HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/22/2004
6:30 p.m. Pre-Meeting
~~!~~~
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO
7500 WEST 29TH AVENUE, MUNICIPAL BUILDING
March 22, 2004
7:00 p.m.
CALL TO ORDER
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL OF MEMBERS
APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF
PROCLAMATIONS AND CEREMONIES
Swearing in Ceremony for Wheat Ridge Boards and Commissions
CITIZENS' RIGHT TO SPEAK
-
1. Citizens, who wish, may speak on any matter not on the Agenda for a maximum of
3 Minutes and sign the Public Comment Roster.
2. Citizens who wish to speak on Agenda Items, please sign the GENERAL
AGENDA ROSTER or appropriate PUBLIC, HEARING ROSTER before the item is
called to be heard.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Item 1.
CONSENT AGENDA
A Approve Award ITB-04-011 Randall Park Parking Lot
B City Contributions to Outside Agencies
C. Urban Area Security Initiative , _ ' z.. t\-w.-11,," f\xrt~ .:.
~). Mt.\"')v\-cJ {~nt <d lL'e",^, \ DtH" 1c l^--\ ,\ L, 1
PUBLIC HEARINGS AND ORDINANCES ON SECOND READING
Item 3.
COUNCIL BILL 03-2004: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 26-621
OF THE WHEAT RIDGE CODE OF LAWS PERTAINING TO PARKING
IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS
COUNCIL BILL 01-2004: A REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF A
REZONING FROM RESIDENTIAL ONE-C TO RESIDENTIAL THREE
(WZ-03-11/Marcem)
Item 2.
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA: March 22, 2004
Item 4.
Page -2-
COUNCIL BILL: 04-2004 AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE
DISPOSITION OF UNCLAIMED PROPERTY
ORDINANCES ON FIRST READING
Item 5.
COUNCIL BILL 05-2004: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 26 OF
THE WHEAT RIDGE CODE OF LAWS REGARDING PLANNED
DEVELOPMENTS (Case No. ZOA-03-14)
COUNCIL BILL 06-2004: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 26 OF
THE WHEAT RIDGE CODE OF LAWS PERTAINING TO EXPIRATION
OF DEVELOPMENT PLANS (Case No. ZOA-03-17)
DECISIONS. RESOLUTIONS. AND MOTIONS
Item 6.
Item 7.
Item 8.
Item 9.
Item 10.
Board and Commission Appointments
Resolution 07-2004: Regarding Support of RTD's FasTracks Plan
Resolution 06-2004: Amending the Fiscal Year 2004 General Fund
Budget to Reflect the Approval of a Supplemental Budget Appropriation
for the Legislative Services Budget
-
Resolution 05-2004. Amending the Fiscal Year 2004 Capital
Improvements Projects Budget to Reflect the Approval if a Reduction of
Appropriations
CITY MANAGER'S MATTERS
CITY ATTORNEY'S MATTERS
ELECTED OFFICIALS' MATTERS
ADJOURNMENT
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
Council Chambers
Municipal Building
7500 West 29th Avenue
City of Wheat Ridge, Colorado
March 8. 2004
The Regular City Council Meeting was called to order by Mayor Cerveny at 7'00 p.m.
Councilmembers present: Jerry DiTullio, Karen Berry, Dean Gokey, Wanda Sang, Mike Stites,
Karen Adams, Lena Rotola, and Larry Schulz. Also present: City Clerk, Pamela Anderson;
City Manager, Randy Young, City Attorney, Gerald Dahl; Joyce Manwaring, Director of Parks
and Recreation, Tim Paranto, Director of Public Works; staff; and interested citizens
CALL TO ORDER
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
-
APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF February 23. 2004
Motion by Mr DiTullio for the approval of the Minutes of February 23, 2004 with the
following corrections' strike the name of Hal McVey on Page 3 that was printed twice;
seconded by Mrs. Sang, carried 7-0-1 with Mrs Adams abstaining
CITIZENS' RIGHT TO SPEAK
Presentation of Annual Report by Wheat Ridge Fire Chief Jim Payne. Chief Payne
gave a brief history of the Wheat Ridge Fire District. He gave a description of the
services that the fire district provided by an 85 strong volunteer force with four full-time
district staff members. The fire district ran 2,574 calls Sixty-four percent of the calls
were EMS calls that they co-respond to with an ambulance company called Pridemark
Paramedics. Chief Payne described the shift program changes and how it has
decreased response times. He pointed out the number of mutual aid calls for
assistance, or calls for help from neighboring municipalities. Chief Payne stated that the
Wheat Ridge Fire District has the lowest mill levy. He said that the average response
time for last year was 3 minutes and 45 seconds which compares well to other fire
departments, volunteer or not. He stated that the department is looking to increase their
numbers from eighty-five to about one hundred. Chief Payne recognized the dedication
of the members of the department as the ones that make all of this happen.
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: March 8, 2004
2
Item 1.
Consent Agenda:
A. Award ITB-04-008 2004 Crack Seal/Slurry Project.
B Approve Award RFB-04-003 Leisure Guide Schedules.
Item 1 Consent Agenda was introduced by Mr Stites Pam Anderson read the
executive summary for Consent Items 1A and 1 B
Motion by Mr. Stites to approve the Consent Agenda Item A. and Item B.; seconded by
Mrs Sang; carried 8-0.
PUBLIC HEARINGS AND ORDINANCES ON SECOND READING
Item 2.
COUNCIL BILL 02-2004 - AN ORDINANCE DIRECTING DISPOSAL BY
DEMOLITION OF A CITY-OWNED BUILDING LOCATED AT 6375 WEST
44TH AVENUE
Mayor Cerveny opened the public hearing Council Bill No. 02-2004 was introduced by
Mrs. Sang Pam Anderson read the executive summary.
There were no citizens present that wished to be heard.
Motion by Mrs. Sang to approve Council Bill 02-2004, on second reading, and that it
take effect immediately; seconded by Mr. Schulz; carried 8-0
ORDINANCES ON FIRST READING
Item 3_
COUNCIL BILL 03-2004 - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 26-
621 OF THE WHEAT RIDGE CODE OF LAWS PERTAINING TO
PARKING IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS
Council Bill 03-2004 was introduced on first reading by Mr DiTullio
Motion by Mr. DiTullio to approve Council Bill 03-2004 on first reading, ordered
published, and the public hearing set for Monday, March 22, 2004, at 7:00 p.m. in the
City Council Chambers, and if approved that it take effect 15 days after the final
publication; seconded by Mr. Gokey and Mrs Rotola, carried 8-0
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: March 8, 2004
2
Item 1.
Consent Aaenda:
A Award ITB-04-008 2004 Crack Seal/Slurry Project.
B. Approve Award RFB-04-003 Leisure Guide Schedules.
Item 1. Consent Agenda was introduced by Mr. Stites. Pam Anderson read the
executive summary for Consent Items 1A and 1 B.
Motion by Mr Stites to approve the Consent Agenda Item A and Item B.; seconded by
Mrs Sang; carried 8-0.
PUBLIC HEARINGS AND ORDINANCES ON SECOND READING
Item 2.
COUNCIL BILL 02-2004 - AN ORDINANCE DIRECTING DISPOSAL BY
DEMOLITION OF A CITY-OWNED BUILDING LOCATED AT 6375 WEST
44TH AVENUE.
Mayor Cerveny opened the public hearing Council Bill No. 02-2004 was introduced by
Mrs Sang. Pam Anderson read the executive summary.
There were no citizens present that wished to be heard
Motion by Mrs. Sang to approve Council Bill 02-2004, on second reading, and that it
take effect immediately; seconded by Mr Schulz; carried 8-0.
ORDINANCES ON FIRST READING
Item 3.
COUNCIL BILL 03-2004 - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 26-
621 OF THE WHEAT RIDGE CODE OF LAWS PERTAINING TO
PARKING IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS.
Council Bill 03-2004 was introduced on first reading by Mr DiTullio
Motion by Mr. DiTullio to approve Council Bill 03-2004 on first reading, ordered
published, and the public hearing set for Monday, March 22, 2004, at 7:00 p.m in the
City Council Chambers, and if approved that it take effect 15 days after the final
publication; seconded by Mr. Gokey and Mrs Rotola; carried 8-0
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: March 8, 2004
3
Item 4.
COUNCIL BILL 04-2004 - AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR
DISPOSITION OF UNCLAIMED PROPERTY.
Council Bill 04-2004 was introduced on first reading by Mrs. Rotola.
Motion by Mrs Rotola to approve Council Bill 04-2004 on first reading, ordered
published, and the public hearing set for Monday, March 22, 2004, at 7'00 p m. in the
City Council Chambers, and that it take effect 15 days after final publication if approved;
seconded by Mr Gokey; carried 8-0
DECISIONS. RESOLUTIONS. AND MOTIONS
Item 5.
Allocation of $40,000 from the Capital Improvement Program Budget to
the 38th Avenue Business District.
Allocation of $40,000 from the Capital Improvement Program Budget to the 38th Avenue
Business District was introduced by Mrs. Rotola.
Motion by Mrs Rotola to approve the allocation of $40,000 from CIP account 30-610-
700-721 to the 38th Avenue Business District; seconded by Mrs. Sang; carried 8-0
-
Item 6.
Board and Commission Appointments.
The Board and Commission Appointments were introduced by Mr. DiTullio.
BOARD AND COMMISSION APPOINTMENT BY DISTRICT
DISTRICT I
Motion by Ms. Berry to appoint:
Kim Fear
to the Animal Welfare and Control Commission, term ending 3/2/07.
Jean Schillina
to the Animal Welfare and Control Commission, term ending 3/2/06
Karen Grupe
to the Arborist Board, term ending 3/2/07.
Paul Drda
to the Board of Adjustment, term ending 3/2/07.
Susie Seeds
to the Parks and Recreation Commission, term ending 3/2/07.
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: March 8, 2004
4
Scott Weslev
to the Planning Commission, term ending 3/2/07.
Bob Alldredge to the Liquor Authority, term ending 3/2/07
Seconded by Mr. DiTullio; carried 8-0.
DISTRICT II
Motion by Mr. Gokey to appoint:
Dr. William Trefz to the Animal Welfare and Control Commission, term ending 3/2/07
Robert Howard
to the Board of Adjustment, term ending 3/2/07
Frank Sanzolone to the Liquor Authority, term ending 3/2/07.
Seconded by Mrs. Sang; carried 8-0.
-
DISTRICT III
Motion by Mrs. Adams to appoint:
Ralph Santangelo to the Building Code Advisory Board, term ending 3/2/07
Jerry Sceznev
to the Planning Commission, term ending 3/2/06.
Philip Plummer
to the Planning Commission, term ending 3/2/07
John Miks to the Liquor Authority, term ending 3/2/07.
Seconded by Mr Stites, carried 8-0
DISTRICT IV
Motion by Mr. Schulz to appoint:
Karin Heine to the Animal Welfare and Control Commission, term ending 3/2/07
CITY COUNCil MINUTES: March 8, 2004
5
Kim Stewart
to the Planning Commission, term ending 3/2/06
Anthonv Davia
to the Liquor Authority, term ending 3/2/07
Seconded by Mrs. Rotola; carried 8-0
Item 7.
Evaluation and Reappointment of Municipal Judges.
Evaluation and Reappointment Process of Municipal Judges was introduced by Mrs.
Sang Pam Anderson read the executive summary.
Motion by Mrs. Sang to approve the internal evaluation procedure for the municipal
judges described in the City Attorney's February 23, 2004 memorandum, seconded by
Mrs Rotola; carried 8-0.
Item 8.
Amendment to Council Rules: Election of Mayor pro tem and Council
President.
Amendment to the Council Rules was introduced by Mr. Gokey Mr. Gokey read the
executive summary
-
Motion by Mr. Gokey to amend the Council Rules pertaining to the election of Mayor Pro
Tem and Council President as distributed on February 23,2004, seconded by Mrs.
Sang and Mr DiTullio; carried 8-0
ELECTED OFFICIALS' MATTERS
Mayor Cerveny thanked Mr Gokey for filling in for her when she was away for the
Mayor's Mission to Israel She thanked Eugene Kiefel for being included at a dance
sponsored by all the German clubs in the Denver Metro area. The City of Wheat Ridge
will be receiving two awards at the DRCOG banquet on April 14th: one of the awards in
the category of cooperative service delivery to the Wheat Ridge Police Department for
being a leader in County Crisis Intervention Team, the second award is in the category
of public-private partnerships for the 38th Avenue Business Corridor Revitalization
Program. The City of Wheat Ridge Recreation Center will be honored at the Good News
Breakfast on Tuesday, April 2yth at 6:59 a.m. The breakfast honors people and
organizations that help people and communities maintain good mental and physical
health The Easter Egg Hunt will be on Saturday, April 3rd. All this information is in the
Wheat Ridge Recreation Guide that each household should have received.
Mr. Gokey thanked his fellow Council members, the Mayor, Pam Anderson, and Mary
Cavarra for their participation in the retreat over the weekend He is proud of the effort
of all involved in discussing a strategy for the city, and wanted to particularly thank
Karen Berry for her leadership.
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: March 8, 2004
6
Mrs. Sang thanked her fellow Council members, the Clerk, Treasurer, and the Mayor
for a lot of good input at the retreat. Mrs. Sang asked for a consensus that the sales
tax issue be added to the March 15th Study Session agenda. Consensus was 8 to O.
Mr. Stites wanted to thank Jerry DiTullio for his presentation for the Housing Authority
at the first Monday meeting at the recreation center
Mrs. Rotola thanked everyone for the retreat. She thought that it was informative and
gave us a good heads up on what we need to do
Mr. Schulz stated that he thought the retreat was a real growing experience for him
individually and for the Council as a whole He looks forward to more of those meetings
dealing with the difficult challenges we have facing us. He wished to thank the
applicants for the Boards and Commissions These are significant contributions from the
folks that serve on the committees. He hopes that those not selected at this time will
remain available for other openings in the future.
Mr. DiTullio agreed that the retreat was very good, the facilitator was excellent, the staff
participation was excellent, and the Council was able to debate and talk about the
issues. He asked for a consensus from Council to add an agenda item to the March
15th Study Session with regards to establishing a facilitator process to identify
controversial issues within the community. Consensus was 8 to 0
Ms. Berry wished to thank people for volunteering to work in the community and she
looks forward to meeting everyone and working with them on the various boards and
commissions. Thanks to the citizens for donating your time.
Motion by Mr DiTullio to go into Executive Session for a conference with the City
Attorney, under Charter Section 5 7 (b)(1) and Section 24-6-402 (4)(b), C R.S.,
specifically advice on litigation concerning Chapter 26 of the Code of Laws and advice
concerning the Open Records Act. He further moved that the Council Meeting be
adjourned upon the conclusion of the Executive Session; seconded by Mrs Sang,
carried 8-0
Meeting adjourned at 8:21 p m.
ela Y",-n erson, City Clerk
APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL ON MARCH 22, 2004 BY A VOTE OF to
Wanda Sang, Council President
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: March 8, 2004
7
The preceding Minutes were prepared according to '47. of Robert=s Rules of Order,
i e. they contain a record of what was done at the meeting, not what was said by the
members. Tape recordings and video recordings of the meetings are available for
listening or viewing in the City Clerk=s Office, as well as copies of Ordinances and
Resolutions.
-
\ +- CM-t \
t~soL\\~~!~ ==t=L Occ - ~~0Lj
C)t- ~', ;\~_v\u --=tt 13)2~ l)1 or~ ~ (32. (
CC~ w<'- c ,I b : 1\ '::tl: () -(- ~._. :AJ L/
,J ,.....--/' ',,-
AU '.__ r{J'~\.J'
II ' I \ .p ,~ /,fi--'J
____. \ 0 ~'Vl\ \CCLt-<::"_ v '-~.--"-
G~U~Y ~"\~~ -Ii; ~l:s....ir--
r-
HeA) L_,,- -n.. AuIA.UA,- <2/ --
l\{\J l1". rO<.tt \ l U, t> G-A fJ ~ ~,.{
?x({
D:.. ,--1.' ~
81- 0
4, 'Y. '\ vc il , L 1i\tL>'\. 0---> I S'~ ~''L,^cl" i
( t-( / C~ vt~ .
\'--~ V L.;[_/,Lu~ F -t-L ('- llc ~'''< ~ (ex. C (l1L( cf)
~ L.:-:e-,HL/l Je~ + <'./\ S" t "'~ .
-
l~bVW~
@. - ~1A. L1\...~ Pny}(~thGl/'--\
.'-,~
( 4ftV)'
\
"---/
P6'vl l4U'\l\v\.'li% cG-U Ie '3 k) Llv3i) \:11 At't:
" . . I (' (
S vLt}'L" f-./, ~ CV~'~VLo. Vd -L Cd-- ?:u-.~_tL.~ en... ~-~)
'--':;\Tcl t ,~\ c /tu-l :,t-l.v....1- L;-":-l-LIG lc" (< Xl .t'(~-v--
&', \f~ t L U:,'Y <;~, +'h Il U.. " ':) lc: H~..c\.J..c- ~ 1\.. C:-~J;f-
CLY~_^ttJ<u..-t-:l\<.'u Clli (..1 V.V '-1 Y lo, l~ d,cL-c.'
~."".',~"Iii;BJL' ...'.. ;.' ~'" ..... .'........... ......
, ;' '. W ',\..,' ': c' "..-'
'- -...... ,.,....', .. -'. ", .. ,\..,.; I"', ....,
" .: ,"., .. ", .. - ","'....'
CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO
Municipal Building, Council Chambers
7500 West 29th Avenue
"
\ nit (?
~~L~
March 22. 2004
The Regular City Council Meeting was caljed to order 9Y Mayor CeJYeny at 7:00 p jJl.
Council members pr;fent: Jeny DiTullio; Karen Be~ Dean Gokey, Wanda Sang, Karen
Adams;"Mike Stites, Lena Rotola,lind Lany Schulz: Also present: City Clerk, Pamela
Anderson; City Manager, Randy Young; City Attorney, Gerald Dahl; Director of administrative
Services, Patrick Goff; Director of Community Development, Alan White, Director of Public
Works, Tim Paranto; staff; and interested citizens.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF March 8, 2004 c;j;~
Motion by Mr. DiTullio to approve the Minutes of March 8, 2004; seconded by ; carned ~ -0\
PROCLAMA TIONS AND CEREMONIES
Swearing in Ceremony for Wheat Ridge Boards and Commissions
CITIZENS' RIGHT TO SPEAK
1. Citizens, who wish, may speak on any matter not on the Agenda for a maximum of
3 Minutes and sign the Public Comment Roster.
2. Citizens who wish to speak on Agenda Items, please sign the GENERAL
AGENDA ROSTER or appropriate PUBLIC HEARING ROSTER before the item is
called to be heard.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Motion by Mr. DiTullio to amend the agenda to indude Item
, carried
; seconded by
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: March 22, 2004
2
Item 1,
CONSENT AGENDA
Motion by
b~_ , carried
,y~
\J,\v"k - A. Approve Award ITB-04-011 Randall Park Parking Lot
\I B City Contributions to Outside Agencies
C Urban Area Security Initiative
p . ~-Wtd A-f f 0 I'^ i. .....~1 c (' ~e1/'- * Vc J. ~ t.Ll \c,^s ,\.0.. :.c--
PUBLIC HEARINGS AND ORDINANCES ON SECOND READING
ai-O
to approve the Consent Agenda ltem;Y< B, and C as printed; seconded
&--D.
~\'~ e-:l +,
J '
Item 2. COUNCIL BILL 03-2004 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 26-621
OF THE WHEAT RIDGE CODE OF LAWS PERTAINING TO PARKING
IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS {...~~C{, ~'-c --u- \3\ f
Motion by Mr DiTullio to approve Council Bill 03-2004, on second reading, and that it
take effect 15 days after final publication, seconded by , carried & --- D
/ /t-lC(vd,,-,... I'H...::hq<../ )
,e(
r ~J
Ls::~~l~ ~-"c-; , rl L tli-\..^- Lc.} P:r "y
A--v1,u.{o~~.v<-b . \ ttvl-4-~-( w-< j",..(- h
~--~ r:L i---l.\.L LJ' I-l<;, 0( ~.l'f LJ0~G
l r't..1\ :3 b,\t.tJ-LI\.' ~,~
0;) -\..\ 0 tl.1.-'Vt.' t-w<,<<..t \(.{,~' \7-<' trL .-..,
m 3, COUNCIL BILL 01-2004< A REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF A ' ~ {u.../ '
REZONING FROM RESIDENTIAL ONE-C TO RESIDENTIAL THR E S't{,~ UL h~J
l (WZ -03-11/Marcem) \tl L ,
\\~ '00' lA...LllL cL?~:v:t-.,... --(')< :'c 'S""Vv\vVls "V ~ v-cJ:. *- \ 3\ cl
Motion by Mr DITullIo to approij5 CouncIl BIll 01-2004 on secorfd reading, and that it
take effect ;J ~ day~ after final p~blication, seconded by 1._, carr, ied \> - D
d t"MA;):' G.---ctt.'Ylo- c", I;S,.t t 0t'C.?:c," 0
T ht.vi {. C 1,-Ct.iI--~ \ ') [V\,V\
fv\t;\. L C{\. ,,-0 ) ctf F It ~,-~:f I sru1L6 roy-r-eL.vy {(,'I \
veHf'\.-t.I~/~ ~'9.'\.vJ -\-\L/ d,u<C.A-.l.zeQ.L- ~,:. ~ S'l1A.. ~
(\'\. J -e h-01)
/
I
\
&1Y1M~u.b
S'-ec hU(--,o-~
)
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: March 22, 2004
LA I~'-- Lct\i1;u..y / '3 2)\) O.U~ 0
~ll Me l~1.hYt..1 '326~' C~~~<./
L-O\'\\ ~ Le\,c 4 (,t I k. / '32.-(/0 [)t:Fv
3
crfC~{~
Item 4.
COUNCIL BILL 04-2004 AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE
DISPOSITION OF UNCLAIMED PROPERTY
Motion by Mrs Rotola to approve Council Bill 04-2004 on second reading, and that it
take effect 15 days after final publication, second,ed by , carried IS --0
S;c~. )' c;~)
ORDINANCES ON FIRST READING
Item 5, COUNCIL BILL 05-2004 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 26 OF
THE WHEAT RIDGE CODE OF LAWS REGARDING PLANNED
DEVELOPMENTS (Case No ZOA-0;3-14)
\
Motion by Ms Berry to approve Council Bill 05-2004, ordered published, public hearing
set for April 12, 2004, at 7 00 P m in the City Council Chambers, and that it take effect
15 days after final publication; seconded by qlJ \-z,L ,carried ?S - 10 \
~ .""'-<r
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: March 22, 2004
4
Item 6, COUNCIL BILL 06-2004 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 26 OF
THE WHEAT RIDGE CODE OF LAWS PERTAINING TO EXPIRATION
OF DEVELOPMENT PLANS (Case No ZOA-03-17)
Motion by Mr Stites to approve Council Bill 06-2004,~dered published, public hearing
set for April 12, 2004, at 700 P m. in the City Council Chambers, and that it take effect
15 days after final publication, seconded by Qkv..~,:( ,carried f - 0
\Z,teQ,
DECISIONS, RESOLUTIONS, AND MOTIONS
Item 7,
Board and Commission Appointments
District Two
Motion by Mrs Sang to appoint James A. Chilvers to the Planning Commission, term to
expire March 2,2007, seconded bYe' , ,carried S -0 .
(,v~:".(.1
District Three
Motion by Mrs Adams to appoint Janet Bell to the Board of Adjustment, term to expire
March 2,2006, seconded bys:.'.....I) ,carried ~ - 0
\.)' .'\',<::/) ,
District Four
Motion by Mrs Rotola to appoint Shirley Sandeman to the Wheat Ridge Foundation
Board, term to expire March 2, 2005, seconded by , carried l' - 0 .
~ LwJy
50~
5=11.
~
CO"ZJ
l'-'Orl\,-l C~~I;i " '~~r j L,- ,fe, ,-\,.L... \ Ak L t--
G"L"CJ ~L~~ .d"v~ ~,tt, i0. \ J" C< J' .
~ <; ('_~f,vh-k, " (vC::~'vc.O. "'->C .' c= ( V'\."lh-~'
'?ClLL) Pi '1.jS ~L'-,- " S:y~?-r'" ~'::> ~, [r;eL.I.' ,~.( ----
~U::).",-~:cY '1)~ '::>,,~ tt- L{ \'2\ V\l.c-v ~
-J.-.. -nc "-~ LJ''v- C~ '-..-- ~'l. ,\. \. \< '-j C.{~1.<"''l.u2.), sCu \"-'2....
\ G C 'I. 1 S <:, L-,-,--t0~ t ~ ~ L,Cc..-t.1 Ct "C""" D {.--.--
L~-vJ \
,-;) (\ \) (0 c-\ S'- '-:> 'JtJ.
..v G'v\...I ~{C v(.~0. \, \ ') L0 -::> -( _ ~C~
- L.c L L vk v1;-e...<.-cL _ -t-L. -\-- ~ L \- ~-c.. .. ~ ' ( ,_ ...' l.(;...
"^Co.,,,,,)' 1i' c~~A,- L,,--l;\xhc fH~K +-r"L-~
(.\. ~ -c. c, ti-,-'c'c ) V\.A..' +- ,t"-\ {~~'L ~ ,"we LJ,~LAJe, . '
+l:~. ~ C''(, ~,,,:')J; 1-, V\ '^ Jc. V{C,-'<?_j " cU"'(fC,\,d-:
J.-- ~ LL..C.'v~(). c)<J:J:x/'v y-"
\)i ~~v- DsfYK r
Drr~ +u, --+fu--. c>YcL\A.Q~. c.<2- ~ ,-{~_? I h
& ~.I-' :-c..~ ('1 \ .~c'Y\ \;\", l 'vw..:h~ -1;-~. y-dJ.J ,'~
~ e.--hl~:k C-I.*)0M-l.!A.r-l-'f'W S,-, cJ ~ T '~_
C'. (v' VI. (..l l ('C-:;, -k-~ T (~i:.. "... ~ (\/<.,'4 v-, \.. <: ",..J ( L J'C"
c\.~?\ V\''''r It. 'TL .:') C\/cCv o-c.e.. .' J _ {0-- eCt{,<,.v-z. L
~t\' ) s~( 'v....cc( L.'L_ VI c.('VL\.-1,....~C.)~' U. 1c:,L,,-- (.ccfx.. eO_
C ..ko-/'J' · \k..-JC:"'. 4l,,, "':J :7 (....rtL6 ~ L-"- tc Cj,<\...- ~ V /J ~
l),\?... <Ji1/"--*-k1.V- 1 C\L_<-:..q.....~'~_c;....., t- ) C)'L....C ~ .t~ b"<?<J 1.
I J C< Jt~t ,)(. ,
{\ < ; T '; 1,"' c", v \I, (0", \ / '~+ =,3 ,-v., \J," il'--,f ,1
, LV..- + lye, 1 ~1- ( c '1 "r 1:.:. -~'vVV1) -Iv -K c ct ~-<-'<;LVL.:, l-
t ~~c.. t' t,--,,- l~ L~ lL: (I
1L c;'Vlc,,,"- {~,~C, ~~ \ ~' ~,,\>~ci>~ ,kc--=,
: +~ f. t. (L LL I I <: v_I _L,ev~~C(-L. ~ Ctf!l.l I L.. ( ,
--~, L (.;'v u_cl V...tL~ lCi: \,~{ <.4' -Vc Ct luu llL' ') 1 \.-, VJ2--, GUide ) ,'\c-~ "
~;) Hf T ' C ", \It!'''~' " IZd UK'S_
~{l42... Lcd--{vce. ,::---.l:,^,-vlC-"__ t\,~S tu ~(~lncl0'aLL1r-.....
------\lJ's, (" (;:.t)-~t~L;; vh (VI ~u....,
u_~ ~cl tL,.f- , ' () -<'~
v\( l.\... .""yuA <, p~tL,k1'" h: tlv c, (...... cL~J.-I.<C"(, _':>
I (...J
~~vS... Sb-,,-~ L\ l\C\.v€.G~ -'L\,l, {) cv-.z..+ ~u:...--l ~!r~lz
../ '-../
'vV\ v lL.(-"" k L,J~'~';:-cJ ,- L c(4...,(..tCL ~-o
,tL- \".0'> \ ccf'o<- ~ ,'-' -k, ( T,~ f c," ,
lC<.-<.u....M tv v<'"/a1L"V<--c~ -h c~ t-i.\... i, ~.'- Y""
C\.l\,'(.L GMH"-I'-i0.,-f-, t
c.. \\>>Z [llA."-CLL.., k"~lrY . 6 .[1-
--- \ U \i'VtlltivtJ-c. \--e..c~~
*<00. \.<...- L
+-k-
X "l~.
(
\
\
sc~s h L.. G"'1\.
\.'0tLk ( " \.
~.'Cck.. ~
,~.
~j^,. k-
\.:.Av .. ~L--(
C;:i.~ltk_ ~cf.j,t, 0..-,,-- +-
\ --+e.. t-~. '= :z-::::
~~V{ (cl,--'_j => .... v' L -
--<J[l Vvu..~ ..-<l.L.. t k co c' -::, .
<;,l,,-~
I( tvv'.. ~
-~
~?V/
~,
I ,~41-')
"'---- --- '
~-:::
(\((oC)
,,--,,'-' '1'.1' Chi'~ I ~~il Q,
l' ic, \ (. C~,.,-,.(:., l, \cY"C (""'VVl 1nCpL ,-+--,.,.,::>
/ t '
.l f--.' -Y(--,-,,- \- ( - (.,' V'._ I> \' ~
U'~'\;,l'~ C GGVi/Ll'<:':: I I :''>tZ,J !L~~J~( ~~ ( ~(c_ ~~
-HuA.1'L:r~- f\/lf. cu,(.. ~(..LA_lcl l'L)e,.(.. VL.;2k'..t;, k:-~;l-(('-.SL
i('~ryf, ~ ~~~v L'- ~-~ L_ L-u~~D( - ~'- .-' ~(y~f &,~o~"
~(~ SI, 11,( ft" , ,II 'cCj" h ,teL\ I'~f" t >- ,?"T ~':\
,veLv <'0 ,,']I~ "".J 'it", 1 , c' +c, e, L j,el T" ,ccC..j- 'r-
<t~l~-C- ~ ..
-- .-. ~ ----
}L ,)) , CvLa.~
)31l/~{c ((.d')l;~ / &TIL)l~ <1-"'- 3233 ULc:.-~
Po~ ~/~ l ck.('C~ I' J 282 Pc'_,rc-<'--' Sf...
'./
rOu~j,L~ rHY1c CGL~
~
Ctftl~'1d- ~
-J'f ')0 lU 1 C"'- \ _ j Gee: lei e.... ) ~ 0'~' \,'" S
l D~ leG G+iS L.<J l2S-
. k;-A D :-\IAll, <. C Q'
t--,Lc. ilc\..~ .J ,\--., c\,t''A''n r> ~\.'c ,,'- ( V ~ II L \-CCO-{
S -e. c.c~ ax t.'j ~ ct.'j/
'+L
tis
,r c', \/H J' f c.[ -,
(1. Pr{", ( {").II "I" ~L{ i- ci.cl
I 'Ie
13z \ ,L l' t z.. <:. I, \
',/ .'
be.. w" f'Jl -( (1 .
\ '
l_ (,G~ -(2-
fD'
c.Ac">~
l~Vl b.t
- q
-.,-
-:,)
[u
Ii-'ll \.lLCk
r--('cc~
~ l ~cJ-c C(
[ II 6-< (~i ~ ..
'J- q l.t 1- . '\\uu.'i LV' ~ 4(>,,\ C (I....c'-- \ '\. ~ fL'-l ' \.. pk \. c. c~ ~ H.....c l) 1 \
J ,I J
\clkl~L0"vDC,- / .. (;
c; " '.. ,(' { ~., (.-1 cJ..l::' (' _, 0_ ' , /../1 ,'\1'(
L (:::, t-...!cr\i...l.\d. 'i ~v," "-" I- _, .Y:., N',<'l/\. COt I" ''J
,l..- Y I ) ~ \.. ""C -'-= C. ~ ..~.I-'C' ~
C ,---- ,.. t-' (~ '7. (~ 1 13, c, v'-- \-- '<- Ll
ll\C\.cv'<'" A--vu.~l-CV,cc:'_ ~ OPfl..,>-tcC_J .~
'v~.9Jcx ('Lv, lvj J~\ldh,<-..~f \-~( iV1e +C.-,
I <':' L ( ( A... <.... ~,~, c...c~ +t" ~{- Ll: (J ~ (- (cJL (
(3C;j) '23S- - /Z? 23 ...
--+ ----:-- Gt\.\",JJ. (G~ () l \ L \ ) S't \;~ uAJU.t L \ _ N (:1: 1r~' ~
V \, vllll~ ,\), /";: ( "I)
'\ .>-- ~ y..J.~ \:0- \/1;. L-L\,.-<:> C'/"-'; ,,'..-
- <\ '<.-'\,,--,, -\ A-c~-,"--o> <"<'v~ k,Vlc..~Q...1-"
'.J(; .~ )
'~A( , j
kV~ roo. w--.....S
---~(lV~v,d.S:' t-'1.'-
L.d~D? L1 (C V-<1) -r
)fJfD ~\l1.t..-iJ\,,).-t\,) yt.V:l.) =:,c.l, 1 'LL-<'\,. L~C{'~
(:cL, u_-\, L \..' l \. , L .:'C l c Lv, t" \.< (,I~rffl\..-t -
--VI/Lv- \-h ~-c -)
I,v\.V?~~
kco-r roC L...... /
lte'k/
8-0
(:Vd1\c"( c 'u..
DlC,+
tivl.\..j t
'"
lJ... { "WlCllc::lc.;;-- \!\.tec... t! \. "y'
i fL,C~--L i)~(-i'+-" ..
(\ LI"C~)..,\.. \.-L'---~'-vt 't' t 1
( "\ G......y t-c...
'-
r ,
cje L t, c).,,-,
3.~
. ,
(, )
(,
, "
:~' )
(" -Yc,vJ.\.....; _ 'rx," V,'lY "'" L' t
\\\ r'0'l/0 \J,€L- fn, ')
~ / }
j ~'Y~~ ~(~~ ( , "
. r 7> V 21r/@.. \
....
~dL, r~~~H- 't\l"" ,lcuk r''\ a tc__
1'\.'L''- <).-:;;> ~J"''' ? \..., l;-vC~ t-v. '\.. L --"'-"~
-' . /' --~ ~Lvs ~..:.+.., t c.~ i -Vl..0d--< Ctv\.. C( 'v--,. l<, kv ( -~ V\..LQj~,-i ~\6'.--e{: '--1 ^
( '3\ C )) ~ t1uv-/ 1 ~) A:tf2 v~~. ~to e.L, . 'f C7LZ~Wr- .
'----~/ .
Ur1'-" t\u,':lc~:)- CZ~,;:ttCj"(,>(( vy i~/ 0
) ( s~c &L~ic-5-
(
Jlt:)}
\,,-,V' 5ck~~)
- V~Ll.Lc: LJ Ci)-cv;,'n'L/C,b ,D'-.. -h c. ,'!-cc -DL'-I... c,'Vl C(-+z)
( , \. - I ) t.', -} ,t
C.C'VVlA6L)..--' ClCt-,'v l-\-\ -c. ,j. '-(/ 'i.C;....d<"')CCO-, 'v\;L-<.. v-'<-.-
--
Vi:, \-- l U 1st 1'\~CI).\(*L0 V\;tC{"J iC..J.)
{tclvl <.(-c t \ C, l-e ct l!vLl ~r I\( -C.G-t. L j p...... fry HJ. '2.zj/li
li~'r>v~~j l-'/\ ~C'~Y~J 0UL"L 0-rJ UVl Y1lu g'D .
pc;., \ J), --=--
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: March 22, 2004
5
Item 8,
Resolution 07-2004 Regarding Support of RTD's FasTracks Plan
Motion by Mr Schulz to adopt Resolution 07-2004 regarding support of RTD's
FasTracks Plan, seconde~ by ,carried f;\ - 0
Vtllllt V
Item 9,
Resolution 06-2004 Amending the Fiscal Year 2004 General Fund
Budget to Reflect the Approval of a Supplemental Budget Appropriation
for the Legislative Services Budget
Motion by Mrs Sang (see motions sheet) '\ 2 \...-h: (1, C P D t~ ~\ f.
~ - [J . ' .--.------
Item 10. Resolution 05-2004 Amending the Fiscal Year 2004 Capital
Improvements Projects Budget to Reflect the Approval if a Reduction of
Appropriations
\
,
Motion by Mr DiTullio to adopt Resolution 05-2004 amending the fiscal year 2004 CIP
budget to reflect a reduction of appropriations as follows $50,000 in account number
30-303-800-888, Infill Curb, Gutter and Sidewalk Projects, $100,000 in account number
30-304-800-844, Neighborhood Traffic Management Projects, and $200,000 in account
number 30-306-800-805, 38th Avenue, Kipling to Youngfield Undergrounding Project;
seconded b\-0.ltA..vv, carried -/ ( . I, i, "
Yjl t ., - C-t "-'<.LA- 1',.....
v J U
CITY MANAGER'S MATTERS
CITY ATTORNEY'S MATTERS
CITY COUNCil MINUTES: March 22, 2004
6
ELECTED OFFICIALS' MATTERS
\~'Dl))
Meeting adjourned at p m.
Pamela Y Anderson, City Clerk
APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL ON BY A VOTE OF to
Wanda Sang, Council President
The preceding Minutes were prepared according to '47 of Robert's Rules of Order,
i e they contain a record of what was done at the meeting, not what was said by the
members Tape recordings and video recordings of the meetings are available for
listening or viewing in the City Clerk's Office, as well as copies of Ordinances and
Resolutions
ITEM NO: I A
REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION
COUNCIL MEETING DATE:
March 22, 2004
TITLE:
APPROVE A WARD ITB-04-011 RANDALL PARK PARKING LOT
D PUBLIC HEARING
[g] BIDSIMOTIONS
D RESOLUTIONS
D ORDINANCES FOR 1ST READING (Date: _)
D ORDINANCES FOR 2ND READING
Quasi-Judicial.
D
Yes
[g]
No
BY CLJr in
~ Parks and ~ecreatlO irector
~~f~
City Mana
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
-
A residential lot located at 4105 Fenton, adjacent to Randall Park, was purchased in the spring of
2001 The residential structure located on the lot was demolished before the completion of the
purchase. The purpose of the acquisition was to construct a parkmg lot for park users. There is a
lighted softball field located in the park and the number of parking spaces IS not adequate to
accommodate the users.
The lighted parkmg lot IS designed to accommodate 27 spaces. The entrance will be on Fenton St. and
the eXit will be on 41 st Avenue. The lights will be set on a timer to turn on and off. The lights will turn
off no later than 11'00 pm., assuring ample time for ballfield users to exit the park. The parkng lot
design also conSiders headlight dIrection mto residences and safety features for pedestrians. The
landscapmg for the parkmg lot will be done separately from the construction of the lot.
On February 24,2004 eight (8) bids were received. All met the initial bId reqUIrements. The apparent
low bidder was KECI Colorado, SadalIa in the total amount of$70,863 .00. Staff evaluated their bid
and recommends award based on pricmg, expenence and qualifications. Staff also requests a
contmgency fund of $7,100.00, which is 10% of the total bid.
COMMISSION/BOARD RECOMMENDATION:
N/A
STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES:
The number of participants that use the park and specifically the ball fields for scheduled games,
creates a parking problem In and around the park. Park users impact the residential area by parking on
the street In front of homes. Users also double park in the area available for ballfield parking.
Informational letters with the attached parking lot plan have been sent to the residences surrounding
the park, including homes to the south located on Fenton Court.
ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:
Do not construct a parking lot, convert the lot into a different amemty for the park or bluegrass.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
The project IS budgeted in the amount of$l 00,000.00 in the Conservation Trust Fund (lottery dollars),
which are dedicated revenues for Park and Recreation projects. The bid award IS $70,863.00 With a
10% contIngency fund of $7,100 00.
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
"I move to award ITB-04-011 Randall Park Parking Lot, to KECl Colorado in the amount of
$70,863 00 With an auxilary fund in the amount of$7, 1 00 00 to be charged to account # 54-601-800-
862."
-
or,
"I move to deny award of ITB-04-011 Randall Park ParkIng Lot for the folloWIng reason(s):
"
Report Prepared by-
Reviewed by:
Joyce Manwaring, Parks and Recreation Director
Linda Tnmble, Purchasing Agent
Attachments:
1 Bid Tabulation
2. ParkIng Lot Design Plan
040322 caf Randall Parking Wl
o
u
Wz
~O
Cl_
-I-
0:::<(
1-....1
<(::::>
Ura
~~
u.Cl
Om
>-
t:
u
Q) .~
OJ
<(
OJ J
c
'",
ro
.r: "\
u
~
:J
n.
· J u.
0
:0 >- ~
>-~ ~
lD ~ w
ol-(/)
wrof3
m-g~' w
"
is::J ~ <(
0.
E z
a.Q
o'!1(/)
~8::x::
ci w C'.I ;:: 0:::
z ;0; >-[);O
"'......1:--00:::>
~~~v,,>
o9<(o~()
n..."""'O--f-_
~9~~t3.-J
n.mo-..;:)Q)
9I-Q~@:J
CD_cO 0::0..
I-
o
....I
~
Z
S2
e:::
<(
a.
~
0:::
<(
a.
....I
....I
<(
Cl
Z
~
I-
U
w
-,
o
0:::
0...
Q ""
~
- '- ~
~~~
I..U Cl ~
:d~v3
'"t; ~
~ ~ ~
~~~
" ~.. i
o:::..:h"J '-
1 1
.a 1"-
~~ ~
~~J
~ C
r~
~~ S
.~ ~ \:l
~~S
...;(~:t
1 ("'
~ ~
s '"t;
~JJ
C
Q
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ v ./ ~
~~~~>!~~~~
r:-
~
~
'^ ~ J\ ...., ~ ..1\ '" v vi
~~>~~~~>~
i~ r:-
~
I} ~)~~~~~J
~
-il:t
-~
~
~
~ J'
~ ';1 ." oJ\ ~ V) v' v1
~>~~>->-;:~
1:"-
l.l:lt
\.(\
'::l'-
~ 00 ~ ~ ~ ~ v v
--;:: ~~"J ~ ..; ~ ~ .....'<J --.......:.
t;- ,-~ --' ~ ~ ,-- ?' -----
~
::;ll:
\II
r-
\.r)
~~~""V)v, '-'1v\
>-~->~~~-2~~
~
z
(f) 0
(fJ 0::: j:::
w 0 <(
0 I- ~ U
:> u i:i:
a: <( 0:::
w 0 -!
(fJ 0::: :5
- ill l- LL
(fJ (9 z z -
0 <( p 0 0 "
0 0: N
0 0... ..... '" "
':!) .... .... .... .c
(9 00 0 '"
I ill :J = l- I ~ ~ D
Z 0:: J!l
0 :J 0 (f) s 0 u ~ ~ '0
0:: z >- >= f- (( t z <( ;e
0 0 a:tl. <( 0 0:: 0>
~ C
0 >= (fJ wa:: Z , 00 I- ~ ~ 'in
Z <( :;; ~ 0 <.9 I- Z 0 Z ~ ~ "
w 0 a:: --,(/) ~ 0 2 .c
0 W ww 0
> --' f- 00 (f) 00 -! Z ro 5
0.
ATTACHMENT 1
~
"
o
V
----
6
z.
en
~
u
~
'0
0:
j;
~
!j,
.
.
~:i';j
~!~
<U"
\
I
'q
'i
\3
'it (l.
~~
~ \1l
,z
i~
~
-
~ii
u~
~:.
1,,"31S u01U".,J
w
'g
B,
';T.1
L
I I
. I
~ '" I I
" c ;:l I
~~B <:\
'"
o~1D \>
~~~ ..0:
~ ...
. 0> 1Il
\;i ~g~ -
~ B'6~ .,.
~ !-~\? ...
'i'g't~ 1Il
'"
l{i~~} '"
~OV>""""
1\
~~~~
~,;~~'
~~~~
~~c
-0:'"' .
c:: ,P
g:if. g
~f-~
:I
z
g 0
"e~
i~~
~~~g
~~!~
~g~';
l;" W
[s'j~
~..
g ....0
~'g~~
~-~~:
~a'ti%
,--,..,z:',-.J
~u
0~
, 'l~
\', %~
, ~~ O'i'i
',' g:r ~{0
~,.
\"ru~ u
\\1'5 "-w <l
II, % i~ tg
1\ '-' a~ ~
~ II 'i a~ ~
o ~' % l)-':: ~
) \ ~"ii ~
II \ ~'t: 'ti
I I ~
~
S
l~'f.~
Il ''''l\XIV~\ l
"t" JI/~ ~
~/ (.)
~
r-,--
,\
.L
II
"
"
o
,"'
'50
~
'"
o
.~~~o:
~ .~g
\5~e~
.<r;%
\'tlJ-W
Cl~~~
~~;iS
'2""u\"
lil~rn,n
00
0".......
~;<;~8
~~~~
~'\tv>
%~o~
vRl"->--
~
"
"
JO
if'
a ~ ~ ~ "
~&':
c:: "-' :!'? ~
~~~i~-
t
o ~ <
s~;
.!. ~ "'.
~
'0,
'lJ u01U"-"
~j ~
~
"
\ ~l
,
},~
~
I
I
I
I
'II
~
I' ~
II \ :~
, u~
\ I J....
,\ tn%
h
~u
"X\ \ \
____~ c~
"
~
~
~
~
'0
':\~
~e
ERT''''2''
,..""".O'l"("O,,,"Od""""' ,""
ITEM NO: \ B
REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION
COUNCIL MEETING DATE
March 22, 2004
TITLE:
CITY CONTRIBUTIONS TO OUTSIDE AGENCIES
o PUBLIC HEARING
[g) BIDSIMOTIONS
o RESOLUTIONS
o ORDINANCES FOR 1ST READING (Date:)
o ORDINANCES FOR 2ND READING
QuasI-Judicial:
o
Yes
[g)
No
~~
City Man4er 0
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The CIty Council annually budgets a set amount for contributions to non-profit organizations serving
the cIty's residents. This year's allocation was in the amount of$lO,OOO. The city has received the
following requests for assIstance:
-
y Jefferson Center for Mental Health (open request). Request for funding to help proVIde
essential mental health services to low mcome Wheat Ridge children and their familIes as well
as adults and seniors who are struggling with serious mental illness. During 2003, Jefferson
Center provided services to nearly 500 Wheat RIdge residents totaling $1.4 millIon dollars for
the cost of care. Twenty-percent or approximately $280,000 of that care was subsidIzed.
y Family Tree - $10,000. Request IS for continued support of the cnsis hotline and emergency
clIent needs such as gas vouchers or bus tokens and King Soopers gIft certificates to help with
basic needs such as food, hygiene products, dIapers and formula. The CIty Council has
awarded $10,000 for thIS program through CDBG funding.
y Seniors' Resource Center - $12,000. Request IS to benefit transportation services for older
and/or disabled adults who reside in the city They estimate that 6,500 rides will be provided
to Wheat Ridge cItIzens. The City Council has awarded $10,000 for this program through
CDBG funds.
'r Arapahoe House - $1,000. Request for funding to provide support for the Arapahoe House
detoxification programs. During 2002, 12 Wheat Ridge residents entered the detoxification
program and a total of 17 Wheat RIdge residents were served at various programs throughout
the agency.
> Radio Reading ServIce of the Rockies (RRSR), Inc. - $2,300. Request to provide services to
blmd, VIsually Impaired and print handicapped Wheat RIdge resIdents. ServIces include partIal
underwriting for Wheat Ridge news programmmg, embossing/distribution of BrailIe RRSR
program schedules, printing/distribution of large pnnt RRSR program schedules,
recordmg/dIstributIon of audiocassette RRSR program schedules, purchase of pre-tuned radios
for listeners in pnvate homes or assisted living facilities. Radio Reading Service also prOVIdes
the city with radio services for Channel 8.
COMMISSION/BOARD RECOMMENDATION:
None.
STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES:
None.
AL TERNA TIVES CONSIDERED:
None. Although there are numerous combmatIOns of allocatIOns that could be made by Council,
staffs recommendation is in keeping with past precedence. Volunteers of Amenca has received
fundmg in the past; however, no 2004 fundmg request was received. It IS recommended that funding
be given to Jefferson Center for Mental Health and Arapahoe House in support oftheir programs. In
the past, fundmg has not been given to Radio Reading Service of the Rockies.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
Impact to the city is $10,000 as budgeted in account 01-113-700-780.
--
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
"I move to approve the allocatIOn of$4,000 to Jefferson Center for Mental Health, $2,750 to Family
Tree, $2,750 to the Seniors' Resource Center and $500 to Arapahoe House, as part of the City
Council's 2004 outside agency contributIOns."
or,
"I move to approve the allocatIOn of
agency contributIOns."
as part of the City Council's 2004 outside
Report Prepared by: Debbie Meixner
Attachments:
1. Letters of request
2, CDBG list of approved fundmg
cc Jeanne Oliver, Jefferson Center for Mental Health
Brooke Davidson, Family Tree
John Zabawa, Seniors' Resource Center
Pamela Everett, Arapahoe House
Pam McDonald, RadiO Readmg Service of the Rockies
040322 CAF City Contributions
JEFFERSON CENTER for MENTAL HEALTH
March 4, 2004
Barbara Delgadillo
Assistant to the City Manager
City of Wheat Ridge
Dear Ms. Delgadilllo:
Jefferson Center for Mental Health (Jefferson Center) is pleased to submit this letter to the City
of Wheat Ridge requesting funds to support mental health services for Wheat Ridge residents.
Support from the City will help provide essential mental health services to low income Wheat
Ridge children and their families as well as adults and seniors who are struggling with serious
mental illness.
As a community mental health center, Jefferson Center has been a "safety net" for Wheat Ridge
residents with mental illness or severe emotional problems for over 45 years. During fiscal year
2003, Jefferson Center provided services to nearly 500 Wheat Ridge residents totaling $1.4
million dollars for the cost of care. Twenty-percent or approximately $280,000 of that care was
subsidized. Services provided included:
. individual, family, couples, & group outpatient counseling . 24-hour emergency services
-
. hospital alternative programs such as day treatment . residential care
. vocational assistance and transitional employment . case management
. access to inpatient services at other facilities . medIcation servIces
. psychological testing and evaluation . school-based counseling
. trauma/critical incident debriefing services . employee assistance programs
. adolescent transition services
Additionally, Summit Center, Jefferson Center's vocatIOnal rehabilitation center for adults who
are chronically mentally ill, is located in Wheat Ridge. This drop-in resource center not only
equips adult consumers with job skills training and jobs in the community, but also employs six
full and part-time Jefferson Center staff. We appreciate support the City of Wheat Ridge has
provided Summit Center in the past and look forward to our ongoing relationship in the future.
The Center's most recent contribution to the Wheat Ridge community was a joint project with
Sergeant Kevin Armstrong of the Wheat Ridge Police Department. The Center published a
pocket-sized "Mental Health Resource Guide" in response to his vision to promote mental health
prevention and early intervention to individuals involved with the law. This guide includes
phone numbers, fees and hours of operation of several community agencies so that law
enforcement can quickly and easily refer individuals with mental health issues to the appropriate
care providers.
5265 Vance Street, Arvada, CO 80002 (303) 425-0300 Fax (303) 432-5036
www.jCrrll.org ATTACHMENT 1
J EFFERSON CENTER for MENTAL HEALTH
While providmg mental health servIces to the community is our priority, our ability to continue
serving individuals who are struggling with mental illness is limited due to state budget cuts. In
fiscal years 2003 and 2004 fundmg received from the State was reduced by $2. I million. In the
past, a portIOn of this fundmg has been allocated to the people who have no public or private
insurance coverage and are unable to afford services, like many residents in Wheat Ridge. The
cut in state funding amounts to a 39% reduction in funding for this population resulting in
Jefferson Center bemg forced to reduce, and in some cases, eliminate programs.
Despite these serious funding cuts from the state of Colorado, Jefferson Center was able to provide
mental health ServIces to 6,232 persons during the past year. At any point-in-time, the Center has a
caseload of approximately 4,000 enrolled consumers. This includes children (16.6%), adolescents
(24.7%), adults (54%) and adults over 60 years of age (4.5%). Over 79% of the consumers served had
annual incomes ofless than $10,000. By helping to ensure that these residents receive care, we
not only help the individuals, but we also help to lessen the impact on other service systems, both
public and nonprofit.
We are grateful for the City of Wheat Ridge's support in the past, which has provided essential
mental health services to low-income Wheat Ridge citizens who may not otherwise have
received the services. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at
(303) 432-5174 or by email at ieanneo@icmh.org.
We are hopeful that you will support our mission to provide quality mental health services to
persons with emotional problems and/or serious mental illness by kindly considering this
request.
-
Sincerely,
~
Jeanne Oliver
Vice President, Marketing, Communications & Development
5265 Vance Street, Arvada, CO 80002 (303) 425-0300 Fax (303) 432-5036
www jcmh.org
:i>
....
".."
.y.
r3!!l!!yI!~~lies
www.thefamilytree.org
Family Tree, Inc.
3805 Marshall Street, #\00
Wheat Ridge. CO 80033
Phone: (303) 422-2133
Fax: (303) 422-5707
Gemini
1629 Simms Street
Lakewood, CO 80215
Shelter: (303) 235-0630
Fax: (303) 235-0633
Women In Crisis
P.O, Box 1586
Arvada, CO 80001
Crisis Line: (303) 420-6752
Phone: (303) 420-04\2
Fax: (303) 420-0516
Housing and Family Services
3805 Marshall St" #201
Wheat Ridge. CO 80033
Phone: (303) 467.2604
Fax: (303) 422-4928
I' " Family Center
Kipling Street
L':rewood, CO 80215
Phone: (103) 462-1060
Fax: (303) 462-1315
House of Hope
3301 S, Grant Street
Englewood, CO 80113
Phone: (303) 762.9525
Fax: (303\ 762-9552
Adams County Projects
TANF Stable Families
7190 Colorado Blvd.
Commerce City, CO 80022
Phone: (303) 227-2205
Fax: (303) 227-2777
Early Intervention and
Prevention
Child & Family Services Bldg,
7401 Broadway
Denver, CO 80221
Phone: (303) 412-5123
Fax: (303) 412-5321
Treasure Trunk-Wheat Ridge
7043 W 38th Avenue
Wheat Ridge. CO 80033
Phone: (303) 421-9205
Fax: (720) 898-10\4
T 'Ire Trunk-Lokewood
. W Colfax Avenue
LJewood, CO 80215
Phone: (303) 274-1270
Fax: (303) 274-0594
A. A United Way
'" ^gen(,:y
January 21,2004
Ms. Barbara Delgadillo
Assistant to the City Manager
City of Wheat Ridge
7500 West 29th Avenue
Wheat Ridge, CO 80033
Dear Ms. Delgadillo.
On behalf of families who are helped by Family Tree, we thank the City of Wheat Ridge for
its financial support of our Housing and Family Services Program - from both the CDBG
grant program and from In-kInd donations, And thank you for your information regardIng
these fundIng processes, We would like to submit Family Tree's name for consideration of
$10,000 of In-kInd funds from Wheat Ridge Funds would be used by our Housmg and
Family Services program to help persons who are currently homeless or are at-risk of
becoming homeless.
FundIng would help us pay for program expenses such as our CrISIS hotline and for
emergency chent needs such as gas vouchers or bus tokens (to help with transportation costs
to work, school, doctor's appoIntments and children's parent-teacher conferences), and KIng
Soopers gift certificates to help With baSIC needs such as food, hygiene products, diapers and
formula.
Each year, the number of telephone and walk-in requests for assistance from famihes and
indiViduals in crisis Increases. We receive calls for assistance from far more persons than we
can possibly house. ThiS past year, we assisted 6,295 persons on the criSIS hothne and
provided 633 famihes With either subSidized hOUSIng In conjunction with intensive, home-
based case management through FamIly Tree programs or supportive assistance while on our
walt hst. ASSistance for every person began With a call to our hotline or by walkmg into our
office and meetmg With bilingual hot hne staff.
As neighbors In the same communIty, we appreciate the support from the City of Wheat
Ridge to help citizens who are m need. Thank you for your conSideratIon of our request.
S""l ~'iC ~ ~
Brooke Davldson
Managing Director
Family Tree Housing and Family Services
cC' Ruth Ann Russell, President, Family Tree, lnc
The mission of Family Tree is to help people be safe, strong and self-reliant.
11~
SENIORS'
RESOURCE
CENTER
Building a Foundation for Independent living 5ince 1978,
November 3,2003
Mayor Gretchen Cerveny
City of Wheat Ridge
7500 West 29th Avenue
Wheat Ridge, CO 80033
Dear Mayor Cerveny'
On behalf of everyone at the Seniors' Resource Center (SRC) I would like to thank the City of
Wheat Ridge for its past support. The $5,000 from the General Fund and the $6,000 in
Community Development Block Grant funds for support of SRC' s Transportation Services during
2003 have helped this program to continue to provide services to the older residents living in
Wheat Ridge
-
At this time, we respectfully submit this request for $12,000 from the general fund to provide
transportation services in 2004 for older and/or disabled adults who reside in the City of Wheat
Ridge. We have submitted a separate request for CDBG funds in the amount of$II,OOO for five
hours of transportation on Monday afternoons for residents of Wheat Ridge.
During 2003 the Seniors' Resource Center celebrated its 25th anniversary Since 1978, SRC has
been providing services for older adults in Wheat Ridge Throughout its history the Center has
sought to help older adults maintain their independence and dignity through the programs offered.
These lllclude' in-home care services, employment opportunities, adult day care, volunteer
opportunities, care management services and rural outreach, as well as transportation.
AIl of the services provided by the Seniors' Resource Center are available to the older residents of
Wheat RIdge. Many times a bus driver will notice that some of their riders may need assistance in
areas other than transportation. These referrals are then forwarded to our social workers who are
able to help these older adults access the needed assistance
SRC Transportation Services continues to provide rides to a wide range of older adults
throughout Jefferson County and metro Denver Most are not able to travel without support
from our drivers because of their frailties. It brings comfort to these seniors to know that they
will have help from their home to inside the bus, help with carrying their groceries or getting into
their doctor's office and then assistance back into their home. No other transportation services
offers this level of individual care.
3227 CHASE STREET. DENVER, COLORADO 80212 . (03) 238-8151 . fAX (03) 238.8497
City of Wheat Ridge Request 2004
Seniors' Resource Center TransportatIOn Services
Page 2
SRC Transportation Services provides approximately 72,000 rides per year. Transportation
continues to be one ofthe most requested services by older adults. Due to this large demand and
limited resources more than 100 rides have to be turned down each month. Riders are
encouraged to call in three days in advance to scheduled appointments. They are also asked to
inform dispatchers as early as possible when they need to cancel so those waiting for rides can be
accommodated.
With continued funding from the City of Wheat Ridge, SRC Transportation Services will be able
to continue providing rides to residents of Wheat Ridge. Rides will be provided to medical
appointments, congregate meal sites, grocery shopping adult day care centers, as well as for
personal and escort trips to visit spouses in nursing homes or on trips that combat social isolation.
It is estimated that in 2004, SRC Transportation will provide 6,500 rides to Wheat Ridge
residents.
The cost of providing specialized door-to door transportation continues to rise because of the
increases in gasoline prices, insurance, vehicle maintenance and replacement. With these increases
in expenses the cost of providing a ride for an older adult is $24 The 6,500 estimated rides that
will be provided in Wheat Ridge during 2004 will cost approximately $156,000 To help offset the
cost of providing odes, the riders are charged a fee or asked for a donation. ,There is a fee
schedule based on the type and distance ofthe ride, and the average charged is $6
-
Requests for rides are expected to stay at approximately the same rate as 2003 In order to be able
to continue the services at current level and to also be prepared to accommodate any additional
requests it is necessary for us to ask our funding sources to increase their allocation for these
transportation services. If additional funding is not procured, the number of rides provided might
have to be reduced. SRC Transportation Services would prefer not to have to cut rides to the
growing number of older adults who depend on this transportation service to keep them
independent and in their community As much assistance as the City of Wheat Ridge is able to
provide will be appreciated.
The Seniors' Resource Center and SRC Transportation Services appreciate the past support that
the City of Wheat Ridge has provided. Please feel free to contact Catherine (Kandy) Wagenbach,
Director of Development, at (303) 235-6966 if you have questions or need additional information.
Thank you for your thoughtful consideration of this request.
Sincerely,
~.J-~
J hn Zabawa,
xecutive Director
Comprehens ve Drug, Alcohol and Behavioral Health Services
ARAPAHOE
_ 0 USE
Michael W. ](jrhy, Jr. Ph.D.
CEO
BOARD OF DIRECTORS:
Brian D, Milligan
President
N0171Ul Anderson
Peg Brollm
Lmda J Daniel
Lynn /1.1. Doyle
Bob Hagedorn
David J &hlwey
Brtan D. Larson
-
Diane J\;lourning
Nick Nimmo
Scott E, Pope
Chn'stine C. Powers
Marcella C. Ropp
Mette T. Rlls
Henry "Hank" Robinson
Kathy J Wegner
Ex OFFICIO MEMBERS
Mary Baca
Joan Johnson
Martha Hill Kreutz
Governor Bill Owens
Pat Su/Jivan
Elaine Valente
8801 Lipan Street
Thornton, CO 80260
Main: 303.657.3700
Fax: 303,657,37,8
www.arapahoehouse,org
July 11,2003
Ms. Barbara Delgadillo
ASSistant to the City Manager
City of Wheat Ridge
7500 W. 29th Avenue
Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80215
Dear Ms. Delgadillo:
This letter IS a formal and serious request to the City of Wheat Ridge to support
Arapahoe House for the fiscal year of2003-2004 by contributmg $1,000 00 to our
detoxificatIOn programs. We realize that we recently submitted a proposal to you,
but we are resubmlttmg it so that it IS entered <It the appropnate time dunng your
budget process.
City of Wheat Ridge funding would dIrectly support our DetOXificatIon West
faCIlIty located in your city DetOXification West IS the primary drop site for City
of Wheat Ridge polIce officers delivering intOXicated indiViduals. During calendar
year 2002, 12 Wheat Ridge residents entered our detoxificatIon facilIties; Wheat
Ridge polIce dropped off 8 of these mdlviduals. In 2002, a total of 17 Wheat Ridge
residents were served at vanous programs throughout the agency Wheat Ridge
reSidents benefit from the entire range of services offered at Arapahoe House on a
sliding fee scale.
The average cost, per client admiSSIOn to our detOXification program, IS $220.77
unless medical Issues require the clIent to stay several days for stabilization. As
many detOXificatIon clients are mdlgent, the average amount collected from those
mdlvlduals IS less than $58.00 In order to augment collectIon fees so we may
contmue to proVide services to reSidents and law enforcement officers, we depend
on finanCial support from the City of Wheat Ridge, as well as many metropolitan
Denver municipalIties. In summation, dunng calendar year 2002, 12 Wheat Ridge
clients were admitted to our detoxification programs, mdlcating $2,649.24 in
services.
DetOXification facilitIes are among the most cost-effectIve services supported by
municipalItIes. Arapahoe House provides sites which are convenient and
accessible for polIce officers who need to delIver mtoxlcated indiViduals and
qUIckly return to then dutIes so they may respond to other calls. Furthermore,
Ms. Delgadillo
July I, 2003
Page 2
Wheat Ridge resIdents benefit from increased public safety as a result of removing
and treating intoxicated persons from the streets. The focus of our detoxificahon
program is to facilitate a safe withdrawal from alcohol and drugs and to engage
chents m treatment services offered at Arapahoe House. Detoxification staff
momtors mdlvldual's physIcal symptoms as they WIthdraw from drugs or alcohol.
Upon safe WIthdrawal, the mdlVlduallS assessed for referral into further treatment.
Enclosed you will find one copy of our Program Summary mtended to provide a
bnef overview of our continuum of services. We welcome the opportunity to
facihtate a tour of any of our fourteen metropolitan locations for mterested persons.
On behalf of the Arapahoe House Board of DIrectors and staff, please accept our
appreciatlOn for your conSIderation of support for the City of Wheat Ridge. Please
do not heSItate to contact me directly [303.657.3700] m the event you have
questions regarding this request.
Sincerely,
Arapahoe House, Inc.
~c/rffd-
Michael W. KIrby, Jr., Ph.D.
ChIef Execuhve Officer
Pamela Everett
Busmess Development Manger
cc: Randy Young, Wheat Ridge CIty Manager
Enclosure
October 2, 2003
R-RS~
RADIO READINQ SERVICE OF THE ROCKIES, INC.
Ms. Barbara Delgadillo, Assistant to the City Manager
City Manager's Office
City of Wheat Ridge
7500 W 29th Ave.
Wheat Ridge, CO 80215-6713
Dear Ms. Delgadillo
Thank you and the City of Wheat Ridge for your generous support to the Radio Reading
Service of the Rockies (RRSR) m 2003 RRSR would deeply appreciate your assistance
in presentmg this proposal for fundmg m 2004 to the City of Wheat Ridge m order that
RRSR can not only contmue itS service to current Wheat Ridge reSidents but can locate
and provide our services to additional blmd, visually impaired and print handicapped
Wheat Ridge reSidents. The support from the City of Wheat Ridge is greatly appreciated.
A pnvate non-profit corporatiOn estabhshed m 1990, RRSR is a volunteer based, readmg
and mformation service for Colorado's blmd, Visually impaired and pnnt handicapped
children, youth, workmg age adults and semor Citizens. RRSR broadcasts enable those
persons who - for a vanety of reasons - cannot effectively read newspapers and other
pnnted documents to gam access to otherwise unavailable pnnt matenals.
-
The comment we hear most often from prospective listeners is how much they miSS bemg
able to read their hometown paper ThiS is not surpnsmg when you consider the wealth
of current data newspapers proVide. Today, more than ever, we hve in an mformation-
dnven society Imagine a smgle day without access to newspapers, magazines, menus,
computers, personal & busmess correspondence, etc Detailed mformation that sighted
persons take for granted every day - such as daily news; grocery, discount and store ads,
job opemngs, housmg opportumties; obituaries; calendars of events; school and
neighborhood issues, etc - is Simply not available to the blind, Visually impaired and
pnnt handicapped through any other media.
RRSR is the only readmg service of itS kmd m the State of Colorado. RRSR broadcasts
24 hours a day, 7 days a week. RRSR broadcasts over 80 Colorado newspapers weekly,
includmg the Wheat Ridge Transcript as well as the Arvada Sentinel, Golden Transcript
and Lakewood Sentinel for complete coverage of Jefferson County. RRSR also
broadcast over 50 magazmes weekly mcludmg National Geographic, Readers Digest,
American Heritage and Consumer Reports. RRSR produces daily programming for
children - one m Spamsh - in an effort to encourage literacy and promote cultural
senSitivity. We also produce specific programs for the disabled, semors, parents and
another program in Spanish for adults. All RRSR programs are informative,
educational, unduplicated by other organizations and are offered totally free of
charge. Over 200 volunteers prOVide 8,736 annual hours of audiO mformatlon to RRSR
hsteners.
2200 Central Avenue, Suite A
303786-7777 (voice) email: rrsr(ii)rrsr.org
Boulder, Colorado 80301
web: www.rrsr.org 30393908013 (fax)
RRSR programmmg can be accessed in a number of ways. Rocky Mountam PBS offers
RRSR programs on Its Secondary Audio Programming (SAP) frequency on KMRA TV
Channel 6 in Denver, KTSC TV Channel 8 in Pueblo/Colorado Springs and KRMJ TV
Channel 18 m Grand JunctIon at no cost to RRSR and as a commumty servIce. TV
GUIde's Netlink, Inc. provIdes a free "uplInk" to satellIte services for RRSR programs.
RRSR is made available to all cable TV companies m Colorado at no charge. Programs
are also accessed vIa touch tone telephone usmg our "InformatIOn on Demand" system.
RRSR IS agam available through the internet with the completion of our new T -1 lines
this year RRSR also provides special pre-tuned radIOS which are espeCIally apprecIated
by seniors as they are lightweight, portable and extremely SImple to use. To maxImIze
the use and enjoyment ofRRSR programmmg we also provide quarterly RRSR program
schedules in Braille, large print and audIOcassette formats.
The State of Colorado's Agency for the Blind uses the generally accepted figure that 1 %
ofthe general population under the age of 60 IS blind/VIsually impaIred. ThIS number
Jumps dramatically to 25% after age 60 accordmg to the State of Colorado and the
Denver RegIOnal Council of Government's (DRCOG) Area Agency on Aging. This
means that one in four of our own family, friends and acquaintances age 60 and
older have enough vision loss to be considered visually impaired.
The 2003 projected populatIOn of the City of Wheat Ridge IS 33,308 Based on formulas
explamed above, the CIty of Wheat RIdge is estimated to have 293 b1md/visually
impaired children, youth and workmg age adults WIth an additional 999 blmd/vlsually
ImpaIred senior cItIzens.
These figures do not even mclude the pnnt handIcapped. "Print handicapped" refers to
SIghted persons who, for a WIde vanety of reasons, have difficulty accessing the printed
word. This includes those who phYSIcally cannot hold a newspaper, magazme, etc., or
turn pages such as victims of stroke, paraplegia or any number of debilItatmg dIseases. It
also includes those who cannot mentally process pnnt due to severe dysleXIa,
developmental dIsabilItIes or neurologIcal damage. Colorado has an estimated 52,000
lImIted-English reSIdents who can use RRSR as another resource. Functional illiterates
(estImated to be 17,000 in Colorado) also find RRSR of great benefit. All of the above
mentioned members of the "pnnt handIcapped" category can be found throughout Wheat
RIdge. With the "graYIng" of America and the continued allure of Colorado to all people,
the number of Wheat RIdge reSIdents who can dIrectly benefit from RRSR's umque
servIces WIll contmue to nse. Conservatively, RRSR could be of tremendous servIce to
over 1,500 Wheat RIdge reSIdents alone. Jefferson County has an estimated 23,246
blind/VIsually Impaired populatIon; the State of Colorado has an estimated 120,000-
125,000 b1md/vlsually impaired. According to the American FoundatIOn ofthe Blmd,
one Amencan becomes blmd every 7 minutes.
RRSR is requesting $2,300 from the City of Wheat RIdge to provide the followmg
servIces to bhnd, vIsually ImpaIred and pnnt handicapped Wheat RIdge resIdents.
. Partial underwntmg for Wheat RIdge news programmmg
. Embossmg/dlstributIon of Braille RRSR program schedules
. Printmg/dlstributIon oflarge print RRSR program schedules
. Recording/distribution of audIocassette RRSR program schedules
. Purchase of pre-tuned radIOs for hsteners in private homes or assIsted
hving facilities such as Spnng RIdge Park or Day Break at Vista Village.
Requests for RRSR servIces mcrease each year RRSR apphes to a wide range of
fundmg sources mcludmg JunsdlctlOns, foundatIOns/trusts, corporatIons, servIce and
religious organizations, fundrmsers and pnvate mdlvlduals. For this reason, RRSR IS not
reliant upon anyone source and ItS fundmg requests can remam modest. RRSR asks each
JunsdlctIon to assist m canng for ItS own blmd/vlsually Impmred/pnnt handIcapped
resIdents. The amount requested does NOT cover the full cost of provldmg these
servIces to Wheat RIdge residents but is vital nonetheless. Fundmg dollars translate
dIrectly mto addItIOnal radIOS, program schedules and support services.
There IS no questIon that RRSR servIces greatly enhance the quality ofhfe for the blmd,
vIsually impaired and print handicapped by providmg access to the same informatIOn that
sighted persons take for granted every day. This leads to prolonged mdependence for
semors, heIghtened self-suffiCIency for all, mcreased opportumtIes for employment and
educatIOn, less IsolatIon and depreSSIOn and a means to remam VIable, partlclpatmg
- members of theIr commumties.
Ms. Delgadillo, thank you again for your assistance. Please call if you reqUIre any further
mformatIon. Founder and ExecutIve Director, DavId Dawson, and I would be happy to
meet WIth you and members of the CIty of Wheat Ridge CIty Council to discuss thIS
proposal and answer any questions about RRSR services. RRSR also mVltes you all to
VlSlt our main studIO in Boulder for a tour and the opportumty to mtroduce you to some
of our mcredible volunteers (over 200 and growing! ). We have Just had a member of the
Arvada CIty CouncIl Jom us as a volunteer reader and we would love to have Wheat
RIdge represented in a like manner! I have enclosed the followmg attachments:
. Project Budget
. RRSR 2003/2007 Proposed Budget
. RRSR 2002/2001 AudIt Report
. 501 ( c ) (3) Letter of Determmation
. RRSR Board of Directors
. RRSR Fact Sheet
. Letters of AppreCIatIon, Volunteer InformatIOn and Newspaper ArtIcles
· RRSR Program Schedule (large print format)
Smcerely,
Pam McDonald
Director of Development
enc
City of Wheat Ridge
City Manager's Office
Memorandum
TO: Nick Morgan, CDBG Program Manager
FROM: Barbara Delgadillo, Assistant to City Manager
DATE: January 13,2004
SUBJECT: 2004-2005 CDBG Allocations - City Recommendations
The following are City Council's recommendations for use of the 2004-2005 CDBG program
allocations:
JURISDICTIONAL ALLOCATION ($200.779) $50.121):
1. Jefferson County Housin!!: Authority - $57.500. Funds are for rehabilitation of single-family
housing units owned or leased by low/moderate income individuals or families. These funds will be
used from June 1,2004 through May 30, 2005.
2. Street Improvement Projects - $184.913 (Prot!:. Yr. 2004/2005: $113.162 plus Pro!!:. Yr.
2003/2004: $71.751 - $21.630 Jav Street Project carryover and $50.121 2003 outstandin!!:
- jurisdictional allocation)
Phase 1 major street and pedestrian improvements of area bounded by 46th Avenue and 1-70, Estes
through Carr Streets. The streets are in poor condition beyond normal preventative maintenance and
are located within one of the LowIModerate Income (LMI) target areas. Anticipated Project Cost:
Phase I: $650,000. Total project cost: $2.1 million over three years. Phase 1 timeline is June 1, 2004
through May 30,2005.
Service Proiects ($30.117):
3 Senior Resource Center - $10,000. The Senior Resource Center has requested $11,000 to benefit
transportatIOn services In 2003-2004 for older and/or disabled adults who reside in the City of Wheat
Ridge. SRC is requesting funds for their Community Wheels and Monday Transportation programs
and estimates that these programs will provide over 6,500 rides to Wheat Ridge residents. Timeline
is June 1,2004 through May 30,2005.
4. Stride - $10,117. Stride is requesting $25,000 for the purchase of new office facility. Stride has
lost its current lease and is hoping to purchase office space to provide both stability of services and
long-term cost savings. Location under consideration for purchase is 6025 W. 38th Avenue (current -
offices ofthe Jefferson County Housing Authority). Stride provides self-sufficiency services to 250
homeless and low-income families each year approximately 10 Wheat Ridge residents. The families
receive a combination of case management services, education and training programs, rental
assistance, and other needed supports. Each family has a case manager to help the family develop
ATTACHMENT 2
CDBG Recommendations
2004-2005 Program
Page 2
their self-sufficiency plan, to monitor their progress, and to provide support in achieving their goals.
Timehne is June 1,2004 through May 30, 2005.
5. Family Tree - $10,000. Family Tree is requesting $10,000 continued support of the Hotline/
Information and Referral telephone lines, allowing for continued response to requests for assistance
from families in crisis. They currently employ a part-time low-income Wheat Ridge citizen to
provide advocacy referrals and education to the callers and to provide office support. The assisted
families are homeless or are near homeless and are challenged by rising costs and an inability to meet
their basic needs of rent, food, and utilities. In the past ten (10) years, services have been provided
to 359 persons living within Wheat Ridge. Timeline is June 1,2004 through May 30,2005.
GENERAL ALLOCATION:
1. Nei1!:hborhood Revitalization Stratel!V - $300.000. Economic and Housing strategies for majority
of city area. Boundaries are currently being developed and will encompass all LMI areas ofthe city
averaging 51 % or more.
HOME PROGRAM:
1. Wheat Rid1!:e Housin1!: Authority - $75.000. Buy down of selling cost for very low and low-
mcome housing; increase homeownership.
-
Ibd
ITEM NO' _I C/
REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION
COUNCIL MEETING DATE.
March 22, 2004
TITLE:
URBAN AREA SECURITY INITIATIVE - INTERGOVERNMENTAL
AGREEMENT (IGA)
o PUBLIC HEARING
[gJ BIDS/MOTIONS
o RESOLUTIONS
o ORDINANCES FOR 1ST READING (Date: _)
o ORDINANCES FOR 2ND READING
Quasi-Judicial:
o
Yes
[gJ
No
. (//1 '{ '" ~
Jack Hurst, ChIef ofPohce
City~~
-
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
As the Council is aware, the City of Wheat Ridge has been very active in the development of the
Urban Area Secunty Imtiative (UASI) smce late summer of 2003. Representing the City m thiS
endeavor is Jack Hurst, Chief ofPohce, and Michelle Stodden, Administrative Assistant. Mr Gerald
Dahl, City Attorney, has provided legal review and represented the City's legal mterests in this project
throughout. Documents covenng the history ofthe Urban Area Secunty ImtIatIve and the mvolvement
of the CIty of Wheat Ridge, to date, are attached.
The 2003 and 2004 grant budgets have been approved, and fundmg IS begmmng to occur. The City of
Wheat Ridge has been approved to receive a Significant portion of the 2003 Grant Award to be used to
replace the current emergency radIO system used by the police and Wheat Ridge Fire Department.
That replacement program IS underway at thiS tIme. A finish date IS not known at thiS tIme. The total
award IS approximately $1.5 million dollars for the communications replacement process m Wheat
Ridge.
Due to the extreme pressure placed on UASI participants at the outset ofthls program in 2003, many
administrative and legal processes were delayed m the formal orgamzational process. Over the past
six months, the UASI subcommittees for Legal Affairs, and AdmmlstratlOn developed an
mtergovemmental agreement to be approved by all 23 participatingjunsdlctIons. The final draft ofthe
IGA has been reviewed and approved by the City Attorney, and by the Leadership Committee for
UAS!.
That document is provided for your consideratIOn and approval. I strongly recommend that the city
contmue as a partner in the UASI project for the next four years, as required by thIS agreement. The
potential benefits to this City and its Citizens are great.
The UASI IGA PROVIDES IN PART FOR THE FOLLOWING:
A. Allows for the Denver Urban Area to procure fundmg and assIstance for developmg enhanced
preparedness, mItIgation, response and recovery to/from terronst related actIvIty and attacks
that use or threaten the use of chemical, bIological, radIOlogIcal nuclear and explosive devices.
B Establishes a mechanism and structure for the Denver Urban Area to meet the federal
requirements necessary to develop plans, priorities, and budgets related to grant funding.
C. Defines the "urban area" for purposes of the grant.
D. Defines the roles and responsibilities of participants including the level of participation by
each entIty.
E. Sets the term of the agreement commencing on January 1, 2004 and terminating on December
31,2008.
Appropriate indemnificatIon and severability are provided for partIcIpants.
COMMISSION/BOARD RECOMMENDATION:
None.
STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES:
There are a few issues to be considered. Overall partIcIpation m this program IS positIve and
beneficial. However, the tIme commitment on the part ofrepresentatives to UASI can be conSIderable
and demandmg. The CIty is committed to a four year program, that could evolve into a program
beyond the grant cycles for contmued and future cooperative effort.
ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:
None.
---
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
The finanlcal impact IS generally positive. Some "in-kmd" servIce costs are being absorbed by the
City, but most direct costs for thIS program are covered by the grant Itself.
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
"I move to approve the Intergovernmental Agreement for the Denver Urban Area Secunty InItIatIve,
and authorize the Mayor and Clerk to sign for the City of Wheat Ridge."
or,
"I move to deny approval of the Intergovernmental Agreement for the Denver Urban Area Security
Initiative for the following reason( s) "
Report Prepared by: Jack Hurst
Attachments:
1 Memo dated 03/09/04
2. Memo dated 03/04/04
3 News release dated 12/03
4. Progress report dated 12/08/03
5. Memo dated 10/10/03
6 Progress report dated 09/29/03
Memorandum
TO' Mr Randy Young
City Manager
FROM. Jack Hurst
Chief of Police
SUBJECT. URBAN AREA SECURITY INITIATIVE (VASI)
DATE 03/09/04
As you know, m my capacity as a member of the Urban Area Secunty Imtlatlve (UASt)
Leadership Group, I have been representmg the City of Wheat Ridge on a number of
Issues. The orgamzation was formed when the City and County of Denver received a
federal "homeland secunty" grant m mid 2003 Denver chose to include those
contiguous Jurisdictions to their JunsdlctlOnal boundanes m the benefits of thiS grant
process.
-
The grant process IS for a four-year penod of time, begmnmg with the 2003 award. Two
groups were formed to address all of the logistical, legal, and federal reqUIrements
necessary to secure the grants. One group was the "leadership group" and the other was
the "workmg group". As It ultimately played out, the groups are one-m-the-same.
Therefore I serve on both groups representing the City of Wheat Ridge. Mrs. Michelle
Stodden, Admmlstrative ASSistant to the Chief of Police, is the alternate member.
Because the process was dramatically fast-tracked from the begmning some of the
formal, legal orgamzatlOnallssues were delayed until the present time. Two cntlcal
Issues have recently been resolved and are ready for Junsdlctlonal approval. The by-laws
for the two groups are bemg finalized and will be voted on by the representatives m the
near future. Our meetings are now quarterly, and we expect more by law work done m
June 2004.
The second and most Important matter IS that of the mtergovernmental agreement
development and adoption. Each Junsdiction has had (through their representatives and
their attorneys) an opportumty to review and prelimmarily approve the IGA. That
document IS now m the hands of the City Attorney, and will be presented for City
Council approval at the regular City Council meetmg of March 22, 2004
I strongly encourage the approval of this document. It baSically commits the City to the
UASI for a four-year period of time. The benefits to the City are direct in some cases and
mdlrect m others. Direct benefits mclude the use of a mobile command vehicle and
vanous commumcatlon enhancements mcludmg a $1.5 police/fire radiO commumcatlon
system to replace the current system. Other benefits are trammg programs for first
responders, and metro-Wide exercises to test plans, equipment and response
ATTACHMENT 1
Memorandum
To: Randy Young, City Manager
From: Jack Hurst, Chief of Police
Date: March 4, 2004
RE: Urban Area Security Initiative (UASI) and Region 7 Statewide Security-
Update
It has come to my attention that many elected officials throughout the Denver
Metro area (and probably state-wide) are feeling somewhat frustrated about a
lack of information regarding "homeland security" details. I apologize for not
providing more frequent reports to our Mayor and City Council.
UASI
The City of Wheat Ridge is a participant in the Urban Area Security Initiative
(UASI) and is represented by Jack Hurst and Michelle Stodden, Police
Administrative Assistant. We have been the City's representatives since the
inception of this process in 2003.
-
The UASI grant is Federal and covers approximately 4 years. The 2003 budget
is completed and the City of Wheat Ridge is in line to receive over 1 million
dollars for a complete radio system replacement. The process will include Wheat
Ridge Fire as well.
In addition, training for public safety personnel and other equipment purchases
are part of this process. Wheat Ridge will be a part of this as well. Extensive
training is planned over the next two years. There will also be exercises to test
our capabilities. We have our training coordinator working as part of the training
program.
Region 7 - North Central Region
Wheat Ridge is part of Region 7. The State is divided into regions for purposes
of federal grants and planning. These grants are awarded to the State for local
(Regional) distribution. Awards are to benefit "Regional Response and Needs."
This mayor may not directly benefit Wheat Ridge. We have made several grant
requests through this process as well as UASI but our awards in this program
have been minimal. We will continue to apply for these grants. We participate
through Jefferson County Emergency Management.
On Thursday, March 4, 2004, I reviewed (what I hope to be) the final draft of the
intergovernmental agreement for our continued (official) participation in UASI. I
ATTACHMENT 2
will forward this to the City Attorney who will prepare the IGA for City Council
approval. I hope this approval can be completed as soon as possible.
At this point in time I am relatively pleased and satisfied with both processes.
Obviously with so many governmental entities involved it is not going to be as
smooth as we would like. But, considerable progress and benefit has been
delivered to date.
Please share this information with the Mayor and Council. As I become aware of
specifics I will keep you informed. The communications replacement process will
require considerable Council involvement and notification.
The lack of communication thus far is due primarily to the fact that these
programs are slowly evolving from the initial flurry of activity that started this
process. Progress is more methodical and detailed at this point.
JAH/mls
--
Urban Area Security Initiative
December 2003
The CIty and County of Denver was awarded an Urban Area Secunty Grant from the
Federal government m late summer of2003 The total grant IS over $15 mIllIon. ThIs
grant dIffers from other homeland security grant processes by fact that It goes dIrectly to
the cIty and bypasses the state.
The City and County of Denver gracIOusly decIded to mcorporate contiguous
jurisdictions wIth the CIty of Denver m thIs grant process. That definItIOn mcludes the
CIty of Wheat RIdge. There are over 28 junsdlctlOns mvolved m thIS InItIatIve for 2004
funds. Denver felt that takmg a regIOnal approach m addressmg urban area secunty
needs would benefit not only Denver's response capabIlItIes, but also those capabilItIes of
junsdlctIons ImmedIately adjacent to ItS borders.
Timelmes for meetmg the reporting and applIcatIon process of homeland security grants
are very narrow. The UASI particIpants had less than four months to research, survey,
assess and report costs, quantItIes, mventones, needs and nsks to meet the December 31,
2003 deadline Imposed by the federal government. Through outstandmg cooperatIon,
effort, and commumcatlOn the deadlIne was met, and the grant was submItted for federal
revIew and approvaL
-
ThIS particular grant IS actually a two-year cycle. Fundmg wIll be dIstributed over the
next two years. SpeCIfic goals and objectives have been establIshed for future grants and
IdentIficatIOn of needs in the future.
Smaller junsdlctlOns like the City of Wheat RIdge benefit m a number of ways WIth thIS
type ofreglOnalIzatlOn. Response to senous, WIdespread or catastrophIc events that
would easIly overwhelm a city the sIze of Wheat RIdge would result m a regIOnal
response utilIzmg eqUIpment and resources that came from thIS grant process. A major
consIderatIOn m thIS process IS commumcatIon mteroperabilIty among polIce and fire
response entItIes. The CIty of Wheat Ridge could benefit dIrectly from thIS IdentIfied
need with the purchase and mstallatlOn of a new radIO commUnIcatIOns system that IS
compatible with Denver metro junsdlctIons.
The City will be considering all ofthe optIOns and potentIal benefits available through
our assocIatIon WIth the Urban Area Security ImtIatlve. Intergovernmental agreements
and other operatmg agreements may be brought before the City CouncIl throughout the
first part of 2004
ATTACHMENT 3
Urban Area Security Grant
Progress Report
RE: City of Wheat Ridge Participation Issues
December 8, 2003
Brief History
The CIty of Wheat Ridge IS one of24 partIcIpatmgjunsdIctIons in the 2004 Denver
Urban Area Secunty ImtIative Grant (UASI) process. Grant preparations began m August
2003 with an application deadlme of December 31, 2003
The CIty and County of Denver was one of several major cIties natIOnwide to receive thIS
type of grant. Denver was the only CIty to invite the participatIOn of multiple, contIguous
jUnSdIctIOns mto the development and award process for this grant. The grant award IS
approxImately $15 million. ApproxImately $3 million goes to the State of Colorado WIth
the remainder dedIcated to USAI.
-
In accordance WIth the Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) each partiCIpating
junsdiction will have a representative on the "LeadershIp Group" and on the "Workmg
Group". I serve as the CIty'S primary representatIve on both groups. Michelle Stodden,
,polIce Department AdministratIve Assistant, serves as the alternate to both groups.
I also served as the chaIrman of the Threat/Risk Assessment subcommittee that was one
of several subcommIttees formed to complete the grant development process.
When the process began I saw lIttle hope that the CIty of Wheat RIdge would benefit
from dIrect fundmg opportunIties. However, the UASI CommunicatIon subcommittee
(of the W orkmg Group) evaluated the interoperability potential of all the partiCIpating
jurisdIctIons and determined that the CitIes of Wheat RIdge and Englewood were not
mteroperable WIth Denver or any other major metropolitan city. Ms. Dana Hansen, who
IS the Commumcations Manager for Denver, chaIrs the Communications subcommIttee.
The Communications subcommittee recommended a communications equipment
and installation award for the City of Wheat Ridge in the amount of $1.6 million.
The purpose oHhis recommendation was to satisfy interoperability potential for all
public safety jurisdictions in the Denver Metro Area and specifically within the
VASI.
ATTACHMENT 4
On Thursday, December 4,2003, the UASI WorkIng Group approved the grant budget
contaInmg the Wheat Ridge award, and forwarded the budget to the LeadershIp group
At the same meetmg the Leadership Group approved the budget as proposed. The Denver
Manager of Safety, the Denver City Council, and the federal government must approve
the final budget. Timelines are very short in this process and deadlines arrive
quickly. All "Homeland Security" grants are on accelerated timelines.
Wheat Ridge Radio System Overview
(I will try not to be too technical, but some of technical Information is very Important to
fully understand the current situation regardIng our radio system, and the potential of the
Urban Area Grant award.)
The current radIO commulllcatlons system used by the police department and the fire
department were installed, new, in 1996. The system IS a very good system, and the
eqUipment remains m excellent condItion.
The system IS an analogue (voice) system, trunked (computerized), WIth digItal
capabIlity We have five pairs of "shared frequencies" on thiS system. The CIty basically
owns the nghts to these frequencies granted through FCC licenses. The system operates
in the 800 mhz frequency range.
-
SInce mitial installation the police department has been dissatisfied WIth radio
transmission and reception capabilities in vanous locations throughout the City. Our
recent evaluatIOn of the system Indicates that there may be a variety ofreasons for the
deficienCies. Our communications consultant, Pencle Commumcatlons, prOVIded several
options to remedy these problems. Options varied III both compleXIty and cost by a
conSiderable degree. We recently approved an expenditure of (not to exceed) $50,000 to
begin the lowest level Improvements to the system. Pericle Commumcations was
managing thiS process, and providing the necessary engmeenng.
We have nearly completed the mstallatlon of enhanced radio reception/transmissIOn
eqUipment m cntlcallocatIOns wlthm the City. Everett Middle School, Wheat Ridge
High School, and the Wheat Ridge RecreatIOn Center have received the eqUipment.
Exempla Lutheran HospItal facilities will be completed m early 2004 These
enhancements are reqUired in addItion to any other Improvements to our system.
The most comprehensive and expensive option for improvement of the radio
commumcations system was to combine our system WIth a bigger proVIder, such as the
Denver Police Department. This would allow the City of Wheat Ridge system to access
radIO transmIssion and relay SItes at various locations along the foothIlls, and wIthm close
proXimIty to Denver Due to the high estimated costs for such a remedy the CIty did not
pursue this optIOn.
2
Now, the potentIal of an Urban Area Secunty Grant award of approxImately $1.6 millIon
makes the more comprehensIve remedy a realIty.
It is important to note, however, that there is no radio communication system
available that will be 100% effective throughout the jurisdiction and in all
environmental situations. The best we can hope for is 95% reliability and coverage
with any system.
IF we are ultImately awarded the funds necessary to replace our publIc safety radIo
system (both polIce and fire) there should not be any commUnIcatIons equipment or
mstallation costs assigned to the City. The grant does not reqUIre a matchmg sum of
money However, there are "stnngs".
Grant Process and Requirements
The 2004 grant is the first of several Urban Area Grants that will be receIved by Denver.
It IS highly unlikely that "new members" will be allowed into the process as more funds
are received in subsequent years. All future awards are based upon the goals and
objectIves, as well as the priorities establIshed in the 2004 mitiative. The 2004 grant
covers two to four years. ConceIvably, speCIfic awards could be made anytIme
throughout thIS grant period from 2004 money.
-
In order to remain an active participant in the Urban Area Security Grant process
the City of Wheat Ridge, City Council, must approve and execute an
Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) with the City and County of Denver. This
document needs to be completed wlthm the next 30 to 45 days. A rough draft of the
document has been forwarded to the City Attorney for his review and approval as to
form. ThIS document should be ready for City Council consideratIOn by mId-December
2003. Approval should be completed as early as possible m January 2004.
The IGA sets out speCIfic requirements to partIcIpate. One Important provISIon that
should be noted wlthm the "Purpose SectIOn" provides:
As the recipient of the UAS] Grant. Denver has undertaken responsibility for
administering the UAS] Grant, and for procuring equipment, supplies and
training in accordance with a budget and priorities established by the
Urban Area Working Group, approved by the Urban Area Leadership
Group and concurred in by Denver As the Core City and County
The key words m this section are "responsibility for administering...(and)
. "
procurmg.. .
By agreemg to the proviSIOns of the IGA we agree to allow Denver to administer the
grant, and to procure all eqUIpment, supplIes and trammg. ThIS IS baSIcally a good thmg,
however, the CIty must be careful that their autonomy and theIr interests are protected
throughout the entire process.
3
I believe that a second IGA, or memo ofunderstandmg (MOU), will have to be
developed, and approved by the City of Wheat Ridge and the City and County of Denver
regardmg radio eqUipment and mstallatlOn purchases. The agreement shall have
provisions specific to proprietary rights for equipment currently owned by Wheat Ridge
(towers, consoles, etc.); and, addressing the radio frequencies themselves. It may be
prudent to allow for the use and sharing of the Wheat Ridge frequencies, without
transferring ownership.
I propose the contmued use ofPencle CommunicatIons for advise and for protecting the
City's interest m the development and procurement of radio commumcations systems and
equipment should we be awarded this grant.
Currently, the City of Wheat Ridge contracts radIO maintenance services through Legacy
Communications. The 2004 radio mamtenance budget covers the contract mamtenance
cost as well as a small amount for non-contract maintenance issues. The total budget for
radio mamtenance m 2004 IS slightly less than $50,000 The total budget of$51,268
mcludes mamtenance of other Items such as the unmterrupted power source (UPS)
system and labor costs not covered by contract. Radio mamtenance costs may be higher
through the City of Denver; however, a Denver reqUirement will be that all radiO
mamtenance for the City of Wheat Ridge goes through their maintenance program.
There are legitimate secunty reasons for thiS requirement and unless these costs are
outrageous we should be prepared to pay the higher annual fees.
My primary concern, at thiS point, regarding radiO mamtenance is about tImeliness m
getting equipment fixed or repaired and competing for maintenance time With Denver and
any other JurisdictIon serviced by the Denver shop. Ifpossible I would like to see this
addressed m the agreement With Denver
Recommendations
I recommend the City of Wheat Ridge pursue and work toward capitalizing upon thiS
opportunity. Our radio system will reqUire a full replacement within the next five to
seven years even If we make Improvements recommended by our consultmg engmeers.
The cost of a complete replacement m that time penod will not be any less than the costs
mcurred at thiS tIme.
There are several positive aspects aSSOCiated with the UASI grant proposal.
· All capital costs are paid by the federal grant
· All mstallatlOn costs are paid by the federal grant
· There are no "matchmg costs" to the City of Wheat Ridge
· The City of Wheat Ridge Will have a truly interoperable radio system
matching Denver, Arvada, Lakewood, Westmmster, Englewood, Aurora
and certam contiguous counties (not Jefferson County) and fire dlstncts
(includmg Wheat Ridge Fire, Arvada Fire, and West Metro Fire)
4
. The City of Wheat Ridge radIo system wIll benefit from radIo antenna
locatIOns that redIrect radIo frequencIes VIa mIcrowave from both the east
and west sIdes of the "rIdge" ThIs should improve overall radIO coverage
throughout the City of Wheat Ridge through 95% coverage.
. Accordmg to the latest federal mformatIOn source there is no reqUIrement
to report the dISposItIon of property procured from this grant beyond its
normal lIfe span to the federal government as long as it is dIsposed of m
accordance WIth state and local laws.
. All admimstrative requirements of the grant wIll be provided by the City
of Denver, with the exception of an on-going inventory
. All purchasmg processes and responsibilities for this equipment will be
the responsibilIty ofthe City and County of Denver. The City of Wheat
RIdge will not have to seek bIds, or approve purchases or budget capital
expenditures for this program.
. The duratIOn of the initIal IGA is four years (2004 through 2008)
. Replacement of the City of Wheat Ridge radIO system will be much
sooner than antiCIpated.
. The equipment will be the property ofthe City of Wheat Ridge
Possible negative points m acceptmg thIS grant:
-
. Increased annual radIO maintenance costs (could double)
. Slow maintenance turnaround times
. No dIrect communicatIOns with Jefferson County Sheriff, and other
Jefferson County JUrISdIctIons. ("Star Gate" technologIes may correct thIS
in the near future)
. Voluntary WIthdrawal from the system once we have committed to It may
require full or partIal eqUIpment cost reImbursements to Denver
. The State and federal governments may require the City of Wheat RIdge
to sell or give their current radIO eqUIpment to smaller agenCIes wlthm the
state. Proceeds from sale of eqUIpment may be required to offset new
eqUIpment costs.
. The City of Wheat Ridge will be reqUIred to participate in numerous
trammg programs, field tests, emergency response to WMD exercises and
other components of the grant reqUIrements that we not otherwIse be
mvolved in. (ThIS requirement IS, for some, a negative reqUIrement while
others may see It as very pOSItive)
. InSIgnIficant "turf issues" between participatmg entIties could jeopardize
the award and the entIre program
Critlcal ConsideratiOns mclude:
. Securing continued ownership over currently lIcensed frequencies
. Securing clear understandmg WIth reasonable expectations regarding radIO
maintenance Issues
5
. Securing fair and reasonable severabilIty optiOns from the agreements and
participatIOn in the grant process
. Ensunng the autonomous operatIOn of the CIty of Wheat RIdge's publIc
safety radIO system at all tImes and without agreed upon interference from
any other entity
. Protecting the City of Wheat RIdge's proprietary rights at all levels and
manner. (lncludmg newly obtamed equipment via the UASI grant)
. Ensunng reasonable annual radio maintenance costs.
Hopefully, this document provIdes mformation cntIcal to the decisIOn making process.
We will likely have to expand upon thIS information through a protracted diSCUSSIOn that
mcludes legal and technical options for the City.
Benchmarks in this process requinng decisions of the City Council will come rapidly and
without much warning. Because It is essential that you be well informed at all times, I
will make every effort to communicate with you as soon as I have pertinent mformation
necessary for your consIderation.
This is one of the most important developments involving publIc safety in the City of
Wheat Ridge to take place in the past ten years. This CIty must be m a position to take
full advantage ofthe positIve potential that thIS opportunity presents.
6
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mr. Randy Young
City Manager
FROM Jack Hurst
Chief ofPohce
SUBJECT URBAN AREA SECURITY GRANT INFORMATION
DATE. 10/10/03
As you know, the federal government has awarded the City and County of Denver, an
"Urban Area Secunty Grant" m the amount of $15 mllhon. The City of Denver has
IdentIfied contiguous junsdlctlons to benefit from the award, and to partIcIpate m the
grant plannmg process.
I am representmg the CIty of Wheat RIdge as a member of the "Workmg Group" and as a
sub-committee chaIrman for Risk Assessment. Michelle Stodden IS the alternate
committee member
.-
The CIty of Denver IS planmng a pubhc announcement and press release on Monday,
October 27,2003 The tentative time for thiS event IS 10'00 a.m. It IS to be held m
Denver's CiVIC Center Park. Dlgmtaries from the particlpatmgjunsdlctions are inVited to
partIcipate m the event. A maximum of three people from eachjunsdlctlon WIll be
allowed to partIcIpate, on stage, at thiS event. Any number of people can attend and be m
the audience. It IS anticIpated that the event will last no longer than one hour
I would like you to mform the Mayor and see If she would be wlllmg to represent the
CIty of Wheat Ridge. I do not thmk that everyone mVlted Will have a speakmg role m
thiS event; however, their presence IS certamly encouraged. You and the Mayor may
deCIde If there are any other representatives that should attend.
Lisa StIgall, Pubhc Information Officer for the Pohce Department, IS a member of the
Pubhc Information Committee, and Will be provldmg details as they become aVailable.
ATTACHMENT 5
Urban Area Security Grant
(Federal Homeland Security Grant)
September 29, 2003
Background and Current Status
Background
Followmg federal assistance to major CIties, the federal government made certain
funds, m the form of grants, to other urban areas throughout the United States. Included
m thIS round of funding were urban centers m Denver, Houston, S1. Louis and other
cities. The federal requirement for thIS particular type of grant is that It includes not only
the core city, but also "contiguous JunsdictlOns".
-
This terminology ("conhguous Junsdlchons") has become problemahc for the
Denver Urban Area Secunty Grant Process, and similar issues have surfaced m some of
the other urban areas recelvmg this grant. The federal government did not define
"contiguous Junsdictions". Denver was allowed to make the determmahon, and mihally
assumed mumcipal and county Junsdictions whose borders touched Denver's boundanes
as "conhguous junsdlctions". Of course that ImmedIately excluded recreation dlstncts,
water and sanItation districts, fire dlstncts and other specIal dIstricts (i.e. RTD). It also
automahcally excluded Boulder, Bnghton, Broomfield, Westminster, Douglas County,
Golden, and other "metro-area" Junsdlctions. Tlus situation has not been well receIved
by many of those enhties that were excluded. Recogmzmg a problem, Denver, modIfied
the mitial defimhon and settled on a defimtlOn that included special dIstricts and the
conhguous counhes of Jefferson, Arapaho, Denver, and Adams, and those particular
areas that WIthin those counhes that are close to the City of Denver. There remains a
group of people who are not happy
At the same time, another homeland secunty grant process through the State IS
running concurrent with the Urban Area Grant process. The State, through execuhve
order of the Governor, formed homeland secunty "reglOns" throughout the enhre state,
including the American Indian Reservations. The "north-central region" includes
Jefferson, Broomfield, Adams, Douglas, Arapaho, and Denver Counhes. Some
confuslOn exists regardmg the relatlOnship these grants have WIth each other.
The City of Wheat RIdge IS dIrectly Involved m both the north central (statewIde
grant process) and the Urban Areas Secunty Grant process. Michelle Stodden and myself
have been appointed by the City Manager to represent the CIty of Wheat RIdge on the
Urban Area Working Group. I also served as the ChaIrman of the Threat And RIsk
Assessment Comrmttee for the Urban Area as defined. The committee chaIrpersons also
meet monthly to coordmate the vanous achvlhes ofthe commlttees.
ATTACHMENT 6
The Urban Area Secunty Grant IS a grant of $15 million. This grant requires no
local match. The City and County of Denver will handle the admimstratlon of the grant,
mcludmg all purchases for the Urban Area as defined.
The grant IS for a two-year penoct of tIme. The grant applicatIOn process must be
completed to the federal government no later than December 31, 2003 The grant period
Will be 2004 and 2005 The state grant process also has a December 3151 deadlme, but IS
a one-year program.
Included m the grant will be area wide exercises, equipment purchases, operating
agreements among partIcipating JurisdICtions, traming, and admmistrative costs. The
basic goal of these grants is to foster regional cooperative efforts toward homeland
security and a coordinated "all-hazards" approach.
Current Status
The City of Wheat Ridge may be one ofthe recipients for a portion of the Urban
Secunty Grant funding. One objective m all of these grants is radIO commumcations
mter-operability. The communications commIttee has Identified Wheat Ridge as one of
two junsdlctions m the Urban Area as defined, whIch does not have interoperability
capabilities With the other junsdlctions. If, the Working Group and the Policy Committee
for the Urban Area Grant process agree with the pnorities established by the committees,
Wheat Ridge could receive sufficient fundmg (over $ 1 million) for an entirely new radio
communicatIOn system that would tie us to the Denver Police system. Testing is
currently undeIWay to determme the suitability of such a system modification. I would
offer a word of caution, however, that competitIOn for these funds by the partlcipatmg
Jurisdictions IS very keen, and an award to Wheat Ridge is certainly not guaranteed.
The City will also receive some fundmg for specialized SWAT equipment and
self-contained breathing gear for use by the SWAT team m the stateWide grant process
for 2004.
Many of the committees Within the Urban Area Grant process have completed
their objectives, or are reaching completion. The Workmg Group will discuss prionties,
and they will be fOIWarded to the policy group for finalization and approval.
The City should know where it stands sometime during the month of December
with respect to fundmg and resources.
A "public information/relatIons committee" has also been formed. ThiS
committee is chaired by one of the Denver Police Department's public mformatlOn
officers. The Wheat Ridge public information officer, Lisa Stegal is serving on thIS
committee. It is antIcipated that m the very near future, a press conference will be held
announcmg the Urban Areas Security Grant process, and progress toward a cooperatIve
effort among the vanous partIclpatingjunsdictIons. I am certam the Mayor of Wheat
Ridge and other dignItaries will be IllvIted to attend this event. It IS anticIpated that the
Mayor of Denver, and the Governor will be III attendance and part of the program.
-
ITEM NO: \ D
REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION
COUNCIL MEETING DATE:
March 22, 2004
TITLE:
RATIFICATION OF MAYORAL APPOINTMENT TO HOUSING
AUTHORITY
D PUBLIC HEARING
I2SJ BIDS/MOTIONS
D RESOLUTIONS
D ORDINANCES FOR 1 ST READING (Date: _)
D ORDINANCES FOR 2ND READING
QuasI-JudiCIal.
D
Yes
I2SJ
No
City Manager
~~o~
ty Cle k
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The Mayor appomts the members ofthe Wheat Ridge Housing Authority. Mayor Gretchen Cerveny
received an application for renewal from Kent Davis, current member of the Housing Authority,
whose term expires March 2, 2004. Mayor Cerveny wishes to reappoint Mr. Davis to the Authority for
a five year term.
COMMISSION/BOARD RECOMMENDATION:
N/A
STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES:
N/A
ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:
To not approve the appointment of Kent Davis to Wheat Ridge Housing Authority.
FINANCIAL IMP ACT:
N/A
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
"I move to ratify the appointment of Kent Davis to the Wheat Ridge Housmg Authority, term ending
March 2, 2009 "
Or,
"I move to deny ratification of the appointment of Kent Davis to the Wheat Ridge Housmg Authonty
for the following reasons "
Report Prepared by: Pam Anderson, City Clerk
Attachments.
1 Kent Davis Application to the Wheat Ridge Housing Authonty
j ;' ~ r \V H E !~ r (~! 1) q :"
PLEASE APPLY ONLY FOR ONE BOARD OR COMMISSION '~ 0 F r i C (
CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE 04 FES 13 AM 8: 38
APPLICATION FOR APPOINTMENT TO THE:
DATE:
DISTRICT:
HOW LONG HAVE YOU BEEN A RESIDENT OF WHEAT RIDGE?
66..;g
/
ARE YOU A REGISTERED VOTER? ;/~S
WHY ARE yqu ~EEKI~G THIS APPOINTMENT?
;V /',6p 6C?z.?"It'?
iJ~?7/~/7/?7~A/r--
-
1/ftl,
HAVE YOU EVER SERVED, OR ARE YOU CURRENTLY ON A
BOARD~OM"MISSION/C MM JTEE AND IF SO, WHICH ONE?
j!'tf- ;,I(.~) y. ~; ,-' ~,
ARE THERE ANY CONFLICTS WHIC~ULD INTERFERE WITH REGULAR
ATTENDANCE OR DUTIES?
DO YOU HAVE EXPERIENCE IN THIS AREA?
Signature
~j~
PLEASE PRINT OR lYPE NAME: ~ ?2, ,;/ flcJC6
ADDRESS. ..e08o ~~p~ ~- F&mb~~d:~'?~'\Ci::-~
HOME PHONE: c50.3 - --9C;:?-~-7c:?V / i "'1/9: '(;J../ 17 /01 ~yor; \..-- I
/f/: ' Cieri<: ~ City Mgr:
BUSINESS PHONE: : ( '; ,rdS: City Atty:
Depl Heads:
APPLICATION WILL BE KEPT ON FILE FOR 0
.' -1
t:~ .
l\:. '\'Y'If'_h<"'\.J"(\.?-r>-\"" 'To
\ '~ rn cX\ 0 n fc~ ~[:::f..H:'\G
c ,_-C~cr<' ~2
.=Jt' I( \~ ~ cr..c1-
)
~aO- -t\\G. -tD\\()t.u, >'Ie \Cl
~ .,;)
V'L'Jc..G- \z..~h D of
'k\\'<:~~('l\c-n -\LLf
, ,\
\ ~Ve..L-\r'..z..~\ 00("\ ~eJ\ \ eJ (~ C(,cl-
\ \\2.\\0< s \Gss-t\Y2-"
, S \ 'Y- -t-c e:t ,Yl n<-, 8'11-
( "U '\(:-,( f cL \n G \)C(~ k.. 'i. cf {~
, Cb \10\ De::<<.'}. -tb rn e.e.t
'\ L ?:.r-c0 J. <,:::)\ de... '--jc:x (\..
CCG-Y'b'cclL S Of 1/
ITEM NO' ()
REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION
COUNCIL MEETING DATE.
March 22, 2004
TITLE:
COUNCIL BILL 03-2004: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING
SECTION 26-621 OF THE WHEAT RIDGE CODE OF LAWS
PERTAINNG TO PARKING IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS.
~ PUBLIC HEARING
o BIDSIMOTIONS
o RESOLUTIONS
o ORDINANCES FOR 1ST READING (Date March S, 2004)
~ ORDINANCES FOR 2ND READING
QuasI-JudIcIal 0
~~
~
No
Clty~4
CommunIty Development DIrector
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
-
The proposed ordmance amends the current regulatIOns regardmg the R V parkmg m resIdential
areas. The changes are based upon staff recommendatIOns presented to CIty Council at theIr study
sessIOn on November 1 ih Those recommendatIOns were based upon a senes ofmeetmgs held thIS
past summer wIth RV owners and non-owners. CouncIl also requested that the new ordmance
address the vIsual Impacts oflarge recreatIOnal vehIcles stored m front yards.
Currently, only two recreatIOnal vehicles are allowed to be stored outsIde on a resIdentIal property
ThIS lImItation mcludes trailers, traIlers upon whIch are stored any number of personal recreational
vehIcles, and horse traIlers.
Changes mclude' I) RecreatIOnal vehIcles and traIlers less than SIX feet m heIght are exempt from the
two vehIcle lImitatIOn when parked m the side or rear yard and when screened, 2) Only one
recreatIOnal vehIcle IS allowed to be parked m the front yard, 3) RecreatIOnal velucles parked m a back
yard must meet the SIde and rear setback reqUIrements for an accessory structure; 4) A process has
been created for an owner to request a vanance to the two vehIcle limItatIOn, the lImItatIOn of one
vehIcle being parked m the front yard, and reqUIred setbacks m the rear yard onlv; 5) The regulatIOns
apply to renters,
Per CounCil's dIrectIOn. the ordmance was forwarded to Planmng ConlllllSSlOn. At theIr December IS,
2003 hearmg, the CommISSIOn recommended approval wIth several suggested changes.
COMMISSION/BOARD RECOMMENDATION:
Planmng CommIssIOn recommended approval wIth the followmg suggested changes.
Allow a waIVer ofvanance fees for a penod of two years.
2 Ehmmate horse trallers from the ordmance.
3 Reduce the rear yard setback from 15 feet to 5 feet.
4 Ifthe RV or loaded trailer IS less than 6 feet m heIght, It can be parked next to the rear property
lme
5 If any portIon of an RV extends beyond the front of the house, It would be counted as a front
yard R V
6 To determme If a trailer IS exempt or non-exempt, It must be loaded WIth ItS mtended cargo of
boats, snowmoblles or motorcycles.
These changes HAVE NOT been mcorporated mto the ordmance. Separate motIOns WIll be prepared
for second readmg to mcorporate the Plannmg CommISSIOn recommended changes.
STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES:
In respondmg to Planmng COmmISSIOn suggested changes, the waiver of fees for two years and the
exemption for horse traIlers are pohcy decIsIOns for Councll.
The setbacks for non-exempt RV's (over 6 feet m heIght) are proposed m the ordmance to be the
same as accessory bulldmgs. (15 feet m the R -1 dlstnct; 5 feet Ifless than or equal to 8 feet m
heIght, otherwIse 10 feet m all other zone dlstncts.) ThIS rear yard setback reqUIrement was
recommended by Plannmg CommIssIon to be a straight 5 feet m all zone dlstncts. ThIS allows a
12- foot tall R V to be 5 feet from the rear property lme, but a 12- foot tall shed would have to be 10
feet from the rear property lme. Staff recommends implementmg the setbacks for accessory
structures as wntten m the proposed.ordmance
Recommended change #4 from the Plannmg CommISSIOn IS Impl1clt m the apphcatJon of the
regulatIOns and does not need to be addressed.
Recommended change #5 from the Plannmg Commission should be mcorporated into the
ordmance. It will clanfy how an RV or traller WIll be treated if It straddles the front and SIde
yards.
Recommended change #6 from Plannmg CommISSIOn should be mcorporated mto the ordmance.
It will clanfy that a traller wlll be treated as exempt or non-exempt dependmg upon If It IS loaded.
The concern was that someone mIght claim they have an exempt traller, then put a boat on It, and
still claIm the traller IS exempt.
One of the most frequent comments at the pubhc workshops was to grandfather eXlstmg SItuatIOns.
Grandfathenng eXlstmg SItuatIOns m the commumty would be a tJme-consurnmg and 1abor-
INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER DiTullio
Council Bill No. 03-2004
Ordinance No.
-
Series of 2004
TITLE:
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 26-621 OF THE
WHEAT RIDGE CODE OF LAWS PERTAINING TO
PARKING IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS.
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WHEAT
RIDGE, COLORADO, THAT:
Section 1. Section 26-621 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws is hereby amended as
follows:
Sec. 26-621 Residential parking.
A.
In residential zone districts, the parking of trucks, vans, buses or licensed trailers
which are used for commercial purposes, whether the commercial enterprise is
conducted from the home or conducted elsewhere, is prohibited except as permitted
by this section. An occupant of a dwelling may park, or allow the parking of, no
more than one (1) truck or van which is used for commercial purposes upon the
premises or confined to the street frontage of the lot in question; provided, however,
that such vehicle does not exceed a one-ton chassis. Parking oftrailers which are
used for commercial purposes is prohibited on any public right-of-way.
-
B. In residential zone districts, a maximum of two (2) of any the following vehicles may
be parked outside upon property owned or rented by the vehicle owner, provided the
vehicle owner resides on the property.
. Recreational Vehicle
. Trailer upon which are stored personal recreational vehicles
Recreational vehicles or trailers are exempt from this two-vehicle limitation
provided the vehicles or trailers are stored in the area between the side property
line and the side wall of the structure and the back property line and the back
wall of the structure, provided both of the following are met:
. The vehicles or trailers are less than six (6) feet in height, and
. The vehicles or trailers are not visible from tbe public rigbt-of-way as a
result of being stored behind a solid fence six (6) feet in height, a
structure, or vegetation which completely screens the vehicle from view
from the public right-of-way.
C. Only one (1) such recreational vehicle or trailer may be stored in the area
between the street and all walls of the structure facing the street. Such vehicles
ATTACHMENT 4
or trailers must be parked six (6) feet or more inside the front property line. For
corner lots, the one (1) vehicle restriction shall apply to both areas between the
street and the walls of the structure facing the street. Such vehicles will be
similarly ptmnitted upon residential rental properties where the o'.'mer of the v@hicle
resides upon the premises, and in the case of multifamily residential properties, where
such vehicle or vehicles do not displace parking spaces required to meet the minimum
v@hicular parking Gtandard f{)r the property as set forth herein for multifamily
residential land uses. Where it is difficult to determine the public right-of-way
boundary due to lack of curb, gutter and/or sidewalk, or survey markers, such
boundaries shall be presumed to be ten (10) feet from the edge of pavement or back
of curb. Where a sidewalk exists, such boundaries shall be presumed to be two (2)
feet from the outside edge of sidewalk. For the purposes of this subsection C R,
permanent or temporary carports, frame covered structures, tents, or other temporary
structures shall not be used to store or conceal such recreational vehicles or trailers in
excess of the maximum number permitted.
D. Recreational vehicles or trailers stored in a side yard need not meet any setback
requirements. Recreational vehicles or trailers exceeding six (6) feet in height
stored in a back yard must meet the side and rear yard setback requirements for
accessory structures for the zone district in which the recreational vehicle or
trailer is stored.
G.E.
In residential zone districts, detached trailers and recreational vehicles are prohibited
from parking in public rights-of-way; however one (1) recreational vehicle or one (1)
trailer may be parked within public street rights-of-way for a period up to seventy-
two (72) hours, provided they are attached to the towing vehicle. Moving the towing
vehicle and/or the trailer to another location in the right-of-way does not extend or re-
start the 72 hour period.
-
I).F. In residential zone districts, where it is desired to maintain such a restricted vehicle
either within six (6) feet of a public street on private property or within a lawful
parking area on a public street abutting the front of the property in excess of seventy-
two (72) hours, the property owner may obtain a temporary parking permit from the
planning and development department. Such temporary parking permit shall be for a
time period not to exceed fourteen (14) days and no more than one (1) such permit
shall be issued each six (6) months for the same vehicle. The issuance of a temporary
permit is for the purpose of parking only and not for any other activity. The permit
must be placed upon the inside windshield or side window on the driver's side so as to
be visible for inspection.
KG. Pickup truck-mounted campers, when mounted upon pickup trucks, are not subject to
these parking restrictions except that such camper shall not be used for permanent or
temporary living quarters. Nothing in this section will be construed to restrict or limit
parking of any vehicle so described upon private property so long as said vehicle is
parked in accordance with the limitations of this section and provided that sight
distance triangle requirements of section 26-603 are met.
Il1tenslve endeavor for staff ThIs would entaIl Il1ventorYll1g every residentIal parcelll1 the CIty for
recreatIOnal vehicles and traIlers. Probably several situations would change dunng the course of
conductmg the mventory, rendenng the mventory maccurate Or It would reqUIre some kmd of
penmttmg process WIth a deadhne for apphcatlons, where mevltably someone would not hear
about the deadlIne and would complam. The vanance process and the exemption for smaller RV's
should take care of about 90% of the sItuatIons m the CIty
Another frequent comment was to prOVide rehef from the stnct hmltation of two vehicles. The
ordmance accomphshes this m two ways. RecreatIOnal vehicles and trailers less than 6 feet m
heIght are exempt from the lImItatIOn of two recreatIOnal vehIcles, prOVIded they are located m a
Side or rear yard and are screened by a 6-foot hIgh solId fence, vegetatIOn, or structure and are not
Visible from the public nght-of-way Secondly, a process has been estabhshed to proVide a
mechanIsm to request vanances from the two-vehicle lImitatIon, the one-vehicle m the front yard
lImitatIOn, and rear yard (only) setbacks.
The process for requestmg more than two vehicles, or more than one m the front yard, or lesser
setbacks m the rear yard IS the mmor variance process. This starts as an admmlstratlve process
where adjacent property owners are notified. If there are no obJectIOns, the request(s) can be
approved admmlstratlVely If there are objections, the request goes before the Board of
Adjustment for a heanng.
The regulatIOns apply to renters so long as the vehicle stored on the property IS owned by the
renter
-
AL TERNA TIVES CONSIDERED:
In addressmg the visual Impact Issue, several optIOns were conSidered.
Do /Jot allow parkillg of recreational vehicles beyond the frollt wall of the structure.
ThIs would require the parkmg of all recreatIOnal vehicles m SIde or rear yards. ThIS may
not be possible on smaller lots m the CIty Numerous permits have been Issued m the past
for the purpose of constructmg parkmg pads for vehicle storage m front yards.
2 Require allY recreatiollal vehicles parked ill the frollt yard to be screened. MaXimum
height for fences m the front yard IS four feet. ThIS makes fencmg mlllImally effectIVe m
screenmg. VegetatIOn must be fairly dense and compact to proVide effective screenIng, and
thIS may occur only after many growlllg seasons. DeCiduous vegetation does not proVIde
effective screenIng m the wmter Is It really possible to hIde a motor home parked m a
front yard?
3 Restrict the Ilumber of vehicles allowed to be parked ill the frollt yard. Since two non-
exempt vehIcles are allowed to be stored outSIde, the only restnctlOn aVailable IS to allow
one vehicle to be parked m the front yard. ThIS appears to be the only realIstIc optIOn to
deal WIth the Impact. ThiS restnctIon would apply to all recreatIOnal vehicles and trailers
4 Create classifications of vehicles and prohibit the parking of "oversize" vehicles in the
front yard. The difficulty with this option is defining "oversize" How big IS too big?
Should the measure of "oversize" be height, length, or weight? Such provisIOns might tend
to complicate the regulations for enforcement officers and cItizens and could slow down
enforcement by requmng time to measure a vehicle or to research ItS weight.
5 Increase the required setback from the front property line. The current reqUirement IS SIX
feet. An mcreased setback would push vehicles farther back into the lot. Although the
front setback m each residential zone dlstnct IS 30 feet, many homes have been bUilt With a
lesser setback. The thirty-foot setback allows for the parking of a 24-foot motor home on a
dnveway while meetmg the six-foot setback. These two factors combme to make It
difficult to park a vehicle over 24 feet long entirely m the front yard anyway An mcreased
setback might be dIfficult to Implement m areas of the City With narrow Side yards and
where penmts have been prevIOusly Issued for parkmg pads accommodatmg the Six-foot
setback,
The draft ordmance contams a proVISIOn Implementmg optIOn #3, allowmg only one recreational
vehicle or traller to be stored m the front yard. Short ofbanmng all recreatIOnal vehicles m the
front yard, thiS limitatIOn IS the easIest to mterpret and enforce. It would reduce the potential
number of vehicles parked m front yards, thereby potentially reducmg the visual Impact.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
There IS not a direct finanCial Impact on the CIty
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
"1 move to approve Council Bill 03-2004 on second readmg, and that It take effect 15 days after
final pubhcatlOn, With the followmg amendments:
(Add thefollowing to the motion to implement Planning Commission's recommendation to
institute a period oj time to waive variance Jees Fill in the blank Jar the number oj years you wish
this waiver period to be in effect)
Add the followmg language to paragraph J "Requests for vanances under this subsectIOn J shall
not be charged a fee If the request IS filed wlthm _ years from the effectJve date of thiS
d " 1- - ~("'r__l ft
or mance. "7') \), ( ~wck.( y ~ ,cU~)-1
(Add the Jollowing to the motion to exempt horse trailers Jrom provisions oJthe ordinance.)
2. Delete the words "horse traller" from the defimtlOn of traller m SectIOn 26-123
(Add theJollowing to the motion to implement Planning Commission's suggestion to require one rear
yard setback oj 5 Jeet in all residential zone districts Staff does not recommend this change)
3 Replace paragraph D with the followmg: "Recreational vehicles or trallers stored in a SIde yard
,r' need not meet any setback reqUirements, RecreatiOnal vehicles or trallers exceedmg SiX (6) feet m
,-s '(:'" height stored in a back yard must meet the SIde yard setback requIrements for accessory structures
"-,.:} for the zone dIstnct In which the recreatiOnal vehicle or trailer IS stored, The rear yard setback for
II" recreatiOnal vehicles or trallers exceedmg SiX (6) feet In height shall be five (5) feet In all
residential zone distncts,"
(Add the following to the motIOn to address a vehicle that straddles a front and side yard.)
4 Add the follOWing to paragraph C after the third sentence "Any vehicle or trailer lYing partially
between the street and the front walls ofthe structure shall be considered to be parked or stored In
the front yard,"
(Add the/ollowing to the motion to address loaded and unloaded trailers,)
5 Add the following to the end of paragraph B "In determining If a trmler is exempt or not exempt
from the provisions of thiS paragraph B, the height of the traller Will depend upon whether the
traller IS loaded or not. A traller that is exempt In an unloaded condition shall not be considered
exempt In a loaded condItiOn ifthe trailer plus load exceeds SIX (6) feet m heIght"
,
L..
Or,
-
"1 move to table Indefinitely Council Bill No 03-2004"
Report Prepared by' Alan White, Commumty Development Director
Attachments:
1 LegIslative HIstory
2- Memorandum to Planmng CommIssiOn WIthout attachments
3 IllustratiOn of Allowed Parking Areas
4 Council BJiI No 03-2004
CIty of Wheat fudge
Office of the CIty Clerk
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
WHK\ T RIDGE COUNCIL MEMBERS, l\L\ YOR GRETCHEN CER\ 'ENY
Pc\!\! /\NDERSOK, CITY CLERK
SUBJECT: LEGISL\ 11\'E HISTORY PERTAINING TO P.\RKING IN RESIDE~TL\L .\REAS
DATE:
Cc.
1/14/2004
RANDY YOUNG, CITY l\L\NAGER, AL\N WHITE, PLANNING .\ND
DE\'ELOPMENT DIRECTOR
Enclosed you will all documents pertaillmg to the legtslative hIstOry of mumClpal code changes to
"Parkmg m ResIdenual Areas" The followmg is an outlme of the documents acUon taken,
August 12, 2002:
September 5, 2002:
-
September 23, 2002:
September 26, 2002:
October 21, 2002:
December 9, 2002:
Summer, 2003:
November 17, 2UU3'
December 11,2203:
December 18, 2003:
First reading of Ordinance Amending the Code of Laws Pertaming to
Parlang I Residenual Areas.
Planmng Commission conslderauon of ordinance (Public Hearing).
Council Action form for Council Bill 29-2002, Case #ZOA 02.04, (Public
Hearing), Includes:
Minutes from 09\05\02 Planmng ComnusslOn Meeung Wlth
recommendauons;
Summary of regulauons from paruClpatmg mumClpaliues,
Minutes from September 23, 2002 Council Meeting;
Council Bill 29-2002 (Ordinance No. 1265)
Mayor Cerveny veto of the ordmance; Veto override by Council.
Study Session, l\1inutes (Public Hearing); Council Bill 29-2002 (Orclmance
No. 1265),
Council Meeung (Public Hearing); Includes:
Council Acuon form for re\'1sed ordinance;
l\1inutes of December 9,2002 Council Meeung
Series of meeungs held by Planning and Development staff Wlth concerned
cmzens.
Study SeSSIon Minutes: Consensus to send to Planning CommISSIon,
Memorandum from Alan \Vlute to Planmng commlSSlOn detailing
ordinance and legislauve lustory
Planmng CorrunisslOn Minutes (Public Hearing)
ATTACHMENT 1
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
AGENDA ITEM ~
September 23 , 2002
X PUBLIC HEARINGS
BIDS/MOTIONS
RESOLUTIONS
ORDINANCES FOR 1ST READING
X ORDINANCES FOR 2ND READING
Yes
2L
No
Quasi-Judicial:
SUBJECT: Ordinance Amendmg Section 26-621 of the Code of Laws Pertaining to Parking in
Residential Areas, Case No. ZOA 02-04.
SUMMARY AND BACKGROUND: Council directed staff to examine changes to the section of the
Code to restrict the number of recreational vehicles that could be stored outside on residentially zoned
property First reading of this ordinance occurred on August 12th and the changes to the Code at that time
included restricting the number of recreatIOnal vehicles to one; allowing only one vehicle m non-operative
condition to be stored outside under a car cover and not a tarp; and not allowing carports or frame covered
structures to be used to store or conceal these vehicles. Different limits for different types of recreational
vehicles were not established.
Planning Commission considered the ordinance on August 1.1 and suggested that a distinction be made in the
types of recreatIOnal vehicles and requested information on other cities' restnctions. That information is
mcluded in the attached memorandum to the Planning Director. On September 51h, the Planning CommissIOn
recommended approval of the ordinance with changes. 1) defining snowmobiles, A TV's, etc. as "personal
recreational vehicles;" 2) consolidating into one section the restrictions on parking recreational vehicles in
public rights-of-way; 3) allowing one recreational vehicle plus one trailer loaded with personal recreational
vehicles to be stored outside; and 4) requiring the storage of non-operative vehicles at least six feet from the
property line. These changes are included in the attached ordinance.
-
A IT ACHMENTS:
I Council Bill No. 29-2002
2. Planning and Development Department Memo
3. Draft Planning Commission Minutes of 9/5/02
BUDGET IMPACT:
Original budgeted amount: $0
Actual contracted amount: $0
Impact of expenditure on line item: $0
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
ORIGINATED BY:
City Council
STAFF RESPONSIBLE:
Alan White, Planning and Development Director
SUGGESTED MOTION:
" I move to approve Council Bill No. 29-2002, Case NO. ZOA 02-04,
on second reading."
INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER SCHNEIDER
Council Bill No. 29-2002
Ordinance No. J.3..Lg
Series of 2002
TITLE:
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 26-621 OF THE
WHEAT RIDGE CODE OF LA WS PERTAINING TO
PARKING IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS.
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WHEA T RIDGE,
COLORADO, THAT:
Section 1. Section 26-123 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws IS hereby amended as follows
Recreational vehicle, I;Lr:;,,~ublr:;. A vehicle, such as a recreational trailer, tent camper trailer,
truck camper, travel trailer, motor home or other vehicle With or without motive power,
designed and/or constructed to travel on the public thoroughfare and ongmally Intended and
deSigned for human habitation. The term shall also include vehicles used in recreational
pursuits such as snowmobiles, all-terrain vehicles, jet skis, boats, and other similar
motorized or non-motorized devices.
-
R~Ll"ul;u"ul v"h'LI", "u"I'L",,~ubll;. Vdl;dc,s \19111d. <UL llOt lc,quuc,d to uc, 11G\..lIsc,d uy tl'G
COlOlildu ~lotol Vdllck D; VlS.Oll, bud. as SIl0"V1110b;Jc,s, all-kuat.. "dlic,k~ ".id ot11\..1 ~ul1lla,
"dlidc,s.
Section 2. Section 26-621 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws IS hereby amended as follows
Sec. 26-621 Residential parking.
A. In residential zone districts, the parlang of trucks, vans, buses or licensed trailers which are
used for commercial purposes, whether the commercial enterprise IS conducted from the
home or conducted elsewhere, IS prohibIted except as penrutted by thIS section. An
occupant of a dwelling may park, or allow the parking of, no more than one (1) truck or
van which is used for commercial purposes upon the premises or confined to the street
frontage of the lot In questIOn; provided, however, that such vehicle does not exceed a one-
ton chassis. Parking of trailers which are used for commercial purposes is prohibited on
any public right-of-way.
B. In residential zone districts, one (1) recreational vehicle 111VtO,;2.Gd illIJ 1I0Wll1otOJjz;c,d
C,a1UP;hg "dl;dc.s (except campers mounted upon pickup trucks), tLatkl-1I101:1J1tLd uoats,
and or one (1) other towed vehicles such as, but not limited to, a utility trailers may be
parked within public street nghts-of-way for a period up to seventy-two (72) hours,
provided they are attached to the towing vehIcle. Moving the towing vehicle and/or the
trailer to another location in the right-oC-way does not extend or re-start the 72
hour period.
C. Except as noted above, in residential zone districts, detached traIlers and recreation
vehicles are prohibited from parking in public rights-of-way; however, one (1) detached
trailer or one (1) recreational vehicle they may be parked or stored outside upon
property owned by the vehicle owner, provIded such vehicles are parked SIX (6) feet or
more Inside the front property line. Such vehicles WIll be smlilarly permitted upon
residential rental properties where the owner of the vehicle resides upon the premises, and
in the case of multifamily residential properties, where such vehicle or vehicles do not
dIsplace parlung spaces required to meet the minimum vehicular parking standard for the
property as set forth herein for multifamily reSidential land uses. Where It IS dIfficult to
determine the public right-of-way boundary due to lack of curb, gutter and/or sidewalk, or
survey markers, such boundaries shall be presumed to be ten (10) feet from the edge of
pavement or back of curb Where a sidewalk exists, such boundarn:s shall be presumed to
be two (2) feet from the outside edge of sidewalk. For the purposes of this subsection
C, permanent or temporary carports, frame covered structures, tents, or other
temporary structures shall not be used to store or conceal such recreational
vehicles.
D. In residential zone districts, 111 C,MC,S where it IS deSIred to mamtain such a restncted
vehicle either withm SIX (6) feet of a public street on private property or within a lawful
parlung area on a pubhc street abutting the front of the property In excess of seventy-two
(72) hours, the property owner may obtain a temporary parking permit from the planning -
and development department. Such temporary parlung penrut shall be for a time penod not
to exceed fourteen (14) days and no more than one (1) such permIt shall be issued each SIX
(6) months for the same vehicle The issuance of a temporary permit is for the purpose of
parkmg only and not for any other activity_ The penrut must be placed upon the Inside
windshield or Side wmdow on the driver's SIde so as to be viSIble for inspectIOn.
cE. Pickup truck-mounted campers, when mounted upon pIckup trucks, are not subject to
these parking restnctions except that such camper shall not be used for permanent or
temporary living quarters. Nothing in this section will be construed to restnct or lImit
parking of any vehicle so described upon private property so long as said vehicle 1S parked
in accordance with the lImitations of thIS sectIon and prOVIded that sight distance tnangle
requirements of section 26-603 are met.
F. In residential zone districts, one (1) vehicle in non-operative condition as defined in
Section 154 of the Code of Laws may be stored outside upon property owned by
the vehicle owner. Such vehicle shall be completely covered with a standard
vehicle cover designed and manufactured for the purpose of covering a vehicle.
Such cover shall be of a single earth tone or neutral color and shall be maintained
in good condition free from holes, rips, tears, or other damage. Tarps, plastic
sheets, or any other type of material not specifically designed and manufactured to
cover a vehicle shall not be used to cover a non--operative vehicle. For the
purposes of this subsection F, permanent or temporary carports, frame covered
structures, tents, or other temporary structures shall not be used to store or
conceal such recreational vehicles.
Section 3. Safety Clause. The City Council hereby finds, detenmnes, 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 ordmance IS necessary for the
preservation of health and safety and for the protection of public convenience and welfare. The City
Council further determmes that the ordinance bears a rational relation to the proper legislative object
sought to be attained.
Section 4. Severability. If any clause, sentence, paragraph, or part of this Zomng Code or the
application thereof to any person or circumstances shall for any reason be adjusted by a court of
competent junsdiction invalid, such judgment shall not affect application to other persons or
circumstances.
Section 5. 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 prev311
Section 6. This ordmance shall take effect J.5:... days after final publicatIOn.
-
INTRODUCED, READ, AND ADOPTED on first readmg by a vote of .....L--. to ~
on thIS 19th day of August ,2002, ordered published In full in a newspaper of general
circulatIOn in the City of Wheat Ridge and Public Hearing and conSideration on final passage set for
September 23 ,2002, at 7'00 o'clock p.m., In the Council Chambers, 7500 West 29th Avenue,
Wheat Ridge, Colorado
READ, ADOPTED AND ORDERED PUBLISHED on second and final reading by a vote
of _ to _, thiS _ day of , 2002
SIGNED by the Mayor on this _ day of
,2002
GRETCHEN CERVENY, MA YOR
A ITEST
Wanda Sang, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM BY CITY A ITORNEY
lstPubhcation. August 29, 2002
2nd PublicatIOn:
Wheat Ridge Transcript
EffectIve Date:
GERALD DAHL, CITY A ITORNEY
C:\Documents and Senings\alanIMy Documents\WPFileslProjects\zoning amendmentslres parking ord,wpd
City of Wheat Ridge
Planning and Development Department
Memorandum
TO: Alan White
FROM: Michael Pesicka
SUBJECT: Regulation of Recreational VehIcles and Junk Automobiles
DATE: August 12,2002
The following is a summary of regulations from participating municipalities.
Golden
RV must be lIcensed and there is no limit as to the number that can be stored on any property. One
"Junk car" can be stored on a property, but it must be under restoration, lIcensed and covered or
screened. Cover must be specifically made for covenng automobIles. No tarps allowed as covers.
-- Jefferson County
Does not regulate recreational vehicles unless the property owner is proposing to store them
commercIally The RV must be owned and lIcensed by the owner of the property on whIch It IS being
stored. All vehIcles whether junk, recreational or personal must be licensed and operable.
Arvada
No regulatIon on the number of recreational vehicles someone can own or store RV's do not have to
be screened from View, but cannot be longer than 30 feet. Does allow one (1) antIque vehicle per
property that must be screened from view or stored in a garage. Car covers are allowed as a means to
screen the vehicles, but tarps are not considered covers. All vehicles must be lIcensed with the
property owner.
Lakewood
Attached are copies of Section 17-9-1 of the City of Lakewood Zomng Code, WIth pertinent
information highlIghted in green.
Littleton
No regulatIon on the number of recreational vehicles or operable vehicles. No inoperable or unlicensed
vehicles are allowed on any residential property RV's are limited to a width of 7 feet and a length of
22 feet if they are to be stored on the street. Antique vehicles, or vehicles being restored must be in a
garage or carport. If in a carport, then they must have an opaque cover that is undamaged. Non-
motonzed RV's can be stored on the street no longer than 48 hours.
Westminster
Allow only one RV on any resIdential property and It cannot be stored In the front yard. Any
automobiles on the property must be licensed, but there IS no hmit as to the number of automoblles. No
parking of RV's on the street and all vehicles must be lIcensed.
Nortbl:lenn
No regulation on the number of RV's or automobiles. All operable and inoperable vehicles must be
licensed. VehIcles that are being restored or are Inoperable must be stored In a garage or screened by
a 6 foot fence Northglenn has a proposal on the table to hmit the number of total vehIcles per property
to 5
ARTICLE 9: PARKING REQUIREMENTS
17-9-1. GENERAL PROVISIONS.
(I) No land shall be used or occupied, no structures shall be designed, constructed or altered, and no use
shall be operated unless the off-street parking space herem required is provided in at least the amount
and mamtamed m the manner set forth within thiS Article, No person shall construct, pave or repave a
parking lot without first obtaining a building permit.
(2) All required off-street parking spaces shall be provided within the lot lines established for the uses to be
developed or redeveloped. All other parking proposals shall be reviewed by the Board of Adjustment m
accordance with Section 17-4-7
(3) Provision of parking spaces within an integrated parking and access system is encouraged. The total
number of spaces provided shall be the sum total of the individual requirements. Parking requirements
will be based on the land use(s),
(4) All dnveways, dnve aisles, parking areas, and all parking spaces within those areas located in districts
other than One Acre Residential (RIA) shall be designed and deSignated in conformance with the Site
plan requirements of Title 17, Article 15 Driveways serving one and two family dwellings in districts
(RR) Rural Residential, (I-R) Large Lot Residential, (2-R) Small Lot ReSidential, and (3-R) Duplex
ReSidential which access unimproved streets are exempt from this requirement.
-
(5) All parking rahos in Table 9-4, for combined residential/nonresidential developments shall be
determined based on the individual uses. Mixed nonresidential developments, such as shopping centers,
mdustnal or office parks, shall have parking based upon the type of development and not based on
mdlVldual uses. The number of spaces required in Table 9-4 will be rounded up to the next whole
number
(6) Parking spaces and on site circulation shall be designed in such a manner as to provide safe movement
for pedestnan and vehicular traffic, On site parking shall be maintained m good condition free of
weeds, dust, trash and debris, and major surfacing defects.
(7) When a change in the use or user of the property creates an increase in the parking demand even where
there is no development or redevelopment taking place, the additional parking demand shall be provided
for
(8) Parkmg of Motor Vehicles Restricted
a) Every property zoned (residential) RIA, RR and I-R shall be prohibited from having more than ten
(10) vehicles parked outside on the property.
b) Every property zoned (residential) 2-R, 3-R, 4-R, 5-R, and PD with a single-family detached home
or a duplex unit shall be prohibited from having more than seven (7) vehicles per unit parked outside
on the property Duplexes, triplexes, and other multi-family units shall be prohibited from having
more than four (4) vehicles per unit parked outside on the property.
,,1. .. For purposes of this Article 17-9, vehicles are defined as all vehicles including, trailers, vessels
(boats), all self propelled and non-self propelled vehicles, recreational vehicles, commercial
vehicles. motor homes, trucks, vans, motorcycles, and passenger cars. Vehicles shall not
include bicycles.
2. For purposes of this Article 17-9, a trailer containing a boat shall be considered one (I) vehicle.
Lakewood Zoning Ordinance
August 13,2001
9-1
A trailer containing recreational vehicles such as snowmobiles or motorcycles shall be
considered one vehicle.
3.
-;..,-
Notwithstanding the foregoing, the following vehicles are prohibited from being parked or
stored on any property in residential areas.
a. I Any commercial vehicle which is 20,000 pounds or greater or more than 30 feet In length or ten
feet in height or greater or which has three or more axles.
2. In measuring the height of commerctal vehicles, the measurement shall exclude any
accessory equipment related to the function of the vehicle, such as air conditioning
units, heating units and similar devices mounted on top of the vehicle. Signage shall not
be excluded from such measurement. No more than fifty (50) per cent of the roof area
of the vehicle shall be used for the accessory equipment mounted on top of the vehicle.
b Truck tractors
c. Semitrailers
d. Dump trucks
e. Busses
f ConstructIOn equipment weighIng 10,000 pounds or more except whenbemg used on the
property in conjunction with a building permit or other permit issued for that location.
c) Parking must meet requirements in this section 17-9, and other related municipal ordinances
includmg Chapter 9.80 of the Lakewood MuniCipal Code.
d) On residenl1allots, parkmg areas shall not exceed 50 percent of the back yard, 50 percent of the
front yard, and 50 percent of the side yard. Each lot shall be allowed no more than 30 feet of drive-
cuts along the lot's street frontage.
e) All parking areas shall be kept free of weeds, trash, and debris,
,.'!} Of the vehIcles referred to m 8(a) or 8(b) above, no more than two (2) shall be a junk motor vehicle
as defined ill 9.80 of the Lakewood Municipal Code.
Junk motor vehicles must be stored in the back or SIde yard and must be screened from public
view (as set forth III 9.80 of the Lakewood MuniCipal Code), Side yard parking is prohibited if
the setback is less than eight (8) feet.
g) Of the velucles referred to in 8(a) or 8(b) above, no more than one (I) of either a travel trailer, motor
home, or camper unit per dwelling unit shall be parked on any residential zoned property
b) Not more than two trailers or not more than one trailer and one motor home shall be parked III a
front yard.
i) Of the vehicles referred to ill 8(a) or 8(b) above, no more than one (I) commercial vehicle, as
defmed in Article 2 of the Lakewood Zoning Ordinance, per dwelling unit shall be parked on each
residential lot.
(9) Improved Surface Required: ~~ areas, driveways, or any other part of the property used for
vehicle travel and parking located in the front yard, side yard, and back yard shall be improved all
weather surfaces clearly delineated by curbs, landscaping, or similar features to distinguish the parking
area from the remainder of the yard.
a) Approved all weather surface includes: 'COilcrete paving, Hot mix asphalt paving: or rock One
recommended material is three-quarter-inch thick or larger rock a minimum of three inches in depth.
Approved all weather surfaces shall not include materials such as c:upet, shingles, wood or
Lakewood Zoning Ordinance
August 13.2001
9-2
cardboard.
The purpose of this Subsection 17-9-1(9) is to msure that a dust-free weed-free and mud-free
surface is provided for parking. P.arlcing will not be allowed on grass, weeds, mud or dirt.
b) A property owner shall comply with the requlTement for an improved surface within six (6) months
of a postmg or receipt ofa notice of VIOlation of thiS subsectIOn 17-9-1(9)
c) Exemptions from the above requirement may be granted by the Director for side yard and back yard
parking for properties used for agricultural purposes such as the keeping of horse trailers, tractors,
and other similar items, Applications for the exemption stating the reasons for the exemption shall
be made to the Department of Community Planning & Development. The Director's decision shall
be based upon property use, number of vehicles, compatibility With surrounding property and other
relevant factors. If a request is denied, any appeal shall be to the Board of Adjustment.
(10) Use of Car Covers
a) Car covers may be used to cover motor vehicles but must be expressly made for the purpose of
covering a vehicle and cannot be tarps.
b) If a car cover is used, it must be main tamed at all times, Ripped, tom, or blOWing covers will
not be allowed.
(11)
Occupancy of Travel Trailer, Motor Home, or Camper Unit: A travel trailer, motor home, or
camper unit not located within a travel trailer campground, may be occupied for a period of time not
to exceed two (2) weeks from the date that the travel trailer, motor home, or camper unit first amves
within the City During such time, an adequate water supply and adequate toilet facihties shall be
available at all times to the occupants of the trailer If the trailer is hooked to a power source via an
extension cord, such cord must be maintained as to not create a safety hazard.
-
(] 2) Planning applications where reciprocal or shared parking is contemplated may be reqUIred to mclude
parkIng accumulation studies for existing facilities similar to the proposed uses and for the
sUIToundmg uses with which parkIng is being reciprocated. The following guidelines must be
followed,
a) Determine if shared parking IS possible by examining the land use mix adjacent to the subject
site, the size of each use, the type of operation, and most important, the 12 to 24-hour parking
demand characteristics of each use.
b) Conduct 12 to 24-hour parking accumulatIOn studies for existing facilities similar to those for
which reCiprocal parking is being requested, and for the surrounding ones with which shared
parkmg is anticipated, Weekly and monthly variations in parking demand must be taken into
consideratIOn,
c) Occupancy factors may be a conSideration in determining how well the parkIng spaces for the
existing adjacent uses, with which shared parking is being contemplated, are currently being
utilized. These can be determined during the accumulation studies outlined above,
d) Based on the data for existing similar facilities, the total parking demand for all uses included in
the shared parking analysis must be projected for each hour over a 12 to 24-hour period for the
most critical day of the week and month of the year This must include the Thanksgiving to
Christmas period. This will determine the mimmum number of spaces that must be provided.
Lakewood Zoning Ordinance
August 13,2001
9-3
CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE PLANNING COMMISSION
Minutes of Meeting
September 5, 2002
DRAFT
1 CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER
The regular meeting of the Wheat Ridge Planning Commission was called to order by Chair
WEISZ at 7:00 p.m., September 5, 2002, in the City Council Chambers of the Municipal
Building, 7500 West 29th Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado.
2.
ROLL CALL
Commission Members Present:
Jerry Collins
Paulette Cooper
John McMillin
Marian McNamee
Nancy Snow
Paula Weisz
Kevin Witt
Commission Members Absent:
Philip Plummer
Staff Members Present:
Meredith Reckert, Sr. Planner
Ann Lazzeri, Secretary
3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
-
Following is the official set of Planning Commission minutes for the public hearing of September 5,
2002. A set of these minutes is retained both in the office of the City Clerk and in the Department of
Planrung and Development of the City of Wheat Ridge.
4. APPROVE ORDER OF AGENDA
It was moved by Commissioner SNOW and seconded by Commissioner McNAMEE to
approve the order of the agenda. The motion passed 7-0 with Commissioner PLUMMER
absent.
5. APPROVE MINUTES - August 1, 2001
Commissioner SNOW offered an amendment to the minutes on page 3, paragraph 4, line 4 to
add the following words to the last sentence: "and indicated that the city was not involved in
anyway."
It was moved by Commissioner McNAMEE and seconded by Commissioner COOPER to
approve the minutes as amended. The motion passed 7-0 with Commissioner
PLUMMER absent.
Planning Commission
September 5, 2002
Page 1
6. PUBLIC FORUM
There was no one to appear before the Commission at this time.
7. PUBLIC HEARING
A. Case No. ZOA-02-04: An ordinance amending Section 26-621 of the \\!heat Ridge
Code of Laws pertaining to parking in residential areas.
The case was presented by Meredith Reckert. She reviewed the staff report which set forth
reVIsions to the ordmance as suggested by the Planning Commission and City Council. Tbe
report also included a summary of similar regulations imposed by other jurisdictions.
Commissioner McNAMEE expressed concern about restrictions which would allow only one
recreatIOnal vehicle.
COffiffilsslOner WITT expressed concern about limiting the number of vehIcles that may be
stored on a trailer
COffiffilssioner McMILLIN suggested that, since recreational vehicles vary so much in SIZe, it
mIght work to set forth a linear allotment. For example, each property owner would be allowed
so many linear feet regardless of the combination.
There was dIscussion about whether or not horse trailers should be included in the definitions.
-
It was moved by Commissioner SNOW and seconded by Commissioner COLLINS that
an ordinance amending Section 26-621 of the Wheat Ridge Codes of Law pertaining to
parking in residential areas be recommended for approval with the following
amendments to Sections B, C and F:
Section B shall read: "In residential zone districts, detached trailers and recreational
vehicles are prohibited from parking in public rights of way except that one utility
trailer or one recreational vehicle with or without an attached towed vehicle may be
parked within public street rights-of-way for a period up to seventy-two hours.
Moving the utility trailer or the recreational vehicle to another location in the right-of-
way does not extend or re-start the 72-hour period. This section does not apply to
campers mounted upon pickup trucks."
The Urst sentence of Section C shall read: "In residential zone districts, one
recreational vehicle and one other detached trailer upon which may be mounted
personal recreational vehicles may be parked or stored outside upon property owned
by the vehicle owner, provided such vehicles are parked six (6) feet or more inside the
front property line."
In section F, the following words shall be added to the end of the Urst sentence: "as
long as it is within six feet of a public street on private property under same conditions
as set forth in Section C above."
Planning Conumssion
September 5, 2002
Page 2
Noting that the city of Arvada limits the length of recreational vehicles to thirty feet,
Commissioner McMILLIN moved to amend the motion to limit the length of recreational
vehicles to 30 feet and any attached accessory vehicles be limited to 20 feet or less. The
motion died for lack of a second.
A vote was taken on the original motion which passed by a vote of 7-0 with Commissioner
PLUMMER absent.
8. OLD BUSINESS
Subdivision on north side of 32ad Avenue east of Kiplinl! - Commissioner SNOW expressed
concern that, while another developer has plans to develop property across the street from this
project, the first developer is already responsible for building both sides of the street. There are
also drainage issues involved between the two developers. She commente_d that this points out
the need for some type of a cost recovery ordinance.
9. NEW BUSINESS
Cancellation of Planninl! Commission Meetinl! on September 19. 2002 - MeredIth Reckert
advised the Commission that there were no cases ready to come before the Commission on
September 19,2002.
10. COMMISSION REPORTS
There were no commission reports.
-
11. COMMITfEE AND DEPARTMENT REPORTS
There were no committee or department reports.
12. ADJOURNMENT
It was moved by Commissioner McNAMEE and seconded by Commissioner COOPER to
adjourn the meeting at 8:15 p.m. The motion passed unanimously.
Paula Weisz, Chair
Ann Lazzeri, Recording Secretary
.
~
Planning Commission
September 5, 2002
Page 3
Wl-EATRIIX3E PU<GffiING Fax: 3032345923
Sep 23 2002 15:52
P.Ol
City of Wheat Ridge
Pla1\ning and Development Department
Memorandum
TO: Mayor and Ci'l Council
FROM: Alan White, Planning and Development Director OOJJ
SUBJECT: Ca8e No. ZOA 02~, Ordinance amending Section 26-621 of the Code of Laws
Pertaining to Parking in Residential Areas
DA TE: September 23, 2002
The request for Council Action Sheet for this item states that Planning Commission recommendations ARE
included in the ordinance. The ordinance in your packet DOES NOT include the Planning Commission
recommended changes. This ordinance was inadvertently left out In order to include one or all of the Planning
Commission recommendations, the motion should include 1,2, 3, or 4 below.
Suggested Motion:
-
"r move to approve Council Bill No. 29-2002, Case NO. ZOA 02~, on second reading with the following
changes:
1. Amend Section 26-123 with the addition of the following definition:
Rec~ati<mal Vehicle, Personal. Vehicles used in recreational pursuits designed for use by one or two
persons, including such vehicles lIB snowmobiles, all-terrain vehicles, peIllonal water craft, boats, and
other similar motorized or non-motorized devices.
2. Revise Section B to read: In residential zone districts, detached trailers and recreational vehicles are
prohibited from parking in public rights-of-way except that one utility trailer or one recreational vehicle with or
without an attached towed vehicle may be parked within public street rights-of-way for a period of up to
&eventy-two hOlml. Moving the utility trailer or the recreational vehicle to another location in the right-of-way
docs not extend or re-start the 72-hour period. This section does not apply to campeIll mounted upon pickup
trucks_
3. Change the first sentence of Section C to read: In residential :lone districts, one recreational vehicle and one
other detached trailer upon which may be mounted personal recreational vehicles may be parked or stored
outside upon property owned by the vehicle owner, provided such vehicles are pMked six (6) feet or more
inside the front property line.
4. Add the following wording to the end of the first sentence in Section F: ''provided such vehicles are pMked
six (6) feet or more imide the front property line under the same conditions 8S set forth in Section C above."
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES September 23, 2002
Page -2-
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Motion by Mr Mancinelli to pull Agenda Item 7 because this should have been brought
up for reconsideration on September 9 at the Regular Meeting, seconded by Mr. Gokey;
carried 7-1 with Mr. DiTullio voting no
Motion by Mr Schneider to suspend the Council Rules and allow this Item to be
considered tonight as Item 7 B and further moved that all Rules be suspended for that
particular debate; seconded by Mr. Gokey
Mr DiTullio asked for a division of the question
First question to put this on as Item 7. B carried 8-0
Second part of the motion failed 5-3 with Councilmembers Hanley, Figlus, and DiTullio
voting no. (This needed 6 votes to pass)
Motion by Mr. DiTullio to approve the Agenda as amended; seconded by Mr. Mancinelli;
carried 8-0
PUBLIC HEARINGS AND ORDINANCES ON SECOND READING
Item 1.
Council Bill 29-2002 - An Ordinance amending Section 26-621 of the
Wheat Ridge Code of Laws pertaining to parking in residential areas.
-
Council Bill 29-2002 was introduced on second reading by Mr Schneider; Clerk read
summary and background and assigned Ordinance No 1265.
Alan White presented the staff report. He stated that the Ordinance contained in the
packet was the one passed on first reading by Council and did not include the Planning
Commission recommended changes He faxed out a memo today, which included
those changes. He elaborated on the changes to the Ordinance that were
recommended by the Planning Commission He recommended that the definition of "jet
skis" be changed to "personal water craft"
The changes recommended by Planning Commission read as follows:
1. Amend Section 26-123 with the addition of the following definition.
Recreational Vehicle, Personal. Vehicles used in recreational pursuits designed
for use by one or two persons, including such vehicles as snowmobiles, all-
terrain vehicles, personal water craft, boats, and other similar motorized or non-
motorized devices.
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES' September 23, 2002
Page -3-
2. Revise Section B to read In residential zone districts, detached trailers and
recreational vehicles are prohibited from parking in public rights-of-way except
that one utility trailer or one recreational vehicle with or without an attached
towed vehicle may be parked within public street rights-of-way for a period of up
to seventy-two hours Moving the utility trailer or the recreational vehicle to
another location in the right-of-way does not extend or re-start the 72-hour
period. This section does not apply to campers mounted upon pickup trucks
3 Change the first sentence of Section C. to read In residential zone districts, one
recreational vehicle and one other detached trailer upon which may be mounted
personal recreational vehicles may be parked or stored outside upon property
owned by the vehicle owner, provided such vehicles are parked six (6) feet or
more inside the front property line.
4 Add the following wording to the end of the first sentence in Section F: "provided
such vehicles are parked six (6) feet or more inside the front property line under
the same conditions as set forth in Section C above.
Linda Weatherman is concerned about this Ordinance, they own a 27 ft Winnebago
Motor home and have a 21 ft Pontoon Boat, which are stored on their property She is
not sure if this Ordinance would put them in violation
-
Mr DiTullio asked Mr White if the condition that the recreational vehicle had to belong
to the property owner is in the Ordinance. Mr White stated yes, that was addressed in
Section C. This would apply to either an owner or a renter.
Ms. Figlus asked Mr. White if somebody could have several personal recreational
vehicles on the property. The answer was, yes, if they fit on 1 trailer, otherwise they
would have to be stored inside Mr. White stated that this would be addressed in
change 3.
The definition of "Recreational Vehicle" includes a Motor Home, a snowmobile, a
personal watercraft, a boat, a camper trailer.
She questioned the wording that recreational vehicles cannot be stored in a carport as
addressed in Section C and the same thing in Section F. in the last sentence It
should read "nonoperative vehicle" Mr White agreed
Ms. Figlus questioned the parking of a visitor's RV. They can apply for a temporary
parking permit, not to exceed 14 days and park on the street. Ms. Figlus asked that
this also apply to parking in the driveway and the language be added to the Ordinance
Alan Salzmann applauded Council for drafting an Ordinance with stronger language
regarding recreational vehicles. He has had an experience with a large RV parked next
to his driveway and he narrowly missed hitting children while backing out of his
driveway He submitted a petition 7 years ago for the removal of RV's from any
frontage property 90% of his neighbors signed it
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES September 23,2002
Page -4-
Motion by Mr Schneider to approve Council Bill 29-2002, Case No lOA-02-04, on
second reading. I further move to add the following wording to the end of the first
sentence in Section F. "provided such vehicles are parked six feet or more inside the
front property line under the same conditions as set forth in Section C above." I further
move that we change the words "jet skis" in Section 1 to "personal watercraft",
seconded by Mrs. Rotola.
Motion by Ms. Figlus to add amendments 1 2. and 3. as proposed by the Planning
Commission; seconded by Mr Hanley.
Mr Schneider will vote no on this because this will water down the law we currently
have in place In reading 2 , it says that one utility trailer or recreational vehicle with or
without an attached vehicle may be parked within the public street, this means you can
leave an abandoned trailer in the street. Right now you can't do that. Under our current
ordinance it has to be attached to a towing vehicle
Ms Figlus amended her amendment to strike the words "one utility trailer", seconded by
Mr Hanley
Mr Schneider stated if we left out the entire amendment it would be exactly as it is right
now
Amendment to the amendment failed 2-6 with Councilmembers Hanley and Figlus
voting yes.
-
Motion by Mr Gokey to amend Ms. Figlus' motion to strike 1 and 2 and add 3 ; failed
for lack of a second
Vote on amendment failed 2-6 with Councilmembers Hanley and Figlus voting yes
Motion by Mr Gokey to amend the motion to add 3., seconded by Ms. Figlus
Mr DiTullio stated this motion makes no sense because it goes with 1., which has not
been included in the original motion.
Mr Gokey amended his amendment to add 1 to go with 3 ; seconded by Ms. Figlus
Mr. Gokey stated that he wants to support the responsible RV and boat owners in the
City, who take care of their possessions The problem is with people who store five or
six different recreational vehicles on their property
Motion tied 4-4 with Councilmembers Hanley, Gokey, Rotala, and Figlus voting yes.
Mayor broke the tie by voting yes Motion carried 5-4.
CITY COUNCIL MINUTE~' September 23, 2002
Page -5-
Vote on main motion as amended carried 7-1 with Ms. Figlus voting no
Ms Figlus asked when this would take effect and how people would be notified of this
law Mr. Dahl stated it would take effect 15 days after final publication and people
would be notified by this ordinance being published in the newspaper Ms Figlus feels
all of us are in favor of cleaning up the City, however 15 days is a very short time to
allow people to make other arrangements She doesn't know how many people read
the fine print of public notices and she would be more comfortable if this would be
enforced after the next publication of the Wheat Ridge Connection and give people an
opportunity to find out about this other than getting a warning from the City
Item 2.
Council Bill 30-2002 - An Ordinance adopting by reference the
Wadsworth Boulevard Corridor Plan (Case No ZOA-02-05)
Council Bill 30-2002 was introduced on second reading by Mr Mancinelli, who read the
title, summary and background Clerk assigned Ordinance No 1266.
Alan White presented the staff report and answered Councils' questions
Motion by Mr Mancinelli to adopt Council Bill 30-2002 (Ordinance 1266) (Case No
ZOA-02-5) on second reading and that it take effect immediately; seconded by Mr
Edwards, carried 7-1 with Mr Gokey voting no
-
Item 3.
Consideration of an application for a Special Use Permit to allow a
gasoline fueling facility on C-1 zoned property located at 5201 West 38th
Avenue and 3817 Sheridan Blvd
(Case No SUP-02-01) (King Soopers)
Vance Edwards stated that, based upon a discussion with Mr. Dahl, he will abstain from
this Agenda Item Charter Section 5 9 requires every Councilmember to vote on all
matters unless he/or she has a personal or private interest in the matter In the past,
when items related to this matter were discussed, the party was 38th & Sheridan Ltd.
Partnership, which owns the Shopping Center He was then required to vote The
applicant this evening is King Soopers, who is his employer If he voted, it would be
considered a conflict of interest. He will leave Council Chambers for the entire agenda
item and abstain from voting.
Mr. Edwards left Council Chambers
Item 3 was introduced by Mr DiTullio, who read the title, summary and background
Meredith Reckerl, Planning Department, was sworn in by the Mayor and presented the
staff report. She stated that Planning Commission had denied this request and an
appeal was filed to City Council, that is why we are hearing this case tonight. She
recommended an additional condition regarding the design of the canopy that would
meet the streetscape manual requirements.
CITY COUNCIL MINUTE~ September 23, 2002
Page -5-
Vote on main motion as amended carried 7-1 with Ms Figlus voting no
Ms Figlus asked when this would take effect and how people would be notified of this
law. Mr. Dahl stated it would take effect 15 days after final publication and people
would be notified by this ordinance being published in the newspaper Ms. Figlus feels
all of us are in favor of cleaning up the City, however 15 days is a very short time to
allow people to make other arrangements She doesn't know how many people read
the fine print of public notices and she would be more comfortable if this would be
enforced after the next publication of the Wheat Ridge Connection and give people an
opportunity to find out about this other than getting a warning from the City.
Item 2.
Council Bill 30-2002 - An Ordinance adopting by reference the
Wadsworth Boulevard Corridor Plan (Case No ZOA-02-05)
Council Bill 30-2002 was introduced on second reading by Mr Mancinelli, who read the
title, summary and background Clerk assigned Ordinance No 1266
Alan White presented the staff report and answered Councils' questions
Motion by Mr Mancinelli to adopt Council Bill 30-2002 (Ordinance 1266) (Case No
ZOA-02-5) on second reading and that it take effect immediately; seconded by Mr
Edwards, carried 7-1 with Mr Gokey voting no
-
Item 3.
Consideration of an application for a Special Use Permit to allow a
gasoline fueling facility on C-1 zoned property located at 5201 West 38th
Avenue and 3817 Sheridan Blvd
(Case No SUP-02-01) (King Soopers)
Vance Edwards stated that, based upon a discussion with Mr. Dahl, he will abstain from
this Agenda Item Charter Section 5 9 requires every Councilmember to vote on all
matters unless he/or she has a personal or private interest in the matter In the past,
when items related to this matter were discussed, the party was 38th & Sheridan Ltd.
Partnership, which owns the Shopping Center He was then required to vote The
applicant this evening is King Soopers, who is his employer If he voted, it would be
considered a conflict of interest. He will leave Council Chambers for the entire agenda
item and abstain from voting
Mr. Edwards left Council Chambers
Item 3 was introduced by Mr DiTullio, who read the title, summary and background
Meredith Reckert, Planning Department, was sworn in by the Mayor and presented the
staff report. She stated that Planning Commission had denied this request and an
appeal was filed to City Council, that is why we are hearing this case tonight. She
recommended an additional condition regarding the design of the canopy that would
meet the streetscape manual requirements.
CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION MINUTES
CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO
October 21, 2002
Mayor Cerveny called the Study Session to order at 7.00 p m. Councilmembers present:
Vance Edwards, Odarka Figlus, Dean Gokey, Harry Hanley, Ralph Mancinelli, Lena Rotola and
David Schneider. Jerry DiTullio was not present. Also present: City Clerk, Wanda Sang; City
Manager, Randy Young; Director of Planning, Alan White, Chief of Police Jack Hurst; Director of
Parks and Recreation, Joyce Manwaring; staff and interested citizens.
Motion by Mr. Mancinelli to approve the Minutes of September 16,2002; seconded by Mrs
Rotola; carried 7-0.
Motion by Mr Schneider to move Agenda Item 5 to Agenda Item 1; seconded by Mr
Mancinelli; carried 7-0.
Motion by Ms. Figlus to move Item 4 to Item 2, seconded by Mr. Hanley; carried 7-0.
Approval of Agenda as amended, Item 5 is the first Item on the Agenda, Item 4 is the second
Item on the Agenda; the other 3 Items follow; carried 7 -0.
Item 1.
Ordinance 1265 - Parking in Residential Areas
-
Alan White presented this item and passed out a list of comments and Staff recommendations
Kenneth King, 2949 Vivian St., spoke against the ordinance He said that he had driven
around Wheat Ridge and talked to 27 people about their knowledge of this ordinance. None of
them knew anything about it. He asked that there be better communication between City
Council and the citizens
Denver Johnson, 2948 Vivian St., read a letter he had written against the ordinance
Motion by Ms. Figlus to suspend the rules for the length of time spent on this item, seconded by
Mr. Hanley; carried 6-1.
Jim Opp, 3232 Vivian Dr, said that the ordinance should allow two RV's for each property.
Shirley Walker, 4298 Kipling St., Unit A, owns a feed store in Wheat Ridge and spoke against
the ordinance
Gary Hartley, 3250 Moore Ct., and Herbert Hartline, also spoke against the ordinance.
David Schneider read comments from supporters of the ordinance and explained the reasons
for the ordinance
STUDY SESSION MINUTES, October 21,2002
Page - 2 -
Discussion on the list of staff recommendations followed
1. Consensus 7-0 to follow Staff recommendation regarding the number of vehicles.
2. Consensus 7-0 to follow Staff recommendation regarding the types of vehicles.
3. (a) Consensus 6-1 to follow Staff recommendation regarding the number and type of
trailers, and consider all trailers to be the same.
(b) Consensus 7-0 that a trailer with 4 snowmobiles on it would be considered one
vehicle.
4. Consensus 7-0 NOT to incorporate Staff recommendation on the setbacks.
5. Consensus 6-1 to follow Staff recommendation for parking/storage surfaces
6. Consensus 7-0 to follow Staff recommendation for parking in carports
7 Consensus 7-0 to follow Staff recommendation for sight triangle/obstructions.
8. Consensus 7-0 to follow Staff recommendation to move the non-operative vehicles
provision to Chapter 15
9 Consensus 6-1 to follow Staff recommendation to not include a grandfather clause.
Consensus failed 2-5 to allow visitors to a residence to be able to park on private property with
a permit.
Item 2.
Code Enforcement
-
Chief of Police Jack Hurst gave his recommendations on changes to Code Enforcement.
Discussion followed
Consensus 7-0 to go along with Chief Hurst's Pro-Active Code Enforcement Position
Item 3.
Arvada Excavating request to move channel into Johnson Park
Alan White presented this proposal and asked Council to make a consensus to move this
forward to a regular City Council Meeting Discussion followed_ Walt Pettit stated that this
modification would help Wheat Ridge Water District. Joyce Manwaring asked that she get
some kind of agreement or clarification of the plan to see how it would affect the park.
Consensus 7-0 to bring this item forth to a regular City Council Meeting with are-vegetation
plan that will be comprehensive and address the concerns of Council.
Item 4.
Teen Center - future direction
Joyce Manwaring and Julie Brisson, Recreation Superintendent, recommend closing the teen
center as a drop-in center and moving the direction of the program into more programmed or
scheduled activities and basing it out of the Anderson building Discussion followed.
Consensus 7 -0 to support the policy direction on the teen program and to bring back options for
the teen building.
....
ITEM S.
October 21, 2002
INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER SCHNEIDER
Council Bill No. 29-2002
Ordinance No. J.2.6.S
Series of 2002
TITLE:
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 26-621 OF THE
WHEAT RIDGE CODE OF LA WS PERTAINING TO
PARKING IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS.
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE,
COLORADO, THAT:
Section 1. Section 26-123 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws IS hereby amended as follows.
Recreational vehicle. l,,~th..ubll;. A vehicle, such as a recreational trailer, tent camper trailer,
truck camper, travel trailer, motor home or other vehicle with or without motive power,
designed and/or constructed to travel on the public thoroughfare and onginally intended and
deSigned for human habitation. The term shall also include vehicles used in recreational
pursuits such as snowmobiles, all-terrain vehicles, personal water craft, boats, and
other similar motorized or non-motorized devices.
RtLltul'UHul vth,dt, HUfll,<..eH..ablt. \\J,~d,-~ ~hjcl. a.,,, IIOt lcql1u"d to f.,,,, h,-clI~"d f.,j tllc
Cololado ?-.fvtOl V d';'ck DIY l~IOIl, 511(,), as SIIO~ 1ll0L~le~, all-t(ll a., II .dllclcs dlld vtl.u ~llllllaJ
. (Il, cI",s.
-
Section 2. Section 26-621 of the Wheat RIdge Code of Laws IS hereby amended as follows
Sec 26-621 ReSidential parking.
A. In reSidential zone dlstncts, the parkmg of trucks, vans, buses or licensed traIlers whIch are
used for commercial purposes, whether the commercial enterprise is conducted from the
home or conducted elsewhere, IS prohibIted except as penrutted by this section. An
occupant of a dwelling may park, or allow the parkmg of. no more than one (1) truck or
van which IS used for commercial purposes upon the prell1lses or confined to the street
frontage of the lot In question, provided, however, that such vehIcle does not exceed a one- _
ton chaSSIS Parking of trailers which are used for commercial purposes IS prohibIted on
any public nght-of-way
B In resJdentlal zone districts, one (1) recreational vehicle lllvtUllz<:.J a.,.d 1l01I-1I1Ululll.cd
GaJ/lp~llg .ducks (except campers mounted upon piCkup trucks), l:.t.hle,-woullt(d boats,
and or one (1) other towed vehicles such as, but not lill1lted to, a utility tratlers may be
parked wlthm public street nghts-of-way for a period up to seventy-two (72) hours,
proVIded they are attached to the towing vehIcle. Moving the towing vehicle and/or the
trailer to another location in the right-or-way does not extend or re-start the 72
hour period.
C. Except as noted above, in residential zone districts, detached trailers and recreation
vehicles are prohibited from parlang III pubhc nghts-of-way; however, one (1) detached
trailer or one (1) recreational vehicle they may be parked or stored outside upon
property owned by the vehicle owner, proVIded such vehicles are parked SIX (6) feet or
more Illslde the front property line. Such vehicles WIll be similarly pennitted upon
residential rental propertIes where the owner of the vehicle reSides upon the premises, and
in the case of multlfanuly residential properties, where such vehicle or vehicles do not
displace parlo.ng spaces required to meet the IIlill1mUm vehicular parlang standard for the
property as set forth herein for multifarmly residential land uses. Where It IS difficult to
detennine the public nght-of-way boundary due to lack of curb, gutter and/or Sidewalk, or
survey markers, such boundaries shall be presumed to be ten (10) feet from the edge of
pavement or back of curb Where a SIdewalk exists, such boundanes shall be presumed to
be two (2) feet from the outside edge of sidewalk. For the purposes of this subsection
C, permanent or temporary carports, frame covered structures, tents, or other
temporary structures shall not be used to store or conceal such recreational
vehicles.
D.
In residential zone districts, 1, ,-,,5<:-5 where It IS desired to mamtam such a restncted
vehicle either withm six (6) feet of a publIc street on pnvate property or withIn a lawful
parlang area on a public street abuttmg the front of the property III excess of seventy-two
(72) hours, the property owner may obtam a temporary parlang penrut from the planmng
and development department. Such temporary parlang penrut shall be for a time penod not
to exceed fourteen (14) days and no more than one (1) such penrut shall be Issued each SIX
(6) months for the same velucle The Issuance of a temporary penrut IS for the purpose of
parkIng only and not for any other actIvity The penrut must be placed upon the InSide
wmdshleld or SIde window on the dnver's Side so as to be VISible for mspectlOn
-
€:E. Pickup truck.mounted campers, when mounted upon pIckup trucks, are not subject to
these parkmg restnctlons except that such camper shall not be used for permanent or
temporary lIving quarters. Notlung m this secl.1on will be construed to restnct or hIIlit
parlo.ng of any velucle so descnbed upon private property so long as s3.1d vehicle IS parked
m accordance with the liIIlitations of this sectIOn and proVIded that SIght distance tnangle
requirements of sectlon 26-603 are met.
F. In residential zone districts, one (1) vehicle in non-operative condition as defined in
Section 15-4 of the Code of Laws may be stored outside upon property owned by
the vehicle owner, provided such vehicles are parked six (6) feet or more inside the
front property line under the same conditions as set forth in Section C above. Such
vehicle shall be completely covered with a standard vehicle cover designed and
manufactured for the purpose of covering a vehicle. Such cover shall be of a single
earth tone or neutral color and shall be maintained in good condition free from
holes, rips, tears, or other damage. Tarps, plastic sheets, or any other type of
material not specifically designed and manufactured to cover a vehicle shall not be
used to cover a non-operative vehicle. For the purposes of this subsection F,
permanent or temporary carports, frame covered structures, tents, or other
temporary structures shall not be used to store or conceal such non-operative
vehicles.
Section 3. Safety Clause. The City Council hereby finds, detenrunes, and declares that this
ordmance is promulgated under the general pollce 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 detennines that the ordinance bears a ratIOnal relation to the proper legislative object
sought to be attained.
Section 4. 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 Junsdlction mvalId, such judgment shall not affect apphcatlOn to other persons or
cIrcumstances.
Section 5. Supersession Clause. If any provision, requIrement or standard estabhshed by thIS
OrdInance is found to conflIct with sunilar 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 6. This ordmance shall take effect u~n adoption.
INTRODUCED, READ, AND ADOPTED on first reading by a vote of ~ to ~ on thIS
~ day of August , 2002, ordered published in full In a newspaper of general CIrculatIOn In the
CIty of Wheat Ridge and Public Hearing and consideratIOn on final passage set for September 23
2002, at 7'00 o'clock p.m" in the Council Chambers, 7500 West 29th Avenue, Wheat RIdge,
Colorado.
READ, ADOPTED AND ORDERED PUBLISHED on second and final readmg by a vote
of.-:L........ to ~, thIS ...2.1z:d... day of September , 2002
Vetoed by the Mayor on thIS ~ day of September
,2002
MAYOR'S VETO OVERRIDDEN BY A VOTE OF 6 TO 2; COUNCIL MEETING OCTOBER 14, 2002.
GRETCHEN CERVENY, MAYOR
ATTEST:
Wanda Sang, City Clerk
~-~~
GERALD DAHL, CITY ATTORNEY
1st Pubhcation. August 29, 2002
2nd PublicatIon: October 17, 2002
Wheat Ridge Transcnpt
Effective Date: October 14, 2002
C:\Documents and Settings\alan\My DocumentslWPFtles\Projectslzoning arreodmentslres parking ord,wpd
.,
-
TO.
MAYOR GRETCHEN CERVENY
3425 Moore 8t.
Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80033-5533
v",o" 303.233-1506 fIDe 303.23 J:~03 3788887
Wheat RIdge CIty Council r ~
DATE September 26, 20 2
ThIS IS your offiCIal notificatIOn t at I am vetoing OrdInance # 1265 (Council Bill #29-2002)
which Council passed on Monday, September 23, 2002.
'In good conscience I can not allow thIS Ordinance to govern all the people of Wheat Ridge.
ThiS ordInance, as reconsidered and passed, allows citizens to park or store only one recreational
vehicle or detached trailer outside on their drIveway.
I am vetoIng thiS ordinance because It discrimmates agaInst the many owners of recreational
vehicles who pull a boat or trailer with A TV's or snow machInes behInd their recreatIOnal
vehicle. ThIS ordInance would not allow them to park outside on thelT own property
It is my goal, as It is With Council, to keep "Wheat Ridge a nice place to live and work"
I am aware that many of the people who move to some of the new neighborhoods In Wheat
RIdge prefer the very restrIctive covenants their homeowner associatIOns enforce I know there
are some neighborhoods which have allowed their covenants to expIre and WIsh to form a new
homeowners aSSOCIatIOn. However, I do not believe that the majorIty of Wheat RIdge CitIzens
'~ant the laws of Whe?t Ridge to be this restnctive.
I do believe the City should have some restrIctions on recreatIOnal vehicles and trailers In
reSidential areas. The City should have parkIng ordinances whICh protect public safety,
particularly In the area of "Sight tnangles" where tall recreational vehicles can obstruct the VISIOn
of dnvers. As we heard In the testImony September 23, 2002, this ordinance does not address
the public safety concern of tall recreatIOnal vehicles WhICh do not have to follow the height
restrIctions the City has for fenCIng.
I urge Council not to forget that the CItizens are our customers and to bring forward ordInances
which address public safety and welfare Without unduly infnngIng on our citizens' personal
rIghts.
-
Provision Comment Staff Recommendation
1. Number of Vehicles Currently limited to one (1) Increase number of
Recreational vehicles vs. recreational vehicles or
personal craft trailers allowed to be stored
or parked to two (2).
2. Types of Vehicles Currently all are treated the same. Create second definition of
Recreational Vehicles vs. If allowed in addition to personal recreational vehicle
personal craft recreational vehicles, should the to cover snowmobiles, etc.
number of personal craft stored on
a trailer be limited?
3. Trailers (Number and type) Not clear if snowmobile on a trailer Allow these vehicles to be
Horse trailers are not constitutes one recreational stored on a trailer as an
mentioned vehicle plus one trailer - a equivalent to a recreational
violation. Needs clarification. vehicle. Horse trailers should
be treated as any other trailer
4. Setbacks Current requirement is 6 feet in Require storage in the side or
Front front only rear yards to conform to
Side carport/detached garage
Rear setback (generally 5 feet).
Front setback remains 6 feet,
unless a driveway sight
triangle is involved.
5. Parking/Storage Surface Not addressed in Section 26-621 Many areas of the City have
Section 26-501 (D) requires "areas gravel driveways. Gravel
subject to wheeled traffic for should be allowed as a
access, parking, sales, or parking surlace.
storage, to be surlaced with
concrete, asphalt, brick pavers or
similar materials." The first 25
feet of a driveway must be
surlaced with these or "similar
materials."
6. Parking in Carports Intent was to prohibit recreational Make change to ordinance.
vehicles or trailers above the one
allowed on the property to be
stored in a carport or tent. This
needs to be clarified.
7. Sight Triangles/Obstructions Current requirement applies to Clarify that this requirement
driveways only' 15 from the edge or the 6-foot setback applies,
of driveway and 15 feet from the whichever is greater
right-of-way line
8. Non-operative Vehicles This provisions should be moved Make change to ordinance.
to Chapter 15 where non-operative
vehicles are defined.
9. Grandfather Existing This would require verification of Do not include a
Vehicles and Trailers current vehicles and trailers in the grandfathering clause.
City via a windshield survey of
every lot on every street. Very
time consuming.
~CD
REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION
COUNCIL MEETING DATE.
December 9,2002
TITLE:
CASE NO. ZOA 02-04, RESIDENTIAL PARKING
(REVISED)
~ PUBLIC HEARING
o BIDS/MOTIONS
o RESOLUTIONS
o ORDINANCES FOR 1ST READING (Date 11/18/02)
~ ORDINANCES FOR 2ND READING
QuasI-Judicial.
o
Yes
~
No
~/JJk-
~i~~
City Manager Cl
Planmng and Development Dlfector
RECOMMENDED ACTION.
Staff recommends approval of Council Bill No 36-2002 WIth the following amendments
Renumber SectIOn 5, Safety Clause to Section 6
2. Renumber SectIOn 6 to SectIOn 7
3 Renumber SectIOn 7, Suppression Clause to Section 8.
EXECUTIVE SUMMAR Y.
Th1s 1S an update to inform Council of Plannmg COffilllisslOn's action on this case at their hearing on
December 5, 2002.
The attached ordinance contains all changes agreed to by consensus at Council's study session held on
October 21,2002 and all changes made on first readmg.
FINANCIAL IMPACT.
See origmal action form.
COMMISSION/BOARD RECOMMENDATION.
Plannmg Commission recommended adoption of the ordinance With the following amendments:
SectIon 1, third paragraph under defimtion of trailer' eliminate the words "and horse trailers"
and add the words "but does not include horse trallers."
2. Section 2, paragraph B, second lme, after the words "may be stored outside" add the folloWIng
words "In the front yard setback or any unfenced sIde yard adjacent to a publIc street.
Parkmg IS allowed only upon property occupied by the vehlcle owner Addltlonal recreatlonal
vehIcles or trailers may be parked elsewhere on the property provIded that the maxImum area
used for parking or storage of recreatlOnal veh1cles, traders or non-operatIVe vehicles does not
exceed 40% of the remainder of the lot."
3 SectIOn 2, paragraph B, add the followmg words to the end of paragraph B "Any property
owner may apply to the BOA for a variance from the location and number of recreatIOnal
vehicles and traIlers Imposed by thiS subsectIOn Such applicatIOn shall be made m the manner
reqUlred by SectIOn 2-61 and 26-115 and shall be evaluated and decIded upon by the Board of
Adjustment m the manner reqUlred by Section 2-53(d) and 26-115 AddItIOnal vehIcles
permitted by actIOn of the Board shall be located, screened or covered as directed by the Board
by condItIOns of approval of any such vanance "
4 Section 2, paragraph E, change the first sentence to read. "Horse trailers, pIckup truck-
mounted campers
5 Section 2, paragraph F, add the followmg words to the end of this paragraph "Any owner of
property attemptmg to improve the reqUlred parkmg surface to comply With thiS ordmance
shall be given until September 30, 2003 to comply"
-
6 SectIOn 3, paragraph (k) second Ime, after the words "may be stored outSIde" add the follOWIng
words "in the front setback or unfenced slde yard adj3cent to a pubhc street. Parkmg 1S
allowed only upon property occupIed by the vehicle owner
7
SectIon 3, paragraph (k) lIne 12, change wordIng as follows "Any property owner may apply
to the Board of Adjustment for a vanance from the location and number of non-operative
vehicles imposed by thiS subsection " _
'I- N0tJ-O~uAlll) E VLWCLS~
Sectlon 3, paragraph (k) lIne 12, InseI1 the follOWIng language pnor to the Board of
Adjustment provIsIon" I s or traders may be parked elsewhere
on the property provlded that the maxImum area used for parkIng or storage of recreational
vehIcles, trailers or non-operatIve veh1c1es does not exceed 40% of the remaInder of the lot.
8
9 Sectlon 5 - Safety Clause should be renumbered to SectIOn 6
10 SectJon 6 should be renumbered to Section 7 and add the following words. "Warmng tIckets
will be the only type of enforcement for SIX months after the effectJve date of thIS ordmance
No fines wlll be assessed for SIX months after the effective date of th1S ordmance"
11 SectlOn 7, SuppressIOn Clause should be renumbered to Section 8
Each portion of the above motion was discussed and approved by consensus earher in the meeting prior to
making the formal motion.
Because no consensus was reached on the issue of parkmg or stonng oversIze recreational vehIcles, the
CommiSSIon voted to study thIS Issue further at a later date The motion faIled 3-3
C:\Documents and Seuings\alan\My Documents\WPFiles\Projecls\zuning amcndmems\RV parkIng cc aL'llon update. due
PROJECT HISTORY.
See origmal action form.
STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES:
In discussmg large recreatIOnal veh1cles, the Planning CommISSIOn consIdered establishmg setbacks and
prohibitmg parking in both side yards to address impacts to neighbors. No consensus was reached.
The Commission generally agreed that restrictmg RV's to a certam number across the board was
unreasonable given the widely varylllg lot sizes in the City Owners of larger lots should have the abIlity
to store more vehIcles.
The Planning Commission's recommendations to permit any number of recreational or non-operative
veh1cles in side or back yards are attempts to reconcile the issue of lot size versus number of vehIcles
allowed. The 1mplementation of thIS will be difficult and time consuming. There will be those who will
claim the five non-operative vehIcles In the back yard are collector cars, when III realllY an lllegal auto
repair home occupation is being conducted.
If storage is allowed III the SIde and back yards for vehIcles In excess of the two allowed In the front, IS
there a need to create a vanance process with the BOA') The only Item aVailable for variance IS the 40%
lot coverage reqUIrement.
The variance procedures for eIther non-operatJve vehIcles or recreational vehicles will add to staff
workload.
-
AL TERNA TIVES CONSIDERED:
See onginal actlOn form.
Report Prepared by' Alan White (303)- 235-2844
Attachments.
None
C'\Documents and Settings\a\an\My Documents\WPFiles\Projects\zoning amendments\RV parking cc action update.doc
Id-EAWIOCiE PlW-flSING Fax:3032345923
Dee 9 2((12 16:29
P.04
~
REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION
rP[~~ ~~~
COUNCn.. MEETING DATE.
December 9,2002
TITLE:
CASE NO. ZOA 02-04, RESIDENTIAL PARKING
(REVISED)
IZl.PUBilc HEARING
o BIDSlMOTIONS
o RESOLUTIONS
o ORDINANCES FOR 1ST READING (Date: 11/18/02)
i2] ORDINANCES FOR 2ND READING
Quasi -Judicial:
o
Yes
~
No
~/JJ!vk
Planning and Development Director
City :t-'h
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Staff recommends approval of Council Bill No. 36-2002 with the following amendments:
--
1.
Renumber Section 5, Safety Clause to Section 6.
2. Renumber Section 6 to Section 7.
3 Renumber Section 7, Suppression CIlWlle to Section 8.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
This is an update to inform Council of Planning Commission's action on this case at their bearing on
December 5, 2002.
The attached ordinance contains all changes agreed to by consensus at Council's study session held on
October 21,2002 and all changes made on first reading.
FINANCIAL IMP ACf:
See original action form.
COMMISSIONIBOARD RECOMMENDATION:
Planning Commission reconunended adoption of the ordinance with the following amendment!!:
1. Section 1. third paragraph under definition of trailer' eliminate the words "and horse trailers"
and add the words "but does not include horse trailers."
UH:ATRIDGE PlJ<O-ffiI~ Fax:3032345923
Dec 9 2002 16:29
PC6
PROJECT HISTORY:
See original action form.
STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES:
In discussing large recreational vehicles, the Planning Commission considered establishing setbacks and
prohibiting parking in both side yards to address impacts to neighbors. No consensus was reached.
The Commission generally agreed that restricting RV's to a certain number across the board was
unreasonable given the widely varying lot sizes in the City. Owners of larger lots should have the ability
to store more vehicles.
The Planning Commission's recommendations to permit any number of recreational or non-operative
vehicles in side or back yards are attempts to reconcile the issue of lot size venus number of vehicles
allowed. The implcmcntation of this will be difficult and time consuming. There will be those who will
claim the five non-operative vehicles in the back yard are collectOr cars, when in real1ty an illegal auto
repair home occupation is being conducted.
IT storage is allowed in the side and back yards for vehicles in excess of the two allowed in the front, is
there a need to create a variance process with the BOA? The only item available for variance is the 40%
lot coverage requirement.
The variance procedures for either non. operative vehicles or recreational vehicles will add to staff
workload.
-
ALTERNATIVES CONSIDRRRD;
See original action fonn.
Report Prepared by' AllUl White (303)- 235-2844
Attachments:
None
C:\Documenls and Settings\aJan\My DocumcnlS\WPFiles\Projoclll~ning amendmeots\RV parlcing cc action update.doc
UJ-EATRIDGE PlJ<O-flSlf'.KJ Fax:3032345923
Dee 9 20:)2 16:29
P.CO
2. Section 2, paragraph B, second line, after the words "may be stored outside" add the following
words: "in the front yard setback or any unfenced side yard adjacent to a public s~t.
Parldng is allowed only upon property occupied by the vehicle owner. Additional recreational
vehicles or trailers may be parked elsewhere on the property provided that the maximum area
used for parking or storage of recreational vehicles, trailers or non--operative vehicles does not
exceed 40% of the remainder of the lot."
3 Section 2, paragraph B. add the following words to the end of paragraph B: "Any property
owner may apply to the BOA for a variance from the location and number of recreational
vehicles and trailers imposed by thiS subsection. Such application shall be made in the manner
required by Section 2-61 and 26-115 and shall be evaluated and decided upon by the Board of
Adjustment in the manner required by Section 2-53(d) and 26-115. Additional vehicles
permitted by action of the Board shall be located, screened or covered as directed by the Board
by conditions of approval of any such variance."
4. Section 2, paragraph E, change the first sentence to read: "Horse trailers, pickup truck-
mounted ClUllpers. , , . . . . . . "
5. Section 2, paragraph F, add the following words to the end of this paragraph: "Any owner of
property attempting to improve the required parking surface to comply with this ordinance
shall be given until September 30,2003 to comply."
-
6. Section 3, paragraph (k) second line, after the words "may be stored outside" add the following
words: "in the front setback or unfenced side yard adjacent to a public street. Parking is
allowed only upon property occupied by the vehicle owner "
7 Section 3, paragraph (k) line 12, change wording as follows: "Any property owner may apply
to the Board of Adjustment for a variance from the location and number of non-operative
vehicles imposed by this subsection.. ."
8. Section 3, paragraph (k.) line 12, insert the following language prior to the Board of
Adjustment provision: "Additional recreational vehicles Of trailers may be parked elsewhere
on the property provided that the maximum area used for parking or storage of ~ational
vehkles, trailers or non--operativc vehicles does not exceed 40% of the remainder of the lot.
9. Section 5 - Sa'cty Clause should be renumbered to Section 6.
10. Section 6 should be renumbered to Section 7 and add the following words; "Warning tickets
will be the only type of enforccment for six months after the effective date of this ordinance.
No fines will be assessed for six months after the effective date of this ordinance."
11. Section 7, Suppression Clause should be renumbered to Section 8.
Bach portion of the above motion was discussed and approved by consensus earlier in the meeting prior to
making the formal motion.
BecllUse no consensus was roached on the if>sue of pMking or storing oven~ue recreational vehicles, the
Commission voted to study this issue further at a later date. The motion failed 3-3.
C:\Documents and Settings\al.lII\My Documents\WPFiles\Projects\zonitlll amcndmenis\RV parking cc aceion update.doc
-...---- ..
CITY COUNCIL MINUTE0 December 9 2002
,
Page -2-
Motion by Mr Edwards that at the end of the Regular City Council Meeting we go into
Executive Session for conference with the City Attorney under Charter Section 5 7(b)(1)
and Section 24-6-4(2)(4)(b) of C R.S , specifically legal advise on specific legal
questions, waiver of environmental indemnification and threatened litigation, seconded
by Mrs. Rotola; carried 7-0
Motion by Mr. DiTullio to approve the Agenda as amended, seconded by Mr Edwards;
carried 7-0.
PUBLIC HEARINGS AND ORDINANCES ON SECOND READING
Item 1.
Council Bill 36-2002 - An Ordinance amending the Wheat Ridge Code of
Laws pertaining to parking and storage of vehicles in Residential areas
(Case No. ZOA-02-04)
Council Bill 36-2002 was introduced on second reading by Mr Schneider; Clerk
assigned Ordinance No 1271
Alan White, Director of Planning, explained the differences between this new
Ordinance and the previous Ordinances addressing Recreational Vehicles He also
addressed Planning Commission recommendations He clarified that this Ordinance
applies to Residential Zone Districts, anything that starts with R-, not Agricultural Zone
Districts.
The following citizens spoke against the Ordinance:
Perry DeVere, Don Kammerzell, Leslie Owens, Art Baston, Bill Chouinard, Shirley
Walker, Nancy Ward, Liz Cardenas, Kevin Craig, Polly Pinkston, Greg Squires,
Don MacDougall, Marc Kahre, Jim Stevens, John McMillin, Paul Dierschow,
Robert Beyl, Jeff Moellentine, Lyal Bright, Barbara Bright, Greg Lagerberg,
Denver Johnson, Randy Stone, Cindy Shaw, Jim Simons, William Hedden, Brent
Owens, Cindy Owens, Doug Linder, RaeAnn Flageolle, Gerald Flageolle, Kate
Hartline, Tom Nielsen, Victor Olson, Janet Bradford, Daniel Lazzari, Chris
Whiteman, Luis Riggiero.
Their comments and concerns were: The Ordinance needs to be changed to allow
farmers to conduct their business in Wheat Ridge, the previous Ordinance is ridiculous
and needs to be revoked in its entirety; there should be more hearings on this matter;
people bought large properties so they can store their recreational vehicles in their back
yard, this should go to a vote of the people, this is not a covenants community; take the
advice of the Planning Commission or face recall; it won't be easy to enforce this
Ordinance,
CITY COUNCIL MINUTE~: December 9, 2002
Page -3-
are we going to expend police time in enforcing this, don't rush through this, it is not a
crisis and an imminent danger to Wheat Ridge, leave us alone and take care of trashy
places with the nuisance code, RV owners pay a lot of taxes and buy their tires and
supplies in Wheat Ridge; don't spend our tax money on enforcing this
The following citizens spoke in favor and support of the Ordinance and urged Council
to pass it: Don Peterson, Sheila Bardwell, Ellen Rollins, and Jay Rollins Their
comments included We want to have a nice rural community and respect each others
property; property values need to increase, we don't want a blighted community
Motion by Mr Schneider to approve Council Bill 36-2002 (Ordinance 1271), Case No
ZOA-02-04 on second reading, seconded by Mr Gokey
Motion by Mr DiTullio to amend to delete Sections 1 2 and 7 and by renumbering the
remaining Sections accordingly; seconded by Ms. Figlus, failed 2-5 with Mr DiTullio
and Ms Figlus voting yes.
Motion by Mr DiTullio to amend by incorporating the Planning Commission
recommendations listed on the fax dated December 9, 2002, including the corrections
Mr White made; seconded by Ms Figlus, failed 2-5 with Councilmembers Figlus and
DiTullio voting yes.
Motion by Ms Figlus to refer this Item to the January Study Session, seconded by Mr
DiTullio, failed 2-5 with Mr. DiTullio and Ms. Figlus voting yes
-
Vote on original motion carried 6-1 with Ms Figlus voting no Ms Figlus agreed with a
member of the audience that this Ordinance is less bad than the last one, but bad is bad
and she will not support it.
Item 2.
Council Bill 35-2002 - repealing and reenacting Chapter 22 of the Code of
Laws of the City of Wheat Ridge concerning Taxation, moving certain
sections of chapter 22 concerning the licensing of Peddlers, Solicitors and
Nonresident vendors to Chapter 11; and eliminating the requirement that
canvassers obtain a license
Council Bill 35-2002 was introduced on second reading by Ms. Figlus, who also read
the title and summary. Clerk assigned Ordinance No 1272.
City Treasurer, Ron Patera, explained that this makes some of the language a little
more user friendly and when there are references to the Colorado Revised Statutes
they are correct. This has no impact on tax policy
CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION MINUTES
CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO
November 17. 2003
7:30 p.m.
The Study Session was called to order by Mayor Cerveny at 7 30 P m Councilmembers
present: Jerry DiTullio, Karen Berry, Dean Gokey, Wanda Sang, Karen Adams, Lena
Rotola, and Larry Schulz. Also present: City Clerk, Pam Anderson, City Manager, Randy
Young; Director of Community Development, Alan White; and interested citizens
APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF APRIL 21, 2003
Motion by Mr DiTullio to approve the Minutes of April 21, 2003, seconded by Mrs. Rotola,
carried 3-0 with Councilmembers DiTullio, Rotola and Gokey voting yes Councilmembers
Berry, Sang, Adams, and Schulz were not on Council during that meeting
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Motion by Mrs Sang to approve the Agenda as printed, seconded by Mr Gokey,
carried 7-0
--
~ Item 1.
Ordinance 1271 - Parking and Storage of Vehicles in Residential Areas.
Mr White reported on the history and intent of the ordinance He also gave his
recommendation on not including a grandfather clause His department has heard a lot of
concerns regarding storage of large recreational vehicles
Mr. DiTullio asked Mr White if Council had the option to send these recommendations to
Planning Commission
Mrs. Adams said she felt that this should go back to Planning Commission, and felt it would
be important to have a notification process to concerned citizens
Mr Young explained that the study session process is to establish whether Council wished
to go forward with staff recommendations, and get feedback.
Mr. DiTullio asked for consensus that the staff recommendations be drafted in ordinance
form and sent to Planning Commission for consideration
STUDY SESSION MINUTES November 17, 2003
Page -2-
Mr Gokey asked to amend the consensus to include more detailed criteria and Instructions
that recreational vehicles must meet setbacks for accessory structures, and present zoning
codes, Consensus was 7 to O.
Mr Gokey asked to amend instructions to create size criteria or classification for
recreational vehicles.
Mr White suggests a consensus to give general direction to staff and Planning
Commission to come up with a way to deal with the visual impacts of large recreational
vehicles stored in the front yard; Consensus was 7 to o.
Main consensus by Mr. DiTullio to send staff recommendations with two amendments to
Planning Commission and come back with a recommendation or not;
Consensus was 7 to 0
1"
Item 2.
Review of Section 26-613. Home Occupation (Commercial Vehicles)
Mr White reviewed the code section regarding home occupation of commercial vehicles
The code restricts home occupation to one commercial vehicle per home occupation He
explained the history, details, and intent of the code and explained that the ordinance does
not refer to limousines in particular
-
Mr Young wanted to establish the context of the ordinance He stated that selecting one
exemption for residential zones makes it difficult, because you are selecting one above
others
Mrs Sang asked for consensus to hear a representative from the audience, Consensus
wa", 7 to 0
Peter Perrone spoke on behalf of audience members. The PUC considers sedans
limousines. The limousines have no more traffic impact than other people coming and going
from work. The business goes to great lengths to not impact the community The industry
has a desire to preserve residential neighborhoods \Nhat is the distinction between allowing
two RVs, but only one limousine?
Mr DiTullio reemphasized that this is not about limousines, but that they have to consider all
commercial vehicles. Mr. Perrone felt that there should be a process for exception. Sedans
should be exempt.
Mr. Schulz stated that it is important that the rules make sense and that Wheat Ridge is
friendly to businesses, and we are fair He would like to know how we compare to other
communities. Mr White said that there would have to be some research about some of the
neighboring communities
INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER
Council Bill No.
Ordinance No.
Series of 2004
TITLE:
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 26-621 OF THE
WHEA T RIDGE CODE OF LA WS PERTAINING TO
PARKING IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS.
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COlJNCIL OF THE CITY OF WHEA T
RIDGE. COLORADO, THAT:
Section 1. SectIon 26-621 of the Wheat RIdge Code of Laws IS hereby amended as
follows
See 26-621 ResJdenlla] park.mg.
A In reSIdential zone dlstncts. the parkmg of trucks. vans, buses or licensed trallers
whIch are used for commercial purposes, whether the commercIal enterpnse IS
conducted from the home or conducted elsewhere, IS prohIbIted except as permitted
by thIS sectIon An occupant of a dwellmg may park or allow the parkmg of, no
more than one (I) truck. or van whIch IS used for commercwl purposes upon the
premIses or confined to the street frontage of the lot m questIOn, prOVIded, however.
that such vehIcle does not exceed a one-ton chaSSIS Parkmg of trallers whIch are
used for commerCIal purposes is prohIbIted on any public nght-of-way
B In residentIal zone dlstncts, a maxImum of two (2) of any the followmg vehIcles may
be parked outsJde upon property owned or rented by the vehIcle owner, prOVIded the
vehIcle owner reSIdes on the property
. Recreal10nal VehIcle
. Traller upon whIch are stored personal recreallonal vehIcles
Recreational vehicles or trailers are exempt from this two-vehicle limitation
provided the vehicles or trailers are stored in the area between the side property
line and the side wall of the structure and the back property line and the back
wall of the structure, provided both of the following are met:
. The vehicles or trailers are less than six (6) feet in height, and
. The vehicles or trailers are not visible from the public right-of-way as a
result of being stored behind a solid fence six (6) feet in height, a
structure, or vegetation which completely screens the vehicle from view
from the public right-of-way.
C. Only one (1) such recreational vehicle or trailer may be stored in the area
between the street and all walls of the structure facing the street. Such vehIcles
C \Projects\zoning amendments\Residential Parking\res parking 3rd version.rtf
or trallers must be parked SIX (6) feet or more inside the front property line For
corner lots, the one (1) vehicle restriction shall apply to both areas between the
street and the walls of the structure facing the street. Such '.chlcles 'sill bc
slmJlurly permitted upon resldentlUl rental propertlcs '...here the owner of the '.ehlcle
reSides upon thc premIses, and In the case of mulllfamily resldcntlUl properties. v. here
such vehIcle or vehIcles do not dIsplace parlung spaces requIred to meet the minImum
\ehlcular parJung standard for the property a~ set forth herem for multifamily
reSIdentIal land uses. Where It JS difficult to determine the publIC nght-of-way
boundary due to lack of curb, gutter and/or SIdewalk, or survey markers such
boundanes shall be presumed to be ten (10) feet from the edge of pavement or back
of curb Where a SIdewalk eXIsts, such boundanes shall be presumed to be two (2)
feet from the outSide edge of SIdewalk. For the purposes of thIS subsectlon C B.
permanent or temporary carpons, frame covered structures, tents, or other temporary
structures shall not be used to store or conceal such recreatIOnal vehICles or trailers In
excess of the maX1mum number permmed.
D. Recreational vehicles or trailers stored in a side yard need not meet any setback
requirements. Recreational vehicles or trailers exceeding six (6) feet in height
stored in a back yard must meet the side and rear yard setback requirements for
accessory structures for the zone district in which the recreational \'ehicle or
trailer is stored.
-
FE.
In reSIdential zone dlstncts, detached trailers and recreatIOnal vehIcles are prohibited
from parking In pubhc nghts-of-way, however one (1) recreatIOnal vehicle or one (1 )
trailer may be parked wlthm publiC street nghts-of-way for a penod up to seventy-
two (72) hours, prOVIded they are attached to the towing vehIcle MOVing the towmg
vehlcle and/or the trader to another locatIon In the nght-of-way does not extend or re-
stan the ...,:: hLljf pcr;vd.
f).F. In reSIdentIal zone distncts, where It IS deslfed to main tam such a restncted vehIcle
elther WIthin SIX (6) feet of a public street on pnvate property or within a lawful
parkmg area on a public street abutting the front of the property m excess of seventy-
t\\'o (72) hours the property owner may ohtam a tcmpor~lry parl'lng pcrmH fr0m the
planmng and development department Such temporary parkmg permll shall be for a
time penod not to exceed fourteen (14) days and no more than one (1) such permll
shall be Issued each SIX (6) months for the same vehIcle. The Issuance of a temporary
permlt IS for the purpose of parlong only and not for any other activIty The permlt
must be placed upon the mSlde WindshIeld or sJde wmdow on the dnver's SIde so as to
be VISIble for mspection.
E.G. Pickup truck-mounted campers, when mounted upon pIckup trucks, are not subject to
these parlong restnclIons except that such camper shall not be used for permanenl or
temporary IIvmg quarters. Nothmg m thIS section wlll be construed to restnct or IImlt
parlong of any vehIcle so descnbed upon pnvale property so long as saId vehIcle IS
parked In accordance wllh the lImitations of thIS section and proVIded that SIght
distance tnangle reqUIrements uf seCllon 26-603 are met.
C \ProJects\zomng amendments\Residemial Parking\res parking 3rd version.nf
~ H. Areas whIch are used to store or park allowed recreatIOnal vehIcles or trallers shall be
of an Improved surface conslstmg of concrete, asphalt, bnck pavers, gravel at least SI \
(6) mches In depth, or Similar matenals. If gravel IS used, the parklng or storage area
must be bullt to that the matenaI used for surfacIng stays contamed with the storage
or parking area WIth the use of concrete curbs, raIlroad tJes. landscape tImbers. or
SimIlar matenals
I. The storage of recreational vehicles or trailers is permitted upon multi-famil~'
residential properties where the owner of the vehicle resides upon the premises.
and where such vehicle or vehicles do not displace parking spaces required to
meet the minimum vehicular parking requirement for the property as set forth
herein for multifamily residential land uses.
J. Any vehicle or trailer owner may apply for a variance to the restrictions
contained in paragraphs B, C, and D in accordance with the procedures for
requesting a minor variance as provided in Section 26-115 C 1 of this code,
whether or not the requested variance is within the ten (10) percent limitation.
Should objections be received from the adjacent property owners, the
Community Development Director shall schedule the request for a public
hearing before the Board of Adjustment according to the noticing procedures
contained in Section 26-109 B, C and D.
Section 2. Safety Clause. The City Councll 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 publlc and that thIS ordmance IS
necessary for the preservation of health and safety and for the protectJon of publIc convenIence
and welfare. The City Council further detenmnes that the ordmance bears a ratlOnal relatlOn to
the proper legIslatIve object sought to be attmned.
Section 3. Severabillty. If any clause, sentence, paragraph. or part of thIS Zoning Code
or the applicatIon thereof to any person or CIrcumstances shall for an) reason be adjusted by a
court of competent JUn<dlctlOn InvalId slIch Judgment <hall not affect applIcat10n to other
persons or circumstances
Section 4. SupersessIon Clause. If any proVISIon, reqUIrement or standard establlshed by
thIS OrdInance IS found to confllct with slmllar provIsions, reqUIrements or standards found
elsewhere In the Code of Laws of the City of Wheat Ridge, Wh1Ch are In existence as of the date
of adoptIon of thiS Ordinance, the provIsions, requirements and standards herem shall supersede
and preVaIl
Section 6. ThiS ordmance shall take effect 15 days after final pubhcation.
INTRODUCED, READ, AND ADOPTED on first readmg by a vote of _ to on
C \Projecls\zoning amendmenls\Residential Parking\res parking 3rd version.rtf
this day of ,2004, ordered published m full m a newspaper of general
cIrculatIon m the CllY of Wheat Ridge and Public Heanng and consIderatIOn on final passage set
for ,2004, at 7000 clock pm, m the CouncIl Chambers, 7500 West 29th
Avenue, Wheat RJdge, Colorado
READ, ADOPTED AND ORDERED PUBLISHED on second and final readmg by a
vote of _ to _, thIS _ day of , 2004
SIGl',>'ED by the Mayor on thiS _ day of
,2004
GRETCHEN CERVENY, MAYOR
ATTEST
Pamela Anderson, CIty Clerk
-
APPROVED AS TO FORM BY CITY ATTORi\TEY
GERALD DAHL, CITY A TTORi\TEY
1 st PubllcatJon
2nd Pubhcatlon,
Wheat Ridge Transcnpt
EffectJVe Date:
C \PruJ~,I>\z0mng am~ndmenl.S\Resld~nual Parldng\res parking 3rd \erslon.nf
Intenor Lot
RV Parking in Residential Areas
Area of 1 RV, 6' setback
from the property line
~
Area of exempt RV's
if screened: non-
exempt must meet
setbacks
Corner Lot
- Dwelling Unit
:.~ .;~:L~(f~,~
~
/
Areas of non-exempt RVs, and
exempt RVs if screened
Area of exempt RVs
if screened: non-
exempt must meet
setbacks
.....
Area of 1 RV: 6' setback
from the property line
\
:': -..:-'::' ~ - -:~.: ...;::
,; ;,.-..
";7:;~
Area of non-exempt
RVs, and exempt RVs :
if screened '
~
. ..' ~ ;: . '...
, DW~lii~ir~uri~. ~,;::t
fl,...~'....~.........~""lli;;;'
~~ _,'~i"';;~.~~'!.-!~it;l.-:,:.";.
Street
Q3
i':'
<i5
Q3
i!'
(jj
Melllorandum
City of Wheat Ridge
Planning and Development Department
TO: Plannmg CommissIOn
FROM: Alan WhIte, Planmng and Development DIrector 6tUJ
SUBJECT: Case No ZOA 03-19, Parkmg m ResIdentIal Areas
DATE: December II, 2003
ThIS Case IS
_ Quasi-judic1al
X Leg1slatJve
Proper notIce was given for thIS pubhc heanng
Background
-
Attached IS a revIsed ordmance addressmg RV parkmg m resldentJal areas The changes are
based upon staff recommendatIons made to the CouncIl at theIr study seSSlOn on November 17th
Those recommendations were based upon a senes of meetmgs held thIS past summer WIth RV
owners and non-owners. Attached to th1S memo IS the memo prepared for the CouncIl's study
sessIOn contammg a summary of the history of thIS legIslatIOn and staff recommendatIOns
Council's dIrectIOn was to forward to Planmng CommISSIOn a new ordmance contammg staff
recommendatIOns and a way to address the vlsual Impacts of large recreatlOna] vehIcles stored In
the front yard. Attached are the mInutes from the study sessIOn
Changes proposed for the CommISSIon's consIderation are shown m bold. DeletIons are shown
m stnkcthreugh
Summary of Ordinance Changes
The current regulations have been changed as follows
RecreatIOnal vehicles and traIlers less than 6 feet in heIght are exempt from the hmItatJon
of two recreatIOnal vehIcles, provIded they are located In a SIde or rear yard and are
screened by a 6-foot hIgh solid fence, vegetation, or structure and are not VISIble from the
pubhc nght-of-way
') Recreational vehIcles parked m the front and SIde yards need not meet any setback
requirements other than the eXlstmg requirement for a 6-foot setback from the front
property Ime Recreational \ehlcles parl\.ed m a back yard must meet the side and rear
setback requIrements for an accessory structure
3 Any vehIcle or traller owner may request a \ anance to the t\\ 0 recreational vehIcle/traIler
IImllatlon, the IImltatlon of one vehIcle beIng parked m the front yard, and reqUired
setbacks m the rear yard only The process referred to used IS the mmor vanance process.
whether or not the request exceeds the 10% IImltatlOn or not.
4 The regulatIOns apply to renters so long as the vehIcle stored on the property IS owned by
the renter
5 There are no provIsIons to grandfather any eXlstmg SituatIons
Staff Comments
Grandfathenng eXlstmg SllUallons In the commumty would be a lime-consuming and labor-
intensIve endeavor ThIS would entall inventorymg every resIdentIal parcel In the Clty for
recreational vehIcles and trallers. Probably several sltuatlOns would change dunng the course of
conductIng the Inventory, rendenng the mventory Inaccurate There sImply Isn't the time or
personnel to commll to thiS task.
The process for requestIng more than two vehicles, or more than one In the front yard, or lesser
setbacks m the rear yard IS the mmor vanance process. ThIS starts as an admmlstratlve process
where adjacent property owners are notified. If there are no ObjeCllOnS, the request(s) can be
approved admlmstrat1vely If there are objectIOns, the request goes before the Board of
Adjustment for a heanng
In addressmg the VIsual lmpact lssue, there are severa] optIons to conSider'
Do not allow parking of recreational ~'ehicles beyond the front wall of the structure.
ThIS would reqUIre the parking of all recreatIOnal vehIcles m slde or rear yards. ThiS may
not be pOSSIble on smaller lots m the City Numerous permIts have been Issued for the
purpose of constructmg parlung pads for vehicle storage m front yards.
2. Require any recreational vehicles parked in the front yard to be screened. MaXimum
heIght for fences m the front yard IS four feet. ThIS makes fenCing mlmmally effective In
screemng. Vegetation must be fairly dense and compact to provide effective screenmg,
and thIS may occur only after many growing seasons. DeCiduous vegetatlOn does not
proVIde effective screenIng In the winter Is It really pOSSIble to hide a motor home
parked m a front yard?
3. Restrict the number of vehicles allowed to be parked in the front yard. Since two non-
exempt vehicles are allowed to be stored outside, the only restnction available IS to
allowed one vehicle to be parked m the front yard. ThIS appears to be the only realistIC
option to deal With the Impact ThiS restnctlon would apply to all recreatIOnal vehicles
4 Create classlficatlOllS of vehicles ulld prohibiJ the parklllg of "OI'erSlZe" ~'ehlcles Illlhe
front yard. The difficulty WIth thiS optIon IS defimng "oversIze" How b1g 1S too bIg?
Should the measure of "oversIze" be helght. length, or v. eIght') Such pro\'lslons mIght
tend to comphcate the regulatIons for enforcement officers and cItIzens and could slo\\
down enforcement by requlnng tIme to measure a vehlcle or to research ItS \\ eIght
S. Increase the required setback from the front property line. The current reqUIrement IS
SIX feet. An Increased setback would push vehlCles farther bad. Into the lot Although
the front setback In each reSIder:: al zone dlstnct lS 30 feet, many homes have been buIlt
WIth a lesser setback. The thmy-foot setback allows for the parl-dng of a 24-foot motor
home on a dnvev.ay ""hlle meeting the SIx-foot setback These two factors combIne to
make It dIfficult to park a \ehlcle 0\ er 24 feet long entIrely In the front yard any\\ ay An
Increased setback mIght be dIfficult to Implement In areas of the City With narrov. SIde
yards and where permits have been prevlOusly Issued for parkIng pads accommodatIng
the SIx-foot setback
The draft ordInance contaInS a proVISIon ImplementIng optIOn #3, allOWIng only one recreational
vehIcle or traIler to be stored in the front yard. Short of banning all recreatIOnal vehIcles In the
front yard, thlS hmIlatlOn IS the easiest to Interpret and enforce It v.ould reduce the potential
number of \ehlcles p<.Irked In front yards, thereby potentially redUCIng the vIsual Impact
Exhlblts
-
I Memo to CIty Manager dated 11/07/03
2. Minutes of Councll study sessIOn of I I/! 7/03
3 Proposed OrdInance
4 Figures shOWIng allowed parkmg areas
City of Wheat Rldge
Conununity Development Department
Memorandum
TO: Randy Young, Clly Manager
FROM: Alan WhIte, Community Development D1rector
SUBJECT: RecreatIOnal VehIcle Parkmg
DA TE: November 7,2003
ThIS memorandum presents a bnef history of the changes made to R V parkmg regulauons, a
summary of recommendatJOns from pub!Jc meetmg held th1S past summer, and staff
recommendatJOns for changes to the eXlsting regu]atJOns
The current regulatlons are found m Section 26-621, Residential Parking, of the Code of Laws.
History
. RevIsed Chapter 26 was adopted by Council m February 2001 Amendments did not mclude
any changes to residential parkmg dealmg with recreatIOnal vehIcles PrevlOusly, and w1th
the ne\\ Chapter 26, there was no limIt on the number of recreatIOnal vehicles allowed on a
resldentlal lot.
. Ordmance No. 1265 was adopted by CounCIl on September 23,2002 ThIS ordmance
defined recreational veh1cles and !Jmited the number allowed to be parked outsIde on
resldentlal property to one. Ordmance 1265 IS attached.
. Ordmance No 1265 was vetoed by the Mayor Councll overrode the veto
. Council held a studv session on Octoher 21 2002 and reached consensus Cln several changes
to the ordmance.
. Ordmance No 1271 was adopted by CounCIl on December 9, 2002. ThIS ordmance made the
followmg changes to the proVISIOnS adopted m September'
o A definItion of personal recreatlOna] vehlcle was added. Horse traders were added to
the defimtlOn of traIlers.
o A maximum number of two of the followmg can be stored outsIde on resldentlal
property: recreatlOnal vehIcle, traIler upon which IS stored any number of personal
recreatIonal vehIcles.
o Clanfied language relatmg to parkmg veh1cles m excess of the two permllted vehicles
m carports or temporary struclUres.
o AlIov, ed parkmg or storage areas to be surfaced wJth gravel
o Mo\ ed the non-operative \ ehlcle provIsIon to Chapter 15 (NUIsances) of the Code of
Laws
o Empowered the Board of Adjustment to hear requests for \ anances to the number of
non-operative vehIcles allo\\ed on a resIdentIal property
These are the regulatlOns currently m effect. Ordmance 1271 IS attached.
. On January 13,2003, Councll dIrected staff to conduct a senes of public meetmgs to soliCIt
comments and Ideas about changes to the ordmance Meetmgs v,ere held at the Recreation
Center on May 21st, June lsth, and July 16th The group recommended the followmg
changes
o ~10dlfy the current ordInance to exempt recreatIOnal vehicles and traIlers under SIX feet In
heIght
o Grandfather eXIstIng vehIcles over SIX feet m heIght The grandfather status should ta\..e
Into account all hem to the property (i e famIly members who purchase the property) and
would need to consider when a landowner trades one RV m for a newer model The
ordInance should address people that own RV's but rent the property
o Create a variance process that would prOVIde relief and allow property owners to have
more than two recreational vehicles or trailers.
o Some restnctlon on the amount of lot that could be used for RV or trader parkmg should
be mcluded, along the lIne of the 40% rear coverage recommended by Planmng
CommIssion m 2002. No speCIfic percentage was recommended
- Staff Recommendations
Staff recommends the follOWIng changes to the ordmance
3
Allow recreational vehIcles less than 6 feet m heIght whIch are stored outSIde to be exempt
from the two recreational vehicle limitatIon, proVided they are screened by a 6-foot hIgh
solid fence and not VISIble from the public nght-of-way
RecreatIOnal vehIcles parked m the front and SIde yards need not meet any setbac\..
reqUIrements other than the eXIstIng reqUIrement for a 6-foot setback from the front property
lIne RecreatIonal vehIcles parked m a back yard must meet the SIde and rear selback
reqUIrements for an accessory structure
Create a process (slmllar to the non-operative exception process) whereby an owner may
apply for additlOnal vehlcles above the two recreatIOnal vehIcles lImJtatlon
Amend the regulatIons so that what IS allowed applIes to renters.
Do not create any proVISIons grandfathenng any eXlstmg situations.
,
4
5
CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE PLANNING COMMISSION
Minutes of Meeting
December 18,2003
DRArl
1 CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER
The regular meeting of the Wheat RJdge Planning Commission was called to order by ChaIr
McNAMEE at 7'02 p.m. in the City Council Chambers of the Municipal Building, 7500 West
29th Avenue, Wheat RJdge, Colorado.
2.
ROLL CALL
CommlSS10n Members Present:
John McMlllin
Manan McNamee
Phil Plummer (arrived at 7:04 p.m )
Paula We1sz
Scott Wesley
Kevin Witt
Staff Members Present.
Alan WhIte, Community Development Director
Kathy Field, Administrative Assistant
3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Followmg IS the offiCial set of Planmng CommIssion mlTIutes for the publ1c hearing of December IS.
2003 A set of these mmutes IS retalTIed both lTI the office of the City Clerk and m the Commumty
Development Department of the City of Wheat Ridge.
4. APPROVE ORDER OF AGENDA
It was moved by Commissioner WEISZ and seconded by Commissioner WITT to
approve the agenda as presented. The motion passed unanimously.
5. APPROVE MINUTES - December 4, 2003
It was moved by Commissioner McMILLIN and seconded by Commissioner WESLEY to
approve the minutes of December 4, 2003 as presented. The motion passed with
Commissioners WEISZ and WITT abstaining.
6. PUBLIC FORUM
There were none present to address the CommiSSIOn.
7. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Case No. ZOA-03-19: An ordinance amendmg Section 26-621 of the Wheat Ridge
Code of Laws pertaining to parking in reSidential areas.
The case was presented by Alan White. He adVised the CommiSSIOn there was jurisdictIOn to
hear the case and reviewed the staff report.
Planning Commission
December 18, 2003
Page I
CommIssIoner McMILLIN suggested that language be added to clarify that If an R V IS parked
on the side, but a portIOn of it extends into the front yard, 1t would be counted as an R V parked
m the front yard.
ComrnlSSlOner McMILLIN referred to the 6-foot height lImitation, and suggested that specific
language be added regardmg boat trailers because, whlle a boat trailer would not exceed the 6-
foot hmitatlon, adding a boat would most hkely exceed that 6-foot hmlt. Alan White
commented that thiS would come under the exempt status.
In response to a question from Commissioner McMILLIN, Alan WhIte estImated that vanance
fees would fall between $200 and $500 CommISSIOner McMILLIN then suggested that
vanance fees be forgiven for a certain period of time to allow CItIzens to apply for a vanance
WIthout charge
CommiSSIOner WESLEY asked if there are height hmltatlOns for boats. Alan WhIte explained
that heIght hmitations presently apply only to structures.
-
Don MacDougall
9815 W. 37'h Ave.
Mr MacDougall was sworn m by Chair McNAMEE. He dId not feel lot sizes had been
adequately taken mto consIderation m this ordmance He has lived m hIS present locatIOn for
35 years and has never received a complamt about his horse traJlers and stated he was m favor
of a grandfather clause
O.R~r~~
ChaH McNAMEE mVlted public comment at thiS time.
Victor Olson
2620 Upham St.
Mr Olson was sworn in by Chair McNAMEE. He questIOned the objective behind the
regulations. Alan WhIte responded that it was developed to help clean up the appearance of the
CIty Mr Olson questioned where such regulations had been effectIve and what ordinance the
regulatIOns were modeled after He objected to the whole concept of regulating RV's.
Tom Gillen
3250 Nelson St.
Mr Gillen was sworn in by Chair McNAMEE. He thought the ordinance was a good
compromIse. He thanked Alan White and staff for their work on the issue.
Roger Davidson
4590 Vance St.
Mr DaVidson was sworn in by Chair McNAMEE. He stated he thought the C1ty was shooting
itself m the foot by making these rules. He asked about non-operative vehicles and was told
they are handled under the nuisance code. He asked about vehicles parked partially in the front
yard.
Planning Commission
December 18, 2003
Page 2
Denver Johnson
2948 Vivian St.
Mr. Johnson was sworn in by Chalf McNAMEE. He commented that the rules were beIng
estabhshed for aesthetIc reasons. He has a utllity trader and an RV He explaIned that his
house Sits on an angle on a comer lot and asked how the rules of front yard and side yard would
apply in his SItuation.
Jim Opp
3232 Vivian Dr.
Mr Opp was sworn in by Chair McNAMEE. He explained hIs SItuation. His lot backs up to
Lena Gulch and he can't access his back yard from the rear He can't access his back yard
from the side and he can't park on the side because the houses are too close together, so he
must park his RV and traller m the front yard. He suggested a hohday period for enforCIng the
regulatIOns so that residents could apply for vanances.
PR~tl
Polly Pinkston
10630 W. 46th Ave.
Ms. Pinkston was sworn in by ChaIr McNAMEE. She asked If the regulatIOns apphed to her
property zoned A-2. Alan White replied that the regulations only apply to residentially zoned
property and that they would not apply to her She thanked staff for theIr work.
Kevin Craig
10615 W. 46th Ave.
Mr Cr3lg was sworn in by Chair McNAMEE. He questIOned If there would be a height
problem With traders and whether the 6-foot exemptIOn applied with or Without contents loaded
on It. Alan White responded that It would depend - empty and less than 6 feet Jt would be ~
exempt; loaded and over 6 feet It would not be exempt; loaded and under 6 feet it would be
exempt. Mr Craig supported the holiday penod to apply for vanances.
Vanessa Moreno
6671 W. 26th Ave.
Ms. Moreno was sworn in by Chair McNAMEE. She commented about the proposed setbacks.
In her case, the mcreased setback would actually make her trailer more visible.
Comm1ssloner WESLEY commented that the sign of a good government 1S one that changes
laws accordIng to tImes. Because there seems to be a lot of confUSIOn about thiS ordInance and
because there seems to be no precipitating actIOn to warrant the ordinance, he beheved there
should be more informatIOn in order to make a fully mformed deCISIOn.
CommiSSioner McNAMEE stated she was strongly opposed to havmg horse trailers Included in
thiS ordmance. One of the nice things about the cIty is the number of large lots and horse
properties. She also commented that she had never seen a problem with RV's in the city She
believed that setback issues need to be examined more closely
Commissioner WEISZ commented that she beheved the ordinance presented a good
compromise from the more restrictive ordinance. She agreed that a further compromise would
be a holiday of nine months from fees for variance applications.
Planning Commission
December 18. 2003
Page 3
CommISSIOner PLUMMER agreed that horse traders should be eliminated from the ordinance
and suggested that a waiver of variance fees be allowed for a penod of up to two years. He
further commented that the Commission should act upon the ordinance at thIS time.
CommIssioner McMILLIN dIsagreed that the Commission should act upon the ordmance at
thIS time because there is not a full Commission and he didn't believe there was any pressure
from City Council to take Immediate actIOn on thIS matter. He suggested contmumg dIscussIon
of the ordinance untIl January. He also beheved that It wdl take a comphcated ordinance to
address everyone's issues. He further agreed WIth a fee holiday He suggested that the
CommissIOn meet w1th the Board of Adjustment to dISCUSS vanances for RV's. He commented
that he felt a grandfather clause would be feasible and disagreed WIth the IS-foot rear yard
setback requirement.
It was moved by Commissioner PLUMMER and seconded by Commissioner WEISZ to
recommend approval of an ordinance amending Section 26-621 of the Wheat Ridge Code
of Laws pertaining to parking in residential areas with an amendment to allow a waiver
of variance fees for a period of two years after the ordinance is adopted and that horse
trailers be eliminated.
-
Commissioner McMILLIN offered the following friendly amendments: Reduce the rear
yard setback from fifteen feet to five feet. If the RV or loaded vehicle is less than six feet
in height, it can be parked next to the rear property line. If any portion of an RV extends
beyond the front structure of the house, it would be counted as a "front-yard" RV. To
determine whether a trailer is exempt or non-exempt, it must be loaded with its intended
cargo of boats, snowmobiles or motorcycles.
The amendments were accepted by Commissioners PLUMMER and WEISZ. The motion
passed 5-1 with Commissioner WESLEY voting no.
8.
OLD BUSINESS
,....-
PR(\:-
. Commissioner McMILLIN asked about the status of an earher request for staff to
investigate a lightmg code based on objective measurements. Alan replied that thiS request
was taken to Council and they also requested staff to pursue the matter CommIssioners
PLUMMER and McMILLIN volunteered to prepare a report based on theIr research
resources.
9. NEW BUSINESS
. Alan White advised the Commission that the next Planning CommISSIon meetmg falls on
January l. 2004 (New Year's Day). It was moved by Commissioner PLUMMER and
seconded by Commissioner WEISZ that the January 1,2004 Planning Commission
meeting be canceled. The motion passed unanimously.
10. COMMISSION REPORTS
There were no commission reports.
Planning Commission
December 18, 2003
Page 4
11.
COMMITTEE AND DEPARTMENT REPORTS
There were no committee and department reports. P.RAFT
ADJOURNMENT
It was moved by Commissioner PLUMMER and seconded by Commissioner WESLEY to
adjourn the meeting at 9:08p.m. The motion passed unanimously.
12.
Marian McNamee, Chair
Ann Lazzeri, Recordmg Secretary
Planning Commission
December 18, 2003
Page 5
City of Wheat Ridge
Planning and Development Department
Memorandum
TO: Planmng CommIssIon
FROM: Alan WhIte, Plannll1g and Development Duector
SUBJECT: Case No ZOA 03-19, Parkll1g m ReSIdential Areas
DATE: December 11,2003
ThIS Case IS
~ QuaSI-JudIcial
_X_ LegIslative
Proper notIce was gIven for thIS pubhc heanng.
Background
-
Attached IS a revIsed ordmance addressll1g RV parkmg m reSIdential areas. The changes are
based upon staff recommendatIOns made to the Councll at their study sessIOn on November 1 ih
Those recommendatIOns were based upon a senes ofmeetmgs held thIS past summer WIth RV
owners and non-owners. Attached to th1S memo IS the memo prepared for the Counc1l's study
sessIOn contammg a summary of the hIStOry of thIS leglslat10n and staff recommendatlOns.
Councll.s dlrectlOn was to forward to Plannmg Comm1ssIon a new ordmance contammg staff
recommendatIOns and a way to address the vIsual Impacts of large recreatlOnal vehlc les stored m
the front yard. Attached are the mmutes from the study sessIOn.
Changes proposed for the CommIsslOn's conslderatlOn are shown m bold. DeletlOns are shown
m strikethrough.
Summary of Ordinance Changes
The current regulations have heen changed as follows
RecreatIOnal vehIcles and trallers less than 6 feet m heIght are exempt from the hnlltatIon
of two recreatlOnal vehIcles, proVIded they are located m a SIde or rear yard and are
screened by a 6-foot hIgh sohd fence, vegetatlOn, or structure and are not visible from the
pubhc nght-of-way
2 RecreatlOnal vehIcles parked m the front and SIde yards need not meet any setback
reqUIrements other than the eXIstmg reqUIrement for a 6-foot setback from the front
ATTACHMENT 2
property lme. RecreatIOnal vehicles parked m a back yard must meet the sIde and rear
setback reqUIrements for an accessory structure
3 Any vehIcle or trmler owner may request a vanance to the two recreatIOnal veh1cle/traller
hmltatlOn, the hm1tatlOn of one vehIcle bemg parked m the front yard, and reqUIred
setbacks m the rear yard onlv The process referred to used IS the mmor vanance process,
whether or not the request exceeds the 10% hm1tatlOn or not.
4 The regulatIOns apply to renters so long as the vehicle stored on the property IS owned by
the renter
5 There are no prOVISIons to grandfather any eXlstmg sItuatIons.
Staff Comments
Grandfathenng eX1stmg sltuatlOns m the commumty would be a tJme-consummg and labor-
mtensIVe endeavor ThIS would entall mventorymg every reSIdential parcel m the CIty for
recreatIOnal vehicles and trallers. Probably several SituatIOns would change dunng the course of
conductmg the mventory, rendenng the mventory maccurate. There SImply isn't the time or
personnel to commIt to th1S task.
The process for requestmg more than two vehIcles, or more than one m the front yard, or lesser
setbacks m the rear yard IS the mmor vanance process. ThIS starts as an admmlstratlve process
where adjacent property owners are not1fied. If there are no obJectlOns, the request(s) can be
approved admmlstratJvely If there are obJectIOns, the request goes before the Board of
Adjustment for a heanng.
In addressmg the vIsual Impact Issue, there are several optlOns to consIder'
Do not allow parking of recreational vehicles beyond the front wall of the structure.
ThiS would reqUIre the parkmg of all recreatIOnal veh1cles m SIde or rear yards. Th1s may
not be possible on smaller lots m the CIty Numerous perm1ts have been Issued for the
purpose of constructmg parkmg pads for vehIcle storage m front yards.
2. Require any recreational vehicles parked in the front yard to be screened. MaX1mum
height for fences m the front yard IS four feet. ThIS makes fencing mlmmally effectIVe m
screenmg. VegetatIOn must be fmrly dense and compact to proVide effectlYe screenmg,
and thIS may occur only after many growmg seasons. DeClduous vegetatIOn does not
provide effectIve screemng m the wmter Is It really possible to h1de a motor home
parked m a front yard?
3 Restrict the number ofvellicles allowed to be parked in the front yard. Since two non-
exempt vehIcles are allowed to be stored outside, the only restrictIOn avaIlable IS to
allowed one vehIcle to be parked m the front yard. ThIS appears to be the only reahstlc
optIon to deal with the Impact. ThIS restnctlon would apply to all recreatIOnal vehIcles.
4 Create classifications of vehicles and prohibit the parking of "oversize" vehicles in the
front yard. The dIfficulty WIth this optIOn IS defimng "overs1ze." How bIg IS too big?
Should the measure of "overS1ze.' be heIght-length, or weight') Such prov1sions might
tend to complicate the regulatlOns for enforcement officers and C1tJzens and could slow
down enforcement by requmng l1me to measure a vehIcle or to research Its weIght.
5 Increase the required setback from the front property line. The current reqUlrement IS
SlX feet. An Increased setback would push vehIcles farther back Into the lot. Although
the front setback In each resIdential zone d1stnct IS 30 feet, many homes have been bUllt
WIth a lesser setback. The thirty-foot setback allows for the parking of a 24-foot motor
home on a dnveway whlle meeting the SIx-foot setback. These two factors combine to
make It dIfficult to park a veh1cle over 24 feet long entJrely 111 the front yard anyway. An
mcreased setback mIght be dIfficult to Implement 111 areas of the Clty WIth narrow SIde
yards and where perm1ts have been prevlOusly Issued for park111g pads accommodatmg
the SIx-foot setback.
The draft ordInance contams a proVIsIon Implementmg optlOn #3, allow111g only one recreatlOnal
vehIcle or trader to be stored m the front yard. Short ofbannmg all recreatlOnal vehIcles m the
front yard, this I1mltatlOn 1S the eaSIest to mterpret and enforce lt would reduce the potentwl
number of vehicles parked in front yards, thereby potentially reducmg the vIsual Impact.
ExhibIts.
-
Memo to Clty Manager dated 11/07/03
2 Mmutes of Co un cd study sessIOn of 1 1/l7/03
3 Proposed Ordmance
4 Figures showmg allowed parkmg areas
I nterior Lot
Area of exempt RV's
if screened; non-
exempt must meet
setbacks
-
Corner Lot
RV Parking in Residential Areas
Area of 1 RV, 6' setback
from the property line
..
~
Areas of non-exempt RV's, and
exempt RV's if screened
Area of exempt RV's
if screened, non-
exempt must meet
setbacks
Area of non-exempt
RV's. and exempt RV's
if screened
~r ~
~
Area of 1 RV, 6' setback
from the property line
Street
ATTACHMENT 3
a;
<J)
b
CIJ
a;
<J)
b
CIJ
F.H. Areas which are used to store or park allowed recreational vehicles or trailers shall be
of an improved surface consisting of concrete, asphalt, brick pavers, gravel at least six
(6) inches in depth, or similar materials. If gravel is used, the parking or storage area
must be built to that the material used for surfacing stays contained with the storage
or parking area with the use of concrete curbs, railroad ties, landscape timbers, or
similar materials.
I. The storage of recreational vehicles or trailers is permitted upon multi-family
residential properties where the owner of the vehicle resides upon the premises,
and where such vehicle or vehicles do not displace parking spaces required to
meet the minimum vehicular parking requirement for the property as set forth
herein for multifamily residential land uses.
J. Any vehicle or trailer owner may apply for a variance to the restrictions
contained in paragraphs B, C, and D in accordance with the procedures for
requesting a minor variance as provided in Section 26-115 C 1 ofthis code,
whether or not the requested variance is within the ten (10) percent limitation.
Should objections be received from the adjacent property owners, the
Community Development Director shall schedule the request for a public
hearing before the Board of Adjustment according to the noticing procedures
contained in Section 26-109 B, C and D.
-
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 ofthe 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 6. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect 15 days after final
publication.
INTRODUCED, READ, AND ADOPTED on first reading by a vote of 8 to 0 on this
8th day of March, 2004, 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 22,
2004, 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 ,2004.
SIGNED by the Mayor on this _ day of
,2004.
GRETCHEN CERVENY, MAYOR
ATTEST:
Pamela Y. Anderson, City Clerk
-
APPROVED AS TO FORM BY CITY ATTORNEY
GERALD DAHL, CITY ATTORNEY
1st Publication: March 11,2004
2nd Publication:
Wheat Ridge Transcript
Effective Date:
.'.O~~\
!~! ,,' \0\
\ 'I;;'!
'~
ITEM NO
3
REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION
COUNCIL MEETING DATE MARCH 22, 2004
TITLE:
COUNCIL BILL NO. 01-2004: A REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF A
REZONING FROM RESIDENTIAL ONE-C TO RESIDENTIAL
THREE (WZ-03-11/MARCEM)
~ PUBLIC HEARING
o BIDS/MOTIONS
o RESOLUTIONS
D ORDINANCES FOR 1ST READING
~ ORDINANCES FOR 2ND READING
QU'''-J~ dh "
o
No
Clty~o-r~
Commumty Development DIrector
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
-
Marc Cave, of Marc Em propertJes, IS requestmg approval of a rezonmg for the property located at
3281 Chase Street. The property IS currently zoned ResIdentIal One-C The apphcant Wishes to
rezone the property to ResIdentIal-Three The R-l C zone d1stnct allows only smgle-famlly
structures and aSSOCIated accessory buddmgs, whde the R-3 zone d1Stflct allows a range of
reSIdentIal uses from smgle-famlly through high denSity multl-famdy The R-3 zone d1stnct reqmres
a mmlmum lot sIze of 9,000 square feet and a mlmmum lot WIdth of 75 feet to accommodate a two-
famlly dwellmg. The R-3 zone dlstflct reqmres a mmlmum lot sIze of 12,500 square feet and a
mmlmum lot WIdth of 100 feet to accommodate three or more famdy dwellmgs. The subject parcel
1S 9,3 75 square feet m SIze, IS 75 feet WIde, and therefore could accommodate a two-fam1ly
dwelhng. Pursuant to Chapter 26, a recommendatIOn of demal by Planmng CommIssion stands,
unless the apphcant appeals to CIty Councll. Plannmg Comm1SSI011 heard thIS case on February 5.
2004 and recommended demal
COMMISSION/BOARD RECOMMENDATION:
Planmng C'omml~slOn heard thIS request on Fehruary 5.2004 and recommended demal for the
followlI1g reasons.
I Nonconformance With the comprehensIve plan.
2 The developer has created a self-Imposed hardshIp
There were several ne1ghbors present at th1S pubhc heaflng to speak m opposItIOn of thIS request. A
letter of OpposItIOn was submItted to the Planmng Comm1sslOn the mght of the heanng.
STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES:
Plannmg Comm1SSIOn recommended denial of thIs request at the pubhc heanng on February 5,
2004 Th1s recommendatlOn was based partly on the ab1hty for potentIal redevelopment of
nelghbonng propertIes to multl-famlly Planning Comm1ssIOn felt that even though Resldentlal
Three zonmg eXIsted to the east of thIs property, If thIs apphcatlOn were to be approved and the
subject property were rezoned to ReSIdentIal Three, the potentIal for addItIOnal large-scale multl-
famlly dwelhngs m the area would be Immment. It should be noted that any future rezoning would
reqUIre pubhc heanngs before both PlanllJng CommIssIOn and CIty CounCIl, and ultimately CIty
CounCIl must approve any such rezoning.
Density m the R-3 zone dlstnct IS regulated by the sIze of the subject parcel The Code of Laws
states that a two-famlly dwellmg m the R-3 zone dlstnct must have a lot SlZe of at least 9,000 square
feet. A multl-fam1ly dwellmg Unit (3 or more umts) reqUIres a mmlmum lot sIze of 12,500 square
feet. The subject property 1S 9,375 square feet m sIze A multl-famlly dwelhng Unit would not be
allowed on thIS property WIthout multIple vanances to lot sIze and WIdth. The sIze of the lot
constncts the redevelopment, and effectively would make a multl-famlly dwellmg umt extremely
dIfficult.
The ComprehenSIve Plan deSIgnates thIS property as Smgle Famlly, not to exceed SIX dwellmg Units
per acre (SF 6) If a two-famlly dwellmg were to be located on thIS parcel, the denSIty would be
approx1mately 9 umts per acre ThIS mconslstency WIth the SF (6) deSignatIon was d1scussed at
Plannmg Comm1sslon, however, 1t should be noted that the current R-IC zonmg also exceeds the
SIX umts per acre deSIgnatIOn.
A letter from a neIghbor IS mcluded as attachment 4
AL TERNA TIVES CONSIDERED:
Staff conSidered advlsmg the apphcants to rezone the property to R-2 or R-2A. ReZOning to R-2
would allow a two-fam11y dwelhng, however vanances to lot Slze and w1dth would need to be
processed, and rezoning to R-2 would constitute spot zonmg. ReZOning to R-2A would also
accommodate a two-famlly dwellmg, but th1S would constitute spot zOning, as there IS no R-2A
zomng m the ImmedIate vlclmty Staff felt that due to the development standards for lot Slze m the
R-3 zone d1stnct and the presence ofR-3 zonmg m the neIghborhood, R-3 zomng would be
appropnate for thIS parcel.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
None
RECOMMENDED MOTIONS:
'.r move to approve Councll Blll No 01-2004, case number WZ-03-ll, a request for a rezomng
from ReSidential One-C to ReSIdentIal Three for property located at 3281 Chase Street, to take
effect 15 days after final publicatlOn, for the followmg reasons
The change m zone will be 111 conformance wIth the CIty of Wheat R1dge
Comprehens1ve Plan goals, objectives and pohCles.
2. The proposed use IS compatible wIth the surroundmg area.
3 The change of zone w1ll not adversely affect the pubhc health, safety or
welfare.
4 There are adequate pubhc faCIlities to serve the use proposed."'
OR
"1 move to table mdefinitely Council B111 No 01-2004, case number WZ-03-11, a request for a
rezomng from Res1dential One-C to Res1dentlal Three for property located at 3281 Chase Street."
Report Prepared bY' TravIs Crane, 303.235.2849
Reviewed by' Alan WhIte
Attachments.
I Plannmg CommIssion staff report (With exhibits)
2. CounClI B1ll No 01-2004
3 Apphcant ExhibIt
4 NeIghbor Letter
-
C.ICase Review/MarcEm/MarcEm Council Action Form 2"" Reading
CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE
PLANNING DIVISION STAFF REPORT
TO'
Plannmg CommIssIOn
CASE MANAGER. TravIs Crane
CASE NO. & NAME WZ-03-11IMarcEm
DATE OF MEETING 5 February 2004
ACTION REQUESTED' A request for a rezomng from Resldenl1al One-C to Resldenl1al-Three
LOCA TION OF REQUEST 3281 Chase Street
APPLICAIW (S).
Marc and Emily Cave OWNER (S): same
2600 S Parker Road # 5-155
Aurora, CO 80014
APPROXIMATE AREA 9,375 square feet
PRESENT ZONING Residential One-C (R-IC)
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN- Smgle-Family - not to exceed 6 dwellmg umts per acre (SF6)
ENTER INTO RECORD:
(X)
(X)
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
ZONING ORDINANCE
(X)
(X)
CASE FILE & PACKET MATERIALS
DIGIT AL PRESENT A TION
-
M
M
0 ~,
~ .1\1 32Q6
"'I
1
3281
3269
~ 3205
3255
I-
3320
g~t
LocatIOn
Map
3310
,.en
3206
<l
1'j
do
~
R-3
III 32152
I
6 3230
322.
".
32"
3290
N
~
'"'
LT
! !
I
I
sl
3241 l,;,~ R-1 C
i---
I
M
I ::l
~--=-
I
~I ~
i
all col ~
;' ~ :;,
~
!':j
'"'
w. 32nd Ave.
~-~ ~~~
r;;=i....--
r~~~ - ._L
All notJficatlOn and postmg reqUIrements have been met, therefore, there IS junsdlctlon to hear
thIS case.
ATTACHMENT 1
Planning Commission
WZ-03-1 LMarcEm
I. REQUEST
The apphcant IS requestmg approval of a rezonmg from ResIdential One-C (R-l C) to Residential
Three (R-3)
II. CASE ANALYSIS
The property m question 1S located at 3281 Chase Street, and is approx1mately 9,375 square feet
m area. The property 1S zoned Res1dent1al One-C and prevIOusly contamed a smgle-famJly
structure This structure has smce been demolished and the lot remams vacant land. The
apphcant IS requestmg a rezomng from Res1dentlal One-C to Res1dentJal Three to accommodate
a two-famJly dwelhng.
The Resldentlal One-C zone dlstnct allows only smgle-family dwellmgs and assoCIated
accessory structures. The ReSidentIal Three zone dlstnct allows smgle, two- and multi-family
structures, based upon the lot sIze and width. The ReSIdential Three zone d1stnct reqUIres a
mimmum lot width of75 feet and a mimmum lot size of9,000 square feet to accommodate a
duplex The subject property meets both of these standards (Exhib1t 1, Improvement LocatlOn
Certificate)
For a multl-famJly structure, a property m the R-3 distnct must have a m1mmum lot sIze of
12,500 square feet and a mm1mum lot Width of 100 feet. Based on the current lot SIze, a multI-
family structure would not be allowed WIthout a vanance to both the lot sIze and w1dth. A
vanance that would mcrease dens1ty (add dwellmg umts) may not be approved admm1stratlVely,
rather the requests must be heard by the Board of Adjustment.
III. NEIGHBORHOOD MEETlNG/REFERRAL
A meetmg for neIghborhood mput was held December 9, 2003 A slgn-m sheet and synOpSIS are
mcluded for revIew (ExhibIt 2, NeIghborhood Meetmg Summary and ExhibIt 3, Slgn-m Sheet)
There were two ne1ghbors m attendance, and they seemed generally acceptmg of thIs proposal.
ThiS request was referred to all affected agencies for comment. All outSide serv1ce agencIes that
currently serve the property will continue to serve the property, and have mdlcated that the
property owner wJll mcur any assocJated costs of Improvement.
The Wheat R1dge Water Distnct md1cated that a separate water tap would be reqUired for the
add1tJonal umt. The Public Works Department has mdlcated a drainage report IS not necessary
Dramage wJlI be reViewed upon submlttal of the buildmg perm1t for constructIOn of the new
duplex.
IV. CRITERIA
Staff has the followmg comments regardmg the critena used to evaluate a change m zone'
1. That the existing zone classification currently recorded on the official zoning maps
of the City of Wheat Ridge is an error.
Planning Conunission
WZ-03-11IMarcEm
2
The eX1stmg zone classificatIOn on the official zomng map IS not m error The property
currently has Res1dentlal One-C zomng.
2. That a change in character in the area has occurred due to installation of public
facilities, other zone changes, new growth trends, deterioration, or development
transitions, and that the evidence supports the finding of the following.
There has been no change m character to the area. Although much of the surroundmg
land IS currently zoned as Residential One-C, this IS a result of a mass rezomng that
occurred m 1984 ThIs entire area was ongmally zoned Resldentwl Three when the City
mcorporated m 1969 Res1dents m the area petJtlOned the City to change the zomng to
ResldentlalOne-C Some of the property owners were given the opportumty to remam R-
3 Much of the surroundmg area IS used as resldentJal. The property dIrectly to the south
of the subject property IS a quasl-pubhc use as the structure IS occupIed by the semor
resource center and the Wheat Ridge library
3.
That the change of zone is in conformance, or will bring the property into
conformance, with the City of Wheat Ridge Comprehensive Plan goals, objectives
and policies, and other related policies or plans for the area.
The denSIty, 1f the rezomng IS approved, WIll be approx1mately mne umts per acre. The
ComprehenslYe Plan deSignates thIS area as SF (6) (smgle-fam11y not to exceed SIX
dweJlmg umts per acre) The SF (6) claSSificatIOn IS defined as smgle-famlly detached
and eXlstmg two-famlly conforming structures and lots. While there IS not an eXlstmg
structure, the lot IS large enough to accommodate a two-fam11y structure.
-
4. That the proposed change of zone is compatible with the surrounding area and
there will be minimal adverse impacts considering the benefits to be derived.
The proposed change of zone wlll be compatible w1th the surroundmg area. Much of the
surroundmg land IS zoned and used resldent1ally The abllity to construct an addItIOnal
umt should not have a slgmficant effect on the surrounding area. All properties wlthm the
Immediate area are zoned either ResidentJal One-C or Res1dentJal Three. A small enclave
of Restncted CommercIal zomng IS located on the east slde of Chase Street Just north of
32nd Avenue. A large multl-famlly complex With 14 umts IS located dIrectly to the east of
th1S property
5. That there will be social, recreational, physical andlor economic benefits to the
community derived by the change of zone.
ThIS proposed zone change should create a benefit to the commumty The property
contamed a dllap1dated smgle-famlly structure. The apphcants stated the structure, as it
preVIOusly eXIsted, was unfit for habitatIOn as ven tied hy a Wheat Ridge hUlldmg
inspector A new structure will be a vast Improvement for th1s propeliy ami the
neIghborhood.
6. That adequate infrastructure/facilities are available to serve the type of uses allowed
by the change of zone, or that the applicant will upgrade and provide such where
they do not exist or are under capacity.
Planning Commission
WZ-03-11/MarcEm
3
All respondmg agenCIes are able to serve the property, and the developer w111 mcur the
cost and mamtenance of any Improvements. The Wheat RIdge Water Dlstnct w11l reqUire
the installatlOn of an additJonal water tap
7. That the change of zone will not adversely affect public health, safety or welfare by
creating excessive traffic congestion, creating drainage problems, or seriously
reducing light and air to adjacent properties.
The change m zone will not affect pubhc health, safety or welfare m the area. Traffic
should not mcrease slgmficantly, and a dramage study wJll be reqUired when the bUlldmg
permIt is subm1tted for reV1ew ThIS proposed development should not reduce aIr or hght
to adjacent propertJes.
8. That the change of zone will not create an isolated or spot zone district unrelated to
adjacent or nearby areas.
ThIS change of zone wlll not create an Isolated zone dlstnct. R-3 zonmg is present to the
east. ThIS property was zoned ReSIdential Three when the CIty mcorporated m 1969,
however the mass rezomng m 1984 changed the zomng to ResidentJal One-C.
V. STAFF CONCLUSION & RECOMMENDED MOTION (S)
Staff concludes that the proposed zone change is conSistent With the Comprehensive Plan. The
proposed use wlll be compatible w1th adjacent land use and zonmg. Therefore, staffrecommends
APPROVAL of Case No WZ-03-1l.
OPTION A.
"'I move to recommend APPROVAL of Case No WZ-03-11, a request to rezone from
ResldentJal One-C to ResldentJal Three for property located at 3281 Chase Street, for the
followmg reasons'
The change m zone will be m conformance w1th the CIty of Wheat Ridge
Comprehensive Plan goals, objectJves and polic1es.
2. The proposed use 1S compatible w1th the surroundmg area.
3 The change of zone will not adversely affect the public health, safety or
welfare.
4 There are adequate pubhc facJlitJes to serve the use proposed.
OPTION B.
"1 111me to reCOIllll1\:nJ DENIAL of Case No WZ-03-11, a request to reZOIle from RCSH.icntlal
One-C to ResidentJal Three for property located at 3281 Chase Street, for the followmg reasons
Planning Commission
WZ-03-IIIMarcEm
4
II:XttllSlT 1
DATE 1.2/10/2003FEE ~ JOBn 03-2297
MORTGAGE CO M.e...RCEM PROPERTIES LLC
LAND
SURVEYING
ADDHESS
3281 CHASE ST
54(,0 WARD ROAD . ~UITE 160
AfiVA,OA. COt DR.:.. 00 AOU02
13031420-4788
BURROWERS NA E
IMPQOVI;.MENT LOCATION CERTIFICATE
Attn EMILEY
Ll jAL DESCf?IPTION
r:TS 40. H Aln 42, BLOCK 1,
COLUMBIA HEIG~TS, COUNTY OF
JEFFERSON, ST~TE OF COLORADO
I
L
~
~
'SLA '-I::.-
1"=2-0'
--1"'-
12-~OO
*'-
-'
...j
~
o
C)Q
.\11
\.I]f\J
l'
\)
\)
Vi
l'
?
~.
'\J.'
'0
~
L-
V)
l1J
'"'
"'\-
~
\J
o
I
L
-I
I
Laue., I
--!
I'
o
~I
[- ~I v1 J'I 0 ) ~t
I u' ~ Co-vc-'-. I~.rr==
~ FD<.J'-'D,~TIOIJ \"1
I ~ P~-I / ~
I'" \ 55 I
J ~ j ~I
L_ L9'4--
+ ~ I
Z5.Sr
o
~
{,-I 3"
'"
.~
'-.,
Vl
I\J
~
t'J
00
N
IVj
HOlt:.
:lUllvnISOf\A.......us"~a
Pl.I.TUOA,N'GlfSO,,"
IIlAf",'C.~A"O O'''~''$19''$
On the basIs of my ~'e~~~~2'F!r'I\t.~' e-ce belief. I herehy certify that this Improvement lo<:(\tlol""\ car\\f\cat~ was pfep3red for
. that it IS not i3 land Survey Plat
or Improvement Survey Plat, and that It IS not to be relied upon for the establishment oj fence, building, or other future
improvement lines, I further certify that the improvements on the above described porce, on this date except utility
connections, are entirely within the boundanes of the parcel, except as shown. that there 3.re no encroachments upon the
described premises by improvements on any adjOining premises, except as indIcated, and that there IS no apparent eVIdence or
sign of any easement crossing or burdening any part of said parcel, except as noted, lit II
\\\\\\\11 11111111//
""onCE: According to Colorado law yOll mu.-,' commence any legal action based ~2,,:~ JL66I.~,{(t~v survtty withIn thr66 years after yOU
51 discover suCIl defoct. _ In no event n)D}' any '-iL:llvll based upon any defect /fl thiS S~~~~'!:r~~". ~]ClJ!, re than ten years from the date of
~ ,€I certlhcatlon Shown hereon." ~ :-.... ..-.." \ M 4..1&.. ..... ~
~ <:0.. ,-n '1",/-'.'<;>-:
~ f...>:.C:J <:', "=.
~ '" :""C 272G8 ~ : g;;; "
~. :::-.:.. 1'( /1 ?l"I_)
Robert E. Port, L.!:l~~21 or Ro~r-:~~. Hayden, L.S. 27268
~"/ U'o... ..c. ~
'i_ u<s ... &..~ '
/"III,,:"4L Lr..~ 'I>'
111/11111:11111,\'\
EXHIBIT 2
7500 West 29th Avenue
Wheat RIdge. Colorado 80215
City of
Wheat Ridge
Telephone (303)235-2846
Fax (303 )235-2857
Date:
9 December 2003
City Staff Present: TraVIS Crane
Location of Meeting: MUTIlClpal Bulldmg. 2nd floor conference room
Property Address:
Property Owner'
Applicant:
3281 Chase St.
Marc Cave
Same
Property Owner Present? Yes
Existing Zoning:
R-IC
Comp Plan Designation: SF-6
Single Family-6
Existing use/site conditions: Vacant lot
'--
Applicants proposal:Rezone property from Res1dentlal-One C to ResIdential Three A duplex would
be constructed
Issues discussed:
Two neighbors attended the meetmg, and were m favor of the process There
were a few questIOns about what k10d of structure wlll occupy the lot, and the
onentatlOn of the proposed structure. The appltcant replted he was planmng on
located a modular home on thIS property, and there were questlOns regard10g
these structures. The neIghbors seemed to be 10 favor of thIS proposal, as Jt
would be an Improvement over eXIstmg conditIOns
....:>
....:>
....:>
o
to
CP
-.l
(j)
<.n
~
v:>
tv
....:>
,
n\;
" ~ t.-
"- <
<::'
"'0 ~"
~
'-'.l (j,J ~ ~)
'0~ ~
~ :P rn
V C"- o. "'0 ~~
otJ --... 0.
~ ::0
;\ (> (l) - g ;0.
~ :j:: (/l ~
1> (/l ~ ~ :J:G
l' yJ Z
~ 0'\ ~ ~~ g.
s:::-
\J', %. ~ 0-
0- rn
'-. t-)
g ~4
c".)rn
~
U,l -
~ , Z
"'-l c. 0
.....:; It <N \,A G"J
"-' 1
~ 'J {"
~
--J ().
,
J::: .L
CS 'D
\ 's.
C) (.:.
UI
INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER DITULLIO
Council Bill No. 01-2004
Ordinance No.
Series of 2004
TITLE:
AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE
APPROVAL OF REZONING FROM RESIDENTIAL
ONE-C TO RESIDENTIAL THREE FOR PROPERTY
LOCATED AT 3281 CHASE STREET, CITY OF
WHEAT RIDGE, COUNTY OF JEFFERSON, STATE
OF COLORADO.
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WHEAT
RIDGE, COLORADO, THAT:
Section 1. Upon application by Marc and Emily Cave, approval of a rezoning in
Wheat Ridge, Colorado, Case No. WZ-03-ll, for property located at 3281 Chase Street,
and based on a recommendation of denial from the Wheat Ridge Planning Commission
and pursuant to the findmgs made based on testimony and evidence presented at a public
hearing before the Wheat Ridge City Council, Wheat Ridge maps are hereby amended to
exclude from the Residential One-C District and to include in the Residential Three zone
d1stncts the following described land:
-
A PARCEL OF LAND LOCATED IN THE SOUTHEAST ONE-QUARTER OF
SECTION 17,
TOWNSHIP 3 SOUTH, RANGE 69 WEST OF THE SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN,
CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COUNTY OF JEFFERSON, STATE OF COLORADO,
MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS
LOTS 40, 41 AND 42, BLOCK 1, COLUMBIA HEIGHTS, COUNTY OF
JEFFERSON, STATE OF COLORADO
Section 2. Vested Propertv Rights. Approval of this rezomng does not create a
vested property nght. Vested property nghts may only arise and accrue pursuant to the
provisions of Section 26-121 of the Code of Laws of the City of Wheat Ridge
Section 3. Safety Clause. The C1ty Counc11 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 th1S 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 ordmance bears a rational relation to the proper legislative object sought to be
attained.
Section 4. 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
ATTACHMENT 2
adjusted by a court of competent junsdiction invalid, such judgment shall not affect
application to other persons or circumstances.
Section 5. 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 Ordmance, the provisions, requirements and
standards herein shall supersede and prevail.
Section 6. This ordmance shall take effect after final adopHon.
INTRODUCED, READ, AND ADOPTED on first reading by a vote of ~ to
.--2..- on th1S 23rd day of February, 2004, ordered published in fullm a newspaper of
general circulation in the City of Wheat Ridge and Public Hearing and consideration on
final passage set for March 22nd, 2004, 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
readmg by a vote of _ to _' this _ day of , 2004
SIGNED by the Mayor on this _ day of
,2004.
GRETCHEN CERVENY, MAYOR
-
ATTEST.
Pamela Y Anderson, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM BY CITY
ATTORNEY
GERALD DAHL, CITY ATTORNEY
1 st Publication: February 26, 2004
2nd Publication.
Wheat Ridge Transcript
Effective Date.
e: \plann ing\forms\ord. frm
March 12, 2004
From. T Baldwm Yager
OwnerIResldent
3287 Chase St.
Wheat Ridge, Colorado
To City Counc1l
City of Wheat Ridge, Colorado
Re. Case No. WZ-03-ll
I received a letter about the proposed rezoning in my ne1ghborhood. I am wntmg to
provide comment from the neighborhood about the proposed rezoning from R -1 C to R - 3
for 3281 Chase St. I understand that the current owner of the 3281 property would like to
bulld a duplex on that property, and so needs a rezoning of that property. As a resident
and homeowner on that block, I object to the rezonmg to R-3 for the followmg reasons
· We worked very hard a few years ago wIth the city to get the zonmg changed to
DECREASED density in that neIghborhood. Changmg the zoTIlng to increase
densIty seems like a big step backwards for that neIghborhood.
-
· Decreased densIty (a single-falllily home) is preferred for that property because
increased dens1ty (a duplex) is likely to increase traffic. There already is a great
deal of traffic from the Senior Resource Center (adjacent property to the south)
Large RTD buses and many, many senIOr commuter vans traverse Chase Street
every day as It 1S. I would prefer that the city does not add to this problem by
rezoning the 3281 property.
· Decreased densIty also is preferred for that property because there is a great deal
of traffic and commotion from the high-density development (apartment complex)
across the street. Parking from that complex often extends to the west side of
Chase Street. The current "parlang lot" character of Chase Street is not attractive
and unlikely to be improved by moving 2 families onto the 3281 property I
would prefer that the cIty does not add to th1S problem by rezoning the 3281
property.
· Decreased denSIty also is preferred for that property because there 1S much traffic
and commotlOn m the alley west of that property from actiVIties associated WIth
the hbrary, fin:house, Sel1lOr Resuurce Center, and trash removal Movmg 2
families onto the 3281 property, a relatively small area, seems likely to increase
the commotion and congestion In that neighborhood.
Thank you for considering these comments.
c#':TTACHMENT 4
"t-
, 0 0
" 0) Cf') ...J ~
I C ...J Q)
.- -+-' I en
C'J C Cf) C!: -
(/) co
0 0 Q) 0 Q) c
N . .
- ~ .- m
I Q) (J) -+-' C t ~
- N
C!: ro () CO Q)
-
S ..c 0 0. -
- ~ 0 Q)
() .-
~ -
I 0. ~ >
0 C!: 0.0.. CO
"t-
W ~ <( 0
- +-' cc E E
- (J) N 0
(f) Q) 0 W
- Cf') ~
<( ~ ~ 0 CO
- ~
- rr LL CO ~
() Q) ~
C!:
ATTACHMENT 3
.
..,.
~
g
S oml ~ .,
CGi~
~~\\
:;.a ~; ~
..$ ~\ \
..... := . % ""
:. ... p~
\)
~
o
.c
\)
~
Ul
"
-
-
-
-
-
!;
~
\II
~
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
...
(/) ...
~ '- 0)
C "@ E
CO ro g-.~
"t-'o -00) 0) '- "1>
'- 0) '-
c:. CO ._
Q) 30-5';:.
~ 0~0Z'
. - :;... Q) -0 ro
-5 :;::; E _ ()
C ~ .....~"o.
CO '~O)o.~
J:::()v'"Q)t::.-
~.s~~....o
(/) ... 0. 0 0>......,
.- CO 0) c:. (/)
, "\ (.) -0 0) .- 0)
'-' . c C s:. -0 (/) en
..J Q) "_ _ Q) :;:) ....
..Jc:.....CQ)OQ)
- 7 s:. .- C s:. :;...
~ "-I... . g) (/) (/) Q) :;:)
.~ "t-'o 0) 0) 0) (/).0
'- "t-' (.) (/) 0) 0)
o)(/)o~~
o..oQ)OO-5E
O.....c-Os:.~O
0....... (/) 0 Q) :;... Q) s:.
Q) .....:;:)(/)<!.
E~~~.o-o:c
uJE~Q)Q)~u..
~ 0 * %$
~:l: .
.
.
(/) en
'-
c
Q)
--
~ t)
en ::J c
+-' c .c co
Q)
~ -- c
(/) Q)
- ~ --
- ro ::J E '+-
-- ~ 0 <(
0
- ..c
+-' :r:
-
Q) ..c
- 0) Q) u..
Q)
- ~
-- ro .c
- E en
r- eo
- c
--
-c ~ --
N
'- ~
0 (/) --
--
tt::: '- ~
-- :J
<( u..
. . .
CD
(/)
ro
s::-
O
~ ~
cD
- C'J
- c<)
- \.-
0
.-
- \.-
2
-
- )(
- uJ
-
-
-
-
Q)
en
co
..c
0
~
co
N
- M
s.....
- 0
.-
- s.....
Q)
- +-'
C
-
-
~..'..-.-r" .,~"
f"I"""t:'" ....
..;' , .~
11'" . f -\ .
'J .'
.. t:
Q)
(/)
~
~
<.)
...
- ~
cO
- '"
- cr>
- '-'
- 0
.-
- '-'
- 2
- c
--
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
..
i..,
.~
.,..
c\
irl
:!
",;~l
c'f'J'.
.3:1;.
-~..#.';""~
ki
~
-
-0
o
o
~
\..-
o ~-
~ 0 .
~ ~
0) {; (f)
.---
Q) 0 Q)
ZcO~
\.(- ~
ogo
\..-('1
~c0
()
ro
\..-
ro
~
o
.,;
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
())
en
ro
..c
o
N
T""""
N
('f)
Q)
en
ro
..c
o
""'"
N
N
('f)
-
-
- Q)
- Q) en
> ro
- <( ..c
"0 0
- c
N ""'"
('f) T""""
- S N
('f)
- T""""
LO
""'"
LO
"
-
--
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
--
-
--
(l)
~,
.s::..\
~\'
\.0:
~ ~.
c0 t
(l)
~
s::.
()
-c::t
~
\
o
~
_?
(l)
~
s::.
()
o
~
Q)
(/)
ro
..c
U
l.()
cx::>
N
("")
Q)
(/)
co
..c
U
~
cx::>
I-N
Q)("")
...... 0
C......
Q)......
U C
I- ())
o u
ro
c .--'
Q)"'O
CJ)<(
..... Q)
(/)
()) ro
(/) ..c
..... ro U
..c
U ("")
l"- cx::>
N
cx::> ("")
N
("")
;f W~
69ZC oil ~ J'\ ~Ol>'S I
~3~ .. ~ " i
. N
M M M n
t? ~K i
I
I
rz;; I~
U
~ ~ .. ," I
~ ~ c. D:
Il'6lt i>9lC ..... ... N ,..,
'"
Ii. , ~~-...d:. J ....
Q)
en
CO
...c
O)()
c......
.- 0
C
O~
N g
0)-
cC:O
-- 0
CJ)o
XN
WM
....
~
.....
~
'" Z9Zt oat
.....
,.,
~
-
t1
.L~l(
H013H
--
-
.....
-
- ())
- >
<(
- -0
C
- N
>OM
- I....
CO L()
I.... ,......
- ..Q
-.:::t
..... .....J L()
....'
-
SLK
S6~
------------
\.-
0) 0)
(,) ~
c ~
0) .0-
-0 0)
-0 .-
(/) E.
0) 0)
\.- 0
(/) ~ s::..
... 0
-- 4-
- .E
- 0- J:
- 0 ro U-
- '-+-
~ 0 '"
- 0- 0)
- ~ E.
-
.-
- 0) ~
- -- ~
- ~
\.-
- .-
-0 '-+-
-
\.- \.-
0 0
- '-+- U-
4-
-
- .
- .
-
-
-
"'C
Q)
en
o
c..
o
s....
0..
-
-
-
",I
~,/-
9-
I
t
i
I
y
f----y--,~. '^ .-
., . ~~ w
1""^" s-..~ f-J
I I
. i
, -
.
(l)~
(/) .--
C. '/'
o Q)
o.(t.
(/) \.-
Q) 0
(t.~
~ ro
c. .--
ro \.-
t)~
-- .--
:-- \.-
0.0
~.9
..
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
0'>
C
.-
-0
C
~
o
'--
'--
. ~
~ <f)
0) :S
'E .-
~ $
<f) 0)
o ~
....., . -
....., ~
C 0-
<8 E
(\j 0
.-""""" 0
-0
(\j <f)
.-
0) 0)
'-- 0'>
(\j C
<f) (\j
.~ .c
~ 0
-
.- -0
o 0)
$ <f)
o 0
:.:::: 0- ro
.0 0 0)
~ '-- '--
(l..0-(\j
0)
c
o
N
~
o
0-
~ <f)
0) '--
~ 0
0) 0) -0
-
.0 0) 0)
(\j <f) ~
~ '-- ~
(\j 0) 0
~ ~ <f)
ro -0 .-
<f) (\j C
.- C (\j
0) .- 0)
'-- ....., ~
0) ~ -S (\j
.~ ~ <f) ~
ID 2 ~ 0
-0 ~ ~ ~
- <fJ. 0 9
~ ~ C ~
$'+--===
C - .-
~'-'3 $
~ 0) 0)
5ro~0'>
E6-c~
E 0) ro .c
o-o.co
04:.0
.
.
~
.-
a;
C
0)
.0
-
(\j
.-
o
o
<f)
.
.
.
.
-+-'
C/')
~
\,f:::
o
.-
E
o
c
o
o
0)
"0
C
cu
-
cu
.-
o
o
C/')
Q)
>
.-
~
0)
"0
-
c
o
--
CJ)
:::J
-
()
C
o
()
-+-'
o 0)
::J..c
~ -+-'
-+-' ~
C/')
cS
o 0>
o C
o .-
-+-' C/')
C/') ::J
::J 0
..c 03
3:~~
~E-6
CU Q)
4- E
3: 0
O)Z~
0>0)<(
c-
cu..cI
..cCULL
o "0 ..
~
0) 0 0)
..ctt::E
r-CU-+-,
.-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
3:
~
-+-' -+-'
-- --
04-
0)
0) C
..c 0)
r-..c
-
-
.
.
ITEM NO: 1
REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION
COUNCIL MEETING DATE:
March 22, 2004
TITLE:
COUNCIL BILL 04-2004: AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR
DISPOSITION OF UNCLAIMED PROPERTY
~ PUBLIC HEARING
o BIDS/MOTIONS
o RESOLUTIONS
o ORDINANCES FOR 1ST READING
~ ORDINANCES FOR 2ND READING (Date. March 22, 2004)
Quasi-Judicial:
o
Yes
~
No
City~
City Attorney
-
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Currently the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws (Art IV Chapter 19) prov1des for the disposition of
unclaimed property by the Pollce Department. State statute reqUires local governments to release
all other unclaimed property to the state. As a home rule city, Wheat Ridge has the authority to
supersede th1S statute and retain such property. The Community Development Department
currently 1S holdmg secunty deposits and other funds, for which it cannot locate owners. Some of
these funds have been held for over 15 years. This creates problems for the C1ty'S annual audit. The
ordinance would amend the Code of Laws to permit all city departments to dispose of unclaimed
property and deposit the proceeds mto the general fund.
COMMISSION/BOARD RECOMMENDATION:
NIA
STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES:
State statutes require local governments to release unclaimed property or cash to the state. As a
home rule city, Wheat R1dge has authonty to supersede th1S statute and retain such property. While
the Code of Laws does so for property held by the pollce department, (Art IV Chapter 19), that
art1cle does not presently extend to other City departments.
ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:
Do not adopt the ordmance; gJve unclalmed property to the state.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
The general fund will be increased by the value of the unclaimed property disposed of each year.
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
"I move to approve Council Bill 04-2004,an ordmance providing for dispos1tJon of unclaimed
property, on second reading and that It take effect 15 days after final pubhcation."
or,
"I move to deny Council Bill 04-2004,an ordinance providing for disposition of unclaimed property,
for the following reason(s) "
Report Prepared by: Gerald Dahl, City Attorney (303) 376-5019
Attachments:
1 Council Bill 04-2004.
-
GED\53027\466877 I
CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO
INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER ROTOLA
Council Bill No. 04-2004
Ordinance No.
Series of 2004
TITLE: AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR DISPOSITION OF
UNCLAIMED PROPERTY
WHEREAS, Colorado Revised Statutes section 38-13-104 requires state
custody of all unclaimed property unless otherwise provided by statute or local law;
and
WHEREAS, the City of Wheat Ridge has all power and authority to legislate
and act upon matters of local concern as a home rule municipality pursuant to
Article XX of the Colorado Constitution; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has previously adopted Article IV of Chapter 19
of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws, providing for disposition of unclaimed property
by the police department; and
WHEREAS, the Council wishes to provide for disposition of unclaimed
_ property by other City departments.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO:
Section 1. Article IV, Chapter 1 9 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws IS
amended by the addition of a new section 19-92, to read:
Sec. 19-92.
general procedure.
Disposition of abandoned personal property:
Personal property held by any department of the City other than
the police department may be disposed of in the following
manner: Tangible and intangible personal property shall be
deemed abandoned if unclaimed 30 days after written notice is
mailed by first class mail to the last known address of the
owner. If intangible, the property shall then be converted to
cash and deposited in the general fund. If tangible, such
property may then be disposed of or sold in the same manner
set forth in code sections 19-80(2}; 19-82; 19-83; 19-84; and
19-85, and the proceeds deposited in the general fund.
Section 2. Safety Clause. The City Council hereby finds, determines, and
declares that this Ordinance is promulgated under the general police power of the
GED\53027\466763.1
ATTACHMENT 1
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; Conflicting Ordinances Repealed. If any section,
subsection or clause of this ordinance shall be deemed to be unconstitutional or
otherwise invalid, the validity 'of the remaining sections, subsections and clauses
shall not be affected thereby. All other ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict
with the provisions of this ordinance are hereby repealed.
Section 4. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect fifteen days after
final publication, as provided by Section 5.11 of the Charter.
INTRODUCED, READ, AND ADOPTED on first reading by a vote of 8 to 0 on
this 8th day of March, 2004, 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 22, 2004, 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 , 2004.
SIGNED by the Mayor on this
day of
,2004.
Gretchen Cerveny, Mayor
ATTEST:
Wanda Sang, City Clerk
Approved As To Form
Gerald E. Dahl, City Attorney
First Publication: March 11, 2004
Second Publication:
Wheat Ridge Transcript
Effective Date:
GED\53027\466763.1
ITEM NO
s
REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION
COUNCIL MEETING DATE
March 22, 2004
TITLE:
COUNCIL BILL NO. 05-2004: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING
CHAPTER 26 OF THE WHEAT RIDGE CODE OF LAWS
REGARDING PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS
(CASE NO. ZOA-03-14)
o PUBLIC HEARING
o BIDSIMOTIONS
o RESOLUTIONS
~ ORDINANCES FOR 1 ST READING (Date: March 22, 2004)
o ORDINANCES FOR 2ND READING
Quasi-Judicial
o
Yes
~
No
utdiL
City M~6LJr-~
-
Commumty Development Director
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Article III. of Chapter 26 pertains to the City's planned development regulations. This sectIOn of
the code recogmzes the different types of planned developments in the City and specifies the
requirements and processes for the rezonmg/outline development plan step and the final
development plan step. This sectlOn of the code also recognizes the administrative authority of
the community development director to approve amendments to final development plans.
The eX1sting language was adopted when Chapter 26 was repealed and reenacted in February 2001
Many of the changes proposed by staff are housekeeping measures which remove redundancies
and reflect other approved code changes affectmg this section. The changes proposed by staff w1ll
improve the processing of and standards for planned development district applications.
Planmng CommisslOn reviewed this request on September 4,2003, and recommended approval with
conditIOns. Planning Comn11SSlon reviewed the proposed changes again on February 19,2004, where
a recommendation of approval was given.
BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION:
Plannmg Commission reviewed this request at a pubhc heanng held on September 4,2003 and made a
recommendatlOn of approval with the following conditions:
Regarding Section 26-311.B., there be a limitatlOn of gross floor area not to exceed
10,000 square feet.
2. Following paragraph A of SectlOn 26-311, the followmg words be added. "and all
property owners who may be Impacted by the proposed amendment to the final
development plan."
The recommended conditions from September 4, 2003 were incorporated into the document,
although the wording IS somewhat different than the original motion.
Planning Commission reviewed the proposed amendments again at a public hearing held on
February 19,2004 where a recommendation of approval was made for the following reasons'
1 It alleviates redundant language.
2. It extends the time limit for mylar submIttal.
3 It addresses time hmits for outline and final development plan expiration.
4 It allows more flexibility for administrative approval of final development plan
amendments.
There were no recommended conditions of approval.
ST A TEMENT OF THE ISSUES:
Many of the proposed changes are minor in nature eliminatmg redundancies and reflecting other
approved code changes.
Significant changes include the following.
. Similar use determinations: The appeal body for similar use determmations has
been modified from the Board of Adjustment to Planning Commission.
. Time limit for mylar recordation: The time hmit for mylar recordatlOn has been
extended from 30 days to 60 days.
. Expiration of development plans: The existing time limitation for both the
outline and final development plans is one year. Staff is recommending that the
explratlOn period for both documents be eliminated.
. Application of standards: Staff is recommending that if a previously approved
outline development plan is substandard to today's development standards, that a
proposed final development can be consistent with the smaller standards, as
represented on the approved outhne development plan.
. Administrative amendments to development plans: The communIty
development dIrector has the authonty to approve final development plan
amendments administratively if certain criteria are met. Staff is recommending
changes which would allow greater authority for the community development
director for approving fdp amendments. Those would include the ability to reduce
certain development standards, the abihty to increase gross floor area up to 10%
and the ability to increase a change of land area in an fdp up to 10%.
2
For more mformatlOn regarding the proposed changes, please refer to Attachment 1.
AL TERNA TIVES CONSIDERED:
Do not approve legislation.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
The expansion of the community development director's authonty to approve adm1mstrat1ve
amendments to final development plans will result in a slight decrease in revenue from application
fees. However, this will be offset by a reduction of staff time spent on a project, as it w11l reduce
the number of required public hearings. The other proposed modifications will have no financial
Impact to the city.
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
"I move to approve Counc11 Bill. No 05-2004, Case No. lOA-03-14, an ordinance amending
Chapter 26 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws regarding planned developments, ordered published,
public heanng set for April 12,2004, at 7'00 PM in the City Council Chambers, and that it take
effect 15 days after final publication."
Or,
-
"I move to table indefimtely Council Bill No 05-2004, Case No lOA-03-l4, an ordmance amendmg
Chapter 26 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws regarding planned developments."
Report Prepared by: Meredith Reckert, 303-235-2848
ReViewed by. Alan Wh1te
Attachments.
1 February 19,2004, Planning Commission report
2. Council Bill No 05-2004
CouncilActionform
3
City of Wheat Ridge
Planning and Development Department
Memorandum
TO: Planmng Commission
FROM: MeredIth Reckert
SUBJECT: Case No ZOA-03-14/Planned Development D1stnct RegulalJons
DATE: February 10, 2004
This Case IS.
_ QuasI-JudicIal
----.-.x_ LegIslatIve
Proper notIce was given for th1S pubhc hearing.
Background
-
Attached IS legislatIOn amendmg Chapter 26 of the Wheat R1dge Code of Laws regardmg
planned developments
On September 4, 2003, Staff d1scussed proposed amendments to the planned development
d1stnct regulat10ns w1th Plannmg CommIssIon. At that meeting, a motIOn was made to amend
the regulatIOns as proposed by staff wIth the followmg changes:
Regardmg SeClJon 26-3ll.B , there be a I1mltatJon of gross floor area not to
exceed 10,000 square feet.
2 Followmg paragraph A of Section 26-311, the following words be added "and all
property owners who may be 1mpacted by the proposed amendment to the final
development plan.
Attached is staff's original memo to Planning CommiSSIOn. Attached also are the minutes from
the September 4 meetmg as well as mmutes from the December 4, 2003, where there was
mtemnngled dlSCUSS10n regarding both the explfalJon of plan approvals and the Issue of old
development plans mconsistent WIth today's development standards. Staff has had addltlonal
time to diSCUSS and cons1der other changes as outhned below
Changes proposed for the CommIssion's consIderatIOn are shown 111 bold. DeletIOns are shown
111 strikethrough.
1
ATTACHMENT 1
Summary of Ordinance Changes/Staff Comments
The followmg revIsIons are bemg proposed as shown on ExhibIt 1.
. References to "subdistrict": References to planned development "subdistncts" have
been modlfied to "planned development dlstnct categories" (page 1).
. PMUD: The Planned Mixed Use Development (PMUD) dlstnct has been mcorporated
mto the categones ofldentdied planned developments wlthm the city (page I) No
change from original PC review.
. Lot coverage: The definitIOn CItatIOn and speCIfic reqUIrements for lot coverage have
been removed from the d1fferent planned developments des1gn standards (pages 3, 4,5, 7,
8) No change from original PC review.
. Landscaping, parking, fences and walls and sign age: The language relative to these
deSIgn standards has been reworded. These reVISIOns do not reduce the reqUIrement, but
recognlZe that there can be flexibility m applicatIOn based on the deSIgn features of a
specific planned development dlstnct through the outlme and final plan approval
processes. Th1s reV1Slon affects all five of the planned development dlstncts (pages 3,4,
5,6,7,8,9) No change from original PC review.
. Commercial use conditions in the PRD district: M1xed-use developments are more
appropriately addressed through PMUD apphcatlOns. For thIS reason, staff IS
recommendmg the commerCIal use condItIOns be removed from the PRD zone dIstrict
regulatIOns (page 3) No change from original PC review.
--
. Residential use conditions in the PCD district: MIxed-use developments are more
appropnately addressed through PMUD apphcatlons. For th1S reason, staffls
recommendmg the reSIdential use condItIOns be removed from the PCD zone distnct
regulatIOns (page 5) No change from original PC review.
. Planned Hospital District: Independent livmg uruts have been added as an allowed use
m the PHD d1stnct. (page 6) The allowed reSIdential denSity has been corrected from 21
units per acre (old standard) to 16 units per acre (current standard) (page 7). No change
from original PC review.
. Planned Mixed Use District: The res1dentlal denSity standard has been corrected by the
ellmmatlOn of reqUIred commercial parking from the denSIty calculatIOn. Th1S reVISIOn 1S
consIstent WIth the ongmal ordmance adoptmg the PMUD dlstnct (page 8) No change
from original PC review.
. Similar use determinations: Staff has modIfied the appeal body from Board of
Adjustment to Planmng CommIssIOn. The use determination IS memorialized by a
recorded affidaVit of amendment to the outlme development plan (page 10).
2
. Removal of preliminary plats: The subdlvlslOn process was modlfied last year by
elimmatlOn of the prelimmary plat step This change is cons1stent With that leglslatlOn (p
10) No change from original PC review.
. Neighborhood meeting: The word "referral" has been removed and the applicant IS
reqUired to provide a notIce of the neighborhood meetmg. It IS standard procedure that a
representative of the plannmg dIVISIon staff attends and prepares a synopsis of the
meetmg that becomes a part of the file (page 11)
. Outline development plan submittal requirements: Item f. (list of adjacent property
owners) has been removed from the applicant's submIttal requirements Plannmg
dlVision staff researches and proVides the adjacent owner list (page 11)
. Outline development plan contents: 'TYPical" lot sizes has been replaced WIth
"m1mmum" lot sizes (page 13). No changefrom original PC review.
. Planning Commission Certificate: The Plannmg CommlsslOn certlficate for both
outlme and final plan document certlficatlOns has been rev1sed (pages 14 and 18) No
change from original PC review.
-
. Time limit for mylar recordation: Staff1s recommendmg that the time lim1t for
recordatlOn of mylars for outline and final development plans be extended from 30 to 60
days With the opportumty for one extenslOn (pages 15 and 19) No change from original
PC review.
. Final development submittal requirements: Item d. (list of adjacent property owners)
has been removed from the apphcant's submJttal requirements Plannmg dlvislOn staff
researches and proVIdes the adjacent owner list (page 16) Item f has been expanded to
allow the dlscretlOnary reqUirement for submittal of Clvll engmeenng plans (page 16)
. Final development plan contents: The last sentence m each 1tems c. and d. of SectlOn 2
have been stncken as they are redundant (page 16).
. Final development plan contents: The reqUirement for typ1cal floor plans as part of the
final development plan package has been removed (page 17) The "owner's certificatlOn"
has been modIfied by the removal of the words "and plat" as It is a requirement m the
code that these documents be separately recorded (page 18) No change from original
PC review.
. Expiration of final development plans: The eXlstmg one-year eXpIratIOn penod for all
development plans IS located in section 26-107 Staff is recommendmg that the
expiration penod for both outlme and final development plans be ehmmated. The outhne
plan stage 1S the zorung step and the correspondmg odp document should remam m effect
m perpetUity. Staff IS recommendmg that the expiration of final development plans be
3
dIctated by the development schedule reqUIred on the fdp If the terms of the
development schedule on the fdp are exceeded, an amendment w1l1 be reqUIred (page 20)
· Application of standards: A prevIOus d1scusslOn wIth Planmng CommIssIon at the
December 4 meetmg related to deahng wIth old development plans that do not meet
today's standards. After more diSCUSSIOn at the staff level, we have recommended that If
an old outhne plan does not meet today's standards, a proposed final development plan
can be consIstent with that approval and the former, smaller standards (page 20)
Example scenano Generally, a property's lot coverage IS made up of a combmatlOn of
bulldmg, parkmg and landscaped coverages equalmg 100% of the sIte. An mcrease or
decrease in one of these areas should result m a corresponding increase or decrease m the
other two categones. If a recorded outhne development plan 1S approved showmg 10%
landscaped coverage (the old standard), IS It fair that the landscaped coverage reqUIred at
the time of final development plan approval be mcreased to 20% (the new standard)?
What wlll be the correspondmg decrease') In most cases, the correspondmg decrease
would be m permItted bUlldmg area. What If someone has purchased a property based on
a speCIfic square footage ofbUlldmg area allowed as reflected on a recorded outlme
development plan? If the zomng on a property and a recorded outlme development plan
are to remam m effect m perpetuity, shouldn't the approved final development plan
reflect the standards estabhshed on the outhne plan?
. Amendments to development plans (owner approval): The eXlstmg regulatlOns
spec1fy that all owners of real property wlthm the confines of the proposed outlme
development plan must approve of the apphcatlOn m wntmg. Th1S would also apply to
outhne development plan amendments. The regulatlOns pertammg to owner concurrence
for a final development amendment are unclear Per Plannmg CommIssIon
recommendatlOn, thiS sectIOn was modIfied so that owners outside of the phase must
concur If there are modlficatJons to the common elements (access, dramage, utJhtles and
CIrculation) ThIS proviSIOn IS worded somewhat d1fferently than the Plannmg
CommISSIon motlOn (page 21)
. Amendments to development plans: The Community Development DIrector has the
authonty to approve final development amendments admmlstratlVely If certain cntena are
met.
Reduction of development standards: Staffs onginal recommendatlOn discussed at the
September 4 meetmg was specific to landscaping. Staff has revised our recommendatlOn
so that admimstrative approval authonty 1S apphed to all development standards
(landscaped coverage, setbacks, parking, bUlldmg heIght, slgnage) The dIrector could
approve an amendment to reduce the development standard from the ongmal final plan
approval as long as It would not reduce the development standard to an amount less than
the requirement on the ongmal outlme plan (page 22, Item 7).
Example scenano, A partJcular outhne development plan des1gnates mlrumum
landscaped coverage to be 20%. The final development plan has been approved WIth
4
28%) landscaped coverage The owner would like to dIsplace some landscapmg to mstall
an add1tiOnal handIcapped parkmg space. The resultant reductiOn of landscapmg IS 3%,
bnngmg the proposed total to 25% Under thIS prOVlSlon, the DIrector could approve the
reductlOn as the landscaping coverage still exceeds the ongmal 20% reqUlred by the
outline development plan.
Example scenano An outline development plan IS approved allowmg commercIal
structures WIth mlmmum perimeter side and rear setbacks of 10' A final development
plan IS approved showing SIde setbacks of 15'. After the final des1gn drawings are
completed, the archItect reahzes the structure needs to be setback 12' on one SIde to
accommodate spec1al HV AC eqUlpment housed WIthin the bUlldmg. Under th1S
provision, the Director could approve the 3' setback reduction, as the resultmg setback. IS
stllllarger than the 10' mmlmum side setback allowed by the approved outlme
development plan.
Increase in gross floor area: Staff IS recommending that the Commumty Development
Director be authonzed to approve increases of gross floor area of no more than 10%.
ThIS IS allowed m many other CItIes In the metropolitan area (Westminster, LIttleton,
Arvada, Lakewood) Plannmg CommISSiOn amended thIS provIsIon at theIr September 4
meetmg to allow an mcreased floor area not to exceed 10,000 square feet (page 21, Item
9)
-
Increase in land area devoted to a particular use: Another common pract1ce mother
clt1es IS to allow admmlstratJve approval of a change of land area devoted to a partIcular
use (I e., reSIdentIal versus commerCIal) All of the cItIes canvassed had a limitatiOn of
not more than a 10% change. (page 22, Item 10) No change from original PC review.
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
"I move that Case No. ZOA-03-l4, proposed amendments to Chapter 26 of the Wheat RIdge
Code of Laws regardmg planned development, be forwarded to CIty Council w1th a
recommendatiOn of APPROVAL for the followmg reasons
I. It alleviates redundant language.
2 It extends the tJme hmlt for mylar submIttal
3 It addresses tJme limIts for outlme and final development plan expuatlOn.
4 It allows more flexib1hty for admimstratJve approval of final development plan
amendments".
ExhibIts
1 Proposed ReVIsions
2. Onginal memo to Plannmg Comm1sslon dated August 29, 2003
3 Mmutes ofPlanmng Commlss10n meetmg dated September 4,2003
4 Mmutes of Planning CommiSSIon meetmg dated December 4, 2003
5
City of Wheat Ridge
Chapter 26
Article III. Planned Development District Regulations
Planning Commission - February 19,2004
9-4-03 PC recommendations incorporated
Sec. 26-301. Scope and application.
A. There IS hereby created a Planned Development D1stnct to further promote the
publIc health, safety and general welfare by permlttmg greater flexiblhty and mnovatlon
m land development based upon a comprehensIve, mtegrated plan. For the purpose of
ensunng maX1mum flexibll1ty of thiS dlstnct, the dlstnct IS divIded mto the followmg
sll-bd15tnct designations planned development zone district categories, based on the
pnmary land use of a proposed development plan or portIOn thereof
Planned ResIdentIal Development--PRD
2 Planned CommercIal Development--PCD
3 Planned Industnal Development--PID
4 Planned Hospital Development--PHD
-
5. Planned Mixed Use Development - PMUD.
By creatmg the above sll-bdistricts, zone district categories, the C1ty councd recogmzes
that these subdistricts zone district categories may eXist smgly or m combmatlOn wlthm
any approved planned development.
B On and after the effective date of thIS chapter as set forth m sectIOn 26-1003, all
apphcatlOns for pnvate rezomng under section 26-112 for properties m excess of one (I)
acre (for rezomng to resIdential or mdustnal zones), and all apphcatlOns for pnvate
rezonmg to any commercial dlstnct shall be reqUIred to request rezomng to one (I) of the
lIsted planned development subaistncts zone district categories. The procedure for
revIew of any planned development apphcatlOn shall be that for pnvate rezomng at
sectIOn 26-112. A Planned Development D1stnct may be approved for any smgle use or
any combmatlOn of uses, provided, that the mtent and purposes ofth1s section are met,
and that the general health, safety and welfare of the commumty are advanced through ItS
approval ThiS sectIOn shall apply to
Any new applIcatIOn for a rezomng to a Planned Development DIstnct.
2 Any apphcatlOn for amendment to an eXlstmg planned development
subdlStrict. zone district.
EXHIBIT 1
C The mtent of the Planned Development D1stnct IS to permIt the estabhshment of
well-desIgned, mnovatlve developments wh1ch may not be permitted by a standard zone
dlstnct, howcyor but, whIch may be perm1tted through the use of an approved
development plan by assunng greater control and specificIty of mtended development
character, use, operatIOns and mamtenance, while at the same time allowmg flexibihty
and dIversIty Th1S dlstnct recogmzes the great vanety ofland use mtensltles, densitIes,
and env1ronmental and land use mterfaces wh1ch are possible The general purposes of
thIS sectIOn are as follows
To accomphsh compatible development WIth adjacent commerCIal,
res1dentlal and/or mdustflalland uses through proper land use tranSItIOns
and buffenng techmques.
2 To promote flexiblllty m design and permit d1versdlcaflOn m the locatIOn
of structures.
3 To promote the effic1ent use ofland to facilitate a more economIc
arrangement ofbUlldmg, ClrculatlOn systems, land use and utlhtles.
4 To preserve, to the greatest extent possible, the eXlstmg landscape features
and to mlmmlze Impacts on other natural features of the sIte
5 To prov1de for more usable space through the combmatlon and groupmg
of structures, parkmg, loadmg and storage areas.
6 To comb me and coordmate architectural styles, bUlldmg forms and
bUlldmg relatlOnsh1ps wlthm the planned developments.
7 To mm1m1ze traffic congestion on public streets, control street access, and
to proVide for well-deSigned mtenor ClrculatlOn.
8 To ensure that adequate pubhc utlhtles and facil1t1es are avallable wlthm
the area, to serve the speClfic development.
9 To promote conformance w1th the adopted comprehenSive plan,
estabhshed pol1cles and gUldehnes for the area and for the commumty
Sec. 26-303. Planned Residential Developments (PRD) regulations.
A. Area. No mm1mum.
B DenSIty: Max1mum slxteen (16) dwelhng umts per acre.
C HeIght: MaXimum thirty-five (35) feet.
2
D. Lot coverage: Maximum seventy five (75) percent. (See section 26 123 for
definition.)
.g., D. Landscaping: In accordance with Section 26-502, otherwise as established by
the outline development plan and as specifically detailed on an approved final
development plan. MinffiIDffi twenty fhe (25) percent. (See section 26 502.)
I< E. Parking: In accordance with Section 26-501, otherwise as established by the
outline development plan and as specifically detailed on an approved final
development plan. Based upon specific uses. (See section 26 501.)
G: F. Fences and walls: In accordance with Section 26-603, otherwise as
established by the outline development plan and as specifically detailed on an
approved final development plan. I.s sflecifically detailed on an approved final
de';oIopment plan, otherwise follow requirements of section 26603.
H,. G. Signage: In accordance with article VII., otherwise as established by the
outline development plan and as specifically detailed on an approved fmal
development plan. ;\s specifically detailed on and approved on final dl:)Yelopment plan,
otherwise fBllow re~uirements of artiole VII.
1. Commercial use eonditions:
-
l.
Commercial uses shall be allowed only ....'here speCifically aflproyed in a
final develoJ'lffieflt J'llan.
2. Commerciallises, iaclading all associated land used for building space,
parking and landseaJ'lmg, shall not exceed tweaty fi'/e (25) percent efthe
gross area in.cluded \vithin a J'lartielilar Plwmed ReSidential De';elopment
District.
3. Land l:Ised for commercial uses iRoll:lding parking, iagress, egress, and
landscafling, shall be oalculated separately and may not be induded in the
land area ased to ea-ltJ1:llate the mrodml:llB of sixteen (16) residootial units
per aere. Ifuses are oombined in a structure, the land attributable to the
commereiall:lse shall be considered to be the bl:lilding square footage
ocollpied by commercial1:lses, the required plH"kiRg, and a pmportioRate
share ofilie CORllHeR areas, such as ingress egress, landscapiag, roadways,
et&.
"'" H. The reqUIrements of thIs sectIOn shall not apply to Impose a denSIty reqUIrement
of less than twenty-one (21) Unlts per acre, w1th respect to the reconstructIOn of
reSIdential dwelling m the PRO district, where such structures and the1r reconstruction
meet all of the followmg reqUIrements.
The structure was legally m eXIstence on September 8, 1997,
3
2 The structure 1S located upon a lot whIch does not meet the then-appl1cable
m1mmum lot area and/or mimmum land area per umt reqUlrements for
such proposed reconstructJon, and
3 Such reconstructlOn 1S restncted to replacement of the structure whIch has
been destroyed.
ThIS exemptIon shall not apply to
New construction where no replacement of a preexlstmg structure takes
place; or
2 ReconstructlOn of structures wh1ch were not legally m eX1stence (as
dlstmgUlshed from legal nonconformmg structures)
K,- I. All planned resldentJal developments shall meet the resldentJal sIte deSIgn
standards of article V unless specifically varied on the outline and [mal development
plan.
h- J. A planned resldentJal development shall be reqUlred for any mob lie home park
and must meet the standards for moblle home park des1gn m sectlOn 26-506
Sec. 26-304. Planned Commercial Developments (PCD) regulations.
A. Area. No mlmmum.
B. Height: Commercial structures shall not exceed fifty (50) feet; residential
structures shall Ret elLeced thirty five (35) feet; residential uses loeated within a
commercial structure shall not be permitted above thirty fiye (35) fcet.
C. Let eoverage: Maximum eighty (80) pereent. (See seetieR 26 123 for definitleR.)
I}; C. Landscaping: In accordance with Section 26-502, otherwise as established by
the outline development plan and as specifically detailed on an approved final
development plan. Millirnum twenty (20) pereeRt. (See seetieR 26 502.)
E: D. Parking: In accordance with Section 26-501, otherwise as established by the
outline development plan and as specifically detailed on an approved final
development plan. Based upon specific uses. (See scctioR 26 501.)
F:- E. Fences and walls: In accordance with Section 26-603, otherwise as established
by the outline development plan and as specifically detailed on an approved [mal
development plan. As specifically detailed on appro'led final deyelopmCHt plan,
otherwise folle'1/ re({l:lH-ements of seetioR 2e e03.
4
G-, F. Signage: In accordance with article VII., otherwise as established by the
outline development plan and as specifically detailed on an approved final
development plan. ,A.S specifically detmled on and approved on final development plan,
otherw1se follow reqUIrements of article VII.
I+. Residentialase conditiclFls:
1. Residential uses shall not exceed thirty fi'le (35) feet in height.
2. Residentiallises, induding associated parkmg, land ased f-or buildings,
landscaping, etc., shall not eJcceed fifty (50) percent ofthe gross area
inchlded within a particular Planned Commercial Developmeat Distnct.
3.
Where residential uses are part of a pl8flfl:ed commerCIal development, the
land used for commereialases includiag parking, ingress, egress and
landscaping, shall be calculated separately, and may not be included iR the
llmd area used to calclilate the maxiffiWR of sixteen (16) l:lfIits per acre. If
the commercial and residential uses arc mixed in the sanle building or for
other reasons cannot be elearly separated fmID the residential area, the
laRd attriblitable to the commercial use shall be conSidered to be the
buildiag square footage occupied by commereial1:lses, the required
parking, and a proportionate share of the common areas, sueh as
mgress/egress, landscapmg roadways, etc.
-
I-: G. A Planned CommefClal D1stnct shall be used to estabhsh any proposed
recreatIOnal vehlde park.
Sec. 26-305. Planned Industrial Development (PID) regulations.
A. Area. Each Planned lndustnal Development Dlstnct shall be mmlmum of one (I)
acre.
B HeIght: MaXimum fifty (50) feet.
G-: Lot coverage: Maximum eighty (80) perceat. (See sectioR 26 123 for dcfmition.)
D. C. Landscaping: In accordance with Section 26-502, otherwise as established by
the outline development plan and as specifically detailed on an approved final
development plan. Minimum twenty (20) percont. (See SOChOR 26 502.)
:&. D. Parking: In accordance with Section 26-501, otherwise as established by the
outline development plan and as specifically detailed on an approved fmal
development plan. Based lipon speeific uses. (See section 26 501.)
5
F-: E. Fences and walls: In accordance with Section 26-603, otherwise as established
by the outline development plan and as specifically detailed on an approved final
development plan. I..s speeifieally detailed eR approyed fiRal de'/elopmoot plan,
otherwise fellow reqmremeflts ef seetien 2e e03.
G, F. Signage: In accordance with article VII., otherwise as established by the
outline development plan and as specifically detailed on an approved final plan. As
specifically detailea on approyed final de'lelopment plan, otherwise follow requirements
of artiele VII.
H: G. All planned mdustnal developments shall meet the mdustnal performance
standards set forth m sectIOn 26-505
Sec. 26-306. Planned Hospital District (PHD) regulations.
A. Allowable uses. The following uses herem after listed shall be permJtted only as
speCifically designated on the approved final development plan.
1 Public and pnvate general hospItal.
2. HospItals or san1tanums for contagIOus d1seases, or the mentally d1sturbed
or hand1capped.
-
3. Independent living units, Homes homes for the aged, nursmg homes,
congregate care homes, hosp1ces or SImilar reSIdential facll1t1es whIch are
accessory to a hosp1tal or samtanum prinCIpal use.
4 Accessory uses and structures customanly assoc1ated w1th the permItted
uses as shown on the approved final development plan.
B Area. Each Planned Hosp1tal Dlstnct shall be a mm1mum of five (5) acres, except
as prov1ded below
C Lot WIdth. Two hundred (200) feet mlmmum.
D Setback reqUlrements.
1 Front: Fifty (50) feet mm1mum.
2. SIde: Twenty-five (25) feet mm1mum plus ten (10) feet for each story. The
mtent IS to prOVIde a mlmmum twenty-five-foot landscape buffer adjacent
to residential zoned property.
6
3 Rear' Twenty-five (25) feet mInimUm, plus ten (10) feet for each story
The mtent IS to proVIde a mm1mum twenty-five-foot landscape buffer
adjacent to reSIdential zoned property
E HeIght.
HospItal bUlldmgs. F1fty (50) feet maX1mum, except as follows
a. SIxty-five (65) feet where the lot on wh1ch the bUlldmg IS to be
constructed 1S at least fifty (50) acres m Slze
b AddItIOns attached to eXlstmg hospItals may be bUlIt to a heIght
not to exceed the he1ght of the eX1stmg bUllding.
2 Offices Fifty (50) feet maX1mum.
3 Res1dentlal. Th1rty-five (35) feet maxImum.
4 Accessory' ThIrty-five (35) feet maX1mum.
F. Lot coverage. Se'/enty five (75) peroent maximum overall site coyeragc.
-
G. F. Residential density. No residential development, excluding congregate care
homes, nursing homes or intermediate nursing care facilities, shall exceed sixteen (16)
t'.",cnty one (21) dwelling umts per acre.
H. G.
Landscapmg:
Mm1mum twenty-five (25) percent overall sIte reqUIrement.
2 Twenty-five-foot landscape buffer reqUIred along property Imes adjacent
to res1dentlal zoned property
3 Unless otherwise spec1fically proVIded for on the approved plan, all
landscapmg shall meet the requirements set forth m sectlOn 26-502
t- H. Parking: In accordance with Section 26-501, otherwise as established by the
outline development plan and as specifically detailed on an approved final
development plan. Based upon speeifie uses. (See section 26 501.)
J-, I. Fences and walls: In accordance with Section 26-603, otherwise as established
by the outline development plan and as specifically detailed on an approved final
development plan. As specifieaIly detailed on an appnrved [mal de'/elopmeffi plan,
otherwise follow requirements efsection 26603.
7
G:- J. Signage: In accordance with article VII., otherwise as established by the
outline development plan and as specifically detailed on an approved final
development plan. f.s speeifieaUy detailed OR llf)proyed fiRal denlopment plan,
otherwise follow requirements of artiole VII.
Sec. 26-306.5. Planned Mixed Use District.
A. Apphcablhty Th1S zone dlstnct shall be used only m the mIxed use areas shown
on the Streetscape ClassificatIOn Map m the Streetscape and Arch1tectural DeSign
Manual adopted January II, 2002, as amended.
B Purpose. ThiS dlstnct IS estabhshed to provIde a zomng classIficatIOn to allow the
mtegratlOn of resldent1al and commerCIal uses and development whIch IS cons1stent WIth
the surroundmg ne1ghborhoods and whIch meets the mtent of the comprehenSive plan and
the Streetscape and Architectural DeSign Manual. It 1S not mtended to be used solely to
perm1t a hIgher denSIty than allowed m the planned res1dentlal development (PRO)
dlstnct nor to cIrcumvent other specific standards of the planned resldentJal and planned
commerCIal dlstncts. Instead, It IS mtended to create a zone d1stnct which wlll allow
flexiblhty m use, deSIgn, and onentatlOn wh11e maxlmlzmg space, commumty mterest
and protectmg nearby and adjacent reSIdentIal neIghborhoods.
C PermItted uses. PermItted uses shall be a mIxture of reSIdential and commerCial
uses governed by approval of the outlme development plan.
-
D Area. No mmlmum.
E. Height. MaXImum fifty (50) feet for freestandmg commerCIal bmldmgs only;
thIrty-five (35) feet for structures contammg commerCIal and res1dentlal uses, thIrty-five
(35) feet for freestandmg reSIdential structures.
F. Lot co'/erago. No maxiflTl:liR.
G. F. DenSIty MaXimum of sixteen (16) umts per acre. Land used for commercial
uses, mcluding excluding parking, may not be used to calculate the maX1mum of slxteen
(16) umts per acre. If the commerCIal and resldent1al uses are mixed m the same bmldmg,
the land attributable to the commerCial use shall be cons1dered to be one-half (1/2) of the
bmldmg footpnnt. If the commerCIal and reSidential uses are m separate bmldmgs, the
land attributable to the commerCIal use shall be consIdered to be the entJre commerCIal
hlllldlllg footpnnt.
~ G. Landscaping: In accordance with Section 26-502, otherwise as established by
the outline development plan and as specifically detailed on an approved final
development plan. No mffiimum coyerage. Landscaping shall be eonsistont with section
26 502.
8
1- H. Parking. In accordance with Section 26-501, otherwise as established by the
outline development plan and as specifically detailed on an approved final
development plan. Based upon specifie use. Parking shall be consistent with sectIOn 25
Wh Allowances may be made for shared parkmg spaces If It can be demonstrated to the
satlsfactJon of the person or approval body deSIgnated as having final approval authonty
that parkmg demand for dIfferent uses occurs at dIfferent tJmes.
h I. Fences and walls. In accordance with Section 26-603, otherwise as established
by the outline development plan and as specifically detailed on an approved final
development plan. ,A.s specifically detailed on the approved final development plan;
otherwise follow reqUirements of section 26 603.
&- J. Slgnage. In accordance with article VII., otherwise as established by the
outline development plan and as specifically detailed on an approved final
development plan. As specifically detailed OR the flIlpro'/ed final development pla-n;
otherwise f-allow requirements of article VII.
Sec. 26-307. Similar uses in planned developments.
A. DefimtJon. A sIm11ar use IS a use whIch would be slmllar In SIze, type of
operatIOn, servIces proVIded or eqUIpment used, number of employees, and hours of
operatlOn and wlllch would.
-
Be compatible m character and Impact With permItted uses m the planned
development,
2 Be cons1stent WIth the mtent of the planned development.
3 Not be objectionable to nearby property by reason of odor, dust, fumes,
gas, nOIse, radIatIOn, heat, glare, vibratIOn, traffic generatIOn, parking
needs, outdoor storage or use, and
4 Not be hazardous to the health and safety of surrounding areas through
danger of fire or explosion.
B SImIlar use determlnatJon process. Any use whIch IS not specdically hsted as a
permitted use m a planned development dlstnct IS allowed only under the followmg
procedure
The planmng and community development director shall notify adjacent
property owners by letter notIce and posting of the sIte for ten (10) days
that a SImIlar use IS requested for the property The notice and posting
shall con tam a descnptlOn of the proposed slm1lar use and a copy of
Ordinance 1200, senes 2000
9
2 If no wntten objectIOn to the proposed slm1lar use 1S receIved and the
planmng and development director finds that the proposed slm11ar use
meets the defimtlOn ofslmllar use contamed m sectIOn (a) above, the
planning and development community development director IS
authonzed to approve the slm11ar use
3 If a wntten objectIOn IS received or If the plar~1ing and deyelopment
community development duector finds that the defimtlOn of slmllar use
does not apply, the planniRg and development community development
dIrector shall forward the determmatlOn request to the board of adjustment
planning commission at a pubhc heanng. NotJce of sa1d heanng shall be
as proVIded m sectIOn 26-109
C RecordatIOn. If approved, the slm1lar use shall be recorded as an affidavit of
amendment to the outline development plan. OR the final dcyolopment plan lR the same
manner as the original final development plan was recorded.
Sec. 26-308. Application for planned developments.
All apphcatlOns for approval of a planned development, redevelopment, alteratIOn or
addItIOn shall be filed WIth the departmont ofplar.ning and de'/elopment community
development department pnor to Issuance of a bUlldmg pemllt. In some mstances,
plattmg 1S reqUIred and the plat can be processed concurrently WIth the planned
development request. ArtJcle IV of this chapter should be consulted for subdiVISIOn
reqUIrements and procedures.
A. Development plans. There are two (2) dlstmct steps m estabhshmg a planned
development: an outlme development plan and a final development plan. The outline
development plan may be submitted for cons1deratlOn by Itself or It may be combmed
WIth a final development plan. When the outline development plan IS combmed With final
plans, two (2) separate drawmgs are reqUIred. All mformatlOnal reqmrements of the
respectJve plans shall be met.
B Subdlvlslon/plattmg. Subd1v1s10n or plat reV1ew may be camed out
sImultaneously WIth the review of development plans. All reqmrements of the
subdIVISIOn regulatJons for a prelimiRaI)' and final plat, If apphcable, must be satJsfied If
there are any parcel dIVISIOns created, or If there are any dedlcatJons for streets,
easements or other pubhc purposes, or If a prevIOusly approved subdIviSIOn IS amended
In any way by the proposed development In cases where subdlvls10n IS to occur
Simultaneous With development plan reVIew, the applicant shall subm1t separate sheet(s)
m add1tlOn to the subject development plan.
C Outhne development plan. An apphcant shall submit an outhne development plan
for approval of a change of zone to a Planned Development Dlstnct. The outhne
10
development plan IS the zomng and general concept step It provIdes generahzed graph1c
and wntten mformatlOn on layout, uses and mtended character of the development.
SubmIttal reqUIrements.
a. Appropnate fee
b Evidence that the reqUired neighborhood referral meeting has
occurred Neighborhood meeting notice (see section 26-109)
c Complete and notanzed applicatIOn.
d. Proof of ownershIp, such as copIes of deeds or title commItment.
e. Power of attorney from owner(s) where an agent acts on behalf of
the owner(s)
f. Names aHd addresses of all adjacent property owners, including
property across abutting streets.
g. f. Names, addresses, telephone numbers of arch1tects, surveyors, and
engmeers assocIated WIth the preparatIon of the plans.
-
fl. g. AddItIOnal mforn1atlOn may be reqUIred, mcludmg, but not hmlted
to, dramage study and plan, gradmg plan, geologIcal stab1hty
report, traffic Impact report, floodplam 1mpact report, or general
env1ronmentallmpact report.
2. Form and content of the outhne development plan. The maps wh1ch are a
part of the outlme development plan shall be made at a scale of not less
than one (l) mch equals one hundred (l00) feet. The sIze of the sheet shall
be twenty-four (24) mches by thlrtY-S1X (36) mches. The drawmgs may be
m general schematic form and shall contam the followmg mlmmum
mformatlOn.
a. Ownersh1p/umfied control statement. A hst of all eX1stmg owners
of real property mcluded wlthm the proposed Planned
Development Dlstnct, and a written statement wh1ch describes
antiCIpated future ownershIp character (I e. smgle ownershIp,
partnershIp, condommJ\l1ll, etc ), and whIch mdlcates proposed
manner of mamtammg umfied control throughout the plannmg,
development, use, operatIOn and contmued mamtenance of the
planned development.
b Character of development. A wntten descnptlon of the general
character of the development and of the objectives to be achIeved
11
by the partIcular development concept bemg proposed. This
statement shall mclude, but not be hmlted to, the manner m wh1ch
the proposed development meets or exceeds the mtent of the
Planned Development D1stnct as stJpulated m sectIOn 26-30lC, the
proposed archItectural and sIte desIgn concepts, bUlldmg matenals
(type, textures and colors), specIfic concepts by whIch the
proposed development will make an orderly transltJon from
eX1stmg adjacent development, and speClfic concepts for the use
and landscapmg of all pubhc and pnvate open spaces. It IS the
mtent of thIs reqUIrement that the apphcant proVIde a clear, concIse
statement for the revlewmg authontles to better understand the
proposed development concept and upon whIch their deCISIon
regardmg the proposal can be based.
c The eXlstmg topographIc character of the land at a contour ll1terval
of two (2) feet 1f the slope IS less than ten (10) percent and five (5)
feet If the slope IS greater than ten (10) percent.
d. Generalll1d1catJon of areas to be landscaped.
e. Property boundanes as per accompanYll1g legal descnptlOn.
f EXlstmg and proposed lot hnes, easements and nghts-of-way on
and adjacent to the sIte.
g. Adjacent zonmg, land use, streets, streams, etc
h. LocatIOn of all eXlstmg streets, alleys, easements, dramage areas,
ImgatlOn dItches and laterals wlthm and adjacent to the sIte.
1. LocatJon of all proposed streets, alleys, easements, dramage areas,
parks, and other areas to be reserved or dedIcated to pubhc use.
J ApprOXImate locatIOn and extent of maJor use areas.
k. Any SIgnIficant vegetatIOn or land use features wlthm or adjacent
to the sIte whIch may mfluence development.
l. When located wlthm a regulated 100-year floodplam, deslgnat10n
of areas subject to a 1 OO-year flood shall be proVIded. Both the
floodway and flood fnnge areas shall be shown. Development
wlthm 100-year floodplams, mcludmg fill or excavatIOn, IS
regulated by article VIII.
m. Scale (no less than one (1) mch equals one hundred (100) feet) and
north arrow
12
n. Small-scale locatIOn map as an inset whIch shows the subject
property centered wlthm a quarter-mlle radlUs
o Proposed name of the planned development.
P A general mdlcatlon of the expected ut111zatlOn of the land and a
l1st of uses to be permltted in the development.
q Legal descnptlOn (metes and bounds) of total Site, includmg area.
r Project data for the entIre sIte and including, by phase, building
area and percent, paved area and percent, landscape area and
percent, number of lots, typieal minimum lot sIzes and
dImensIOns, net dens1ty, gross densIty, etc
s. Development time schedule by phase
t. ReqUlred certificatIOns.
3 The outlme development plan shall be recorded With the Jefferson County
Clerk and Recorder and, therefore. must meet theIr reqUlrements for
recordatIOn.
-
4 The follOWing certificatIOns, in add1tlOn to the reqUlred surveyor's
certificate, shall also be placed upon the outline development plan
OWNER'S CERTIFICATION
The belOW-Signed owner(s), or legally deSIgnated agent(s) thereof, do hereby agree that
the property legally described hereon w1ll be developed as a planned development m
accordance WIth the uses, restrictIons and condItIons contained in thIS plan, and as may
otherw1se be reqUired by law I (we) further recognize that the approval ofrezomng to
Planned Development, and approval of thIs outlme development plan, does not create a
vested property nght. Vested property nghts may only anse and accrue pursuant to the
prOVlS10ns of sectIOn 26-121 of the Wheat R1dge Code of Laws.
SIgnature of Owner(s) or Agent(s)
NOTARY PUBLIC
Subscribed and sworn to before me thIS
day of
Witness my hand and offic1al seal
13
My commISSIOn expIres
NOTARY SEAL
PLANNING COMMISSION CERTIFICATION
Recommended for approval Approved this
by the Wheat Ridge Planning Commission.
day of
Chairperson Chairman
PLJ\.NNING /.ND DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
CITY COUNCIL CERTIFICATION
Approved thIS
Councll
day of
, by the Wheat RJdge CIty
ATTEST
CIty Clerk
Mayor
CITY SEAL
COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER'S CERTIFICATE
Tins document accepted for filmg m the office of the County Clerk and Recorder of
Jefferson County at Golden, Colorado, on the day of
AD, m Book ~___, Page , ReceptIOn No
JEFFERSON COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER
By'
14
Deputy
5 Renew procedures.
a. Staff revIew Upon filmg of an apphcatlOn and other reqmred
documents, planmng and dovelopment community development
staffwlll refer copIes of the plans to affected departments and
agencIes for review All comments shall be forwarded to the
apphcant so that necessary reVISIOns may be made by the apphcant
pnor to scheduhng the apphcatlOn before planmng commiSSion.
b Planmng commISSIOn heanng. The plannmg comm1SSlOn shall hold
a public hearing pursuant to the pubhc notlce reqUlrements of
sectIOn 26-109. The plannmg commission shall recommend
approval, approval WIth modlficatlons or demal of the outlme
development plan, statmg the reasons for ItS recommendatIOn. The
recommendatlon shall be forwarded to cIty councll
c City councll heanng. The city counc11 shall hold a pubhc heanng
pursuant to pubhc notlce as reqmred by sectIOn 26-109 The cIty
councll shall approve, approve WIth modIficatIOns or deny the
application.
-
6.
RecordatlOn. All approved outline development plans shall be recorded
with the Jefferson County Clerk and Recorder. Such plans, and associated
recording fees shall be submitted to the planniag !lad development
community development department within thirty (30) sixty (60) days of
council's final action. Should a recordable approved outline development
plan not be provided to staff within thirty (30) sixty (60) days of counCIl's
final action, staff shall schedule a public hearing before city council and
CIty council shall reconsider its approval. A one-time, thirty-day
extension for mylar submittal may be requested from the Community
Development Director. The request must be submitted in writing
prior to expiration of the 60-day time limit showing evidence of good
cause for not meeting the deadline.
D Fmal development plan. The final development plan prov1des the final
engmeenng and slte deSign detalls for final approval of one (1) or more phases of a
proposed development.
Submittal requirements
a. Complete and notanzed apphcatlOn.
b Proof of ownershIp, such as copIes of deeds or tItle commitment.
15
Deputy
5 RevIew procedures
a. Staff revIew' Upon filmg of an applIcatIOn and other reqUIred
documents, plar.mng and de'ielopment community development
staffw1l1 refer copies of the plans to affected departments and
agenCles for revIew All comments shall be forwarded to the
applIcant so that necessary reVISIOns may be made by the applIcant
pnor to schedulmg the apphcation before planmng commISSIOn.
b Planmng commIssIon heanng. The planmng commlSSlOn shall hold
a pubhc heanng pursuant to the pubhc notice reqUlrements of
sectIOn 26-109. The plannmg commISSIon shall recommend
approval, approval WIth modificatIOns or demal of the outhne
development plan, statmg the reasons for 1tS recommendatlOn. The
recommendatlOn shall be forwarded to C1ty cound
c CIty councll heanng. The cIty councll shall hold a publIc heanng
pursuant to publIc notIce as reqUlred by sectlOn 26-109 The Clty
counc1l shall approve, approve WIth modificatIOns or deny the
applicatlOn.
-
6
RecordatlOn. All approved outline development plans shall be recorded
with the Jefferson County Clerk and Recorder. Such plans, and associated
recording fees shall be submitted to the plan.:1ing and development
community development department within thirty (30) sixty (60) days of
council's final action. Should a recordable approved outline development
plan not be provided to staff within tlurty (30) sixty (60) days of council's
final action, staff shall schedule a public hearing before city council and
city council shall reconsider its approval. A one-time, thirty-day
extension for mylar submittal may be requested from the Community
Development Director. The request must be submitted in writing
prior to expiration of the 60-day time limit showing evidence of good
cause for not meeting the deadline,
D Final development plan. The final development plan prov1des the final
engmeenng and sIte desIgn detmls for final approval of one (1) or more phases of a
proposed development.
Submittal reqUlrements
a. Complete and notanzed apphcatlOn.
b Proof of ownershIp, such as copIes of deeds or title commItment.
15
c Power of attorney from owner(s) where an agent acts on behalf of
the owner(s)
d. Names afld addresses of all adjacent property ovmers, ineludmg
property across abutting streots.
e-;- d. Names, addresses and telephone numbers of archItects and
engmeers assoclated wIth preparation of the plans and plat.
f- e. Caples of proposed agreements, provlslOns, covenants,
condommlUm declaratIOns, etc., which govern the use,
maintenance and contmued protectIOn of the planned development
and any of ItS common areas and facllltles, and whlch wlll
guarantee umfied control.
g, f. AddltlOnal mformatlOn may be reqUlred, mcludmg, but not lImJted
to, geological stability report, traffic Impact report, civil
engineering plans, floodplam lmpact report or general
envlronmentallmpact report.
..,
Form and content of the final development plan. The final development
plan shall be consistent wIth the approved prelimmary outline
development plan. The final development plan shall be drawn at a scale
of no less than one (1) mch to one hundred (100) feet and contam the
followmg:
a. Legal descnptlon of the entire planned development, and lfthe
final development plan IS for only a portion of the slte, a legal
description of that portion of the site included wlthm the final
development plan.
b LocatIOn, extent, type and surfacmg matenals or all proposed
walks, malls, paved areas, turfing and other areas not be covered
by buildmgs or structures.
c LocatIOn, SIze, type, heIght and onentatlOn of all SIgnS. Signs not
speeifieally approved as part of a final developmont plafl shall not
be permitted.
d ~ landscape plan which proVides locatIOn, type. size and quantltles
of all eXlstmg (to remam) and proposed plant matenal and other
landscape features and matenals. Common and botamcal names of
all plant matenals shall be mdlcated. Location and type of
lITIgatIOn system shall be mdlcated. AlllafldscapiHg shall meet tho
reqHiremeets of this so chon as well as section 26 502.
16
e LocatlOn, extent, types of matenals and heIght of all walls and
fences.
f Extenor hghtmg devIces, type, height, 10catlOn and onentation.
g. Location, extent, maxmmm heIght, number of floors and total floor
area of all blilldmgs and structures.
h Total number of dwelhng umts. and typlCal floor plans for
resldential projects.
Elevations and perspectl ve drawmgs of all proposed structures and
Improvements, mdlcatmg archItectural style and bUlldmg
matenals. The drawmgs need not be the result of final archItectural
deSIgn but of suffiCIent detall to permIt evaluatIOn of the proposed
structures
-
Off-street parkmg and loadmg plan whIch mdlcates the Slze,
locatIOn and number of parkmg and loadmg spaces and whIch
shows the proposed cIrculatIOn of vehIcles and pedestnans wlthm
the planned development and to and from eXlstmg or proposed
pubhc thoroughfares. Any spec13l engmeenng features and traffic
regulatIOn devlces needed to facllItate and ensure the safety of thIS
CIrculatIOn pattern, mcludmg fire lanes, must be shown.
k.
IndlcatIon of all proposed uses for all bUlldmgs, structures and
open areas. OutsIde storage and dlsplay areas must be mdlcated lf
proposed. Descnptlon of any proposed temporary or mtenm uses
ofland or eXlstmg bUlldmgs pnor to development m accordance
WIth the approved final development plan,
I.
A development schedule mdlcatmg the approxImate date on whIch
constructIOn of the project can be expected to begm and
approximate dates when constructlon wlll be completed. If a
multlphased proJect, mdlcate tJmes for each phase
m.
The final development plan (and plat) shall be recorded wJth the
Jefferson County Clerk and Recorder and, therefore, must meet
their reqUlrements for recordatIOn.
3 The followmg certIficatIOns, and approvals, m addItIOn 10 thc reqUIred
surveyor's certlficate, shall also be placed upon the final development plan
(and plat)
17
OWNER'S CERTIFICATION
The below-sIgned owner(s), or legally desIgnated agent(s) thereof, do hereby agree that
the property legally described hereon wlll be developed as a planned development m
accordance With the uses, restrictions and condltlOns cOTItamed m thiS plan, and as may
otherwlse be reqUIred by law I (we) further recogmze that the approval of final
development plan (aRd plat) does not create a vested property right. Vested property
nghts may only anse and accrue pursuant to the prOV1SlOns of section 26-121 of artIcle I
of the Wheat RIdge Code of Laws.
SIgnature ofOwner(s) or Agent(s)
NOTARY PUBLIC
Subscribed and sworn to before me thlS
day of
Witness my hand and offiCIal seal.
My commISSIOn expIres
NOTARY SEAL
PLANNING COMMISSION CERTIFICATION
Recommended for approval .^.pproyed this
by the Wheat Ridge Planning Comnussion.
day of
Chairperson Chairman
PL.\NNING AND DEYELOP11ENT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
CITY COUNCIL CERTIFICATION
Approved thlS
Councll.
day of
, by the Wheat RIdge City
ATTEST
Clty Clerk
Mayor
18
CITY SEAL
COUNTY CLERK. AND RECORDER'S CERTIFICATE
ThlS document accepted for filmg m the office of the County Clerk and Recorder of
Jefferson County at Golden, Colorado, on the day of
AD, m Book , Page , Reception No
JEFFERSON COUNTY CLERK. AND RECORDER
By"
Deputy
4 Review procedures.
a.
Staffrevlew Upon filmg of an appl1catlOn and other reqUlred
documents, the plan...J:ing ood dC'/dopment community
development staff will refer copies of the plans to affected
departments and agencles for review All comments shall be
forwarded to the appl1cant so that necessary reVlSlOns may be made
by the applicant poor to scheduhng the appl1catlOn before the
planmng commlSS10n.
-
b Planmng comnllSSlOn hearing. Planmng commlSSlOn shall hold a
pubhc heaong pursuant to the reqUlrements of section 26-109 The
planmng commiSSIOn shall recommend to city council approval,
approval wlth modlficatlOns, or demal statmg the reasons for
actIOn.
c Clty council heaong. Upon recelpt of the planmng commISSion's
recommendatIOn, city counCIl shall hold a publ1c heaong pursuant
to the reqUlrements of sectlOn 26-109. City councIl shall approve,
approve WIth modIficatIOns or deny the appl1catlOn.
d. Recordation. All approved final development plans shall be
recorded with the Jefferson County Clerk and Recorder Such
plans, and associated recording fees, shall be submitted to the
pll!llfliag aa8 aO'lelapmont community development staff within
thirty (30) sixty (60) days of council's final action. Should a
recordable approved final development not be provided to the staff
Wlthin thirty (30) sixty (60) days of council's final actlOn, the staff
shall schedule a public hearing before city councl1 and city council
19
shall reconsider Its previous approval. A one-time, thirty-day
extension for mylar submittal may be requested from the
Community Development Director. The request must be
submitted in writing prior to expiration ofthe 60-day time
limit showing good cause for not meeting the 60-day deadline.
5. Expiration of final development plan approvals; reapplications.
a. Construction shall commence in accordance with the
development schedule specified on the recorded fmal
development plan.
b. Extension of the development schedule specified on a recorded
final development plan shall require amendment to the final
development plan.
c. A new application for substantially the same development
application may not be refiled for one (1) year after denial.
Sec. 26-309. Ioterpretatioo Application of standards.
A. DetaJled specificatIOns and standards whIch should have been set forth on an
approved outline and final development plan, but whlch were found subsequent to
approval to have been omltted, may be mterpreted by the community development
dIrector ofplannmg and development to be those specIficatIOns and standards set forth m
the zone dlstnct m whlch the approved uses contamed wlthm the final development plan
would be permitted.
B The supplementary regulatJons of artIcle VI apply to uses and actlvltles wlthm
planned development dlstncts, unless otherwIse proVIded m the approved final
development plan.
C If the outline and final development plan does not address a partIcular
development standard, the standard of the zone dlstnct whIch most closely matches the
planned development as determmed by the pla-niliag and development community
development dIrector shall be used.
D The owner of any property who or whlch feels aggneved by such determmation
may appeal thc determmatlOn pursuant to the provIsIons of sectIOn 26-115
E. If the development standards specified on a recorded outline development
plan do not meet the current standard, a fmal development plan can be approved
consistent with those standards on the recorded outline development plan.
20
F. To vary from the minimum development standards established on a recorded
outline development plan, an amended outline development plan is required.
G. To vary from the standards set forth on a recorded final development plan,
an amended final development plan is required.
Sec. 26-310. Binding upon successors and assigns.
All approved development plans shall be bIndmg upon the owner(s), theIr successors and
assIgns, and shall hmll the development to all CondltlOns and I1mltatlOns estabhshed m
such plans, and as may be contamed m separately recorded agreements, covenants,
condomllllUm declaratIOns, etc., which were approved by Clty councll as part of a planned
development approval
Sec. 26-311. Amendments to development plans.
-
A. The procedures and requirements for amending an approved development plan
(preluninary outline or fmal) shall be the same as prescribed for original approval, except
as provided for under subsection (ej (B) below. All applications for amendment to an
outline development plan must be approved in writing by all owners of real property
contained within the area originally approved by the outline development plan, unless
specific alternative provislOns have been approved by city cOWlcil as part of the unified
control agreement. All applications for amendment to a final development plan must
be approved in writing by aU owners of real property and owners of interest
contained within the parcel or phase of the planned development where the
amendment is being requested. If the amendment affects the provisions for access,
drainage, utilities and/or circulation, affected property owners must consent to the
application for amendment in writing.
B. Based upon showmg of necessity therefore, mlllor changes m the locations of
structures and theIr accessory uses, fences, parkmg areas, landscapmg and other site
Improvements may be permltted as an "admimstratlve amendment" by the community
development director 6f planning and development, If such changes w1l1 not cause any of
the followmg Clrcumstances to occur:
Change m the character of the development.
,
Increase 111 the lI1tenslty (or denslty) of use
3
Increase of the problems of circulation, safety and utll1tles.
4
Increase ofthe external effects on the adjacent properties.
5
Increase m maXlITIUm bulldmg helght.
21
F. To vary from the minimum development standards established on a recorded
outline development plan, an amended outline development plan is required.
G. To vary from the standards set forth on a recorded final development plan,
an amended final development plan is required.
Sec. 26-310. Binding upon successors and assigns.
All approved development plans shall be bmdmg upon the owner(s), theIr successors and
assIgns, and shall hmIt the development to all condltJons and hmltatlOns estabhshed m
such plans, and as may be contamed m separately recorded agreements, covenants,
condommium declaratIOns, etc , whIch were approved by cIty councIl as part of a planned
development approval.
Sec. 26-311. Amendments to development plans.
-
A. The procedures and reqUirements for amending an approved development plan
(preliminary outline or [mal) shall be the same as prescribed for original approval, except
as provided for under subsection tbj (B) below. All applications for amendment to an
outline development plan must be approved in writing by all owners of real property
contained wlthin the area originally approved by the outline development plan, unless
speclfic alternatlve provisions have been approved by city cOWlcil as part of the unified
control agreement. All applications for amendment to a final development plan must
be approved in writing by all owners of real property and owners of interest
contained within the parcel or phase of the planned development where the
amendment is being requested. If the amendment affects the provisions for access,
drainage, utilities and/or circulation, affected property owners must consent to the
application for amendment in writing.
B Based upon showmg of necessity therefore, mmor changes m the locations of
structures and theIr accessory uses, fences, parkmg areas, landscapmg and other slte
Improvements may be permltted as an "adnuTIlstratJve amendment" by the community
development dlrector ef planning and d(wc1opmcnt, If such changes wl11 not cause any of
the followmg Clrcumstances to occur'
Change m the character of the development.
'1
Increase 111 the 1I1tenslty (or denSity) of use
3
Increase of the problems of Clrculation, safety and utlhtJes.
4
Increase of the external effects on the adjacent propertIes.
5
Increase m maxImum bulldmg heIght.
21
6 ReductIOn m the ongmally approved setbacks from penmeter property
lmes.
7 Reduction in landscape area of total site, Reduction of a development
standard on the approved final development plan provided the
reduction does not decrease the development standard to an amount
less than the requirement on the approved outline development plan.
8. or relocatIOn Relocation of landscape areas whIch are reqmred as buffer
yards or estabhsh project character
9. Increase m the gross floor area of structures of over 10% beyond the
authonzed maXlmum allowed WIth the approved planned development,
but not to exceed an increase of 10,000 square feet.
10. Change of the land area devoted to any approved use by more than
10%.
C Any changes or reV1Slons of a final development plan which are approved, eIther
admmlstratJvely or by cIty counCll actlOn, must be recorded WIth the Jefferson County
Recorder as amendments to the ongmal recorded development plan subject to the
deadline provisions of Section 26-308.D.4.d.
Sec. 26-312. Interim use.
Subsequent to rezomng to a Planned Development Dlstnct and approval of a final
development plan, but pnor to development and use of a parcel m accordance With the
approved plan, the property may contmue to be used for any lawful purpose for whlch It
was used at the tJme of preliminary outline development plan approval, prOVIded,
however, that no new permanent structures or additIOns to eXlstmg structures wlll be
permItted.
22
CIty of Wheat Ridge
Community Development Department
Memorandum
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
DATE:
Planmng CommissIOn
Meredlth Reckert
Case No. ZOA-03-14/Planned Dnelopment District Regulations
August 29, 2003
Attached for the Plannmg CommIssIon's conslderatlOn are staffs proposed changes to ArtlCle m of
the Zomng and Development Code. The eXlstmg planned development regulatlOns were
Incorporated Into Chapter 26 when lt was rewntten In 2001 For companson purposes, both the
eXIsting sectlOn of the code WIth proposed changes (ExhibIt I) and the proposed reVlSlOns m
ordmance fonn (ExhibIt 2) have been Included. Only the affected sections of the regulatIons have
been mcluded m the ordmance The fonnat of both documents uses (;'.rike throughc; for deleted
language and bolding for addItIons All changes have been designated WIth shadowmg.
The followmg reVISIons are being proposed as shown on Exhibit I
. PMUD: The Planned Mlxed Use Development (PMUD) dlstnct has been mcorporated mto
the categones of IdentIfied planned developments wlthm the City (page 1)
-
. Lot coyerage: The defimtlOn cltatlOn and specdic reqUIrements for lot coverage have been
removed from the dIfferent planned developments deSIgn standards (pages 2, 4, 5, 7, 8)
. Landscaping, parking, fences and walls and sign age: The language relatlYe to these
deSIgn standards has been reworded. These reVISIons do not reduce the requirement, but
recognIze that there can be flexibllllY m apphcatlOn based on the deSIgn features of a speCIfic
planned development dlstnct through the outhne and final plan approval processes. ThIs
reVISIOn affects all five of the planned development dlstncts (pages 2, 3,4, 5, 6, 7, 8,9)
. Commercial use conditions in tbe PRD district: MIxed use developments are more
appropnately addressed through PMUD applicatIOns. For thls reason, staff IS
recommendmg the commercial use condltlOns be removed from the PRO zone dlstnct
regulatIOns (page 3)
. Residential use conditions in tbe PCD district: Mixed use developments are more
appropnately addressed through PM1JD applIcatIOns For thiS reason, staff IS recommendmg
the resldentlal use conditions be removed from the peD zone distnc\ regulations (page 5)
. Planned Hospital District: Independent hVlTIg uruts have been added as an allowed use In
the PHD district. (page 6) The allowed resldenl1al density has been corrected from 21 uOlts
per acre (old standard) to 16 uruts per acre (current standard). (page 7)
EXHIBIT 2
· Planned Mixed Use District: The resIdential densIty standard has been corrected by the
ehmmatlon of reqUlred commercIal parkmg from the density calculation. ThIs reVlSlon lS
consIstent wllh the ongmal ordmance adoptmg the PMlJD dlstnct (page 8).
· Remonl of preliminary plats: The subdlYlslOn process was modified last year by
ehmmatlOn of the prehmmary plat step ThIS change IS consIstent wlth that legIslatIOn (p
10)
· Neighborhood meeting: The word "referral" has been removed (page II)
· Outline de, elopment plan contents: "TypIcal" lot sizes has been replaced with
"mlmmum" lot sIzes (page 13)
· Planning Commission Certificate: The Plannmg COnUTIlSSlOn certificate for both outlme
and final plan document certlficatlOns has been revIsed (pages 14 and 18)
· Time limit for mylar recordation: Staffls recommendmg that the time hmlt for
recordatlon of mylars for outlme and final development plans be extended from 30 to 60 days
With the opportumty for one extensIOn (pages 15 and 19)
· Final development plan contents: The reqUIrement for typical floor plans as part of the
final development plan package has been removed (page 17) The "owner's certificatIOn"
has been modIfied by the removal of the words "and plat" as It IS a reqUlrement m the code
that these documents be separately recorded
· Expiration of final development plans: A prOVISIon for explrahon of final development
plans has been Incorporated mto the planned development regulatlOns. The eXIsting
prOVISIon lS currently located In sectJOn 26-107 and provldes a one-year explratJon period.
Staff is recommending the expiratIOn period be extended to three years.
· Amendments to denlopmeDt plans (owner approval): The existing regulatJOns specIfy
that all owners of real property wnhm the confines of the proposed outhne development plan
must approve of the app!Jcatlon In wntmg. This apphes to both outline plan approvals and
outlme plan amendments. The regulatJOns pertammg to owner concurrence for a final
development amendment are unclear Staff recommends that agreement be reqUired by only
owners wlthm Ihe parcel or phase where the amendment wlll occur
· Amendments to development plans: The Commulllty Development DIrector has the
authonty to approve final development amendments administratively If certam cntena are
met.
Reduction of landscaping: Staff IS recommending that the admirustrative approval
authonty be applied to landscaped coverage In very !Jmited sItuations. The dlfector could
approved an amendment to reduce the amount of landscapmg from the anginal final plan
approval as long as It would not reduce the landscaped area to an amount less than the
requirement on the anginal oUllme plan.
2
Example scenano A par1lcu]ar outhne development plan desIgnates mlmmum landscaped
coverage to be 20%. The final de\ e]opment plan has been approved vilth 28% landscaped
coverage. The owner \\ ould like to dIsplace some landscapIng to Install an additIonal
handicapped parking space The resultant reductIOn of landscaping IS 30/0, bringing the
proposed total to 250/0. Under thiS prOVIsion, the Director could appro\e the reductIOn as the
landscapmg coverage stIll exceeds the ongInal 20% reqUIred by the outlIne development
plan. (page 21, Item 7)
Increase in gross floor area: Staff IS recommending that the Commumty Development
DIrector be authorized to approve Increases of gross floor area of no more than I Oo~. ThIs IS
allowed In many other Cllles In the metropolitan area (Westminster, Littleton, Arvada,
Lakewood) (page 21, llem 9)
Increase in land area devoted to a particular use: Another common practlCe In other
cIties IS to allow admlnlstratl\e approval of a change ofland area dnoted to a par1lcular use
(Ie, resldentJal versus commerCIal) All of the cItIes canvassed had a lImItatIon of not more
than a 10% change. (page 21, llem 10)
RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move that Case No ZOA-03-14, proposed amendments to
Chapter 26 of the Zomng and Development Code regardIng planned development dlstnct
regulatIOns, be forwarded to CIty Councll wllh a recommendatlon of APPROVAL for the follOWIng
reasons
--
I
2
3
4
It alleVIates redundant language
It extends the tIme hmlt for mylar submJttal
It extends the tJme lImIt for final development plan expIratIOn
It allows more flexibIlity for approval of admmlstratlve final development plan
amendments. "
3
7. PUBLIC HEARINGS
-
I
~
A. Case No. WZ-02-13 (continued from AU2.ust 21, 2003): An applIcatIon filed by
Melody Homes, Inc for approval of a Planned ResIdentIal Development final
development plan for property located at 10285 RIdge Road
B. Case No. WS-02-0I (continued from AU2.ust 21, 2003): An applicatIOn filed by
Melody Homes, Inc for approval of a 38-lot SUbdiVIsIon plat for property located at
10285 Ridge Road.
A request was made for contmuance of the Fmal Development Plan and Fmal Plat to the nnt
Plannmg CommissIon meeting Staff recommended approval of this request.
It was mOYed by Commissioner STITES and seconded by Commissioner McMILLIN that
Case No. WZ-02-13, a request for approval of a final deYelopment plan, and Case No.
WS-02-01, a request for approval of a 38-lot major subdivision plat, for property located
at 10285 Ridge Road, be continued to September 18,2003. The motion passed 6-0 with
Commissioners DAVIS and PLUMMER absent.
C. Case No. ZOA-03-13: An ordmance amending SectIOn 26- ] ] 0 of the Wheat RIdge
Code of Laws concerning cost recovery for construction of certam publIc
Improvements
ThiS case was presented by Meredith Reckert. She reviewed the staff report whIch contamed
an ordinance prepared by the cIty attorney's office regarding future cost recovery for requIred
Improvements It would allow developers who mstall publIc street and dramage Improvements
to be reImbursed from a subsequent developer who benefits from the ongmal constructIon of
these publIc Improvements. Staff recommended approval of the ordmance
It was moved by Commissioner WEISZ and seconded by Commissioner WITT that Case
l"o. ZOA-03-13, a proposed amendment to Chapter 26 of the Zoning and Development
Code regarding cost recovery for the installation of public impronments, be forwarded
to City Council with a recommendation of approval for the following reason:
1. It will allow developers to be reimbursed for construction of impro'\'Cments that
benefit others.
The motion passed 6-0 with Commissioners DAVIS and PLUMMER absent.
D. Case No. ZOA-03-14: An ordmance amending ArtIcle III of Chapter 26 of the \\'heat
fudge Code of La\\s per1alllmg to plillu1ed dn e1opments.
This case was presented by MeredIth Reckert. She revIewed each eXIsting sectIon of the code
and compared them WIth the proposed reVisions. Staff recommended approval of the
ordmance.
Planmng Commission
September 4, 2003
Page 2
EXHIBIT 3
l'
L
It was mond by Commissioner BERRY and seconded by Commissioner McMILLIN that
Case l"o. ZOA-03-14, proposed amendments to Chapter 26 of the Zoning and
Denlopment Code regarding planned development district regulations, be fon\ arded to
City Council with a recommfOdation of appro\'31 for the follo\\ ing reasons:
1. It allniates redundant language.
2. It extends the time limit for mylar submittal.
3, It extends the time limit for final development plan expiration.
4. It allo\\ s more flexibilit), for appro~'al of administrative final development plan.
With the following conditions:
1. Regarding Section 26-311.B.9, there be a limitation of gross floor area not to
exceed 10,000 square feet.
2. Following paragraph A of Section 26-311, the following words be added: and all
property owners who may be impacted by the proposed amendment to the final
development plan.
The motion passed 6-0 with Commissioners DAVIS and PLUMMER absent.
E, Case No. ZOA-03-15: An ordinance amending SectIon 26- ] 06 of the Wheat RIdge
Code of Laws concem1l1g the reVIew process chart.
TIm case was presented by Meredith Reckert. She reviewed the staff report and Tn lewed the
eXlstmg process chart companng It with the proposed reVISions.
It was moved by Commissioner McMILLIN and seconded by Commissioner STITES that
Case No. ZOA-03-15, a proposed amendment to Chapter 26 of tile Zof!ing and
Development Code regarding the land use review process chart, be forwarded to Cit),
Council with a recommendation of approyal for the following reasons:
1. It will streamline the reyiew process by simplifying the pre-application meeting
requirement.
2. It expedites the subdivision approval process by elimination of the neighborhood
meeting requirement.
3. It distinguishes between the different categories of planned development
approyals.
4. It reflects recent legislation regarding the special use process.
With the following condition:
1. That wording in footnote #1 of the proposed rniew p..-ocess chart be changed to
read: If five or fewer parcels, minor subdivision process applies. If more than fi,'e
parcels, major subdivision process applies.
The motion passed 6-0 with Commissioners DAVIS and PLUMMER absent.
Planning Commission
September 4, 2003
Page 3
-
B. Case No, ZOA-03-I7: An ordInance amendIng Section 26- ] 07 of the \\'heat RIdge
Code of La\\ s concernIng eXpIratIOn of de\ elopment appro\ als
\1eredlth Reckert presented thIs matter She reviewed the staff report and noted that staff
recommended removal of time lImIts on outlIne development plans so they remaIn In
perpetuity HoweHr, staff acknowledges there should be more dISCUSSIon and conslderallon on
the proposed changes to the final development plan e'\plratIons and recommended conllnuatlon
of that diSCUSSion to a later time
Alan \Vhlte explaIned that there are final development plans that are 30 years old where the
outlIne plan sets the standard for landscaping at 8% to 10% The current requIrement for
landscaping IS 200/0
CommIsSIOner McNAMEE asked how many old planned developments exist that ha\e nC\er
been developed Alan White explained that most SituatIons deal wlth the last one or two
buIldings wlthl11 an old planned deHlopment. He eSllmated there are probabl y two dozen of
these SItuatIons
CommiSSIOner PLUMMER suggested a requirement that, If not developed Wlth111 a certaIn
number of years, the plan must be re'de\\ed whIch \\ould m\ olve new appllcallon fees
CommISSIoner STITES suggested a requirement that the application must be brought up to
current code requirements after a certain lime 11rT11t has passed
Commlssloner McMILLIN asked about an applicant's vested nghts wllh prIor development
approval Alan White expla111ed that the statutory lImit for vested rights IS three years
However, a de\ eloper could come 111 and request a vested rIghts agreement but such agreement
would have to be reviewed and approved by CIty CouncIl
CommISSIoner PLUMMER expressed concern that large projects sometImes take longer than
three years to prepare for constructIOn and drainage, roadway and other condltlons could
change dunng that IJme Alan \Vhlte expla111ed that notices of any such changes 111 Planned
Developments are given to the owners or developers of surroundlOg propertIes
CommiSSIoner McMILLIN suggested a prOVISion to shIft ame11lIJes such as landscaping
accordl11g to changes that have taken place since the InitIal approval
CommiSSIoner McNAMEE asked if there were time restncllons for a developer to begin or
complete hiS project Alan White stated that there IS the one-year restncllon to begIn DuddIng
He noted that a prOVISIon 111 the code adopted two years ago slated that buddmg needed to
begm Wlthm one year of adoptIng the code or their approval would expIre No notice to O\\l1erS
was given of this reqUirement. No one responded to thIS aCllon.
CommISSioner McMILLIN suggested a survey of other mU11lClpalities regardmg their
regulations. Meredith Reckert Slated that she checked With other mU11IclpalItles and found that
most have a three-)ear IImitaIJon on final de\elopment plans She didn't check to see what
Planning Comm'S5.on
[Xcember 4. 2003
Page 3
EXHIBIT 4
procedures were In place when the time lImitation IS up and indicated that she \\ ould contact
ne!ghoonr.g rnunlclpalttJes regarding thIs Illalter
It was mOHd by Commissioner PLt:~l~lER and seconded by Commissioner ~lcMILLlN
that Case l"o. ZOA-03-17, an ordin.mce amending Section 26-107 of the Wheat Ridge
Code of La\\s concerning expiration of deHlopment appro\'al, be continued to Februal)
5,2004. The motion passed unanimously.
8 OLD BCSI;".ESS
. A Ian WhIte reported that AutoNatJon IS In the ~rocess of installIng a \\ ellands/detentlOn
pond and SlOml se\\er Improvements out to 38' A\enue A buJldl11g permit for then ne\v
bUIldIng IS anticIpated In the spnng They ha\ e IndIcated they want to be open by Januar\
2005
. Jn response to a question from CommISSioner McNAMEE regardIng the temporary lot at
Lutheran HospItal, Meredllh Reckert explaIned thIS \\']11 accommodate constructIon and
employee parkIng that is bel11g displaced by the new medical buIldl11g constructIon ThiS IS
bel11g processed as an adml11lstratlve amendment and staff IS attemptIng to stay cognIzant of
neIghborhood concerns Alan \\ihlte reported that there IS a 5-year tIme lImit on the
temporary lot
9. :"EW BUS1NESS
Alan White reported that the December J8\h Plan!1lllg CommIssion agenda wIillncludc R.-
regulations.
Meredith Reckert reported that the InteT\'lew process has begun to fill the planner
tech11lClan vacancy
]0, COM;\llSSION REPORTS
There were no commiSSion reports.
] 1. COMMITTEE AND DEPARTMENT REPORTS
There were no committee and department reports
12. ADJOURNMEl'lT
It was mond by Commissioner PLUMMER and seconded by Commissioner STITES to
adjourn the meeting at 7:55p.m. The motion passed un:lOimousl)'.
/Y) (L{-I{l r, 111 (' ~ h.n& ~
!\hrian McNamee, Chair
/j 0
(~. .~~ j1Jt
Ann Lazzen, RecordlO . ~retarv
Planning CommiSSion
December 4, 2003
Page 4
INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER
Council Bill No. 05-2004
Ordinance No.
Series of 2004
TITLE: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 26 OF THE WHEAT
RIDGE CODE OF LAWS PERTAINING TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT
DISTRICT REGULATIONS
WHEREAS, the CIty of Wheat RIdge has adopted regulatIOns pertammg to the
reqUIrement for and content of planned deveJopment dlstncts,
WHEREAS, the CIty has Identified changes whIch WIll Improve the processmg
of and standards for planned development dlstnct applicatIOns.
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WHEAT
RIDGE, COLORADO THAT:
Section 1. ArtIcle III of Chapter 26 of the Wheat RIdge Code of Laws IS hereby
amended as follows
-
Sec. 26-301. Scope and application.
A. There IS hereby created a Planned Development Dlstnct to further promote the
pubhc health, safety and general welfare by permlttmg greater flexiblhty and InnovatIOn
mland development based upon a comprehensIve, mtegrated plan, For the purpose of
ensunng maxImum flexiblhty of thIS dlstnct, the dlstnct IS dIvIded mto the followmg
subdlStnct deSIgnations planned development zone district categories, based on the
pnmary land use of a proposed development plan or portIon thereof
Planned ResIdential Development--PRD
2. Planned CommercIal Development--PCD
3 Planned lndustnal Development--PID
4 PJanned HospItal Development--PHD
5. Planned Mixed Use Development - PMUD.
By creatmg the above subdlstncts, zone district categories, the cIty counctl recogmzes
that these subdlStncts zone district categories may eXIst smgJy or m combmatlon wlthm
any approved planned development.
ATTACHMENT 2
1
B On and after the effective date of thIs chapter as set forth m sectIOn 26-]003, all
applIcatIOns for pnvate rezoning under sectIOn 26-1] 2 for propertIes III excess of one (J)
acre (for rezoning to resIdential or l11dustna] zones), and all applIcations for pnvate
rezoning to any commercIal dlstnct shaJJ be reqUIred to request rezonmg to one (]) of the
lIsted planned development subdlstncts zone district categories. The procedure for
revIew of any planned development applIcatIon shall be that for pnvate rezonl11g at
sectIOn 26- ] ] 2. A Planned Development DIstnct may be approved for any smgle use or
any combmatlOn of uses; proVIded, that the mtent and purposes of thIs sectIon are met,
and that the general health, safety and we]fare of the community are advanced through Its
approval. ThIS sectIon shall apply to
Any new apphcatlon for a rezonl11g to a Planned Development Dlstnct.
2 Any applIcatIOn for amendment to an eXlstmg planned development
subdlstnct. zone district.
C The mtent of the Planned Development Dlstnct IS to penlllt the establIshment of
well-deSIgned, mnovatlve developments whIch may not be penllltted by a standard zone
dlstnct, howQ'icr but, whIch may be permItted through the use of an approved
development p]an by assunng greater control and specIficIty of l11tended development
character, use, operatIOns and mamtenance, whIle at the same time aJJowmg flexibIlIty
and dIverSIty ThIS dlstnct recogmzes the great vanety ofland use l11tensltles, densIties,
and envIronmental and land use interfaces whIch are possible. The genera] purposes of
thIS sectIOn are as foJJows
1 To accomplIsh compatible development WIth adjacent commercIal,
resIdentIal and/or l11dustnalland uses through proper land use tranSItIOns
and buffenng techmques.
2 To promote flexibIlIty m desIgn and permIt dIverSIficatIon m the locatIOn
of structures.
3 To promote the effiCIent use ofland to facIlItate a more economIc
arrangement ofbUlldmg, circulatIon systems, land use and utilItIes
4 To preserve, to the greatest extent possible, the eXIstmg landscape features
and to mmlmlze Impacts on other natural features of the sIte.
5 To proVIde for more usable space through the combmatlOn and groupmg
of structures, parkmg, loadmg and storage areas
6 To combl11e and coordmate archItectural sty]es, bUl]dl11g forms and
bUlldl11g relationshIps wlthm the planned deve]opments.
7 To mInimIze traffic congestIOn on publIc streets, control street access, and
to proVIde for well-deSIgned mtenor CIrculatIOn.
2
8 To ensure that adequate publIc utlhtles and factlltles are avmlab]e wIthin
the area, to serve the speCIfic development.
9 To promote confoTInance wIth the adopted comprehensIve plan,
establIshed pohCles and gUldelmes for the area and for the communIty
Sec. 26-303. Planned Residential Developments (PRD) regulations.
A. Area. No mmlmum.
B DensIty- MaxImum sIxteen (16) dwellmg UnIts per acre.
C HeIght: MaXImum thIrty-five (35) feet.
D. Lot coverage: Mmumum seventy five (75) percent, (See sectIOn 26 ]23 for
definItIOn. )
-&. D. Landscapmg: In accordance with Section 26-502, otherwise as established by
the outline development plan and as specifically detailed on an approved final
development plan. MI11lmUm twenty five (25) percent. (See sectIOn 26 502.)
-
F E. Parkmg In accordance with Section 26-501, otherwise as established by the
outline development plan and as specifically detailed on an approved final
deHlopment plan. Based upon specIfic uses. (See sectIOn 26 501.)
&- F. Fences and walls In accordance with Section 26-603, otherwise as
established by the outline development plan and as specifically detailed on an
approved final development plan. i\S specIfically detmled on an appro','ed fina]
development plan, otherWIse follow reqUIrements of section 26 603.
Ho G. Slgnage. In accordance with article VII., otherwise as established by the
outline development plan and as specifically detailed on an approved final
development plan. As specIfically detatled on and approved on final dC'lclopmont plan,
othorVilse follow reqUIrements of u~:lcle VII.
1. CommerclUl use condItions:
]. \ol11l11erclal uscs shall be allowed only where specIfically approycd 111 a
final development p]an.
2. CommercIal uses, mcludmg all assoclUted land used for bUl]dmg space,
parlung and landscapmg, shall not exceed t,vent)' five (25) percent of the
gross area mc]uded wlthm a partIcular Planned ReSIdential Development
DIstnct.
3
3. Land used for commercIal uses mcludmg parkmg, mgress, egress, and
lundscapmg, shall be calculated separately and may not be mcluded m the
land area used to calculate the maxImum of sIxteen (J 6) residenttaJ umts
per acre, If uses are combmed III a structure, the land attributable to the
commercll1l use shall be consIdered to be the buildmg square footage
occupIed by commercIal uses, the reqUIred parkl11g, and a proportIOnate
share of the common areas, such as l11gress egress, landscap1Og, roadways,
et€-,
J.: H. The reqUirements of thIs sectIOn shall not appJy to Impose a densIty reqUIrement
of less than twenty-one (21) umts per acre, WIth respect to the reconstructIOn of
reSIdential dwelll11g 111 the PRD dlstnct, where such structures and theIr reconstructIon
meet all of the followmg reqUIrements
The structure was legally m eXIstence on September 8, ] 997,
2 The structure IS located upon a lot whIch does not meet the then-applIcable
mmlmum Jot area and/or mlmmum land area per umt reqUIrements for
such proposed reconstructIOn, and
3 Such reconstructIOn IS restncted to replacement of the structure whIch has
been destroyed.
ThIs exemptIOn shall not apply to
New constructIon where no replacement of a preexlstmg structure takes
place; or
2 ReconstructIOn of structures whIch were not legally 10 eXIstence (as
dlstmgUlshed from legal nonconformmg structures)
K-, I. All planned resldenttal developments shall meet the resIdentIal sIte deSIgn
standards of artIcle V unless specifically varied on the outline and final development
plan.
h J. A pJanned resldenttal development shall be reqUired for any mobIle home park
and must meet the standards for mobIle home park deSIgn 111 sectIon 26-506
Sec. 26-304. Planned Commercial Developments (PCD) regulations.
A. Area. No mlmmum.
4
B Height: CommefClal structures shall not exceed fifty (50) feet; residentIal
structures shall not cxceed thirty five (35) fect; residential uses located with10 a
commerCial structure shall not be pem11tted above thIrty five (35) feet.
C. Lot coverage: MaXimum eighty (80) percent. (See section 26 123 for definItIOn.)
I* C. Landscap1Og: In accordance with Section 26-502, otherwise as established by
the outline development plan and as specifically detailed on an approved final
development plan. MInImum twenty (20) percent. (See sectIOn 26 502.)
.g.,. D. ParkIng: In accordance with Section 26-501, otherwise as established by the
outline development plan and as specifically detailed on an approved final
development plan. Based upon specIfic uses. (See section 26 501 .)
F-: E. Fenees and wa]]s In accordance with Section 26-603, otherwise as established
by the outline development plan and as specifically detailed on an approved final
development plan. As speclfically detaiJed on approved final development plan,
otherWise follow reqUIrements of sectIOn 26 603,
G., F. Slgnage In accordance with article VII., otherwise as established by the
outline development plan and as specifically detailed on an approved final
development plan. As speCIfically detailed on and approved on final development plan,
otherWise f-ollO\y reqUIrements of article VII.
-
H., ReSIdential use condItIOns:
J. ReSIdential uses shall not exceed thirty five (35) feet In heIght.
2. ReSldentJaJ uses, includIng aSSOCiated parking, land used for bUlldmgs,
Jandscapmg, etc., sha]] not exceed fifty (50) percent of the gross area
mcluded withm a partieuJar Planned CommercIa] Development DlStnct.
3. '.\There reSIdential uses arc part of a planned commercIal development, the
land used for commerCial uses includIng parking, Ingress, egress and
1andscapmg, sha]] be caJculated separately, and may not be mcluded m the
land area used to caJeuJate the maxImum of SIxteen (16) UnIts pcr acre. If
the commerCIal and reSIdential uses are mixed In the same bUlld111!'; or for
other reasons CUlmot be clearly separated from the reoildentwl area, the
land attributable to the commerCial use shall be conSIdered to be the
bl111d1l1; sq'cHire footage occupIed 11)' commercwl uscs, the req:med
parking, and a proportionate share of the common areas, such as
1ne,'Tess/egress, Jandscaplng roadways, etc.
h G. A Planned CommerCIal Dlstnct shaJJ be used to establish any proposed
recreatIOnal vehicle park.
5
Sec. 26-305. Planned Industrial Development (PID) regulations.
A. Area. Each Planned Industnal Development Dlstnct shall be mlmmum of one (J)
acre.
B HeIght: MaxImum fifty (50) feet.
(;.;. Lot coverage: Max!ffium eighty (80) percent. (See sectIOn 26 ]23 f-or defimtlOn.)
9 C. Landscapmg: In accordance with Section 26-502, otherwise as established by
the outline development plan and as specifically detailed on an approved final
development plan. Mimmum twenty (20) percent. (8ee sectIOn 26 502.)
E-, D. Parkmg: In accordance with Section 26-501, otherwise as established by the
outline development plan and as specifically detailed on an approved final
development plan. Based upon specIfic uses. (8ee sectIOn 26 50] .)
F:- E. Fences and walls In accordance with Section 26-603, otherwise as established
by the outline development plan and as specifically detailed on an approved final
development plan. ,\s speCIfically detailed on approved final development plan,
otherwISe follow reqUIrements of sectIOn 26 603.
Go F. Slgnage In accordance with article VII., otherwise as established by the
outline development plan and as specifically detailed on an approved final plan. As
speCIfically detmled on approved final development plan, othenvlse follow reqUIrements
of artIcle VII.
H-, G. All plarmed mdustnal developments shall meet the mdustnal performance
standards set forth m section 26-505
Sec. 26-306. Planned Hospital District (PHD) regulations.
A. Allowable uses. The follOWing uses herem after hsted shall be permItted only as
specifIcally designated on the approved final development plan.
Publtc and pnvate general hospItal
2 Hospitals or sanItanums for contagloLls dIseases, or the mentally dlsturbed
or handIcapped.
3 Independent living units, Homes homes for the aged, nursmg homes,
congregate care homes, hospIces or slmtlar reSIdential facllItles which are
accessory to a hospltaJ or sanItanum pnnClpal use.
6
4 Accessory uses and structures customanly assoCIated wIth the permItted
uses as shown on the approved final development plan.
B Area. Each Planned HospItal Dlstnct shall be a Immmum of five (5) acres, except
as proVIded below
C Lot WIdth. Two hundred (200) feet mmlmum.
D Setback reqUIrements,
Front. FIfty (50) feet mlmmum.
2 SIde' Twenty-five (25) feet mlmmum plus ten (JO) feet for each story The
lIltent IS to proVIde a mInImum twenty-five-foot landscape buffer adjacent
to reSIdential zoned property
3 Rear' Twenty-five (25) feet nllnImUm, plus ten (10) feet for each story
The mtent IS to proVIde a mmlmum twenty-five-foot landscape buffer
adjacent to resIdentIal zoned property
E HeIght.
HospItal bUlldmgs Fifty (50) feet maXImum, except as follows.
-
a. SIxty-five (65) feet where the lot on whIch the bUlJdmg IS to be
constructed IS at least fifty (50) acres m sIze
b AddItIons attached to eXlstmg hospItals may be bUIlt to a heIght
not to exceed the heIght of the eXlstmg bUlldmg.
2 Offices FIfty (50) feet maxImum.
3 ResldentlaJ ThIrty-five (35) feet maxImum.
4 Accessory' Thirty-five (35) feet maximum.
F. Lot coverage. Seventy five (75) percent mmnmum overall sIte coverage.
G F. ReSIdentIal densIty No reSIdential development, excJudmg congregate care
homes, nursmg homes or mtermectIate nursmg care faCIlitIes, shall exceed sixteen (Hi)
tv.enty onc (21) dwellmg U11lts per acre
H. G.
Landscapmg:
MInImum twenty-five (25) percent overall sIte reqUIrement.
7
2 Twenty-five-foot landscape buffer reqUIred along property lmes adjacent
to resIdentIal zoned property.
3 UnJess otherwIse specIfically proVIded for on the approved plan, all
landscapmg shall meet the reqUIrements set forth m sectIOn 26-502
h H. Parkmg: In accordance with Section 26-501, otherwise as established by the
outline development plan and as specificaIly detailed on an approved final
development plan. Based upon speCific uses. (See section 26 50] .)
J-, I. Fences and walls In accordance with Section 26-603, otherwise as established
by the outline development plan and as specificaIly detailed on an approved final
development plan. ,'\s speCIfically detmled on an approved fin a] de'iOJopment pJan,
othervilse follow reqUIrements of section 26 603.
Go- J. Slgnage In accordance with article VII., otherwise as established by the
outline development plan and as specificaIly detailed on an approved final
development plan. ,A.s speCifically detmled on approved final de'iOlopment plan,
othervnse follow reqUIrements of article VII.
Sec. 26-306.5. Planned Mixed Use District.
A. Apphcablhty ThIS zone dlstnct shall be used only In the mIxed use areas shown
on the Streetscape ClassIfication Map m the Streetscape and ArchItectural DeSIgn
Manual adopted January] J, 2002, as amended.
B Purpose ThIS dlstnct IS estabhshed to proVide a zonmg claSSIficatIOn to allow the
mtegratlOn of reSIdential and commercIa] uses and development which IS consIstent With
the surroundmg neighborhoods and whIch meets the mtent of the comprehensIve plan and
the Streetscape and ArchltecturaJ DeSIgn Manual. It IS not mtended to be used solely to
permIt a hIgher denSIty than allowed In the pJanned reSIdentIal development (PRD)
dlstnct nor to circumvent other speCIfic standards of the pJanned resldentiaJ and planned
commerCial distncts. Instead, It IS Intended to create a zone dlstnct whIch wlll allow
flexiblhty m use, deSIgn, and onentatton whIle maxlmlzmg space, commumty mterest
and protectmg nearby and adjacent reSidential neighborhoods.
C Permitted uses. Penmtted uses shall be a mIxture ofresldenttaJ and commercial
uses governed hy approval of the outlIne development plan
D Area. No mmlmum.
E. HeIght. MaXImum fifty (50) feet for freestandmg commerCIal bmJdlOgs onJy;
thlrty-five (35) feet for structures contammg commerCIal and resldentlal uses; thIrty-five
(35) feet for freestandmg resldentlaJ structures.
8
F. Lot coverage. No maxImum.
G F. DensIty MaxImum of sIxteen (J6) UnIts per acre Land used for commerCIal uses,
mcludmg excluding parkmg, may not be used to calculate the maxnllum of sIxteen (J 6)
UnIts per acre rfthe commerCIal and resIdentIal uses are mIxed m the same bUlldmg, the
land attributable to the commercial use shall be consIdered to be one-half (J/2) of the
bUlJdmg footpnnt. rfthe commercIal and resldentlaJ uses are 10 separate bUlldmgs, the
land attributable to the commercIal use shall be consIdered to be the entIre commerCIal
bUlldmg footpnnt.
H-c G. Landscapmg: In accordance with Section 26-502, otherwise as established by
the outline development plan and as specifically detailed on an approved final
development plan. No mmmmm coveragc. Landscapmg shall be consIstent WIth scctlOn
26 502.
h H. Parkmg. In accordance with Section 26-501, otherwise as established by the
outline development plan and as specificaIly detailed on an approved final
development plan. Based upon specIfic use Parkmg shall bc consIStent '.'nth sectIOn 25
~ AIlowances may be made for shared parkmg spaces If It can be demonstrated to the
satIsfactIOn of the person or approval body deSIgnated as havmg final approval authonty
that parkmg demand for dIfferent uses occurs at dIfferent tImes.
-
J-, I. Fences and walls. In accordance with Section 26-603, otherwise as established
by the outline development plan and as specificaIly detailed on an approved final
development plan. .'\.s speCIfically detaiJcd on the approved final dC'iClopment plan;
othcrwlse follow reqUIrements of sectIOn 26 603.
K-, J. Slgnage. In accordance with article VII., otherwise as established by the
outline development plan and as specificaIly detailed on an approved final
development plan. As speCIfically detmled on the appro'iCd finaJ dcvelopment pJan;
otherwise follow reqUIrements of artIcle VII.
Sec. 26-307. Similar uses in planned developments.
A. DefinItIOn. A SImilar use IS a use whIch would be slmtlar m SIze, type of
operatIon, servIces provIded or eqUIpment used, number of empJoyees, and hours of
operatIon and whIch wouJd.
Be compatible 111 character and Impact WIth penmtted uses 111 the planned
development,
2. Be consIstent WIth the mtent of the planned deveJopment,
9
3. Not be objectIOnable to nearby property by reason of odor, dust, fumes,
gas, nOise, radIatIOn, heat, glare, vibratIOn, traffic generatIOn, parkmg
needs, outdoor storage or use, and
4 Not be hazardous to the health and safety of surroundmg areas through
danger of fire or explOSIOn.
B SImIlar use determmatlOn process. Any use whIch IS not specIfically hsted as a
pem1itted use m a planned development dlstnct IS allowed only under the followmg
procedure
J. The commumty development dIrector shall notIfy adjacent property
owners by letter notIce and postmg of the sIte for ten (10) days that a
slmtlar use IS requested for the property The notIce and postmg shall
contam a descnptJon of the proposed sImIlar use and a copy of Ordmance
] 200, senes 2000
2 If no wntten objectIOn to the proposed sImIlar use IS receIved and the
plannmg and deveJopment director finds that the proposed slmtlar use
meets the defimtlOn of sImIlar use conta111ed 111 sectIon (a) above, the
commumty development dIrector IS authonzed to approve the sImIlar use.
3 If a wntten objectIOn IS receIved or If the commumty development dIrector
finds that the defimtlOn of slmtlar use does not apply, the commumty
development director shall forward the determmatlOn request to the ooare
of adjustment planning commission at a public hearmg. NotIce of said
heanng shall be as provIded m sectIon 26- ] 09
C RecordatIOn. If approved, the sImilar use shall be recorded as an affidavit of
amendment to the outline development plan. on the fino] development pJan m the same
manner as the ongmaJ final development plan was recorded.
Sec. 26-308. Application for planned developments.
All apphcatIons for approval of a planned development, redevelopment, alteration or
addItion shall be filed WIth the commumty deveJopment department pnor to Issuance of a
bUlJdmg permIt. In some mstances, platting IS reqUIred and the plat can be processed
concurrently WIth the pJanned development request. ArtIcle IV of thIs chapter shouJd be
consulted for suhdlVISlOn requirements and procedures.
A. Development plans. There are two (2) distmct steps 111 establtshmg a pJanned
development. an outlme development plan and a final development plan. The outlme
development plan may be submitted for conSIderation by Itself or It may be combined
WIth a final development plan. When the outline development plan IS combmed WIth final
10
plans, two (2) separate drawmgs are reqUIred. All mfomlatlOnal requIrements of the
respectlYe plans shall be met.
B Subdlvlslon/plattmg. SubdIvIsion or plat revIew may be carned out
sImultaneously wIth the revIew of development plans. All reqUIrements of the
subdivIsIOn reguJations for a preltmmnry and final plat, If applIcable, must be satIsfied If
there are any parcel diviSIOns created, or If there are any dedIcatIons for streets,
easements or other publIc purposes, or If a prevIOusly approved subdIVISIon IS amended
10 any way by the proposed development. In cases where subdIVIsIon IS to occur
sm1UItaneous With development plan reVIew, the applIcant shall submIt separate sheet(s)
In addItIon to the subject development pJan.
C Outlme development plan. An applIcant shall submlt an outline development plan
for approval of a change of zone to a Planned Development Dlstnct. The outlIne
deveJopment pJan IS the zonmg and general concept step It proVIdes generaltzed graphIC
and wntten mformatlOn on Jayout, useS and mtended character of the development.
Submlltal reqUIrements.
a. Appropnate fee
b EVldcnce that the reqUIred ncighborhood referraJ mectlng has
occurred Neighborhood meeting notice (see sectIOn 26- ] 09)
-
c. Complete and notanzed apphcatlOn.
d. Proof of ownershIp, such as copIes of deeds or !ltle commItment.
e. Power of attorney from owner(s) where an agent acts on behalf of
the owner(s)
f. Names and addresses of all adjacent property owners, mcludmg
property across abuttmg streets.
g. f. Names, addresses, telephone numbers of archItects, surveyors, and
engmeers aSSOCIated With the prepara!lon of the plans.
fl. g. Addl!lonal mforma!lon may be reqUIred, mcludmg, but not lImIted
to, dramage study and plan, gradmg plan, geologIcal stablhty
report, traffic 1mpact report, floodpla111 Impact report. or general
envIronment a] Impact report.
2. Form and content of the outlIne development plan. The maps whIch are a
part of the outline development plan shall be made at a scaJe of not Jess
than one (J) mch equals one hundred (J 00) feet. The size of the sheet shall
be twenty-four (24) mches by thirty-six (36) mches. The drawmgs may be
] ]
m general schematic form and shall contam the followmg mmlmum
mformatlon
a. Ownershlp/umfied control statement. A Itst of all eXlstmg owners
of real property mcluded wlthm the proposed Planned
DeveJopment Dlstnct, and a wntten statement whIch describes
antlClpated future ownershIp character (i e. smgle ownership,
partnershIp, condommlUm, etc ), and whIch mdlcates proposed
manner ofmamtammg umfied control throughout the planmng,
development, use, operatIOn and contmued mamtenance of the
planned deveJopment.
b Character of development. A wntten descnptlOn of the general
character of the development and of the objectIves to be achIeved
by the partIcular development concept bemg proposed. ThIs
statement shallmclude, but not be Itmlted to, the manner m whIch
the proposed development meets or exceeds the mtent of the
Planned Development Dlstnct as stlpulated m sectIOn 26-30] C, the
proposed archltecturaJ and sIte deSIgn concepts, bUlldmg matenals
(type, textures and colors); speCIfic concepts by whIch the
proposed development wtll make an orderly transitIon from
eXlstmg adjacent development, and speCIfic concepts for the use
and landscapmg of all publtc and pnvate open spaces. It IS the
mtent of thIs reqUIrement that the appltcant provIde a clear, conCIse
statement for the revlewmg authontles to better understand the
proposed deveJopment concept and upon whIch theIr deCISIOn
regardmg the proposal can be based.
c The eXlstmg topographic character of the Jand at a contour mterval
of two (2) feet If the slope IS Jess than ten (10) percent and five (5)
feet If the sJope IS greater than ten (J 0) percent.
d. General indIcatIon of areas to be landscaped.
e. Property boundanes as per accompanymg legal descnptlOn.
f. EXlstmg and proposed lot Itnes, easements and nghts-of-way on
and adjacent to the sIte
g. Adjacent 70mng, land lise, streets, streams, etc
h. LocatIOn of all eXlstmg streets, alleys, easements, dram age areas,
ImgatlOn dItches and Jaterals wlthm and adjacent to the sIte.
Locatlon of all proposed streets, alleys, easements, dramage areas,
parks, and other areas to be reserved or dedicated to pubhc use.
]2
ApproxImate locatIOn and extent of major use areas.
k. Any slgmficant vegetation or land use features wlthm or adjacent
to the site which may mfluence development.
When located wlthm a reguJated ] OO-year floodplam, desIgnatIOn
of areas subject to a ] OO-year flood shal1 be provIded. Both the
floodway and flood fnnge areas shall be shown. Development
wlthm ] OO-year floodplams, mcludmg fill or excavatIOn, IS
regulated by article VIII.
m Scale (no less than one (J) mch equals one hundred (J 00) feet) and
north arrow
n. Small-scale Jocatlon map as an mset which shows the subject
property centered wlthm a quarter-mile radIUs.
o Proposed name of the planned deveJopment.
P A general mdlcatIon of the expected utilizatIOn of the land and a
list of uses to be permItted m the development.
-
q
Legal descnptlOn (metes and bounds) of total SIte, mcludmg area.
r Project data for the entire sIte and mcludmg, by phase, bUlldmg
area and percent, paved area and percent, landscape area and
percent, number of lots, tYPIcal minimum Jot sIzes and
dImenSIOns, net denSity, gross denSIty, etc
s. Development time schedule by phase.
t. ReqUired certIficatIOns.
3 The outline development plan shall be recorded With the Jefferson County
Clerk and Recorder and, therefore, must meet theIr reqUIrements for
recordatIOn.
4 The followmg certificatIOns, m addItIOn to the reqUired surveyor's
cCl11J'icate, shal1 also he placed upon the outlllle development plan
OWNER'S CERTIFICATION
The beJow-slgned owner(s), or legally deSIgnated agent(s) thereof, do hereby agree that
the property legal1y described hereon will be developed as a planned deveJopment m
accordance WIth the uses. restnctlons and condItIons contamed m thiS plan, and as may
13
otherwise be reqUired by law I (we) further recognIze that the approval ofrezomng to
Planned Development, and approval of thIs outlme development plan, does not create a
vested property nght. Vested property nghts may only anse and accrue pursuant to the
prOVISIOns of section 26- ] 2 I of the Wheat RIdge Code of Laws.
SIgnature ofOwner(s) or Agent(s)
NOTARY PUBLIC
Subscribed and sworn to before me thiS
day of
WItness my hand and offiCial seal
My commiSSIon expIres
NOTARY SEAL
PLANNING COMMISSION CERTIFICATION
Recommended for approval Approved thIS
by the Wheat Ridge Plannmg CommISSIOn.
day of
Chairperson Chamnan
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
CITY COUNCIL CERTIFICATION
Approved thIS
CounCIl.
day of
, by the Wheat RIdge City
ATTEST
CIty Clerk
Mayor
]4
CITY SEAL
COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER'S CERTIFICATE
ThIS document accepted for filmg m the office of the County Clerk and Recorder of
Jefferson County at Golden, Colorado, on the day of
AD, m Book , Page , ReceptIOn No
JEFFERSON COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER
BY'
Deputy
5 RevIew procedures
a. Staff revIew' Upon filmg of an apphcatlOn and other reqUIred
documents, commumty development staff wIll refer copIes of the
plans to affected departments and agencIes for revIew All
comments shall be forwarded to the apphcant so that necessary
revIsIons may be made by the apphcant pnor to schedulmg the
apphcatIon before plannmg commISSIon.
b PJanmng commIssIon heanng. The plannmg commISSIOn shall hold
a pubhc heanng pursuant to the pubhc notIce reqUIrements of
sectIOn 26-109 The pJanmng commIssIon shall recommend
approval, approval WIth modIficatIOns or demal of the outlme
development plan, statmg the reasons for ItS recommendatIOn. The
recommendatIon shall be forwarded to city council
c. CIty counCIl heanng. The city councIl shall hold a pubhc heanng
pursuant to pubhc notIce as reqUIred by sectIOn 26-109 The cIty
counClJ shall approve, approve WIth modIficatIOns or deny the
apphcatlon.
6 RecordatIOn. All approved outlme development plans shall be recorded
WIth the Jefferson County Clerk and Recorder Such pJans, and associated
recordmg fees shall be submitted to the commumty development
department wlth1l1 tffirty (:()) si~ty (1iO) days of councIl's fin:!l actIOn
Should a recordable approved outlme development plan not be proVIded to
staff wlthm thirty (30) sixty (60) days of councIl's final actIOn, staff shaJJ
schedule a pubhc heanng before cIty council and cIty councIl shaJJ
reconSIder ItS approval. A one-time, thirty-day extension for mylar
submittal may be requested from the Community Development
Director. The request must be submitted in writing prior to
] 5
expiration of the 60-day time limit showing evidence of good cause for
not meeting the deadline.
D Fmal development plan. The final development plan provIdes the final
engmeenng and sIte desIgn detalls for final approval of one (J) or more phases of a
proposed development.
SubmlttaJ requirements.
a. Complete and notanzed apphcatIOn.
b Proof of ownershIp, such as copIes of deeds or tItle commItment.
c Power of attorney from owner(s) where an agent acts on behaJf of
the owner(s)
d. Names and addresses of all adjacent propcrty ovmers, mcludmg
property across abuttmg streets.
&. d. Names, addresses and telephone numbers of archItects and
engmeers assocIated WIth preparatIOn of the plans and plat.
f, e. CopIes of proposed agreements, proVIsIOns, covenants,
condommlUm declaratIOns, etc , whIch govern the use,
mamtenance and continued protectIOn of the planned deveJopment
and any of Its common areas and factlltIes, and whIch wtll
guarantee umfied control
go- f. AddItIonal mformatIOn may be reqUIred, mcludmg, but not hmlted
to, geologIcal stabihty report, traffic Impact report, civil
engineering plans, floodplam Impact report or general
envIronmental Impact report.
2 Form and content of the final development pJan. The finaJ development
plan shall be consIstent WIth the approved prehmmary outline
development plan. The final deveJopment pJan shall be drawn at a scale
of no less than one (1) mch to one hundred (100) feet and contam the
followmg:
a. Legal descnptlOn of the entIre planned development, and If the
final development plan IS for only a portIOn of the sIte, a legal
descnptIOn of that portIOn of the sIte mcluded wlthm the finaJ
deveJopment plan.
16
b LocatIOn, extent, type and surfacmg matenals or all proposed
walks, malls, paved areas, turfing and other areas not be covered
by bUlldmgs or structures.
c LocatIOn, SIze, type, heIght and onentatlOn of all SIgnS. SIgns not
speCIfically approved as part of a final development plan shull not
be permItted.
d. A landscape plan whIch provIdes locatIOn, type, size and quantItIes
of all eXlstmg (to rem am) and proposed plant matenal and other
landscape features and matenals Common and botamcal names of
all plant matenals shall be mdlcated. LocatIon and type of
lITigatIon system shall be indIcated. Alllundscapmg shull meet the
reqUIrements of thIS sectIOn as well as sectIOn 26 502.
e LocatIOn, extent, types of matenals and height of all walls and
fences.
f. Extenor IIghtmg devices, type, heIght, locatIOn and onentatIon.
g. LocatIOn, extent, maxImum height, number of floors and total floor
area of all buildmgs and structures.
-
h.
TotaJ number of dwellmg Ul1lts. and typlcaJ floor plans for
resldenttal pro] ects.
ElevatIOns and perspectIve drawmgs of all proposed structures and
Improvements, mdlcatmg archItectural style and bUlldmg
matenals. The drawmgs need not be the result of final archItectural
design but of sufficient detml to permit evaluatIOn of the proposed
structures.
] Off-street parkmg and loadmg plan whIch mdlcates the size,
locatIOn and number of parkmg and Joadmg spaces and whIch
shows the proposed clfculatlOn of vehicles and pedestnans wlthm
the planned development and to and from eXlstmg or proposed
publIc thoroughfares. Any speclaJ engmeenng features and traffic
regulatIOn deVIces needed to faCIlItate and ensure the safety of thIs
cIrculatIOn pattern, mcludmg fire lanes, must be shown.
k. IndIcatIOn of aJJ proposed uses for all bmJdmgs, structures and
open areas. OutSIde storage and dlspJay areas must be mdlcated If
proposed. DescnptlOn of any proposed temporary or intenm uses
of land or eXlstmg bUlldmgs pnor to development 10 accordance
WIth the approved final development pJan,
17
I. A development schedule IndIcatIng the approxImate date on whIch
constructIon of the project can be expected to begIn and
approxImate dates when constructlOn will be completed. If a
multlphased proJect, IndIcate tImes for each phase
m. The final development plan (and plat) shall be recorded With the
Jefferson County Clerk and Recorder and, therefore, must meet
theIr reqUIrements for recordatIon.
3 The folloWIng certlficatlOns, and approvals, In addItIon to the reqUIred
surveyor's certIficate, shall also be placed upon the final development plan
(and plat)
OWNER'S CERTIFICATION
The beJow-slgned owner(s), or legally deSignated agent(s) thereof, do hereby agree that
the property legally described hereon wIll be developed as a pJanned development In
accordance WIth the uses, restnctlOns and condltlOns contamed In thIS plan, and as may
otherwise be reqUIred by law I (we) further recogmze that the approval of finaJ
development plan (and plat) does not create a vested property nght. Vested property
nghts may only anse and accrue pursuant to the provlslOns of sectIOn 26- ] 2 ] of artIcle I
of the Wheat RIdge Code of Laws.
Signature ofOwner(s) or Agent(s)
NOT ARY PUBLIC
Subscribed and sworn to before me thIS
day of
Witness my hand and officIal seal.
My commlSSlOn expIres
NOTARY SEAL
PLANNfNG COMMISSION CERTfFTC A TION
Recommended for approval Approycd thIS
by the Wheat RIdge Plan11lng CommIsSIon.
day of
Chairperson Chairman
]8
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
CITY COUNCIL CERTIFICATION
Approved thiS
CounCIl.
day of
, by the Wheat RIdge CIty
ATTEST
City Clerk
Mayor
CITY SEAL
COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER'S CERTIFICATE
-
TIns document accepted for filing m the office of the County Clerk and Recorder of
Jefferson County at Golden, Colorado, on the day of
AD, 10 Book , Page , ReceptIOn No
JEFFERSON COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER
By'
Deputy
4 ReVIew procedures
a. Staff revIew Upon filmg of an applicatIOn and other requIred
documents, the commumty deveJopment staff will refer copIes of
the plans to affected departments and agencies for revIew. All
comments shall be forwarded to the apphcant so that necessary
reV1S10ns may be made by the applicant pnor to schedull11g the
applicatIOn before the plannmg commISSIOn.
b PJanmng commISSIOn heanng. Planmng commISSIOn shall hoJd a
pubJic heanng pursuant to the reqUirements of section 26-109 The
planmng commISSIOn shall recommend to Clty counctl approval,
19
approval with modIficatIons, or demal statmg the reasons for
actIOn.
c City counCIl heanng. Upon receipt of the planmng commIssIOn's
recommendatIOn, city counCIl shall hold a publtc heanng pursuant
to the reqUIrements of sectIOn 26-109 CIty council shall approve,
approve WIth modIficatIOns or deny the apphcatlOn.
d. RecordatIOn. All approved final deveJopment pJans shall be
recorded WIth the Jefferson County Clerk and Recorder Such
plans, and assoCIated recordmg fees, shall be submItted to the
commumty development staffwlthm thIrty (30) sixty (60) days of
counciJ's finaJ actIOn. Should a recordable approved final
development not be prOVIded to the staffwlthm thIrty (30) sixty
(60) days of councIl's final action, the staff shall schedule a public
heanng before cIty councIl and cIty councIl shall reconsider ItS
prevIous approval. A one-time, thirty-day extension for mylar
submittal may be requested from the Community Development
Director. The request must be submitted in writing prior to
expiration of the 60-day time limit showing good cause for not
meeting the 60-day deadline.
5. Expiration of final development plan approvals; reapplications.
a. Construction shall commence in accordance with the
development schedule specified on the recorded final
development plan.
b. Extension of the development schedule specified on a recorded
final development plan shall require amendment to the final
development plan.
c. A new application for substantially the same development
application may not be refiIed for one (1) year after denial.
Sec. 26-309. Interpretation Application of standards.
A. Detailed speCIficatIons and standards whIch shouJd have been set forth on an
approved outline and final development plan, but \\ hlch were found subsequent to
approval to have been omItted, may be mterpreted by the community development
dIrector to be those specIficatIOns and standards set forth 111 the zone dlstnct 111 whIch the
approved uses conta111ed wlthm the finaJ development plan wouJd be permItted.
20
B The supplementary regulatIOns of article VI apply to uses and activities wlthm
planned development dlstncts, unless otherwIse provided 10 the approved final
development plan.
C, rfthe outline and final development plan does not address a particular
development standard, the standard of the zone dIstrict whIch most c10seJy matches the
pJanned deveJopment as determmed by the community development director shall be
used.
D The owner of any property who or whIch feels aggneved by such determmatlOn
may appeal the determmatlOn pursuant to the provisions of section 26- ] ] 5
E. If the development standards specified on a recorded outline development
plan do not meet the current standard, a final development plan can be approved
consistent with those standards on the recorded outline development plan.
F. To vary from the minimum development standards established on a recorded
outline development plan, an amended outline development plan is required.
G. To vary from the standards set forth on a recorded final development plan,
an amended final development plan is required.
-
Sec. 26-310. Binding upon successors and assigns.
AJJ approved deveJopment plans shalI be bmding upon the owner(s), their successors and
assigns, and shall limIt the development to alI condItions and lImItatIOns establtshed 111
such plans, and as may be contamed m separately recorded agreements, covenants,
condommmm declarations, etc , whIch were approved by cIty councIl as part of a planned
development approval.
Sec. 26-311. Amendments to development plans.
A. The procedures and reqUIrements for amendmg an approved deveJopment pJan
(prclimmary outline or final) shall be the same as prescribed for ongmaJ approvaJ, except
as prOVIded for under subsectIOn tbj (B) beJow AlI applicatIOns for amendment to an
outline development plan must be approved in writmg by alI owners of real property
contamed wlthm the area onginalIy approved by the outltne development pJan, unless
specdic altemat1Ve nmv\s\ons have been approved by Clty counclJ as part oftne umfied
control agrecment. All applications for amendment to a final development plan must
be approved in writing by all owners of real property and owners of interest
contained within the parcel or phase of the planned development where the
amendment is being requested. If the amendment affects the provisions for access,
drainage, utilities and/or circulation, affected property owners must consent to the
application for amendment in writing.
2]
B Based upon showmg of necessIty therefore, mmor changes 10 the locatIOns of
structures and theIr accessory uses, fences, parkmg areas, landscapmg and other sIte
Improvements may be permitted as an "admmlstratlve amendment" by the commumty
development dIrector, If such changes wIll not cause any of the followmg cIrcumstances
to occur
Change 10 the character of the development.
2 Increase m the mtenslty (or denSIty) of use.
3 Increase of the problems of cIrculatIOn, safety and uttlltJes.
4 Increase of the extemaJ effects on the adjacent propertIes.
5 Increase m maximum bUlldmg height.
6 ReductIOn m the ongmally approved setbacks from penmeter property
lInes.
7 ReductIOn m landscape area of total sIte, Reduction of a development
standard on the approved final development plan provided the
reduction does not decrease the development standard to an amount
less than the requirement on the approved outline development plan.
8. or relocatIOn Relocation of landscape areas whIch are reqUIred as buffer
yards or establIsh project character
9. Increase m the gross floor area of structures of over 10% beyond the
authonzed maxImum allowed WIth the approved planned development,
but not to exceed an increase of 10,000 square feet.
10. Change of the land area devoted to any approved use by more than
10%.
C Any changes or reVISIOns of a final development plan whIch are approved, eIther
admmistratJveJy or by cIty counctl actIOn, must be recorded WIth the Jefferson County
Recorder as amendments to the ongmal recorded development plan subject to the
deadline provisions of Section 26-308.D.4.d.
Sec. 26-312. Interim use.
Subsequent to rezomng to a Planned Development Dlstnct and approvaJ of a final
development plan, but pnor to development and use of a parcel III accordance WIth the
approved pJan, the property may contmue to be used for any lawful purpose for whIch It
22
was used at the tIme of prchmmary outline development plan approvaJ, provIded,
however, that no new permanent structures or addItIOns to eXistmg structures wtll be
pem1ltted.
Section 2. Safety Clause. The CIty of Wheat RIdge hereby finds, determmes, and
declares that thIs ordmance IS promuJgated under the genera] pohce power of the CIty of Wheat
RIdge, that it IS promuJgated for the health, safety, and weJfare of the pubhc and that thIS
ordmance IS necessary for the preservatIOn of health and safety and for the protectIOn ofpubhc
convemence and welfare The CIty CounCIl further determmes that the ordmance bears a rattons
relatIon to the proper legIslative object sought to be attamed.
Section 3. Severabihty. If any clause, sentence, paragraph, or part of thIs Zomng
code or the applicatIon thereof to any person or cIrcumstances shall for any reason be adjusted by
a court of competent JunsdlctlOn mvahd, such Judgment shall not affect apphcatlOn to other
persons or cIrcumstances.
Section 4. SupersessIOn Clause. If any proVIsion, reqUIrements or standard
establtshed by thIs Ordmance is found to conflIct WIth slmtlar proVisIOns, reqUIrements or
standards found elsewhere m the Code of Laws of the CIty of Wheat RIdge, whIch are m
eXistence as of the date of adoptIOn of thIs Ordmance, the proVisIOns, reqUirements and standards
here shall supersede and prevail.
-
Section 5. EffectlVe Date. ThIs ordmance shall take effect] 5 days after final
publtcatlOn.
INTRODUCED, READ, AND ADOPTED on first readmg by a vote of to
m this day of , 2004, ordered pubhshed In full In a newspaper
of general CIrculatIOn In the CIty of Wheat Ridge and Pubhc Heanng and consIderatIOn on final
passage set for ,2004, at 7'00 o'clock p.m.. m the Council
Chambers, 7500 West 29th Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado
READ, ADOPTED AND ORDERED PUBLISHED on second and finaJ readmg by a
vote of to , thIS day of , 2004
SIGNED by the Mayor on thIS
day of
,2004
GRETCHEN CERVENY MAYOR
ATTEST
PameJa Y Anderson, CIty Clerk
23
APPROVED AS TO FORM BY CITY ATTORNEY
GERAL DAHL, CITY ATTORNEY
ST
I" publIcatIOn
2nd publIcatIOn
Wheat RIdge Transcnpt
Effective Date
24
ITEM NO'
~
REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION
COUNCIL MEETING DATE
March 22, 2004
TITLE:
COUNCIL BILL NO. 06-2004: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING
CHAPTER 26 OF THE WHEAT RIDGE CODE OF LAWS
PERTAINING TO EXPIRATION OF DEVELOPMENT PLANS
(CASE NO. ZOA-03-17)
o PUBLIC HEARING
o BIDSIMOTIONS
o RESOLUTIONS
~ ORDINANCES FOR] ST READING (Date, March 22, 2004)
o ORDINANCES FOR 2ND READING
Quasi-JudIcIal
o
Yes
~
No
-
~diL
~~~
City Manag ~
Commumty Development Director
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Section 26-107 of Chapter 26 is intended to address the expiration for different types of
development approvals. However, some of the land development approvals have different terms
of expuatlOn which is codified elsewhere In the code of laws, For example, a variance approvaJ
becomes null and VOId If a building permIt is not Issued wIthin 180 days. Whtle the term of
expiration for variances is specIfied In Section 26- ] ] 5 (Variance/waivers/ temporary
permIts/interpretatIOns), it is not included in Section 26-107, Other expIration periods addressed
include the revised special use procedures adopted by City Council in 2003 and the expiration for
building permits after construction has commenced.
Both preliminary and final development plan approvals are specified to expire within one year.
Staff IS recommending this expiration date be removed for both types of approval.
..
The existing language was adopted when Chapter 26 was repeaJed and reenacted in February 200]
Planmng CommissIOn reviewed this case at pubhc hearings held on December 4, 2003, and February
5, 2004 A recommendation of approval was gIven.
BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION:
Planning Commission reviewed this request at a pubhc hearing held on December 4,2003. The
Item was contmued until February 5, 2004, when a recommendatIOn of approval was made for the
followmg reasons,
The proposed language distinguishes between different types of development plan
approvals.
2, The proposed language recognizes the planned development outline development
pJan as the zomng document which should remain in effect in perpetUIty
3, The proposed language reflects changes to the speciaJ use permit procedures,
4. The proposed language allows staff flexibility in dealing wIth final development
plans.
There were no conditions attached to the approval recommendation.
ST A TEMENT OF THE ISSUES:
The most siglllficant changes proposed by staff are the expiration pen ods for pJanned development
preliminary deveJopment plan (now called outhne development plan) and final development plan
approvals. Both outline and final development plans are recorded with the Jefferson County Clerk
and Recorders office, but the eXlstmg provision in section 26-107 provides a one-year expiration
period for both documents. The outline development plan is the rezoning step. Staff believes that
is unreahstic for this zoning approval to expire. We are recommending that this provision be
removed so that outlme development plans remain in effect in perpetuity
--
Staff IS aJso recommending that there be no specIfic expiration dates for final development plans.
All final development plans are required to have a construction schedule which specifies
approximate dates for project commencement and completion, If a bUIlding permit IS submitted
for an approved development plan after the constructIOn schedule has expired, staff can requue
amendment to the plan to extend the schedule through a public hearing process.
AL TERNA TIYES CONSIDERED:
Staffs ongmal recommendatIOn to Planning Commission included a three-year expiration for
planned development final development plan approvals. After considerable discussion, we
concluded that it is impossible to write a regulation that is "one size fits all" Removal of a
specIfic, codified period for expiration will allow staff more flexibIlity to deal with expIred final
development plans. The expiration for final development plans will be tied to the construction
schedule specIfied on the fdp.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
None.
2
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
"I move to approve CouncIl Bill. No. 06-2004, Case No, ZOA-03- ] 7, an ordmartce amending
Chapter 26 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws pertaming to expIration of development plarts,
ordered published, pubhc hearing set for Apn112, 2004, at 7'00 PM in the City Council
Chambers, and that it take effect] 5 days after final publication."
Or,
"I move to table indefinItely Council BIll No, 06-2004, Case No ZOA-03-l7, an ordinartce
amendmg Chapter 26 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws pertainmg to expIration of development
plans."
Report Prepared by' Meredith Reckert, 303-235-2848
Reviewed by: AJan White
Attachments.
1 February 5, 2004, Planning Commission report
2. CouncIl BIll No 06-2004
-
CouncilActiooform
3
Memorandum
City of Wheat Ridge
Planning and Development Department
TO:
FROM:
Planmng CommIsslon
\~redlth Reckert
SUBJECT:
Case No ZOA- 03-] 7/ExpiratJon of Development Plans
DATE:
Januar) 29, 2004
ThIS Case IS
_ QuasI-JudIcIal
X Leglslatl ve
Proper notice was gl ven for thIS publtc heanng
Background
-
Attached lS an ordmance amendmg SectIOn 26-107 of the Zoning and Development Code
relatIng to the eXpIratIon of development approvals and reappltcatlOns
On December 4,2003, Staff discussed thIS proposed amendment with Planmng CommIssIOn
Attached IS staff's ongmal memo and recommended language proVIded to the CommIssIon
Attached also are the mmutes from the December meetmg. Please note that 111 revIewing the
mInutes. there was I11tennmgled dlScusslon regardmg both the expiratIon of plan approvals and
the Issue of old development plans mconslstent WIth today's development standards. The second
Issue wIll be dIscussed at a future publtc heanng dealIng speCIfically WIth the planned
development dlstnct regulatIOns
Changes proposed for the CommIssIOn's consIderatIOn are shown 111 bold. Deletions are shown
10 stnkcthrough.
ThlS case was contl11ued to February 5, 2004
Summary of Ordinance Changes
The current regulatIOns have been amended as follows.
The expIratIOn tenn of one year for a preliml11ary development plan (now called outlIne
development plan) approval has been removed. These documents wIll remal11 m effect In
ATTACHMENT 1
perpetuIty
2 The eXpIratIOn term of one year for a final development plan approval has been removed.
These documents will also remal11 111 effect 111 perpetuIty See dISCUSSIon under "Staff
comments"
3 The expIration penod for vanances as specIfied 111 Section 26-1] 5 4 has been I11cluded.
4 The terms for expIration of special use approvals have been modified to be consIstent
wIth the changes to the specIal use procedures approved by City CouncIl 111 2003
5 The sectIon addressl11g bulldl11g permIts has been expanded to address cessation of
constructIon actl VIty
Staff Comments
The outll11e development stage IS the rezomng approval As WIth any zomng, It remal11s 111 effect
until such tIme as the landowner requests a change or the CIty Imtlates a CItywide rezonl11g.
Outll11e development plans should not have an explfatlOn tlmeframe
Staff's ongl11al language to Planmng CommIssIon I11cluded a three-year expIratIOn for planned
development final development plan approvaJs After considerable dISCUSSion at the staff level,
we concluded that It IS ImpossIble to wnte a regulatIon that IS "one sIze fits all" We thl11k that
I11stead of establ1shl11g yet another process, It IS easIer to deal WIth explfed development plans on
a case-by-case baSIS.
-
Remember too, that all final development plans are reqUIred to have a constructIOn schedule
whIch speCIfies approximate dates for project commencement and completIOn. If a bUlldl11g
permit is submItted for an approved development pJan after the constructIon schedule has
expIred, staff can reqUIre amendment to the pJan to extend the schedule
Recommended Motion
"I move that Case No ZOA-03- ] 7, a proposed amendment to Chapter 26 of the Z0111ng and
Development Code regardl11g the expIratIon of development pJans, be forwarded to City CouncIl
WIth a recommendatJon of APPROVAL for the followl11g reasons
The proposed language dlstl11gUlshes between dIfferent types of development plan
approvals.
2 The proposed language recog111zes the planned development outhne development
plan as the zonl11g document whIch should remam 111 effect 10 perpetuity
3 The proposed language reflects changes to the speCial use permit procedures.
4 The proposed language allows staff flexlblhty 111 deahng with final development
plans"
Exhibits
2
--
1
..,
Ongmal memo to PlannIng CommIssIOn Wllh suggested language dated 11/28/03
MInutes of Planmng CommIssIon meetIng dated 12/04/03
Proposed Ordinance
3
3
City of Wheat Ridge
Community Development Department
Memorandum
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
DATE:
PlannIng CommissIon
Meredith Reckert
Case No. ZOA-03-17/expiration of development plan approvals
November 28, 2003
Attached IS proposed legislation amendIng SectIOn 26- 107 of the zonIng and development code
reJatIng to the expiratlOn of development approvals. As always, new language IS shown in bold
typeface and deletlOns are shown wIth strikc throughs
Many of the land development approvals have dIfferent terms of eXpIratIon For example, a vanance
approval becomes null and VOId If a bUIlding permlllS not Issued WllhIn 180 days While the term of
ex plratlon for vanances IS specified In SectIOn 26- ] 15 (Van ance/wal vers/temporary
permltslinterpretations), It IS not Included In Section 26-107 SectIOn 3 of the proposed legIslatIon
has been expanded to address the reVIsed special use procedures adopted by CIty Council earlIer this
year The term of explratlOn for bUIldIng permIts after constructIon has commenced has been
mcluded In Section 4
-
The most slgmficant changes address the explratlOn of planned development prelJmInary
development plan (now called outlJne development plan) and final development plan approvals.
Both outlIne and final development plans are recorded Wllh the Jefferson County Clerk and
Recorders Office, but the eXIstIng provlslOn In sectIon 26-]07 proVIdes a one-year explratlOn penod
for both documents The outlme development plan IS the rezomng step Staff belIeves that IS
unrealIstIc for thiS zonIng approval to expIre We are recommendIng that thIS proVISIOn be removed
so that outline development plans remain 10 effect In perpetUIty
Staff has recommended that approved final development plans expIre WithIn three years of approval
If no buildIng permit actiVIty commences. The City has numerous final development plans that were
approved over 20 years ago but never constructed. These old final development plans are typically
substandard to today's development standards for lJghtIng, landscapIng and slgnage. In many
Instances none of these development standards are addressed at all The burden then falls back. on
staff to determme how or whether today's standards should be applIed. Many tImes the
cIrcumstances surroundIng the ongmal fdp approval have changed. It would therefore make sense to
have outdated final plan approvals expIre
However, many tImes once a final development plan publIc heanng process IS completed, the market
for the approved development has changed and financing lS not available. Is It reasonable to require
that a developer reapply to get the angInal final development approved agam? ShouJd thIS approval
be through a publIc hearing process or should It be an admInIstrative approval?
Finally, should final development expIratIOns be retroactIve to old projects or should It apply to new
approvals only?
EXHIBIT 1
Staff acknowledges that there should more dIScussIon and consIderatIOn on the proposed changes to
final development plan eXpIratIOns For these reasons we are recommendmg dIScussIon be
contInued untIl the first avaIlable publ1c heanng date In January
RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move that Case No. ZOA-03-17, a proposed amendment to
Chapter 26 of the Zonmg and Development Code regardmg the expiratIon of development plan
approvals, be continued untIl January ]5,2004,"
--
2
CASE NO. ZOA-03-17/expiration of development appronl
Section 26-107. Expiration of development approval; reapplications.
A. Any prelimmary or final approval of a sIte development plan shall expire and
become null and void If.
(1). For prelIm1l1ary approvaJs, an applIcatIOn for final approval IS not filed wlthll1
one lJ ) year of such approval, or
Ri (1) For planned development district final development plan approvals, a
buildmg permIt IS not Issued for the work authonzed wlthm one (J) year three (3)
years from the date of final development plan approval. or If the work IS ceased
for a penod of one hundred twenty (J 20) days or more at any tIme after work IS
commenced.
(2) For variances, a building permit is not issued within 180 days from the
date it was granted. See section 26-115,4.
-
(3) For administrative special use site development approvals, the
Community Development Director shall decide whether the zoning and/or
permitted use of the property shall revert to that in place prior to the expired
approval. For rezomng, planned development and spectal use final sIte
development approvals, For special uses approved through a public hearing
process, a publtc hearmg before the cIty counctlm the manner required for final
review shall be held to confirm whether the zoning and lor permItted use of the
property shall revert to that in place prior to the expired approval. If an
approved special use ceases operation for any reason for a period of one (1)
year, the special use permit shall be deemed expired, unless othenvise
provided in the permit itself.
(4) Any Issued bUlldmg permIt shall expIre if the work authonzed IS not
commenced wlthm sixty (60) days from the date of issuance, or if the work is
ceased for a period of one hundred twenty (120) days or more at any time
after work is commenced.
B. After sIte development approval has expIred, no work shall be commenced
unttl the developer has receIved new approval pursuant to the procedures set forth
m thIS chapter
C. A new applIcation for substantially the same development process may not be
refiJed for one (J) year after dental
-
B. Case No. ZOA-03-17: An ordInance amendIng Section 26-107 of the \Vheat RIdge
Code of Laws concermng eXpIratIOn of deveJopment appro\als.
Meredith Reckert presented thIs matter She reviewed the staff report and noted that staff
recommended removal of tIme limIts on outline development plans so they remaIn in
perpetUity However, staff acknowledges there should be more dIscussion and consIderatIOn on
the proposed changes to the final development plan expIrations and recommended contInuatlon
of that dIscussIOn to a later time
Alan WhIte explaIned that there are final development plans that are 30 years old where the
outlme plan sets the standard for landscapll1g at 8% to ] 0%. The current reqUirement for
landscapmg IS 20%.
Commissioner McNAMEE asked how many old planned developments eXIst that have never
been developed Alan White explamed that most sItuatIOns deal WIth the last one or two
bUlldll1gs wlthm an old planned development. He estImated there are probably two dozen of
these sItuatIons
CommIsSIoner PLUMMER suggested a reqUIrement that, If not developed within a certall1
number of years, the plan must be revIewed whIch would mvolve new applIcatlOn fees
ComnllSslOner STITES suggested a reqUirement that the applicatIon must be brought up to
current code requIrements after a certall1 tIme limIt has passed.
CommIssIoner McMILLIN asked about an appltcant's vested nghts with pnor development
approval Alan WhIte explamed that the statutory lImIt for vested nghts IS three years
However, a developer could come Il1 and request a vested nghts agreement but such agreement
would have to be reviewed and approved by CIty CounCll
CommIssIoner PLUMMER expressed concern that large projects sometimes take Jonger than
three years to prepare for constructIOn and dramage, roadway and other condItIons could
change during that time, Alan WhIte explall1ed that notices of any such changes 111 Planned
DeveJopments are gIven to the owners or developers of surroundmg propertIes.
CommissIOner McMILLIN suggested a prOVision to shIft amemtles such as landscapmg
accordmg to changes that have taken place sll1ce the mitla) approval.
ConuntsslOner McNAMEE asked If there were time restrictIOns for a developer to begIn or
complete hiS project. AJan White stated that there lS the one-year restrIction to begin budding.
He noted that a provision in the code adopted two years ago stated that buildmg needed to
begin withm one year of adopting the code or their approval would expIre. No notIce to owners
was gIven of this reqUirement. No one responded to this actIOn.
CommIssioner McMILLIN suggested a survey of other mUllicipalities regarding their
regulatIons. MeredIth Reckert stated that she checked WIth other mUl11clpalItles and found that
most have a three-year limitatIOn on final development plans She didn't check to see what
Planning CommISsion
December 4 2003
Page :>
EXHIBIT 2
procedures were m place when the time lImitatIOn IS up and mdlcated that she would contact
nelghbonng mumclpalities regarding this matter
It was moved by Commissioner PLUMMER and seconded by Commissioner McMILLIN
that Case No. ZOA-03-17, an ordinance amending Section 26-107 of the Wheat Ridge
Code of Laws concerning expiration of development approval, be continued to February
5,2004. The motion passed unanimously.
8. OLD BUSINESS
.
Alan WhIte reported that AutoNatlOn IS In the ~rocess of mstallmg a wetlands/detentIOn
pond and storm sewer Improvements out to 38' Avenue. A bUlldmg permIt for theIr new
bUlldl11g IS anticipated In the spnng. They have Indicated they want to be open by Januarj,
2005
In response to a questIOn from CommIssIOner McNAMEE regardIng the temporary lot at
Lutheran Hospital, MeredIth Reckert explained thIs WIll accommodate constructIon and
employee parking that is beIng dIsplaced by the new medical bUlldmg construction. This IS
being processed as an admmlstrattve amendment and staff IS attemptmg to stay cognIzant of
neIghborhood concems Alan WhIte reported that there is a 5-year time hmit on the
temporary lot
.
9. NEW BUSINESS
. Alan White reported that the December] 8th Planmng CommISSIon agenda wIll Include RV
regulatIOns
. MeredIth Reckert reported that the mtervlew process has begun to fill the planner
techmclan vacancy
10. COMMISSION REPORTS
There were no commIssion reports.
II. COMMITTEE AND DEPARTMENT REPORTS
There were no committee and department reports.
12. ADJOURNMENT
It was moved by Commissioner PLUMMER and seconded by Commissioner STITES to
adjourn the meeting at 7:55p.m. The motion passed unanimously.
fr) WJo 1\ t11 (' ~ 1-,~
Marian McNamee, Chair
y'/
Planning Commission
December 4, 2003
Page 4
INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER
Council Bill No. -2004
Ordinance No.
Series of 2004
TITLE: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING AND
DEVELOPMENT CODE PERTAINING TO THE EXPIRA nON OF
DEVELOPMENT APPROVALS (CASE NO. ZOA-03-17)
WHEREAS, the eXlstl11g language does not dIfferentiate between the permItted types of
sIte development approvals,
WHEREAS, the planned development outlme development plan IS the document which
establishes zonIng and should remal11 10 effect in perpetuity,
WHEREAS, the specIal use permIt procedures have been modIfied by City Counctl
actIon.
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WHEAT
RIDGE, COLORADO THAT:
-
Section 1. The ZOnIng and Development Code IS hereby amended by adoptIon of the
followl11g:
Section 26-107. Expiration of development approval; reapplications.
A Any prchmlflar)' or final approval of a sIte development shall expIre and become
null and VOId If
(1) I'or prchmmary approvals, an apphcatlOn for fiflaJ appro iaJ IS not filed vdtnlfl
ofle (1) )car of such approval, or
P-j For final approvals, a bUlldlflg pcrmlt IS flot Issued for the work authonzed
wttftm one (J) ycar from the datc of final appro <,al or If the work is ccased for a
pcnod of one hundred twcnty (120) days or morc at any tIme aftcr work is
commenced.
(1) For variances, a building permit is not issued within 180 days from the
date it was granted. See section 26-115.4.
(2) If an approved special use ceases operation for any reason for a period of
one (1) year, the special use permit shall be deemed expired, unless otherwise
provided in the permit itself.
EXHIBIT 3
For administrative special use site development approvals, the Community
Development Director shall decide whether the zoning and/or permitted use
of the property shall revert to that in place prior to the expired approval.
For rcz011lng, pla11l'lCd dcvelopmcnt and specIal use final stte development
approvals. For special uses approved through a public hearing process, a
public heanng before the city counctlm the manner requITed for final revIew shall
be held to confirm whether the zo11lng and lor permItted use of the property shall
revert to that in place pnor to the expired approval
(3) Any Issued butlding permIt shall expIre If the work. authonzed IS not
commenced wtthl11 sixty (60) days from the date of Issuance, or if the work is
ceased for a period of one hundred twenty (120) days or more at any time
after work is commenced.
B. After site development approval has expired, no work shall be commenced until
the developer has received new approval pursuant to the procedures set forth in this
chapter.
C. A new application for substantially the same development process may not be
refiled for one (1) year after denial.
Section 2. Safety Clause. The Ctty of Wheat RIdge hereby finds, determl11es, and
declares that thIS ordmance IS promulgated under the general polIce power of the Ctty of Wheat
RIdge, that It IS promulgated for the health, safety, and welfare of the publJc and that thlS
ordmance IS necessary for the preservatIOn of health and safety and for the protectIon of publtc
convenience and welfare. The City CouncIl further determl11es that the ordlI1ance bears a ratIons
relatIon to the proper leglslatlve object sought to be attal11ed.
Section 3. SeverabIlIty. If any clause, sentence, paragraph, or part of thIS Zonl11g
code or the applIcatIon thereof to any person or cIrcumstances shall for any reason be adjusted by
a court of competent Junsdiction invalJd, such judgment shall not affect applIcatIon to other
persons or cIrcumstances
Section 4. SupersessIon Clause. If any proviSIon, reqUIrements or standard
establJshed by thIS ordl11ance IS found to conflJct WIth slmIlar provisions, reqUIrements or
standards found elsewhere in the Code of Laws of the City of Wheat Rldge, whIch are in
eXIstence as of the date of adoption of this ordl11ance, the provisions, requirements and standards
here shall supersede and prevatl
Section 5. ThIS ordmance shall take effect upon adoption, as permItted by the Charter
INTRODUCED, READ, AI\'D ADOPTED on first reading by a vote of to
In thIS day of , 2004, ordered published 111 full In a newspaper
of general clrculatlon 111 the City of Wheat RIdge and Public Heanng and conSIderatIon on final
passage set for ,2004, at 7'00 o'clock p.m., 111 the CouncIl
Chambers, 7500 West 29th A venue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado
2
READ, ADOPTED AND ORDERED PUBLISHED an second and final readmg by a
\ ate of to , thlS day of , 2004
SIGNED by the Mayor on thIs
day of
,2004
GRETCHEN CERVENY, MA YOR
ATIEST
Pamela Anderson, CIty Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM BY CITY ATIORNEY
-
GERAL DAHL. CITY A TIORNEY
ST
1 pubhcatlOn
2nd publIcatlOn
Wheat Ridge Transcnpt
Effective Date
3
INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER
Council Bill No. 06-2004
Ordinance No.
Series of 2004
TITLE: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 26 OF THE WHEAT
RIDGE CODE OF LAWS PERTAINING TO THE EXPIRATION OF
DEVELOPMENT APPROVALS (CASE NO. ZOA-03-17)
WHEREAS, the eXlst111g language does not dIfferentiate between the permitted types of
site development approvals,
WHEREAS, the planned development outline development plan is the document which
establishes zoning and shouJd remain in effect in perpetUIty,
WHEREAS, the special use permit procedures have been modified by City Council
actIon,
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WHEAT
RIDGE, COLORADO THAT:
-
Section 1. The Zoning and Development Code is hereby amended by adoption of the
following:
Section 26-107. Expiration of development approval; reapplications.
A. Any prehm.mary or final approval of a sIte development shall expIre and become
null and void If:
(1). For preliminary approvals, an application for final approval is not filed within
one (1) year of such approval, or
(2j For final approvals, a building permit is not issued for the work authorized
withm ORe (J) year from the date of final approval. or if the work IS ceased for a
period of one hundred twenty (120) days or more at any time after work is
commenced,
(1) For variances, a building permit is not issued within 180 days from the
date it was granted. See section 26-115.4.
(2) If an approved special use ceases operation for any reason for a period of
one (1) year, the special use permit shall be deemed expired, unless otherwise
provided in the permit itself.
ATTACHMENT 2
For administrative special use site development approvals, the Community
Development Director shall decide whether the zoning and/or permitted use
of the property shall revert to that in place prior to the expired approval.
For rezoning, planned de'.'elopment and special use final site development
approvals, For special uses approved through a public hearing process, a
public hearing before the city counciJ in the manner required for final revIew shall
be held to confirm whether the zomng and lor permitted use of the property shall
revert to that in place pnor to the expired approval.
(3) Any issued building permit shall expire if the work authorized is not
commenced within sixty (60) days from the date of issuance, or if the work is
ceased for a period of one hundred twenty (120) days or more at any time
after work is commenced.
B. After site development approval has expired, no work shall be commenced until
the developer has received new approval pursuant to the procedures set forth in this
chapter.
C. A new application for substantially the same development process may not be
refiled for one (1) year after denial.
Section 2. Safety Clause. The City of Wheat Ridge hereby finds, determines, artd
declares that thIS ordmance 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 pubhc
convenience and welfare. The City Council further determines that the ordmance bears a rations
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, requirements 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 m
eXistence as of the date of adoption of thIS ordmartce, the provisions, reqUIrements artd standards
here shall supersede and prevail.
Section 5. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect ] 5 days after final
publicatIOn.
INTRODUCED, READ, AND ADOPTED on first reading by a vote of to
in thIS day of , 2004, ordered published in full in a newspaper
of general cuculatIon in the City of Wheat Ridge and Public Hearing artd consideration on final
passage set for ,2004, at 7'00 o'clock p.m" in the Council
Chambers, 7500 West 29th Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado.
2
READ, ADOPTED AND ORDERED PUBLISHED on second and final reading by a
vote of to , thIs day of , 2004
SIGNED by the Mayor on this
day of
,2004
GRETCHEN CERVENY, MAYOR
ATTEST'
Pamela Y Anderson, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM BY CITY ATTORNEY
-
GERAL DAHL, CITY ATTORNEY
] ST publicatIon.
2nd bJ' .
pu IcatlOn:
Wheat Ridge Transcript
Effective Date
3
ITEM NO
1-
REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION
COUNCIL MEETING DATE
March 22, 2004
TITLE: BOARD AND COMMISSION APPOINTMENTS
o PUBLIC HEARING
[gj BIDS/MOTIONS
o RESOLUTIONS
o ORDINANCES FOR] ST READING (Date _)
o ORDINANCES FOR 2ND READING
Quasi-Judicial.
D
Yes
[gj
No
~;J,~
. Clerk
Clty~4
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Board and Commission vacancies were advertised in the Wheat Ridge Transcript, Channel 8 and the
- City's Website, Applications have been received for appomtments for the vacancies on the Wheat
Ridge Foundation, the Planning Commission, and the Board of Adjustment.
COMMISSION/BOARD RECOMMENDATION:
N/A
STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES:
If appJicants are not appointed to the Wheat Ridge Foundation Board vacancIes will remain.
AL TERN A TIVES CONSIDERED:
Not appoint applicants to fill the vacancIes on the Wheat Ridge Foundation Board.
FINANCIAL IMP ACT:
N/A
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
District Two
"I move to appoint James A. Chi Ivers to the Planning CommIssion, term to expire March 2, 2007"
or,
"I move to deny the appointment of James A. Chi Ivers to the Planning CommIssion because
"
District Three
"I move to appoint Janet Bell to the Board of Adjustment, term to expire March 2, 2006 "
or,
"I move to deny the appointment of Janet Bell to the Board of Adjustment because
"
District Four
-
"I move to appoint Shirley Sandeman to the Wheat RIdge Foundation Board, term to expire March 2,
2005 "
or,
"I move to deny the appointment of Shirley Sandeman to the Wheat RIdge FoundatIOn because
Attachments:
1. James A. Chi Ivers applicatIOn to Planning CommIssion.
2. Janet Bell apphcation to Board of Adjustment.
3 Shirley Sandeman apphcation to the Wheat Ridge Foundation Board
040112 Board and Commission Appamtment
c ,'.,. T' ...; r tl ~-' E ., ,
i: t ::Lr:r; ~ I~~~, hiucr
PLEASE APPLY ONLY FOR ONE BOARD OR COMMISSIO'N1 K .J !_' F F 1 , :. -
CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE ~ -I PH 2: 03
tV: .';J. U
. I 0,
APPLICATION FOR APPOINTMENT TO THE:
PI4nnh1 + 2on/n COmr/l/$S/On
(BOAR ICOMMISSION/COMMITTEE)
DATE. N C{ yeAl (0 2 Q(y'J-
DISTRICT. 2-
HOW LONG HAVE YOU BEEN A RESIDENT OF WHEAT RIDGE? /q 'ye(}..YS
ARE YOU A REGISTERED VOTER? "1[,5
WHY ARE YOU SEEKING THIS APPOINTMENT? L/(~ A CHANC(;. TO
SflZV[ MY C OHMUN/7V
- DO YOU HAVE EXPERIENCE IN THIS AREA? 'f HAVf AN i/\/111Zf:5-r
HAVE YOU EVER SERVED, OR ARE YOU CURRENTLY ON A
BOARD/COMMISSION/COMMITTEE AND IF SO, WHICH ONE? HOW LONG?
NO .-
ARE THERE ANY CONFLICTS WHICH WOULD INTERFERE WITH REGULAR
ATTENDANCE OR DUTIES? IV 0
Signature ~ ~ ~
PLEASE PRINT OR TYPE NAME: J o.me:s A Ch dvpys
ADDRESS '704Q W '-+3 AVE.
HOME PHONE:3)3~ 42J; '-:)/02-
BUSINESS PHONE: 303 - ~no ~63{O
ZIP: '/S'003S
r"- .-.--
~ ~ i.:">[1 J l' i 10
:J at_ _ ':YJS.1.1L '-/
Ci~ \..<r,\. ..........
Chi' --t2,]S:
Council: &'
Mayor: L-
City Mgr. l--
City Ally: v
D?pt Heads:
APPLICATION WILL BE KEPT ON FILE F
-
ATTACHMENT 1
t y
~ '.
... . . . \ CITY OF WHfAT RlD<>E
APPLICATION FOR APPtNTMENT TO THE:
~O~ ~JIC~~Irs;~"r:M~e)
DATEJ . ~-I -0 'A
.!., , "
--.'DISTR\'Oltf.~-~~~~-t--~~. '. ..----- .' .............- ..-
HOW 40NG HAVE YOU SkEN A ~ESrDENT ~F WHEAT RIDGE? ;LO
E
ARE Y~U A REGISTEREO;IVOTER? Ite- s
-Are AR~~Ot SEEKING fH'S APPOINTMENT? --{/ me'" *' '/' /J e. -f.o
\ Ii
,
~...
\e.:.
I .
,.
03/05/04
16::\1 FAX 303 271 8744
, ,
-j
-\
, ,
Jeffco Planning & Zoning
..,~~~' ~
1
I
;-!\',
'~
1
j.
.,
;1
I .
,
\._,
-- -.,j
'-'
I
DO YOU HAVE EXPERIENGE IN THIS AREA? Ie / <.,.
HAVE YOU EVER SERVED1 OR ARE YOU CURRENTLY ON A
BOAR~C~~/~~~Nq IF SO, W tCHON_E?
~~E~~::C~1iRC~~~t~~~~~I~%~EGU~H
- ' Sj~nature ~
. Istnbuted 10: Council: i
HOME PHONE: 3 0 23 - 01-3 S- - () .=3 d.-.O Date: 3J-r loLl MayOI': .....
. ..-s. 3- tJJ n I _ 0 '7 :> Q City Clerk: ...... City Mgr: ~
BUSINESS PHONE. c."') 0 {X. / 0 /.....; I City Treas: City Atty:--
Oepl Heads:
--
-
ATTACHMENT 2
......
.
~
,[,' 'i:rtHEAT"I"~"
': i- i' = ~.rR' K I ~;\ C i~ f:f'~: ~t
~EASE APPLY oNLY FOR, ONE BOARD OR OWMMlSSlOhl
~4 'AflIO: 10
CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE Fe.lJ-03
f\PPLlCAT10N FOR APPOINT',1ENT TO THF:
- _~JN2rt ~~ ~~~t~t;ZISSIONICOMMITTEE)
_~ - -2 - 01\
OA1E. _ ~
~
DISTRICT
HOW LONG HAVE YOU REE:N A RESIDENT OF WHEAT RiDGE?.. J\ 0_ l~~~
f,RE YOU A REGISTERED VOTER? ~J. e S
,
WHY ARE yOU SEEKING 1 HIS APPOINTMeNT? T"" ,_ S \2Q... a.}\O-..e~d-
__f\."-;, I Il'lll C:.l~ ", ~.Q.D-)'~; ~ ~ '> : ~ 00l QQ-: 01
c::> \~ I; __ - /' 't'-...
'- 'Y'~~~ \O....^ raO ~ (VI L?_ - '- )
-
~
DOYOUHAVEEXPERIENCE\NTH1SAREA?C>.(J'\a...D~ItA \~.~ rH,-":-~,,(j\,,CO--
HAV, YOU EVER SERVED, OR. ARE YOU CURRENTLY ON A
80ARDJCOMMISS10N!C()~~~ AND IF SO, WHICH ONE? HOW LONG?
ARE TH[RE ANY CONFLICTS WHICH WOULD INTERFERE WITH REGULAR
ATTFNDANCE OR DUTIES? \'\..D .
S;gnature ~ l-~ r..- <.\ ~k J 0 >fV\.{lp
Sf\.N\)t:f\Af\~
~_. ... - - -- ~ ~ --~~-
~ .---------
, - - . .~~~, .~--~.--...-----
" "<--- .
t.:: . -~_ .---"~- :---=:.:::= =--
APPLICATION WILL BE KEPT ON FILE FQR ONE
-
ATTACHMENT 3
ITEM NO:
g
REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION
COUNCIL MEETING DATE:
March 22, 2004
TITLE:
A RESOLUTION REGARDING SUPPORT OF RTD'S
F AS TRACKS PLAN
o PUBLIC HEARING
o BIDS/MOTIONS
~ RESOLUTIONS
o ORDINANCES FOR 1ST READING (Date' _)
o ORDINANCES FOR 2ND READING
QuasI-Judicial.
o
Yes
~
No
.(:f.
Dire~~l:: ~s
(~Q.)9
CIty Manag
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
-
RTD representatives attended the March ]5,2004 CIty Council Study Session and presented an
overview of the RTDlFasTracks transIt plan. FasTracks IS a proactive plan that responds to the
growmg transportation needs of the Denver metropolItan region and was developed from the
recommendatIOns of MaJor Investment Studies and Environmental Impact Studies conducted by RTD,
The RTD Board has approved forwarding FasTracks to the Denver Regional Council of Governments
for review and approval. The R TD Board of Directors are pJanning to submit to the voters ofthe R TD
distnct a ballot Issue to seek authorization to fund construction ofthe FasTracks PJan with a 4% sales
tax mcrease. FasTracks will pOSItively affect the cItizens of Wheat Ridge by reducing congestion;
stimulating the economy and encouragmg economIC development; provIdmg development and
redeveJopment opportunities; mcreasing travel choices and reducmg travel time; and improvmg aIr
qualIty,
COMMISSION/BOARD RECOMMENDATION:
None,
STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES:
The Denver metropolitan region IS currently the third most congested metropolitan area 10 the country
and IS expected to worsen as the region adds more than 900,000 peopJe and 600,000 jobs by 2025.
ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:
To not adopt a resolutlOn regarding support ofRTD's Fastracks Plan,
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
There is no financial impact associated with the adoption of the resolutlOn regardmg support ofRTD's
FasTracks Plan. However, the City will partner with R TD by contribution through city specific direct
and indirect contributlOns, The contributions may consist of right-of-way dedIcations, permit fee
waivers, and other genera] local support.
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
"1 move to adopt Resolution No. 07-2004 regarding support ofRTD's FasTracks Plan,
or,
"1 move to deny adoption of Resolution No, 07-2004 regarding support ofRTD's Fastracks Plan for
the foJJowmg reason(s) "
Report Prepared bY' Tim Paranto, Director ofPubJic Works
~
Attachments:
1. Resolution 07-2004
040322 CAF Fastracks Resolution
RESOLUTION NO. 07
Series of 2004
TITLE:
A RESOLUTION REGARDING SUPPORT OF RTD'S
FASTRACKS PLAN
WHEREAS, the Denver metropolitan region is currently the third most congested
metropoJitan area in the COUTItry and is expected to worsen as the region adds more than
900,000 people and 600,000 jobs by 2025;
WHEREAS, the Regional Transportation District has developed a regional transit
plan called "FasTracks" whIch includes development of six new rapid transit corridors (I-
22S, GoJd Line, East, West, North Metro and US 36) and improvements/extensions to an
additional three rapid transIt corridors (Southwest, Southeast and Centra]); new and
expanded park-n-Ride's; development of the transit elements of Denver Union Station;
and an enhanced bus network including timed transfer points caned "FastConnects;" all
that will be implemented within a ]2 year time frame; and
WHEREAS, FasTracks is a proactive pJan that responds to the growmg
transportatIOn needs of the Denver metropolitan region by providing transportation
alternatives through an enhanced region-wide, reliable and safe transIt system; and
-
WHEREAS, FasTracks was developed from the recommendations ofMa]or
Investment Studies and Environmental Impact StudIes that were conducted by RTD over
the past SIX years with extensive input from the genera] public and 10caJ governments.
Those results were further refined through an open public process that ultlmately became
the FasTracks Plan.
WHEREAS, the RTD Board has unanimously approved forwardmg FasTracks to
the Denver RegIOnal Council of Governments for revlCw and approval, as to the methods
of financing and the technology selected for each of the fixed gUIdeway corridors per SB
90-208, and
WHEREAS, the Board of DIrectors of the RegIOnal Transportation District is
pJanning to submit to the voters of the RTD distnct a ballot issue to seek authonzatlon to
fund construction of the FasTracks Plan with a 4% sales tax increase; and
WHEREAS, ifFasTracks IS not approved by the voters, fundmg for any
addItional transit comdors would not be availabJe for over 20 years; and
WHEREAS, FasTracks win posItiveJy affect the citizens of Wheat Ridge,
Colorado, by reducmg congestIOn; stlmuJating the economy and encouraging economIC
deveJopment; proVIding development and redeveJopment opportumties; increasing travel
choices and reducmg travel time; and Improving air quahty,
ATTACHMENT 1
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Courtci1 of the City of Wheat
RIdge, Colorado that:
1. The CIty of Wheat Ridge supports approval ofRTD's FasTracks Plan by the
Denver RegionaJ CounciJ of Governments, and
2. The City of Wheat Ridge, CoJorado, supports RTD going to the voters in
November 2004 with a .4% saJes tax increase to implement FasTracks; and
3, The City of Wheat RIdge will partner WIth RTD by contributing through cIty
specific direct and mdirect contributions. The contributions may consist of
nght-of-way dedications, permIt fee waivers, and other general local support,
4. The City of Wheat Ridge WIll continue to work cooperatively with RTD to
work out details and resolve Issues as they arise through this process; and
5, The City of Wheat Ridge will actively work on informing their citizens of the
FasTracks Plan.
DONE AND RESOLVED THIS 22 day of March, 2004.
Gretchen Cerveny, Mayor
ATTEST:
Pamela Anderson, City Clerk
ITEM NO:
9
REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION
COUNCIL MEETING DATE:
March 22, 2004
TITLE:
RESOLUTION AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2004 GENERAL
FUND BUDGET TO REFLECT THE APPROVAL OF A
SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET APPROPRIATION FOR THE
LEGISLATIVE SERVICES BUDGET
o PUBLIC HEARING
o BIDSIMOTIONS
~ RESOLUTIONS
o ORDINANCES FOR 1ST READING (Date' _)
o ORDINANCES FOR 2ND READING
QuasI-JudICIal:
o
Yes
[gJ
No
CIty Clerk
C:K-\~ r-~
City Managr \:
-
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
As dIscussed at the March 15,2004 City Council Study Session, during the 2003 budget process, the
LegIslative Services budget was reduced by approximately $35,000, However, there are still certain
expendItures being charged to other accounts that relate dIrectly to the Office ofthe Mayor and City
Council which are not currently budgeted but shouJd be budgeted for within the Legislative ServIces
budget. Items Illcluded III the proposed revision to the LegIslative Services budget include costs for a
Board and CommIssion recognition dinner, Mayor and CIty Council attendance at appropriate training
sessions and in state conferences, fundmg for special City Council meetmgs and retreats and general
operating expenses for the Office of the Mayor and City Counctl. Board and CommiSSIOn pOSItions
are voJunteer pOSItions and the Board and CommIssion recognition dinner provides the opportunity for
the Mayor and City Council to recognize and thank volunteers for their service. Colorado Mumcipal
League (CML) along with other agencies provide training opportunities that are beneficial to elected
offiCIals and the cIty. Training sessions and conferences also provide elected officials with the
opportunity to mteract with elected officials from other CIties and counties and stay apprised of
ongoing Issues and concerns withm the state Attendance at training sessions will be limIted to two
traming seSSlOns per City Council member and Mayor for the remamder of 2004 DoJJars budgeted
for speciaJ meetings and retreats and genera] operating expenses for the Office ofthe Mayor and City
CounciJ will be used on an as needed and as necessary basis, Any funding remainmg at the end of the
year wiJ] be returned to the genera] fund undesignated reserves account.
COMMISSION/BOARD RECOMMENDATION:
N/A
STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES:
These expenditures were not incJuded in the 2004 budget. The budget for the Office ofthe Mayor and
City CounciJ for future years will be reviewed and evaluated during the normal budget process,
ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:
Not approve a revisIOn to the Legislative Services budget.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
Additional dollars for the Office of the Mayor and City Council are not currently budgeted. The
request for $18,300.00 would be funded from the General Fund undesignated reserves.
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
"I move to approve Resolution No. 06-2004, a budget supplemental appropnation from the General
Fund undesignated reserves to the LegIslative Services budget m the amount of $14,950 00 into
account 01-102-700-702 for conferences/meetings and $3,350,00 into account 01-]02-650-651 for
office supplies."
or,
"I move to deny approval of ResolutlOn No 06-2004, a budget supplemental appropnation from
the General Fund undeslgnated reserves for the Legislative Servlces budget for the following
reason(s)
"
Report Prepared bY' Pam Anderson, City Clerk
Reviewed by: Patnck Goff, Admmistrative Services Director
Attachments:
1, ResolutIOn No, 06-2004
D Original Motion - Budget includes funds for Mayor and 8 Council
Members to attend CML Conference
(Originally included City Clerk and City Treasurer but they have their own
budgets so I pulled them out and office supplies is now split between office
supplies and operating supplies for budget clarification).
"I move to approve Resolution No. 06-2004, a budget supplemental
appropriation from the General Fund undesignated reserves to the
Legislative Services budget in the amount of$13,900.00 into account OI-
102-700-702 for conferences/meetings, $2,607.00 into account 01-102-650-
660 for operating suppl1es and $750.00 into account 01-102-650-651 for
office supplies."
Current Legislative Services Budget = $109,172
Total Proposed Increase = $17,257
Proposed Amended Budget = $126,429
Cl Alternative Motion #1 - Budget includes funds for 5 Council
Members or Mayor to attend CML Conference
"I move to approve Resolution No, 06-2004, a budget supplemental
appropriation from the General Fund undesignated reserves to the
LegIslatIve Services budget in the amount of $10,820.00 into account OI-
102-700-702 for conferences/meetings, $2,607.00 into account 01-102-650-
660 for operating supplies and $750.00 into account 01-102-650-651 for
office supplies,"
Current Legislative Services Budget = $109,172
Total Proposed Increase = $14,177
Proposed Amended Budget = $123,349
IJ Alternative Motion #2 - Removing CML Conference from Budget
"I move to approve Resolution No, 06-2004, a budget supplemental
appropnation from the General Fund undesignated reserves to the
Legislative Services budget in the amount of $6,960.00 into account 01-102-
700-702 for conferences/meetings, $2,607.00 into account 01-102-650-660
for operating supplies and $750.00 into account 01-102-650-651 for office
supplies."
Current Legislative Services Budget = $109,172
Total Proposed Increase = $10,317
Proposed Amended Budget = $119,489
RESOLUTION NO. 06
Series of 2004
TITLE:
A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2004
GENERAL FUND BUDGET TO REFLECT THE
APPROV AL OF A SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET
APPROPRIATION FOR THE LEGISLATIVE SERVICES
BUDGET
WHEREAS, a reVISIon to the budget for the Office of the Mayor and City
Council IS needed for City Council trainmg, conferences, retreats and general operatmg
expenses,
WHEREAS, supplementaJ budget appropriatlOns require approval by City
Council through a resolutIOn;
WHEREAS, the General Fund has funds in undeslgnated reserves to transfer to
the Lepslatlve Services budget for approved expenses;
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Wheat Ridge, Colorado, as follows:
A. The City of Wheat Ridge fiscal year 2004 General Fund Budget be
amended accordingly, specifically transferring $14,950 00 from General
Fund undesignated reserves into account OJ - ] 02-700-702 and $3,350,00
mto account 01-102-650-651
DONE AND RESOLVED THIS 22 day of March, 2004.
Gretchen Cerveny, Mayor
ATTEST:
Pamela Anderson, City Clerk
ATTACHMENT 1
ITEM NO:
/0
REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION
COUNCIL MEETING DATE,
March 22, 2004
TITLE:
A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2004 CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CIP) BUDGET TO REFLECT THE
APPROVAL OF A REDUCTION OF APPROPRIA nONS
o PUBLIC HEARING
o BIDSIMOTIONS
[gJ RESOLUTIONS
o ORDINANCES FOR 1ST READING (Date' _)
o ORDINANCES FOR 2ND READING
Quasi-Judicia]:
o
Yes
~
No
~~
City Man r (J
DIrector of Public Works
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
--
At the January 20,2004 study session, staff presented a budget update to City Council. The update
Illcluded staffs concerns with the CIty'S current budget status and future revenue projectIons, The City
Manager has asked that all Department Directors review discretIOnary spending. Following this
dIrectIVe, the Pubhc Works Director identified several projects in the CIP budget that are not related to
maintenance of the cIty's infrastructure and could be considered as discretionary spending,
Recommendations Illclude defemng the Infill Curb, Gutter and Sidewalk Projects; defemng the
Neighborhood Traffic Management Projects; and defemng the 38th Avenue, Kipling to Youngfie1d
Undergroundlllg project. The total cost savings in the 2004 CIP budget totaJs $350,000 In additIOn to
these reductIOns III appropriatIOns, staff recommends that the electnc power lines aJong K1pJing Street,
from 44th Avenue to 49th Avenue be undergrounded in cOllJunction with the KlpJing Pedestrian
Inlprovements project, whIch IS scheduled in 2004. This undergroundlllg project would be funded
With Excel Energy franchise credIts and would not affect the CIP budget.
COMMISSION/BOARD RECOMMENDATION:
N/A
STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES:
By defemng these dIscretionary CIP projects, CIty Council and staff will have the flexibility to
reevaluate CIP priontIes and additIOnal revenues will be freed up to help fund future preventative
maintenance projects, repnontIzed CIP projects and general fund operating expendItures, ifnecessary,
ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:
Do not defer any CIP expendItures.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
The recommended reduction in 2004 CIP appropriations totals $350,000, Tlus reduction reduces total
CIP expendItures from $5,540,467 to $5,190,467, a 6.7 percent decrease, The 2004 projected ending
fund balance in the adopted 2004 Budget is $1,233,694. This reduction in appropriations would
mcrease the fund balance to $1,583,694, If the same projects are deferred to 2007, as recommended,
the CIP fund balance is projected to mcrease by $1,580,000 by the end of2006.
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
"I move to approve Resolution No 05-2004 amending the fiscaJ year 2004 CIP budget to reflect a
reduction of appropriations as foJJows: $50,000 m account number 30-303-800-888, InfiJJ Curb,
Gutter and Sidewalk Projects; $100,000 in account number 30-304-800-844, Neighborhood Traffic
Management Projects, and $200,000 in account number 30-306-800-805, 38th Avenue, Kiplmg to
Y oungfield Undergroundmg project.
or,
"I move to deny approval of ResoJu!lon No 05-2004 for the foJJowing reason(s)
Initiated by:
Report Prepared bY'
Reviewed bY'
Tim Paranto, Director of Public Works
Patrick Goff, Director of Administrative Services
Randy Young, City Manager
Attachments:
J, Memorandum from Tim Paranto, dated March 15, 2004
RESOLUTION NO. 05
Series of2004
TITLE:
A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2004
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CIP) BUDGET TO
REFLECT THE APPROVAL OF A REDUCTION OF
APPROPRIATIONS
WHEREAS, the City Council adopted the 2004 CIP Budget on September 8,
2003;
WHEREAS, the budget for the City of Wheat Ridge has been experiencing
excess expenditures over revenues;
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that it would be fiscally
responsible to defer several 2004 discretionary ClP projects until a later date;
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Wheat Ridge, Colorado, as follows:
-
1. The City of Wheat Ridge fiscal year 2004 CIP Budget be amended
accordingly:
a. Reducing the Infill Curb, Gutter arid Sidewalk projects account
(30-303-800-888) by $50,000 to $0.
b. Reducing the Neighborhood Traffic Management projects account
(30-304-800-844) by $100,000 to $0.
c, Reducing the 38th Avenue, Kipling to Youngfield Undergrounding
project account (30-306-800-805) by $200,000 to $0.
DONE AND RESOLVED TillS 22nd day of March, 2004.
Gretchen Cerveny, Mayor
ATTEST:
Wanda Sang, City Clerk
ATTACHMENT 1
Jefferson County Housing /\uthority
6025 West 3Rth /\Ve.lILw . Wheal Ridge C.nlorarln R0033
301-422 R600 . rilX. 303-422 3229 . T.O D 1-800-659-2656
Email IF.ffcnhsg@aol com
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
RE:
March 19,2004
Supporlers and contributors ofthe Jefferson CountyjLakewood
Homeowner Housing Rehab Program
Doug Knop, Housing Rehab Specialist
Melody Toineeta, Rehab Program Specialist
Rehab Program Year-End Report for year 2003
Attached IS the year-end report that we prepare to show what the Homeowner
Rehab Program has accomplished dunng the previous year. We wish to thank each
of you for the time and effort you have contributed to keep our program going.
We hope to accomplish even more in the coming years.
At the Jefferson County Housing Authority we strive to proVide affordable
housing to those who need it. And we in the Rehab Program believe that there is
no more affordable housing than an individual or family living in a home that they
own, maybe bought years ago, and they owe little or nothing on it. But they,
particularly those who are elderly or disabled and on a fixed income, may not have
the funds to do costly repairs, upgrades or upkeep Our program helps not only the
low/moderate income homeowner keep their home safe and livable, but also may
allow them to contmue as homeowners in their home. And our program helps
mamtain the stability, livability and value for the neighborhood m general.
While a recent study shows that upwards to 40,000 homes III Jefferson may need
and qualifY for housing rehabilitatIOn, the 250 homes rehabbed since we started in
1994 may not seem like many But the figures show how great the needs are and
we, WIth your support, will continue to do all that we can.
\ Thonk yo~
.Stj; J
Doug Knop
Jefferson County Housing Authority
Homeowner Housing Rehabilitation Program
including Jefferson County and Lakewood Rehab Programs
YEAR END REPORT - 2003
For the HOMEOWNER. SINGLE-FAMILY REHABILITA nON PROGRAM
Accessible addition with new bedroom and bath accommodating whee/chair use.
11
"'I!""""-
.
~
~
Single-Family, Homeowner Housing Rehabilitation Program
Jefferson County Housing Authority
Year End Report for 2003
INTRODUCTION
The Homeowner Housmg Rehabilitation Program, set up through the Jefferson County Housing
Authority, received the:first CDBG funding in 1994 when Jefferson County became an entitlement area.
The Rehab Program receives CDBG funds from unincorporated Jefferson County, Wheat Ridge,
Golden, Edgewater and Mountain View to do work in those areas. In 2002 JCHA also began
administrating the Rehab Program for the City of Lakewood under their CDBG program.
The Rehab Program was modeled after other rehab programs in the metro area and natIonwide
that has had over 30 years of experience under HUD regulatIon and funding. The Housmg Rehab
Program provides technical and financial assistance for qualified homeowners to do the necessary
repairs to make their homes safe, decent and affordabJe. The Rehab Program has assisted approximately
250 low or moderate-income households since 1994
The goals of the Housing Rehab Program are:
. To increase the supply of decent, safe, sanitary and affordable housing by providing technical and
financial assistance to low-moderate income homeowners in Jefferson County.
. To promote homeownerslup, stabilize and enhance neighborhoods, and aid in the prevention or
elimination of slum or bJight conditions.
. To make energy saving improvements to the homes.
. To increase the supply of special needs housing in Jefferson County
. To help protect young children from lead-based paint hazards in the houses assisted.
Purpose of the Rehab Program:
Many homeowners in Jefferson County are faced with needing major repairs such as a fuiJing
furnace, leaking roof, plumbing and electrical systems that are outdated and dangerous. Some homes
even the lack indoor pJumbing and potable water And most low or moderate income households may
not have the means to take on such a major expense. This situation can threaten their safety, standard of
living, the appearance and stability of the neighborhood and even their continued home ownership.
More than one-half of the househoJds assisted under the Rehab Program are elderly or disabled
and on a fixed income. The majority of the rest of the households are low-moderate income working,
one or two parent families. To qualify for the program the household must have an income of 80% or
less of the median income, must own the home and live there, and the home must be located in
Jefferson County (unincorporated Jeffco or participating communitIes, now including Lakewood as a
separately funded program).
Qualified homeowners are provided with no cost technical assistance that includes a thorough
inspection to determine problems, an analysis of the extent of the problems, and estunate of the cost of
repairs and the best method to correct them. The homeowner also receives assistance m getting
reasonable bids or proposals from qualified local contractors, and with oversight and regulation of
payments during the construction. And the homeowner is provided with financial assistance for the
actual contracted cost of rehabilitation through a low interest loan set as affordable to the individual by
a Rehabilitation Loan Committee made up of knowledgeable volunteer members of the communitJes
served. When we added the Lakewood Rehab Program under our Rehab organization, we added a
representative from Lakewood to the Loan Committee.
C:\Documents and SeUingsldknoplMv Documents\CDBGI2003cdb,,12003YearRrenort.doc 2/17/04 page 2
Rehab Program Accomplishments in the year 2003
The year 2003 saw a substantial increase in Program Income from paid off existing rehab loans.
In fact over twice as much Program Income was spent as was new CDBG monies. This allowed us to
continue on budget completing rehabilitation on 20 Jeffco homes. The CDBG 2002 Funding Year
contract allocated $273,664 and as of the end of the year we have only had to draw $124,433 of new
2002FY funds against the aIJocation., leavmg a balance of $149,232 going IOto the calendar year of
2004
Under our contract with Lakewood we have used all of the $150,000 allocation from 2002FY
CDBG funds. And we have just started into the 2003FY funds (allocation for 2003FY IS $]55,000). In
calendar year 2003 10 Lakewood homes have been completed.
Rehab Proiects for 2003
Projects Completed: 30 ~ 20 in Jefferson Co. ~
10 in Lakewood
30 Projects Total
Plus projects under construction at end of year = 10 homes
Homes worked on in 2003: 40 Projects
9 in unincorp Jeffco
7 in Wheat Ridge
I in Golden
2 in Edgewater
I in Mountain View
20 Jeffco Projects
Projects under construction at start of2003 7
New Rehab proiects started in 2003. 33
Total active projects in 2003 40
Number of Rehab Proiects completed: - 30
Projects under construction at end of '03 10
Average total project costs for the projects completed in 2003 is just under $17,000
Rehab applications being processed at the end of the year- 9
Number of applications received in 2003' 41
Total applications on the Waiting List at end of2003' 25
Funds used in 2003:
Direct Project Admin I
Program General Total Costs Source of funding
Costs Costs
Jeffco CnBG $ 270,006 $ 117,509 $ 387,515 $124,433 from 2002FY CDBG funds
2002 FY + $263,082 from Program Income
Lakewood 84,850 36,311 121,261 $107,418 from the 2002FY allocation
2002 & 03 FY + $12,843 into the 2003FY allocation
TOTALS: $ 354,85b $ 153,820 $ 508,676 $263,232 from Program Income
245,444 from CnBG funds
C:lDocuments and Settings\dknop\Mv Documenls\CDBGI2003cdbgI2003YearRreport.doc 2/17/04 page 3
Rehab Projects Completed--2003
IEGOS IHarlan 51., Edgewater
LoanType: I 3% Deferred
Completion Date: I 5122103
Household situation I needs:
EIder1y (63) working widow, inherited house
when father died in 2001, has lived In the
house for last 10 years while taking care of her
parents. Failing old brick foundation was in
critical condition. Loan Comm approved
9/24/02. Engineering and bids co~leted.
Loan/contract closed in March '03.
Work Status: !Complete
IEG06 \IN 24th Ave., Edgewater
LoanType: I 3% Deferred
Completion Date: I 2/27103
Household situation I needs:
Couple w/3 young children, father working,
very low income. Called in by State Health Dept
aller children had elevated blood lead levels.
Working wi NE Denver Housing on lead
abatement and making the property safe. Also
needs furnace (existing space healers are
dangerous), roof, plumbing and eIedricaI work.
Work Status: IComplete
IGD51 ICheyenne 51., Golden
LoanType: I Grant + 3% payment
Completion Date: I 8128103
Household situation 1.-cIs:
Single elderly lady, very low income, in
manufactured home. In LEAP program,
SunPower refered to replace leaking roof
before insulation. Inspected and bid for new
roof and water healer. Approved irHlouse as
grant plus smal monthly payments
($11 48/m0) on promissory note because of
depreciation of maufactured home.
Work Status: I CompJete
IJC089 Ipark Ave. in Pine
LoanType: I 0% Deferred
Completion Date: I 12130103
Household situation I needs:
Single lady on See.Sec. At application had no
well and only an outhouse which Is difficult for
her because of a chronic illness. New well and
full septic was installed after land aqulred to
meet requirements of county Also added an
add~ion to accommodate the new kitchen and
bath areas.
Work Status: I Complete
Rehab Costs: I $25,000.00
Description of House:
Old, small house, 1 bedroom, 1 bath.
Interior in good shape. Lead paint
clearance OK
Buitt: 118941
Rehab Work:
The foundation was unsound and failing.
Excavated and replaced north foundation
and reconstruct west and south walls.
Rehab Costs: I $15,920.00
Description of House:
Old, converted garage, poor cond~ion, 2
bdrm, 1 bath
Rehab Work:
Assisted NDHC to do lead abatement to
protect the children, also did roof, healing,
plumbing and electrical work.
Rehab Costs: I $2,565.00
Description of House:
Manufactured home, 2 bedroom, 1 bath.
Buitt: 119651
Rehab Work:
Had leaking roof that needs replacement
plus water healer replacement. Repairs
completed in August '03.
Rehab Costs: I $44,000.00
Description of House:
Old (1890), one story frame house, 626
sq.fl., no indoor bath or plumbing
Buitt: 11890 I
Rehab Work:
New well and septic and indoor bath and
kitchen to accommodate condition.
IJC138 Ilsabell SI.,Golden (unincorp Jeffc
LoanType: I 3% deferred
Completion Dale: I 12130/03
Household situation / needs:
Recently widowed, elderly lady on Soc.Sec.,
still wor1<ing part time at WalMart. Roof is
leaking, needed electrical and plumbing wort<,
only heat is gas healer in the living room as well
as other general rehab.
Work Slalus: I Complete
IJC141 IEstes SI. Arvada (unincorp Jeffco
LoanType: I 3% Deferred
Completion Date: I 4/10103
Household situation / needs:
Single, non-elder1y, lady, disabled (resent
amputee), on AND until can get approved for
SSI, very low-income. Sewer line was
collapsed, called in and qualified for
emergency. Approved in-house for emergency
work. Problem corrected next day. Then placed
on wailing list for further rehab.
Work Slatus: IComplete-Emergency
IJC142 IMnl.Vemon Rd., Golden (unincor
LoanType: I Grant
Completion Dale: I 6/26103
Household situation / needs:
Elderly, but still wor1<ing, lady, low income.
Manufactured home had structural roof trusses
damaged by Ma(03 show storm. Daughter
called for help. Arranged for contractor
Insurance should lake care of most damage,
we took lake care of any other rehab costs.
Wort< Slalus: IComplete
IJC145 IBuffalo Creek
LoanType: I 3% Deferred
Completion Dale: I 12130103
Household situation / needs:
Disabled gentleman, very low income, in old
house in Buffalo Crt<.. Septic system is leaking
causing health hazard. Loan Committee
approved 3% deferred loan to lake care of
leaking septic and then do roof and funace to
max of $25,000.
Wort< Status: IComplete
Rehab Costs: I $37,580.00
Description of House:
Old, small (720sqll), house located on the
outskirts of Golden. Two bedroom, one
bath.
Bui~: [191!lJ
Rehab Work:
Rehab includes new roof, add healing
system, upgrade electrical and plumbing,
new doors and windows and other rehab
items.
Rehab Costs: I $2,875.00
Description of House:
One story frame house, bui~ in '58
Bui~: 119581
Rehab Work:
Sewer line collapsed, plus replace leaking
lead waste lines.
Rehab Costs: I $351.00
Description of House:
Single-wide, manufactured home (1972)
Bui~: [19721
Rehab Work:
Snow broke roof trusses (mobile home) +
other rehab repairs due to roof damage.
Rehab Costs: I $25,000.00
Description of House:
Older mountain house in Buffalo Creek
with several additions
Bui~: 119241
Rehab Work:
Septic replaced-leaking above ground.
Also new furnace and roof.
.'
~"'" "''''''''--
. ;~''':".~'-
h.~~'=j
IJCl49 IW 84th, Arvada (unincorp Jeffco
LoanType: I 3% Deferred
Completion Date: I 7/31/03
Household situation / needs:
Owner is elderly widow in nursing home and
her disabled adutt son lives in the house (has
all his life) but is not on the title. His brother,
has conserviatorship for the mother and signed
the application and signed the loan for the
emergency water line. Approved in-house for
replacement water line. $1000 of cost was
grant and the balance or $2,925 is 3% deferred
loan against the house.
Work Status: Icomplete
IJC1S1 Iwest 82nd Ave (unincorp Jeffco)
LoanType: I 3% monthly pmnt
Completion Dale: I 8121I03
Household situation / needs:
Working couple with chldren. At 55% of
median income. Had broken water line. Would
have to take out 2nd mortgage to pay for repair
costs. Receilled rehab monthly payment loan to
cover the cost of excavating and replacing the
water line.
Work Status: IComplete
IJC157 ICalle Louisa, Golden (unlncorp)
LoanType: I Grant
Completion Dale: I 11/6103
Household situation / needs:
Disabled, low-lncome lady with gas Dne from
propane tank leaking. Requested $1000 grant
to help pay for the propane company to do
repairs. Approved in-house for emergency
repairs.
Work Status: IComplete
IJC1S8 IMnt Vernon Rd. (mobile home)
LoanType: I Emergency Grant
Completion Date: I 12/23103
Household situation / needs:
Eighly-<:>ne year old lady, Iow-income (Social
Security) in mobile home with brokenlfrozen
pipes.
Work Status: I Complete
Rehab Costs: I $3,925.00
Description of House:
Old two slot')' house-rebuilt by family in
1972. Family has been there since 1962.
Rehab Work:
Water line (250 fin.fl.) is broken and cut off
by water depl.- need replaced as
emergency. Wort\ star1ed 71'22103,
completed and paid 7/31/03.
Rehab Costs: I $4,075.00
Description of House:
Well maintained one story older
fannhouse. Only v.ork required is
replacement of broken water line. Tested
and cleared for any lead hazards for the
children. Buitt: 1'1946l
Rehab Work:
Excavation and replacement of broken
water line from main to house.
Rehab Costs: I $1,000.00
Description of House:
House buitt on isolated land west of
Golden near Golden Gale park. Two
bedroom, one bath.
Rehab Work:
Gas line from the propane tank was
leaking. The propane supply company
replaced the old piping with new piping and
contois to code. No other work was
requested or required.
Rehab Costs: I $191.00
Description of House:
Manufactured home
Buitt:C]
Rehab Work:
Emergency plumbing repairs
I' t
."'"
..
',---~~
--.
ILKOO9 ISecurity Ave., Lakewood
LoanType: I 3% Payment
Completion Date: I 1/31103
Household situation I needs:
Single, eIdef1y woman on retirement (Iow-
income, but wi savings and little payments),
needs roof, windows, plumbing, electrical.
Approved for 3% Payment loan and the
homeower also requested work done over the
$25,000 loan limit and win pay directly for that
work.
Work Status: I Complete-Paid off
ILK016 IChase St., Lakewood
LoanType: I 3% Deferred
c~ Date: I 4124103
Household situation I needs:
Single lady wi 3 kids and elderly mother who
had stroke and needs accessible addition so
she can take care of mother at homer Family
has come up with funds (from sister who will
be repaid from sale of moIhe(s condo) to cover
costs above the $25,000 rehab loan. As soon
as the addition is completed, the mother may
be moved from the expensive care facility to the
daughle(s home.
Work Status: lcomplete
ILK017 IW Maryland, Lakewood
LoanType: I Old Lakewood loan
Completion Date: I 11/13103
Household situation I needs:
Single wofldng lady. Received Lakewood rehab
loan a couple years ago and has an mused
balance. Will use the $2,188 balance left from
previous LKW Rehab loan for plumbing repairs.
Work Status: lComplete
ILK018 IFlower Cr., Lakewood
LoanType: I 3% Deferred
Completion Date: I 4124103
Household situation I needs:
Single lady on retirement-disabiHty (kia1ey
transplant, arthritis, hyper tension) works 2
days a week. Needs accessible IM)I'k + general
repairs. Townhouse bui~ in 1984.
Work Status: I Complete
Rehab Costs: I $12,700.00
DescrIption of House:
One-112 story, 2 bedrm, 2 bath, old house
moved to this site in '56 and has had
several additions.
Buitt: 119561
Rehab Work:
Elect upgrade, roof..gutters, insulation,
flooring, new furnace and heat runs,
plumbing/electrical upgrades, water heater
Also did some work to reduce lead hazards.
Rehab Costs: I $25,000.00
Description of House:
Habitate for Humanity house. Newer
ranch, 3 bdnn, 1 +3'4 bath but house is not
wheelchair accessible.
Buitt: 119991
Rehab Work:
New addition with wheelchair accessible
bedroom and bath.
Rehab Costs: I $2,188.00
DescrIption of House:
One story wi basement and attached
garage; 3 bdnn, 1+3'4 baths
Rehab Work:
$2,188 balance left from previous LKW
Rehab loan for rehab work which includes
new water heater, kitchen sinklcountertop
and other plumbing repairs.
Rehab Costs: I $25,000.00
Description of House:
Townhouse, buitt '84
Buitt: 119841
Rehab Work:
Accessibility work (move laundry from
basement), electrical/plumbing repairs,
bath fixtures, kitchen upgrade, new
fumace, WH, interior painting, and owner
to cover costs of "oaring over the $25,000
max.
"
.....-"'-4
ILK034 IMoore SI., Lakewood
LoanType: I 3% Deferred
Completion Date: I 11/13/03
Household situation / needs:
EIder1y couple. He is in a nwsing home and all
of his Soc.See goes to the home. The only
household income is Soc. See and pension.
Work status: IComplete
I LK036 IS. Harlan st., Lakewood
LoanType: I Emergency Grant
Completion Date: I 11/13103
Household situation / needs:
Couple with 2 children, only one parent working
and at less that 50% of median income.
Furnace stopped working and tried to fDl
themselves but couldn1. Had funace repaired
same day of call-in. Only work they requested
and that was essentiaf at the time. WiU call
back if more rehab is needed.
Work Status: I Complete
IMV021 ISenton SI., Mountain VIeW
LoanType: I Grant
Completion Date: I 10130103
Household situation / needs:
EIder1y widow, low-income on Soc See and
retirement. Had clogged sewer line. Approved
In-house for emergency line clear 71']J3JOO.
Waste line cleared and repaired, and additional
plumbing repairs being completed.
Wort< Status: IComplete
IWR074 IChase SI., Wheat Ridge
LoanType: I 00,4 Deferred
Complelion Date: I 12130103
Household situation / needs:
EIder1y lady on fixed Income. Needs foundation
drainage work, plumbing replacement, new
water healer, and electrical to code. (0% loan
was approved In 2000 before loans were
changed to 3%)
Work Status: I Complete
Rehab Costs: I $4,087.00
Description of House:
House is in good condition except for poor
soil conditions that has caused the walks
and patto area to crack and water and ice
is damaging the foundation structure.
Suitt: 119611
Rehab Work:
The rehab work Is to replace concrete to
provide proper drainage to reduce damage
to the foundation. No other work is
requested or required.
Rehab Costs:
$80.00
Description of House:
One story, 3 bedroom house with a couple
and two daughters.
Suitt: 119541
Rehab Work:
Emergency repair of non working furnace
(faulty paris replacement).
Rehab Costs: I $990.00
DescrIption of House:
One story, 2 bedroom, 1 bath house with
basement. In good condition excepted for
plumbing waste lines.
Suitt: fl907 I .
Rehab Work:
Clogged sewer line was vidioed, cleared wI
new clealHlut and lead pipes replaced
under bath.
Rehab Costs: I $25,000.00
Description of House:
One story older home. well maintained, 2
bedrooms, 1 bath.
Suitt: 119361
Rehab Work:
Did foundation drainage work, replaced
sewer line, plus windows ldoors, plumbing
replacement, new water heater and
electrical upgrade.
, ~ ~.....- -__ _r-".
~ -=~~ ;'~=-I~~~
.. -"';;1r
.,..........,
,....'.&..'.. i.
:.".~~-t .
-,
i. '
-,
IWR082 100is St., Wheat Ridge
LoanType: I 3% Deferred
Completion Date: I 12130/03
Household situation / needs:
Single disabled woman (on SSI and child
support), in a house w/ 2 bedrooms, one bath
for her and her boy and girl who are old enough
to need separate bedrooms. Need addttional
bedroom and bath as well as other repairs. The
Rehab Loan Cornm approved the amount
required to do the addition and essential repairs.
Work Status: I Complete
IWR096 lupham St., Wheat Ridge
LoanType: I 3% Deferred
Completion Date: I 9/24/03
Household situation / needs:
Disabled single lady, very low-income, called
because her sewer is collapsed or clogged-
started as Emergency work Sewer was
completed in 2001 and application was placed
on Watting Ust.
Reached the top of the list and total rehab
started March '03. Loan Committee approved
total rehab of $33,680.
Work Status: IComplete
IWR105 Iw 30th Ave., Wheat Ridge
LoanType: I 5% Payment
Completion Dale: I 2/27103
Household situation I needs:
Single elderly lady, works part time, + income
from Sac.Sec., PERA, IRA. Needed new
fumace-replaced Aug'02 as emergency work
before winter. Then approved for additional
rehab in 2003.
Work Status: I Complete
IWR106 IUpham St., Wheat Ridge
LoanType: I 3% Deferred
Completion Date: I 3/27103
Household situation I needs:
Elderly widow in ill health and recent surgeries.
Plumbing to be redone as emergency work.
Accessible shower and we. Approved by Loan
Comm 1120103.
Work Status: I Complete
Rehab Costs: I $37,746.00
Description of House:
One story house wI 2 bedrooms, 1 bath.
Suitt in 1953.
Buitt:!I~
Rehab Work:
New addition in the rear of the house and
conversion of laundry to l!lClra bath to
accommodate the chldrens needs.
Rehab Costs: $33,680.00
Description of House:
One story, 2 bedroom, 1 bath house buill
in 1951
Buill: ~9511
Rehab Work:
Complete new mof and gutlers. New
siding and windows (LBP-Safe Work
Practices), doors, bath and electrical
upgrades. Plus additional minor rehab.
Rehab Costs: $18,055.00
Description of House:
One story, 3 bednn, 1 bath house buill in
1953.
Rehab Work:
Rehab: roof, drainage-foundation work,
e1ectr upgrade, general rehab. Plus
reconstructed slruclurany unsound porch.
Interim control on lead hazards from
exterior paint.
Rehab Costs: I $25,000.00
Description of House:
One story wI crawlspace, 3 bdnn, 1 bath,
attached garage.
Rehab Work:
Pumbing is delerloraled-done as
emergency wI new fixtures for
accessibility, plus electrical upgrade.
Additional rehab included flooring, painting,
vanity, and AC for medical reasons.
u-
~~.~
~~
--
~;
IWR110 IEaton SI., Wheat Ridge
LoanType: I 0% Deferred
Completion Date: I 3/27/03
Household situation I needs:
Disabled (degenerative arthr~is, scoliosis, three
surgeries for carpal tunnel), single lady needing
accessible bathrooms and other repairs. Had
rehab completed in 2001 ($23,815). Called in
3126103 with broken sewer line-Emerg for
$5500 (had to dig into street to main city line).
Original loan was added to for total of
$29,315+$900 grant for street repair
Work Status: IComplete-Emergency
IWR112 jAmes St., Wheat Ridge
LoanType: I Grant
Completion Date: I 1019103
Household situation I needs:
Single mother with 4 children. Unemployed only
income is $513 a month child support. Has
broken water line from house. Also furnace is
not working. Approved emergency work for
water line and funace, $1000 grant.
Work Status: I Complete
Rehab Costs:
$6,400.00
Description of House:
One story, brick house (1128sq.ft.) wi
crawlspace, attached garage. Buitt 1951, 2
bedroom, 1 bath.
Buitt: 11951 1
Rehab Work:
Sewer line broke~g-up and replace
Rehab Costs:
$1,000.00
Description of House:
Single story house with basement, 2
bedrooms up and 2 in basement.
Rehab Work:
The broken water tine was replaced, the
fumace repaired and the rear door
replaced for security Negotiated wi
contractor for the $1000 grant available.
2/17/04
PUBLIC COMMENT ROSTER
DATE:
ANY PERSON MAY SPEAK ON MATTERS OTHER
THREE MINUTES, UNLESS ADDITIONAL TIME
COUNCIL.
AGENDA ITEMS FOR A
GRANTED BY AGREEMEN
IMUM OF
EACH SUCH PERSON MUST SIGN THE
ADDRESS, AND TOPIC OF COMMENT.
C COMMENT ROSTER,
ASE PRINTllllllll
NAME,
NAME
TOPIC
-~ tL.L
L INti,4
S 2.. (2) :3 C,,\.,A <.." ::...
'>cPr (!tl ~
\~L--b-S-'--
.. ('
CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE
PUBLIC BEARING ROSTER
AGENDA ITEM NO. 4
PUBLIC BEARING BEFORE THE WHEAT RIDGE CITY COUNCIL
COUNCIL BILL NO. 04-2004
CASE NO.
TITLE:
COUNCIL BILL: 04-2004 AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE DISPOSITION OF
UNCLAIMED PROPERTY
PLEASE PRINT YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS CHECK
IN FAVOR OPPOSED
IF YOU NEED MORE ROOM PLEASE SIGN ON BACK OF PAGE!
CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE
PUBLIC BEARING ROSTER
AGENDA ITEM NO. 3
PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE WHEAT RIDGE CITY COUNCIL
CASE NO. \J\J 7.- - 0 3 -II COUNCIL BILL NO. 01-2004
TITLE:
COUNCIL BILL 01-2004 A REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF A REZONING FROM
RESIDENTIAL ONE-C TO RESIDENTIAL THREE (WZ-03-11/Marcem)
C!..-
_><;d ~
j..., (po?'t-t ,S
CHECK
IN FAVOR OPPOSED
PLEASE PRINT YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS
~
)(
><
3..2 3 ()
AcY; e"" ;}-<. 3 tJ
IF YOU HEED MORE ROOM PLEASE SIGN ON BACK OF PAGEl
CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE
PUBLIC BEARING ROSTER
AGENDA ITEM HO. 2
PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE WHEAT RIDGE CITY COUNCIL
CASE NO.
COUNCIL BILL NO. 03-2004
TITLE:
COUNCIL BILL 03-2004: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 26-621 OF THE
WHEAT RIDGE CODE OF LAWS PERTAINING TO PARKING IN RESIDENTIAL
AREAS
PLEASE PRIN'!' YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS
CHECK
IN FAVOR OPPOSED
)\
,Y
O\~rW V
IF YOU REED MORE ROOM PLEASE SIGN ON BACK OF PAGEl
@tlYW. @U@ll~ moo.@
CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO
COMMUNICATIONS RETREAT
Richards-Hart Estate
28th & Benton
6:00 p.m. - 7:30 p.m.
April 1. 2004
Present: Randy Young, City Manager; Patrick Goff, Administrative Services Director;
City Treasurer Mary Cavarra, City Clerk Pam Anderson, Councilors Karen Berry, Jerry
DiTullio, Wanda Sang, Dean Gokey, Karen Adams, Mike Stites, Larry Schulz, Lena
Rotola,
Steve Weichert gave a presentation on a Communications Proposal. He described a
Blue Ribbon Panel to assess the City's future needs.
The meeting adjourned at 7.24 p m