Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/16/2007, . . AGENDA CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE PLANNING COMMISSION August 16, 2007 Notice is hereby given of a Public Meeting to be held before the City of Wheat Ridge Planning Commission on August 16, 2007, at 7:00 p.m., .in the City Council Chambers of the Municipal Building, 7500 West 29th Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorada 1. CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER 2. ROLL CALL OF MEMBERS 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 4. APPROVE THE ORDER OF THE AGENDA'(Items of new and old business may be recommended for placement on the agenda.) 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - August 2, 2007 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.) 7. PUBLIC HEARING A. Case No. WPA-06-03: A resolution adopting the Wadsworth Corridor Subazea Plan. 8. OTHER ITEMS 9. ADJOURNMENT CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE PLANNING COMMISSION Minutes of Meeting August 2, 2007 CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER The regular meeting of the Wheat Ridge Planning Commission was called to order by Chair SCEZNEY at 7:02 p.m. in the City Council Chambers of the Municipal Building, 7500 West 291h Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colarado. 2. ROLL CALL OF MEMBERS Commission Members Present: Commission Members Absent: Staff Members Present: Brinkman Jim Lhilvers Dick Matthews ' Davis Reinhart Jerry Scezney Cassie;Spaniel John Sally Payne, Interim Community ' Development Director Meredith Reckert, Senior Planner Travis Crane, Planner II Ann Lazzeri, Secretary 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE` 4. APPROVE ORDER OF AGENDA It was.moved by Commissioner STEWART and seconded by Commissioner SPANIEL to approve the order of the agenda. The motion passed 7-0. 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - July 19, 2007 It was moved by Commissioner MATTHEWS and seconded by Commissioner SPANIEL to approve the minutes of July 19, 2007 as presented. The motion passed 6-0 with Commissioner SCEZNEY abstaining and Commissioner McMILLIN absent. 6. PUBLIC FORUM (This is the time for any person to speak on any subject not appearing on the agenda.) Planning Commission Minutes 1. - August 2, 2007 PUBLIC HEARING Travis Crane informed the Commission that the applicant in the first case was not present. Therefore, it was moved by Commissioner BRINKMAN and seconded by Commissioner STEWART to amend the agenda to hear the second, third and fourth items first. The motion passed unanimously. It was moved by Commissioner REINHART and seconded by Commissioner BRINKMAN to recess the meeting for five minutes. The motion passed unanimously. The meeting was recessed at 7:06 p.m. and rewnvened at 7:12 p.m. Sally Payne informed the Commission that the applicant for the first case was present at this time. Therefare, it was moved by Commissioner BRINKMAN and seconded by Commissioner STEWART to return to the original order of the agenda. The motion passed unanimously. A. Case No. MS-07-02: An application filed by Dale Brothers for approval of a two-lot ininor subdivision plat far property zoned Residential-Two and located at 3661 Millei Street. The case was presented by Travis'Crane. He entered alFpertinent documents into the record and advised the Commission there was jurisdiction to hear the case. He reviewed the sta£f report and digital presentation. Staff recommended approval for reasons outfined in the staff report. Dale Brothers 9822 Chadwick Way Littleton, CO Mr. Brothers appeared as a representative of the owner of the subj ect property. He stated there are no plans to remove the existing brick house. He stated his belief that building a duplex on the property would greatly improve and enhance the property. Commissioner BRINKMAN asked Mr. Brothers if there were plans to demolish the two outbuildings if the application is approved. Mr. Brothers replied that they would definitely be removed. Rick Nobbe 11187 Chase Way, Westminster Mr. Knobbe appeared as the surveyor for the property. In response to a question from Commissioner REINHART, Mr. Nobbe stated that the south building is approximately 5'h to 6 feet from the southern property line and does not lie within the easements. Planning Commission Minutes - 2- August 2, 2007 In response to a question from Commissioner STEWART, Mr. Brothers stated that he would estimate there are forty to fifty percent duplexes in the area. Vice Chair CHILVERS asked to hear from members of the public at this time. Steve Miller 3595 Miller Street Mr. Miller agreed that the lot would be improved by a new structure but did not want to see a duplex built on the property. He disagreed with Mr. Brothers' statement that the area consists of forty to fifty percent duplexes. He stated that there is only one duplex on his street and there are no duplexes on the street directly to the west. There is a combination of duplexes and single family homes on the street directly to the east. Albert Perry 3645 Miller Mr. Perry stated that he believed the of a single family home rather than a southern half of the property has exp be better served by construction ; also stated that, in the past, the ver problems. Meredith Johns 3585 Miller Street Ms. Johns stated her opposition to the construction of a duplex on the property. The street would look mare uniform with a single family residence. A single family residence woulfl also lessen the amount of rentals in the area. Fran Langdon . 3570 Miller Stree"t; Ms. Langdon stated that she has lived on Miller Street for 45 years and that the area was originally zonecl R-1. Miller Street got lumped into R-2 zoning when the city was incorporated. She also disagreed with Mr. Brothers' statement that the area consists of forty to fifty percent duplexes. She stated there are sewer problems on the property bzcause there are only four feet rather than six feet of line, and the house directly across the street has a septic tank. She also expressed concern that there is the possibility that the existing brick house could be replaced with another duplex. She stated her belief that a single fainily home would blend in better with the neighborhood. Scott Palat 3641 Miller Mr. Palat expressed opposition to a duplex being built next door to his property. He stated his belief that a single family home would be of more financial benefit to the owner and developer than a duplex. Charles Burns 3520 Miller Planning Commission Minutes - 3- August 2, 2007 Mr. Burns expressed his opposition to construction of a duplex. He has lived in his home since 1958 and the area has always been considered a single family area. Dale Brothers returned to the podium. He stated that he may have been wrong about the percentage of duplexes in the area, however, there are many duplexes in the area. He stated that the three sewer lines coming from the existing house were scoped and no issues were found. He stated he would provide a copy of the report if necessary. He stated that the garage on the west portion of the lot would be removed. Both outbuildings would be removed. He stated his belief that the proposed duplex would not detract from property values of existing homes in the neighborhood and he disagreed with Mr. Palat that a single family home would be of more benefit to the owner and developer than a duplex. In response to questions from Commissioner BRINKMAN;`Mr. Brothers stated that the sewer lines were scoped as a part of standard due diligence. If problems were to occur, he would have to fix them in order to sell the units: He also stated that he is not aware of a high water table in the area. The existing home does have a basement and there are no signs ofwater damage. Commissioner STEWART asked if the intent was to sell the two units as separate residences? Mr. Burns replied that the individual cost per duplex will almost ensure they would be purchased as single family homes. Each unit will have a two car garages and there will be separate'utilities. In response to a question from Commissioner CHILVERS, Mr. Crane explained that, due to lot width, the existing home could not be converted to a duplex unless a variance were to be approved by the Board of Adjustment. There were no Commissioner BRINKMAN asked if present structures would be removed once the application is approved. Dale Brothers retumed to the podium and stated fliat, due to asbestos shingles on the buildings, it will be necessary to have a company specializing in removal of asbestos to demolish the buildings. He stated the timing of demolition and construction would be direcfly related to the time the project is in the City's planning and'development stage. It was moved by Commissioner REINHART and seconded by Commissioner MATTHEWS to approve Case No. MS-07-02, a request for approval of a two-lot subdivision plat for property located at 3661 Miller Street, for the following reasons: 1. All requirements of the Subdivision Regulations have been met. 2. All required utility easements are being provided. Planning Commission Minutes - 4- August 2, 2007 3. Adequate infrastructure will be constructed with the development to serve the proposed use. The motion passed 6-1 with Commissioner BRINKMAN voting no and Commissioner McMILLIN absent. B. Case No. WA-07-04: An application filed by Crown Land Development far approval of a variance to the 500-foot maximum cul-de-sac length far property zoned Residential-One and located at approximately 3301 Quail Street. C. Case No. WS-07-01: An application filed by Crown Land Development for approval of an 11-lot major subdivision plat for property zoned Residential-One and located at approximately 3301<Quail Street. D. Case No. WF-07-01: An application filed by Crown Land Aevelopment for approval of a Class I Flood Plain Special Exception Pennit to allow street and other subdivision improvements in the Lena Gulch 1-00-year flood plain for property zoned Residential-One and located at approximately 3301 Quail Street. (Chair SCEZNEY disclosed that he lives adjacent to the property involved in these cases and therefore he would nothear the case. At this point, Chair SCEZNEY left the council chambers and Vice Chair CHILVERS conducted the remainder of the meeYirig.) Prior to presenting the case, Meredith Reckert distributed an addendum to the staff report to Commission members. The addendum related to staff recommendations made after the public works department completed its review of the cases. The results of that review were not available at the time the staff report The three cases were;presented concurrently by Ms. Reckert. Each case would require a separate motion. She entered all pertinent documents into the record and advised the:Coinmission there was jurisdiction to hear the case. She reviewed the staff report and digital presentation. Staff recommended approval of all three cases for reasons, and with conditions, as outlined in the staff report and addendum. She advised the Commission that Case No. WA-07-04 and Case No. WF-07-01 would require five positive votes far approval in accordance with regulations for special waivers. Commissioner BRINKMAN asked the reason for the regulation that set cul-de- sac length at 500 feet. Ms. Reckert replied that she was not sure of the reasons, but it has been in the subdivision regulations since 1972 and probably relates to connectivity and emergency access. Planning Commission Minutes - 5- August 2, 2007 Steve McKendry Steve McKendry, the applicant, addressed questions from the Commission. In regard to the cul-de-sac variance, he stated there are naturalfeatures which have necessitated longer cul-de-sacs in adjacent neighborhoods. The cul-de-sac is designed with a large bulb at the end to accommodate emergency vehicles. Drainage will include box culverts designed to handle a hundred-year flood event and will be done in harmony with existing trees. The floodplain exception is being requested only for the improvement of the roadways and sewer lines that are going into that section of the floodplain. Once roadways and sewer lines are constructed, the area will be reclaimed and seeded. A request will be made at a later date to improve Lena Gulch and will be consistent with the drainage study to show that it will improve the drainage. Once Lena Gulch is improved, application will be made to FEMA for a map revision that will re-establish the floodplain so the remaining three homes would not be in a floodplain. The proposed homes will be consistent with size and configuration of the lots. The natural grades will be adhered to as much as possible to eliminate the necessity of a lot of infill. Commissioner BRINKMAN asked about the proposed culvert. Mr. McKendry explained that the box culvert will be six feet high and eight feet wide and designed to handle a hundred year storm. ` There will 'be a two-foot soldier wall to handle low flows. The area will be maintained by the homeowners association. There is an existing easement to the narth end of the property which allows Urban Drainage to rriainiain that portion. Commissioner BRINKMAN asked if NIr. McKendry had actively worked with the neighbors to address eoncems about the proposed development. Mr. McKendry stated that he held a neighborhood meeting and commented that much of the opposition was from people who would oppose anything developed on the site. Other than that; much of the opposition concerned traffic, especially as it relates to school traffic, existing trees and consideration for wildlife. He stated that the plan has been designed to accommodate those concerns. There are no plans to develop an area to the north of Lena Gulch in order to allow it to remain in a natural stiate. (Vice Chair CHILVERS declared a recess at 8:41 p.m. The meeting was reconvened at 8:48 p.m.) Vice Chair CHILVERS asked to hear from members of the public. Louise Turner 11256 West 38t1' Avenue Planning Commission Minutes - 6- August 2, 2007 Mrs. Turner and her husband own the property immediately north of the center section of the proposed development. She also owns half of the Williams wildlife preserve to the north and east. She commented that anyone who purchases floodplain land should expect to deal with resulting issues. Urban Drainage and the City of Wheat Ridge adopted a plan for Lena Gulch which provided for an open low-flow channel to carry water at a slow rate. She objected to Mr. McKendry's plans to change the configuration of the channel where constrictions would cause water to flow at a faster rate. She asked that the original plan for Lena Gulch not be violated. Commissioner BRINKMAN stated that Urban Drainage and the City are working in conjunction to adopt a new flood hazard delineation plan for Lena Gulch. This plan shows channelization for Lena Gulch but not for this area. She asked Ms. Turner if channelization was a concern. Ms. Turner replied that any channelization is of concern because it increases the rate of wafer flow. If the study is based on current conditions, it should be more restrictive than it is now because of the drastic enlargement of the;Maple Grave Reservoir. Consolidated Mutual Water Department obtained permi'ssion to replace the fiber dashs with steel gates to store an additional five feet of water. When this water is released, flooding occurs. Linda Gibbard 3415 Quail Street Ms. Gibbard stated that she was opposed to any development on this property. She expressed cQncem about the effect of development on wildlife habitat as well as safety for children in the culvert areas. Arthur Gibbard 3425 Quail Mr: Gibbard stated that he has lived in his home since 1977. He expressed concern about the effect on wildlife habitat. He was also concerned about the deueloper bringing in fill dirt. Mark Sares 3455 Quail Mr. Sares has lived at this address far five years. He expressed concern about the impact of increased traffic from the development. He did not believe that the impact of increased traffic from the Cabela's development has been taken into account far this area. He expressed concern about safety of his children with the proposed culverts that will run behind his house. There is also a safety issue with children who play on the school grounds near the water in the summer. He agreed with Louise Turner's comments and requested that the low flow drainage for this area be retained. He would like to see a decision delayed until the new study is adopted. He commented that the 500-foot would not be necessary if the length of the road were shortened. This might necessitate the elimination of one Planning Commission Minutes - 7- August 2, 2007 or two houses for the developer, but it would pull the cul-de-sac away from Lena Gulch and allow the low flow drainage to remain. Caroline Green 11254 West 381" Avenue Ms. Green lives directly north of the subject property. She expressed concem about safety issues with fast moving water. She commented that while development is inevitable it must be done in a safe manner. She expressed concern as to whether or not engineering had been thoroughly completed. She stated that she wasn't sure she could trust a developer and a homeowners association to determine what happens with her property. Nancy Snow 11155 West 40t" Avenue Ms. Snow requested that, if the application is approved, park land dedication be required rather than cash in ]ieu of dedication. Ms. Reckert explained that the Parks Commission had already approved a requirement for cash in lieu of land dedication. Steve McKendry returned to podium. He commented that it is important for a city to grow and there are needs of inany people that need to be considered. He stated that he was not asking to be treated differently than any other developer. He commented that this meeting is not the tame to consider floodplain issues. These will be considered at a meeting with solid engineering results and safety will be of utmost impoYtance. The City, Urban Drainage and FEMA will be involved. In regard to Mr. Sazes' concerns, the original engineering called for eleven feet of infill along the site to push the tributary out of its historic path. The design was changed to leave the tributary in its historic area to avoid infilling the area. Commissioner CHILVERS asked if Mr. McKendry was concerned about school traffic in his subdivision. Mr. McKendry stated that a traffic count showed the traffic to be negligible. He met with the school to discuss these issues. In regard to the neighborhood meeting, Ms. Reckert commented that the developer chose to conduct a neighborhood meeting even though it was not required. Linda Gibbard returned to the podium. She stated that the subject property would no longer be beautiful once houses are built on it. Caroline Green returned to the podium. She asked if the developer could be required to install buffer zones for the existing residents. Ms. Reckert explained that it is hard to put conditions on a subdivision plat. Technically, it is only necessary for the developer to meet the regulations of the subdivision regulations. Planning Commission Minutes - 8- August 2, 2007 Vice Chair CHILVERS asked if there were any other comments from the public. Hearing no response, he closed the public hearing portion of the meeting. Commissioner REINHART commented that he was comfortable with the drainage engineering. The improved drainage should provide more safety for children in the area than presently exists. It was moved by Commissioner BRINKMAN and seconded by Commissioner SPANIEL to approve Case No. WA-07-04, a request for approval of a cul-de-sac length variance for property located at approximately 3301 Quail Street, for the following reasons: 1. Staff has concluded that granting of the'variance would not alter the character of the area. 2. There are several cul-de-sacs serving subdivisions in the vicinity which exceed 500 feet in length thereby setting precedents. 3. There are unique challenges with the property due to the pass- through tributary to Lena Gulch, exis'ting utiliries and grade changes which preclude alternate access designs. 4. Granting of the variance should not impair the amount of light and air to adjacent properties, increase congestion in the public streets or increase fire danger. With the following condition: 1. During construction, alternate access shall be provided by the 25-foot wide access.easement through Lot 1 of Applewood Baptist Church The motion failed by a vote of 4-2 with Commissioners STEWART and MATTHEWS voting no and Commissioner McMILLIN absent. (This application required 5 affirmative votes far approval.) It was moved by Commissioner REINHART and seconded by Commissioner BRINKIVIAN to approve Case No. WS-07-01, a request for approval of an 11- lot major subdivision at approximately 3301 Quail Street, for the following reasons: 1. All lots meet or exceed the R-1 development standards. 2. The developer has attempted to maintain the integrity of the natural features on the property. 3. The drainage report is approved. 4. With the exceprion of the street length, all requirements of the Subdivision Regulations have been met. Planning Commission Minutes - 9- August 2, 2007 With the following conditions: 1. The existing and proposed floodplain lines shall be shown on page 2 of the document. 2. An area shall be reserved in a tract as future right-of-way to provide access to a potential future filing to the south. This reservation would be located in what is currently shown as Tract C where the boundary of Tract C intersects the proposed right-of-way for 33"d Drive. 3. The applicant shall resolve sanitary sewer service easement issues with Northwest Lakewood Sanitation priar to City Council public hearing. - 4. Staft's recommended language regarding Tract A shall be added to the first page of the plat document. 5. Modifications to the Homeowners' Association Covenants shall be made prior to City Council public hearing. 6. An approved LOMR shall be required prior to any modification of the existing Lena Gulch drainage way and 100-year floodplain on the site. The motion passed 5-1 with Commissioner STEWART voting no and Commissioner McMILLIN absent. It was moved by Commissioner REINHART and seconded by Commissioner MATTHEWS to approve Case No. WF-07-01, a request for approval of a Class I special exception permit for construction of street and other public improvements in the Lena Gulch 100-year floodplain for property located at approximateiy 3301 Quail Street, for the following reasons: L The street co,nstruction'will have negligible impaMs on the existing floodplain. 2. There will be no adverse impact on adjacent property. 3. The floodplain administrator has reviewed and approved the Class I special exception study. With the following'conditions: 1. Until the floodplain improvements and LOMR is approved, additional construction in the floodplain will require a Class II Floodplain exception. 2. No construction, including fences, shall be allowed within the existing limits of the Lena Gulch Access and Maintenance Easement. The motion failed by a vote of 3-3 with Commissioners STEWART, BRINKMAN and CHILVERS voting no. (This application required 5 affirmative votes for approval.) Planning Commission Minu[es - 10 - August 2, 2007 8. 9. OTHERITEMS There was no other business to come before the Commission. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Commissioner REINHART and seconded by Commissioner STEWART to adjourn the meeting at 10:00 p.m. The motion passed unanimously. Jerry Scezney Chair James Chilvers Acting Chair Ann Lazzeri Secretary Planning Commission Minutes - ll- August 2, 2007 oF WHEAT PLANNING COMMISSION I LEGISLATIVE TTEM STAFF REPORT lb(ORA00 MEETING DATE: August 16, 2007 TITLE: Wadsworth Corridor Subarea Plan CASE NO. wrA 06-03 M PUBLIC HEARING Z RESOLUTION Case Manager: Sally Payne, Seniar Planner Date of Preparation: August 8, 2007 ❑ CODE CHANGE ORDINANCE ❑ STUDY SESSION ITEM Enclosed is a copy of the revised Wadsworth Comdor Subarea Plan. The Plan was prepared by Winston and Associates over the course of the last year aud a half. Preparation of the Plan fulfills one of City Council's strategic goals to prepare plans far subareas in the City in order to prepare for growth and its opportunities. Wadsworth Blvd. was selected as on of the first subarea plans due to the need to define a roadway design and right-of-way needs for property owners and future developers as they consider redevelopment along the corridor. Wadsworth Blvd. is a state highway meaning the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) has jurisdiction over the roadway and will ultimately decide how Wadsworth Blvd. will be widened. In regards to public outreach, five public meetings were held during development of the Plan, including a two and one-half day planning charrette and a warking meeting where a Visual Preference Survey and land use mapping exercise were undertaken. Thousands of notices were sent notifying people in the planning area of these public meetings. To recap the sequence of events related to the Plan adoption, Planning Commission was first presented the Plan at a public hearing on February 1. At that meeting, the Commission requested revisions be made to the Plan and that it be brought back for reconsideration at a March 1, 2007 public hearing. At the March 1, 2007 hearing, the Commission recommended denial of adoption of the Plan by a 4-3 vote. The Plan went to a March 26, 2007 City Council public hearing. At this hearing, Council made a motion to endorse the goals, land use concepts, urban design recommendations and implementation steps of the proposed plan. Council also requested that more detailed roadway design studies be done and that a budget amendment be processed to pay for such as study. Please see the attached City Council meering minutes from the March 26 meeting for the full motion made at this meeting. At a July 9, 2007 public hearing, Council made a motion to revise portions of the Wadsworth Corridor Subarea Plan and to indefinitely postpone amending the budget for funding of more detailed roadway design studies. Please see the attached memo from Mayor DiTullio detailing the revisions to be made to the Plan. This most recent version of Uie Plan reflects revisions based on direction from City Council at their July 9, 2001 public meeting. In summary, revisions to the Plan include changing the 162 foot width for improvements to Wadsworth Blvd. to 150 feet, removing the Multi-way Boulevard as the preferred alternative and including a range of alternatives for consideration including the Multi-way Boulevard, the modified 1999 Wadsworth Boulevard Comdor Plan and the Asyimnetrical Boulevard. In addition, the Architectural and Site Design Manual is to be modified for Wadsworth Boulevard from a Contemporary Overlay to the Traditional Overlay. As was previously mentioned, based on City Council's motion from their March 26, 2007 meeting, changes have not been made to the goals, land use concepts, urban design recommendations and implementation steps of the Plan with the exception of revisions referencing the Multi-Way Boulevard as the Preferred Alternative. BACKGROUND ON REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLANNING: The Denver Regional Council of Goverrunents (DRCOG) is the region's Metropolitan Planning Organization. As such, DRCOG develops and updates a Metro Vision Regional Transportation Plan (Metro Vision RTP). This plan presents the vision for a multimodal transportation system that is needed to respond to future growth in the Denver Metro area. The Metro Vision RTP identifies numerous improvement projects needed in the next 25 years. Those projects that have a reasonable expectation of construction, based on projected revenues, are further identified in the fiscally constrained Metro Vision RTP. DRCOG also develops a short term Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) which identifies federally funded transportation improvements to be completed by CDOT, the Regional Transportation District (RTD) and local governments over a six-year period. DRCOG reviews CDOT submitted projects for consistency with the Metro Vision RTP. If funding is proposed by CDOT in the next 25 years, the projects are included in the current fiscally constrained RTP. At this time the segment of Wadsworth Blvd. from 36`h Avenue to 46th Avenue is included in the Fiscally Constrained 2030 RTP, with an estimated cost of $139 M. The remaining sections of Wadsworth Blvd. in Wheat Ridge are listed as un-funded widening projects in the Metro Vision RTP. The actual design and construction of Wadsworth Boulevard improvements will be implemented by CDOT. Once a project is included in the TIP a concept plan is prepared and environmental studies and clearances are pursued following the Federal process. During the environmental process several alternative plans are evaluated and public input is solicited. A community- supported plan for Wadsworth Blvd. would be likely be considered as one of the alternative plans during the environmental process. STATEMENT OF ISSUES: City Council has stated that upon adoption of the Wadsworth Corridor Subarea P1an, the City will submit a TIP application to DRCOG for a Wadsworth corridor National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA) study. The Plan is a planning docuinent, not an engineering study. The Plan is not a regulatory document requiring right-of-way dedication, nor will it be used for right-of-way acquisition. Detailed engineering studies and maps examining the impacts of right-of-way acquisition will be done as part of CDOT's environmental studies. The Plan is a tool to guide staff, Planning Commission and City Council, and land use applicants in making decisions about development on Wadsworth Blvd. befare CDOT undertakes their environmental studies and widening. The Wadsworth Comdor Subarea Plan is proposed to supercede the Comprehensive Plan for the area. The existing Comprehensive Plan references the unadopted 1999 Plan regarding improvements to Wadsworth Blvd. Since the 2000 Comprehensive Plan was adopted, CDOT has projected funding in their long range plan for the widening of Wadsworth Blvd. as previously mentioned. References are made in the text of the Plan to the Appendix. It is a lengthy document so it has not been included as part of this packet. Please contact the Community Development Department to obtain a copy of the Appendix if desired. If you have any questions regarding the Plan, please contact Sally Payne at 303-235-2852 or spayne@ci.wheatridge.co.us. Notice as required by state statute far the hearing as been provided. (Notice in the Transcript newspaper.) In addition, notices regarding the public hearing were sent to a mailing list of approximately 1000 persons located in the planning area. Staff recommends adoption of the Plan. A motion to adopt a resolution recommending adoption of the plan by City Council is needed. Suggested Motion: "I move to adopt Resolution 01-2007, a resolution recommending adoption of the Wadsworth Comdor Subarea Plan, and forwarding this recommendation along with the Resolution to the City Council far their consideration." Attachments: 1. Wadsworth Corridor Subarea Plan 2. Planning Commission Resolution 3. Memo dated July 2, 2007 from Mayor DiTullio -"Wadsworth Comdor Plan Recommendations and Next Steps" 4. March 26, 2007 City Council Meeting Minutes including motion on the Wadsworth Comdor Subarea Plan WADSWORTH CORRIDOR SUBAREA PLAN ~ , . y TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 SUBAREA PLANS 1 1.2 PURPOSE OF THE WADSWORTH CORRIDOR SUBAREA PLAN 'I 1.3 WADSWORTH CORRIDOR CFiALLENGES 2 1.4 THE WADSWORTH CORRIDOR: OPPORTUNITY FOR A UNIQUE IDENTITY 2 1.5 SUMMARY OF PLANNING PROCESS 3 1.E GOALS FOR THE WADSWORTH CORRIDOR SUBAREA 3 1.7 OVERVIEW OF THE WADSWORTH CORRIDOR SUBAREA PLAN 4 2. ROADWAY DESIGlV 5 Z."I ROADWqY DESIGN ALTERNATIVES 5 2.2 MULTI-WAY BOULEVARDALTERNATIVE rJ 2.3 MODIFIED 1999 WADSWORTH BOULEVARD STUDYALTERNATIVE F) 2.4 ASYMMETRICAL BOULEVARDALTERNATIVE 6 2.5 OTHER ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS 7 2.6 FUTURE LAND USE 9 2.7 TRANSIT 11 3. POL9CiES AIdD iMPLEMENTATiON ACTIONS 12 3.1 THE CORE RETAIL AREA - APPROXIMATELY 44'" AVENUE TO 3H'" AVENUE 12 3.2 RELIANCE ON THE WADSWORTH CORRIDOR SUBAREA PLAN 13 3.3 INCREASED CONNECTIVITY 13 3.4 .SHARED PARKING 13 3.5 DESIGN 13 3.6 IMPLEMENTATION 14 3.7 DENSiTV 14 3.8 IMPLEMENTATIONACTIONS 14 4. EXISTING CHARACTERISTICS OF VIfADSWORTH BOUI.EVARD 17 4.1 EXISTING LAND USE 17 4.2 EXISTING ZONING 19 4.3 gUILDING CONDITIONS 21 4.4 TaaFFic 24 WADSWORTH SUBAREA PLAN 4.5 TRANSIT 26 4.6 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 26 ,4.7 COMMUNITY SERVICES AND FACILITIES 27 5. THE REGULATORY CONTEXT 29 5.1 DRCOG nND CDOT RecioNnL PLa,NS 29 5.2 .IEFFERSON COUNTY: COUNTY-WIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 29 5.3 RELATIONSHIP OF THE WADSWORTH CORRIDOR SUBAREA PLAN TO OTHER CITY PLANS 30 APPENDIX (A SEPARATE DOCUMENT) A1. SUMMARY OF THE WADSWORTH CORRIDOR PLANNING PROCESS A2. ALTERNATIVE ROADWAY CONCEPTS A3. ALTERNATIVE INTERSECTION CONCEPTS A4. SUMMARY OF 1999 WADSWORTH BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY WADSWORTH SUBAREA PLAN TABLE OF FIGURES Figure 1: The Wadsworth Boulevard Subarea 1 Figure 2: Cross Sections ofthe ThreeAlternatives 8 Figure 3: Recommended Land Use in the Wadsworth Corridor 10 Figure 4: Current Land Uses 18 Figure 5: Zoning districts of the municipal code 19 Figure 6: Approximate acres and percentage of Subarea by zoning type 19 Figure 7: Existing Zoning 20 Figure 8: Example 1, buildings along Wadsworth Boulevard 21 Figure 9: Example 2, buildings along Wadsworth Boulevard 21 Figure 10: Inventory of Commercial Square Footage by Community 21 Figure 11: Example 3, buildings along Wadsworth Boulevard 22 Figure 12: Uacancy Rate 461 Avenue to 3G" Avenue 22 Figure 13: Comparison of Jefferson County communities, square footage asking price. 22 Figure 14: Land ownership 441' and 381h 22 Figure 15: Wadsworth Boulevard buildings; year built 23 Figure 16: Wadsworth Boulevard Intersections 44th and 38th Avenues, projected level of services 24 Figore 17: 1999 Wadsworth Boulevard Conidor Plan current traffic conditions; Comparative traffic counts and projections 25 Figure 18: RTD Route 76 serves Wadsworth Boulevard, routes 38L and 44L intersect in east-west directions. 26 Figure 19: An excerpt of the Jelferson County Transportation Plan. 30 Figure 20: Urban Renewal Plans 30 WADSWORTH SUBAREA PLAN ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS WHEAT RIDGE CITYCOUNCIL Mayor Jerry DiTullio District I: Karen Berry & Terry Womble District II: Dean Gokey & Wanda Sang District III: Karen Adams & Mike Stites District IV: Lena Rotola & Larry Schulz WHEAT RIDGE PLANNING COMMISSION District I: Anne Brinkman & Scott Wesley District II: Cassandra Spaniel & James Chilvers District III: Philip Plummer & Jerry Scezney District IV: Kim Stewart & John McMillin CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE STAFF Randy Young, City Manager COMMUNITYDEVELOPMENTDEPARTMENT Alan White, Director Sally Payne, Senior Planner Meredith Reckert, Senior Planner Travis Crane, Planner II Adam Tietz, Planner I CONSULTANT Winston Associates The City of Wheat Ridge would like to thank property owners, business owners and residents who participated in planning meetings for development of the Wadsworth Corridor Subarea Plan. WADSWORTH SUBAREA PLAN IV 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 SUBAREA PLANS In 2005, the CityofWheat Ridge completed a Neighborhood Revitalization Strategy (NRS) that analyzed Wheat Ridge in the broader Jefferson County context relative to population and household trends, jobs and retail sales trends, housing market and commercial inventory. The resulting NRS, Repositioning Wheat Ridge, recommended a variety of strategies to restore the City to a"community of choice" for homeowners and businesses. The Wheat Ridge City Council accepted the NRS findings and recommendations as guiding principles for subsequent City-regulated development. One of the recommendations of Repositioning Wheat Ridge called for the City to undertake subarea planning in order to apply the revitalization strategies to the unique opportunities and challenges facing specific areas of the City. Recommended objectives of Wheat Ridge's subarea planning included: 1) Incorporate the Neighborhood Revitalization Strategies into the City's official planning documents. 2) Provide broad policy guidance regarding the future development or redevelopment of the identified subareas. 3) Provide a more detailed comprehensive planning guide to areas of immediate concern or opportunity untii an updated Comprehensive Plan is completed. 4) Encourage quality development by accelerating the planning process. 1.2 PURPOSE OF THE WADSWORTH CORRIDOR SUBAREA PLAN 1 i a s QV ~ a s o p~ ~ DQN/ I ~ , Figure 1: The Wadsworfh Boulevard Subarea The Wadsworth Corridor Subarea Plan is one of the first rounds of subarea plans prepared by the City pursuant to the recommendations of the 2005 Neighborhood Revitalization Strategy (NRS). Like the other subareas plans, it is both a short-term and long-term planning document. Some elements can, and should, be implemented immediately, whereas other elements of the plan may take 20-30 years or longer to implement. As shown in Figure 1, the Wadsworth Corridor Subarea extends ftom I-70 on the north to W. 261' Avenue on the south. The eastem boundary is generally Upham Street, and the western boundary is generally Yarrow Street. Wadsworth Corridor Subarea Plan provides guidance for the future development and re-development of properties along Wadsworth Boulevard. The document provides a series of roadway design alternatives and a recommended roadway width, taking into account CDOT's long-term plans to widen the state highway. It is an advisory document, WADSWORTH SUBAREA PLAN providing a vision for the future of Wadsworth Boulevard. Since the widening of Wadsworth Boulevard is on CDOT's long-range plan, it is important for the City to have a plan in place because CDOT considers all locally adopted plans through the environmental studies that must be undertaken as a requirement for use of federal funds. 1.3 WADSWORTH CORRIDOR CHAILENGES Wadsworth Boulevard is both a major regional traffic artery as well as Wheat Ridge's "front door". Carrying almost 40,000 vehicles per day, Wadsworth Boulevard is the most heavily used arterial through Wheat Ridge and one of the major north-south corridors in the western part of the Denver metropolitan area. Wadsworth Boulevard is also a State Highway, so it is regulated by both the City and the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT). During commuting periods, Wadsworth Boulevard experiences significant traffic congestion. CDOT has projected future traffic volumes and concluded that Wadsworth Boulevard needs to be widened from the current four through-lanes to six. Beyond the recognized neetl to widen Wadsworth Boulevard, no specific roadway improvement plans have been established, nor has a time line for these capacity improvements been confirmed. In the absence of clear direction, many property owners have deferred reinvestment and upgrading of properties. Although there has been some redevelopment, in general the corridor suffers from gradually declining conditions. in most cases, the Wadsworth Corridor through Wheat Ridge lacks the level of investmenUreinvestment seen in communities to the north and south on the corridor. In addition, Wadsworth Corridor is uninviting to pedestrians: buildings are setback far from the sidewalk and often separated by parking lots, there are large-scale biocks with few intervening streets and a general lack of amenities such as street trees, benches and trash receptacles. Finaily, a lack of clear edges or transitions contributes to overall lack of community identity. Signage is uncoordinated and varies greatly in quality. The Wadsworth Corridor provides the only impression of Wheat Ridge for many commuters, and the image portrayed is negative, stagnant and evidences a lack of community pride. As a result, various portions of the corridor present slightly negative to very-negative impressions to the large number of travelers that pass through the City. The generally deciining conditions along various portions of Wadsworth Boulevard act as negative 'billboards' for Wheat Ridge that mask the many other appealing aspects of the City. If the Wadsworth Boulevard corridor continues to decline, or merely maintains its current level of investment, the City will miss an opportunity to increase commercial activity (and sales taxes) in the corridor as well as to improve the City's image in the region, both of which would greatly benefit the residents of Wheat Ridge. 1.4 THE WADSWORTH CORRIDOR: OPPORTUNITY FOR A UNIQUE IDENTITY Wheat Ridge citizens have recognized the need to protect and upgrade Wheat Ridge's unique identity. In the Visual Preference Survey held during the fourth public meeting for the Wadsworth Boulevard Subarea, citizens were polled with a variety of questions. One of the questions was "What are the most important objectives for improving Wadsworth Boulevard?" Wheat Ridge citizens noted that one of the most important objectives for the Wadsworth Corridor was to "Create a signature identity for Wheat Ridge - make Wheat Ridge unique." The 2000 Wheat Ridge Comprehensive Pian also noted that: "A distinct sense of place gives the local citizens a sense of belonging in a world becoming ever more autonomous and can do much to promote civic pride. A distinct identity also informs visitors that they have entered a special place different from surrounding communities. Distinctiveness between communities can prevent a homogenized, generic city appearance:" Throughout the subarea planning process, people expressed the concems for a unique Wheat Ridge identity that includes eclectic urban design and is different from both Arvada to the north and Belmar to the south. Ensuring the WADSWORTH SUBAREA PLAN creation of a unique identity for Wheat Ridge will require engagement in the design review process. The City should explore possible means for establishing a design review process. 1.5 SUMMARY OF PLANNING PROCESS In order to gain public input regarding the future of Wadsworth Boulevard, a series of public meetings were heid. Six public meetings were heid from December 2005 to November 2006. These meetings included a three-day planning charrette where participants evaluated existing conditions and discussed future opportunities for the Wadsworth Comdor inciuding roadway design, potential land uses and pedestrian needs. At another public meeting, a Visual Preference Survey was undertaken to obtain feedback on the most important issues facing Wadsworth Boulevard, objectives for improving Wadsworth Boulevard, potential roadway designs, and various urban design options. In addition, a mapping exercise was done where participants were asked to indicate where along Wadsworth Corridor they would like to see different types of land uses and at what densities. In addition to several public meetings, work sessions were held with CDOT staff to obtain their input on potential roadway designs for Wadsworth Boulevard. For more detailed information about the public participation and feedback, please see the Appendix. 1.6 GOALS FOR THE WADSWORTH CORRIDOR SUBAREA The following goals for the Wadsworth Boulevard Corridor have been extracted from the NRS, the 1999 Wadsworth Boulevard Corridor Plan and from the Wadsworth Corridor Subarea Plan public meetings. • Improve the success of businesses along Wadsworth Boulevard. • Create an attractive, welcoming front door to Wheat Ridge. • Create a town center with vitality, attractive shopping and a gathering place for the community. • Develop a plan that will create predictabiiity-that will alleviate the current uncertainties and allow investment and development to occur. • Improve traffic flows to provide better vehicular access to, and through, the Wadsworth Corridor-balanced with the "livability" needs of businesses and residents. ~ Preserve and enhance the residential neighborhoods east and west of the Subarea. • Create a regular grid for drivers and pedestrians to get to local businesses without negatively affecting local neighborhoods. • Create a plan that can be implemented by individual property owners and developers. The overriding challenge is to balance increased future traffic while still allowing convenient access to ensure business success. 1.7 OVERVIEW OF THE WADSWORTH CORRIDOR SUBAREA PLAN WADSWORTH SUBAREA PLAN A major goal of this plan is to provide a proactive vision for the Wadsworth Corridor Subarea. This will allow the City, current landowners and business owners and future developers to work together to stimulate economic development along the corridor. The major features of the plan include: • Encouragement of the development of the Wadsworth Corridor, especially between W. 441" Avenue and W. 381' Avenue as a town center for Wheat Ridge-filiing in both sides of Wadsworth Boulevard with a mix of commercial, office and residential uses, convenient parking both on-street and behind the buildings, and broad sidewalks with benches, street tree planting and areas for plazas and outdoor dining. • On the east side of Wadsworth Boulevard, existing commercial street (approximately Webster Street) that serves the shopping center will be preserved. On the west side of Wadsworth Boulevard, between W. 4411 and W. 41s'Avenues, create links to connect existing north-south roadways (approximately Yukon and Yarrow Streets) as service lanes. • Implementation of Town Center Park, which has long been a component of the City plans, as a large "central park" to provide a central focus for a town center, as well as an area for events that will draw additional patrons to the area. • Just east of the newly named Webster Street and on both sides of W. 44t' Avenue, encourage infill with mixed- use development, including the under utilized area at W. 44t' Avenue and Upham Street. Similarly, on W. 38'" Avenue east of Wadsworth Boulevard, encourage infill mixed-use developments that will gratlually transition between the Wadsworth Corridor and adjacent W. 381hAvenue'main streeP commercial area. • In general, encourage a gradual increase in density and building height closer to Wadsworth Boulevard to provide the critical mass of uses, and residents, that will help support the businesses in the Corridor and bring life to this town center as well as prevent encroachment into the residential neighborhoods east and west of the subarea. WADSWORTH SUBAREA PLAN 2. ROADWAY DESIGN 2.1 SUMMARY OF ROADWAY DESIGN ALTERNATIVES Roadway design alternatives were developed through an extensive process, in which various design options were considered. While several options were initially considered, the process was narrowed to three options that fit into a 150 foot envelope. The three options include the Multi-Way Boulevard alternative, the modified 1999 Wadsworth Boulevard Corridor Study and the Asymmetrical Plan. The 150' would also accommodate more typical widening options by CDOT. Public roadway improvements along Wadsworth Boulevard shall not exceed 150 feet in width. 2.2 MULTI-WAY BOULEVARD The Multi-Way Boulevard includes three through lanes of traffic in each direction, a raised or painted narrow median, and one-way frontage roads located on each side of Watlsworth Boulevard. The frontage roads would serve the properties adjacent to Wadsworth Boulevard from W. 38th Avenue to W. 46th Avenue. The frontage roads are both separated ftom the through-traffic lanes by planted islands with street trees. The frontage road would include one lane of traffic bordered by a lane of parallel parking adjacent to the sidewalk. Sidewalks would be wide enough to encourage a pedestrian friendly environment. Buildings would be required, via a build-to line as outlined in the City of Wheat Ridge Architectural and Site Design Manual Traditional Overlay, to align at or near the ROW line to create an almost-continuous shopping frontage. An additional building setback of 5' to 10' is encouraged to allow room for outdoor dining, private planting areas, sidewalks sales and similar pedestrian oriented activity. Frequent curb cuts would be allowed to provide access between the frontage road and rear parking lots. However, curb cut consolidation would be encouraged to allow a more continuous shopping fagade on the street. The incentive for curb cut consolidation would be the additional development area that can be captured. A key to curb cut consolidation would be the interconnecting of rear parking lots. This will require cooperation of adjacent businesses and may be accomplished by a special improvement district. On the east side of Wadsworth Boulevard, infill development is also encouraged-but to a slightly lesser degree than the west side in order to allow'gaps' that provide visibility from Wadsworth Boulevard to the existing interior stores and businesses. To encourage infill of development between the existing 'pad site' restaurants, parking requirements would be reduced to allow conversion of parking to buildings. The reduction in parking requirements would be compensated in two ways: • The application of 'shared parking' -to recognize the fact that various businesses have different peak hours for their clients. The development of a parking structure, when appropriate. The existing north-south street serving the shopping center (approximately Webster Street) is proposed to remain as WADSWOR7H SUBAREA PLAN a single-loaded street that maintains access to the existing stores as well as to the rear of buildings facing Wadsworth Boulevard. The Multi-Way Boulevard alternative presents a challenge regarding how the frontage roads would intersect with local and arterial streets. Three options were identified to address this issue. Explanation of these can be found in the Appendix. CHARACTERISTICS OF THE MULTI-WAY BOULEVARD The Multi-Way Boulevard would create a unique identity for Wadsworth Boulevard through Wheat Ridge. The roadway section would be transformed into a pedestrian friendly environment while still able to handle large traffic volumes. The design would allow redevelopment of commercial areas, and would introduce higher density residential uses to the corridor. The Multi-Way Boulevard would contain frontage roads to serve the adjacent properties along Wadsworth. The Multi-Way Boulevard option was the recommended roadway design alternative selected by Wheat Ridge residents when polled at Public Meeting #4. 2.3 MODIFIED 1999 WADSWORTH BOULEVARD STUDYALTERNATIVE The Modified 1999 Boulevard alternative would contain three through lanes plus one auxiliary acceleration/deceleration lane in each direction. A center median would separate traffic, which could be used to accommodate an additional tum lane in certain areas. A wide tree lawn would separate a sidewalk from traffic. Access points would be consolidated. The acceleration/deceleration lane would allow access to properties which have frontage on Wadsworth Boulevard. Buildings would be located within the required build-to area, as established in the Architectural and Site Design Manual Traditional Overlay zone. This option would allow background traffic to move quickly through the corridor. There is no frontage road in this alternative, and therefore would require less engineering study than the other two options. 2.4 ASYMMETRICAL BOULEVARD ALTERNATIVE The Asymmetrical Boulevard features three central through-lanes in each direction separated by a broad, planted center median. On each side of the through lanes, a landscaped tree lawn would separate the roadway from a wide sidewalk. On the west side of Wadsworth Boulevard between W. 44'" Avenue and W. 38'"Avenue, a frontage road would carry one-way southbound traffic. Adjacent to the frontage road would be on-street parallel parking. The frontage road would be located where many small parking lots exist today. The existing access points used to access these parking lots would remain as access to parking lots behind buiidings located in the build-to area. The frontage road would be separated from the through traffic by a planted lantlscape island. A wide sidewalk would separate the buildings from the on-street parking. Buildings would be located within the required build-to area, as established in the Architectural and Site Design Manual Traditional Overlay zone. On the east side of Wadsworth Boulevard, the existing roadway that currently serves the shopping center between W. 38"' Avenue and W. 44"h Avenue should be retained and formalized as a two-way 'separated frontage road'. Curb cut consolidation would be encouraged to reduce conflict points for through traffic. It should be noted that while the actual right-of-way is less than the 150-foot standard section, the'separated frontage road' is needed for full functionality, and will act as a public street. The separated frontage road would provide a pedestrian friendly environment while still accommodating the through traffic on Wadsworth Boulevard. This option would create two areas on the east side of Wadsworth Boulevard where buildings are located within a close proximity to a roadway; Wadsworth Boulevard on one side and the formalized detached frontage road in the shopping center. This would provide an opportunity for a more dense commercial core WADSWORTH SUBAREA PLAN 6 with increased pedestrian activity. Continuous building facades would frame the east side of Wadsworth. WADSWORTH BOULEVARD NORTH OF W. 44'" AVENUE AND SOUTH OF W. 38'" AVENUE North of W. 44" Avenue, the roadway wili generally be six lanes, three through lanes in either direction. The iwo outer lanes, north and south bound extend from the on and off ramps of I-70. The widening of Wadsworth Boulevard south of W. 381" Avenue is not currently in CDOT's long-range plan. While the widening may not be in the long-range plan, future increased traffic volumes could justify widening Wadsworth Boulevard in this area. 2.5 OTHER ROADWAYIMPROVEMENTS Several other roadway improvements along the corridorwere identified during the public meetings. These improvements work in tandem with any of the roadway alternatives. These improvements are intended to improve both pedestrian and vehicular traffic. • Improve pedestrian access from W. 461' Avenue north to Johnson Park. • Reduce the road grade from W. 46"' Avenue to the highway underpass. • The W. 48" Avenue/Wadsworth Boulevard intersection on the west side of Wadsworth would be eliminated. W. 4V Avenue should cui-de-sac at Wadsworth Boulevard. Residents would exit the area from either W. 471" Avenue or the new W. 46" Avenue signaled intersection. Create a three quarter turn at W. 47'" Avenue and Wadsworth Boulevard, the three-quarter turn will include left and right off Wadsworth Boulevarcl onto W. 47"' Avenue and a right out of W. 47" Avenue onto Wadsworth Boulevard. The left-out northbound tuming movement onto Wadsworth Boulevard would be eliminated. • From the east, W. 461" Avenue should continue across Wadsworth Boulevard to join W. 461' Avenue on the west side. A signal should be introtluced at W. 46th Avenue and Wadsworth Boulevard creating a four-way signaled intersection. • In coordination with CDOT, the traffic signal at Three-Acre Lane should be moved to W. 418'Avenue. The Three Acre Lane/Wadsworth Boulevard intersection should be eliminated and be connected to the frontage road and service lane. • A service lane west of Wadsworth Boulevard should connect from W. 44t' to W. 415' Avenues. • Yukon should be extended south to W. 351' Avenue. • W. 361, Avenue will continue on the west side of Wadsworth Boulevard to intersect with Yukon Street. Both the east and west intersection of W. 361 Avenue with Wadsworth Boulevard will be restricted to right-in, right-out and left-in tuming. The intersection at W. 35"' Avenue and Wadsworth Boulevard will become a signaled intersection, contingent on CDOT approval. • W. 34t' Place will cul-de-sac and not intersect with Wadsworth Boulevard. • The Wadsworth Boulevard may contain a raised or painted median. WADSWORTH SUBAREA PLAN Wadsworth Blvd.lllternatives - Cross Sections I ~ AM. I I Building Leftmm Thmlane Thmlane Thmlane Tumlane o-12foot l ane/Median I set6ack Property Cenrer Line I Line I Modifed1999 rotalwidth(halfsection)-75feet Altemative rotalwidih(fullsection)-i50feet ~ Bwlding Median Thmlane Thmlane Thmlane FrontageROad Parking 0-12 00[ setback I Cenrer l Pmperry Line Line I I Multi-Wayelvd. rotalwidth(halfsectioN-75feet Alrernative rotalwidth(fullseaion)-150feet I ~ I Buildin9 . Thrulane Thrulane Thrulane/ 0-12foot 15d0 feet I Tumlane I sethack Conneaordrive Property ~ Line I @n[er Line Symmetrical rotalwidth(halfsectioN-67feet Plan (east side) totalwid[h(fullsection)-134feet Altemative Figure 2: Cross-Sections of the Three Alternatives For specifics on roadway design, tuming motions, etc., please refer to conceptual roadway diagrams in the Appendix. SUBAREA PLAN 2.6 FUTURE LAND USE The Future Land Use Map encourages the creation of a town center between W. 38th Avenue and W. 44th Avenue. In this section, higher density mixed use development is proposed. This would include buildings with more than one use; by example, commercial on fhe ground floor and office or residential on the upper floors. Between W. 38th Avenue and W. 44th Avenue, land uses are encouraged to increase gratlually from the existing low-density single family neighborhoods to higher intensity uses along Wadsworth Bouievard. The following is a description of the types of land uses being proposed. 1) General Commercial There are only a few areas of General Commercial designated in the subarea plan-primarily to reflect existing conditions in areas that do not seem compatible with mixed use commercial. Most of the commercial uses are encouraged in a mixed-use form. 2) Medium-High Density Mixed-Use This Mixed-Use category is the dominant designation along both sides of Wadsworth Boulevard. Mixed-Use requires that buildings have more than one use, such as commercial on the ground floor, office or residential on the second floor and residential uses on any higher floors. The residential component of this category will have the same density and type as Metlium High-Density Residential, except that it will be combined with another use. A minor note: Infill development is proposed along the north side of W. 38"' Avenue near Upham Street, in the existing Middle School parking area, in orderto provide commercial uses on both sides of the W. 38t'Avenue "Main StreeP'. The displaced parking can be relocated to other vacant school property such as Reed Street north of W. 39t' Avenue. 3) Medium Density Residential Medium Density Residential will be developed at a density between five and ten units to the acre. This category is designated on the outer edges of the Subarea. The density ranges from single-family homes on small lots (to be compatibie with adjacent to single-family homes) up to townhomes. 4) Medium-High Density Residential Medium-High Density Residential land use will be developed between ten and twenty-one units to the acre. This range includes townhomes, condominiums and apaRments. 5) Civic The Civic category includes public amenities such as: band shell, library, police and fire stations, day-care centers or a post office. It could even include a city hall complex. A major civic use or cluster of civic uses is encouraged in the core of the Subarea, but located away from prime commerciai sites. 6) Parks Trails and Recreation This category includes pubiicly accessible park land, recreation facilities and natural areas that can be utilized for passive recreational purposes. A major expansion of Town Center Park is proposed-to create a large "central park" in the heart of the Subarea and adjacent to Watlsworth Boulevard. The park is envisioned to be a major civic gathering space, as well as an urban open space on which stores and offices front. The exact dimensions and orientation of the park would be WADSWORTH SUBAREA PLAN Legend ~ COMMERCIAL - CIVIC ~ PARK ! ! MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM HIGH DENSITY MIXED USE ~ TRAFFIC SIGNALS WADSWORTH ROW 150 FEET Q VARIOUS LANDMARKS ' BUILDINGS - PEDESTRIAN CONNECTION Figure 3: Recommended Land Uses in the Wadsworth Corridor determined in conjunction with detailed planning of the commercial development Johnson Park is located at I-70 and Wadsworth Boulevard and forms a natural northem gateway to Wheat Ridge. The Wheat Ridge Parks and Recreation Master Plan recommends that vehicular access to the park be closed (except for service and emergency) and the park be removed from park inventory. The park acreage should be transitioned to the greenbeit as open space. The Master Plan recommends an oversized walk/trail connection be added to Wadsworth Boulevard in this area, and a trail connection provided to the Clear Creek Trail near Johnson Park, which is well below street level. The Wadsworth Corridor Subarea Plan supports building multi-use pathways on either side of Wadsworth Boulevard to improve access from Wadsworth Boulevard's commercial area to the greenbelt and trail. These paths will allow pedestrians and bicyclists both to descend from the City to the Clear Creek corridor and connect north under I-70 to Arvada and east and west to the Metro area trail system. Apel-Bacher Park, located at the southwest comer of Vance Street and W. 451" Avenue has tennis courts and serves the neighborhood north of W. 4411 Avenue and east of Wadsworth Boulevard. Though not illustrated specifically, other small pocket parks, greenways and pedestrian ways will be desirable throughout the Wadsworth Boulevard Subarea. These types of small recreation amenities are extremely important to the livability and desirability of the town center for mixed uses, especially in higher density areas. For any recreation amenities that are too small to be maintained efficiently by the City, construction and/or maintenance by a special improvement district should be considered. 2.7 TRANSir Long-range transit planning is not sufficiently developed and therefore is not incorporated into the Wadsworth Corridor Subarea Plan. For example, it is not known whether Wadsworth Boulevard will someday be a candidate for light rail or troliey service. The Subarea Plan assumes that the primary service for the near future will continue to be buses. It is assumed that regional buses will use the through-traffic lanes of the Boulevard, possibly with pull-ins carved out of the planting islands. Smaller, local buses could possibly use the frontage roads. WADSWORTH SUBAREA PL4N 11 3. POLICIES AND IMPLEMENTATI ACTIONS The City prefers that Wadsworth Boulevard will be kept as narrow as possible. However, to the extent that traffic projections indicate continued increases in Uaffic volumes on Wadsworth Boulevard, the City supports widening Wadsworth Boulevard to six through-traffic lanes. Prior to the Wadsworth Boulevard improvements, the City will encourage property owners to make site improvements consistent with the Wadsworth Corridor Subarea Plan. 3.1 THE CORE RETAIL AREA - APPROXIMATELY W. 44~ AVENUE TO W. 381 AVENUE Wadsworth Boulevard between W. 38th Avenue and W. 44th Avenue will be considered, and designed to function, as a"town center" for Wheat Ridge. To function as a town center, and to create an attractive setting for shopping and civic functions that will increase the success of businesses and attractiveness as a gathering place and shopping destination for residents of Wheat Ridge, Wadsworth Boulevard will have: • A near-continuous fagade of buildings aligned at or near the ROW line as designated in the Architectural and Site Design Manual Traditional Overlay; • A mix of uses that include retail shops and offices on the ground floors and offices and muiti-family residential on upper floors; • Broad, continuous sidewalks made of durable materials with decorative colors and/or textures; Places along the sidewalk, but out of the pedestrian travel zone, for outdoor dining, street sales, and street furniture such as benches, fountains, pubiic art, light fixtures and directional signage, • Street trees that provide shade and help soften and shape the public realm; • A physical barrier or separation belween sidewalks and through traffic lanes that buffers pedestrians from high speed traffic and traffic-related noise, splashing antl snow plowing; • Limited curb cuts that break the continuous faCade of buildings and interrupt the shopping experience; Parking lots located to the rear of buildings (on the opposite side of the buiidings from Wadsworth Boulevard); • A major green, "central park" for passive use as well as for public gatherings and events; and • Plazas and other public places designed for comfortable sitting and public events. Until CDOT undertakes environmental studies required for roadway widening, the future ROW envelope for WadswoAh Boulevard roadway improvements will be established at 75 feet from the center line of the existing roadway. This will accommodate the three roadway options. WADSWORTH SUBAREA PLAN 12 3.2 RELIANCE ON THE WADSWORTH CORRIDOR SUBAREA PLAN The Wadsworth Corridor Subarea Plan is general and conceptual in nature. It contains adequate specificity to guide and coordinate the development of individual properties to achieve the goals of the plan. However, the Wadsworth Corridor Subarea Plan should be seen as somewhat flexible so long as projects still accomplish the goals and policies of the plan. This is especially true where property consolidation may make possible more extensive development concepts. Where the 2000 Wheat Ridge Comprehensive Plan or the 1999 Wadsworth Boulevard Corridor Plan conflicts with the Wadsworth Corridor Subarea Plan, the Wadsworth Corridor Subarea Plan shall supersede the Comprehensive Plan and/or the 1999 Wadsworth Boulevard Corridor Pian. 3.3 INCREASED CONNECTIVITY It is an objective of the Wadsworth Corridor Subarea Pian to increase the connectivity and accessibility of properties and businesses-to provide multiple ways for potential customers to reach an establishment. This will be accomplished by: • For vehicles-introducing new streets, interconnecting parking and shopping areas, creating and/or moving intersections for vehicular convenience and improved traffic flow. • For pedestrians-creating safe street crossings, and on both sides of Wadsworth, a continuous sidewalk with street trees, benches and wide enough for sidewalk activities (outdoor dining, sidewalk sales, etc.). • For bicycles-creating safe street crossings. • Trail connections to Johnson Park, Clear Creek Open Space and Arvada. 3.4 SHARED PARKING The City encourages, and will support wherever possible (in the Wadsworth Boulevard corridor), a"shared parking" program that: • Applies to an entire block or more. • Is justified by a credible parking analysis. Reduces the individual and cumulative parking requirements of individual land uses. 3.5 DESIGN All new buildings in the Wadsworth Boulevard corridor will be subject to the Wheat Ridge Architectural & Site Design Manual. Wadsworth Boulevard is designated as a Traditional Overlay area with a 0-12 foot build-to area. For specific site and building design requirements, refer to the Architectural and Site Design Manual. WADSWORTH SUBAREA PLAN 13 3.6 IMPLEMENTATION To provitle a mechanism for implementation within the Subarea, the City encourages the creation of a special district such as special improvement or business improvement districts. 3.7 DENSITY In the proposed town center area between W. 38'" Avenue and W. 44'h Avenue, higher densities (10-20 units per acre) could be encouraged over and above commercial uses. Densities will be "feathered" (gradually decreased) along the edges of the corridor to make a transition to adjacent zoning. If densities over 21 units per acre were to be considered, a City Charter amendment would be required. 3.8 IMPLEMENTATIONACTIONS ROADWAY AND LAND USE • Upon adoption of the Wadsworth Corridor Subarea Plan, the City shall submit a Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) application to DRCOG for proceeding with environmental studies for Wadsworth Boulevard. • Survey center line of Wadsworth Boulevard to establish the 150' temporary roadway widening improvement envelope. • Inventory existing utilities and identify any improvements in location or capacity (to support density increases) that should be included in future Wadsworth Boulevard improvements. • Coilaborate with Wheat Ridge 2020 in order to explore incentives that encourage development and redevelopment. • Work with the Urban Renewal Authority to update their Urban Renewal Plans to reflect the Wadsworth Corridor Subarea Plan. • Rather than amend existing zoning that applies to the whole city, establish an overlay zone district to regulate the development of the Wadsworth Boulevard Subarea. The exact area to be covered by an overlay zone will be determined as part of the overlay zone process. ~ DuringtheupcomingComprehensivePlanupdate,incorporaterevisionsthatreflectthechangingcircumstances of the roadway since development of the 2000 Comprehensive Plan. ROADWAY DESIGN The ultimate roadway design will be determined through the environmental studies performed by CDOT. The three alternatives proposed in this Plan should be considered during environmental studies. PARKING UndeRake a"shared parking" analysis for the Subarea. Use the shared parking credit as an incentive for properties to place parking in the rear of buildings. In the analysis, consider the varying parking needs of an entire block rather than individual properties. Provide incentives to encourage voluntary consolidation of curb cuts, for example encourage a shared parking program which reduces the parking requirement for land owners who consolidate. The City could reduce service costs for those WADSWORTH SUBAREA PL4N 14 businesses which remove excess curb cuts. DESIGN - STANDARDS AND REVIEW The City of Wheat Ridge Architectural & Site Design Manual should be referenced regarding appropriate design standards site and building design. These standards may be modified by the development of an overlay district for Wadsworth Boulevard. IMPLEMENTATION OFA SPECIAL DISTRICT OR DISTRICTS Explore with business and property owners the creation of a special district such as a Special Improvement or Business Improvement District. Among other things the special district could: • Sponsor programs and special events to promote Wadsworth businesses; • Provide input to design review; • Provide design assistance for deserving projects; • Work with property owners and merchants to establish and maintain aesthetic and maintenance standards; • Develop streetscape improvements; • Develop consolidated parking lots and structures; • Maintain sidewalks at a level higher than current City standards permit; • Construct and maintain small, quasi-public spaces such as plazas and pocket parks; and • Undertake utility improvements to accommodate high-density redevelopment. WADSWORTH SUBAREA PLAN 15 WADSWORTH SUBAREA 16 4. EXISTING CHARACTERISTICS WADSWORTH BOULEVARD 4.1 EXISTING LAND USE At the northem edge of the subarea Johnson Park and the Clear Creek open space provides a potentially attractive gateway and a destination for residents. The open space is bordered on the south by single-family neighborhoods that gradually transitions into commercial uses beginning at approximately W. 461" Avenue. Along the central section of Wadsworth Boulevard, from W. 44'" Avenue to approximately W. 38N' Avenue, the primary existing land uses are community commercial: retail sales (e.g. grocery, dry goods, auto sales), services (e.g. auto repair, gas stations, copy center, veterinary clinic, bank) and a wide variety of restaurants and professional offices- in converted residential buildings as well as office structures. Within this central area, there are also pockets of higher density residential uses, light industrial (including a green house, a feed store and recycling center) and several churches. To the east and west of Wadsworth Boulevard, the commercial uses gradually transition to residential uses in largely single-family neighborhoods at the edges of the Subarea. South of approximately W. 361'Avenue, residential uses predominate, including both apartment complexes and single- family homes. The City Hall Complex and the Crown Hill Cemetery form the southern entry to the Subarea. WADSWORTH SUBAREA PLAN 17 Figure 4: Current Land Uses WADSWORTH SUBAREA 18 4.2 EXISTING ZONING The zoning forthe Wadsworth Boulevard corridor is predominantly (42%) residential (R-2) which allows single-family and dupiex residences on lots larger than 12,500 square feet - a relatively low density for a town center commerciai area. C-1 (general commercial) zoning, which allows a variety of retail types, comprises 24% of the Subarea, predominantly along Wadsworth Boulevard between W. 46'hand W. 381hAvenues. Figure 5: Zoning districts of the municipal code. Source: Wheat Ridge Municipal Code, Sec. 26-201. < o > ° -•e Commerial-One This district is estabiished to provide for areas with a wide range of commercial land uses District (C-1) Which include offce, general business, and retail sale and service establishments. This district is supported by the community andlor entire region. This district is established to provide for a reasonably compatible transition between residen- Neighborhood tial and more intensive commercial land uses. It provides for residential scale, neighborhood- Commercial District (NC) oriented professional offices and services which, by their nature and through design limitation, will promote neighborhood stability and protect neighborhood values and character. The district also provides neighborhootl-oriented retail uses by special use approval. Planned Commercial , Development (PCD) Planned Residential , Development (PRD) Residential-One This district is estabiished to provide high quality, safe, quiet and stable low-density residential District (R-1) neighborhoods, and to prohibit activities of any nature which are incompatible with the low- density residentiai character. Residential-One A District This district is established to provide high quality, safe, quiet and stable low-tlensity residential (R-1A) neighborhoods, and to prohibit activities of any nature which are incompatible with the low- density residential character. Residential-Two This district is established to provide high quality, safe, quiet and stable low to moderate-den- District (R-2) sity residential neighborhoods and to prohibit activities of any nature which are incompatible with the medium to high-density residential character. This district is established to accommodate various types of office uses performing adminis- Restricted Commercial trative, professional and personal services, and to provide for a limited range of retail uses District (RC) Which are neighborhood oriented. It is the intent that general retail uses that serve the com- munity or region, wholesaling, warehousing, industrial, and uses which require outside stor- age or display be prohibited, since these uses are incompatibie with other uses in this district. `PRD and PCD are planned development and are defined by individual documents. a ,iwll!d `~z~ C-1 73 24.3 R-1 1 0.4 C-2 1 0.2 R-1A 13 4.3 I 1 0.3 R-2 126 42.1 centage of Subarea by zoning type N-C 5 1.7 R-3 28 9.4 Source: Wheat Ridge Zoning Map PCD 28 9,5 R-C 23 7.6 PRD 0 0.1 17 WADSWORTH SUBAREA PLAN 19 Figure 6: Approximate acres and per- Figure 7: Existing Zoning near the Wadsworth Boulevard Subarea WADSWORTH SUBAREA PLAN 20 4.3 BUILDING CONDITIONS The median age for all buildings along Wadsworth Boulevard is 51 years, and the median age for commercial buildings along the Wadsworth Boulevarcl corzidor is 39 years', reflec6ng the lack of new development that has occurred in the last decade. Ninety-one percentof all properties along Watlsworth Boulevard have a primary structure over 30 years old. The vacancy rate for commercial uses is low (3.3%), but a visual inspection reveals that many of the buiidings, particularly on the west side of Wadsworth Boulevard, are being used by businesses taking advantage of relatively low rents. Most commerciai real estate along Wadsworth Boulevard is in relative disrepair. Old buildings in disrepair create an uninviting environment, which both shoppers and upscale retailers avoid. The median year in which commercial space was built in Wheat Ridge is 1970, compared to 1973 for the county as a whole. In Wheat Ridge, 37%of commercial square footage was built before 1969, compared to 26% for Lakewood, 20°/a for Arvada and 28% for Golden. The Jefferson County portion of Westminster has the newest commercial space, on average (1988), where one-fourth of the existing commercial was built in 2000 or later. The median age of commercial property in Lakewood is similarto Wheat Ridge; however, Lakewood has a higher percentage of space built since 1990 (22 percent) than Wheat Ridge (18 percent). The average asking price for office space in Wheat Ridge is at least 16 percent lower than other Jefferson County communities while Figure 9: Example 2, buildings along Wadsworth retail space falls at least 36 percent below the other communities. Boulevard The high availability of retail space in Wheat Ridge combined with comparatively low price per square foot indicates demand for this type of space may be low in Wheat Ridge compared to other areas of the county. Median-year-built, All buildings (1956), Commercial buildings (1968) WADSWORTH SUBAREA PLAN 21 Figure 8: Example 1, buildings along Wadsworth Boulevard Figure 10: Inventory of Commercial Square Footage by Community Source: Jefferson CountyAssessordata (Feb. 2005); RRCAssociates, Inc. Figure 11: Example 3, buildings along Wadsworfh Boulevard ~u « s~o R 2 Q ~so n $d10 c ° - a~so ~ w $100 q $50 ~ Figure 12: l/acancy Rate W. 46^Avenue to W. 36'°Avenue Source: City of Wheat Ridge, Economic Development Once 0i~o~:vmi n oomce GRe61l a _____________sa______ q n a « ~ . ~ . e ~ e o ; ; » ---'°-----~-9' - --------Q~- ANaOa Gopel L34eq0a0 Weafillahl WleatRqge Ot1e1JeTR[a' Cal lff Figure 13: Comparison of Jefferson County communities, square footage asking price. Figure 14: Wadsworfh Boulevard buildings; year built PuN 23 4.4 TRAFFIC The City acknowledges that traffic congestion and low Ievels of service (level "E" and lower) at peak periods are not consistent with regionai transportation and emergency requirements. The levei-of-service is designated A-F, with 'A representing the best operating conditions and 'F', the worse operating conditions. Levels-of-service are used to describe the operating conditions of a roadway base on factors such as speed, travel time, delay, etc. There is a high frequency of accidents at the major intersections. An excess number of curb cuts spaced closely together and near major intersections add to the traffic problem. Finally, varying roadway widths exacerbate the problem. The charts below indicate the expected levels of service in the years 2020 and 2030 with and without improvements. nnd3FchA~c i I '-10301~ ~2020A F2030 2" ~3030 ' ~ 1993~ ;2010~ k2020j 1 [2030-) 1 1 7 ~ wlimpii lm ~ I m~mpi Figure 15: Wadsworth Boulevard Intersections W. 44fh and W. 38th Avenues, projected level of services Intersections with and without improvement WADSWORTH SUBAREA PLAN 24 NWh of 291h Are. ,•.,~~t~ + _ l_NUM - n:.... . . . _ -.w 4~ :Y} • r :I~t `m ~Gr'g i{4ssz'Srt' Q ~ xt~ip M~ 0 P4~ ~ ~YIINAw h/S ~.!s e ~~.$m; . R IF. _.1:: K~tlAa. • • • •.11L.IbAMI'~n n 'Y ~ W IINAs t ' 3~ .Vt Iq r~, ~aA ~ _ r y T- North of 48th L- North of 44th Nortn or sacn I T-- North of 35th I T- North of 29th i0000 ~ 44th Ave. ilGCO 0 199D 30W 3010 3020 30J0 2610 38th AVe. Nonn or aeffi nve. - iooaa 900M Aawo ~ 35th Ave. p~ ,oaao 0 isao zooo zoio mm zmo zao Norlhof 441h Ave. 32nd Ave. 7- -iass -zaae «1B9B. -2W8 _Iqgp: ~2008 ~ 1f9B~ LXNSJ J, ~ 26th Ave. ~ W,1flN-.1w 60000 50000 :.169g 30000 tOWp 0 199D 20W ZO10 2020 20]0 21N0 Figure 16: Left, 1999 Wadsworth Boulevard Corridor Plan current traffic conditions; Righh Comparative traffic counts and projections (1999 vs. 2006). On each graph the first line (blue) =1990 existing and 30 year projection. The second line (magenta) = 2006 existing traffic and revised projection WADSWORTH SUBAREA PLAN . 25 4.5 4.6 TRANSIT Several RTD routes currently serve the subarea as illustrated in Figure 17. In the Metro Vision 2030 Plan, DRCOG designates Wadsworth Boulevard as an inter-regional major regional arterial as well as a future multi-modal corridor in which rapid transit is eventually planned. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT The importance of revitalizing Wadsworth Boulevard is paramount to City revitalization. Success in this corridor will encourage success throughout the City. When updating Wadsworth Boulevard's retail environment redevelopment in the Wadsworth Corridor, the City has the chance to become a regional destination while providing residents a place to gather and shop. zeaz t~ 'n RB EDGEWATE Figure 17: RTD Route 76 serves Wadsworth Boulevard, routes 38L and 44L intersect in east- west direcfions. From the extensive input received during the NRS process, creating a vibrant Source: RTD route map 2006 town center emerged as a strong need to attract the strong househoids that are important to other aspects of Wheat Ridge's revitalization strategy. The following section summarizes some of the data that underscores the need for revitalization. While the 2000 Comprehensive Plan indicated growing retail sales in the Wadsworth Corridor, a more recent report (Repositioning Wheat Ridge Neighborhood Revitalization Strategy) examined the source of this growth and attributed it primarily to two industries, health care and auto sales/services. It identified these as relatively weak sales tax generating industries. The report documented the decline of stronger sales tax generators (i.e. food stores, eating/ d(nkingestablishments,buildingmaterialsandfinance/insuranceandrealestate). The report observed that stronger tax generation may be possibie by the growth of these industries, but also observed that the affluence of local households is a key factor in attracting and retaining these businesses. The Urban Renewal Authority (URA) and the Urban Renewal Plans (URP) have focused on the preservation of current commercial areas and re-oriented those lots available towards a regional commercial draw. The Urban Renewal Plan for the Wadsworth Boulevard Corridor did not include mixed-use development component. To create a successful retail environment and encourage redevelopment, residential densities need to be increased in this area. Changing the land use along the corridor to include a higher density residential component associated with mixed use will assist in the creation of a retail environment. The URAshould update the current urban renewal plan to include the land use plan outlined in this document. The URA should evaluate tools such as tax increment financing to help encourage the realization of this plan. Wheat Ridge's housing market has also been declining and transitional opportunities are low. While some houses sell at current market rate or above market rate, many houses, in the Wadsworth Boulevard area in particular, sell below average. Thirty-one percent of Wheat Ridge pays over thirty-percent of their household income in housing costs and roughly, sixty-seven percent of Wheat Ridge's multifamily housing market is rental. Other Wheat Ridge trends that reflect the importance of revitalizing: • While Wheat Ridge was attracting more jobs in the 1990s, Lakewood and Arvada are attracting more jobs today. • Only 16% of employees working in Wheat Ridge live in Wheat Ridge, compared to 42% in Arvada and 32% in Lakewood. • Sales price of Wheat Ridge commercial property is 36% lower than Jefferson County. WADSWORTH SUBAREA PLAN 26 • In 2005, Wheat Ridge had over 50% of the available (for-sale) retail in Jefferson County. • Of all data available, the asking price for square footage for Wheat Ridge commercial is lower than Arvada, Golden, Lakewood and Westminster. Between 1990 and 2000, Wheat Ridge was the only one of the compared communities to report a loss in sales revenue from building materials, finance/insurance and real estate. Wheat Ridge also had the lowest percentage gain in construction sales (27%), whereas nearby communities showed increases between 136% (Arvada) and 655% (Westminster). The revitalization of the Wadsworth Boulevard Subarea is an essential element of the NRS charge to revitalize Wheat Ridge. The corridor is the City's most visible and expansive commerciai area. It is also a significantly under performing area, but also has the greatest potential for infill development and redevelopment. The revitalization of the Wadsworth Corridor should be a high priority within the City's economic development goals. The City shouid look for other partners such as Wheat Ridge 2020 to help acquire and land-bank problem properties in the corridor as they become available. Finally, the City should consider using their authority to acquire lots at fair market prices and to condemn as necessary. 4.7 COMMUNITY SERVICES AND FACILITIES The following provitles background information regarding the various government services, roles and responsibilities in the Wadsworth Bouievard Subarea. Services in the subarea are provided by the City, The Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) and various special districts. Water, sanitary sewer and fire protection services are provided by special districts. Crown Hill Cemetery is in unincorporated Jefferson County, so the City does not provide services to the cemetery. Aside from state highways, the City provides road construction and maintenance. The Consolidated Mutual Company and the Wheat Ridge Water District provide water service construction and maintenance. The City also provides park and recreation facilities and general govemmental services for the subarea. The two major water districts in the subarea are the Consolidated Mutual Company and Wheat Ridge Water District. Even though these are separate providers, there is substantial dependence on the Denver Water Department. Each district must comply with the Denver Water DepartmenPs limitations on the number of new taps they can allot each year. Consolidated Mutual Water is the only water district to have its own storage or treatment facility. Nonetheless, approximately 80% of its customers receive some Denver water. These two providers also coordinate street improvements with water improvemenUupgratles. The Sanitation district serving the subarea is the Wheat Ridge Sanitation District, which relies heavilyon the Metropolitan Denver Sewage Disposal District Number 1 for treatment. The Wheat Ridge Fire Protection District serves the area south of Clear Creek. Redevelopment projects that occur in Wheat Ridge will need to conform to current fire safety codes. The City of Wheat Ridge provides police protection to all residents and businesses. The City's police force is comprised of patrol, traffic and investigative officers, emergency specialists, community service officers and administrative staff. The Crown Hill cemetery at the southem entl of the subarea is in unincorporated Jefferson County and the County Sheriff provides police protection. In the Wadsworth Boulevard Subarea, the plan proposes the expansion of existing Town Center park. This will be a relatively large central park which has retail on its edges. In a semi-urban environment with multifamily housing, a need for small open areas/pocket parks is anticipated. Apel-Bacher Park is an example of such a pocket park. WADSWORTH SUBAREA PLAN 27 CDOT will maintain, provide routine repair services and upkeep to Wadsworth Boulevard. Aside from Wadsworth Boulevard, the City provides road maintenance and routine repair services in the subarea, including snow removal, sweeping, crack seal and similar maintenance activities. Repair of existing curb, gutter and sidewalk is accomplished through the City's 6-year capital investment program (CIP). Needed reconstruction projects or major repairs are programmed in the CIP and are included in the City's annual budget on a priority basis as funds are available. Under the City's development code, developers are responsible for constructing roads, including curb, gutter, and sidewalk within and adjacent to new development. When located within the public right-of-way, this infrastructure is dedicated to the City for maintenance after a warranty period. WADSWORTH SUBAREA PLAN 28 R ro 5. THE REGULATORY CONTEXT x ! ~ J ` Even though Wadsworth Boulevard is within the City of Wheat Ridge, the Coiorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) has jurisdiction over Wadsworth Boulevard, which is State Highway 121. 5.1 DRCOG ANO CDOT RecioNnL PvaNs The Denver Regional Council of Governments (DRCOG) is the region's Metropolitan Planning Organization. As such, DRCOG develops and updates a Metro Vision Regional Transportation Plan (Metro Vision RTP). This plan presents the vision for a multimodal transportation system that is needed to respond to future growth in the Denver Metro area. The Metro Vision RTP identifies numerous improvement projects needed in the next 25 years. Those projects that have a reasonable expectation of construction, based on projected revenues, are further identified in the fiscally constrained Metro Vision RTP. DRCOG also develops a short term Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) which identifies federally funded transportation improvements to be completed by CDOT, the Regional Transportation District (RTD) and local governments over a six-year period. DRCOG reviews CDOT submitted projects for consistency with the Metro Vision RTP. If funding is proposed by CDOT in the next 25 years, the projects are included in the current fiscally constrainetl RTP. At this time the segment of Wadsworth from 36th Avenue to 46th Avenue is included in the Fiscally Constrained 2030 RTP, with an estimated cost of $13.9 M. The remaining sections of Wadsworth Boulevartl in Wheat Ridge are listed as un-funded widening projects in the Metro Vision RTP. The actual design and construction of Wadsworth Boulevard improvements will be implementetl by CDOT. Once a project is included in the TIP a concept plan is prepared and environmental clearances are pursued following the Federal process. During the environmental process several alternative plans are evaluated and public input is solicited. A community-supported plan for Wadsworth Boulevard would be likely be considered as one of the alternative plans during the environmental process. 5.2 JEFFERSON COUNTY: COUNTY-WIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN The 1998 Jefferson County-Wide Transportation Plan (JCTP) and a 2002 addendum are intended to be a tool for coordinating amongst separate jurisdictions, not to replace local plans. The plan has a vision statement and goals to accomplish the vision, a needs analysis based on projections to 2015, a fiscally constrained plan (related to funding availability) and an implementation strategy. The current JCTP indicates that from I-70 South to W. 26th Avenue Wadsworth Boulevard will be "very severely congested" by 2015 if no capacity improvements are implemented. The JCTP suggests improvements but stipulates that Wheat Ridge will make the decision as to the timing and selection of capacity-increasing approaches. The JCTP also identifies trail needs throughout the county. Wadsworth Boulevard is identified as a gap in the county-wide trails system. From the needs based analysis, Wadsworth from W. 26th Avenue to I-70 was identified and designated within the "fiscally constrained" category (could be funded within the constraints of the revenue forecast). WADSWORTH SUBAREA PLAN 29 5.3 RELATIONSHIP OF THE WADSWORTH CORRIDOR SUBAREA PLAN TO OTHER CITY PLANS °z 1116 The Wheat Ridge Comprehensive Plan For the portion of the City covered by the Wadsworth Corridor Subarea Plan, the Wadsworth CorridorSubarea Plan will take precedence overthe 2000 Comprehensive Plan (until the Comprehensive Plan is amended). That is, where there are conflicts between the two documents, the Wadsworth Corridor Subarea Plan shall supersede the Comprehensive Plan. 1999 Wadsworth Boulevard Corridor Study In 1999, the City commissioned the "Wadsworth Boulevard Corridor, Transportation, Land Use and Design Plan" to address many of these issues. the majority of Wadsworth Boulevard at four through-lanes but recommended including additional accel/decel lanes and turn lanes, several new street connections, access control, and streetscape enhancements. The study was neither officially adopted nor implemented and has no official standing. The Wadsworth Corridor Subarea Plan incorporates and builds upon many of the observations and recommendations of the 1999 plan. Figure 18: An excerpt of fhe Jelferson County Transportation Plan. Blue shading indicates 1995 roads with peak- hour congestion oflevel-of-seroiceEorbelow. (Source:Jef- ferson County-Wide Transportation PIan.) This study proposed to maintain number of other improvements, Y2n0.me~J4en m The Wheat Ridge Ur6an Renewal Plans 3RM Overthe years, theWheat Ridge Urban Renewal Authority has designated several Urban Renewal Areas (URA's) that Figure 19: Urban Renewal Plans overlap portions of the Wadsworth Corridor Subarea: the Town Center, the W. 38'" Avenue Corridor and the Wadsworth Boulevard Corridor. The Wadsworth Boulevard Corridor Redevelopment Plan included a portion of the previous Town Center area. The current boundaries of the URAs are illustrated in Figure 19. The 25-year life of the Town Center Urban Renewal Area expired. As a result, the Urban Renew Authority has the authority to initiate redevelopment within the Wadsworth Boulevard Subarea. The Urban Renewal Authority should be seen as a partner in plan implementation. Major principles developed in the renewal plans for the various URA's are generally consistent with the Wadsworth Corridor Subarea Plan (see individual descriptions below). Where Urban Renewal Plans conflict with the Wadsworth Corridor Subarea Plan, those plans should be revised. WADSWORTH SUBAREA PLAN 30 Wadsworth Boulevard Conidor Redevelopment Plan The City adopted the Wadsworth Boulevard Corridor Redevelopment URP in October 2001. This plan recommended conformance with the January 2001 comprehensive plan's vision of a"Community Commercial Center' along Wadsworth. The Community Commercial Center includes a mix of compatible retail and office uses that primarily serve a regional market area. The overall land use goal of the 2001 Wadsworth Boulevard Corridor URP (WBCURP) is consistent with the Wadsworth Corridor Subarea Plan: "...to strengthen the market potential and identity of Wadsworth Boulevard as a regional, destination-oriented commercial center, by facilitating opportunities fordeveloping additional regional-scaled projects, maintaining desirable community- orientetl uses and improving the physical environment of the redevelopment area.". Other key objectives of the Wadsworth Corridor Urban Renewal Plan that are consistent with the Wadsworth Corridor Subarea Plan are: • Improve the market potential and physical environment along the Wadsworth Boulevard. • Improve functionality and safety for vehicle and transit movement. • Improve the physical appearance and amenities of Wadsworth Boulevard. Some land uses of the WBCURP are not consistent with the land uses adopted in this Wadsworth Corridor Subarea Plan, to the following extent: whereas the URP recommended single-use categories, the Wadsworth Corridor Subarea Plan proposes a mix of uses along Wadsworth, including commercial, office and residential. Residential uses are important to provide additional market for the commercial uses. WADSWORTH SUBAREA PLAN 31 CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. Ol Series of 2007 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO, CONCERNING THE ADOPTION OF THE WADSWORTH CORRIDOR SUBAREA PLAN WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Wheat Ridge adopted a Comprehensive Plan on October 25, 1999 and amendments were considered and adopted in January 24, 2000; and WHEREAS, the Wadsworth Boulevard Comdar: Transportation, Land Use, and Design Plan prepared in 1999 was not officially adopted, the Wadsworth Corridor Subarea Plan updates the 1999 Plan and provides direction regarding future roadway design for cunent landowners, business owners, and future developers to work to stimulate economic development along the corridor; and WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plan adopted in 2000 referenced the unadopted 1999 Plan regarding improvements to Wadsworth Blvd; and WHEREAS, the City Council directed staff and its consultant to prepare a subarea plan for the area generally bounded by I-70, Upham St., 26`h Ave. and Yanow St. in fulfillment of one of the Council's strategic goals; and WHEREAS, C.R.S. 31-23-206 (2) provides that the Comprehensive Plan may be amended by the City from time to time; and WHEREAS, City Council desires to amend the Comprehensive Plan to address changed circumstances related to CDOT's commitment of funding in their long range plan for the widening of Wadsworth Blvd. from 36"' Ave. to I-70; and WHEREAS, Planning Commission has held a public hearing as provided by C.R.S. 31- 23-208 and Section 2-60 (b) of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws; legal notice thereof duly published in the Wheat Ridge Transcript on January 18, 2007. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Wheat Ridge, Colorado, as follows: The Planning Commission of the City of Wheat Ridge hereby recommends adoption of the Wadsworth Corridor Subarea Plan attached as Attachment 2. 2. The Planning Commission recommends that the Wadsworth Corridar Subarea Plan supercede the Comprehensive Plan for the portion of the City covered by the Subarea Plan. 3. A copy of this resolution shall be forwarded to the City Council. I:\Comdev\Wadsworth Subarea Plan\pc resolu[ion8-I6.doc DONE AND RESOLVED THIS day of , 2007. CHAIR, PLANNING COMMISSION ATTEST: Secretary to the Planning Commission I:\Comdev\Wadsworth Subarea Plan\pc resolution8-16.doc City of Wheat Ridge Office of the Mayor F WHEqT o P ti o U m c~lORP00 Memorandum TO: City Council CC: Planning Commission Randy Young, City Manager Alan White, Community Development Director Rob Osborn, Wheat Ridge 2020 Randy Jensen, Regional Transportation Director for CDOT Region Six FROM: Jerry DiTullio, Mayor DATE: 7/2/2007 SUBJECT: Wadsworth Corridor Plan Recommendations and Next Steps As you know, there have been ongoing discussions with citizens, property owners, CDOT staff, DRCOG staff, City staff, Councilmember Schulz, Councilmember Berry and the Mayor's Office with regards to the proposed Wadsworth Corridor Plan. The goal has to been to develop a common-sense and timely approach to the reconstruction of Wadsworth Blvd. and to examine the possibility offunding an Environmental Assessment (EA) or an Environmental impact Study (EIS) in conformance with the Nationai Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) by CDOT. Either study would eventually be required by CDOT before any actual reconstruction takes piace on Wadsworth Blvd. Performing the required NEPA study would facilitate a more efficient time schedule and funding mechanism for the possible reconstruction of Wadsworth Blvd. A NEPA study by CDOT is a full and transparent pubiic process that generally takes 12 -18 months to complete. I would like to thank Region 6 Director Randy Jensen from CDOT and his staff for attending multiple meetings with Wheat Ridge and providing valuable input. Based on these high level discussions, the following proposed action plan and motions are recommended to City Council for the July 9`h City Council meeting: Julv 9"' Citv Council Meetinq I MOVE to indefinitely postpone City Council Resolution 15-2007 a resolution amending the 2007 budget for funding of a Wadsworth Blvd traffic study by the City. Council VOTE I MOVE to rescind parts of the motion made on March 26, 2007 directing staff to refine the road design concepts and present them to Council prior to October 23, 2007, and directing staff to prepare an overlay zone to establish a build-to line. Council VOTE I MOVE to direct the City Manager's Office to modify the draft Wadsworth Corridor Plan to read as follows: o Public road improvements along Wadsworth Blvd, within the pian area, shall not exceed 150feetin width. o Language regarding the preferred alternative of a multi-way boulevard shall be amended to include the range of alternatives outlined in the Appendix: the multi-way boulevard, the modified 1999 template, and the asymmetrical boulevard. I FURTHER MOVE to direct that the City Manager's Office shall modify the Architectural and Site Design Manual to change the overlay area designation along Wadsworth Blvd, within the plan area, from Contemporary to Traditional. Within the setback range established for the traditional overlay area, The City Manager's Office shall set minimum and maximum building setbacks, so that the pedestrian features of the three Roadway Design Alternatives are preserved. I FURTHER MOVE that prior to August 27, 2007, the Planning Commission shall hold at least one public hearing on the modified Wadsworth Plan and forward its final recommendations on the plan to City Council. I FURTHER MOVE that on August 27, 2007, in a public hearing, the City Council shall consider adoption of the modified Wadsworth Corridor Plan. 3 Auqust 27, 2007 Public Hearinq (Public Hearing motions and resolutions to be drafted by the City Manager's Office as needed based on the following action plan below) • At a public hearing, City Council will act on the modified plan. City Council believes it is in the best interest of the community to further study the range of roadway alternatives for Wadsworth in conformance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). To that end, upon adoption of the Wadsworth Plan, the City Manager's Office shall: o Submit a Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) application to the Denver Regional Council of Governments for a Wadsworth Corridor NEPA study. o Prepare a budget amendment to the 2007 budget for 50% of the costs of the NEPA study. The monies will be taken out of the city's reserve and used as a 50% match. The monies will only be used if 50% funding from other sources, such as CDOT or DRCOG, is obtained. • In a separate resolution, approve a budget amendment to pay 50% of the costs of the NEPA study. This need not be done until CDOT is ready to do the study. Otherwise, a supplemental appropriation will have to be made each year to carry over the funds. • Direct the City Manager's Office to submit a copy of the 1999 Wadsworth Plan to CDOT as additional information to consider during the NEPA study. Please feel free to call with questions or clarifications. Thank you. CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO March 26. 2007 Mayor DiTullio called the Regular City Council Meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Councilmembers present: Karen Adams, Karen Berry, Dean Gokey, Lena Rotola, Wanda Sang, Larry Schulz, Mike Stites, and Terry Wombie: Also present: City Clerk, Michael Snow; City Manage[, Randy Young; Deputy City Manager, Patrick Goff; City Attomey, Gerald Dahl; Director of Community Development, Alan White; staff; and interested citizens. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF Februarv 26. 2007 Motion by Council Member Sang to approve the Minutes of February 26, 2007; seconded by Council Member Womble. Council Member Berry asked to change the term appointment date noted in the minutes for the District I Planning Commission appointment of Davis Reinhart; appointment date coRection of 4/1/07. Motion carried 8-0. CITIZENS' RIGHT TO SPERK Aaron Cordova from Jefferson Genter for Mental Health, informed the City of the four office locations in Wheat Ridge and spoke of the Physicai and Mentai services provided. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Motion by Council Member Schulz to add to the agenda Item #5: Board & Commission Appointments; seconded by Council Member Sang; carried 8-0 PUBLIC HEARINGS AND ORDINANCES ON SECOND READING Item 1. PUBLIC HEARING ON RESOLUTION 06-2007 - A RESOLUTION ~ ADOPTING THE WADSWORTH CORRIDOR SUBAREA PLAN. (CASE NO. WPA-06-03) (Continued from February 12, 2007) Mayor DiTullio opened the public hearing. Resolution 06-2007 was introduced by Council Member Stites, who read the Executive Summary. Jeff Winsfon of Winston Associates shared a PowerPoint presentation outlining his arguments for adoption of the Plan. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: March 26, 2007 Page -2- Alan White presented a staff summary of points in support of the proposed Plan. Mayor DiTullio called for a break at 8:02 p.m.; resuming at 8:12 p.m. The following 21 speakers were present and spoke in opposition to the resolution: v Wh. e~t Ridge resident"nd business ow ers, Debbie ~drich, Bruce " LoTumer, ~irley Wa/ker, Patncia Fisher, Tom S/atfery, oward Gerel"ck, Kent Davis, Ltafry Merkl, Ph ~lummer, Dav Ohmart, Clau~~ Wo pane e Shaver, Mart~&kjordahl, Jed LeipT6ns, Susre Seeds, Nnc Snow, Roger Loecher, Niko/as Loecher, Bridgeite Skjordahl and Virginia Tomko. Their comments included, but were not limited to: • No attempt has been made to identify and quantify impacts to residents and businesses within the subarea. • The effort to notify and invoive the public in genecal and the residents and businesses affected by the Plan were inadequate. • The little information that residents and business owners have received or heard never mention that it will bring in large, high-rise apartment buildings. • Pianning Commission members voted this down because it was ill-conceived. Council is urged to read the minutes. • The pian explicitly states that the City should acquire lots and condemn as necessary. This affects many of the residences ail the way down to Teller Street. • Remove all language that mentions changing the Charter with respect to density and height restrictions or property condemnation. • Homes affected by this Plan, especialiy those potentially open to condemnation, will lose their value. • The result of this plan is in direct contradiction to NRS recommendations: Wheat Ridge has too many rentals, as stated in the NRS and as residents have said for over 30 years. This calis for high-density rezoning and development, which will eventuaily bring an increase of rentals. • Denver has shown in several recent articles that all the areas in its City that are similar to the design of this plan, have few to no children; the NRS study calls for changes that generate Strong Households, which includes families with children. • Council Members are encouraged to drive through Arvada Center and ask themselves whether theyd want to live there, raise chiidren there and whether it is truly what theyd want in Wheat Ridge. . Twelve-foot sidewalks are not needed, they don't actually bring more people and aren't necessary to handle the volume of pedestrians that will need to use these sidewalks. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: March 26, 2007 Page -3- • The neighborhood meetings where participants were asked which pian option they wouid prefer were given documents that showed beautiful pictures oNy of the plan option that Winston Associates wanted, which greatly skewed the participants impressions of the options. • This pian is very much like Arvada's downtown plan, which eliminated necessary parking, created a serious hindrance to business viability and residences there are now having difficulty selling. • The plan brings in the same high-paced; high•density living that is present in the downtown area of Denver. Residents of Wheat Ridge like the slower pace identity of the Ciry and do not want that changed. • There needs to be as much focus on the "vision" the residents of Wheat Ridge have as the Council has put on the vision for business and tax revenue improvements; Council owes this to its residents. • Such drastic changes shouid be done only based on citizen demand, of which there was none. • The expansion that CDOT will propose is unlikely to be any more than one lane on each side, not all the extra lanes and developments. • Under this Plan, no consideration was given to Federal Intermodai Surface Transportation Efficiency Act - ISTEA, the intent of which is to allow communities to adopt plans that can restrain adverse impact on the community and demand mitigation of those impacts when federai funds are used for roadway improvements. The present proposals invite CDOT to adversely impact the corridor by providing a 150-162 foot right of way that will not fit in the existing urban fabric. • All that is required by CDOT for a six-lane roadway is 132 feet - why not adopt a plan with a roadway of 132 feet. • A recent article from DRCOG listing the top most-congested areas in the Metro area does not mention the Wadsworth corridor. • This pian is detrimental to the customer/vehicle access to the existing stores on Wadsworth. • Business owners cannot and do not want to give up any more of the area they currently have. • The roadway design in the Plan makes a bypass through Wheat Ridge, and right by all the businesses, which is why Arvada and Lakewood want this plan. • If properties are condemned because of this plan, the City should buy these properties at their current value, rather than the value they will have once they are condemned. • Other cities that have had these similar problem areas have adopted plans that preserve the characteristics and value of the neighborhoods - and residents and business owners are very happy. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: March 26, 2007 Page -4- • The town center aiready has a roadway providing off-highway access and the parking there is already busy and heavily used; iYs a good thing and this messes it all up. • Every roadway widening in the Cit)(s history has resulted in lower property values along its corridor. • The plan calis for help to business in the area, but it should be to support the existing businesses, not to wipe them out. . Increased density means increased crime and needed services, which means more needed Police, Fire, Sewer, Water and other services. The pian hasn't addressed this impact and compared it to its benefits. • No one would fault Councii if it voted to postpone adoption of this plan to give it the additional attention and study it deserves. The foilowing speakers were present and spoke in support of the resolution: v ~ Wheat Ridge re,~~idents and busin ss,owners, B'ri~a DeLaet, D~se Waddell, Frqn Langdon, Tra~Langwortjl y; Rn Fisher, ritta Fisher, Katie Thorshei`Terrell Wi/liams, To~'i Abboft, Curf Gilmore, Th r►as Ripp, DYiiis Reinhart, Gretchen Cerveny, and K"lomino. Their comments included, but were not limited to: • The Plan creates a"plan" for the vision of the city. • This Plan is a"wmmunity plan"; the result of the input of large numbers of citizens from different perspectives. If this is not passed, iYsays community members aren't valued. • To vote this down would throw away over $100k invested in the study and stop the process of devising a plan. • The current condition of Wadsworth presents a negative image. This plan makes for a welcoming "front-door' presentation of the City of Wheat Ridge. • This is not a plan to widen Wadsworth: . The Plan will provide predictability as well as flexibiliry to investors and business owners, which adds value. • This plan expands Right-of-Way and builci-able area by recJucing setbacks, creating a more attractive community. • CDOT will be widening Wadsworth because of increasing traffic. This Plan gives Wheat Ridge the power to negotiate with CDOT when they approach the area for widening and improvements. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: March 26, 2007 Page -5- • City Staff and consultants met with hundreds of residents and business owners to get input into devising this Plan. • The plan provides for safe traffic flow, while providing a vision for commercial development and a Multi-use residential area that acts as a buffer to the neighboring lower-density residential areas. • The City needs some high-density commercial development in the City that will attract people to spend their money there. • This is a plan for the future - it will provide for guidance in a change process that will take many years. • The plan provides for the needs identified in the NRS. • The current roadway is too dangerous for pedestrian-based retail. This plan provides a welcoming design for pedestrian and vehicle retaii that is safe. • Sidewalks next to the roadway are known as snow-throw zones and should be placed away from the roadway, as this plan does. • This plan does address the needs of the type of pedestrians who already visit the businesses in this area. • This plan cou►d make Wheat Ridge one of the most progressive areas in the Denver area. • The plan calis for future citizen involvement and future engineering study, which the opposition says is the reason it should be voted down; but this is the first step in the process. • This plan sends the message that Wheat Ridge is a city that welcomes newcomers and businesses. • One resident, as a Civil Engineer and Planner of 25 years and participant in the development plan for the Lowry area, says no plan he ever worked on of this type ever negatively affected property values. • Wadsworth divides the City in half - this plan makes it friendly for pedestrians and would remove this division. Mayor DiTullio called for a break at 9:36 p.m., resuming at 9:46 p.m. At the request of Mayor DiTullio, Mr. Dahl reported that because a public hearing wasn't held for the adoption of the Wadsworth Corridor Plan as part of the Comprehensive Plan in 1999, which is required by law, its adoption at that time, as part of the Comprehensive Plan, does not stand. Council Member Gokey expressed his support for this plan, but that the width proposed is not necessary. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: March 26, 2007 Page -6- Council Member Berry read into the record an e-mail sent to her by a resident in support of the Plan. Council Merr►ber Berry further asked Mr. White to expound on the means and manner used to inform and involve residents of the public meetings and hearings on the Plan when the study began. Council Member Womble stated his opposition to this plan because of the lack of discussion amongst the affected residents and business owners. Council Member Adams asked Mr. White whether the Council came to consensus to support the current plan during the July Study Session when Council first heard the Pian. Mayor DiTullio closed the public hearing Motion by Council Member Stites to: 1. Endorse the goals, land use concepts, urban design recommendations, and implementation steps of the proposed plan. 2. Delete any text references to 162 feet of right of way and frontage roads and to modify all maps and illustrations to delete depictions of the same. 3. Conduct further study of the right-of-way needed to widen Wadsworth, to: a. Assess whether the right-of-way should be 150 feet or less. b. Complement the generai planning goals of the proposed draft plan. 4. Modify the cunent draft of the Plan to incorporate the above changes. Staff shall schedule a pubiic hearing to adopt the modified Plan no later than September 26, 2007. 5. Allocate funding for the additional study requested and for the additionai work to be performed to modify the plan and p.repare a new draft. The allocation of additional funding shall be considered through a budget amendment requesf at a later date. Seconded by Council Member Gokey. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: March 26, 2007 Page -7- Motion by Council Member Berry to amend the previous motion as follows: 1. Endorse the goals, land use concepts, urban design recommendations, and implementation steps of the proposed plan. 2-. Strike out 3: Conduct further study of the right-of-way needed to widen Wadsworth, Sfrike out ta!. N b. And Insert "including but not limited to detailed road design studies to assess the feasibility of the Multi-Way BoulevaM and refine and finalize design concepts for intersections. Public input shall be gathered during all phases of the design process. Before October 23, 2007, the final design concept shall be brought before the Planning Commission and City Council for ratification and inclusion into the subarea plan. 4. Strike out , 2007.2 and Insert "Before October 23, 2007, a publie hearing shall be held to consider adoption of an overlay zone district that establishes structure "build to" lines" 5. Aliocate funding for the additional Strike out" and Insert "Muiti-Way Boulevard and intersection study. Up to $40,000 shall be allocated for the study. The study shall be completed no later than Septemtier 1, 2007." Insert "Within 30 days of city council approval of the final design concept, the city shall consider, at a public hearing, adoption of an Art in Public Places ordinance for the area within the Wadsworth Subarea Plan. The ordinance shall designate one percent of the City's and State of Colorado's capital construction projects of $50,000 or more for the purchase of public art and the promotion of cultural events." Amendment seconded by Council Member Adams. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: March 26, 2007 Page -8- Motion by Council Member Sang to extend meeting past 11 p.m.; seconded by Council Member Schulz; carried 7-1, with Council Member Gokey voting No. Council Member Berry Called for the Question on the Amendment; seconded by Council Member Rotola; carried 8-0. Amendment tied 4-4 with Council Members Womble, Gokey, Sang and Stites voting No; Councii Members Schulz, Rotola, Adams and Berry voting Yes; Mayor DiTullio broke the tie by voting yes. Motion carried 5-4. Oriqinal Motion, as amended, tied 4-4 with Council Members Womble, Gokey, Sang and Stites voting No; Council Members Berry, Adams, Rotola and Schulz voting Yes; Mayor DiTullio broke the tie by voting yes. Motion carried 5-4. ~ Mayor DiTullio called for a break at 11:15 p.m., resuming at 11:24 p.m. DECISIONS. RESOLUTIONS, AND MOTIONS Item 2. APPROVAL OF THE ANNUAL RENEWAL FOR TME COMPUTER AIDED DISPATCH AND RECORDS MANAGEMENT SYSTEM IN THE AMOUNT OF $55,135.00. Item 2 was introduced by Council Member Womble, who read the Executive Summary. Motion by Council Member Womble to approve the annual support and licensing renewal for the Computer Aided Dispatch and Records Management System in the amount of $55,135.00 to Logisys; seconded by Council Member Schulz; carried 7-1, with Council Member Gokey voting No. Item 3. AWARD ITB-07-17 2007 SLURRY SEAL PROJECT IN THE AMOUNT OF $302,108.41. Item 3 was introduced by Council Member Gokey, who read the Executive Summary. Motion by Council Member Gokey to award ITB-07-17, 2007 Slurry Seal Project, to Quality resurfacing of Henderson, Colorado in the amount of $302,108.41. I further move that a contingency amount of $30,210.84 be approved; seconded by Council Member Sang.