . He believed the ordinance provides
appropriate balance and with dedication from staff, residents and volunteers a
balance will be maintained.
Commissioner GOKEY stated that he would vo te for the ordinance. He would
like to see the ordinance presented in smaller portions when it goes before
Counci l. Ms. Showalter explained that a study session was held with Council in
June to go over the entire ordinance. He thanked city staff and the Task Force
for the many hours spent in drafting the ordinance and using language that the
average citizen can understand.
Planning Commission Minutes J August 5, 20 IO
i
I
I
I
I.
I
!
I
I
It was moved by Commissioner GOKEY and seconded by Commissioner
BUCKNAM to recommend approval of the proposed ordinance amending
Chapter 26 concerning the creation of mixcd use zonc districts. The motion
carried 5-0.
8. STUDY SESSIONS
9.
10.
There were no study session items.
OTHER ITEMS
Ken Johnstone added his appreciation to the Commission, the Task Force and city
staff, especially Sarah Showalter, for the time and effort spent in drafting the
ordinance.
ADJOURNMENT
It was moved by Commissioner GOKEY and seconded by Commissioner
DWYER to adjourn the meeting at 8:00 p.m. The motion carried 5-0.
Richard Matthews, Chair Ann Lazzeri , Secretary
Planning Commission Minutes 4 AugustS,2010
I
I
I
i
I
I
I
September 10, 2010
Honorable Mayor DiTullio and City Council
City of Wheat Ridge
7500 W 29th Avenue
1st floor
Wheat Ridge, CO 80033
Dear Mayor DiTullio and City Council Members:
As members of the LiveWell Wheat Ridge (LWWR) Active Community Environments (ACE) Task
Force and staff, we commend your support and leadership related to the development of the
Mixed Use Zoning District (MUZD) ordinance. We ask that you adopt the Mixed Use Zoning
District ordinances at the City Council hearing on Monday, September 13th, 2010.
The adoption of these important mixed use zoning regulations will provide Wheat Ridge with a
vision and regulatory environment that will support a more healthy, active and economically
vibrant community. In fact, the Center for Disease Control 2009 report titled Weight of the
National Recommended Strategies and Measurements to Prevent Obesity in the United States
recommends that “communities should zone for mixed use”; because mixed use developments
provide opportunities for alternative forms of transportation, support streetscape and landuse
design that support walking and bicycling, and encourage connectivity to goods, services and
resources.
In addition to the health benefits of mixed use areas, there are considerable economic benefits
of mixed use. The demographics of Wheat Ridge illustrate there is an untapped demand for
mixed use projects. The older and younger professional populations are a market that often
seeks out mixed use residential and commercial developments. Also, there are many examples
within our metropolitan area that demonstrate that mixed use development have been a
catalyst for urban revitalization. These positive social and economic benefits will only help
move Wheat Ridge into the future and positively position it in a very competitive suburban
environment.
LiveWell Wheat Ridge has been a partner in the mixed use process. Early on in this process, we
provided funds to develop the mixed use zone website. Additionally, LiveWell Wheat Ridge had
the opportunity to review the draft version of the code and provided technical comments as
the City and the Technical Review Team were moving through the drafting process of the Mixed
Use Zoning District Ordinances. We believe the ordinances provide the appropriate minimum
standard for mixed use developments and will result in attractive, pedestrian friendly
development areas overtime. These ordinances will streamline the development process and
provide clear regulations for developers that would like to build within Wheat Ridge.
Additionally, these regulations will provide community residents with an understanding of how
mixed use developments will be integrated into the community.
As leaders and policy makers in Wheat Ridge we thank you for your vision that enabled this
planning process and encourage you to adopt the mixed use zoning ordinances scheduled for
the September 13th City Council hearing.
Sincerely,
Members of the LiveWell Wheat Ridge Active Community Environments (ACE) Task Force,
Greg Seebart, Wheat Ridge resident and Co‐Chair of the Wheat Ridge Active Community Environments
Task Force
Ted Heyd, Co‐Chair of the Wheat Ridge Active Community Environments Task Force
Mindi Ramig, Jefferson County Public Health and member of the Active Community Environments Task
Force
Dayna Oehm, Prospect Valley and Wheat Ridge High School parent and member of the Active
Community Environments Task Force
Elise Lubell, Director of Jefferson County Public Health Promotion and Lifestyle Management Division
Molly Hanson, LiveWell Wheat Ridge Coordinator
Bill Mahar, LiveWell Wheat Ridge Technical and Planning Consultant
From:Nancy Snow
To:Michael Snow
Subject:Comments on the Mixed Use District
Date:Monday, September 13, 2010 6:30:36 PM
Because I am unable to attend tonight’s council meeting and the hearing on adoption of regulations for
the Mixed Use Districts, I would like the following comments to be entered into the record.
As you all know, I was adamantly opposed to the removal of height and density limits from the
Charter. For that reason, you may well think that my opinion is an isolated one, since the majority of
voters did approve the change.
However, I have talked to many people both before and since the election, and I have not heard
anyone express an opinion that they wanted, or envisioned, buildings as high as 122 feet. In fact, it
was common for people advocating the change to reassure prospective voters that no one was
proposing buildings as high as 100 feet, that what was needed and desired was just few more stories
to be competitive.
Once again, it seems that hired consultants have come up with a proposal for buildings far higher than
anyone but developers want.
I would encourage someone on the Council to scale back several stories from the current written
proposed ordinance.
C ity of , Wheat Ri..-dge
TITLE:
ITEM No :3
DATE: September 13 ,2010
REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION
RESOLUTION NO. 52-2010 -A RESOLUTION OPPOSING
PROPOSITION 101 AND AMENDMENTS 60 AND 61 AND
ASKING VOTERS TO EDUCATE THEMSELVES ON THE
DEVASTATING IMPACT THESE MEASURES WILL HAVE
ON THE ABILITY OF THEIR GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES
TO PROVIDE ESSENTIAL SERVICES AND PROGRAMS
o PUBLIC HE ARING o ORDINANCES FOR I ST READING o BIDS/MOTIONS
[gI RESOLUTIONS
QUASI -JUDICIAL :
ISSUE:
o ORDINANCES FOR 2ND READING
o YES [gI NO
Colorado voters will see three statewide ballot issues on the November 20 I 0 ballot, Proposition
101 and Amendments 60 and 61, which will independently and collectively slash municipal tax
and fee revenue and impose restraints that will make financing public facilities and infrastructure
difficult and expensive. These measures will further the devastating effects that the recession has
had on municipalities and citizens and could cause a "double dip " recession by promising tax
relief that cannot be sustained. While supporters of these measures claim that this is the way to
put money back in the pockets of taxpayers , they are not fully educating voters about th e
devastating effect these measures will have on the essential services they receive from their
local, county and state governments.
This resolution demonstrates the City Council 's opposition to the three statewide ballot
initiatives, Proposition 101 and Amendments 60 and 61, and urges voters to educate them selves
on these initiatives and to VOTE NO on their November 20 I 0 ballot.
Supplementa l Budget for Contract Buildin g In spections
Council Action Form
September 13 , 20 I 0
Page 2
PRIOR ACTION:
City Council heard a presentation by Dee Wisor, Attorney with Sherman & Howard at the June
7th Study Session concerning these measures. Attached is a copy of Mr. Wisor 's Powe rP o int
presentation.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
The City of Wheat Ridge will not be "immune" to the negative effects of Proposition 101 and
Amendments 60 and 61 . While the City is already in the process of evalua ting alternative
revenue sources and assessing long-term fiscal sustainability, the passage of any of these three
measures will negatively impact critical revenue sources, forcing the City to cut service levels or
dip into the City 's reserves. The later is not an option that can be sustained over the long-term.
Clifton Gunderson, LLP conducted an analysis on what the projected financial impact of the
three measures would look like for the City . Please refe r to Attachment 2 for a detailed
explanation of each aspect of the financial analysi s s ummarized below.
Proposition 101
The total estima ted losses in annual City revenues:
2011 $3 ,029,463
201 2 $3 ,2 28 ,2 59
2013 $3,429,680
2014 $3 ,633 ,422
Amendment 60
The total estimated losses in annual City revenues :
• Estimated election cost (for mail in ballots): $100,000
• The City "de-Bruced" on August 14 ,2006 . If Amendment 60 passes, the City's maximum
annual tax limit (TABOR limit) would be $703 ,303 , which is the amount of property tax
revenue received by the City in 2006. A new election would be required to "de-Bruce" or to
allow the City to retain and use its property tax revenue that exceeds the $703,303 TABOR
limit which, based from 2010 budgeted property tax, would be equal to $62,557.
• The analysis also indicated that the City 's property tax levy will need to be lowered to offset
the tax revenues paid by enterprises and authorities within the City's boundaries. Based on
the tax revenues anticipated to be received by the City from its Water District, Sanitation
District and ORA (total of$657,575 per amounts outlined in the analysis), the City would be
eliminating 1.549 mills from its current 1.830 mill levy . This is about an 85 percent
reduction ofthe City 's mill levy or property tax revenues (using 2009 assessed values). Fees
imposed by enterprises would likely need to be increased to cover the property taxes to be
paid. The impact of higher fees (e.g. water bills) is expected to be offset by lower property
tax rates from entities that will be receiving property tax revenues from enterprise s. It should
be noted that property taxes are deductible for income tax purposes, while utility fee s are not.
People who do not own property will receive minimal tax savings, while paying mo re for
services.
Council Action Form
September 13, 2010
Page 3
Amendment 61
• If amendment 61 passes, the total amount of debt that the City may be able to issue , using
2009 assessed values , is equal to $42 ,446,738 . For some local governments, this amendment
limits the ability to plan for future long-term needs and may force them to downsize projects ,
i.e., capital infrastructure . The City of Wheat Ridge currently has no long-term obligations,
which gives them more flexibility to plan future major projects. However, the repayment-
without-penalty provision (which will likely increase interest costs) and the requirement for
debt to mature within 10 years will increase annual payment amounts.
Overall, the fmancial impact of these initiatives, if passed collectively , is approximately $4
million in revenues annually and this amount increases in out years starting in 2012.
BACKGROUND:
A summary of each of the three measures is included below:
Proposition 101
• Reduces specific ownership tax paid on vehicle registration to $2 for new vehicles , $1 a
year thereafter. The loss of this property tax is estimated at $500 million statewide for
municipalities and other taxing districts.
• Reduces vehicle registration fee to a flat $10 . This ends one of the principal funding
sources for the Highway Users Tax Fund -and will reduce the municipal share ofHUTF
by some $45 million . Street maintenance dollars to cities and towns will decrease 38
percent.
• Eliminates sales tax on the first $10,000 ofa vehicle 's value . Municipal sales tax
averages about 3.5 percent. This will significantly reduce sales tax revenue for cities and
towns.
• El iminates sales tax on telecommunication services. This is another significant reduction
in sales tax revenue -the primary source of revenue for municipalities.
• Cuts the state income tax by 25 percent -a loss of some $1 billion for the state budget.
Amendment 60
• Cancels voter-authorized property tax TABOR over-rides. TABOR authorizes voters to
allow revenue generated above the TABOR limits to be retained and expended by
municipalities . Most cities and towns have voter-approved or temporary over-rides.
• Future TABOR over-rides limited to four year period. If a future TABOR over-ride is
approved, it can never be in effect for longer than four years .
• Enterp rise funds must pay property tax. Municipal services such as water, sewer,
electrical utilities , recreation programs, will have to pay property tax, forcing an increase
in utility bills and program fees.
• Imposes a 10-year limit on any property tax increase approved by voters. This would
eliminate the ability of municipalities to ask voters to approve the type of long-term
bonds used to finance such projects as water treatment plants and library buildings.
Council Action Form
September 13 , 20 I 0
Page 4
• Cuts school district mill levies in half -state required to backfill . This is the same state
budget that was forced to cut school district funding by more than $300 million this year.
Amendment 61
• Lowers limit on municipal borrowing. Future limit would be set at 10 percent of real
property assessed value.
• Requires voter approval for any public debt , including lease-purchase and lease-back
financing.
• Requires tax decrease to match debt payments upon completion of debt repayment. This
would require a tax reduction even if the debt was repaid by project revenues and not tax
dollars.
• No state government debt -period. What you have now for large state facilities is what
you get.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff is recommending approval of the resolution based on the severe impact the three statewide
ballot measures will have, whether adopted independently or collectively, on the City of Wheat
Ridge's ability to provide essential services and programs to Wheat Ridge residents.
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
"I move to approve Resolution No . 52-20 I 0 -A resolution opposing Proposition 101 and
Amendments 60 and 61 and asking voters to educate themselves on the devastating impact these
measures will have on the ability of their governmental agencies to provide those essential
services and programs they depend on a daily basis."
Or,
"I move to postpone indefinitely Resolution No. 52-20 I 0 for the following
reason(s) "
REPORT PREPARED BY:
Heather Geyer, Interim Administrative Services Director
Patrick Goff, City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:
l. Resolution No. 52-20 JO
2. Analysis of Potential Financial Impact of Proposition 101 and Amendments 60
and 61 by Cl ifton Gunderson, LLP
3. CML Memorandum on Proposition 101 and Amendments 60 & 61
4. Copy of Powerpoint Presentation by Dee Wisor, Sherman & Howard
5. Talking Points from CML to Use Against Proposition 101 and Amendments 60 &
61
TITLE:
CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO
RESOLUTION NO. 52
Series of 2010
A RESOLUTION OPPOSING PROPOSITION 101 AND
AMENDMENTS 60 AND 61 AND ASKING VOTERS TO
EDUCATE THEMSELVES ON THE DEVASTATING IMPACT
THESE MEASURES WILL HAVE ON THE ABILITY OF THEIR
GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES TO PROVIDE ESSENTIAL
SERVICES AND PROGRAMS
WHEREAS , state voters will have the opportunity at the November 2,2010
statewide general election to protect the fiscal health of local government by defeating
Proposition 101, Amendment 60 , and Amendment 61 ; and
WHEREAS, these measures individually and collectively significantly reduce or
otherwise restrict both state and local revenues in a number of different ways including
but not limited to: specific ownership taxes, telecommunication taxes , state income
taxes , state-shared revenues to assist municipalities with local street and transit
improvements , other state grants and loans to help local government , and property
taxes ; and
WHEREAS , the projected impact in loss of revenues , if these measures are
passed collectively, total approximately $4 million annually beginning in 2011, and the
projected revenue impacts increase in 2012 , 2013 and 2014; severely impacting the
way the City provides services ; and
WHEREAS, the ability for the City and the special districts within the City that
provide essential services to finance long-term capital improvements like water and
wastewater treatment plants, fire stations, and other public facilities are dramatically
impaired by the restrictions on debt financing as proposed by Amendment 61; and
WHEREAS, City Council will need to identify services and programs in Wheat
Ridge that will be limited or curtailed because of the numerous restrictions and revenue
reductions proposed by these three measures; and
WHEREAS, Wheat Ridge is concerned about the impact these three
measures will have on our ability to work effectively with other local governments in
the form of intergovernmental agreements, in particular, at a time when cities are
looking for ways to cost-share on a regional level; and
WHEREAS, a number of prominent individuals , newspapers, and organizations
including our own Colorado Municipal League are voicing opposition to these measures
as not being in the best interests of Colorado and of local communities; and
WHEREAS, provisions of state law do allow Wheat Ridge to put forth this
resolution as a statement of opposition to the measures known as Proposition 10 1,
Amendment 60 , and Amendment 61 ;
Attachment 1
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of Wheat Ridge
opposes Proposition 101 , Amendment 60 , and Amendment 61 and urges our citizens
to educate themselves on these measures and to VOTE NO on all three ballot
measures.
DONE AND RESOLVED this 13th day of September 2010.
Jerry DiTullio, Mayor
ATTEST:
Michael D . Snow, City Clerk
City of Wheat Ridge
Proposition lOl and Amendments 60 and 61 -Analysis of Potential Fina n cia l Impact to the City
Pro positio n 1 0 1
Reduction in motor vehicle tax, income tax and telecommunication tax/charge s
• Spec ific ownership taxes will decrease in fou r equa l annual steps to reach $2 for new vehicles and $1 for old
vehicles.
• There will be no state or loca l taxes on vehicle rentals or leases.
• There will be no state or local taxes on the first $10,000 of value of vehicle sales price (will be phased in over
four equal annual steps).
• All other state and local charges on ve hicl es and vehicle uses will cease, except for charges above, fines, tolls,
parking, seizu re i nspection and new-plate charges.
• All reg istration, license and title charge s co mbin ed shall total $10 yearly per vehicle.
• No sales taxes and other fees sha ll apply to telephone, pager, cable, television, radio, internet, computer
satell ite, o r other telecommunication service customer accounts. Emergency/911 fees are permitted to
continue at 2009 rates.
• State income rate is being reduced from 4.63 % to 4.5% in 2011. Rate will decrease 0.1% yearly, in each of the
f irst 10 years that yearly in come tax revenue net growth exceeds 6%, until the rate reaches 3.5%. Note: When
fu ll y implemented, Proposition 101 is projected to reduce state income tax revenues by $1.2 billion annually
(current value).
Estimated losses in Annual City Revenues (based on the City's 2010 Budget unless noted otherwi se)
.:. Speci fi c ownership taxes (on new/u sed/leased motor vehicle s) would decrease in 4 equal annual steps as follows:
2011: $13,750 2012: $27,500 2013: $41,250 2014: $54,615
.:. Sales taxes on first $10,000 of purchased motor vehicle (n ew and old) would be phased out over 4 years as follows:
2011: $97,500 2012: $195,000 2013: $292,500 2014: $390,000
.:. Sales taxes from leased vehicles that wou ld be elim inated (based on 2009 receipts): $3,855
.:. Sales taxes and rental fees from rented vehicles that would be eliminated (based on 2009 receipts): $82,845
.:. Sales taxes and other fees from telecommunications that wou ld be eliminated (based an 2009 receipts): $2,378,082
.:. Highway User Tax Fund (HUTF) is projected to decrease annually by: $358,831
.:. Motor vehicle registration fees (City's portion of vehicle regi stration fees) wou ld decrease annually by: $94,600
.:. Total estimated losses in annual City revenues :
2011: $3,029,463 2012 : $3,228,259 2013: $3,429,680 2014: $3,633,422
1
City of Wheat Ridge
Pro pos it ion 101 and Amendments 60 and 61 -Analysis of Potential Financial Impact to the City
Am e n d m en t 60
Property Tax Limitations
• Property tax elections-
o Must be held in November.
o Must be independent of debt qu est ions (may res ult in a vote r approval to incur debt, but no vo ter
approva l to increase taxes to pay for the debt).
• Citizens may petition local governments, including districts, to reduce property ta xes.
• Future property tax rate increases will expire within 10 years .
o Extending expiring property tax is a ta x increase.
• Electors may v ote on property taxes where they own real property. Elector is not defin ed and could mean just
a bout anyone (i.e. real property owners, co rp orat ions, residents out of st ate or in anothe r co untry, property
owners not registered to vote, etc .).
• Property ta x bills may list only property ta xes and late charges (will no lo nger allow delinquent utility fee s and
charges and spec ial assessments to be col lec t ed on the property ta x bill).
• Enterprises (e .g ., Water, Sanitation) and authorities (e.g ., Urban Renewal Authority) must pay property t axes.
Taxes collected from enterprise and authoritie s must be offset by lower property tax es for homeowners and
other taxpayers.
• Enterprise and unelected boards may not levy mandatory f ees or taxes on property.
• Repeals "de -brucing". Prior voter approved elections that allowed the City to retain and use property taxes
above its constitutional o r TABOR limit will expire.
o Future action to "de -bruce" will require an ele ction .
o Future or new "de-brucing" will expire in 4 years.
Expected impact to the City
.:. Estimated election cos t (for mail in ballots): $100,000
.:. The City "de-bruced " on August 14, 2006 . If Amendment 60 passes, the City's ma ximum annua l tax limit (TABOR
limit) would be $703,303, which is th e amount of property ta x revenue re ce ived by the City in 2006.
~ A new election would be requ ired to "de-bruce" or to allow th e City to retain and use its property tax revenue
that exceed s the $703,303 TABOR limit which, based from 2010 budgeted property ta x, would be equal to
$62,557 .
• :. Using the City's 2009 assessed values and as suming an overlapping mill le vy of93 .1 46 (highest in the area), the
estimated property t axes to be paid by the Wheat Ridge URA and enterprises are as follows:
~ What Ridge Urban Renewal Authority: $40,108 ($788 will go to the City of Wheat Ridge)
~ Wheat Ridge Water District: $16,596,586 ($326,066 will go to the City of Wheat Ridge)
~ Wheat Ridge Sanitation District: $16,833,519 ($330,721 will go to the City of Wh ea t Rid ge)
2
City of Wheat Ridge
Proposition 101 and Amendments 60 and 61-Analysis of Potential Financial Impact to the City
Amendment 60 (continued)
Property Ta x Limitations
The City's property ta x levy must be lowered to offset the tax revenues paid by enterprises and authorities within the
City's boundaries. Based on the tax revenues anticipated to be received by the City from its Water District, Sanitation
District and URA (total of $657,575 per above), the City would be eliminating 1.549 mills from its current 1.830 mill levy.
This is about 8S% reduction of the City's mill levy or property tax revenues (using 2009 assessed values).
Fees imposed by enterprises would likely need to be increased to cover the property taxes to be paid . The impact of
higher fees (e .g. water bills) is expected to be offset by lower property tax rates from entities that will be receiving
property tax revenues from enterprises. It should be noted that property taxes are deductible for incom e tax purpo ses,
whi le utility fees are not. People who do not own property wi ll receive minimal tax sav in gs, wh il e paying more for
services.
3
City of Wheat Ridge
Proposilion 101 and Amendments 60 and 61 -Ana lysis of Potential Financial Impact to thc City
Amen d m cnt 61
Debt Limitations
• Local governments and their enterprises may borrow money only after a Novemb er vote. Voter approval is
required for: enterprise borrowings, refinancing at lower rate , urban renewal authority borrowings and cas h
f lo w borrowing lasting less than one year.
• For loca l governments other than enterprises, there will be a debt limit equal to 10% of the entity's current
assessed valuation of real property (excludes personal property).
• Debt must be subject to prepayment without penalty at any time.
• Debt mu st mature within 10 years.
• Except for enterprise borrowings, after current d ebt is repaid , tax rates must decline in an amount equa l to that
debt's plann e d average annual repa ymen t, even if the d ebt is not repa id by t axes .
• Red efi ne s the obligations that are considered "debt" -any loan, whether or not it las t s more than one year,
including lease -purchase, lea se-le aseback financing, certificates of participation, revenue bond s.
Ex pec ted impact to the City
.:. If Amendment 61 passes, the total amount of debt that the City may be ab le to issue, using 2009 assessed values, is
equal to $42,446,738.
~ For so m e lo ca l governments, this amendment limits the ability to plan future long-te rm needs and may force
them to downsize project s, i.e ., capita l infrastructure. The City of Wh eat Ridge currently ha s no long -t erm
obli gations, which gives them more flexibility to plan future major projects. However, the prepayment-w ithout-
penalty provision (which wi ll likel y increase interest cos t s) and the requirement for debt to mature within 10
years will increase annual payment amounts.
4
City of Wheat Ridge
Proposition 101 and Amendments 60 and 61-Analysis of Potential Financial Impact to the City
Ad di tional infomlation
• Amendments 60 and 61 requires the State to conduct annual aud it of cities, countie s, school districts
and other lo ca l governments to ensure compliance .
• Amendment 60 also changes financing of public schools -
o By 2020, sc hool di stricts mu st phase out one-half of their 2011 tax rate s (excluding debt servi ce
levies). The State must backfill the lost revenues (source of State revenue s was not prOVided).
• The impact of Proposition 101 to franchise and PEG fees is not certa in at this time.
Note: Above information ha s many points that are su bject to various interpretations. The City should seek the
advise of its Counsel.
5
• The restriction on telecommun ications tax e s is qu ite bro ad and w ill cover utility
occupation taxes and sales and use taxes on telecommun ic ation services .
• 9-1-1 fees are locked permanently into their 2009 rates with no flexibil ity to be
increased . This will have significant impacts on delivering emergency serv ice s .
• The state income tax reduction it has been estimated by the Bell Policy Cente r c ou ld be
over $1 billion , which means virtually no on -going state financial support fo r certa in
grant and loan programs available to cities and towns .
• Major General Assembly changes to this initiated statute are highly unl ikely as a political
matter.
Amendment #60 (covers property taxes ; initiated constitutional amendment)
Websites
• www.limitpropertvtax .com (for)
• www.donthurtcolorado .com (against)
Key highlights (not comprehensive)
• Electors may vote on property taxes where they own real property .
• Requires local governments to allow petitions to lower property taxes .
• November elections only for property taxes and must be independent of debt questions .
• Property tax bills are limited o nly to taxes and late charges .
• Requires enterprises and authorities to pay property taxes . Local governments have to
reduce their mill levies to offset this revenue . These entities may not levy a fee or ta x.
• Expires within 10 years all future property ta x increases .
• Extending an expiring property tax is a ta x increase .
• Prior actions to keep excess property tax revenues expire .
• Future actions to keep excess property tax revenues must ex pire in 4 years.
• Non-college school districts must phase out half their non-debt paying property taxes
(i.e ., operations and maintenance taxes) by 2020 and requires the state to backfill the
reduced revenue .
Municipal implications
• Elector is not defined and could mean just about anyone or anything : real property
owners, corporations , residents out of state or in another country , property owners
not registered to vote. This substantially broadens voter participation to entities and
individuals having little stake and trump the interests of municipal residents .
• The petition process is broadened to cover counties , special districts , and schools.
• Separating a debt question from the property tax question may make it harder to
finance debt.
• What will the impact on school finance be ; how will the state absorb this additional
backfill re sp onsibility; how will local communities be affected?
• Prior voter-approved questions at the municipal level to keep and spend excess
revenues are eliminated and other restrictions imposed . Over 400 such questions
have been approved at the municipal level since 1993.
• Munici pal enterprise and autho r ity op e rat ions w ill b e seve re ly ha m pe red and these
cover such services as sewer, wate r, electric , gas , aviation , downtown
redevelopment. Rates and fees will increase and tax deductions will be lowered .
• Statehouse fle xi bility to modify or implement these provis ions will be vi rtu ally
impossible . Anticipate costly litigation similar to TABOR implem e ntatio n .
Amendment #61 (covers debt limits ; initiated constitutional amendment)
Websites
• www.limitcodebt.com (for)
• www.donthurtco/orado .com (against)
Key highlights (not comprehensive)
• The state may not contract debt by loan in any form .
• Prohibits local governments to contract debt by loan in any form w ithout vote r approva l.
• The ballot title for any question must detail how the moneys to be borrowed are to be
used .
• Prohibits any subsequent change in the use of the money borrowed .
• Prohibits any voter-approved debt incurred from being repealed until it is fully repaid .
• Imposes speCified limits on borrowing pegged to a percentage of assessed valuation
after 2010 (10% of assessed value).
• After current borrowing is repaid , tax rates must decline in an amount equa l to that
debt's planned average annual repayment, even if the debt is not repaid by ta xe s .
Municipal implica tions
• Traditional lease purchase and lease-leaseback financings will be considered debt. This
could cover traditional property and equipment leases .
• State level authorities which work with municipalities like CHFA on affordable hous ing
projects and the WaterlPower Resources Authority for water and wastewater will be
curtailed from issuing bonds . Federal funds , like Rural Development loans, may also be
affected .
• New voter approvals will be required for; enterprise borrowings ; certificates of
participation; lower interest rate refinancings ; URA borrowings ; less than one year cash
flow borrowing s .
• The 10% assessed valuation debt limit will severely impact local government and needs
to be exami ned for full impact in each municipality .
• Interest costs will increase as a re s ult of the prepayment without penalty , which is not
common in the current municipal marketplace .
• The 10 year maturity requirement will force cities and towns to downsize substantially
infrastructure and hamper the ability to plan for future long-term needs .
• AntiCipate that this mea s ure will affect the rating agencies ' views of the municipal
market in Colorado both in the short and long run .
• Infrastructure financing through debt will be substantially curtailed .
• Statehouse flexibility to modify or implement these provisions will be difficult. AntiCipate
costly litigation similar to TABOR implementation .
A Few Talking Points For Elected Officials To Use Against Proposition 101 ,
Amendment 60, Amendment 61 When Asked To Comment On Them
• These measures individually and collectively will have a dramatic impact on
reducing revenue at the state and local government level ; services will be di rectl y
affected . (please insert local municipal impacts here)
• Proposition 101 significantly reduces revenue which we collect from the spec ific
ownership tax. This is a tax an owner of a vehicle pays like a property tax on your
home. It has been a tax established in the Colorado Constitution since 1937. Last
year, nearly $500 million was collected and is distributed back to all local
governments to pay for local services . Our reduction in this tax revenue will be
(fill in the blank) and result in the following programs or services either
substantially reduced or eliminated entirely (fill in the blank here). I don 't thin k
these reductions are either fair to this community or to you as a residen t.
• Proposition 101 freezes E 9-1-1 fees at their 2009 leve l. These fees can never be
increased to meet on -going dem ands for public safety and emergency service
response calls . We believe this will impact us locally in the following way (fi ll in
the blank here w ith information from your local emergency response agency ).
• The measure also reduces our revenue in several other areas , and here is where
we think we are impacted (fill in local examples here).
• We have already instituted belt tightening in our budget. Here is what we have
done already as a response to the economic challenges fac ing our community
(cite local examples).
• We have also tried to jump start the local economy like a lot of other cities and
towns around the state by boosting our support for local economic development
programs and local jobs (cite some local examples).
• I agree with Governor Ritter and many other respected state leaders from both
sides of the political aisle who are afraid that these measures will limit both future
job growth and our economic development activity by restricting our revenues
and ability to plan for the future . I don 't want to hurt Colorado and I surely don 't
want to hurt (name of municipality).
• Amendment 60 places significant limitations on our ability to raise revenue from
the property tax . For example , one of the things it does is substantially increase
the number of people who can vote on a property tax increase in our community
by allowing people who live outside of the town, the state , or even the country to
have a vote . Your influence over local deci sions will be diminished as a result. I
don 't think that this is a very good idea.
• (use this talking point if you had a property tax de-brucing measure on the ballot)
Amendment 60 will roll back and eliminate our prior property tax revenue
retention vote dealing with (fill in the blank) and this is what it means to us locally
(cite example).
ATTACHMENT 5
• Amendment 61 places severe restrictions on our ability to plan for the future and
pay for much needed pu blic improvements by limiting the type of debt financi ng
we might want to undertake . It will also require simple leases, for equipment su c h
as a fire truck or police car, from being used unless a vote is held .
• Colorado is a below average tax burden state when state and local taxes are
combined . It has been that way for a number of years . In (name of city or town),
we have been prudent guardians and good fiscal stewards of the budget and of
taxes and fees generally . We want to assure you that as a community we always
want to move ahead . I am very afraid that these proposals will move us far
behind and th at their revenue reductions and restr ictions on our municipal
operations will not be in (name of city or town) best interests and our future .
• I do hope that you vote no on 60, 61, and 101 in November. It's why we passed a
resolution in oppos ition to them. I'll be glad to give you a copy if you want one .
Don 't hurt Colorado and don 't hurt (insert name of municipality). I hope you will
encourage others to be against these measures .
Assignment of Private Activity Bond s
September 13 , 2010
Page 2
stimulating economic activity and jobs. The City of Wheat Ridge 's allocation ofPAB may create
$2.8 million in economic activity and 19 jobs in the single family industry or $3.0 million in
economic activity and 23 jobs in the multifamily industry or $3.3 million in economic activity and
26 jobs in the manufacturing industry . Between 2005 and 2009, CHF A provided 38 single family
loans in Wheat Ridge for a total of$5.6 million.
BACKGROUND:
P AB are tax exempt bonds designed to offer low-cost financing to private sector borrowers for
projects that create jobs and expand the tax bases of local communities . PAB may be used to
fmance a broad array of community development projects including housing, manufacturing,
higher education, infrastructure, and environmental projects. The bonding authority which allows
the issuance of PAB is Volume Cap, created under the federal Tax Reform Act of 1986 . The
federal government allocates a maximum amount of Volume Cap use to each state annually, based
on population.
Per Colorado statute, the Department of Local Affairs (DOLA) administers the state 's allocation
of Volume Cap. Under the statute, 50 percent of Colorado's allocation is given to five statewide
authorities , with DOLA deciding the proportional allocation of each.
As a political subdivision of the state and an authority, CHFA is eligible to receive an allocation of
Volume Cap, which it uses to issue tax exempt bonds throughout Colorado. CHFA uses its annual
allocation to issue tax exempt bonds from single family mortgages, multifamily rental
developments, manufacturers, and mortgage credit certificates .
The remaining 50 percent of annual Volume Cap is allocated to local issuing authorities . A local
issuing authority consists of "any city, town, county, or city and county which has a'population in
any year which would result in the local issuing authority having any alIocation of the state ceiling
in excess of one million dollars " (CRS 24-32-1702-8). In 20 I 0, communities with a population of
at least 22 ,883 received an allocation of Volume Cap . After allocating Volume Cap to local
issuing authorities, any remaining balance becomes available by application to the statewide
balance.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends assigning the City'S PAB allocation to CHFA. CHFA has an extensive history
of partnering with cities and counties to support local projects by leveraging Volume Cap.
Partnering with CHF A is a beneficial option for Wheat Ridge to ensure its Volume Cap is used in
a timely manner, since any unused Volume Cap is relinquished back to the statewide balance and
administered by DOLA, meaning it is not likely to be used in Wheat Ridge, as the original
allocation would be. When Wheat Ridge transfers its annual allocation of Volume Cap to CHF A,
it can take advantage ofCHFA's bond issuance expertise and AI /A + Issuer Credit Rating .
Assignme nt o f Priv ate Activity Bond s
Septembe r 13 , 2010
Page 3
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
"I move to approve the Assignment of Allocation between the C olorado Housing and Finance
Authority (CHF A) and the City of Wheat Ridge and to adopt Resolution No. 53-2010 authorizing
assignment to the Colorado Housing and Finance Authority of a Private Activity Bond Allocation
of the City of Wheat Ridge pursuant to the Colorado Private Activity Bond Ceiling Allocation Act
in the amount of $1 ,424 ,250 thereby designating the City's PAB allocation to CHFA for the
purpose of providing single-family mortgage loans to low-and moderate-income persons and
families . "
Or,
"I move to return the unused portion of the PAB allocation to the Statewide Balance for the
following reason(s) "
REPORT PREPARED BY:
Patrick Goff, City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:
I. Certificate Assigning PAB Allocation
Exhibit A : Resolution No . 53-2010
Exhibit B : Assignment of Allocation
CERTIFICATE OF THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE , COLORADO
CONCERNING ASSIGNMENT OF
PRIVATE ACTIVITY BOND VOLUME CAP ALLOCATION
I, the undersigned , hereby certify that I am a duly chosen, qualified and C ity Attorney of
the City of Wheat Ridge, Colorado (the "City "), and that:
I . The City is a public body politic and corporate , duly organi ze d and existing under
the constitution and laws of the State of Colorado.
2. The City has been previously notified that, pursuant to Section 24-32-1706 of the
Colorado Private Activity Bond Ceiling Allocation Act, Part 17 of Article 32 of Title 24,
Co lorado Revised Statutes (the "A llocation Act"), it has an allocation of the State ceiling (as
defined in the Allocation Act) for 2010 in the amount of $1 ,424,250 (the "20 10 Allocation").
3. Attached hereto as Exhibit A is a true and correct copy of a re so lution and the
related minutes thereto (the "Resolution ") authorizing the assignment to the Co lor ado Housing
and Finance Authority (the "Authority ") of all or a portion of the 2010 Allocation in an amount
equal to $1 ,424 ,2 50 (the "Assigned Allocation"), and authorizing the execution and delivery of
an Assignment of Allocation dated as of September 13 , 20 I 0 (the "Assignment of Allocation ")
between the City and the Authority in connection therewith , which Resolution was duly adopted
by th e City Council of the City (the "City Council") at a meeting thereof held on September 13 ,
2010, at which meeting a quorum was present and acting throughout and which Resolution has
not been revoked , rescinded , repealed , amended or modified and is in full force and effect on the
date hereo f.
4. The meeting of the City Council at which action has been taken with respect to
th e Assignment of Allocation wa s a regular meeting properly called and open to the public at all
time s .
5. With respect to the Assigned Allocation, the City has not heretofore : (a) issued
private activity bonds ; (b) assigned the Assigned Allocation to another "issuing authority," as
defined in the Allocation Act ; (c) made a mortgage credit certificate election ; or (d) treated the
Assigned Allocation as an allocation for a project with a carryforward purpose, as defined in the
Allocation Act.
6. The Assignment of Allocation, attached hereto as Exhibit B, is in the form
presented to and approved by the City Council at the meeting thereof held on September 13 ,
2010.
7. On or before the date hereof, counterparts of the Assignment of Allocation were
officially executed by the Mayor and the City Clerk of the City. On the date of such signing,
such persons were the duly sworn, qualified and acting officers of the City authorized to execute
the Assignment of Allocation and holding the offices of the Mayor and City C lerk, re spectively .
J:\Counci l Action Forms\2010 Co uncil Acti on Fo rm s\I00 9 t3 PAB 2010 City Attorney Cert Fonn (2).doc
Vcrsion: 1 (07 .20 10)
Attachment 1
8. The City has authorized the execution, delivery and due performance of the
Assignment of Allocation, and the execution and delivery of the Assignment of Allocation and
the compliance by the City with the provisions thereof, will not, to the best of my knowledge,
conflict with or constitute on the part of the City a breach of or a default under any existing
Colorado law, City resolution, court or administrative regulation, decree or order or any
agreement or other instrument to which the City is subject or by which it is bound .
9. To the best of my knowledge, there does not exist any action, suit, proceeding or
investigation pending, or threatened against the City, contesting (a) the corporate existence of the
City , (b) the title of its present officers or any of them to their respective offices, including,
without limitation, the members of the City Council, (c) the validity of the Assignment of
Allocation or (d) the power of the City to execute, deliver or perform the Assignment of
Allocation.
10 . No referendum petition has been filed concerning the Resolution; and to the best
of my knowledge none is being circulated or planned for circulation .
WITNESS my hand and the seal of the City this ________ ,2010.
City Attorney
(SEAL)
2
J:\C ouncii Action Forms\2 0 10 Cou ncil Action Fonns\\ 00913 PAB 2010 Cit y Attorney Cert Fonn (2).doc
Version : 1 (07 .2010)
CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO
RESOLUTION NO . 53
Series of 2010
TITLE: A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ASSIGNMENT TO THE
COLORADO HOUSING AND FINANCE AUTHORITY OF A
PRIVATE ACTIVITY BOND ALLOCATION OF THE CITY OF
WHEAT RIDGE PURSUANT TO THE COLORADO PRIVATE
ACTIVITY BOND CEILING ALLOCATION ACT
WHEREAS, the City of Wheat Ridge is authorized and empowered under the
laws of the State of Colorado (the "State") to issue revenue bonds for the purpose of
providing single-family mortgage loans to low-and moderate-income persons and
families ; and
WHEREAS, the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the "Code"),
restricts the amount of tax-exempt bonds ("Private Activity Bonds") which may be
issued in the State to provide such mortgage loans and for certain other purposes ; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the Code, the Colorado legislature adopted the
Colorado Private Activity Bond Ceiling Allocation Act, Part 17 of Article 32 of Title 24,
Colorado Revised Statutes (the "Allocation Act"), providing for the allocation of the
State Ceiling among the Colorado Housing and Finance Authority (the "Authority") and
other governmental units in the State, and further providing for the assignment of such
allocations from such other governmental units to the Authority; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to an allocation under Section 24-32-1706 of the Allocation
Act , the City of Wheat Ridge has an allocation of the 2010 State Ceiling for the
issuance of a specified principal amount of Private Activity Bonds prior to September
15 , 2010 (the "2010 Allocation"); and
WHEREAS, the City of Wheat Ridge has determined that, in order to increase
the availability of adequate affordable housing for low-and moderate-income persons
and families within the City of Wheat Ridge and elsewhere in the State, it is necessary
or desirable to provide for the utilization of all or a portion of the 2010 Allocation; and
WHEREAS, the City of Wheat Ridge has determined that the 2010 Allocation, or
a portion thereof, can be utilized most efficiently by assigning it to the Authority to issue
Private Activity Bonds for the purpose of providing single-family mortgage loans to low-
and moderate-income persons and families; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Wheat Ridge has determined to
assign $1,424,250 of its 2010 Allocation to the Authority , which assignment is to be
evidenced by an Assignment of Allocation between the City of Wheat Ridge and the
Authority (the "Assignment of Allocation"),
Icgal\bo ndcap\ho mcown\2006rcassgn.doc
I
EXHIBIT A
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Wheat
Ridge as follows:
1. The assignment to the Authority of $1 ,424,250 of the City of Wheat Ridge's 2010
Allocation be and hereby is approved.
2 . The form and substance of the Assignment of Allocation be and hereby are
approved; provided, however, that the Mayor be and hereby is authorized to
make such technical variations , additions or deletions in or to such Assignment
of Allocation as he shall deem necessary or appropriate and not inconsistent
with the approval thereof by this resolution.
3. The City Council of the City of Wheat Ridge be and hereby is authorized to
execute and deliver the Assignment of Allocation on behalf of the City of Wheat
Ridge and to take such other steps or actions as may be necessary, useful or
convenient to effect the aforesaid assignment in accordance with the intent of
this resolution.
4 . If any section, paragraph, clause, or provision of this resolution shall for any
reason be held to be invalid or unenforceable, the invalidity or unenforceability of
such section, paragraph, clause , or provision shall not affect any of the
remaining provisions of this resolution .
5. This resolution shall be in full force and effect upon its passage and approval.
PASSED, ADOPTED AND APPROVED this ___ day of _____ , 2010 .
ATIEST:
Michael D . Snow, City Clerk
[SEAL]
ATIEST:
By : _~-,----__ -,----________ _
Assistant Secretary
le gaJ\bond ca p\h omcown\2006 re assg n.d oc
Jerry DiTullio, Mayor
COLORADO HOUSING AND FINANCE
AUTHORITY
By :.~ __ ~~~~ ________ ___
Executive Director
2
EXHIBIT A
ASSIGNMENT OF ALLOCATION
(Single Family Mortgage Revenue Bonds)
This Assignment of Allocation (the "Assignment"), dated this 13th day of
September, 2010, is between the City of Wheat Ridge (the "Assignor") and the Colorado
Housing and Finance Authority (the "Assignee").
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS , the Assignor and the Assignee are authorized and empowered under
the laws of the State of Colorado (the "State") to issue revenue bonds for the purpose of
providing single-family mortgage loans to low-and moderate-income persons and
families; and
WHEREAS , the Internal Revenue Code of \986, as amended (the "Code"),
restricts the amount of tax-exempt bonds ("Private Activity Bonds") which may be issued
in the State to provide such mortgage loans and for certain other purposes (the "State
Ceiling"); and
WHEREAS , pursuant to the Code, the Colorado legislature adopted the Colorado
Private Activity Bond Ceiling Allocation Act, Part 17 of Article 32 of Title 24 , Colorado
Revised Statutes (the "Allocation Act"), providing for the allocation of the State Ceiling
among the Assignee and other governmental units in the State , and further providing for
the assignment of allocations from such other governmental units to the Assignee; and
WHEREAS , pursuant to an allocation under Section 24-32-1706 of the Allocation
Act, the Assignor has an allocation of the 20 I 0 State Ceiling for the issuance of a
specified principal amount of Private Activity Bonds prior to September 15, 2010, the
"Allocation"); and
WHEREAS, the Assignor has determined that, in order to increase the availability
of adequate affordable housing for low-and moderate-income persons and families
within the City of Wheat Ridge and elsewhere in the State, it is necessary or desirable to
provide for the utilization of all or a portion of the Allocation ; and
WHEREAS , the Assignor has determined that the 20 I 0 Allocation, or a portion
thereof, can be utilized most efficiently by assigning it to the Assignee to issue Private
Activity Bonds for the purpose of providing single-family mortgage loans to low-and
moderate-income persons and families ("Revenue Bonds"), and the Assignee has
expressed its willingness to attempt to issue Revenue Bonds with respect to the 20 \ 0
Allocation ; and
EXHIBIT B
J:\Co un cil Action Forms\2010 Co uncil Act ion Fonn5l.100913 PAB 20 10 HF Assign (2).doc
Version : I (07 .20 10)
WHEREAS, the City Council of the Assignor has determined to assign to th e
Assignee $1 ,424 ,250 of its 2010 Allocation , and the Assignee has agreed to accept such
assignment , which is to be evidenced by this Assignment.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and the mutual promises
hereinafter set forth, the parties hereto agree as follows:
I. The Assignor hereby assigns to the Assignee $1 ,424,250 of its 20 I 0
Allocation , subject to the terms and conditions contained herein. The Assignor represents
that it has received no monetary consideration for said assignment.
2. The Assignee hereby accepts the assignment to it by the Assignor of
$1,424,250 of Assignor's 20 10 Allocation , subject to the terms and conditions contained
herein. The Assignee agrees to use its best efforts to issue and sell Revenue Bonds, in
one or more series, and to make proceeds of such Revenue Bonds available from time to
time during the period of two (2) years from the date of this Assignment for the purchase
of mortgage loans in at least the aggregate amount of$I ,424 ,250 to finance single-family
housing facilities located in the City of Wheat Ridge. Unless otherwise agreed to in
writing, the mortgage loans will be subject to all applicable current requirements of
Assignee's mortgage revenue bond program , including Assignee 's income and purchase
price limits .
3. The Assignor hereby consents to the election by the Assignee, if the
Assignee in its discretion so decides , to treat all or any portion of the assignment set forth
herein as an allocation for a project with a carryforward purpose .
4 . The Assignor and Assignee each agree that it will take such further action
and adopt such further proceedings as may be required to implement the terms of this
Assignment.
5 . Nothing contained in this Assignment shall obligate the Assignee to
finance mortgage loans in any particular amount or at any particular interest rate or to use
any part icu lar percentage of the proceeds of its Revenue Bonds to provide mortgage loans
to finance s ing le-family housing facilities located in the City of Wheat Ridge.
6. This Assignment is effective upon execution and is irrevocable .
2
J:\Co uncil Action Form Sll OIO Council Acti on Fonns\) 009 13 PAS 2010 HF Assi gn (2 ).doc
Ve rs ion: I (07 .2010 )
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have duly executed this Assignment
on the date first written above.
[S EA L]
ATTEST:
By:
Title: __________ _
[S E AL]
ATTEST :
By:
Assistant Secretary
CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE
By :
Title:
COLORADO HOUSING AND FINANCE
AUTHORITY
By : ___________ __
Chief Financial Officer
3
J:\Counci l Action Foml s\2 010 Council Action Fomls\10D913 PAS 2010 rlF As s ign (2).do c
Ver sion : 1 (07 .2010)