HomeMy WebLinkAboutZOA-02-08INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER DiTullio
Council Bill No. o5-2003
Ordinance No. 3920
Series of 2003
TITLE: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING APPENDIX A TO
CHAPTER 26 OF THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE CODE
OF LAWS.
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WHEAT
RIDGE, COLORADO, THAT
Section I Appendix A of Chapter 26 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws is hereby
amended as shown on Exhibit A attached to this ordinance
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 immediately upon adoption
INTRODUCED, READ, AND ADOPTED on first reading by a vote of 8 to
0 on this 24th day of February , 2003, 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 March 10 , 2003, 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 S to 0 , this 10th day of March 2003
C'\Dneumenie and Sc¢ingv\alun\My Documents\W PFilev\i'rojeasbuning amendment4ec sched urd.duc
SIGNED by the Mayor on this 11 t-hday of --March,-, 2003
HEN CERVENY,
ATTEST
kc
Wanda Sang, City CI
APPROVED AS TO FORM BY CITY ATTORNEY
GERALD DAHL, CITY ATTORNEY
1st Publication February 27, 2003
2nd Publication March 13, 2003
Wheat Ridge Transcript
Effective Date March 10, 2003
C'\Documents and Suttings\alan\My Unuuments\WPPilus\Prngects\enning amendmemsWee silted ord.doc
rw
0guj V)
0
0 n. 0.
O
WOT
T O J
0zY
O V LL
d
N ~
O
O
Cl)
fA
C
lL
V
N LL
6 (Oi
Q 0O
O Z
U
vLLC
~o m
N V U
C n.o
C
m
m
09
O
u
ao
as
m m
IL Z
m N m U
V U A to
N O
O 'O
C11 N U) N N p p 0 C.
r. ~ O ~y p f9 00 O FA r
O o tl~+ Cl) } O O H fR
O 069
O O Cl)
00 6. 613~ 60
W
-O
N ~ N
d 0 Z
0 0 ~ G1 N
N E d m C IL C LL LL
O LL l1' to E N V
LL N 0 b U O
U > U V Z 0 Q
g p 0 Z O Z Z
Z ID Z Z 0 0 m 12
v V C 0 U E y D U 01 N
IL 4).0 7 N N 25 C LL .d 0 LL LLO. LL Cl.
7
V ..C, ti 0. LL 0. m C G E C C E G O o 0 0 0
E2 G G U 0 0 d 4 O_ O Q O O Q p i., )A .gyp
o y N c C t~ W a• U c> U
Z Q
0 am
oEa.o 4 a~ =a k Qa as
m 3 o a~ O M.0 `u aa~ a3 q w qa
aia 2qa CL 0- m ~qo m4a m c
m c 2 o g O> p- n ro^
C)
m N 9 N y
R V C O N C C m N O 4 U
L
d oa- = N CD m R LL Q V
0. CL 0 Ix
N N
X
N ~ A d
CL a) E
L no
0
po QO oriQ
wa CO m
U) -6 0
~d
N U
p M o m o 0
C> C,
O O O O~ N O
OO ~C-4 VlW 00 + + p~
O O O p W d 00) ++N 00 0 H
+O~ tOn~ O ~Cl) ~ 00 00~ 00
p fR O 00 C~ to VR
O
1 Dl
1~1
W LL LL
LL LL
yy V V
V U p O 0
Z O 0 Z u Z
N
(.1 ,f] N U d d
-0 4v
LL , N L d 3 m N d LL O. C G
lA U j LL 4. LL tl O C C G Q GO p Op 0ro
C 153 C G O C O 0 _0 'gi~p-D C U U
G O C3 O O 0 C
Z D U O O U O
c a
N o FFC n '~o. n 3 c~i a ' CL °a- •S Q tl
C N 4' 0 c Qa ? bm Q . ~q C-
m LL a q a a a p a 4 'F 7=
C C C Z` m O 7 cn 0-
w m c p w m ? N -wOC qy O c
CLQ
m C C > ~tL
d O-P A b E6
QQ 0. 7Q Fy M
0
N O C L N d O
u~ 7i .do d u 5 E
L
a 5 c= N s o U
d y•RO3s3u m
'6 E N C~' d d r
LJ' F N O C y .fl p
o IMv a"o.° 0-
4•" t,Y3 E
0
m - m u u a rn
~ E O.6 7 Q. d d
y.. d r ¢Y
4) 0 CL
O'm
m ~ 61 O Co
N c u Q 0 E
N 0 n N t p
m U 1 d O W m?
i5 - R ..0. 9 N to C. 'O
01 C m d
Q• ar5 > m A co
7 'CS •tS 0,
y' 9 y
ao
rn R N m C co o
m d O C C A m E V
svm 0
c5 mm
d Nr N'C .a T ?Q
T N .O m •3 cc
i F d G
_ L
n~ Y
LL tLU 9 = O d i71 m o
d u E G c°° °
P'a d~
me ua to
a`~ L O {yd
O CJ) a 3 `L N o m
0- co
a
Z j C tr- F Q j
G p. O d 0 O
o m _ -a 'y o L
co r_
d N N
d d m a= m 'n m ~ E
N L.. .m. w C yy N 'C
d R n L O .p d m d L N U td m 01
'G" U.3 T u .mr ..m.„ 3 N jo r 6 p 7
y F G .P- G G C CO N y Ot 01 O
_ o 0 0.~ a°.~ m tn
o °'E mS;cFttcNi~ N^ oc quo aF a mN
U O.•p _ ~ U w e~ N to d Hi
C 'O N p.0~ Nam lQ. o°'.a O ~ C V ~M~ Q
o a °o °o Q co c m° m'; N m m CL Lo al d m q K
co en m oi ~
r- c3 m e c_. 2 c ~d 8~ X m
N w N N' II d u1 N U
60
N L A N N N U N N~ ~ N
t Q w w U w ..m. ~ 7 N y U w~ O 9
d co
N~^ c0
G d C y d N Q E D m 'C~ 9 tj N N of
E tv O 3 N N N i1 7 F' m 'O •O .G.
.p 6y
U
N 7 7 N w C A N Lpo C
A
L 0. N G O
mmmID Nth
M
tmi. Oc a. cti x vdi o m'° 'CL mw o
Ro $ uc RNm°'QE99Qn Q =aY 4) m~~>> tdy aN
t to O LmOU n3~~a a 3= d. o~tn u _
d Y ' 0 7i C Z N rn N m N N N w N m d ro w m$ u. 3 y U O Z' o is
a3' 7~ Z YIM V G F' E too m w b 5 N 4) m y 7 lA N C m O v N
C Y m O L G V wr Ntn 'Q Q. !E N U w d C CU O~ G Cf d tv,
_ ! V mm
d m O- y 7 11-
0 U N y 5. OE N O tU¢ 4 O L p.
£ adiOL 0 r- R` coo dGmm m'amm~aotn~ OC
3 c w a c a o f m.m = E m a o
-0 co m O r W m d
-y N O
d U U N d d N U L
G O
r- 2~ :3 0
p 0
V N
v J
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: March 10, 2003
Page -2-
Cynthia LeFevre, 12149 E. Exposition Drive, Aurora, also addressed the psychic
ordinance.
PUBLIC HEARINGS AND ORDINANCES ON SECOND READING
Item 1. Council Bill 05-2003 - An Ordinance amending Appendix A to Chapter 26
of the Code of Laws of the City of Wheat Ridge. (Fee Schedule)
V (Case No. ZOA-02-08)
Council Bill 05-2003 was introduced on second reading by Mr. DiTullio. Clerk read title
and executive summary and assigned Ordinance No. 1280.
Alan White, Community Development Director, explained the fees are meant to recover
some of the City's cost. When there is a larger project, the fees will be higher. He
stressed that there is a lot of review time on some of the projects and we have not
recovered our cost, but with the new fees we will be able to recoup some of our cost.
We will also start charging a re-submittal fee, which has taken a lot of review time.
Don Peterson spoke in support of this ordinance, but had reservations about increasing
the surcharge.
Motion by Mr. DiTullio to approve Council Bill 05-2003 (Ordinance No. 1280), Case No.
ZOA-02-08 on second reading and that the Ordinance take effect immediately upon
adoption; seconded by Mr. Edwards; carried 8-0.
Item 2. Council Bill 07-2003 - An Ordinance concerning the terms of office for
members of the Cultural Commission
Council Bill 07-2003 was introduced on second reading by Mr. Schneider, who also
read the title and executive summary. Clerk assigned Ordinance No. 1281.
Motion by Mr. Schneider that Council Bill 07-2003 (Ordinance No. 1281) be approved
on second reading, and take effect 15 days after final publication;
Ron Gehauf, term ending 3/2/06:
Dona Downing, term ending 3/2/05:
Virginia Johnson, term ending 3/2106:
Charles Jorgensen, term ending 312/05,
Sharon Couturier, term ending 3/2/06:
Calvin Johnson, term ending 3/2/05:
Jeoffrey Wodell, term ending 3/2/06;
Barb Gallagher, term ending 3/2/05:
seconded by Mr. Edwards; carried 8-0.
OF WHEgT ITEM NO:
v Pm
OLORA~ REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION
COUNCIL MEETING DATE: March 10, 2003
TITLE: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING APPENDIX A TO CHAPTER 26 OF
THE WHEAT RIDGE CODE OF LAWS PERTAINING TO
PLANNING AND ZONING FEES (CASE NO. ZOA 02-08)
® PUBLIC HEARING ❑ ORDINANCES FOR 1ST READING (Date: February 24, 2003)
❑ BIDS/MOTIONS ® ORDINANCES FOR 2ND READING
❑ RESOLUTIONS
Quasi-Judicial: ❑
Yes No
AL-,
Community Development Director
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
City Manager
This ordinance amends the fees charged by the Community Development Department for processing
land use cases. The fees were last updated in 2001.
The proposed fee schedule was created by reviewing the amount of time spent reviewing certain
land use cases processed in 2002, the cost to the City for that time, and the fees collected for that
land use case. Adjustments were made in either the "base fee" or the cost per acre or dwelling unit
to cover as much as possible the time spent reviewing cases and preparing for hearings. The
proposed fees include the cost of engineering review. The approach used to establish the new fees
assigns an average amount of staff time, and the subsequent average cost, to an average project.
One significant cost to the City is the cost to review submittals up to six and seven times. The
proposed fee schedule establishes a significant increase in the resubmittal fee.
The proposed fees were compared with surrounding communities. Results of the comparison showed
the proposed fees to be comparable to Lakewood's and slightly higher than Golden's. Lakewood's
cover engineering review, while Golden's do not. The proposed fees are higher than Arvada's, but
their fees are very low.
The Planning Commission reviewed this ordinance and recommended three changes. Staff agrees
with the change recommended for increasing the fee for final development plans and this has been
incorporated into the proposed fee schedule.
COMMISSION/BOARD RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning Commission recommended approval of the new fee schedule with the following
policy modifications:
1. That City Council find mechanisms to place surcharges, or higher charges, (perhaps 50%)
on commercial projects. Staff would note that some fees are already higher for non-
residential projects and commercial projects do not necessarily require more time to
review. Fees as much as 50% higher could be a deterrent to commercial development.
Staff does not recommend making this change.
2. The $1,000 fee for a final development plan of planned developments be reduced by 50%
and the acre charge be doubled to $500 up front and $500 per acre, or some similar
modification so as not to unduly discourage small planned developments. Staff agrees with
the recommendation to lower the base fee and raise the per acre fee for final development
plans. The proposed fee schedule has been changed accordingly.
3. Allow a significant reduction in special use permit (SUP) fees for any property owner
required to apply for a SUP due to a change in the ordinance which made a prior legal use
one which would now require a special use permit. Staff is not sure of the intent of this
recommendation. During the re-write of Chapter 26, uses that were made special uses that
were previously permitted uses were made legally non-conforming, meaning that a special
use is not required unless the use is not enlarged or altered. In the case of tattoo parlors
and physic advisors, the existing locations were grandfathered. The uses were not listed
previously in the use chart. No change to the current special use fee is proposed with the
new fee schedule. Staff will re-evaluate the special use permit fee pending any changes to
the special use process adopted' by Council.
STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES:
Fees should cover, as nearly as possible, the costs involved with staff review of land use cases.
Since the last fee increase in 2001, personnel costs in the Community Development Department
have increased approximately 10%. Not all staff time can be charged to a land use case.
Questions about zoning and zoning regulations, researching and drafting ordinances, and preparing
updates to the Comprehensive Plan are examples of work performed by staff for which a fee
cannot be charged.
Many of the land use cases involve review by personnel in the Public Works Department. The
current fee schedule does not include the cost of engineering review. The proposed fees include
the cost of engineering review.
A comparison with other communities' fees is difficult given the different processes and steps in the
processes of different jurisdictions. We have made comparisons where we could and have found the
proposed fees to be comparable to Lakewood's and slightly higher than Golden's. Lakewood's cover
CAProjects\zoning amendments\Fees\new fee schedule 2nd reading.doc
engineering review, while Golden's do not. The proposed fees are higher than Arvada's, but their fees
are very low.
One significant cost to the City is the cost to review submittals up to six and seven times. The old
resubmittal fee was a flat $150 per resubmittal (after the first two reviews). Under the new fee
schedule, this fee will still be charged after the first two reviews, but a significant increase in the fee
will be charged for each subsequent resubmittal.
Publication fees were not changed due to a change in notification procedure that has reduced the
publication cost, but personnel costs have risen to offset this reduced cost.
ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:
A straight percentage increase was considered, but this would not adequately include the costs of
engineering review.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
If the same number and types of cases processed in 2002 were processed in 2003, the fees collected in
2003 would be approximately $73,900. This is an increase of $48,900 in the budgeted revenue for
2003. The $73,900 is an increase of 53% over the $48,300 in fees collected in 2002.
"I move to approve Council Bill No. Case No. ZOA 02-08, an Ordinance
amending Appendix A to Chapter 26 of the City of Wheat Ridge Code of Laws pertaining to planning
and zoning fees, on second reading and that the ordinance take effect immediately upon adoption."
Or,
"I move to table indefinitely Council Bill No. , Case No. ZOA 02-08, an
Ordinance amending Appendix A to Chapter 26 of the City of Wheat Ridge Code of Laws pertaining
to planning and zoning fees, on second reading with the following findings:
1.
2. "
Initiated by: Community Development Department
Report Prepared by: Alan White 303-235-2844
Attachments:
1. Old Fee Schedule
2. Council Bill No. , with proposed fees schedule attached.
C:\Prcjects\zoning amendments\Fees\new fee schedule 2nd reading.doc
CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE
ZONING AND DEVELOPMENT
FEE SCHEDULE - EFFECTIVE 4116101
IN 5
Pre-Application $150
Annexation and Zoning
Application Fee $500 + $50/acre
Publication/Public Notice Fee $500
Variance
Administrative or Regular
Application Fee $200
Publication/Public Notice Fee $90
Temporary Permit
30-Day
Application Fee $150
Publication/Public Notice Fee $90
One-Year
Application Fee $200
Publication/Public Notice Fee $90
Minor Subdivision
Without Dedication
Application Fee $500 + $30/lot SFR
$500 + $100/acre Non SFR
Publication/Public Notice Fee $150
With Dedication
Application Fee $500 + $30/lot SFR
$500 + $100/acre Non SFR
Publication/Public Notice Fee $300
Major Subdivision
Preliminary Plan
Application Fee $500 + $30/lot SFR
$500+$100/acre Non SFR
Publication/Public Notice Fee $300
Final Plat
Application Fee $300 + $15/lot SFR
$300 + $100/acre Non SFR
Publication/Public Notice Fee $300
Lot Line Adjustment, Plat Amendment, or Consolidation Plat without Dedication
Application Fee $200
Publication/Public Notice Fee $0
Consolidation Plat With Dedication
Application Fee
Publication/Public Notice Fee
$300
$300
R-O-W Vacation, Street Width Designation
Application Fee $300
Publication/Public Notice Fee $300
ATTACHMENT 1
Planned Building Group, Site Plan
Application Fee
Publication/Public Notice Fee
Special Use Permit
Application Fee
Publication/Public Notice Fee
Rezoning
Rezone to Non-PD District
Application Fee
Publication/Public Notice Fee
Rezone to PD District
Planned Developments
Final Development Plan
Development Plan Amendment
Application Fee
Publication/Public Notice Fee
Application Fee
Publication/Public Notice Fee
Application Fee
Publication/Public Notice Fee
$250/acre
$0
$500
$300
$500 + $15/acre
$300
$750 + $15/acre
$300
$250/acre
$300
$250/acre
$300 (Not required if administrative)
Floodplain Exemption
Class 1
Class 11
Application Fee
Publication/Public Notice Fee
Application Fee
Publication/Public Notice Fee
$150
$0
$250
$90
Resubmittal Fee $150
Each application shall be reviewed by staff once and be returned for corrections. If after review of the resubmittal
changes have not been made as requested by staff, the application will be returned with corrections. Subsequent
review will occur only when the resubmittal fee is paid. Each subsequent resubmittal will require the fee.
Multiple Case Process
In cases where applications require the processing of more than one request, the applicant will be charged
the fees for each request.
Recording Fees
Applicants will be charged the fees to record documents as set by the County Clerk and Recorder as follows:
Plats & Development Plans
Boundary Surveys
Mylar Copies
Other Documents (8 1/2 x 11 or 8 1/2 x 14)
$10/page
$20/first page + $10/ea. add'I page
$5/page
$5/page
NOTES:
SFR = Single Family Residential and Duplex
Per Acre charges are based upon the acreage rounded to the next highest whole number.
Applicants will be charged the actual cost of mailing and publication of public notices. Costs given are
for an average of 12 mailings and public notice with an average legal description. Applications with
extraordinary mailing requirements or legal descriptions will be charged the additional cost of postage
or publication.
INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER
Council Bill No.
Ordinance No.
Series of 2003
TITLE: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING APPENDIX A TO
CHAPTER 26 OF THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE CODE
OF LAWS.
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WHEAT
RIDGE, COLORADO, THAT:
Section 1. Appendix A of Chapter 26 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws is hereby
amended as shown on Exhibit A attached to this ordinance.
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 immediately upon adoption.
INTRODUCED, READ, AND ADOPTED on first reading by a vote of to
on this day of 2003, 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 , 2003, 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 2003.
ATTACHMENT 2
CADocuments and Settings\alan\My Documents\WPFi1a\Projects\zoning amendments\fee sched ord.doc
SIGNED by the Mayor on this day of 2003.
CERVENY, MAYOR
ATTEST:
Wanda Sang, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM BY CITY ATTORNEY
GERALD DAHL, CITY ATTORNEY
Ist Publication:
2nd Publication:
Wheat Ridge Transcript
Effective Date:
CADocumenis and Settings\alan\My Documents\WPFileffrojects\zoning amendments\fee sched ord.doc
Q
L)
N
N
N
(D
LO
U)
C)
a
a
N
N
O
U)
LO
d=
O
O O
O
O
~O
y)O
~
00
00
3
0
O
M
+ M
+ M
+M
+ M
+
M
64
(
)
r(A
O
L
J
(A (A
O (A
O (f1
O EA
0 6%
O
(A
Cl)
(D
co
U)
M
co
6-1
ta
4-1
<A
•
64
a
C
;
e
d
~
d
d
d
y
y
d
Q)
O
a)
L
C
d
C
d
a
i
LL
LL
U
L
U
0
a
U
a
LL
U
LL
U
N
U
=
Q
t
a
z
0
o
O
O
0
z
z
c
z
c
z
z
s`r
adi
adi
0
c
0
L)
v
LL
LL
U dm
j
dm
d~Q
'O
d.a
a
d
d
~
dd
Q, d
d
d 0
LL a
d=
LL a
d=
LLLa
c
d
d O
LL a
c
d
d
LL
d
LL
=
a
d
LLa
U
O
U
h
G G
C C
rm
C
C C
o
`
C C
E
C
C
C
C
C C
`
0
0
X00
b
oo
da
oo
¢
oo
Q
o
0
0
0
00
_o'
«
z
U
z
E 0
a m 6
y
6 u
E G
m m
c
m m
e
,
m
a
m
m
m m
>
=nN
Q
C d
d
0
G
L)
.
O. d
o Y
s
m
o o
n
m
a
o
d
0
0
0 8
'
d
.
Q.
OQ
a
.o
s
a
.fl
a
3
LL 0
aLL a
i
~
d
> ~
i
_
r.
-
_
z¢ L
¢
QCL
Z
a-
~
¢
W
Q
l
<0
_Q
;
'
7 C
Ln 0 0
d
C C
y 0 0
O
~
d d
C
Z W
v
o
10 m m
m co
c
d
d
N
v
Q
Q
l0
d U U
(6 U U
.
O
d O
O
0
O
C
N
LA W W
tW
C
O
N
co
m
c n
a=
N
d
C G
N
N
O
CL
X
0
lKa
=
I
0
)
N
d
d
K
O
O
L
U
00
L
U
a
a
L
L
I
Q~
: W
3
j
U.
LL
o
z =
}
}
L_~N
d N
d N
ad
Ur2 LLJ
~L
CL t
~L.
W
U
LL
as -
O
LL Q
Q
LL
L Q
L
U) a)
,
l6
U
O
U
o
(o
r
:2
O
N
d
O O
m
O O
O O
C.
O O
co
O O
N
RI y"
0 0
C
M
O
.
O
'F
O O
O C.
O O
(n
•
O
(p
O
0 0
O
0 0
O O
M
+ +
+ +
M
M
-
N
V3 EA
O LL)
O
MEA
64
N(A
61
O
6q
(A
O O
6%
O O
Eft
OO
O O
tf1
Mt-
O
O
O O
(0 (D
O O
O co
O O
r
EA
(fl
61 61
(A 64
fA (fl
d
N
d
d
d
d
a
i
LL
LL
LL
LL
LL
LL
U
U
U
U
U
U
O
O
O
O
O
O
r=~~
z
z
z
z
z
z
w
d
d
U
U
U
U
U
U
_
LL
L
d.0
d.0
a
d.0
d
-0
d
m
d
.D
d
N
d 7
d
d
d
d
d
0
d
=d
LA (
1
LL a
LL a
3
LL a
LL
a
U.
a
LL
0-
c
5 0
c c
c c
3
c c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c z
d
~
o o
0 o
co
o 0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
d
0
N U
mm
d
mm
o
mm
ec
m
m
m
m
c co
m
'
p
U U
U U
3
U U
O y
U
U
U
U
0 U
U
C
O 'O
O d
c d
d
a 9
a
11
a s
m d
U
a
C
o.
m
a
I~m
°
c
Q 3
¢ a
d
a
d
¢ a
c
a
¢ a
m
CL
¢
a
U
Q
Q
3
a
D
.
¢
a
±
o
u
m
Z
O
'
F:
r
O o 0
y
co
O
3 m
0)
U)
Q
o co
a. z
m c
L ° U) 'E
X C N d d C
d 7L E
C N
c 'A ; a C O
COd
CD 'a E NF a4°1 U
d
O I4 N 0 d d
r C L a
CL 0
a C Na •-r. O•;
L a d
(D 0 > CL
0 C 0 M IM d O N C
U U` d d V V
L E
a = w '0 N R= O
d d a ) N a O. w
w d L O) C O d d 'O
c a a 0 d C• L ,C "dO
4 L d d d 0 T~ c
> IM
~.a,v_ 4
"O a •~i O N E
d O a a
a) 0 w a1 r> N d a y' d
cc U) M - CL 0 .0
.0 L O C 0) C d G T
41 U a 5 0 m d Co 0
> o d t-= O L E c
m a d= E v a T N
a E d p 0 3 0 d p
a '0
LL m d 3 0 0 =
d c
E
V U) C w r Q= U d
0) E C U O 70 d N E .
r CL
fA CO U c V a U O d 4) C N O
w II ¢ O p_ Q. a I Y LO a •C •L a N >
0 vLL i a 3 ¢ O Q. 4x) v 3 t H
N N
C J c O m
0-0
d > O
N
cu E
O
L a L
o m w C U N "06 U
d
0 CL a) mn
C t L L O O C d m L d O E
y O
j U_ 3 a a d d d a c U = a
4)
L l0 3 .2 .2 0 .mod. ,'N ,c N U N E
O _ C C 2 a. d N a + C
d E°° o_ C_ O C C 3 co
)
a) (D C .C .0 m N a m 0 0 .O N 0) 0 E
O U 0 o C C V a a N 4)
c a D_ C.
a~ U O O N 'O Q O O n. a N O c E U m 01 a 0
MfA a m d C a N 'O V C_ C_ C_ U= U U O Q co
L
GP 0 4E
a O _ co cc 3 cO a) 3 U UN 0.y C_ O'U N 1!) wN
p !K N N a C C v=. w? a -o d EA fA fA 5 (fl
M N> N O"d O s d
C C K N N d a Y N N v Q'
d i+ C ° .Q C N N U N w O N N a
V V ° a m -a 5z: C cc y d N 0 y
y °a A 3> d 'E N d U d 0 00 C.
E Qd d U d N N 2] O 0 C w N LO Ul
Q d 4.61 d N N 6 N N C Ld-. a N C
7. LL p C LL = d co d O . d c X a
t U L O U 'D CU N Vi (4 N a n o 4-O) 'O a N c)
a.. _ a cv ~Z=z 3 U) rno d E
3 ° C O a vi d 0.m ' E N 4N) ° o)$ a U c aD 'c
dR U Ru) U Nrna N0- .0 7.0 .Q 1 a) 03j OO~_d0 r a) U~'.. E T-w N
a) CL a) c -
IL d J a d N O a C N N N N N 0. E T a U)
C a) .0 N d O d N
Z
`o d c
75 E 4)
0 LL
cC = c'a a V N LO N Md'¢ R" a Y = LL Y° 0) U LL d
Q a 0 0 a 'a 0 0 pQ c -0 cu U d U C_ 0422 U p Z, O
CL 0 r
c o.~ 10 .2.2 a a c a) _a c m E o 6 USN ya~
J U) a d N 41 n..n 7 U > d d_ d 0 fl. d a O L.. N a
,N C C_ C` C_ N a o a E -
oci¢a 0 y¢a a0 w 0 L y 3+ 0:<0' ad,
O
M
a
m
N
of WHE4, ITEM NO:
Vi 44
REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION
COUNCIL MEETING DATE: February 24, 2003
TITLE: CASE NO. ZOA 02-08, AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 26
PERTAINING TO PLANNING AND ZONING FEES
❑ PUBLIC HEARING ® ORDINANCES FOR 1ST READING (Date: )
❑ BIDS/MOTIONS ❑ ORDINANCES FOR 2ND READING
❑ RESOLUTIONS
Quasi-Judicial: ❑
Yes No
4-
Community Development Director
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
City Manager
I move to approve Council Bill No. , Case No. ZOA 02-08, on first reading,
ordered published, public hearing set for March 10, 2003 at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council
Chambers.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
This ordinance amends the fees charged by the Community Development Department for processing
land use cases.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
If the same number and types of cases processed last year were processed in 2003, the fees collected
would be approximately $73,900, or an increase of 53% over the $48,300 in fees collected in 2002.
COMMISSION/BOARD RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning Commission recommended approval of the new fee schedule with the following
policy modifications:
1. That City Council find mechanisms to place surcharges, or higher charges, (perhaps 50%) on
commercial projects.
2. The $1,000 fee for a final development plan of planned developments be reduced by 50%
and the acre charge be doubled to $500 up front and $500 per acre, or some similar
modification so as not to unduly discourage small planned developments.
3. Allow a significant reduction in special use permit (SUP) fees for any property owner
required to apply for a SUP due to a change in the ordinance which made a prior legal use
one which would now require a special use permit.
PROJECT HISTORY:
Fees were last updated in 2001.
STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES:
Fees should cover, as nearly as possible, the costs involved with staff review of land use cases.
Since the last fee increase in 2001, personnel costs in the Community Development Department
have increased approximately 10%. Not all staff time can be charged to a land use case. Questions
about zoning and zoning regulations, researching and drafting ordinances, and preparing updates to
the Comprehensive Plan are examples of work performed by staff for which a fee cannot be
charged.
Many of the land use cases involve review by personnel in the Public Works Department. The
current fee schedule does not include the cost of engineering review. The proposed fees include the
cost of engineering review.
A comparison with other communities' fees is difficult given the different processes and steps in the
processes of different jurisdictions. We have made comparisons where we could and have found the
proposed fees to be comparable to Lakewood's and slightly higher than Golden's. Lakewood's
cover engineering review, while Golden's do not. The proposed fees are higher than Arvada's, but
their fees are very low.
Regarding the Planning Commission recommendations:
1. Some fees are already higher for non-residential projects. Commercial projects do not
necessarily require more time to review. Fees as much as 50% higher could be a deterrent to
commercial development. Staff does not recommend making this change.
2. Staff agrees with the recommendation to lower the base fee and raise the per acre fee for
final development plans. The proposed fee schedule has been changed accordingly.
Staff is not sure of the intent of this recommendation. During the re-write of Chapter 26,
uses that were made special uses that were previously permitted uses were made legally non-
conforming. No special use is required if the use is not enlarged or altered. This was not the
case with tattoo parlors and physic advisors. No change to the current special use fee is
proposed with the new fee schedule. Staff will re-evaluate the special use permit fee
pending any changes to the process adopted by Council.
C:\Documents and Settings\alan\My Documents\WPFiles\Projects\zoning amendments\new fee schedule.doc
ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:
A straight percentage increase was considered, but this would not adequately include the costs of
engineering review.
Report Prepared by: Alan White 303-235-2844
Attachments:
1. Current fee schedule.
2. Council Bill No. with proposed fee schedule attached.
C:\Documents and SettingsWan\My Documents\WPFiles\Projects\zoning amendments\new fee schedule.doc
It was moved by Commissioner McNULLIN and seconded by Commissioner PLUMMER
to recommend approval of the variance associated with Case No. MS-02-08, a request for
a 7.5-foot lot width variance for a corner lot located in the R-1C zone district, for
property located at 6015 West 40th Avenue for the following reasons:
1. The hardship has not been created by any person having current interest in the
property.
2. The request would not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other
properties in the area.
3. Granting of the variance will not alter the essential character of the locality.
In answer to questions from Commissioner McMILLIN, Alan White stated that the applicant
recently purchased this property and had no interest in the original subdivision and that he
could see no visual or other impact to having a 75-foot width on Harlan Street.
Commissioner SNOW requested a friendly amendment to add a fourth reason: A portion
of the lot width deficiency on Harlan was created by the City's right-of-way dedication to
match existing sidewalks. The amendment was accepted by Commissioners McMILLIN
and PLUMMER.
The motion passed 6-0 with Commissioner McNAMEE absent.
It was moved by Commissioner SNOW and seconded by Commissioner COOPER to
recommend approval of Case No. MS-02-08, a request for a final subdivision plat for
property located at 6015 West 40th Avenue for the following reasons:
1. The subdivision meets all requirements of a final plat with the granting of a
variance for the lot width requirement for a corner lot in the R-IC zone district.
With the following condition:
1. The fee in lieu of parkland dedication, as specified by the Parks and Recreation
Commission, be paid for each lot prior to issuance of the certificate of occupancy.
The motion passed 6-0 with Commissioner McNAMEE absent.
C. Case No. ZOA-02-08: An ordinance amending Appendix A of Chapter 26 of the
Wheat Ridge Code of Laws pertaining to the Zoning and Development Fee Schedule.
The case was presented by Alan White. He reviewed the staff report with a recommendation
of approval of the new fee schedule. Fee schedules were last revised two years ago. One
significant increase is due to the costs of engineering reviews required for certain cases. Fee
schedules of surrounding communities were surveyed. The suggested fee schedule will be
similar to that of Lakewood.
Commissioner PLUMMER expressed concern about the impact of increased fees on small
development, such as when an individual wants to build a single house on a vacant lot. He
Planning Commission Page 3
February 6, 2003
asked what the increased fees would have cost the previous applicant. Alan White gave an
estimate of $2,325 or an increase of approximately $800 from the present fee schedule.
Commissioner SNOW expressed concern about situations where someone would have to pay
these fees in addition to obtaining a special use permit.
In answer to a question from Commissioner McMILLIN, Alan White stated that fees are not
proportional to the size of the development. Commissioner McMILLIN stated that he would
not be in favor of increasing the intial pre-application fee and, further, he believed the planned
development fees should be proportional to the size of the development.
Chair WEISZ asked if there were any present who wished to address this matter.
Don Peterson " °
9945 West 34`n Drive
Mr. Peterson spoke in favor of the fee increase because he believed the city should be able to
recover the costs incurred in processing developments. He also suggested the possibility of
finding a way to shorten the process for small developers which would result in lower fees.
Commissioner SNOW expressed concern that the city doesn't have the ability to offer fee
waivers to attract certain types of development the city might find desirable.
Commissioner McMILLIN asked if there was any basis to set costs according to the value of
the development. Alan White explained that the schedule does allow for some differentiation
in fees between commercial and residential. In response to another question from
Commissioner McMILLIN, Mr. White stated that he knows of at least one jurisdiction that has
a substantial differentiation between fees for commercial as opposed to residential
developments.
It was moved by Commissioner McMILLLIN and seconded by Commissioner SNOW to
recommend approval of the ordinance amending Appendix A of Chapter 26 concerning
the fees charged for the review of land use applications with the following policy
modifications:
1. That City Council find mechanisms to place surcharges, or higher charges,
(perhaps 50%) on commercial development.
2. The $1,000 fee for a final development plan of planned developments be reduced
by 50% and the acre charge be doubled to $500 up front and $500 per acre, or
some similar modification so as not to unduly discourage small planned
developments.
Commissioner SNOW requested a third modification which would allow for a significant
reduction in special use permit (SUP) fees for any property owner required to apply for a
SUP due to a change in the zoning ordinance which made a prior legal use one which
would now require a special use permit. This amendment was accepted by Commissioner
McMILLIN.
Planning Commission Page 4
February 6, 2003
The motion passed 6-0 with Commissioner McNAMEE absent.
8. OLD BUSINESS
Gerald Dahl, city attorney, appeared before the Commission to address a letter from Dan
Schneider which was copied to Planning Commission members asking for a change to plat
conditions imposed during a previous hearing. Mr. Dahl advised the Planning Commission
that they have no jurisdiction in this matter.
Discussion ensued regarding the possible institution of a cost recovery provision in the
code.
It was moved by Commissioner SNOW and seconded by Commissioner PLUMMER
to request that City Council consider an ordinance which would institute a cost
recovery system for road and drainage improvements and a further requirement that
evidence of permission for off-site road improvements, drainage and use of drainage
systems be required as a condition of approval.
The motion passed 6-0 with Commissioner McNAMEE absent.
Commissioner McMILLIN reported that the owner of the Phillips 66 station has yet to
comply with lighting standards. Alan White stated that the owner has been contacted about
this and will follow up with the owner again.
9. NEW BUSINESS AF
• Commissioner SNOW requested that the list of uses allowed in neighborhood commercial
zones be reviewed at a future study session. She expressed concern that this list includes
uses such as candy stores that probably shouldn't require a special use permit.
Commissioner SNOW moved and Commissioner PLUMMER seconded that Planning
Commission consider reviewing the issue of both special and permitted uses in the .
neighborhood commercial district at a study session (date to be set by staff).
The motion passed 6-0 with Commissioner McNAMEE absent.
10. COMMISSION REPORTS
Chair WEISZ announced that she will be having surgery and will be absent from the next
two planning commission meetings.
11. COMMITTEE AND DEPARTMENT REPORTS
There were no committee or department reports.
Planning Commission Page 5
February 6, 2003
INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER
Council Bill No.
Ordinance No.
Series of 2003
TITLE: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING APPENDIX A TO
CHAPTER 26 OF THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE
CODE OF LAWS.
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WHEAT
RIDGE, COLORADO, THAT:
Section 1. Appendix A of Chapter 26 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws is
hereby amended as shown on Exhibit A attached to this ordinance.
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 immediately upon adoption.
INTRODUCED, READ, AND ADOPTED on first reading by a vote of
to on this day of 2003, 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 2003, 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 2003.
CADocuments and Settings\alan\My Documents\WPFiles\Projects\zoning amendmentsWee sched ord.doc
SIGNED by the Mayor on this day of 2003.
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:
CADocuments and Settings\alanNMy Documents%WPFiles%Projects\zoning amendmentsVee sched ord.doc
City of Wheat Ridge ~F WHEgT p
Community Development Department
Memorandum c~E OR P~~
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Alan White, Community Development Director 0V
SUBJECT: Ordinance Regarding Appendix A to the Zoning and Development Code -
Fee Schedule
DATE: January 30, 2003
Attached is an ordinance changing the fees for various land use applications processed by the
Department. The fee schedule is Appendix A to Chapter 26. As with any change to Chapter 26,
Planning Commission needs to provide a recommendation to City Council.
Also attached is the current fee schedule which has been in place for two years. A comparison of the
current fees with the proposed fees shows an increase for most applications. The reasons for the
increase are twofold:
• Increased personnel costs over the past two years.
• Inclusion of fees for engineering review.
Higher fees are associated with the more complex projects where a substantial amount of
engineering review occurs.
Staff recommends approval of the new fee schedule.
Suggested Motion:
"I move to recommend approval of the ordinance amending Appendix A of Chapter 26 concerning
the fees charged for the review of land use applications."
CMwumenB and Sewngs\alan\My Documents\WPFiles\MEMOS\Fee Sched PC.doe
CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
FEE SCHEDULE - EFFECTIVE 4/16101
Pre-Application $150
Annexation and Zoning
Application Fee $500 + $50/acre
Publication/Public Notice Fee $500
Variance
Administrative or Regular
Application Fee $200
Publication/Public Notice Fee $90
Temporary Permit
30-Day
One-Year
Application Fee $150
Publication/Public Notice Fee $90
Application Fee $200
Publication/Public Notice Fee $90
Minor Subdivision
Without Dedication
Application Fee $500 + $30/lot SFR
$500 + $100/acre Non SFR
Publication/Public Notice Fee $150
With Dedication
Application Fee $500 + $30/lot SFR
$500 + $100/acre Non SFR
Publication/Public Notice Fee $300
Major Subdivision
Preliminary Plan
Application Fee $500 + $30/lot SFR
$500+ $1001acre Non SFR
Publication/Public Notice Fee $300
Final Plat
Application Fee $300 + $15/lot SFR
$300 + $100/acre Non SFR
Publication/Public Notice Fee $300
Lot Line Adjustment, Plat Amendment, or Consolidation Plat without Dedication
Application Fee $200
Publication/Public Notice Fee $0
Consolidation Plat With Dedication
Application Fee $300
Publication/Public Notice Fee $300
R-O-W Vacation, Street Width Designation
Application Fee $300
Publication/Public Notice Fee $300
Current
Planned Building Group, Site Plan
Application Fee
Publication/Public Notice Fee
Special Use Permit
Application Fee
Publication/Public Notice Fee
Rezoning
Rezone to Non-PD District
Rezone to PD District
Application Fee
Publication/Public Notice Fee
Planned Developments
Final Development Plan
Application Fee
Publication/Public Notice Fee
Development Plan Amendment
Application Fee
Publication/Public Notice Fee
Application Fee
Publication/Public Notice Fee
$250/acre
$0
$500
$300
$500 + $15/acre
$300
$750 + $15/acre
$300
$250/acre
$300
$250/acre
$300 (Not required if administrative)
Floodplain Exemption
Class I
Class II
Application Fee
Publication/Public Notice Fee
Application Fee
Publication/Public Notice Fee
$150
$0.
$250
$90
Resubmittal Fee
$150
Each application shall be reviewed by staff once and be returned for corrections. If after review of the resubmittal
changes have not been made as requested by staff, the application will be returned with corrections. Subsequent
review will occur only when the resubmittal fee is paid. Each subsequent resubmittal will require the fee.
Multiple Case Process
In cases where applications require the processing of more than one request, the applicant will be charged
the fees for each request.
Recording Fees
Applicants will be charged the fees to record documents as set by the County Clerk and Recorder as follows:
Plats & Development Plans $10/page
Boundary Surveys $20/first page + $10/ea. add'I page
Mylar Copies $5/page
Other Documents (8 1/2 x 11 or 8 1/2 x 14) $5/page
NOTES:
SFR = Single Family Residential and Duplex
Per Acre charges are based upon the acreage rounded to the next highest whole number.
Applicants will be charged the actual cost of mailing and publication of public notices. Costs given are
for an average of 12 mailings and public notice with an average legal description. Applications with
extraordinary mailing requirements or legal descriptions will be charged the additional cost of postage
or publication.
-v
M.-I".,
I
U
£
U
m
U
m
O
O
m
M
VJ
LO
LLJ
U)
O
O
~
d
O
O O
04
~ O
C-4
~ O
04
O
O
)
~
O
°
O
6s
O O
U~ (3)
A
j
N
C°j
+ M
+ M
O M
+ ~•Oj
+
M
L
O
(A V)
O
O Vi
C)
0 (A
O
~
O
Cl) -
O
(O
O
O
O
O
(D
M
6%
fA
to
ER
fA
G
Ems'
a)
a
~
a
E_
N
N
23
a
N
N
h
=
N
a
LL
_0
L
LL
LL
co
LL
LL
LL
C
U
U
U
=
U
a
U
U
y
o
a
p
o
0
0
0
0
z
a)
z
z
c
z
c
z
z
r
y
a)
v
v
v
E
v
v
v
s
t
w
~.0
a) -
a
a)a
a
a)
a)
-0
a)
d m
U
U
a
LLa
O
a)
LL Q.
4
m
LL a
c
(1)
m
LL d
c
N
d
LL
a)
LL
z
-
LL a
.
3
Q
N
c C
C c
~
C
C c
E
C c
E
c
c
c
c
c c
p O O
o o
N a
O O
¢
O O
Q
O
w
O
O
O O
Q
Z
z
ca
E c
m m
c
m co
c
m
CL
m
m
m m
4
CD
o
Y
E
:5
~
a
.
N
p
v ~
=
=
Q, o
u g
N
a
U g
-
R
a
.
E
2
0
0 4
d
Qa
c
CL .
o
o E
an
a2
a
0
CL
-0
CL -0
a)
?LLL
m
a)
aria'
z¢a
a
¢a'
> o
Qa
~
<CL
~
¢
w
¢
a_
<(L
c: d
C
) 0
U)
O
O
C
~
;
V a) a)
(6 (a
C
O
0
'O Q
O
O
16
Z W
;
d U U
jp U U
c
G
y
o.
N
co
C
C
>
N
co
o a a
"V,
Q a'
aQ a
of Ni
CD
~
a)
~
° ~
0)
O
O
0
°
U
U
O
W
IL
m
c
-
a
ti
or
LU CL
www
,
e
=o~
w
O
N
N
N
N
N
4) a)
c
UAW
?L
U
w
❑
O
O
1
0
0
06
U
VD
LL ¢
LL Q
d
m
(n N
(n
U
°
o m
o c
Co
-
O
o
3
°
°
°
°C) 0
N
_
O
O
o C)
_
0 0
O
+
O O
0 0
c
0 0
EH ~
O
(AD
O
O
V~l64
+ +
0
o
O_O
N
O
O LO
om
M613,
Orn
N A
d
Orn
MfA
+ +
u~
+ +
M
OO
M
-Wt=.
fA 69
O 61)
(A
64
O
(R
0 0
(A
o c)
(A
o C)
(A
-
O
O
O O
0 0
O O
(O O
w O
1
(A
fA
(A (4
(f)
(A (H
(D
(D
LL
LL
LL
LL
LL
LL
U
U
U
U
U
U
O
O
O
O
O
O
Z
Z
z
z
z
z
~
U
U
U
U
_U
U
-
LL
N 9
a) a
U
a) a
a)
a
(1)
m
N
M
U
an
'
d
LL a
a) m
LL (L
~S
a) =
LL a
m
LL
m
(L
m
LL
a
a)
LL
3
a
C
C C
C C
QQ
C c
C
C
C
C
C
C
r
•C O
Q)
Q
O O
O O
m
0 0
O
O
O
O
O
O
`a
Q
z
m m
m m
o
m co
c o
m
m
m
co
c m
m
=AW
N U
•
p
2.9
.2 .2
U U
O
•
U
U
C
U
U
Q U
•
U
rW,
c
C (i) .Q
0
Q .
O_ Q
O. M
N Q
'
V
O.
.L)
Q
-
O_
a
z
N d
d
•
~
O
`b
r O
m lL a
a 3
¢a
a)
a
a 3
Qa
c
a 3
¢a
5,
a
°
a
¢
3
a
m
¢
~
a
~
¢
'
a
m0
ccc
m
Z
p
Qd
aO
o
a
a
Q o o
y
m
m
° Q
R cu cc
c
u
3
?
_
U
)
Va
W
a t
¢
x 3 3
.
c
E
Q m
a0
o
c
m
o
w
w
om
s
cam
O
o
~s
U-
a` z
a¢ a
F M
o c N Y
m O d 3
:c y 0)'3 0 0 E
x .c c N- 0 0 c
7= c
c a ° 3= = o V
L° E m N H o o
0
rn , c
d¢'CLA ° 3
c 'R CA N v E
C [A
O` G) 4'00 Q - O
a) w> a e a= d 0
r E
m O c v a) O m
~ U m N m V O
co N w 'm0 O N a p
w m m +N' N m 6
CL 0 c m m 0 O. r L a
Y a)
Y CAL ° 0Y a)
> Y a
oN
a 'O .m. O E
m m m
0
a) 4) CA „N, > N U m CL
0
w
N m N o. 0 .0
L O C rn C m r T
a) 0Um50a0 mo
0 E
m acc =E vv v>.
N
E - o
D
LL c 0 0
a) ; a) m h L N
O) U E w C O C r w Lf/°1 0
uj (n U c V .G U O m a) c w 0
wu¢o aaa,m~,M N> -C a)
Za`)a 3 ¢`0 taxi 0 3s Ho
N C
0 a)
N
N
m
c
c c r- 0
0-0 tr- v
m 2) a) 0
o
O a) ..L.. ~ ) U N° Y a) a) U co t
(M O. a) a _N ai
0 M.0 N O O m 0) Q O N
c m 9 E
a) C L L - - C)
~m3a a0ia0a0 t~cci w E
w w
° 0 o a n c c c .3 L Z m c
0E' wmm900 0 0 io a) E
O L U C C !6 l6 co a) > C c m N
00 00 o_0~aa~u0 omc rn~0 a~
C) f» o o m a n o o 0 0 n-n-n Doc E o m 0) o
> 0 U 0 3 m 3 m m o C) ° N N
a) Y U U N - CL a U N )n O N
o 0, a) n -0.11) 6»066. >t»
O m _
O `
mom'>y ~v0 03 a6i
cc w Na)a) sa)~rri K
mw c j o.oc`
o N N cti `mw o N N
vu 0 aa)O -ffi m wd-0 No Q a0i
c " 0 a) zr " v a) ° 0 CC) 0
m 3: E N 0 N N y 9 E 0 O 0 w co
N O
a a) Q a) y N > a) O N N C 0 a U ) m N C
Y O LL G LL fo a) O a) ' C m
m O W C m N m w c c 21= j .0 s co x
a t 0 ° 0 N v m m m m a) m m a a) a CA
0 3 6 0 - m c v z 'a H 0 Q ° o c
ia Co a) a co
0Y Z Y~ Z Na)a U n
9.O9LN U~9 °-C LLL. NNN O
Ea v m. rnm0N>>>>a 00 a)0 U ET_ N
Y a a N 0 0 0 E N N N N E_ 9 N N a 0. 0 C
T U
(a a) r (D LL 0 ~4) 'a n+ C C 'a+ rL+ C C 16 U N p N M V Q a) Y j LL ° a) (n J LL
U
Qm00 0v00 rac .0 c U0~ a o s
E Uw N c a)
c c.L.L) O~'-2'`-2 aL a) N c E.0 n a) c co
J N O. Q N a7 m U N 0= c L CD
> N -c m= V nc m O+~ N
_j L) 0 M
0 0<CL 0N¢a ~w c0>t ~~Y 3 K¢ 0 aa))am0
0
M
d
in
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 February 6, 2003, at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council
Chambers of the Municipal Building at 7500 West 29w 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-02-08: An ordinance amending Appendix A to Chapter 26 of the
Wheat Ridge Code of Laws pertaining to the Zoning & Development Fee
Schedule.
Kathy Field, Administrative Assistant
ATTEST:
Wanda Sang, City Clerk
To Be Published: Wheat Ridge Transcript
Date: January 30, 2003
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 January 16, 2003, at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council
Chambers of the Municipal Building at 7500 West 291h 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-02-08: An ordinance amending Appendix A to Chapter 26 of the
Wheat Ridge Code of Laws pertaining to the Zoning & Development Fee
Schedule.
Kathy Field, Administrative Assistant
ATTEST:
Wanda Sang, City Clerk
To Be Published: Wheat Ridge Transcript
Date: January 9, 2003
Case No.: OA0208
Quarter Section Map N
App: Last Name: Citywide
Related Cases:
App: First N ame:
Case Histor y:
Owne r: Last Name:
Owner: First Nam e:....
App Addre as:
~
Review Body:
City, State Z ip: r
App: Pho ne:
APN:
Owner Address:
2nd Revie w Body:
City/St ate/Zip:
2nd Review Date
Owner Phone:
Decision-making Body
Project Address:
-
Appro vallDenial Date:
Street Name :
City/State, Zip:
Reso/Ordinance No.:
Case Disposition:
Project Planner: hite
File Lo cation: ctive
Notes:.
Follow- Up:
o.:
mend code concerning
removal of fee schedule
rom code
PC - 1/16/03
CC -.1127103 (1st)
CC - 2110/03 (2nd)
Conditions of Approval:
District: F_
Date Rec eived: 1211712002
Pre-App Date: F_
C.ofo"~pagel";: