Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZOA-01-07INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER DiTullio Council Bill No. 29-2001 Ordinance No. 1239 Series of 2001 TITLE: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 26 OF THE CODE OF LAWS OF THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO, BY THE ADDITION OF SECTION 26-306.5, ESTABLISHING A NEW PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ZONE DISTRICT, PLANNED MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT. WHEREAS, PURSUANT TO Colorado Revised Statutes of Section 23-23-301, the City possesses the power to regulate and restrict the use of land within the City for the purpose of promoting the health, safety, morals or general welfare of the community; and WHEREAS, the City has identified desirable future land use in certain areas within the City as "Mixed Use" in the Streetscape and Architectural Design Manual; and WHEREAS, the City has regulations pertaining to Planned Residential Development and Planned Commercial Development Districts; but neither zone district has adequate provision for a true mixed use development within the City. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO: Section 1. Chapter 26 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws is amended by the addition of the following Section 26-306.5, which shall read in its entirety as follows: Section 26-306.5 Planned Mixed Use District A. Applicability: This zone district shall be used only in the mixed use areas shown on the Streetscape Classification Map in the Streetscape and Architectural Design Manual adopted January 11, 2002, as amended. B. Purpose: This district is established to provide a zoning classification to allow the integration of residential and commercial uses and development which is consistent with the surrounding neighborhoods and which meets the intent of the Comprehensive Plan and the Streetscape and Architectural Design Manual. It is not intended to be used solely to permit a higher density than allowed in the planned residential development (PRD) district nor to circumvent other specific standards of the planned residential and planned commercial districts. Instead, it is intended to create a zone district which will allow flexibility in use, design, and orientation while maximizing space, community interest Page 1 of 3 and protecting nearby and adjacent residential neighborhoods. C. Permitted Uses: Permitted uses shall be a mixture of residential and commercial uses governed by approval of the preliminary development plan. D. Area: No minimum. E. Height: Maximum fifty (50) feet for freestanding commercial buildings only; thirty-five (35) feet for structures containing commercial and residential uses; thirty-five (35) feet for freestanding residential structures. F. Lot Coverage: No maximum. G. Density: Maximum of sixteen (16) units per acre. Land used for commercial uses, including parking, may not be used to calculate the maximum of sixteen (16) units per acre. If the commercial and residential uses are mixed in the same building, the land attributable to the commercial use shall be considered to be one-half (%s) of the building footprint. If the commercial and residential uses are in separate buildings, the land attributable to the commercial use shall be considered to be the entire commercial building footprint. H. Landscaping: No minimum coverage. Landscaping shall be consistent with Section 26- 502. I. Parking: Based upon specific use. Parking shall be consistent with Section 25-501. Allowances may be made for shared parking spaces if it can be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the person or approval body designated as having final approval authority that parking demand for different uses occurs at different times. Fences and Walls: As specifically detailed on the approved final development plan; otherwise follow requirements of Section 26-603. K. Signage: As specifically detailed on the approved final development plan; otherwise follow requirements of Article VII. Section 2. 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 3. Severability. If any clause, sentence, paragraph, or part of this Zoning Code Page 2 of 3 or the application thereof to any person or circumstances shall for any reason be adjusted by a court of competent jurisdiction invalid, such judgment shall not affect application to other persons or circumstances. Section 4. Supersession Clause. If any provision, requirement or standard established by this Ordinance is found to conflict with similar provisions, requirements or standards found elsewhere in the Code of Laws of the City of Wheat Ridge, which are in existence as of the date of adoption of this Ordinance, the provisions, requirements and standards herein shall supersede and prevail. Section 5. This ordinance shall take effect immediately upon adoption, as permitted by the Charter. INTRODUCED, READ, AND ADOPTED on first reading by a vote of _g_ to _0_ on this 10th day of December 2001, ordered published in full in a newspaper of general circulation in the City of Wheat Ridge and Public Hearing and consideration on final passage set for January 14 , 2002, at 7:00 o'clock p.m., in the Council Chambers, 7500 West 29th Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado. READ, ADOPTED AND ORDERED PUBLISHED on second and final reading by a vote of 8 to 0 this 14th January 1 200?.. SIGNED by the Mayor on this / I ATTEST: Wanda Sang, City C k 1st Publication: December 13, 2001 2nd Publication: January 24, 2002 Wheat Ridge Transcript Effective Date: January 14, 2002 Page 3 of 3 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: January 14, 2002 Page - 4 - Item 4. Council Bill 29-2001 - An Ordinance amending Chapter 26 of the Code of Laws of the City of Wheat Ridge, Colorado, by the addition of Section 26- 306.5, establishing a new Planned Development Zone District, Planned Mixed Use Development. (Case No. ZOA-01-07) Council Bill 29-2001 was introduced-on second reading by Mr. DiTullio, who read the title, summary and background. Clerk assigned Ordinance No. 1239. Motion by Mr. DiTullio to adopt Council Bill 29-2001 (Ordinance 1239) with the staff recommended changes on second reading and to take effect immediately upon adoption, with the following amendments: 1. 35 feet for free standing mixed commercial residential buildings. 2. 35 feet for free standing residential only buildings. 3. 50 feet for free standing commercial only buildings. 4. Maximum of 16 residential units per acre. 5. Replace the words "the city" with the person or body designated to approve the parking requirements; seconded by Mr. Edwards; carried 8-0. ORDINANCES ON FIRST READING Item 5. Council Bill 01-2002 - An Ordinance amending Section 22-77 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws, concerning the Enhanced Sales Tax Incentive (ESTIP) Program. Council Bill 01-2002 was introduced on first reading by Mr. Edwards; title read by the Clerk. Motion by Mr. Edwards that Council Bill be approved on first reading, ordered published, public hearing be set for Monday, January 28, 2002 at 7:00 p.m. in City Council Chambers, Municipal Building, and if approved on second reading, take effect immediately upon adoption; seconded by Mr. DiTullio; carried 8-0. Item 6. Council Bill 02-2002 - An Ordinance repealing a Zoning Condition imposed by Ordinance No. 443. Council Bill 02-2002 was introduced on first reading by Mr. Hanley, who also read the title, summary and background. of wHEgr ~ h PQ ~ REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION °otoRno° PUBLIC HEARINGS _ ORDINANCES FOR 1ST READING BIDS/MOTIONS X ORDINANCES FOR 2ND READING RESOLUTIONS Quasi-Judicial: X Yes No SUBJECT: Case No. ZOA 01-07, an Ordinance amending Chapter 26 by the creation of anew zone district, Planned Mixed Use Development. SUMMARY AND BACKGROUND: Existing Planned Residential Development and Planned Commercial Development district regulations, while allowing for a mixture of residential and commercial uses, restrict the amount of a development site that can be used for commercial (if a residential development) or residential (if a commercial development) purposes. Application of the regulations results in double-counting portions of the lot in calculating density or allowable commercial square footage. In order to provide the flexibility needed to accommodate a mixed use development, the Planned Mixed Use Development district is proposed. Planning Commission reviewed the ordinance and suggested several changes. Some of these changes have been incorporated into the ordinance for second reading as outlined in the attached memorandum. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Council Bill No. _ 2. Alan White Memo 3. Planning Commission minutes Original budgeted amount: $0 Actual contracted amount: $0 Impact of expenditure on line item: $0 Budget Account No.: N/A STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adoption ORIGINATED BY: Council STAFF RESPONSIBLE: Alan White, Planning and Development Director SUGGESTED MOTION: "I move to adopt Council Bill No. , Case No. ZOA 01-07, with staff recommended changes, on second reading.". C:\MyFiles\WPFiles\Projecfs\zoning amendments\pmud cc action 2nd.wpd INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER Council Bill No. _ Ordinance No. _ Series of 2002 TITLE: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 26 OF THE CODE OF LAWS OF THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO, BY THE ADDITION OF SECTION 26-306.5, ESTABLISHING A NEW PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ZONE DISTRICT, PLANNED MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT WHEREAS, pursuant to Colorado Revised Statutes of Section 23-23-301, the City possesses the power to regulate and restrict the use of land within the City for the purpose of promoting the health, safety, morals or general welfare of the community; and WHEREAS, the city has identified desirable future land use in certain areas within the City as "Mixed Use" in the Streetscape and Architectural Design Manual; and, WHEREAS, the City has regulations pertaining to Planned Residential Development and Planned. Commercial Development Districts, but neither zone district has adequate provisions for a true mixed use development within the City. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO: Section 1. Chapter 26 of the Wheat Ridge code of Laws is amended by the addition of the following Section 26-306.5, which shall read in its entirety as follows: Section 26-306.5 Planned Mixed Use District A. Applicability: This zone district shall be used only in the mixed use areas shown on the Streetscape Classification Map in the Streetscape and Architectural Design Manual adopted January 11, 2002, as amended. B. Purpose: This district is established to provide a zoning classification to allow the integration of residential and commercial uses and development which is consistent with the surrounding neighborhoods and which meets the intent of the Comprehensive Plan and the Streetscape and Architectural Design Manual. It is not intended to be used solely to permit a higher density than allowed in the planned residential development (PRD) district nor to circumvent other development standards of this chapter. Instead, it is intended to create a zone district which will allow flexibility and creativity in use, design, and orientation while maximizing space, community interest and protecting nearby and adjacent residential neighborhoods. This zone district wit! alf o vv flexibility in use, design, and orientation while maximizing space an C. Permitted Uses: Permitted uses shall be a mixture of residential and commercial uses governed by approval of the preliminary development plan. D. Area: No minimum. E. Height: Maximum fifty (50) thirty-five (35) feet for structures containing commercial and residential uses; thirty-five (35) feet for freestanding residential structures. F. Lot Coverage: No maximum. G. Density: plat. As permitted by approval of the prelinrinaty deveiopment Maximum of twenty-one (21) units per acre. Land used for commercial uses, may not be used to calculate the maximum of twenty-one (21) units per acre. If the commercial and residential uses are mixed in the same building, the land attributable to the commercial use shall be considered to be one-half of the building footprint. If the commercial and residential uses are in separate buildings, the land attributable to the commercial use shall be considered to be the entire commercial building footprint. H. Landscaping: No minimum coverage. Landscaping shall be consistent with Section 26- 502. 1. Parking: Based upon specific use. Parking shall be consistent with Section 26-501. Allowances may be made for shared parking spaces if it can be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the City that parking demand for different uses occurs at different times. Fences and Walls: As specifically detailed on the approved final development plan, otherwise follow requirements of section 26-603. K. Signage: As specifically detailed on the approved final development plan, otherwise follow requirements of Article VII. Section 2. Safetv 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 3. Severability. If any clause, sentence, paragraph, or part of this Zoning Code or the application thereof to any person or circumstances shall for any reason be adjusted by a court of competent jurisdiction invalid, such judgment shall not affect application to other persons or circumstances. Section 4. Supersession Clause. If any provision, requirement or standard established by this Ordinance is found to conflict with similar provisions, requirements or standards found elsewhere in the Code of Laws of the City of Wheat Ridge, which are in existence as of the date of adoption of this Ordinance, the provisions, requirements and standards herein shall supersede and prevail. Section 5. This ordinance shall take effect days after final publication. INTRODUCED, READ, AND ADOPTED on first reading by a vote of to on this day of ,2002, ordered published in full in a newspaper of general circulation in the City of Wheat Ridge and Public Hearing and consideration on final passage set for 2002, at 7:00 o'clock p.m., in the Council Chambers, 7500 West 29th Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado. READ, ADOPTED AND ORDERED PUBLISHED on second and final reading by a vote of to , this day of 2002. SIGNED by the Mayor on this day of 2002. GRETCHEN CERVENY, MAYOR ATTEST: Wanda Sang, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM BY CITY ATTORNEY GERALD DAHL, CITY ATTORNEY 1st Publication: 2nd Publication: Wheat Ridge Transcript Effective Date: OF WHEgT City of Wheat Ridge Po Planning and Development Department m Memorandum TO: Scott D. Staples, City Manager FROM: Alan White, Planning and Development Director Yw SUBJECT: Planned Mixed Use Development District DATE: January 2, 2002 On December 20, 2001 Planning Commission recommended several changes to the PMUD district as proposed by staff. These changes are summarized below with staff comments following: Limit the use only to mixed use areas shown in the Streetscape Manual. (Comment: This was intended, but the added language clarifies the intent.) 2. Requiring the development to contain residential and commercial uses. (Comment: This should be obvious, but this addition adds emphasis to the intent.) 3. Limiting heights to 35 feet. (Comment: The Charter contains restrictions on building heights. Residential districts are restricted to 35 feet; non-residential districts are restricted to 50 feet. The Planning Commission's concern was the impact of 50 foot buildings on adjacent residential uses and they strongly recommended the 35 foot maximum. The Neighborhood Commercial zone district allows a maximum of 35 feet, but the Restricted Commercial and C-1 districts permit a maximum of 50 feet. Even without the use of this new zone district, structures 50 feet in height are allowed adjacent to residential districts. Staff suggests following what is allowed in a PCD allowing a maximum of 50 feet for structures containing commercial and residential uses; 35 feet for freestanding residential structures) 4. Limiting lot coverage to a maximum of 80%. (Comment: Lot coverage and the required landscaping go hand-in-hand. Setting these standards reduces the flexibility for a developer proposing and the City approving a unique project. No maximum should be established.) Limiting density to 16 units/acre. (Comment: The Charter restricts residential densities to a maximum of 21 units per acre, but does not instruct one how to calculate density. The problem with the current PAD and PCD districts is the double counting of lot area. Planning Commission recommended excluding from the density calculation % of the building foot print if commercial and residential uses were mixed within a building. This doesn't address if they're not in the same building. Staff has suggested adding that in the case of a building containing only commercial uses, the entire footprint is excluded from the density calculation. Parking is not considered in the density calculation since shared parking can be provided.) 6. Requiring a minimum of 20% landscaping, a maximum of 50% of which can be non-living material. (Comment: Setting this standard reduces the flexibility of the developer and City. No minimum should be established.) Permitting allowances for shared parking among uses. (This should be encouraged and is included as a staff recommended change) Planning Commission's main concerns with the ordinance were the lack of standards and the potential use of the district in inappropriate areas of the City. Some limitations are imposed by the Charter and these have been incorporated into the ordinance. The scope of the district has been limited to those areas shown as appropriate for mixed uses in the Streetscape Manual. As for other proposed standards, they simply aren't needed. Would Council approve a project with only 2% landscaping? Not likely, but it should depend on the design of the remainder of the project. Within the proposed height and density limitations there is still flexibility for the City and the applicant. There aren't any properties currently zoned PMUD nor will this ordinance rezone any parcels to PMUD. The approval of any rezoning to PMUD is subject to Council review. If something in a proposed PMUD is out of character for the area, incompatible with the neighborhood, or provides a minimal amount of landscaping, parking or other amenities, the application can be DENIED with appropriate findings. Since rezoning to PMUD is a rezoning to a planned development, Council can also require changes to the plan or approve with conditions. 1. All requirements of the City's Subdivision Regulations have been met. 2. The minimum lot size and lot width requirements of the R-2 zoning district have been met. With the following conditions: DKI"AFT 1. The City's standard dedicatory language shall be added to the final plat. The motion passed 8-0. Commissioner SNOW requested that the applicant furnish a copy of the EPA report for the case file. B. Case No. ZOA-01-07: An ordinance amending Article II of Chapter 26 of the Wheat Commissioner PLUMMER stated that he is in favor of commercial/residential development but expressed concern about allowing 50-foot buildings adjacent to residentialneighborhoods. Ridge Code of Laws concerning the addition of a Planned Mixed Use Development District. This case was presented by Alan White. City Council adopted the proposed ordinance on first reading and referred it back to Planning Commission for a recommendation. Mr. White reviewed his memorandum of December 20, 2001, which set forth several suggested changes to the proposed ordinance. Commissioner McNAMEE indicated she was in favor.of the new urbanism concept of mixed commercial and residential and believed the proposed ordinance would give the city control over each individual application. Commissioner SNOW expressed concern that this new zone district could be used all over the city. She also expressed concern that the proposed ordinance would allow using land twice and indicated she was not in favor of the 50-foot height limitation. She expressed further concern about landscaping limitations. Commissioner COLLINS stated that, in view of possible water limitation, alternative landscaping requirements should be considered. He was in favor of the ordinance with the exception of the 50-foot height limitation. Commissioner BRINKMAN asked which land use classifications would apply to PMUD. Alan White stated that transitional residential, village commercial, and neighborhood serving retail would apply to PMUD. He also explained that PMUD would not become an overlay but another zone district. Commissioner BRINKMAN also expressed concern about the 50-foot height but indicated she would support 40 feet. Commissioner THOMPSON suggested that PMUD only be allowed along arterial or collector streets and not be allowed on residential streets. She was in favor of the 50-foot height limitation only if the lot was big enough and the 50-foot building was adjacent to a collector or Planning Commission Page 3 December 20, 2001 arterial street. Height should be 35 feet when adjacent to residential. There should be maximum lot size restrictions. She would like to see protection written into the ordinance to provide that mixed commercial and residential cannot be changed to commercial only. There should also be provision for landscaping and play areas for residential units. She expressed concern about developing an ordinance on the basis of a single application to the city for a mixed residential and commercial use. (Chair THOMPSON declared a brief recess at 8:45 p.m. Commissioner PLUNIMER left the meeting at this time. The meeting was reconvened at 9:55 p.m.) There was a consensus of the Commission to accept the following change to Section 26- 306.5 Purpose: The fast sentence should remain as written. The rest of the paragraph should be substituted with the following wording: "It is not intended to be used solely to permit a higher density.than allowed in the planned residential development (PRD) district nor to circumvent other specific standards of the planned residential and planned commercial districts. Instead it is intended to create a zone district which will allow flexibility in use, design, orientation while maximizing space, community interest and protecting nearby and adjacent residential neighborhoods." There was a consensus of the Commission to change item "A" to read: "Permitted Uses: Permitted uses shall be a mixture of residential and commercial as governed by approval of the preliminary development plan. " There was a consensus of the Commission to leave item "B" as written. There was a consensus of the Commission to change item "C" to read "Height. Maximum thirty-five (35) feet for structures containing commercial and residential uses; thirty-five (35) feet for freestanding residential structures. " There was a consensus of the Commission that item "D" should read: "Lot coverage: Maximum eighty percent (80%)." There was a consensus of the Commission that item "E" should read: "Density: Maximum of sixteen (16) units per acre." Alan White was directed to rewrite the sentence about how the density is calculated with one-half of the commercial building footprint to be subtracted from the lot area to calculate density. r There was a consensus of the Commission that item "F" should read: "Landscaping: Minimum twenty percent (2001o). Amount of landscaped area covered by nonliving plant material may comprise up to a maximum of 50% of the landscaped area; otherwise landscaping must be consistent with Section 26-502." There was a consensus of the Commission to change item "G" to read: "Parking: Based upon specific use consistent with Section 26-501: Allowances may be made for shared parking spaces if it can be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the City that parking demand for different uses occurs at different times. " Planning Commission DRAF Page 4 December 20, 2001 There was a consensus of the Commission to leave items "H" and "I" as written. There was a consensus of the Commission to add a new subsection "B. Applicability. This zone district can only be used in the mixed use areas shown on the streetscape classification map in the streetscape and architectural design manual." Purpose would become subsection "A". Commissioner BRINKMAN asked if lighting should be addressed. Alan White stated that if something is not addressed in a planned development, the code must be followed. It was moved by Commissioner COLLINS and seconded by Commissioner SNOW that Case No. ZOA-01-07, an ordinance amending Article H of Chapter 26 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws concerning the addition of a Planned Mixed Use Development District be forwarded to City Council with a recommendation of approval with changes suggested by Planning Commission at the meeting of December 20, 2001. City Council is strongly encouraged to pass the ordinance with those amendments proposed by the Planning Commission because of serious concerns about the lack of guidelines and controls in the original ordinance. The motion passed 7-0 with Commissioner PLUMMER absent. 8. OLD BUSINESS There was no old business to come before the Commission. 9. NEW BUSINESS A. January 3, 2002 Planning Commission Meeting - It was moved by Commissioner SNOW and seconded by Commissioner McNAMEE to cancel the January 3, 2002 Planning Commission meeting. The motion passed 7-0 with Commissioner PLUMMER absent. B. City Council/Planning Commission meeting - Alan White advised Commission members that a joint City Council/Planning Commission meeting is scheduled for January 21, 2001 at 7:00 p.m. 10. COMMISSION REPORTS There were no commission reports. 11. COMMITTEE AND DEPARTMENT REPORTS VR A! There were no committee or department reports. 12. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Commissioner McNAMEE and seconded by Commissioner COLLINS to adjourn the meeting at 9:30 p.m. The motion passed unanimously. JANICE THOMPSON, Chair Ann Lazzeri, Recording Secretary Planning Commission Page 5 December 20, 2001 1. All requirements of the City's Subdivision Regulations have been met. 2. The minimum lot size and lot width requirements of the R-2 zoning district have been met. With the following conditions: 1. The City's standard dedicatory language shall be added to the final plat. The motion passed 8-0. Commissioner SNOW requested that the applicant furnish a copy of the EPA report for the case file. B. Case No. ZOA-01-07: An ordinance amending Article II of Chapter 26 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws concerning the addition of a Planned Mixed Use Development District. This case was presented by Alan White. City Council adopted the proposed ordinance on first reading and referred it back to Planning Commission for a recommendation. Mr. White reviewed his memorandum of December 20, 2001, which set forth several suggested changes to the proposed ordinance. Commissioner PLUMMER stated that he is in favor of commercial/residential development but expressed concern about allowing 50-foot buildings adjacent to residential neighborhoods. Commissioner McNAMEE indicated she was in favor of the new urbanism concept of mixed commercial and residential and believed the proposed ordinance would give the city control over each individual application. Commissioner SNOW expressed concern that this new zone district could be used all over the city. She also expressed concern that the proposed ordinance would allow using land twice and indicated she was not in favor of the 50-foot height limitation. She expressed further concern about landscaping limitations. Commissioner COLLINS stated that, in view of possible water limitation, alternative landscaping requirements should be considered. He was in favor of the ordinance with the exception of the 50-foot height limitation. Commissioner BRINKMAN asked which land use classifications would apply to PMUD. Alan White stated that transitional residential, village commercial, and neighborhood serving retail would apply to PMUD. He also explained that PMUD would not become an overlay but another zone district. Commissioner BRINKMAN also expressed concern about the 50-foot height but indicated she would support 40 feet. Commissioner THOMPSON suggested that PMUD only be allowed along arterial or collector streets and not be allowed on residential streets. She was in favor of the 50-foot height limitation only if the lot was big enough and the 50-foot building was adjacent to a collector or Planning Commission Page 3 December 20, 2001 arterial street. Height should be 35 feet when adjacent to residential. There should be maximum lot size restrictions. She would like to see protection written into the ordinance to provide that mixed commercial and residential cannot be changed to commercial only. There should also be provision for landscaping and play areas for residential units. She expressed concern about developing an ordinance on the basis of a single application to the city for a mixed residential and commercial use. (Chair THOMPSON declared a brief recess at 8:45 p.m. Commissioner PLUMMER left the meeting at this time. The meeting was reconvened at 9:55 p.m.) There was a consensus of the Commission to accept the following change to Section 26- 306.5 Purpose: The first sentence should remain as written. The rest of the paragraph should be substituted with the following wording: "It is not intended to be used solely to permit a higher density than allowed in the planned residential development (PBD) district nor to circumvent other specific standards of the planned residential and planned commercial districts. Instead it is intended to create a zone district which will allow flexibility in use, design, orientation while maximizing space, community interest and protecting nearby and adjacent residential neighborhoods." There was a consensus of the Commission to change item "A" to read: "Permitted Uses: Permitted_ uses shall be a mixture of residential and commercial as governed by approval of the preliminary development plan." There was a consensus of the Commission to leave item "B" as written. There was a consensus of the Commission to change item "C" to read "Height: Maximum of thirty-five (35) feet." There was a consensus of the Commission that item "D" should read: "Lot coverage: Maximum eighty percent (80%)." There was a consensus of the Commission that item "E" should read: "Density: Maximum of sixteen (16) units per acre. " Alan White was directed to rewrite the sentence about how the density is calculated with one-half of the commercial building footprint to be subtracted from the lot area to calculate density. There was a consensus of the Commission that item "F" should read: "Landscaping: Minimum twenty percent (20%). Amount of landscaped area covered by nonliving plant material may comprise up to a maximum of 50% of the landscaped area; otherwise landscaping must be consistent with Section 26-502. " There was a consensus of the Commission to change item "G" to read: "Parking. Based upon specific use consistent with Section 26-501: Allowances may be made for shared parking spaces if it can be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the City that parking demand for different uses occurs at different times. " There was a consensus of the Commission to leave items "H" and "I" as written. Planning Commission Page 4 December 20, 2001 There was a consensus of the Commission to add a new subsection "B. Applicability. This zone district can only be used in the mixed use areas shown on the streetscape classification map in the streetscape and architectural design manual." Purpose would become subsection "A". Commissioner BR1NKMAN asked if lighting should be addressed. Alan White stated that if something is not addressed in a planned development, the code must be followed. It was moved by Commissioner COLLINS and seconded by Commissioner SNOW that Case No. ZOA-01-07, an ordinance amending Article II of Chapter 26 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws concerning the addition of a Planned Mixed Use Development District be forwarded to City Council with a recommendation of approval with changes suggested by Planning Commission at the meeting of December 20, 2001. City Council is strongly encouraged to pass the ordinance with those amendments proposed by the Planning Commission because of serious concerns about the lack of guidelines and controls in the original ordinance. The motion passed 7-0 with Commissioner PLUMMER absent. 8. OLD BUSINESS There was no old business to come before the Commission. 9. NEW BUSINESS A. January 3, 2002 Planning Commission Meeting - It was moved by Commissioner SNOW and seconded by Commissioner McNAMEE to cancel the January 3, 2002 Planning Commission meeting. The motion passed 7-0 with Commissioner PLUMMER absent. B. City Council/Planning Commission meeting - Alan White advised Commission members that a joint City Council/Planning Commission meeting is scheduled for January 21, 2001 at 7:00 p.m. 10. COMMISSION REPORTS There were no commission reports. 11. 12. COMMITTEE AND DEPARTMENT REPORTS There were no committee or department reports. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Commissioner McNAMEE and seconded by Commissioner COLLINS to adjourn the meeting at 9:30 p.m. The motion passed unanimously. J VH'~t~~hair-- A/,J,VG y 5NOW~ Vice O fM i lt- Arm Lazzeri, Recording Secretary Planning Commission December 20, 2001 Page 5 aCity of Wheat Ridge Planning and Development Department Memorandum TO: Planning Commission FROM: Alan White, Planning and Development Director aw SUBJECT: Planned Mixed Use District DATE: December 20, 2001 Commissioner Snow contacted staff about the proposed district and requested modifications to the requirements concerning residential density. After analyzing the requirements and the intent of the district, we are suggesting the changes outlined below. Our main objective was to keep the requirements simple so they would be easily understood and, easy to work with. Within the proposed limitations there is still flexibility for the City and the applicant.. There aren't any properties currently zoned PMUD nor will this ordinance rezone any parcels to PMUD. I will stress again that the approval of any rezoning to PMUD is subject to Planning Commission and Council review. If something in a proposed PMUD doesn't make sense, seems out of character for the area, or fails to meet the minimum requirements, JUST SAY NO! Since rezoning to PMUD is a rezoning to a planned development, you can also suggest changes or approve with conditions. The following are the suggested changes with added language shown in bold: C. Height: Maximum fifty (50) feet for structures containing commercial and residential uses; thirty-five (35) feet for freestanding residential structures. D. Lot Coverage: Maximum eighty percent (80%). E. Density: Maximum of sixteen (16) units per acre. Density shall be calculated based upon the total lot or parcel area. F. Landscaping: Minimum twenty percent (20%). Amount of landsca ed ea covered by non-living plant material may comprise up to a maximum seventy-five ercent (75%) of the landscaped area; otherwi apmg must be consistent with Section 26-502. G. Parking: Based upon specific use Allowances may be ade for shared parking spaces if it can be demonstrated to the satisfaction of e City that parking demand for different uses occurs at different times; ar s e consis en wr g echon 26-501. City of Wheat Ridge Planning and Development Department Memorandum TO: Planning Commission FROM: Alan White, Planning and Development Director ow SUBJECT: ZOA 01-07, Planned Mixed Use Development District DATE: December 14, 2001 F WHEgT O a U m LORA00 City Council directed staff to bring this ordinance back to Planning Commission for a recommendation. Council has adopted the ordinance on first reading. Second reading is set for January 14, 2002. Attached are the ordinance, my memo from the first time this was brought to Planning Commission, and the minutes of that meeting. Staff recommends approval. A recommendation from the Commission is requested. C:\MyFiles\WPFiles\Projects\zoning amendmews\Z0A0107 2nd pc memo.wpd Page 1 of 1 INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER Council Bill No. _ Ordinance No. Series of 2001 TITLE: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 26 OF THE CODE OF LAWS OF THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO, BY THE ADDITION OF SECTION 26-306.5, ESTABLISHING A NEW PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ZONE DISTRICT, PLANNED MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT WHEREAS, pursuant to Colorado Revised Statutes of Section 23-23-301, the City possesses the power to regulate and restrict the use of land within the City for the purpose of promoting the health, safety, morals or general welfare of the community; and WHEREAS, the city has identified desirable future land use in certain areas within the City as "Mixed Use" in the Streetscape and Architectural Design Manual; and, WHEREAS, the City has regulations pertaining to Planned Residential Development and.Planned Commercial Development Districts, but neither zone district has adequate provisions for a true mixed use development within the City. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO: Section 1. Chapter 26 of the Wheat Ridge code of Laws is amended by the addition of the following Section 26-306.5, which shall read in its entirety as follows: Section 26-306.5 Planned Mixed Use District Purpose: This district is established to provide a zoning classification to allow the integration of residential and commercial uses and development which is consistent with the surrounding neighborhoods and meet the intent of the Comprehensive Plan and the Streetscape and Architectural Design Manual. This zone district will allow flexibility in use, design and orientation while maximizing space and community interest. A. Permitted Uses: Permitted uses shall be governed by approval of the preliminary development plan. B. Area: No minimum. C. Height: Maximum fifty (50) feet. D. Lot Coverage: No maximum. E. Density: As permitted by approval of the preliminary development plan. F. Landscaping: No minimum coverage. Landscaping shall be consistent with Section 26- 502. G. Parking: Based upon specific use. Parking shall be consistent with Section 26-501. H. Fences and Walls: As specifically detailed on the approved final development plan, otherwise follow requirements of section 26-603. 1. Signage: As specifically detailed on the approved final development plan, otherwise follow requirements of Article VII. Section 2. 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 3. Severability. If any clause, sentence, paragraph, or part of this Zoning Code or the application thereof to any person or circumstances shall for any reason be adjusted by a court of competent jurisdiction invalid, such judgment shall not affect application to other persons or circumstances. Section 4. Supersession Clause. If any provision, requirement or standard established by this Ordinance is found to conflict with similar provisions, requirements or standards found elsewhere in the Code of Laws of the City of Wheat Ridge, which are in existence as of the date of adoption of this Ordinance, the provisions, requirements and standards herein shall supersede and prevail. Section 5. This ordinance shall take effect days after final publication. INTRODUCED, READ, AND ADOPTED on first reading by a vote of to on this day of ,2001, ordered published in full in a newspaper of general circulation in the City of Wheat Ridge and Public Hearing and consideration on final passage set for , 2001, at 7:00 o'clock p.m., in the Council Chambers, 7500 West 29th Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado. READ, ADOPTED AND ORDERED PUBLISHED on second and final reading by a vote of to , this day of 2001. SIGNED by the Mayor on this day of , 2001. GRETCHEN CERVENY, MAYOR ATTEST: Wanda Sang, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM BY CITY ATTORNEY GERALD DAHL, CITY ATTORNEY 1 st Publication: 2nd Publication: Wheat Ridge Transcript Effective Date: eAplanning\for \ord.f m OF WHEAT City of Wheat Ridge Po Planning and Development Department U Memorandum TO: Planning Commission FROM: Alan White, Planning and Development Director C* SUBJECT: ZOA 01-07, Planned Mixed Use Development District DATE: October 24, 2001 In dealing with a proposed mixed use development it has become apparent that the City's planned development regulations are geared to larger projects where uses are mixed on the parcel of land rather than in a building. In other words, the Code is designed for the mix of uses horizontally, but not vertically. A proposed development that contains uses mixed in a building is subject to the restrictions outlined below. These restrictions severely limit the kinds of mixed- use development able to occur in the City. The specific restrictions are as follows: In the Planned Commercial District, residential uses are allowed provided they: Do not exceed 50% of the gross site area, including land associated with the building area, parking, and landscaping for the residential use, and 2. Do not exceed a maximum density of 16 units/acre. Land used for the commercial use, including the building, parking, and a proportionate share of the ingress/egress and landscape areas may not be used in calculating the maximum density. In the Planned Residential District, commercial uses are allowed provided they: 1. Do not exceed 25% of the gross site area, including land associated with the building area, parking and landscaping for the commercial uses. Land used for commercial uses, including the building, parking, and a proportionate share of the ingress/egress and landscape areas may not be used in calculating the maximum density of the development. Page 1 of 2 These restrictions were not changed during the rewrite of Chapter 26. They are basically designed so that a in a so-called "residential" development, 50% or 75% of the land isn't devoted to commercial uses. This would change the character of the development dramatically. Similarly, 90% of a "commercial" development shouldn't be comprised of residential uses. The restrictions do not work where uses are mixed vertically, or stacked. If residential uses are located above commercial uses, the footprint of the building is both commercial and residential. In a PCD, this footprint and the associated parking not only are subtracted from the remainder of the lot area to determine the number of units allowed, but the area devoted to residential uses cannot comprise more than 50% of the gross lot area which also includes the footprint of the building. In a PRD, the amount of commercial space is limited to 25% of the lot area. Similar to the above example, the footprint of the mixed use building is used in calculating both the commercial space allowed and the number of units allowed. The result is that under the current regulations mixed uses become arbitrarily restricted and economically infeasible. Staff looked at alternatives to address this issue and decided that creating a new zone district was perhaps the best alternative. The restrictions on PRD's and PCD's should probably remain as they are in the Code now so that PRD's remain primarily residential and PCD's remain commercial. We've created a new zone district PMUD. There are no restrictions, other than height, on what can be done in the district. Uses, standards, density, amount of commercial space, etc. would all be decided on a case-by-case basis during the review process. Planning Commission and Council would still have the ability to modify the request and approve less than what was proposed. Consideration of the proposed ordinance has been noticed as a public hearing. A recommendation to City Council is requested. Staff recommends approval. C:VMyFiles\WPFiles\Proiects\zoning amendmeutAZOA0107 pc memo.wpd Page 2 of 2 Commissioner SNOW expressed concern that the ordinance would allow every owner of an R- 3 lot with apartments on it to request a PRD and add a unit or two. Commissioner BRINKMAN expressed concern about opening the door for encroachment of higher density properties into residential neighborhoods. Chair McNAMEE suggested looking for another approach rather than writing a new ordinance. Commissioner BRINKMAN referred to specific densities set forth in the future land use map and expressed concern that this ordinance would bypass these limits for land use. It was moved by Commissioner SNOW and seconded by Commissioner COOPER that Case No. ZOA-01-04 be forwarded to City Council with a recommendation that the ordinance not be passed for the following reasons: 1. The possibility of undoing the density ordinance of several years ago by allowing owners of any R-3 or R-3A property to apply for a rezoning to PRD and reinstate the undesirable excess density the ordinances were designed to change. 2. The existing nonconforming sections of the zoning ordinance or the possibility of the request for variance are adequate to deal with lots not in conformance with the current ordinance. Commissioner BRINKMAN requested a friendly amendment to add the following additional reason: 3. The Comprehensive Plan clearly denotes two different types of planned residential development, one not to exceed twelve units per acre and the other not to exceed sixteen units per acre, and the proposed ordinance would sidestep the future land use designated in the recently adopted Comprehensive Plan. The amendment was accepted by Commissioner COOPER and the motion passed 7-0 with Commissioner THOMPSON absent. C. Case No. ZOA-01-07: An ordinance amending Article II of Chapter 26 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws concerning the addition of a Planned Mixed Use Development District (PMUD) This case was presented by Alan White. He reviewed the staff report and stated that proper notice had been given for the hearing of this ordinance. A development has been proposed to the city that would combine commercial on the first story with residential units above. The proposed ordinance would address such development. Commissioner BRINKMAN commented that the Comprehensive Plan supports the concept of combining commercial and residential. Planning Commission Page November 1, 2001 Commissioner SNOW expressed concern that the streetscape and architectural design manual contains mixed use when so much effort was put into getting rid of the multiple land use in the Comprehensive Plan. She also expressed concern about the fifty foot height limitation. A suggestion was made that wording be included to limit density to that of a PRD. Commissioner BRINKMAN asked Alan if he thought the height limitation would work against PMUD. He replied that it should be workable with 35 feet. In response to a question from Commissioner COOPER, Alan White stated that if a project would not fit into PRD or commercial, the PMUD would come into play. Commissioner PLUMMER suggested modifying present regulations to allow development with residences built above commercial. He would like to see the city have flexibility with this type of development without having to come up with a new ordinance. It was moved by Commissioner SNOW and seconded by Commissioner PLUMMER that the proposed ordinance not go to City Council on first reading and, in lieu of the proposed ordinance, staff bring back proposals for possible changes to the PRD or PCD, or both, that would address concerns expressed this evening and that specifically has limitations on height and density. The motion passed 7-0 with Commissioner THOMPSON absent. 8. OLD BUSINESS There was no old business to come before the Commission. 9. NEW BUSINESS A. Commissioner BRINKMAN announced that she would not be present at the next Commission meeting. B. Alan White announced that Marilynn Force has been selected as the new Economic Development Director for the city and will be starting early December. 10. COMMISSION REPORTS There were no commission reports. 11. COMMITTEE AND DEPARTMENT REPORTS There were no committee or department reports. 12. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Commissioner SNOW and seconded by Commissioner COLLINS to adjourn the meeting at 8:40 p.m. The motion passed unanimously. CJcUQ/1 C/,Iyyw0 MARIAN McNAMEE, Chair Ann Lazzeri, Recor ' g ecretaryPlanning Commission Page 4 November 1, 2001 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: DECEMBER 10, 2001 Page - 4 - Item 4. Council Bill 24-2001 - An Ordinance amending Subsection (D) of Section 16-179 of the Code of Laws of the City of Wheat Ridge, Colorado, to cure inconsistencies within Section 16-179 concerning the curfew hours for Juveniles between sixteen and eighteen years of age. Council Bill 24-2001 was introduced by Mr. Mancinelli on second reading. Clerk assigned Ordinance No. 1236. Mr. Mancinelli read the title, summary and background. Motion by Mr. Mancinelli to approve Council Bill 24-2001 (Ordinance No. 1236) on second reading: seconded by Mr. Edwards; carried 8-0. Item 5. Council Bill 27-2001 - An Ordinance directing disposal by demolition of a City- owned building located at 9130 West 44'" Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado. Council Bill 27-2001 was introduced on second reading by Mrs. Rotola, who also read the title, summary and background. Clerk assigned Ordinance No. 1237. Don Peterson asked that landscaping, the same as on the east side to the entrance to the park, be continued completely along the west side of the park entrance and move the entrance to the teen center off the parking lot on the south side and include a deck or patio area on the west side of the teen center. Motion by Mrs. Rotola to approve Council Bill 27-2001 (Ordinance 1237) on second reading and it take effect upon adoption; seconded by Mr. DiTullio; carried 8-0. ORDINANCES ON FIRST READING Item 6. Council Bill 29-2001 - An Ordinance amending Chapter 26 of the Code of Laws of the City of Wheat Ridge. Colorado, by the addition of Section 26-306.5, establishing a new Planned Development Zone District, Planned Mixed Use Development. -7_a4-01-07 Council Bill was introduced on first reading by Mr. DiTullio, who also read the title, summary and background. Motion by Mr. DiTullio that Council Bill 29-2001 be approved on first reading, ordered published, public hearing be set for Monday, January 14, 2002 at 7:00 p.m. in City Council Chambers, Municipal Building, and if approved on second reading, take effect 15 days after final publication, seconded by Mr. Edwards, carried 8-0 . NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Notice is hereby given that a Public Hearing is to be held before the City of Wheat Ridge PLANNING COMMISSION on December 20, 2001, at 7:30 p.m. in the City Council Chambers of the Municipal Building at 7500 West 29th Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado. All interested citizens are invited to speak at the Public Hearing or submit written comments. The following petition shall be heard: Case No. ZOA-01-07: An ordinance amending Article II of Chapter 26 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws concerning the addition of a Planned Mixed Use Development District. Kathy Field, Senior Secretary ATTEST: Wanda Sang, City Clerk To be Published: December 13, 2001 Wheat Ridge Transcript C:aadiy\PCRPTS\PLANGCOM\POBHRG\011220pub2.wpd U REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION _ PUBLIC HEARINGS X ORDINANCES FOR I ST READING BIDS/MOTIONS _ ORDINANCES FOR 2ND READING _ RESOLUTIONS Quasi-Judicial: X Yes No SUBJECT: Case No. ZOA 01-07, an Ordinance amending Chapter 26 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws establishing a new zone district, the Planned Mixed Use District. SUMMARY AND BACKGROUND: This ordinance amends Chapter 26 with the addition of Section 306.5 which establishes the Planned Mixed Use District. This district is established to provide a zone district in which mixed uses can occur in the same building, for example, residential units over office or retail uses. The current restrictions in PRD's and PCD's result in double-counting portions of the parcel when determining the number of allowed residential units or the amount of commercial square footage. The Planned Mixed Use District provides flexibility to both an applicant and the City in that there are no such restrictions for the district. Allowable density and square footages are determined during the approval process and are ultimately approved by City Council. Parking, landscaping and signage must follow the requirements of Chapter 26 unless specifically modified by the development plan. Heights are restricted to 50 feet. Planning Commission heard this proposed ordinance at a public hearing on November 1, 2001 and recommended that it not go to Council for first reading and, in lieu of the proposed ordinance, staff bring back proposals for changes to the PRD and PCD requirements that would address their concerns. (ATTACHMENTS: 1. Council Bill No. 2. Alan White memo to Planning Commission 4. Planning Commission minutes BUDGETIMPACT: Original budgeted amount: $0 Actual contracted amount: $0 Impact of expenditure on line item: $0 Budget Account No.: N/A STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval ORIGINATED BY: Planning Staff STAFF RESPONSIBLE: Alan White, Planning and Development Director SUGGESTED MOTION: "I move to adopt Council Bill No. , Case No. ZOA 01-07, on first reading, ordered published, public hearing set for January 14, 2002, and if approved on second reading, take effect 15 days after final publication." C:\MyFiles\WPFiles\Projecm\zoning amendments\pmud cc action Ist.wpd of wHegr City of Wheat Ridge Po Planning and Development Department U m Memorandum TO: Planning Commission FROM: Alan White, Planning and Development Director 0* SUBJECT: ZOA 01-07, Planned Mixed Use Development District DATE: October 24, 2001 In dealing with a proposed mixed use development it has become apparent that the City's planned development regulations are geared to larger projects where uses are mixed on the parcel of land rather than in a building. In other words, the Code is designed for the mix of uses horizontally, but not vertically. A proposed development that contains uses mixed in a building is subject to the restrictions outlined below. These restrictions severely limit the kinds of mixed- use development able to occur in the City. The specific restrictions are as follows: In the Planned Commercial District, residential uses are allowed provided they: 1. Do not exceed 50% of the gross site area, including land associated with the building area, parking, and landscaping for the residential use, and 2. Do not exceed a maximum density of 16 units/acre. Land used for the commercial use, including the building, parking, and a proportionate share of the ingress/egress and landscape areas may not be used in calculating the maximum density. In the Planned Residential District, commercial uses are allowed provided they: Do not exceed 25% of the gross site area, including land associated with the building area, parking and landscaping for the commercial uses. Land used for commercial uses, including the building, parking, and a proportionate share of the ingress/egress and landscape areas may not be used in calculating the maximum density of the development. Page 1 of 2 These restrictions were not changed during the rewrite of Chapter 26. They are basically designed so that a in a so-called "residential" development, 50% or 75% of the land isn't devoted to commercial uses. This would change the character of the development dramatically. Similarly, 90% of a "commercial" development shouldn't be comprised of residential uses. The restrictions do not work where uses are mixed vertically, or stacked. If residential uses are located above commercial uses, the footprint of the building is both commercial and residential. In a PCD, this footprint and the associated parking not only are subtracted from the remainder of the lot area to determine the number of units allowed, but the area devoted to residential uses cannot comprise more than 50% of the gross lot area which also includes the footprint of the building. In a PRD, the amount of commercial space is limited to 25% of the lot area. Similar to the above example, the footprint of the mixed use building is used in calculating both the commercial space allowed and the number of units allowed. The result is that under the current regulations mixed uses become arbitrarily restricted and economically infeasible. Staff looked at alternatives to address this issue and decided that creating a new zone district was perhaps the best alternative. The restrictions on PRD's and PCD's should probably remain as they are in the Code now so that PRD's remain primarily residential and PCD's remain commercial. We've created a new zone district PMUD. There are no restrictions, other than height, on what can be done in the district. Uses, standards, density, amount of commercial space, etc. would all be decided on a case-by-case basis during the review process. Planning Commission and Council would still have the ability to modify the request and approve less than what was proposed. Consideration of the proposed ordinance has been noticed as a public hearing. A recommendation to City Council is requested. Staff recommends approval. C:\MyFiles\WPFiles\Project \zoning ameodmenes\ZOA0107 pc memo. wed Page 2 of 2 Commissioner SNOW expressed concern that the ordinance would allow every owner of an R- 3 lot with apartments on it to request a PRD and add a unit or two.. Commissioner BRINY-MAN expressed concern about opening the door for encroachment of higher density properties into residential neighborhoods. Chair McNAMEE suggested looking for another approach rather than writing a new ordinance. Commissioner BRINKMAN referred to specific densities set forth in the future land use map and expressed concern that this ordinance would bypass these limits for land use. It was moved by Commissioner SNOW and seconded by Commissioner COOPER that Case No. ZOA-01-04 be forwarded to City Council with a recommendation that the ordinance not be passed for the following reasons: 1. The possibility of undoing the density ordinance of several years ago by allowing owners of any R-3 or R-3A property to apply for a rezoning to PRD and reinstate the undesirable excess density the ordinances were designed to change. 2. The existing nonconforming sections of the zoning ordinance or the possibility of the request for variance are adequate to deal with lots not in conformance with the current ordinance. Commissioner BRINKMAN requested a friendly amendment to add the following additional reason: 3. The Comprehensive Plan clearly denotes two different types of planned residential development, one not to exceed twelve units per acre and the other not to exceed sixteen units per acre, and the proposed ordinance would sidestep the future land use designated in the recently adopted Comprehensive Plan. The amendment was accepted by Commissioner COOPER and the motion passed 7-0 with Commissioner THOMPSON absent. C. Case No. ZOA-01-07: An ordinance amending Article II of Chapter 26 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws concerning the addition of a Planned Mixed Use Development District (PMUD) This case was presented by Alan White. He reviewed the staff report and stated that proper notice had been given for the hearing of this ordinance. A development has been proposed to the city that would combine commercial on the first story with residential units above. The proposed ordinance would address such development. Commissioner BRINKMAN commented that the Comprehensive Plan supports the concept of combining commercial and residential. Planning Commission November 1, 2001 Page 3 Commissioner SNOW expressed concern that the streetscape and architectural design manual contains mixed use when so much effort was put into getting rid of the multiple land use in the Comprehensive Plan. She also expressed concern about the fifty foot height limitation. A suggestion was made that wording be included to limit density to that of a PRD. Commissioner BRINKMAN asked Alan if he thought the height limitation would work against PMUD. He replied that it should be workable with 35 feet. In response to a question from Commissioner COOPER, Alan White stated that if a project would not fit into PRD or commercial, the PMUD would come into play. Commissioner PLUMMER suggested modifying present regulations to allow development with residences built above commercial. He would like to see the city have flexibility with this type of development without having to come up with a new ordinance. It was moved by Commissioner SNOW and seconded by Commissioner PLUMMER that the proposed ordinance not go to City Council on first reading and, in lieu of the proposed ordinance, staff bring back proposals for possible changes to the PRD or PCD, or both, that would address concerns expressed this evening and that specifically has limitations on height and density. The motion passed 7-0 with Commissioner THOMPSON absent. 8. OLD BUSINESS There was no old business to come before the Commission. 9. NEW BUSINESS PRAF1 A. Commissioner BRINKMAN announced that she would not be present at the next Commission meeting. B. Alan White announced that Marilynn Force has been selected as the new Economic Development Director for the city and will be starting early December. 10. COMMISSION REPORTS There were no commission reports. 11. COMMITTEE AND DEPARTMENT REPORTS -There were no committee or department reports. 12. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Commissioner SNOW and seconded by Commissioner COLLINS to adjourn the meeting at 8:40 p.m. The motion passed unanimously. MARIAN McNAMEE, Chair Planning Commission November 1, 2001 Ann Lazzeri, Recording Secretary Page 4 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Notice is hereby given that a Public Hearing is to be held before the City of Wheat Ridge PLANNING COMMISSION on November 1, 2001 at 7:30 p.m. in the City Council Chambers of the Municipal Building at 7500 West 29th Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado. All interested citizens are invited to speak at the Public Hearing or submit written comments. The following petitions shall be heard: 1. Case No. ZOA-01-04: An ordinance amending Section 26-303.A of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws allowing Planned Residential Development's (PRD's) to be less than one (1) acre in size. 2. Case No. ZOA-01-07: An ordinance amending Article II of Chapter 26 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws concerning the addition of a Planned Mixed Use Development District. Kathy Field, Senior Secretary ATTEST: Wanda Sang, City Clerk To be Published: October 25, 2001 Wheat Ridge Transcript Q\Kathy\PCRPTS\PLANGCOM\PUBHRG\01 1101 pub2.wpd City of Wheat Ridge Planning and Development Department Memorandum TO: Alan White FROM: Travis Cra SUBJECT: Mixed Use Zone District DATE: 4 October 2001 I have reviewed literature from Longmont, Boulder, Grand Junction and Frisco in respect to a mixed use zoning classification. Documentation from the above mentioned cities is added as an addendum for your review. I have taken out what I deem appropriate and consolidated into a general framework for the ordinance. If you have questions, let me know. Planned Mixed Use District (26-306.1) 1. Intent: To allow areas which integrate residential, commercial (and industrial?) uses and development which are consistent in character with the surrounding neighborhood, on parcels of at least one acre in size.(do you want to specify a minimum?) These areas will allow flexibility in use, design and orientation while maximizing space and community interest. The permitted principal uses shall be governed by approval of the preliminary development plan A. Minimum lot width: none B. Minimum setbacks: none C. Maximum height: fifty feet D. The number of residential units which may be built is flexible, however, the number of acceptable units must be consistent in character with the surrounding area.(?) E. Parking: shall be consistent with Article V of the Code of Laws. F. Landscaping: shall be consistent with Section 26-502 of the Code of Laws. G. Review process: as defined in Section 26-406 and 26-407. H. The criteria for review shall follow the guidelines set forth in Section 26-112 of the Code of Laws, in addition to Section 2.0 of the Streetscape and Architectural Design Manual. 8. 9. NEW BUSINESS A. Separation between car lots This item was introduced by Meredith Reckert. A Wheat Ridge business has indicated a desire for a zoning change in order to be compatible with a temporary use permit that he has had for several years allowing less than a 1500 foot separation between adjacent vehicle storage/display lots. City Council has directed the planning director to come up with a zoning amendment which would address matters such as this and Meredith invited comments from Planning Commission regarding this matter. There was a consensus of the Commission that the existing ordinance was written for good reason and should be left as it is. (Chair McNAMEE declared a brief recess at 8:30 p.m. The meeting was reconvened at 8:40 P.M.) B. 38`n and Depew Property - Meredith Reckert introduced this item. The property owner has expressed interest in developing this site as mixed use. He is proposing the development of townhouses, row houses and some commercial. The property is zoned C-1 and this type of development would have to be a planned development district. This particular proposal does not fit into either the existing PRD or PCD regulations. The planning director and city attorney are presently working on some amendments to the PRD regulations to address situations such as this. Commissioner THOMPSON suggested a separate zone district for situations like this rather than amending the PRD regulations. Commissioner SNOW expressed concern about density and parking issues. COMMISSION REPORTS There were no commission reports. 10. COMMITTEE AND DEPARTMENT REPORTS There were no committee and department reports. 12. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Commissioner SNOW and seconded by Commissioner COOPER to adjourn the meeting at 9:30 p.m. The motion passed unanimously. mC1J MARIAN McNAMEE, Chair Planning Commissi September 20, 2001 Ann Lazzeri, Recordinj S~cretary Page 4 OF WHEgT City of Wheat Ridge Po Planning and Development Department U m Memorandum TO: Scott D. Staples, City Manager FROM: Alan White, Planning and Development Director SUBJECT: PRD's and PCD's DATE: August 27, 2001 I have provided previously a memo in response to a code change which would delete the requirement for a planned residential development to be a minimum of one acre in size. In dealing with the development at 38t /Depew, it is apparent that other changes to the Planned Development regulations may need to be considered. The development envisioned at 38`b/Depew cannot happen under our current regulations. The existing regulations do not work in instances where uses are mixed vertically. The specific problem areas are as follows: In the Planned Commercial District, residential uses are allowed provided they: Do not exceed 50% of the gross site area, including land associated with the building area, parking, and landscaping for the residential use, and 2. Do not exceed a maximum density of 16 units/acre. Land used for the commercial use, including the building, parking, and a proportionate share of the ingress/egress and landscape areas may not be used calculating the maximum density. In the Planned Residential District, commercial uses are allowed provided they: Do not exceed 25% of the gross site area, including land associated with the building area, parking and landscaping for the commercial uses. Land used for commercial uses, including the building, parking, and a proportionate share of the ingress/egress and landscape areas may not be used in calculating the maximum density of the development. Page 1 of 2 These restrictions were not changed during the rewrite of Chapter 26. They are basically designed to address instances where uses are mixed in two dimensions, so that a in a so-called "residential" development, 50% or 75% of the land isn't devoted to commercial uses. This would change the character of the development dramatically. Similarly, 90% of a "commercial" development shouldn't be comprised of residential uses. The restrictions do not work where uses are stacked, or in three dimensions. If residential uses are located above commercial uses, the footprint of the building is both commercial and residential. In a PCD, this footprint and the associated parking not only are subtracted from the remainder of the lot area to determine the number of units allowed, but the number of units cannot comprise more than 50% of the gross lot area which also includes the footprint of the building. In a PRD, the amount of commercial space is limited to 25% of the lot area. Similar to the above example, the footprint of the mixed use building is used in calculating both the commercial space allowed and the number of units allowed. The result is that under the current regulations mixed uses become arbitrarily restricted and economically infeasible. Whether the use conditions in the PRD's and PCD's must be followed is a question that I would like the City Attorney to investigate. The planned development process has been described to Council a one big variance process, so I'm wondering if there is latitude for Council to vary from these conditions. C:\MyFiles\WPFiles\Projects\zoning amendmenNTRD & PCD cm.wpd Page 2 of 2 Case No.: OA0107 Quarter Section Map No App: Last Name: Citywide Related Cases: App: First Name: I Case History Owner: Last Name Owner: First Name App Address: L i Review Body: City, State Zip: App: Phone: L APN: Owner Address: 2nd Review Body: City/State/Zip: 2nd Review Date: Owner Phone: I Decision-making Body: - Project Address: ~ ! Approval/Denial Date: Street Name: City/State, Zip: Reso/Ordinance No Case Disposition: Project Planner: White File Location: dive Notes: r~ Follow-Up: r mend code concerning ddition of Planned Mixed Use Development district. PC -11/1/01 Conditions of Approval: District: Date Received: 1 0/1 612 0 01 Pre-App Date: Gotapage 7