Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/01/2010♦��4 1 City Of Wheat<idge PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA July 1, 2010 Notice is hereby given of a Public Meeting to be held before the City of Wheat Ridge Planning Commission on July 1, 2010, at 7:00 p.m., in the City Council Chambers of the Municipal Building, 7500 West 29th Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado. Individuals with disabilities are encouraged to participate in all public meetings sponsored by the City of Wheat Ridge. Call Heather Geyer, Public Information Officer at 303 -235 -2826 at least one week in advance of a meeting if you are interested in participating and need inclusion assistance. 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 — June 3, 2010 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 HEARINGS A. Case No. ZOA- 10 -03 An ordinance amending Articles II and VI of Chapter 26 concerning accessory buildings on properties with commercial and industrial zoning. 8. OTHER ITEMS A. Mixed Use Zone District Project Update 9. ADJOURNMENT ♦��� City of Wheatlidge PLANNING COMMISSION Minutes of Meeting June 3, 2010 1. CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Chair MATTHEWS Council Chambers of the Municipal Building, 7500 Wes Ridge, Colorado. 2. ROLL CALL OF MEMBERS Commission Members Present: Commission Members Absent: Steve =i p.m. in the City venue, Wheat Meredith Reckert, Sr. Planner Sarah Showalter, Planner II Anne Alan 3. PLEA: 4.1PP: It v�2 BUC 5. APP 6. AGENDA I by Commissioner DWYER and seconded by Commissioner to approve the order of the agenda. The motion carried 7 -0. — May 20, 2010 It was moved by Commissioner BUCKNAM and seconded by Commissioner DWYER to approve the minutes of the May 20, 2010 meeting as presented. The motion carried 6 -0 with Commissioner DIETRICK abstaining. PUBLIC FORUM (This is the time for any person to speak on any subject not appearing on the agenda.) There was no one present who wished to address the Commission at this time. Planning Commission Minutes 1 June 3, 2010 7. PUBLIC HEARING A. Case No. ZOA- 10 -01 An ordinance amending Article VII of Chapter 26 concerning off - premise identification signs, community event/sponsorship banners, and signs in the public right -of -way. This case was presented by Sarah Showalter. She entered all pertinent documents into the record and informed the Commission there was jurisdiction to hear the case. She reviewed the staff report and digital presentation. Commissioner POND asked how size criteria was developed: ,Ms. Showalter replied that sizes were determined primarily on actual requests and determining a size that would fit best with them and similar futur_e_,�requW . Staff was reticent to set a standard that would allow any large commercial sites rnthe city to put up off - premise signs, so the size for major activrty'eenjers was intended for large, regional shopping centers only. Master s - plans for developments ould be reviewed by Planning Commission f Commissioner BUCKNAM asked if staff had consuhecCwith the Jefferson County School District regarding stzeand duration of batfners. Ms. Showalter explained that school properties were no art of the ongi ordinance and it might be a good idea to consult with the school drstrct regarding time and size limitations. Private schools are exempt. Commissioner BILINKMAN expres and stated that e believed that the also recomr4n3ed considering low Ms. at all times. concern about time limitations for banners requirement should be reduced. She p 150 -acre requirement. that businesses and quasi- public uses are Commissioner TIMMS ask "if the city attorney had reviewed the language in the auenlment as it reias to Colorado Revised Statutes. Ms. Showalter stated that the city attorney didlikview the language but would make sure he also reviewed it in light of CRS statutes. Commission&? IMMS expressed concern that exceptions for signs in the public right-of-way could turn into becoming the norm. Ms. Showalter stated that while most jurisdictions have no criteria for this situation, Wheat Ridge has a set of specific criteria in the proposed code to restrict these types of signs so that they are only allowed in limited circumstances. Commissioner DWYER expressed concern that criteria seemed to be developed based on actual situations and not necessarily on all the possible scenarios that could arise in the future. He also asked why highway signage is not allowed for urban renewal areas. Ms. Showalter explained that it was an attempt to reduce the Planning Commission Minutes 2 June 3, 2010 amount of highway signs. Ms. Reckert also explained that any business within 1 /4 mile of a freeway is allowed a 50 -foot sign in the current code. Commissioner BUCKNAM suggested removing the words "wood or metal" in describing material used in a pole supporting a sign. The type of pole material should not be designated. Commissioner POND asked if the ordinance allows for variances. Ms. Showalter stated there is language in the master sign plan that allows flexibility for Planning Commission to make exceptions to the standards. Commissioner MATTHEWS expressed concern about acreage criteria. When there is only one site in the entire city that meets those criteria, it is getting close to quasi-judicial. He suggested that there should lie at leas o or three sites that would meet that criteria. Commissioner MATTHEWS asked how gulations apply to bus benol son public rights -of -way. Ms. Showalter exl51 ed thatitfliq sign code has §pecific regulations for bus benches that would not be changed. Public Works Department works with RTD on these issues. It was moved by Commis BUCKNAM to divide the separately: (1) Off Prem. and and seconded by Commissioner oteon the following issues Sf& (2) Community in the Public Right -of -Way. The motion Commissioner TIMMS , ressed concern about the balance between community aesthetics aid the ri is ofbit "siir�sse�fo advertise in an effective way. It is Pal ink Aafit Yoke flexible but he was riot sure if the ordinance adequately addresses t)ie issues. H64 ed that he w,puld not support numbers 1 and 3. He agreed with Commissioner POND that pole sign regulations could result in more monument sidfi that are more permanent. It was mowed by Commissioner BRINKMAN and seconded by Commissioner DNVYER to recess the meeting at 8:05 p.m. The motion carried 7 -0. (The meeting was reconvened at 8:15 p.m.) • Off- premise identification signs were discussed. Commissioner POND stated that the flexibility allowed through master sign plans lessen his concern about acreage criteria. Planning Commission Minutes 3 June 3, 2010 Commissioner BRINKMAN expressed concern about the arbitrary nature of acreage designations. Commissioner BUCKNAM shared her concern. He would be more comfortable if there were a map or listing of multiple sites where this designation would be applicable. Commissioner DWYER expressed similar reservations as Commissioners BRINKMAN and BUCKNAM. The entire first section seems targeted to a very limited number of places. He would like to see this matter studied further. It was moved by Commissioner TIMMS and seconded by Commissioner DWYER to deny the amendment to Article VII, Chapter 26 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws regarding off - premise identification signs. The motion carried 5 -2 with Commissioners BRINKMAN and POND voting no. • Community Event/Sponsorship Commissioner BUCKNAM stated that condition that staff consult with the Sc time and event restrictions for banners the District's recommendatic the District to better meet its Ms. Showalter commented that a with the School District could be before City Council for. discussio It was mov DWYER to favor of this itemivith the ,reate appropriate size, ;t property and to include rations. This would allow I s a result of discussions ordinance before it goes :KNAM and seconded by Commissioner 'tle amendment to Article VII, Chapter 26 of the Wheat Ridge Code of La regarding community event /sponsarship Nin! rs with the following condition: In order to allow the Jefferson County School to meet their needs, and to maximize the to 0%rate awareness of school programs, events and oppognities, staff must consult with the Jefferson County ict to create appropriate size, time and event restrictions or red oi�chool District property and include the School District's iorr'n any final specifications regarding the same. The motion carried 7 -0. • Signs in the public right -of -way was discussed. Commissioner BUCKNAM asked what would happen with existing pole signs in the right -of -way. Ms. Showalter stated that they would be legal nonconforming signs. It was moved by Commissioner DWYER and seconded by Commissioner BRINKMAN to approve the amendment to Article VII, Chapter 26 of the Planning Commission Minutes 4 June 3, 2010 Wheat Ridge Code regarding signs in the public right -of -way as written. The motion carried 5 -2 with Commissioners TIMMS and DIETRICK voting no. 8. 9. CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING Chair MATTHEWS closed the public hearing at 8:26 p.m. It was moved by Commissioner DWYER and seconded by Commissioner POND to adjourn the regular meeting to study session. The motion carried 7 -0. The regular meeting was adjourned to study session STUDY SESSIONS A. Mixed Use Zoning (continued Staff started an update and discussion on i the 5 -20 -10 meeting. Since there was not it was continued to this meeting. Staff requested discussion and items: 1. Ant 2. Gas 4. 5. the p.m. of mixed use zoning at to finish the discussion, on the following for mixed- large sites over five acres. administrative properties T =leas agreementthat it makes sense to keep gas stations as a conditional use in Niffl i nterstate3 ere gas stations are allowed, "build -to" can be met through" c mbmatibn of a perimeter wall and a canopy. There was some uncertami� abaut aving gas stations as non - permitted use in TOD areas. There was general d ussion about whether all of 38 h Avenue, or just certain nodes, should be designated MU -N. Regarding mixed use requirements, there was general agreement that "mixed use" really means a mix of uses. It was suggested that there should be a notification period and neighborhood meeting for developments over ten acres. It was agreed that it makes sense to keep parking maximums. There should be requirements for bicycle parking. Planning Commission Minutes 5 June 3, 2010 B. Commercial Accessory Structures There was agreement that shipping containers would be allowed in industrial zones but must be screened. Shipping containers would not be allowed in commercial zones. Small sheds up to 120 square feet would be allowed on commercial properties. It was recommended that they do not have to be consistent with the primary building materials. Types of building material should be flexible rather than restrictive. Maximum height should be twelve feet. Sloped roofs could be recommended but not required. Sloped roofs are mainly a concern in residential zone districts, but not commercial onindustrial. 10. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Commissioner DWYER and seconded liy Commissioner BRINKMAN to adjourn the study session 4f-10:25 p.m. 'll"otion carried 7 -0. -- ' Secretary Planning Commission Minutes 6 June 3, 2010 Dick Matthews, Chair � I City of Wheat�dge PLANNING COMMISSION COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT LEGISLATIVE ITEM STAFF REPORT MEETING DATE: July 1, 2010 TITLE: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ARTICLES HAND VI OF CHAPTER 26 CONCERNING ACCESSORY STRUCTURES ON PROPERTIES WITH COMMERCIAL OR INDUSTRIAL ZONING CASE NO. ZOA -10 -03 M PUBLIC HEARING M CODE CHANGE ORDINANCE Case Manager: Sarah Showalter Date of Preparation: June 24, 2010 SUMMARY: The attached ordinance proposes an amendment to the zoning code to allow the construction of accessory buildings and structures on properties with commercial or industrial zoning. Currently, the zoning code does not allow any property within a commercial or industrial zone district to construct an accessory building, such as a storage shed or garage. The proposed code amendment would allow accessory structures on such properties, subject to regulations regarding size, placement, maximum number, and design/screening. The proposals in the attached ordinance represent input from a study session with Planning Commission on June 3, 2010. Notice for this public hearing was provided as required by the Code of Laws. BACKGROUND: Chapter 26 of the Wheat Ridge Municipal Code does not allow any property with commercial or industrial zoning to have an accessory structure on site. This provision has been in place since 2001. There are several commercial and industrial property owners in Wheat Ridge who have expressed interest in building an accessory building, most often to meet storage needs. Currently, the only option for such owners is to receive a Temporary Use Permit, which lasts for a period of one year only. There are some commercial and industrial properties in the city that already have legal nonconforming or illegal accessory structures, often shipping containers, on their property. A provision in the code allowing for accessory structures in commercial and industrial zones would provide a viable, legal option for property owners to construct accessory buildings. Several jurisdictions in the Denver metro area allow for accessory structures on commercial and ZOA- 10 -03/ Accessory Structures 1 industrial properties. Of 12 local municipalities researched by staff, 11 allowed for accessory buildings within commercial and industrial districts. Most jurisdictions include regulations on the size, maximum number, placement, and design of accessory structures to ensure that they do not dominate a property or have an aesthetic impact on neighboring properties and adjacent streets. RATIONALE FOR AMENDMENT The intent of the attached ordinance is to provide a viable option for property owners in industrial and commercial zone districts to build accessory structures on their property. The proposed ordinance would set minimum standards for accessory buildings to ensure that they are appropriately placed and designed and that they do not have a negative visual impact on the surrounding area. Enabling the construction of accessory structures in commercial and industrial districts would meet the needs of many existing and future businesses in the City, and was a recommended code amendment based on the Neighborhood Revitalization Strategy (NRS). The proposed regulations include the following items: • Size limit: the total floor area of all accessory structures may not exceed 50% of the floor area of the primary structure. In no case may an individual accessory structure exceed 500 SF. • Max number: 1 for commercial districts; 2 for industrial districts • Location: May only be located in the required rear or side yard areas (not allowed in side yard areas adjacent to a public right -of -way). • Required setbacks: 5' side; 10' rear • Minimum required building separation: per building code • Maximum height: 12' • Materials: the structure must have materials that are architecturally compatible with the primary structure • Storage units /shipping containers: • Not allowed in commercial districts • Maximum of 1 allowed in industrial districts, but must be screened by a wall or opaque fence that is at least as tall as the unit (maximum of 8 feet tall) The proposed ordinance would also allow the option to construct a small accessory structure —120 square feet or less — that would not be required to have materials compatible with the primary structure. These structures could be composed of any material except metal and would allow a business owner to keep a small shed for storage on their property. New language in the proposed ordinance is bold and highlighted. Deleted language is strike - through and highlighted. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to recommend approval of the proposed ordinance amending Articles II and VI of Chapter 26 concerning accessory structures on properties with commercial or industrial zoning. Exhibits: 1. Proposed Ordinance ZOA- 10 -03/ Accessory Structures EXHIBIT 1: PROPOSED ORDINANCE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER COUNCIL BILL NO. _ ORDINANCE NO. Series 2010 TITLE: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ARTICLES 11 AND VI OF CHAPTER 26 CONCERNING ACCESSORY BUILDINGS ON PROPERTIES WITH COMMERCIAL OR INDUSTRIAL ZONING. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Wheat Ridge is authorized by the Home Rule Charter and the Colorado Constitution and statutes to enact and enforce ordinances for the preservation of the public health, safety and welfare; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Wheat Ridge finds that there is a need to allow for accessory buildings and structures on properties with commercial or industrial zoning. NOW THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO: Section 1: Section 26 -204 of the Code is amended to read: Sec. 26 -204. Zone district use schedule. A. The following schedule of permitted and special uses allowed within the various zone districts is hereby adopted and declared to be a part of this Code and may be amended in the same manner as any other part of this Code. In each zoning district, any uses not expressly permitted (P) or allowed as a special use (S), or as an accessory use (S) shall be deemed to be excluded. The director of community development shall render the final administrative decision concerning the scope, application and meaning of the terms in this section. B. The director of community development has authority to determine that a use not specifically listed as permitted, allowed as a special use or an accessory use should be so permitted or allowed on the basis of its being similar to a listed use, compatible in character and impact with other uses in the zone district, consistent with the intent of the district, and which would not be objectionable to nearby property by reason of odor, dust, fumes, gas, noise, radiation, heat, glare, vibration, traffic generation, parking needs, outdoor storage or use, or is not hazardous to the health and safety of surrounding areas through danger of fire or explosion. The director's decision may be appealed to the board of adjustment. C. Upon application or on its own initiative, the city council may by ordinance add to the uses listed for a zone district, conforming to the conditions set forth in the following special findings: 1. Such use is appropriate to the general physical and environmental character of the district to which it is proposed to be added, and 2. Such use does not create any more hazard to or alteration of the natural environment than the minimum amount normally resulting from the other uses permitted in the district to which it is added, and 3. Such use does not create any more offensive noise, vibration, dust, heat, smoke, odor, glare, or other objectionable influences or more traffic hazards than the minimum amount normally resulting from the other uses permitted in the district to which it is proposed to be added, and 4. Such use is compatible with the uses existing and permitted in the district to which it is proposed to be added at the time of adoption. ZOA- 10 -03/ Accessory Structures TABLEINSET: Commercial and Industrial District Accessory Uses Notes Electric transmission or other public utility lines and poles, irrigation channels, storm drainage and water supply facilities Primarily for the occupants of a building containing Food services a permitted use when located within the same building Residential uses in commercial zones See § 26 -626 Outside storage or display See § 26 -631 Key: P = Permitted Principal Uses S = Special Uses (Ord. No. 2001 -1215, § 1, 2- 26 -01; Ord. No. 1273, § 2, 1- 13 -03; Ord. No. 1274, § 2, 1- 13 -03; Ord. No. 1288, §§ 1, 2, 5- 12 -03; Ord. No. 1301, §§ 2 --4, 7- 28 -03; Ord. No. 1302, §§ 4 - -6, 7- 28 -03; Ord. No. 1313, § 10, 10- 27 -03; Ord. No. 1322, § 1, 5- 10 -04; Ord. No. 1348, § 1, 7- 11 -05; Ord. No. 1370, § 1, 8- 28 -06; Ord. No. 1375, §§ 1, 2,10-24- 06; Ord. No. 1387, § 2, 6- 11 -07; Ord. No. 1413, §§ 2, 3, 6 -9 -08) Section 2: Section 26 -625 of the Code is amended to read: Sec. 26 -625. Accessory r yift�ing_s,;fflffd flstyfi es A. Purpose effi'gl,'` c,Qpe. The purpose of this section is to allow accessory buildings that are incidental and subordinate to the principal use and structure on a property and to set forth standards that help to minimize adverse impacts of these buildings on adjacent ro e . The purpose of this section is also to allow flexibility to construct accessory buildings on challenging . r e is properties relative to size and existing physical improvements while minimizina adverse impacts on surrounding oroperties. T term 1ii�in Andlstr dt. hJ B. Applicability. All accessory buildings shall be sub'ect to the provisions set forth in this section, and those in sections 26 -205 to _ 6' (zone district regulations). In the event of a conflict between the accessory building standards in this section and any other requirements of this Code, this section shall control. C. Accessory building standards o ww ge a a /icu qg a fs nc� 1. General standards. a. Location. i. No accessory building shall be located on a vacant lot devoid of any primary or main building. ii. No accessory building shall be located within any platted or recorded easement or over any utility, except as otherwise expressly agreed to in writing by the city or utility provider, as applicable. b. Size and height. The size and height of accessory buildings shall be as set forth in the residential ffi9Ftc t ra 'off -- i�trle ep tBGep a alp dc e, in sections 26 -205 to 26 -214. c. Miscellaneous provisions. i. Metal accessory building restriction. Metal accessory buildings over one hundred twenty (120) square feet are not permitted in any residential zoning district. Frame -built ZOA- 10 -03/ Accessory Structures 4 residential accessory structures over one hundred twenty (120) square feet in size may be allowed to have metal siding as long as the material has a textured wood grain appearance similar to horizontal clapboard. Vertically placed vinyl -clad siding is not allowed. ii. Buildings housing animals. Any building that houses animals, except a residence, shall be setback a minimum of fifteen (15) feet from property lines and at least thirty (30) feet from a residential structure on an adjacent property, except as otherwise specified in any zone district. iii. Gates and guard houses. Gates and guard houses are only allowed as part of an approved planned development. iv. Dwelling unit restriction. Except as otherwise expressly allowed, no dwelling unit shall be located in any accessory. 2. Major and minor accessory buildings. Major and minor accessory buildings shall be as defined in sections 26 -205 to Section 26 -214 based on size and height. 3. Allowable setback encroachments for accessory buildings. Accessory buildings may encroach into required setbacks as set forth below: a. Front yards and side and rear yards abutting public streets. Where an existing principal building that lawfully existed at the time of the adoption or amendment of this section encroaches into a required front yard setback or a required side or rear yard setback abutting a public street, an accessory building may encroach into the required setback as follows, provided that there shall be no encroachment into the minimum sight distance triangle as set forth in subsection 26- 603.6: Detached garages and carports. Detached garages and carports may build in line with the nonconforming principal building, as long as the detached garage is located behind the front or street - facing facade of the principal building, except as follows: a) Where the garage door or main vehicular access is located parallel to the street, the setback cannot be between five (5) feet and eighteen (18) feet. The purpose of this regulation is to allow setback encroachments where there will be not be the possibility of vehicles parked in the driveway in conflict with public rights -of -way. (See Figure 26- 625.1) ZOA- 10 -03/ Accessory Structures b) Where the garage door or main vehicular access is located perpendicular to the street, the detached garage or carport may be built in line with the principal building. The purpose of this regulation is to allow setback encroachments where there will re not be the possibility of vehicles parked in the driveway in conflict with public rights -of -way. c) Where the garage door or main vehicular access is located parallel to and accessed off of an arterial street, the detached garage may not encroach into the required setback. d) The community development director may require modified setbacks in these instances where there may be potentially hazardous conditions. ZOA- 10 -03/ Accessory Structures ii. All other accessory buildings. Accessory buildings that do not have any vehicular access may build in line with the nonconforming principal structure in front yards and side and rear yards abutting public streets, as long as the accessory building is located behind the front or street - facing facade of the principal structure. Section 3: Safety Clause The City Council hereby finds, determines, and declares that this Ordinance is promulgated under the general police power of the City of Wheat Ridge, that it is promulgated for the health, safety and welfare of the public and that this Ordinance is necessary for the preservation of health and safety and for the protection of public convenience and welfare. The City Council further determines that the Ordinance bears a rational relation to the proper legislative object sought to be attained. Section 4: Severability: Conflictina Ordinances Repealed If any section, subsection or clause of the ordinance shall be deemed to be unconstitutional or otherwise invalid, the validity of the remaining sections, subsections and clauses shall not be affected thereby. All other ordinances or parts of the ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance are hereby repealed. Section 5: Effective Date This Ordinance shall take effect fifteen days after final publication, as provided by Section 5.11 of the Charter. INTRODUCED, READ, AND ADOPTED on first reading by a vote of _ to _ on this _ day of 2010, ordered it published with Public Hearing and consideration of final passage set for 2010 at 7:00 p.m., in the Council Chambers, 7500 West 2e Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado, and that it takes effect 15 days after final publication READ, ADOPTED AND ORDERED PUBLISHED on second and final reading by a vote of to this day of 2010. ZOA- 10 -03/ Accessory Structures e�!�lei��gh�f'���a>�S.m m- eia ot`a rf ece Cy`�."�ri�ef eshal 'e'�, elv, et�12)eef (Ord. No. 1448, § 5, 8- 24 -09) SIGNED by the Mayor on this day of , 2010. Jerry DiTullio, Mayor ATTEST: Michael Snow, City Clerk Approved As To Form Gerald E. Dahl, City Attorney First Publication: Second Publication: _ Wheat Ridge Transcript: Effective Date: ZOA -10 -031 Accessory Structures ♦� City of Wheat�idge COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Memorandum TO: Planning Commission THROUGH: Ken Johnstone, Community Development Director FROM: Sarah Showalter, Planner II DATE: June 25, 2010 (for July 0 Planning Commission Meeting) SUBJECT: Mixed Use Zone Districts - Project Update Since our last study session on the topic of mixed use zoning, held June 3` staff held a study session with City Council and made significant progress finalizing Draft 3, which should be released for public review on July 2 nd . We would like to follow -up on a few items that will be in Draft 3 and update the Planning Commission on the conversation about legislative rezoning that staff had with City Council at their June 21 study session. Mixed Use Requirements for Large Sites At the June 3'd study session, staff requested input from Planning Commission on a requirement in Draft 2 that required mixed use development for sites 5 acres and larger. The mixed use task force expressed concern that this was too restrictive and could potentially preclude development that the city might like to see on certain sites (even if the development was all one use, such as office), and could also make leasing difficult over the life of a project. The task force encouraged staff to either remove the provision or at least expand the size cut -off to sites larger than 5 acres, perhaps larger than 10 acres. After much consideration on this topic, staff decided to remove the.requirement for mixed use for large sites (of any size) for the following reasons: - The approach of the code has been to incentivize, and not require, mixed use. Draft 3 has three primary incentives for mixed use development that we believe will be effective, including reductions in open space, a 2 -story height bonus, and exemptions from drive - thru separation requirements. It could be very difficult to enforce mixed use requirements, especially over the long term. Many large mixed use developments will be split into smaller parcels. For example, for a two - parcel site: if one parcel had office use developed on it as a first phase of development, then the second parcel would only be able to have a non - office use. Staff had difficulty figuring out how this could be enforced, especially over several years. Deed restrictions or other legal methods to ensure mixed use within the same development could be complicated to administer and could ultimately make the leasing of certain buildings very difficult. Finally, given the possibility of legislative rezoning in some areas (see more below on this topic), staff thinks it is important to retain flexibility for sites that currently do not have mixed use requirements. Public Input Process Based on input received from the Planning Commission on June 3` staff added a few opportunities for public comment on large development sites. The following items will be incorporated in Draft 3, for sites over 10 acres only: - Neighborhood Meeting: there will be a neighborhood meeting prior to submittal of the concept plan for property owners within a 600' radius (to follow the process of the current neighborhood meeting requirement in the zoning code). - Public Comment Period: after a concept plan is submitted, everyone within a 300' radius will receive written notification that the plan is available for review at the Community Development Department. The public will have a 15 -day period to review the development proposal and submit comments. A sign with this information will also be posted on site for the 15 days, so that others have the opportunity to view the plans and comment. These provisions for public input were presented to City Council at the June 21 Study Session and staff received positive feedback from City Council. Legislative Rezoning Process In meetings held earlier this year with property owners in areas prioritized for mixed use redevelopment, staff included information on the possibility of city- initiated, or legislative, rezonings. In some areas, particularly the Wadsworth corridor, property owners expressed significant interest. Staff made it clear to property owners that the mixed use code would be written and adopted as a first step, with any legislative rezonings occurring as a separate process with further property -owner input. Currently, we hope to have the new code adopted by early September. Given this timeline, staff proposed the following process to move forward with potential legislative rezonings to City Council: - 38 th Avenue: no immediate action at this time. Community Development will be conducting a Subarea Plan for 38 between Sheridan and Wadsworth this fall. The findings in the plan can help inform what areas of the corridor — whether it is the whole stretch, or just certain nodes — make the most sense for possible legislative rezoning. - Kipling corridor: no immediate action at this time. Renewal Wheat Ridge (RWR) is completing its strategic planning. Kipling is one of its priority areas, so planning staff recommends waiting to move forward with any city- initiated rezoning until there are more concrete plans from RWR for this area. - Wadsworth corridor (between 38 th and 44 Aves): hold a meeting with property owners in September, after adoption of the code, to show them the final version of the code and have a conversation about the potential advantages of legislative rezoning. After the meeting, owners would have a set period — most likely one month — to ask questions and let staff know their interested in being rezoned by the city. After that input is received, staff would propose a rezoning map to City Council at a study session in the fall. 2 TOD area: owners in this portion of the city are generally supportive of the new zoning, at least in the long term. There is at least one major land owner interested in city - initiated rezoning, and potentially others. Staff proposes meeting with the owners in this area in September and following a process similar to that for Wadsworth, depending on owner input received. City Council was supportive of the above proposals and gave staff approval to move forward with meetings on Wadsworth and the TOD area after adoption of the code. Next Steps /Code Adoption Draft 3 should be released for public review on July 2 "d . Staff will forward copies of Draft 3 to Planning Commission as well. The intent is that this is the last draft, with most content in its final form. Staff will use July to finalize the ordinance and has tentatively set the following schedule for adoption of the mixed use code: - August 5 th Planning Commission Public Hearing - August 23` City Council First Reading - September 13` City Council Second Reading /Public Hearing