HomeMy WebLinkAboutWPA-02-01RESOLUTION NO. 10 2002
Series of 2002
A RESOLUTION BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE,
COLORADO, ADOPTING AN AMENDMENT TO THE WHEAT RIDGE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN (WPA 02-01)
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Wheat Ridge adopted a Comprehensive Plan on
October 25, 1999 and further amendments were considered and adopted in January 24, 2000; and
WHEREAS, C.R.S. 31-23-206 (2) provides that the Comprehensive Plan may be amended by
the City from time to time; and
WHEREAS, an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan has been proposed which changes the
land use designation on the Future land Use Map in a certain area of the City in order to accommodate
possible future redevelopment for the benefit of the City as a whole; and
WHEREAS, C.R.S. 31-23-208 and Section 2-60 (b) of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws requires
review of the Comprehensive Plan or amendments thereto to be reviewed by the Planning Commission
with a written recommendation forwarded to the City Council; and
WHEREAS, notice of a public hearing conducted by the Planning Commission concerning the
proposed amendment to the Comprehensive Plan was published in the Wheat Ridge Transcript on March
21, 2002; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 2-60(a) of the Code of Laws of the City of Wheat Ridge, the
Planning Commission held a public hearing and has forwarded its written recommendation on the
proposed amendment to the City Council; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has held a public hearing as provided by Section 2-60(b) of the
Wheat Ridge Code of Laws; legal notice thereof being duly published in the Wheat Ridge Transcript on
April 4, 2002.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Wheat Ridge,
Colorado, as follows:
A. That the City Council of the City of Wheat Ridge hereby adopts the amendment to the
Wheat Ridge Comprehensive Plan illustrated by Exhibit A.
B. An attested copy of this resolution shall be attached to the Plan amendment and a copy
of the Plan as attested shall be certified to Jefferson County, Colorado.
DONE AND RESOLVED THIS
ATTEST:
WANDA SANG, CITY CLERK
Ylj~ ay 2002
LIEN CERVE YOR
C:\MyFiles\WPFilcs\COMPPLAN\upbam amend cc res.wpd
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: APRIL 22, 2002 Page - 2 -
Motion by Mr. DiTullio to suspend the Rules and let Councilmembers speak as many times
as necessary on Items 1. 2. and 3.; seconded by Mr. Gokey; carried 8-0.
INFORMATIONAL ITEMS
Item 1. Follow-up to joint meeting with Urban Renewal Authority on March 25, 2002.
(Jim Windholz) (No back-up material)
Jim Windholz, attorney for the Wheat Ridge Urban Renewal Authority since the mid
1980's, gave follow-up and answered questions regarding the meeting of March 25, 2002.
He outlined the purpose and benefits of Urban Renewal, as well as the State mandated
process.
Arnie Ray of Scymanski/Ray, was present to answer questions. He outlined some
examples that got off the ground because of Urban Renewal, such as Cinderella City, Villa
Italia, Westland, Northglenn, etc.
Alan White, Wheat Ridge Director of Planning, also answered questions. He described
the conditions of the property in the vicinity of 44th and Wadsworth, directly west of the
Stage Stop Antique Store, and also showed pictures. This was the former Spartan Store,
that burned down many years ago and has remained undeveloped. It has turned into a
dumping ground for unwanted items.
PUBLIC HEARINGS AND ORDINANCES ON SECOND READING
Item 2. Public Hearing on Resolution 10-2002 - A Resolution by the City Council of
the City of Wheat Ridge, Colorado, adopting an amendment to the Wheat
Ridge Comprehensive Plan.
(Case No. WPA-02-01)
Item 3. Public Hearing on Resolution 11-2002 - finding blight in certain additional
areas of the Wadsworth Boulevard Corridor Redevelopment Area and
approving the first modification of the Wadsworth Boulevard Corridor
Redevelopment Plan.
Councilmember Edwards introduced Resolution 10-2002 and 11-2002 and read the titles.
City Attorney, Gerald Dahl, stated that public testimony would be taken on both items
together. He encouraged people to focus their testimony on these two items specifically.
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: APRIL 22, 2002 Page - 3 -
Alan White, was sworn in by the Mayor, presented the staff report, and entered exhibits
into the record.
Jim Windhoiz, was sworn in by the Mayor. He established for the record that all the
requirements of the Urban Renewal Statutes had been followed precisely as outlined in the
law. He entered Exhibits 1 through 4 into the record.
Arthur Anderson, Urban Renewal Consultant, was sworn in by the Mayor. He was asked
by the Urban Renewal Authority to investigate the area at 44`h & Upham Street; the
investigation took place on January 7, 2002; report was presented to the Urban Renewal
Authority on February 11, 2002. He. investigated the site this morning and again this
afternoon. He asked that the two pictures on the front, left and right, be crossed out. On
Page 4, the building on 4281 Upham has now been painted. The fence at 4085 Upham
Street has been fixed and replaced with a chain link fence. Page 6, under Section 5.4, the
address under 3. Should be 4145 Upham, not 4115 Upham. 4. 4275 Upham has been
cleaned up. 5. 4001 Upham, the damaged car has been removed. 11. Has been sealed
off. 1. 3955 Upham has been. cleaned up and looks better than the picture indicates.
Page 7, Item 5.5, 2. 3. 6. 8. 9. and 10. should be stricken. On Page 8, 5.6, 1. has been
partially cleaned up. 4. is out and 3955 Upham has been partially cleaned up. 4281
Upham the building has been painted, but there are still stacks on wood in the area. Page
9., 5.7, 1. the fence cut-through has been fixed.
He gave criteria of what he had looked for when he did the blight study: conditions included
some deteriated or deteriating structures defective or inadequate street layout; absence
of curb, gutter and sidewalk; faulty lot layout; unsanitary or unsafe conditions; deteriation of
site and other improvements; unusual topography; defective or unusual conditions of title;
etc. He stated that even with the improvements he observed today, the elements of blight
still exist.
Mr. Anderson's "Upham Street Blight Survey" was entered into the record as Exhibit 5
Mr. White entered into the record the first modification to the Wadsworth Corridor
Development Plan, that is contained within Councils' packet; this is a description and map
and copy of Urban Renewal Authority Resolution 01. These were marked as Exhibit 7.
Mr. Windholz offered the hard copy of the powerpoint presentation that was made and be
entered as Exhibit 6.
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: APRIL 22, 2002 Page - 4 -
The following speakers were sworn in by the Mayor:
John Minshall, 3550 Miller Court; is the owner of the 20 unit apartment complex, shown
on Page 3 of the blight study as 4001 Upham Street, and is also speaking on behalf of his
mother, who owns the 43 apartments at 4065 and 4085 Upham Street. They are very
proud of their apartments, they are well taken care of, have low rents and loyal tenants. Mr.
Minshall presented pictures of the apartments, which were numbered Exhibits A and B.
He is totally outraged that their properties are considered blighted and rebutted numerous
items in the blight study.
Motion by Mr. Mancinelli to remove the pictures displayed on the front of the dais; these
pictures are not representing the area being discussed; seconded by Ms. Figlus; carried
8-0.
Ray Chewning, 4047 Upham Street, implored Council not to take away their affordable
apartments.
Sheryl Chewning, 4047 Upham Street, apartment manager, opposes the Wadsworth
Corridor Redevelopment Plan. She is offended that the area is being referred to as
blighted. They can't afford, nor do they want to, move. She submitted a letter from a tenant
named Chrysti Hagen as Exhibit C.
Beth Jenkins-Eddleblute, 4031 Upham Street, showed pictures of the inside of their
apartment, which were marked Exhibit D. She is very happy and comfortable there.
Clarence Eddleblute, 4031 Upham Street, agreed with the previous speakers. He is
glad to live there and there are no drive-by shootings, drugs, etc.
Gordon Hinshaw, 4045 Upham Street, questioned why the neighbors to the east side of
the street were not informed of this; is worried about his property value dropping.
Kendra Paiement, 4057 Upham Street, has lived at the Minshall Apartments for 7 years;
she can walk to work at Lutheran; apartments are very well kept, affordable, safe
neighborhood.
Kalen Bauer, 4017 Upham Street, resident of town homes for almost 10 years; agrees
with Mr. Minshall; hopes this won't pass.
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: APRIL 22, 2002 Page - 5 -
Susan Seeds, 6147 West 35th Avenue, read a letter on behalf of Wheat Ridge United
Neighborhoods, which urged not to change the west side of Upham Street to a commercial
designation on the Comprehensive Plan. This letter was designated as Exhibit E.
Mike Markham, 4736 West 69th Drive, Westminster, speaking for Lorraine Neumann,
who lives at 4281 Upham. He brought pictures of 4281 Upham, marked as Exhibit F. He
indicated that these pictures clearly show this is not a slum. He disputed the accuracy of
the blight study.
Rosemarie Moore, owns the properties at 3900 and 3920 Upham Street (east side of
street), gave background on neighborhood.
Jan and Dave Kissell, 4115 Upham Street, presented pictures of their property, which
were marked Exhibit G. Wheat Ridge is unique, we don't want to be like other cities.
There are other properties in Wheat Ridge that. can be developed. There are many empty
shopping centers in the metro area.
Motion by Mr. Schneider to suspend the Rules and go past 11:00 p.m.; seconded by Mr.
Edwards; carried 7-1 with Mr. Hanley voting no.
Efiseo Martinez, 1693 Garland Street, owns 3955 Upham Street. He showed pictures of
the property, which were marked-Exhibit H. He asked that Council not gamble with the
community for something that may not come true.
Jan McNeel, 2012 Beech Court, Golden, owns 4275 Upham Street. He brought pictures
of his property, which were marked Exhibit I. He is opposed to the Urban Renewal Plan
for his street.
Justin Grosch, 1410 South Birch Street, Denver, was present to speak on behalf of his
sister, Corrina Lane, 4093 Upham Street. He addressed increased traffic and safety
issues if a commercial area is put in.
Gerald Oslar, 4085 Upham Street, asked that Wheat Ridge not be turned into a
Lakewood or Arvada.
Cliff Peterson, 4105 A Upham Street, loves living on Upham Street.
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: APRIL 22, 2002 Page - 6 -
Tessa Morris, 1070 Rogers Street, Golden, speaking on behalf of her parents, Angelo
and Lynn Martinelli, 4240 Upham Street. Her parents bought their house as a retirement
home and have put a lot of money into it. They wouldn't want to live there if a commercial
development goes in across the street. People on the east side of the street should have
been informed of the meetings..
Louise Adams, 4065 Upham Street, has lived in her apartment for 12 years and does not
want to be displaced.
Edna Fleming, 4053 Upham Street, doesn't feel that her apartment is a slum or in a
blighted area.
Louise Turner, 11256 West 381t, Avenue, stated that "relocation" means taking people's
homes; that is not something to take lightly. There is no shortage of commercial land in
Wheat Ridge. .
Cheryl Johnson, 4200 Upham Street, asked what would go in across the street.
Robert McLeod, 3960 Upham Street, is opposed to the blight survey.
Neil Duggan, 11237 West 26th Place, Lakewood, is a good friend of the Minshalls;
agrees with all the speakers.
Al Leos, 4221 Upham Street, submitted pictures of his property, which were marked
Exhibit J. He doesn't want to relocate.
Cindy and Ted Whaley, 4100 Upham Street, are opposed to the Urban Renewal Plan.
Josh Green, 4089 Upham Street, lives at the Minshall Apartments; needs the affordable
housing. This plan will not benefit the City of Wheat Ridge.
Mr. White entered two letters into the record, which were marked Exhibits 8 and 9.
Exhibit 8 is a letter from Anne Hinshaw. Exhibit 9 is a letter from J.L. Neumann.
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: APRIL 22, 2002 Page - 7 -
Motion by Mr. Edwards to approve Resolution 10-2002, Case No. WPA-02-01, a
Resolution adopting an amendment to the Wheat Ridge Comprehensive Plan; seconded
by Mr. Gokey; carried 5-3 with Councilmembers Hanley, Mancinelli and Figlus voting no.
Mr. Mancinelli voted no because the Urban Renewal Authority needs to go back to Square
One and deal with what we presented to the Colorado Department of Transportation, the
Wadsworth Corridor Study. We told the State that we would develop a "Village Concept"
on that corner.
Mr. White submitted the latest, revised, edited copy of Resolution 11-2002, which was
marked Exhibit 10.
Motion by Mr. Edwards to adopt the latest version of Resolution 11-2002, which was just
handed out and marked Exhibit 10, a resolution finding blight and amending the
Wadsworth Boulevard Corridor Redevelopment Plan by adding the 3900 block to and
including the 4200 block of Upham Street; seconded by Mr. Gokey; carried 5-3 with
Councilmembers Hanley, Mancinelli, and Figlus voting no.
Mr. Mancinelli voted no because we are dealing with taking out a neighborhood; he has
spent 3 years working on the Wheat Ridge Housing Authority and this is a slap in the face
to moderate income housing.
Ms. Figlus voted no because she cannot see how this area is blighted; she found it well
maintained; people really care about this neighborhood.
Mr. Hanley voted no because this is a neighborhood.
ORDINANCES ON FIRST READING
Item 4. Council Bill 13-2002 - An Ordinance repealing and reenacting Chapter 7 of
the Code of Laws of the City of Wheat Ridge concerning the conduct of
municipal elections.
Council Bill 13-2002 was introduced on first reading by Mr. DiTullio, who also read the title,
summary and background.
Motion by Mr. DiTullio that Council Bill 13-2002 be approved on first reading, ordered
published, public hearing be set for Monday, May 13, 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. Mancinelli; carried 8-0.
Of W:iEgT
P
a AGENDA ITEM _QL
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION April 22, 2002
cOC OR P00
X PUBLIC HEARINGS ORDINANCES FOR 1ST READING
_ BIDS/MOTIONS ORDINANCES FOR 2ND READING
X RESOLUTIONS
Quasi-Judicial: X
Yes No
SUBJECT: Case No. WPA 02-01, a Resolution adopting an amendment to the Future Land Use Map of the
City of Wheat Ridge Comprehensive Plan.
SUMMARY AND BACKGROUND: An amendment to the Future Land Use Map of the Comprehensive
Plan is proposed for the area on the west side of Upham Street. This area is currently shown as Transitional
Residential, Single Family (not to exceed 4 du's/acre) and Planned Residential Development (not to exceed 12
du's/acre.) The proposed amendment would changes these designations to Community Commercial Center, so
that the entire area bounded by 38th Avenue, Wadsworth, 44" Avenue, and Upham would be designated
Community Commercial Center.
A resolution is required to adopt an amendment to the City's Comprehensive Plan. Planning Commission
considered this amendment at a public hearing on April 4, 2002 and did not recommended adopting the
nnendment.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Recommendation to City Council form
2. Resolution No. 10- 2002 , with exhibit
showing amendment
3. Memo to City Council
4. Planning Commission resolution
5. Planning Commission 4/4 draft minutes
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval
BUDGETIMPACT:
Original budgeted amount: $0
Actual contracted amount: $0
Impact of expenditure on line item: $0
Budget Account No.: N/A
ORIGINATED BY: Alan White, Planning and Development Director
STAFF RESPONSIBLE: Alan White, Planning and Development Director
SUGGESTED MOTION: "I move to approve Resolution No. M- 200 Case No. WPA 02-01, a
resolution adopting an amendment to the Wheat Ridge Comprehensive
Plan." Vt~l yUtj -72 4*V&6wc~c?
C:WyFiles\WPFiles\COMPPLAN\upham amend cc action.wpd yJ I _ &4
C i t y o f W h e a t R i d g e
Recommendation(s) to Council
Date I /11 LO2
Board 090 1_
Issue or Case #
RECOMMENDATION(S)/AMENDMENT(S) (if applicable, bullet form)
RESOLUTION NO. 10_2002
Series of 2002
A RESOLUTION BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE,
COLORADO, ADOPTING AN AMENDMENT TO THE WHEAT RIDGE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN (WPA 02-01)
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Wheat Ridge adopted a Comprehensive Plan on
October 25, 1999 and further amendments were considered and adopted in January 24, 2000; and
WHEREAS, C.R.S. 31-23-206 (2) provides that the Comprehensive Plan may be amended by
the City from time to time; and
WHEREAS, an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan has been proposed which changes the
land use designation on the Future land Use Map in a certain area of the City in order to accommodate
possible future redevelopment for the benefit of the City as a whole; and
WHEREAS, C.R.S. 31-23-208 and Section 2-60 (b) of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws requires
review of the Comprehensive Plan or amendments thereto to be reviewed by the Planning Commission
with a written recommendation forwarded to the City Council; and
WHEREAS, notice of a public hearing conducted by the Planning Commission concerning the
proposed amendment to the Comprehensive Plan was published in the Wheat Ridge Transcript on March
21, 2002; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 2-60(a) of the Code of Laws of the City of Wheat Ridge, the
Planning Commission held a public hearing and has forwarded its written recommendation on the
proposed amendment to the City Council; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has held a public hearing as provided by Section 2-60(b) of the
Wheat Ridge Code of Laws; legal notice thereof being duly published in the Wheat Ridge Transcript on
April 4, 2002.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Wheat Ridge,
Colorado, as follows:
A. That the City Council of the City of Wheat Ridge hereby adopts the amendment to the
Wheat Ridge Comprehensive Plan illustrated by Exhibit A.
B. An attested copy of this resolution shall be attached to the Plan amendment and a copy
of the Plan as attested shall be certified to Jefferson County, Colorado.
DONE AND RESOLVED THIS day of 2002.
GRETCHEN CERVENY, MAYOR
ATTEST:
WANDA SANG, CITY CLERK
C:\MyFiles\WPFiles\COMPPLAN\upham amend cc res.wpd
OF wH~gr
City of Wheat Ridge o
U ~
Planning and Development Department
COOO
L ORP
Memorandum
TO: City Council
FROM: Alan White, Planning and Development Director W
SUBJECT: Amendment to Comprehensive Plan
DATE: April 11, 2002
Attached is a Resolution to which is attached a map showing the proposed amendment to the
Future Land Use Map of the Comprehensive Plan. The amendment involves changing the land
use designation on the Future Land Use Map for the area on the west side of Upham Street
currently designated Transitional Residential, Single Family Residential (not to exceed 4 du's per
acre), and Planned Residential Development (not to exceed 12 du's per acre.) The proposal is to
change the designations of these areas to Community Commercial Center.
Major goals of the Comprehensive Plan are to revitalize existing commercial areas and stimulate
economic development. The existing shopping center known as Time Square and the area to the
north were developed more than thirty years ago. Subdivision and zoning actions were taken on
an individual, piecemeal basis. As a result, there is a mixture of zoning designations and lot
configurations that are not conducive to redevelopment of the area.
Standards of the retail industry have changed since this area was originally developed. The
changes have been in response to consumer desires and retail practices. The area as currently
configured does not meet industry requirements for lot depth. A change of the land use
designation to Community Commercial Center provides a better potential opportunity for
redevelopment of this area, consistent with the goals of the Comprehensive Plan.
Staff recommends approval of the amendment. A motion to approve the resolution is necessary.
C:\MyFiles\WPFiles\COMPPLAN\upham amend cc memo.wpd
CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. D
Series of 2002
A RESOLUTION CONCERNING ADOPTION OF AN AMENDMENT TO
THE WHEAT RIDGE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND FORWARDING
SAID RECOMMENDATION TO THE WHEAT RIDGE CITY COUNCIL.
WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plan for this area was adopted only a few years ago
after very lengthy study by the Comprehensive Plan Review Committee, the Planning
Commission and the City Council; and
WHEREAS, there has not been sufficient evidence presented to change the
Comprehensive Plan at this time.
It is recommended to the City Council that no change be made in the current designation
of the area on the map presented to the Planning Commission.
DONE AND RESOLVED THIS 411 day of April, 2002.
PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST: Chair
LC7~+~ eti'
Secretary to the Commission
C:\MyFiles\WPFiles\COMPPLAN\upham amend pe res.wpd
EXHIBIT A
Proposed Comprehensive la Amendment
Current
Classification of
Future Land Use
Proposed
Classification of
Future Land Use
CC: Community Commercial Center
P: Park and Open Space
PS. Public/Semi Public
PRD (12). Planned Residential Development (not to exceed 12 du's/acre)
SF (4): Single Family Detached Residential (sotto exceed 4 du's/acre)
TR: Transitional Residential
6. PUBLIC FORUM
There was no one to appear before the Commission at this time.
7. PUBLIC HEARING
A. Resolution No. 01, Series of 2002, Case No. WPA-02-01: An amendment to the City
of Wheat Ridge Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map. The proposed amendment
is to change the future land use designation of certain areas on the west side of Upham
Street to Community Commercial Center.
The case was presented by Alan White. Staff recommended approval of the amendment which
would provide better opportunity for potential redevelopment of this area. Notices of this
hearing was published in the Wheat Ridge Transcript and, although not required, letters of
notification were sent to landowners involved in this proposal.
Commissioner McMILLIN asked if landowners on the east side of Upham Street were also
notified of this meeting. Alan White replied that they were not.
Commissioner SNOW asked if it is intended to find the subject area blighted and, if blight is
found, would properties be condemned. Alan White replied that findings of blight in the area
will be considered during a hearing in front of City Council on April 22 and, if blight is found,
condemnation would be an option.
In response to a question from Commissioner SNOW, Alan White stated there is no specific
development plan for the subject area at this time.
Chair WEISZ asked to hear from those present who wished to address the Commission.
Gordon Hinshaw
4045 Upham
Mr. Hinshaw expressed opposition to the resolution. The city is putting the cart before the
horse-the blight study has not been approved by City Council and there is no developer. He
also commented that the city has done nothing with the Spartan pad in the past twenty years.
He asked the Commission to hold off on making a decision until there is a specific plan.
David Nikkel
4175 Upham
Mr. Nikkel expressed opposition to the resolution. Residents of this area will not want to
improve their properties if they are designated as a blighted area. No decisions should be made
unless there is a specific development plan. He expressed concern that incompatible uses could
be placed next to his property. There are a lot of unanswered questions for residents of the
area.
John Hatzibakus
4107B Upham Street
Ms. Hatzibakus is presently a renter at this address. He likes the area very much and does not
wish to move from this address.
Planning Commission Page 2
April 4, 2002
Joe McCluskey
Mr. McCluskey appeared on behalf of his sister, Pat Price, who resides at 4110 Upham. Her
main concern is increased traffic generation on Upham Street. He wondered if Upham Street
would be widened and, if so, where ingress and egress would occur on the west side.
Jan Kissell
4115 Upham
Ms. Kissell expressed concern that her house could be condemned. She was opposed to her
area being labeled as "blighted." She has lived in this house for 28 years and chose this
location because of the large lot. She urged the Planning Commission to keep Wheat Ridge as
it is and asked that the area not be placed in urban renewal without a specific plan. She stated
that this is the fourth time residents of this area have had to fight for their property.
Richard Carver
4360 Upham
Mr. Carver expressed concern about increased traffic on Upham. He wanted to know what
kind of development would be proposed for the area.
Ted Whaley
4100 Upham
Mr. Whaley expressed opposition to the resolution. He has lived in this location for over forty
years and likes the area. He expressed concern about the traffic on Upham from 38"' to 44a'.
People drive at excessive speeds on this street and development would only increase the
problem. If the west side of Upham is developed commercially, it will limit access into his
property.
John Minshall
3550 Miller Court
Mr. Minshall owns the apartment complex at 4001 to 4039 Upham containing twenty units. He
expressed concern about the lack of a development plan. He also expressed concern about
increased traffic on Upham. He asked if there was someone interested in developing the area
because it seems someone wants the area for urban renewal and the blight study is almost an
afterthought. If blight exists in this area, residents have never been notified so they could
correct any problems.
Commissioner SNOW asked Mr. Minshall if he was notified of the Urban Renewal meeting
held in February. Mr. Minshall replied that it was posted on the bulletin board and listed in the
Transcript. One of the residents found out about the meeting and notified the rest of the
neighbors. He stated that the first notification he received was regarding this hearing.
Ray Chewning
4047 Upham
Mr. Chewning expressed opposition to the resolution and believed there is a lack of humanity
in displacing approximately 130-140 people. He expressed concern about further traffic
problems on Upham where there is already a speeding problem.
Planning Commission Page 3
April 4, 2002
Cheryl Chewning
4047 Upham
Ms. Chewning manages the apartment complexes here and expressed opposition to the plan.
There are 130 residents in 63 units and they do not wish to move. She does not want to see this
area torn down and redeveloped as a commercial area.
Rose Marie Moore
3900-3920 Upham
Ms. Moore spoke in opposition to the resolution. She also expressed concern that homeowners
on the east side of Upham did not receive written notification of this hearing.
Mike Markham
Mr. Markham appeared on behalf of Julie Newman who lives at 4281 Upham. There are too
many unanswered questions. If there are no prospective developers, there seems to be no need
for this resolution. He suggested that citizens be involved in planning for this area and asked
the Commission to shelve this matter until there is a concrete plan to consider.
Lynne Martinelli
4240 Upham
Ms. Martinelli expressed opposition to the resolution. She has lived in the area for four years
although most of her neighbors have lived in the area for 25-50 years. She wondered why,
when she bought her house, they were required to deed part of their property for widening
Upham. She also expressed concern about increased traffic.
In reply to a question from Commissioner SNOW regarding the street dedication, Alan White
explained that the city requested this dedication to bring the road up to right-of-way standards
for a local street.
Tessa Morris
Ms. Morris spoke on behalf of her father, Angelo Martinelli who lives at 4240 Upham. Her
father is opposed to the resolution. As a realtor, she expressed concern about real estate values
which would plummet as a result of being placed in an urban renewal area.
Jan McNeel
4275 Upham
Mr. McNeel is co-owner of this property with his parents and indicated his opposition to the
resolution. The property is presently being rented to someone with an option to buy. This
option is now clouded with the possibility of the area being designated as blighted. He wanted
to know if there was a petition with the signatures of 25 homeowners necessary to form an
urban renewal authority. He objected to the fact that there was no notice to the homeowners
about the blight study dated October 15, 2001. He also expressed concern about the possible
removal of trees with redevelopment. He questioned that blight exists in the area.
Gay Anne Fay
4320 Upham
Ms. Fay spoke in opposition to the resolution. She lives behind the Stage Stop and would
prefer to keep it rather than have new development with more traffic and more delivery trucks.
Planning Commission Page 4
April 4, 2002
Robert McLeod
3960 Upham
Mr. McLeod spoke in opposition to the resolution. His family is living in this house which was
originally built by his wife's grandmother and felt that people have the right to stay in their
houses if they wish to.
Louise Adams
4065 Upham
Ms. Adams spoke in opposition to the resolution. She rents from the Minshall's and stated she
was terrified of losing her home.
Michael Sheeley
4085 Upham
Mr. Sheeley spoke in opposition to the resolution for reasons previously expressed by others.
Chair WEISZ asked if there were others who wished to address the Commission. Hearing no
response, she closed the public hearing.
Commissioner PLUMMER commented that his understanding was that the resolution is just an
invitation to open this area up for redevelopment and wouldn't necessarily mean the loss of any
homes. Landscape buffering and traffic issues would be addressed if development should ever
take place. Alan White stated that, if a specific development is ever considered, there would
have to be several more public hearings before City Council.
Commissioner SNOW expressed concern that there may be some plan in the works that have
not been presented to the residents since the Urban Renewal Authority does conduct executive
sessions.
Commissioner COOPER stated that, as she drove through the subject area, she did not see
evidence of blight. She asked if it were necessary to change the land use plan before a
developer would even look at this area. Jim Windholz replied that the purpose of this
proceeding is to make a recommendation to City Council as to whether the proposed
modification to the urban renewal plan conforms to the City's Comprehensive Plan. This
recommendation would have nothing to do with blight but only with whether the plan is in
conformance with the COMPLAN. He read from the urban renewal law Section 31-25-107(2):
"Prior to the approval or modification ofan urban renewal plan, the City Council shall submit
such a proposed modification to the Planning Commission for review and recommendations as
to the proposed modification's conformity with the general plan for the development of the city
as a whole. "
In response to a question from Commissioner COLLINS as to whether the city has a plan, Mr.
Windholz stated that there is a Wadsworth Corridor Redevelopment Plan and this modification
would add additional area to this plan for mixed use commercial uses.
Commissioner McNAMEE suggested to those individuals who expressed concern about traffic
on Upham Street that they contact the city regarding installation of traffic calming devices. A
Planning Commission Page 5
April 4, 2002
member of the audience stated the residents had already contacted the city but found that such
devices could not be installed because they would interfere with emergency traffic.
Jim Windholz explained that blight is determined when four out of eleven statutory factors of
blight are found and blight does not necessarily mean individual homes. These findings will be
considered at a public hearing before City Council on April 22 when blight will or will not be
proven. He also stated that there is not a developer on board and there have been no secret
meetings with any developer. This does not necessarily mean there will be a developer who
wants to include the residences along Upham, but if it is in an urban renewal area, the
opportunity is there if the City Council determines to include these properties in a
redevelopment area.
Commissioner McMILLIN stated that, as a residential realtor, he believes that placing an area
under urban renewal makes residential properties more difficult to sell.
Upon a motion by Commissioner SNOW and second by Commissioner COOPER the
following resolution was stated:
Whereas, the Comprehensive Plan for this area was adopted only a few years ago
after a very lengthy study by the Comprehensive Plan Study Committee, the Planning
Commission and the City Council; and
Whereas, there has not been sufficient evidence presented to change the
Comprehensive Plan at this time;
It is recommended to the City Council that no change be made in the current
designation of the area on the map presented to Planning Commission.
The motion passed 8-0.
8. OLD BUSINESS
There was no old business to come before the Planning Commission.
9. NEW BUSINESS
A. Resolution No 02, Series of 2002, Wadsworth Boulevard Corridor Redevelopment
Plan - First Modification
Alan White presented this item which is a charge to the Planning Commission to
determine whether or not the proposal to add this area to the urban renewal area is
consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
Upon a motion by Commissioner SNOW and second by Commissioner
McMILLIN, the following resolution was stated:
Whereas, the Planning Commission has evaluated the proposed first
modification of the plan for its compliance with the Wheat Ridge Comprehensive
Plan; and
Whereas, it has been found by the Wheat Ridge Planning Commission that
the proposed first modification is not in conformance with the Wheat Ridge
Comprehensive Plan;
Planning Commission Page 6
April 4, 2002
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
Notice is hereby given that a Public Hearing is to be held before the City of Wheat Ridge CITY
COUNCIL on April 22, 2002, at 7:00 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. WPA-02-01: An amendment to the City of Wheat Ridge Comprehensive Plan
Future Land Use Map. The proposed amendment is to change the future land use
designation of certain areas on the west side of Upham Street from Transitional
Residential, Planned Residential Development (12) and Single Family Detached
Residential (4) to Community Commercial Center.
Kathy Field, Senior Secretary
ATTEST:
Wanda Sang, City Clerk
To be Published: April 4, 2002
Wheat Ridge Transcript
C:\Kathy\CCRPT$\Pubhear\2002\020404.wpd
April 4, 2002
The City of Wheat Ridge
7500 West 29`h Drive
Wheat Ridge, CO 80215--6713
Re: Resolution 01, Comprehensive Plan Amendment
(Future land use designation of property along Upham Street)
This is notice that the listed landowner is opposed to Resolution 01, Amendment to
Comprehensive Plan which was referenced by Alan White, Planning and Development
Director in a Memorandum dated March 27, 2002 regarding the future land use
designation for the property along Upham Street:
Property Address
-'7~ 8/
Apri14, 2002
The City of Wheat Ridge
7500 West 29'h Drive
Wheat Ridge, CO 80215--6713
Re: Resolution 01, Comprehensive Plan Amendment
(Future land use designation of property along Upham Street)
This is notice that the listed landowner is opposed to Resolution 01, Amendment to
Comprehensive Plan which was referenced by Alan White, Planning and Development
Director in a Memorandum dated March 27, 2002 regarding the future land use
designation for the property along Upham Street:
Landowner Name
Property Address
Landowner Signature
Date
'Y{ Zoo Z-
April 4, 2002
The City of Wheat Ridge
7500 West 29`h Drive
Wheat Ridge, CO 80215--6713
Re: Resolution 01, Comprehensive Plan Amendment
(Future land use designation of property along Upham Street)
This is notice that the listed landowner is opposed to Resolution 01, Amendment to
Comprehensive Plan, which was referenced by Alan White, Planning and Development
Director in a Memorandum dated March 27, 2002 regarding the future land use
designation for the property along Upham Street:
Landowner Name
I/
Propefty Address
Date
6 :L1 -&Sz--vim
Apri14, 2002
The City of Wheat Ridge
7500 West 29 h Drive
Wheat Ridge, CO 80215--6713
Re: Resolution 01, Comprehensive Plan Amendment
(Future land use designation of property along Upham Street)
This is notice that the listed landowner is opposed to Resolution 01, Amendment to
Comprehensive Plan which was referenced by Alan White, Planning and Development
Director in a Memorandum dated March 27, 2002 regarding the future land use
designation for the property along Upham Street:
Date
Apri14, 2002
The City of Wheat Ridge
7500 West 2Wh Drive
Wheat Ridge, CO 80215--6713
Re: Resolution 01, Comprehensive Plan Amendment
(Future land use designation of property along Upham Street)
This is notice that the listed landowner is opposed to Resolution 01, Amendment to
Comprehensive Plan, which was referenced by Alan White, Planning and Development
Director in a Memorandum dated March 27, 2002 regarding the future land use
designation for the property along Upham Street:
Landowner Name
W-I V Z--
April 4, 2002
The City of Wheat Ridge
7500 West 29`x' Drive
Wheat Ridge, CO 80215--6713
Re: Resolution 01, Comprehensive Plan Amendment
(Future land use designation of property along Upham Street)
This is notice that the listed landowner is opposed to Resolution 01, Amendment to
Comprehensive Plan, which was referenced by Alan White, Planning and Development
Director in a Memorandum dated March 27, 2002 regarding the future land use
designation for the property along Upham Street:
Landowner Name
Property Address
414f) t1PN~v~. s~).
Landowner Signature
Date
n 4 -n4 -a4 ,
April 4, 2002
The City of Wheat Ridge
7500 West 29"' Drive
Wheat Ridge, CO 80215--6713
Re: Resolution 01, Comprehensive Plan Amendment
(Future land use designation of property along Upham Street)
This is notice that the listed landowner is opposed to Resolution 01, Amendment to
Comprehensive Plan which was referenced by Alan White, Planning and Development
Director in a Memorandum dated March 27, 2002 regarding the future land use
designation for the property along Upham Street:
Landowner Name
Property Address
°,4.~ 2-o Y1P~'
April 4, 2002
The City of Wheat Ridge
7500 West 29`h Drive
Wheat Ridge, CO 80215--6713
Re: Resolution 01, Comprehensive Plan Amendment
(Future land use designation of property along Upham Street)
This is notice that the listed landowner is opposed to Resolution 01, Amendment to
Comprehensive Plan, which was referenced by Alan White, Planning and Development
Director in a Memorandum dated March 27, 2002 regarding the future land use
designation for the property along Upham Street:
Landowner Name
Property Address
Landowner Signature
Date v
-e'7
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 April 4, 2002, 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. WPA-02-01: An amendment to the City of Wheat Ridge Comprehensive Plan
Future Land Use Map. The proposed amendment is to change the future land use
designation of certain areas on the west side of Upham Street from Planned Residential
Development (12) and Single Family Detached Residential (4) to Community
Commercial Center.
Kathy Field, Senior Secretary
ATTEST:
Wanda Sang, City Clerk
To be Published: March 21, 2002
Wheat Ridge Transcript
C\Katlry\PCRPTS\PLANGCOM\PUBHRG\2002\020404.wpd
The City of
7500 WEST 29TH AVENUE
WHEAT RIDGE, CO 80215-6713 (303) 234-5900
WHEAT heat
City Admin. Fax # 234-5924 Police Dept. Fax # 235-2949 GRidge
March 28, 2002
Re: Comprehensive Plan Amendment Hearing
Dear Landowner:
The purpose of this letter is to inform you of an upcoming hearing the Wheat Ridge Planning
Commission will be conducting concerning an Amendment to the Wheat Ridge Comprehensive
Plan. The hearing will be held on April 4, 2002 at 7:30 p.m. in the City Council Chambers of the
Municipal Building at 7500 W. 291 Avenue.
The Comprehensive Plan Amendment is a proposed change to the desired future land use
designation of property along Upham Street on the Future Land Use Map. The proposed
designation is Community Commercial Center.
You are invited to the hearing to provide your comments about the proposed amendment.
Copies of the Plan Amendment are available at the Planning and Development Department.
Please call 303-235-2846 for more information.
a RECYCLED PAPER
Edwin S. Allen Gordon W. & A. C. Hinshaw David F. Kissell
3915 Upham St. 4045 Upham St. 4115 Upham St.
Wheat Ridge, CO 80033 Wheat Ridge, CO 80033 Wheat Ridge, CO 80033
Klaus D. Cox
4145 Upham St.
Wheat Ridge, CO 80033
Maria H. Baylon
4211 Upham St.
Wheat Ridge, CO 80033
Alfonso Leos
4221 Upham St.
Wheat Ridge, CO 80033
Julia L. Neumann
4281 Upham St.
Wheat Ridge, CO 80033
Stanley R. Nikkel
9202 W. Ontario Dr.
Littleton, CO 80128
Minshall Upham Properties, LLLP
11650 W. 38th Pl.
Wheat Ridge, CO 80033
Jan F. & Marie A. McNeel
2012 Beech Ct.
Golden, CO 80401
Eliseo Martinez & G. S. Trust
1924 King St.
Denver, CO 80204
John W. Minshall
11650 W. 38th Pl.
Wheat Ridge, CO 80033
John A. Minshall
3550 Miller Ct.
Wheat Ridge, CO 80033
4275 Upham St.
4065 Upham St.
4175 Upham St.
3955 Upham St.
4001 Upham St.
4085 Upham St.
Edwin S. Allen
Gordon W. & A. C. Hinshaw
David F. Kissell
Klaus D. Cox
Maria H. Baylon
Alfonso, Leos
Julia L. Neumann
Jan F. & Marie A. McNeel
John W. Minshall
Stanley R. Nikkei
Eliseo Martinez & G. S. Trust
John A. Minshall
Minshall Upham Properties, LLLP
3915 Upham St.
4045 Upham St.
4115 Upham St.
4145 Upham St.
4211 Upham St.
4221 Upham St.
4281 Upham St.
2012 Beech Ct.
11650 W. 38th PI.
9202 W. Ontario Dr
1924 King St.
3550 Miller Ct.
11650 W. 38th PI.
Wheat Ridge, CO 80033
Wheat Ridge, CO 80033
Wheat Ridge, CO 80033
Wheat Ridge, CO 80033
Wheat Ridge, CO 80033
Wheat Ridge, CO 80033
Wheat Ridge, CO 80033
Golden, CO 80401
Wheat Ridge, CO 80033
Littleton, CO 80128
Denver, CO 80204
Wheat Ridge, CO 80033
Wheat Ridge, CO 80033
11 T
•
FROM: Alan White, Planning and Development Director W
SUBJECT: Resolution 01, Amendment to Comprehensive Plan
Imm
Major goals • the Comprehensive Plan are to revitalize existing commercial areas and stimulate
economic development. The existing shopping center known as Time Square and the area to the
north were developed more than thirty years ago. Subdivision and zoning actions were taken on
an individual, piecemeal basis. As a result, there is a mixture
• zoning designations and lot
configurations that are not conducive to redevelopment of the area.
Standards • tberetail industry have changed since this area was originally developed. The
changes have been in response to consumer desires and retail practices. The area as currently
configured does not meet industry requirements for lot depth. A change of the land use
designation to Community Commercial Center provides a better potential opportunity for
redevelopment of this area.
I 111i Pill Ili 11
1 111 1 1110 1 1 1 1 1111 11 1 �� 11 1 1 1���Mllli •
C:\MyFile amend pc nwllno.%vpd
CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO.
Series of 2002
I i # I
1121ill WIV U-
1XIII-My. I k I - 1-
CITY COUNCIL.
WHEREAS, the City Council of Wheat Ridge adopted by Resolution No. 62, Series of
1999, the Wheat Ridge Comprehensive Plan on October 25, 1999 and amendments were
considered and adopted on January 24, 2000; and
WHEREAS, C.R.S. 31-23-206 (2) provides that the Comprehensive Plan may be
amended b y the City from time to time; and
WHEREAS, C.R.S. 31-23-208 and Section 2-60 (b) of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws
requires review of the Comprehensive Plan or amendments thereto to be reviewed. by the
Planning Commission with a written recommendation forwarded to the City Council; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has initiated an amendment to the
Comprehensive Plan as permitted by State Statute and the Code of Laws, and which amendment
attached hereto as Exhibit A; and
WHEREAS, the attached amendment changes the land use designation on the Future
land Use Map in a certain area of the City in order to accommodate possible future
redevelopment for the benefit of the City as a whole; and
WHEREAS, notice of a public hearing concerning the amendment to the Comprehensive
Plan was published in the Wheat Ridge Transcript on March 21, 2002; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held the noticed public hearing on April 4. 200
as provided by Section 2-60(b) of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws. i
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of
Wheat Ridge, Colorado, that the Comprehensive Plan is hereby recommended for amendment as
shown in the attached Exhibit A, and which amendment and this written recommendation
thereon is hereby forwarded to the City Council.
BREMOM
Secretary to the Commission
Proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment
Current
Classification of
Future Land Use
Proposed
Classification of
Future Land Use
CC: Community Commercial Center
P: Park and Open Space
PB: Public /Semi Public
PRD (12): Planned Residential Development (not to exceed 12 du's /acre)
SF (4): Single Family Detached Residential (not to exceed 4 du's /acre)
TR: Transitional Residential
Case No.:
App: Last Name:
App: First Name:
Owner: Last Name:
Owner: First Name:
App Address:
City, State Zip:
App:Phone:
Owner Address:
City/State/Zip:
Owner Phone:
Project Address:
Street Name:
City/State, Zip:
Case Disposition:
Project Planner:
File Location:
Notes:
Follow-Up:
PA0201~ Quarter Section Map No.:
Citywide ; Related Cases:
Case History:
Review Body:
APN:
i 2nd Review Body:
2nd Review Date:
Decision-making Body:
Approval/Denial Date:
Reso/Ordinance No.:
hite
dive
- - -
SE23
mend Comp Plan Future
Land Use Map to change
he designation of certain'
reas on west side of
PC - 4/4/02
C - 3/11/02
CC - 4122/02
Conditions of Approval:
District: II
Date Received: 3/1/2002
Pre-App Date:
=Cxoto page 1