Loading...
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)