The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About01/24/2005 Study Session ~(). Y1A AnJu-soY\ SPECIAL STUDY SESSION AGENDA CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO 29TH Avenue, Municipal Building January 24, 2005 5: 43 rv- ,. . 5:30 p,m. ( DinneJ: MeetinQI - Item 1. Neighborhood Revitalization Strategy All ~t., ~ 1~ . ~~~ Vt{1Y1' . l~~ He ~~tk- H vJt~ stl>vt ~lJ I ~rr,- ~ ~"'Vdl ~. ~~. ~~- ~ ~j' __ {;~cU ~\1':>}'M {#1'vJs-fM:' 1k-fF1'^'+~' , ,- r- /I J~-h'~ ti-?rwt ~ ~ oJ--~ ~ N~S, s~J ar-Ol i-v ()Vt f~ LoC/k ~ ~~ ~ ()'Y- *~y f::4-h~ .v>t \L ~~~ o.;..J. ~"'" u+ ~\2ctr, r t.,,;t; ~ ~ -A cL'~w~'t.,W'-- -\-u..~Q ()Y(. ~ i~s~, Mjuw-v~ -- 0 : fI1 30 City of Wheat Ridge City Manager's Office Memorandum TO. FROM Mayor and City Council Randy Young, ~~r DATE January 18, 2005 SUBJECT: Neighborhood Revitalization Strategy (NRS) A speCIal City Council Study Session IS scheduled for Monday, January 24, 2005 to discuss the Neighborhood Revitalization Strategy. Representatives from Winston Associates WIll be present at the meetmg. The purpose of the meeting is as follows and is outlined in the Winston Associates Scope of Work under Task 1.2. Kick-off Session with Council. - At an initial work session with the City Council, we will revIew the project goals and objectives and the charge given to the Consultant. It will be our goal to understand Council priorities and assumptIOns as well as to confirm the basic parameters of the study We will also review in very general terms (based on expenences in other commulllties), some of the possible directions and strategIes for community revitalization that may emerge Please feel free to contact Barbara (303-235-2806) with any questions or if you need additIonal information. '" ~ - ~ rF.J. = ~ .- "0 ~ ~ I '" = o .- - ~ ~ '" = ~ l-. ~ ~ eJ) "0 .- ~ - ~ ~ .c ~ IJ) W ....I <t ..,., IJ) 0 N CO 0) .... CO 0) .... <D C'l 0) .... <D ..,., N 0) .... ~ ~ .... 10 0) 0 .... .... .... ~ u:; ..,., CO eo C'l .... .... N ~ 0 ~ ~ N CO N ~ eo 0 0) 0> eo C'l .... ~ C'l 0 ....I ~ ~ C'l .... .... ~ ~ N cci <t I- 0 I- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ....I 0 0 ..,., 0 0 ..,., ..,., ..,., 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 ..,., 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 <t N ..,., .... ..,.,- 0 0) .... N ..,., 0) 0) 0) 0 0 0 ~ 0) 10 0) 0 0 0 10 0 <D 0 0 .... C> I- eD N- N 0> '" c5 0) 0) N- o) ....- ..,f" ~ c5 0)- 10- '" 0>- ....- ....- ....- ....- ..,., en N- OD 0) eD c5 0 0 ..,., N N N eo .... .... <D 10 ..,., ..,., .... .... C'l C'l C'l N N 0 0> 0> 0> eo CO ..,., ..,., I- .... N N ~ "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" Q) 0 0 0 0 0 E 0 0 0 .. 0 0 C> 0 0 0 0 ..,., 0.> 0 0> ..,., 0> 0 0 0 C> ~ .r: 0) 0>- ....- ....- ..,.,' N '" N c: 8 ~ ..,., N N 0 0> 0> co ~ 0 "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" 0.> I- - ~ E ::J 0 0 '2 0 0 0 0 0 C> 0 C> "Cl 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C> .e 0 0 0_ ..,., o. co 0 0 ..,., C> = 0> r---: .... N- o) 0) cci c5 eo: 0 eo .... ..,., en 't:l ~ 0> ~ 0> CO .... <D ..,., 0> t-- c: "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" a-, 0 a-, U ..... Z. = E 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C> 0.> 0 0 ..,., 0 0 ..,., 0 ..,., C> ..,., 0 0 0 C> ..,., C> C> 0.> '" N ..,., .... ..,., 0 0> eo, N ""- 0> 0> 0 0 C> 0> r-- f - eD N- N 0> ..,., c5 eo 0) N ....- ....- c5 0) '" C'l '" Q) ~ C> ..,., N N N CO ..,., r-- <D ..,., ..,., .... .... C'l C'l C'l CO .... N N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0.> c: "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" Q:l in :E 0 u. ,g ;f'. ,g ,g ,g ,g ;f'. ,g ,g ,g ,g ,g ,g ,g rJ1 :;; ;f'. ,g ,g ,g ,g ;f'. 0 ,g ,g ;f'. ;f'. ,g ,g ,g ,g ;f'. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ..,., 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C> 0 C> 0 0 C> C> 0 C> 0 ~ '" ~ C> C> C> 0 C> C> N 0 0 C> 0 0 C> 0 0 0 0 C> 0 0 C> C> C> C> 0 0 C> C> C'l 0.> 0 CO ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N 8 0 ::r:: u. >R >R >R >R >R >R >R >R >R ;f'. ;f'. ;f'. ;f'. >R >R >R >R 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ... IJ) 0 0 C> 0 0 0 ..,., 0 C> >R 0 0 0 C> C> C> 0 ;f'. >R >R >R >R >R ;f'. ;f'. >R >R >R ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 .... 0 C> C> 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C> C> 0 0 0 0 0 C> 0 0 0 CO 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ C'l ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r-- 0.> ... ,- .. Q., .~ ~ .... eo: E 't:l rJ1 ro c:: '" ::> = '" U> 0 e .::: E :c g ::; 0 :Q -'" .... "Cl :c '0 '" 0- CJ) '" c:: '" ro o1l ... E :c ~ ~ '" ::> '-' :2 U> U> 0 C .<:l g ro '" '" 0 <n ::> ::> '" '" .0 0 CJ) ::> (.) ro .r: <n c:: <-;' E g (f) ro Z U> -'" 0 -'" .E 't:l 0 w b '" U> (.) U> ~ .E ro 0 U> ..,., 0 B ro '0 c:: .E '" '" 0 c:: 't:l '" 't:l <( oS '" 0> Z e -0 .g CJ) Q E c:: cu ~ '" ~ c:: c:: U> ::> '" U> ::> ~ -0 U> 0 U> 0 .;::; ro ~ Cl -0 :!Q E g .;;: ~ 0 U> '" '" '" (.) E 0 ro (.) 0 0 cu (f) <n c:: - ::> X (3 -0 N ~ 0 0 0 ::> iD .!2 '" @: ro '" ro ro c:: - s: c:: S2 CJ) ~ ro e. '" U> U> a:: 0 .!2 (f) :J: ~ - > w "E <( 0> o1l -'" .;;: :c '" (.) Q 0 W '" U> -0 ro U> <0 ::> 0 ro -'" .;::; e::: ?: 't:l '" c:: > -0 '" <n 0 (!501l ~ 0 0 g ro -0 ~ ~ <U c:: ....I 0 E E '.:c -0 Q .2) ....I c:: ro <( 0 <( 0 '" '" %1 = ~ 'E '" ro -'" 0 <( s: a '" a t .r: '" N c:: W '" '" 0 <n ro I- ii:i '" a 0 ro s.- o '" 0- Qj 0- 0 .S! ::> ..,f" 'T ro ro ..c:: ..c:: ro 0 0:: 5 ro iXi U:: .;;: ';2 N 5 5 m .r: Z Z <( Q ro <( Q Z -, Z N :2 w ~ t') :2 .... w U) I- l"l o o l"l .t:J rJ1 ~ = - '" 0.> - eo: '<;j o '" '" '" '" < .c = 0.> g '1: u c.c '" 0 0.> '" -; .. "'~ ... ~o.> .o~ '0 Q; <l.l ... - .. .. ::I ~ 0 .. rJ1 r.FJ * o ~ c:: 0 "\ "- ~ fO .. Q. ~ ..' fO = =0 fO "\ -\ ~~S o "\ ~ = 0 (""l- o ~ l: c:: ';l~ .~ ~ ." t,. ~ '0 ~ ';l ~ = o ~ "\ a ~~ (""l ';;- ~ ~ o (l ..' ~ ... ~ :!' <g ~ o ::> s- g Q -0-0 9l, ~. o 0 66 :3 '3 ro ro if> if> (') 0> '3 9; ~ ro -0 <3 -\3 ro ~ < <l!- -~ )0> ro 0> :2:2:2 ::1" ::1" ro ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .g:.g:r:3 roroO -uor; ~ g ~ 0>0-~ o ..... if> - N Q OJ '{,', '" s- O> "'" ..,. :2 ro :6 w ~ ..- ~ $(J1""'GS..,.<g~ ~~~eo~U' u> ~--Joo'E.--J~'" ~~~-J ~O-"'"-'""..p. ZZ g:% o 0? ~ G> ~ g- ::> <fl ~ ro if> Z ::r 9; Z o 5- :2 ro ;a ..... '" '(] c:: 3' Q Q '" ~ Q '" ro 7<" Q OJ :3 ... ii ro "- o o 0- (fl ro ~. 2 if> o :3 % '" if> ~~~~ ~~ $ ~ o:~~ro o~. ~~ (") ro ~ Q, co ~ s- O) ~ ~ -u w ~ ~(1)~W~~ ------ ~ o o g 0:. Q -nrTI ~.~ 0:'" w '" _ w ro ~ 0? ~~ 7<" if> 0: co ~ ij,. o ::> ~ if> :2 :;S ro ro ~-;::: ~~ 22 ::> ::l g- 8- <fl if> ~......~--J(J1<7>;:;;:;' ..,...... ... ..... ...--.1 ~~ rTI'(:f. ~ -~ 0> en <D OJ c:: ;:; ..... <D '-" o <F w~~~ii (tI"E.O:>(f)a> ~ ro ;:;, "- '" _ )<_ 0 0 if>)o>NO~ \20::>00.- yO-ffi-<?' ~~ro~g, ~3~~~ .~g~(fl-o ~Q-;(t)"S~ rTI~ O-~ if> (fl 9t~ ;;g ~g 3?- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ur g ::> 0- $ s- o. --0 ~ :3 ~. 0> ::> o o ::> 0- o if> wr..OW~ f'.).---~<D (O(J'\~<5;~ ffi ~ UI o ~ o g z c:: %- ~ "\ o .... r.FJ ~ ';' '!'. ,.... \&; \&; ...l So _<:o""'t ';;5u:>0 u:>~ ;::r r.FJ ~ ~ a '-" OJ ~p-~~NO; ~~CP~O .....<0 -"" -""..-'-~ f.JJCP(jl~g ;;,<.>><.ON ..... ..... 0'-" ;j""~"'~~V:>z, ~~t; ... ..... (J\-.Jr--.,)-J ......... ..>--,"NvJtQ ~r.J).J>.(jl$ ~C:;.J>.~ c;<.O:::J 8~~~WW~W~~~~-~W~~W~ OJ co co'" 0 ..,. v:>'-" (J1N~~V:>NNV:>(J1""'cP O~~~O' ... "\ ..... ..... --.1 ..... .... .... ..,. ..,. -,,"--,"~()l~ c>__o..p.~ -I ~~~~g$~~~~3~~~w~~g~~~~~~~~~~g~ ~~(j)y:;r-:>-"'" N ~ v:> (J1 -I-- OOOOOOOOOOO<f. ~<f.~~~~~~~~~~ -..J -""-""-- (5')000000 <..ocft.-RO~oo ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ ~ ~OOOOOOOOOCJ '1~~~~~~~~~<f. o e-- -_.---~- ~ooo9.00 ~~~~~~~ o <7> ,,",,00 b?f!.?f2. ~ -"" -"'" -""-"" oogOOOO ~~~~~~~ ~ >;f ~ ~ - 'a ~ ~ ~ "'t ~ fI> ~ n '* ,... o = fI> \ ~ o e \fl ~ ~ fI> ~ ~ ~ ~ ..... ..... CJ 0 0 ~~~ ....OOOOOOOO~ ~~~~<f.<f.<f.~<f.~ Housing Profile 2000 Wheat Ridge - Pop, 32,913 UselTenure Overcrowding/Occupants per Room # % # % Housing Units 14931 100% 1 00 or less 14055 96.3% Occupied as primary home 14559 975% 1 01 to 1 50 238 1.6% Owners. 7943 546% 1.51 or more 298 2.0% Renters. 6616 454% Overcrowded 536 3.6% Vacant 372 2.5% Seasonal/recreational use 39 3% Type of Heat . Percent of occupied un~s, not total units. # % Utility gas 11717 80.3% Occupancy Bottled, tank, or LP gas 81 6% Vacant Electricity 2502 171% 2% Wood 9 1% Renter ------ Occupied. . / Solar energy 0 0 44% Other fuel/none 282 1.9% Year Structure Built # % 1999 to March 2000 113 8% Type of Structure 1995 to 1998 317 2,1% # % 1990 to 1994 441 2.9% Single-Family 7995 534% 1980 to 1989 1359 91% Multi-Family 7017 464% 1970 to 1979 2508 16.8% Mobile Homes 30 .2% 1960 to 1969 3382 22.6% 1940 to 1959 5938 397% Units in Structure 1939 or earlier 909 6.1% # % Built since 1990 871 58% 1-unit, detached 7995 534% 1-unit, attached 1538 10.3% Year Moved Into Current Residence 2 units 592 40% # % 3 or 4 units 831 56% 1999 to March 2000 3037 208% 5 to 9 units 1032 6.9% 1995 to 1998 5688 314% 10 to 19 units 955 64% 1990 to 1994 2345 16.1% 20 or more units 1969 13.2% 1980 to 1989 1699 11.6% Mobile home 30 .2% 1970 to 1979 1166 80% Boat, RV, van, etc. 25 ,2% 1969 or earlier 1756 12.0% Wheatridge - 2000 Census Profile Income, Housing Costs and Affordability Median Housing Prices/Costs 2000 1999 Median Incomes Value - Owner Occupied $167,800 Median in 1999 Mortgage $1,121 Household Income $38,983 Owner Households $49,593 Gross Rent $651 Renter Households $29,194 Contract Rent $594 Family Income $47,512 Per Capita Income $22,636 Value of Owner-Occupied Units 2003 Median Family Income - Jefferson County # % 50% 80% 100% Less than $50,000 45 6% 1 person $24450 $39150 $48900 $50,000 to $99,999 341 4/7% 2 person $27950 $44750 $55900 3 person $31450 $50350 $62900 $100,000 to $149,999 2274 315% 4 person $34950 $55900 $69900 $150,000 to $199,999 2331 32.3% 5 person $37750 $60400 $75500 $200,000 to $299,999 1645 22.8% 6 person $40550 $64850 $81100 $300,000 to $499,999 514 71% Change - Median Family Income. 1999-2003 $500,000 to $999,999 44 6% 1999 2003 % Change $67,310 $69,900 38% $1,000,000 or more 14 .2% Income Distribution Mortgage Amount Owners Renter Total % # % Less than $5,000 101 315 416 2.9% Less than $300 10 1% $5,000 to $9,999 137 611 748 5.1% $300 to $499 129 18% $10,000 to $14,999 257 605 862 5.9% $500 to $699 372 5.2% $15,000to $19,999 403 608 1011 69% $700 to $999 1323 18.4% $20,000 to $24,999 430 618 1048 7.2% $1,000 to $1,499 1883 261% $25,000 to $34,999 1209 1272 2481 170% $1,500 to $1,999 573 79% $35,000 to $49,999 1489 1195 2684 18.4% $2,000 or more 374 5.2% $50,000 to $74,999 1872 1006 2878 197% With a mortgage 4664 647% $75,000 to $99,999 922 326 1248 8.6% Not mortgaged 2544 353% $100,000 - $149,999 829 43 872 60% $150,000 or more 320 23 343 2.4% Gross Rent # % Percent Income Spent on Housing Less than $200 131 2.0% Owners Renters Total <15% 2647 950 3597 $200 to $299 93 14% 15 to 19% 1196 894 2090 $300 to $499 887 134% 20 to 24% 921 934 1855 $500 to $749 3304 500% 25 to 29% 830 843 1673 $750 to $999 1423 215% 30 to 34% 447 656 1103 $1,000 to $1,499 518 78% 35+% 1114 2058 3172 $1,500 or more 52 8% Not computed 53 No cash rent 196 30% 269 322 % Cost Burdened 217% 411% 310% # Cost Burdened 1561 2714 4275 Wheatridge - 2000 Census Profile Trends and Comparisons 1990 2000 % Change Housing Units & Households # Housing Units 14130 14931 57% # Occupied Housing Units 13138 14559 10.8% Recreational 8 39 387 5% Total Vacant 992 372 -62.5% Homeownership Rate 53.5% 546% 2.1% Household Size Renters 2.03 2.10 34% Owners 2.34 2.29 -2.1% Overcrowded Units 225 536 138.2% Affordability Cost Burdened Households # 3321 4275 28,7% Cost Burdened Households % 27,1% 310% 144% Median Incomes Household Income $28,338 $38,983 37.6% Family Income $35,362 $47,512 344% Per Capita Income $15,451 $22,636 46.5% Median Housing Costs Contract Rent $375 $594 584% Value - Owner Occupied $88,600 $167,800 89,4% Mortgage Pmt. $779 $1,121 43.9% % Increase, 1990 - 2000 Comparison to State of Colorado State of Colorado 673% 32.7% $160,100 $1,197 $611 $47,203 $55,883 56.6% Hoosehcld Contract Rent Value + Owner Mortgage Pmt IncOOle Occupied Owner Occupied Units Renter Occupied Units Value - Owner Occupied Mortgage, Median Contract Rent, Median Household Income Family Income Change in Household Income, 1990 - 2000 % Cost Burdened Residential Growth Rate, 1990 - 2000 29.3% 22.4% Wheatridge. 54.6% 454% $167,800 $1,121 $594 $38,983 $47,512 310% Housing Preferences Would You Prefer To Jefferson Wheat County Ridge Buy new home that is smaller than an old home 18% 5% for same price Buy older home in good condition that costs less 45% 74% than a new home of the same size Purchase a fixer-upper that costs less than new 11% 11% or older home No preference as long as the residence is in my 27% 10% price range Owners Want to Buy a Different Home? Jefferson County Yes 28% No 72% Wheat Ridge 23% 77% "Could you afford your current home at its market rate today?" - Wheat Ridge Yes No I 45% I 55i Uncertain 0% 20% 40% 60% Survey Profile 2003 Wheat Ridge - 14,559 Households "How important are the following factors to you when deciding on a residence?" Wheat Ridge Type of residence (SF, condo, ete) Cost of housing to buy/rent Distance tal from work Distance from services Number of bedrooms Community amenities (schools, parks, etc.) o 2 3 4 5 Average Rating (scale of 1 "not at all important" to 5 "very important..) Why 00 You Want to Buy a Different Home? Jefferson Wheat County Ridge To live in a more rural setting 24% 36% To find a smaller home 16% 36% To live in a different community 21 % 27% To find a larger home 37% 18% To be closer to work 9% 9% Other reason 26% To find a single-family residence 11 % To find an attached residence 8% To live closer to city/town services 3% 'NOTE. Small Wheat Ridge sample size. Wheat Ridge - Household Survey Profile Housing Problems Behind in Payments During Last 2 Years Jefferson Wheat County Ridge 89% 86% 7% 10% 5% 4% Never 1 to 3 times 4 or more times Condition of Home Good or Excellent Fair (needs repairs <$5K) Poor (needs repairs $5 - $10K) Very Poor (needs repairs >$10K) Jefferson County 76% 19% Wheat Ridge 70% 27% 3% 2% 3% Home repairs completed within last 3 years Jefferson Wheat County Ridge 34% 33% 27% 31% 22% 24% 27% 21% 19% 19% 15% 19% 12% 12% 7% 5% 23% 17% Other Kitchen Fumace Plumbing Electrical Roof Basement finishl refinish Additions NONE "Do you agree that it is important. " For seniors to remain in the community For leachers, firefighters, police, elc.lo live in the community which they work To have a variety of rental and for-sale housing For children raised in the community to be able to live in the community as adurts o "Which of the following types of help with housing would you consider?" - Wheat Ridge Average Rating LON interest rehabilitation loan Down payment assistance 3.3 2.6 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% Percent responding 1 or 5 (scale of 1 "would not consider" to 5 "would definitely consider"') Extent to Which Housing is a Problem in Jefferson County It is the most critical problem One of the more serious problems A problem among others needing attention One of our lesser problems I don't believe it is a problem Jefferson Wheat County Ridge 7% 9% 30% 28% 35% 42% 15% 13% 13% 8% 2 3 4 5 Average Rating (scale of 1 "totally disagree" to 5 "totally agree") The Housing Collaborative, Inc. McCormick and Associates, Inc, Rees Consulting, Inc. and RRC Associates, Inc. 7 Employment Employment status Employed by others Retired Self employed Unemployed Homemak.er Student Jefferson County 54% 18% 13% 5% 5% 4% Wheat Ridge 58% 20o/d 9% 6% 4% 4% Have you or anyone in your household been laid off in the last year? None Self only Other employee only Self and other employee Jefferson County 84% 8% 5% 3% Wheat Ridge 80% 6% 6% 8% Employees per Household 1 3 1 3 Primary source of income Jefferson County Social Security Professional services (legal, etc.) Health care services Other ^.griculturel food Construction c:'ovemment Pt:rsonal services (car repair, etc.) Retirement income 19% 7% 12% 2% 5% 9% 11% 10% 9% 7% 7% 5% 6% !'::"rvice 12% 7% 6% 4% 2% 0% 5% 4% 3% 2% 2% Retail Manufacturing Unemployment TANF Where Residents of Wheat Ridge Work Wheal Ridge 5% Denver La kewood Arvada Other Jefferson County Broomfield Golden Boulder County Westminster Other 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% Percent of employees Source: 2003 Household Survey, 2000 US Census Ptvmkz~ STUDY SESSION AGENDA CITY COUNCIL MEETING CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO 7500 W. 29TH Avenue, Municipal Building January 31, 2005 6:30 P,M, ~, ('-- ' ,~ ( I \_ '\ f__\. \I \, \.,"'j '--1' V,,' , ~ S - C' J I APPROV AL OF MINUTES - December 6, 2004 January 10, 2005 APPROVAL OF AGENDA - Item 1. Staff Reports a) Sign Code RevIsions b) Outdoor Lighting Standards c) Multi-Family Housing Inspection Program Options d) Board and Commission Appointments Item 2 Ordinance Amending Section 5-45 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws Pertaining to Publtc Improvements Item 3 Potential Ordinance to Amend Vanance Voting Requirements M@Y!. ~~ I~~M@ CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO Municipal Building 7500 W. 29th Avenue 6:00 p.m, - 7:30 p.m, December 6, 2004 City Council members present: Karen Berry, Jerry DiTullio, Wanda Sang, Dean Gokey, Karen Adams, Mike Stites, Larry Schulz, Lena Rotola, Also present: Randy Young, City Manager; Patrick Goff, Deputy City Manager; City Clerk, Pam Anderson, Intenm Police Chief, Joe Cassa, Director of Public Works, Tim Paranto, staff APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion by Mrs Sang to approve the Minutes of November 15, 2004; seconded by Mr Schulz; carried 7-0, with Mr DiTullio abstaining Motion by Mr DiTullio to approve the Minutes of November 22, 2004; seconded by Mrs Rotola, carried 7-0, with Mr Gokey abstaining APPROVAL OF AGENDA Consensus to move Agenda Item 5 to be included under Agenda Item 1 Staff Reports Consensus was reached. Item 1. Staff Reports Interim Chief, Joe Cassa, Introduced the Item He Introduced Officer Peggy Rowlett who made a staff report regarding the LiveScan Fingerpnnt and Palm pnnt System This system IS an effort to modernize and stream-line the booking system to increase efficiency The item will be coming forward to a regular City Council meeting City Clerk, Pam Anderson, gave an Office of the Council staff report regarding up- coming calendar events STUDY SESSION MINUTES: December 6, 2004 2 Item 2, 2005 Budget Projections City Manager, Randy Young, introduced the item Deputy City Manager, Patrick Goff, made a PowerPomt presentation on City of Wheat Ridge 2005 Budget Projections This included revenue and expenditure history, the sales and use tax ballot question, 2005 Budget revenue adjustments, and revenue and expenditure projections Mr Goff answered questions from Council Item 3 Neighborhood Revitalization Strategy (NRS) Barbara Delgadillo, Assistant to the City Manager, introduced the item Jeff Winston, Principal In Winston and Associates, introduced the staff members on the project: Charles Buki of CZS, LLC, and Chris Cares, housing specialist. Mr Winston spoke about the concepts in the study that the team would conduct. He stated that the mission of the project was to help Wheat Ridge become a community of chOice In the Denver region Mr Buki discussed the revitalization strategies and the demand-based approach to the study Mr Cares discussed the business plan and the rational strategies It would be drawing on Item 4 Storm Water Management Program Update City Manager, Randy Young. Introduced the item He distinguished between the mandated Storm Water Management Program and the storm sewer Infrastructure poliCies Tim Paranto, Director of Public Works, outlined the Storm Water Management Program and the SIX Minimum Measures mandated by the Federal Clean Water Act. He detailed expenditure estimates for the program necessary to comply with federal and state law Mr Paranto recommended the lowest priOrity Capital Investment Program (CIP) project be delayed to fund the program until permanent funding sources are identified Each Councilmember commented on aspects of the program, public education and policy options regarding potential funding sources Mr Paranto stated that it is necessary to establish the program to begm publiC education Staff is prepanng for several meetings throughout the City regarding the program, and will have a preview and meeting dates forthcoming Direction to staff was to bring forward to a future City Council meeting the establishment of the Storm Water Management Program STUDY SESSION MINUTES: December 6, 2004 3 Item 5. Resolution Honoring the Vietnamese-American Community Mayor Gretchen Cerveny presented a proposed draft resolution to Council members regarding the Vietnamese community She received direction from Council to bnng the Resolution forward to the December 13, 2004 City Council Meeting Meeting adjourned at 9 37 P m (~v~ "-pamela Y(!:y derson, City Clerk APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL ON BY A VOTE OF to Lena Rotola, Council President M~\1 ~~@~ I~~M@ CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO January 10,2005 Mayor Gretchen Cerveny called the meeting to order at 8 00 P m City Council members present: Karen Berry, Jerry DiTullio, Wanda Sang, Dean Gokey, Karen Adams, Mike Stites, Larry Schulz, Lena Rotola, Also present: Randy Young, City Manager; City Clerk, Pam Anderson, City Treasurer, Mary Cavarra, Chief of Police, Dan Brennan Item 1, Presentation of the Police Department Organizational Assessment City Manager Randy Young introduced the item He introduced Dr Gerald Williams of G L. Williams Group, LLC, the firm that conducted the assessment. Dr Williams gave a brief description of his background and introduced the following members of the assessment team Dr Fred Rainguet of Rainguet and Associates, Dr Mary Dodge, CriminologiSt. University of Colorado, Karen Duffala, CAD/RMS Specialist; Jerry Gardner, Fort Lupton Police Chief Dr Williams discussed the strengths of the Wheat Ridge Police Department He described the methodology of the various aspects of the assessment and outlined each recommendation The consultant team answered questions from CounCil members Meeting adjourned at 9 14 P m .-." ~~ -- I:L\'ll '- ~ ~ Lei ( ~ , Pamela Y AMerson, City Clerk ../ APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL ON JANUARY 31, 2005 BY A VOTE OF to Lena Rotola. Council PreSident City of Wheat Ridge Community Development Department Memorandum TO: FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: City CouncIl \MeredIth Reckert, Semor Planner Sign Code January 31, 2005 On January 20, 2005, Planning CommissIOn finahzed theIr recommendations regarding reVISIOns to the sIgn code A total of SIX study sessIOns were held with Planning Commission pnor to theIr approval. FORMA T CHANGE: The content of the sIgn code has not been drastIcally changed; however, much of the eXlstmg mformatlOn will be presented m a chart format. Signs exempt from permlttmg, prohIbIted sIgns and permitted signs have been mcorporated mto charts (one for residential, agncultural, and pubhc faClhtles zonings and one for commerCIal, mdustrial and mixed use zonings) Staff feels that the charts wIll be easy to read and understand. The followmg are Issues that City Council may want to be aware of . Political campaign signs: Should there be hmltatlOns on the number of campaIgn sIgns allowed (one per candidate or Issue)? Should there be time hmlts for removal of campaIgn SIgnS? Planning CommissIOn recommended that there be no hmltatlOn on the number of campaign signs permitted, They have requested the city attorney research case law regardmg time hmlts. . Banners: Planning Commission recommended that all uses except for low densIty residentIal can have one banner all the time. The sIze allowance was hmlted to a sIze of one- half the sIze allowed for a permanent wall sIgn. . OfT-premises signs: The existing sign code does not allow off-premIses sIgns with the exceptIOn of billboards and pubhc/semi-pubhc sIgns. Planning Commission recommended that off-premises sIgns not be allowed in the city . Nonconforming regulations: Planning CommIssion's recommended changes, mcluded the addItIOn of a five-year amortization clause which would require all nonconforming signs to be brought into conformance within five years of adoption of the new sign code Staff feels that the Issue of amortizatIOn of eXlstmg non-conformmg SIgnS IS a sensItIve one which needs to be carefully contemplated. Many of the eXIsting business/property owners have rehed on the fact that those eXIsting nonconformmg SIgnS were allowed to remam m perpetUIty. CreatIOn of an amortizatIOn penod which affects so many properties has been uncharactenstlc of prevIOus Cay pohcy. Staff would be happy to discuss the proposed changes at a future study session with Cay Councll prior to proceedmg to publIc hearing. 2 City of Wheat Ridge Community Development Department Memorandum TO: City CouncIl FROM: Alan WhIte, CommunIty Development DIrector SUBJECT: Proposed LIghtmg Standards DATE: January 31,2005 PlannIng CommIssion has been working at crafting new Iightmg standards for the past seven months. Staff organized an Ad Hoc Lightmg CommIttee and met with the commIttee from September through November The CommIttee's recommendatIOns were presented to Plannmg CommissIOn In ordinance form. The ordinance revismg the City's outdoor hghtmg standards has been reVIewed by PlannIng CommiSSIon and was recommended for approval Staff IS recommending schedulmg a review of the new standards as a future study sessIon Item In order to discuss some of the proviSIOns of the new code There are some pohcy and manpower ImplIcations In the reVIsed standards. The proviSIons that may be of concern to Councll are The new standards are measurement-based, replacmg the current standards that are more nUisance-based. 2. Existing lIghtmg IS amortIzed m five years. All hghting must conform to the new standards wlthm five years, or earlIer If re-mmmg fixtures or replacement of bulbs can make the Iightmg conformmg 3 Pedestnan hghting mstalled m the future IS subject to the new standards 4 There are now standards included for lIghting m single famIly and two famlly zone dlstncts. 5. The standards wlll be fairly SImple to adminIster for new developments Conformance WIth approved plans and mspectlOns pnor to Issumg certificates of occupancy are standard practices for ensuring comphance. The larger problem IS existmg nonconformmg hghting and the mcrease m workload of APCO m dealmg WIth VIOlatIons. City of Wheat Ridge Community Development Department Memorandum STUDY SESSION Item 1. c 1/31/05 Randy Young, City Manage~) TO: FROM: Alan White, Community Development Director ~ MultI-family Housing Inspection Program SUBJECT: DATE: January 24,2005 Background: As a first step in designing a multi-family housing inspection program, It is important to know the potential number of units needing inspecting. According to City business license records, there are 2,472 multi-family umts In 95 multi-family structures containing 10 or more units in the City, Owners of structures With 10 or more units are reqUIred to obtain a business license. According to County data, there are 954 umts in 168 structures containing three to nine umts, From the 2000 Census we know that of the 14,559 occupied housing units in the City, 6,610 umts, or 454%, are renter occupIed, Subtracting the business license and County multi-famIly Units accounted for, there are 3,184 rental units that are not in structures with three or more units. These single family and duplex rental units could be anywhere in the City and we have no record of theIr whereabouts. The Census data would only help to identify the number of rental units by Census tract, and not by address. Staff has been investigating programs other jurisdictions have implemented regarding rental housing. Accompanying this memorandum IS a chart summarizing the programs of other Cities. Note that many citIes Imtwte inspections only on a complaint baSIS. Options Other than following our current practice of responding to complaints, the programs of other Jurisdictions seem to fall into three general optIOns for us to conSIder In implementing our own program. These options are described below, along with the pros and cons of each approach. Option 1: Self Certification by Owners This option would reqUIre the owner of a multi-famIly property (initially thiS would include complexes with three or more units) to obtain a certificate or lIcense from the City, The certIficate or license would be issued upon receIving a satisfactory Inspection that all units and the structure meet the minimum standards of the Housing Code Inspections would be conducted by indi VIdual 1 Inspectors or companies hired by the property owners that are pre-quahfied by the City to conduct such InSpectIOns, Pros: Cons . InitIally we know where the units are because they are reqUIred to have a busIness Itcense or are part of the County data base we have access to · No additional inspectors would need to be hIred by the CIty, . We would have the abihty to require all inspectIOns at the same time of year, or the inspectIOns could be staggered throughout the year . The cost to the City is the least of all optIOns. · We would need to add at least a part time clerical position and enforcement positIOn. . There is the potentIal for collUSIOn between Inspectors and owners u inspectors "pass" properties so they're hired again, or owners hire or pay only those Inspectors who "pass" their properties. . The program may not uncover all safety problems at complexes and may not result in viSible improvements to the exteriors of structures, . ThIS is probably the least effective option. Option 2: Certification by City Staff The City would hire a full-time inspector or inspectors and clerical positIOn (probably part time) to perform inspections and provide "pass" or "fail" evaluatIOns, Staff would follow through on correcting violations and court summonses. Pros. Cons: . The CIty would control the inspection and enforcement processes. . There IS no potential for collUSIOn between owners and Inspectors, . There is the potential for uncovenng real problems. . Inspections could be staggered throughout the year . ThiS is probably the most effective option. . Requires hiring minimum of 1.5 additIOnal FIE to perform inspections and c1encal work (funding from hotel/motel fund?) . The program probably couldn't be self-funding. . The program may not result in viSible improvements to the exterior of structures. Option 3: Certification by City-hired Firm The City would hue a qualified firm to provide all services reqUIred of the InspectIOn program, from conducting the InspectIOns and followmg up on violations, to record keeping. CIty staff would only be Involved m senous VIOlations that went to court, The City would need to go through an RFQ/RFP process to hire the firm to conduct the inspections. The firm wouldprovlde monthly or quarterly reports, 2 Pros Cons . There is mInimal potential for collusIOn between inspectors and owners. · No additional City staff would be reqUIred. . InspectIOns could be done all at the same time of year, or staggered throughout the year . The City doesn't have day-to-day control over the program. . FundIng is needed to hIre a firm, the cost is probably greater than hiring in- house staff · It is doubtful that the program could be self-funding. . The program may not result in visible improvements to the extenor of structures. With any of the optIOns, the City will need to adopt an ordinance establishing the program. Prior to draftIng an ordinance, staff needs direction on the folloWIng: 1. What are CouncIl's expectations for the program? Is the goal to improve the appearance of the property or to provide safe, decent, and habitable liVIng units? Or both? 2. Do we start with all rental units in the CIty or build up to that? 3 How far do you want to go WIth enforcement? Do we take the owners to court and receive court-ordered abatement of vIOlatIOns, or do we take action to order the umts or building vacated? 4. Should inspections be required annually for all structures, be staggered to account for the age of the structure, or be based upon the conditIon of the structure at the imtial inspection? 5. All of the options require some level of funding. What level of funding is acceptable? 3 ..-------- ~ - t: <.) ~ ~ '0 u.. o (f) ~ cc. ~ ") -i z o - '0 U1 0- (f) Z - ~ ~ ':) o ~ ~ :>< C (\) o 0.. :.e. C C r./l '0 (\) 0 ....C(\),oo ~S~c'O >-(\)(\)~(\) to .c.o ..;.. '0- ......... (\) (\) ? o(jco..g -J3?;;.(\) . oc_Cr./l (/I C' ? .s 'E 5 .(ii ....(\);;~~O~ c"::>'r./lw_c.o Cl)(\)(\)~(\)~c E ~:s ,OJ C .<<1 E '0 '0 ~ .t; .~ 0.. o? ,- (/).- c ()'O~'0 .50 C_(\)r./lr./lo 0"'0.......... o (\) r./l ~.c ~ (\) :S ,t; >-? C (;ac"<<ItO"<<Io .^ 0 '.;::; .....c '0 V' 0...- r./l A' C c.- (\) "" O? ,- r./l'" '0 ..;::; Ole c ~ (\) o cO'" 0.. ~:.o ~ '-g ~ ~ r./l C ,S (\)."::>"- C (\) ..... 0.. ,- (\) ., 0.. (\) r./l '0 ... (\)(\).cc.t;~ a: '0 ..... ,- ... .8."<<1 r./lC C(\)"U cg...? o"U~'O .- (\) 0 c ....o..c8 ._ r./l '-c'-- U .- 0 (\) (/I(\)oc Cl)... C 0.- 5 0 ?....r./l Eg:s'ii> to ... ,- 0.. . ... r./l 5 >- ~ o~r./lr-o ~ .~ ~ 0 .~ 0. ~ 3 ,(\) ?or./lo.. Ol?r- r./l (\)... C c a: U; ? .- c o ""'3 Q; :.au; (/I c 'c 'E ~..... ..,r./l (\) ~ CJ) w i= C3 a: w J: I- o LL o CJ) ~ <( a: C) ') ~..r: Q. Z o i= o W Q. CJ) Z - C) Z CJ) ::J o J: III .... c C1) E E o () o Q)g> ~ .2: 'S; :; t5 .m 7:: Q) Q) 0 ~ "- :;:: Q) ~ 2 (1l ~~ .sU5~ _Q)Q)OQ)Q) " ctS.:=:"-co..c..c...... E(1l(1len+-'f-C en .- +-' Q) .- c+-'o E .s Q) 0 ffi Q) Q) E 10 t5 C ~:"Q .~ en Q)::JQ)2::J ,- 2 0.. C ::J g E.- en 0 en 0 Q) C C C "- (1l::J-0..Q)Q)Q) o,..c ,::J.!::i:; en o:'.:::t::en:'.::: C "-::i:o::i:OEQ) 0.. 0..0 00 Q)enQ)_ ,"-= ..cE"-o~-=Q) +-,Q)c"'-oQ)..c "0 .0 0 :::= .- ... ..... Q)o~(1lCil<DO .....'--.....-.0...... (1lo..Q)eno en o 0.. .-.::t: .- C en C > 0 C '0 Q) C 0.- '0 0 .Q ,S Q) .- C - Q :;::'O~.,..;ciJ>-Q) (1lQ)ocen(1lo +-'>+-'a.>COX en (1l 0 +-' 0 .- Q) "- ~ (1l en ,- -:;:; Q) ~ en .(ii t5 E'u (1l '0 Q) .- C Q) "- ::J CiiCil 0 0...8 ~ o..cenoen::JQ) en f- (1l .S .S (1l en Q) en'O_ C a.> 'u (1lQ)E'O C en en +-' .~ "- C ' occa:;-O(1lC ,- 0 0 "- (1l 't: en .0 ~~+= 0)1- .~ 0 0 (1l g> 0.. 0 Q) .... a.> Q) ,- C t5 ..c ~ g g '0 .S 0 a.> +-'0 v, (1l.- ,.., C1) C c~+-'+-'.....+-' ~.ooent:: C '0 '0 ~ 0 Q) .S 0 E a.> Q) .S vr-o 0.. en en 0- .ca.>Q) ~ (1l (1l Q) en,_._ "- ....0.0 "-:!:c:t::':>. "", +-' +-' C _ t:: L. o C C .!!2 ::J 'u a.> 0 Ii. .co.co Q) 0) en y t5 Q. g. en .S ,~ C 2 E E C en ::J.- en Q)::J 0._ 000 0- +-' O 0 .- 0 a.> >- (1l .....J..c ,,-.0 en c o +: (,) 't:l III .;: (1l ciJ Cii ::::l'O,,-'O ",,(1l0::J C :; 0 <(<(en -roE ..c .~ ::i:t:: Q) (1l E+-' o en t::en02 ::J en +-' .c OciJ2~ o ::i: .c -- >-E~o C "- (1l ~ (1l1~ -0 0) 0) E C 0 C (1l a..- ::J en 0 C cQ)'Oc o ..c -0 .- ._ +-' Q) (1l Cil-o-ot:: 02c[15 .- ciJ a.> > 0 E (1l C'O E..c Oc :'.::: 0..:': 8 ::i: ::J -- Q) en ::i:-s"-Q) oen >-:; = Q) ...... o '..co --enf-::J +-' Q) "- en en '1i5 ::J C Q) EO>+-' E ~ ~ :;:: EO,=., (1l Q) +-' ....:::J:::::O enenQ)c en ."!: C ~ en en en en en en en en Q) en C C C C C C C C "- "- C 00000000 ,800 :g'U"t5.U:g.Ut5"t5 'O'OE:g ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 13 Q) ,~ 0 ~ en en en en en en en en ::J ::J ~ a.> en ccc:ccc:c:c:-o'Oo-a.>C: OC:~9-'~~ '0'0'0'0'0'0'0-0 ~-~~ Q) Q) Q) a.> a.> Q) a.> a.> oeno 9-':: enQ) en en en en en en en en _~ (1l (1l (1l ciJ (1l (1l (1l (1l E (1l."!: (1l .o.o.o.o.o.o.o.o'::enen::i:.o cccccccc-cccooc .- -- .- .- ~, 0 0 Q) (1lciJciJciJ(1l(1l(1lciJ~~~"-(1l 9- 9- 9- 9- 9- 9- 9- Q..- 0 0 .2 a.. EEEEEEEE~~~oE 00000000:'.:::enen20 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .S .S 1i5 0 ~ c: ~~ -0 en en -0 +-' Q) 0 c: 0 C C:;;:O'O,,-=c:?-oo .8 E ~ Q) 0 Q) a.> ::i: E ~00.Q EO-o ~~ g> .i::' "- 0 Q) +-' 0 "- (1l 0 enenOOLL~~.....J.....J o en+-'a.> Q) '0 a.> enQ)+-' (J) 1rr.... ."!::: (1l"S E o..o-E >-Q)o t:: "- Q)Q)0 0.."-0 0(1l+-, "-en+-' o..Q)c --ena.> .- c: en -oQ)en 20(1l c.- ~ (1l.....J .... Q) 0):>'0 >-:'.::: C -O(1l c: c: oQ)'O en..c "- .- +-' 0 >->-~ t::.o Q) '0 :>. 0..Q)= o E (1l "-,,-::J~ o..oc~ +-''t:c-6 a:; Q) (1l ::J '- 0."'0 en o C a.> "- +-' 0 ::i: a.> Q)~Q)..c en 0 ct:: C:Q)Q)::J Q) a. "- ....... .~ ~ a.> <5 .....J ._ .0 __ '0= Q) (1l "- -- ::J 0 o-c: Q)O "- .- Q)t5 o a.> c:o.. (1l en ,S .S :>. -o'Ot:: "- c: Q) 0(1l0.. '0 0) 0 Q)c:a. en ._ Oen- o..c.s o a.> C tl: .~ ~ c c: c: a.> (1l 0) '0 ..c ";;:: t:: Q) o ..c Z en en c: o ~ o Q) 0.. en c: '0 Q) en (1l .0 +-' c: .co 0.. E o o C o +-' C "- o ..c f- City of Wheat Ridge Office of the City Clerk Memorandum STUDY SESSION Item 1 ~7' ~1iI)~."" 1/31/0 A -, \1-: v "'I ,I '~O/ TO. Mayor & City Council /\/ Pam Anderson, City ClerG January 26, 2005 FROM. DATE SUBJECT: Board and Commission Appointments Attached is a chart that indicates the vacancies on the Boards and Commissions as well as the members up for renewal. Members that are interested in renewal are required by ordinance to submit an application or at least a letter of interest. The following are the future relevant dates and deadlines for this year's appointment process. February 7th: Application deadline February 14th: Informal reception for applicants in Municipal Building lobby February 28th: Council Meeting- Agenda Item for Appointments March 2nd: Term ending for 2005. - You will note on the chart that there have been few applications received. If you are aware of citizens that may be interested in volunteering you may wish to contact them as soon as possible. Thanks. pa:pa W W'W W W W W W W ----------- NNNNNNN~~I (325 010 23 2310 0 0 cococococomQ)Q)m 6-fu-~gl~.g o~.g ::r () :J -. ...-+' CD ~ C (t) I' ~ ^ :J ,~ ~. ::::J 15. - ::I "" ;:0 '< I~ Q. _. => I _. "'" 0 r,' Ol ~ '- 0 ::::l () en U)'(IJ 010 0 ~IC S:CD~~:;: :JOl 0.0..'< ~,~ :::J aCOCD 010.. => 3i"""" ::11 Ol i ' => I -< -<1-< <- -<1-< < <,< -0 -0 -ol-n -n Ol Ol OliO 0 :::J ~ ~,~ 5 :Jwcna.a. :::J ~~ 0. 0. => ::> 0'0 C C ;:::+ ;::::::; C C ~ ~ e!..e!.. OJ OJ 00 )>)> , -<I~-< z'I' momo (IJ,< (IJ , ,m o 2:;--<., on,. \S' ;-,.::; v -~ -~ o - ""'0- ~\ W W!W W ------ NNNN ----- 0000 Q)Q)COQ) -n <5 '< a. (IJ Ol en ,Ol I 91;J ~ OlOlo "'-3S CD Ol -. en en Ol '- )> I' -0 Qcr~ ~ g-< => ::+ en CD ::> =-- OJ)>)> 0"'''' )>13 3. Ol Ol WI i\:5, -- o co W ww N Ni~ -- -,- 000 CO--.JQ) WWWW -.... -- --- NNNN 00100 Q)Q)Q)Q) www NNN -- -- -- 000 Q)m--.J -100 CD "0 "0 ~ (l) (l) -< ::::l ::::l < 5' 5. Cf 10 110 3 Q: CD = oOJ)> S. o~. C )>,3 ~ IOl ,e!.. - -< m (IJ -', ~ -lOIO (l) 0 CD 0 '3"'3roS 3 () :t> w. en -. "0 ~. ~ s: "OO:JCD o '" Ol 3 5' 0 ,::l- rr 3CD(T~ (D::::J-<w ;a"'o z~2l. :t> ~ Is: }i m :;: :::r () :::r ::> a. o. Ol CD en g: CD () C ~ ~ CD :::l. OJ o Ol ~ a. Q en -l 2:! C1 1-1 lXJ o :t> ;;a C r -l ;;a ;;a m en "'tl o z en m /'\' /'\ 0 m\ m -l <, ::; :r m 21 z ;;a I I )> 0 0 "'tl 0 0' "'tl 0 01 :r , ,- I ' C1 )> ~ Z -l en .... c::.. c... )> ~ z -,.- N ~ en 0 --.;:: "" -5:... e:- N ...-\ -- N <D -- 0 -t> \ -----=..1 -00' Ol C ~ - ^~ en ~ I Ol I I z-< Om (IJ ,I 01 c' w. CD -I C ~ '" CD ~ s: 0 '- ;:01 Q) w 0 Q! ..., (/) ~ rr o ~ICD CD :J ::l', t.... ;:l. G)a.OlOJ Q) D3 '< ID I~ ~ ~ ::> '" CD ~ o "0 (l) ::::l ::::l i(Q 0'/'\ -g I~ :!.' 5' ::::l ~ lOa = = =1= OJOJ-o-o CCmOl 'o:Ci:::J~ Is S. ~,en lOCO:J1 oolOl o 0 'I a. a. CD CD -nlo OJ gl~ 0 '" C )> a.~ Ol e!.. ~ 0. '" 5~5 I ilf ~ Co '1-. I City of Wheat Ridge Community Development Department Memorandum TO: Randy Young, City Managefi-\' FROM: Alan WhIte, Community Development DIrector ~ SUBJECT: Requlnng Public Improvements DA TE: January 24, 2005 In 2001 when the new Chapter 26 (Zoning and Development) code was adopted, Section 26-110 enabled the City to require public improvements in connectIOn with the approval of any site development, without limitation, Case law tells us that any reqUIrements must meet "reasonableness" and "rough proportionality" standards - reasonably related to the development and roughly in proportion to the Impacts created by the development. These standards are meant to keep local governments from overreaching when approvmg development. Site development is defined as "all construction and improvements on any parcel, lot or tract of property within the city and on any structure (other than nonnal maintenance or repair allowedfor nonconfonning uses), including but not limited to, . , building, building additions or alterations, ' and erectio/l or moving of structures. " Site development also includes all those activities listed under "approvals sought" in the review process chart. These approvals include rezonmgs, planned developments, special use permits, planned building groups, and floodplain permits, among others. In Chapter 26, the construction of public Improvements is guaranteed m one of two ways, If improvements are to be constructed immedIately, a subdivision improvement agreement along WIth security (usually a letter of credit) to guarantee the constructIOn is required, If Improvements are to be constructed at a later date, a development covenant is reqUIred. The development covenant IS a "promise to pay in the future" if the City constructs improvements to the street in the future. The regulations enable the City to reqUIre funds to be placed in escrow (usually 100% of the cost of the improvements) when requiring a development covenant. Conflicting Regulations These Chapter 26 proviSIOns are in conflict with a proVISIOn m Chapter 5 (BUlldmgs and BUlldmg RegulatIOns) Section 5-45, adopted m 1996, enables the City to require public improvements in connectIOn with issuing a building permit; however, there are limitations on what can be required. These limitations are' L There must be speCific adverse effects created by the proposed constructIOn to warrant the improvements. < ~,.~l~.~ , \ 2. Installation of curbs, gutters, sidewalks and related road Improvements may nofbe required where , ~\" .\,' ~\ '-- vy'., J 1 a. Less than half of the properties on both sides of the street extending 500 feet from the property in question have curbs, gutters and SIdewalks, or b, The installation would be impractIcal, economically unfeasIble or not in the best interest of the city, 3 In no event shall installatIOn of curbs, gutters and SIdewalks be required If the cost of installatIOn exceeds 10% of the building permIt value. If In excess of 10%, or If the City decides the improvements can be placed at a later date, an escrow (either 10% or the actual cost if under 10%) is reqUIred to be deposited WIth the City, 4 If an escrow is required, a development agreement is required which remains In effect for 10 years. 5 The installation of curb, gutter and sidewalk is not reqUIred nor allowed on any street deSIgnated as exempt in the comprehensive plan, What Exactly are the Requirements? The conflicting regulatIOns create confusion for applicants and staff The following deficiencies in the existing building sectIOn are noted. 1 There are no streets designated as exempt in the current Comprehensive Plan, 2 Many owners argue the "economIcally unfeasible" issue, even If the cost IS well below 10% of the value of the building permit. 3, What are the specIfic adverse effects of an infill smgle family residential structure, or a tenant finish in a commercIal structure? The effects are minimal or difficult to quantify This requirement likely was written to reqUIre a nexus between the public improvements and the Impacts of the project 4 The 10% limItation rarely affects new reSIdential or non-residential constructIOn. Some commerCial building and site Improvements (minor remodeling to accommodate another use or paving a parkmg lot, for example) are minor and the installatIOn of public Improvements may exceed the 10% In such cases the public improvements cannot be reqUIred. 5. The escrow requirement is problematic from two standpoints, a) The maximum escrow amount is 10%, meaning the City must come up with the remaining 90% to construct the improvements, and do so within 10 years or refund the escrow, If the partIcular street where an escrow has been collected does not make it on the capital investment list within 10 years, the City has gained very little from the escrow b) City staff must create a record of and hold the escrows. If the Improvements are not installed within 10 years, the escrow is refunded. The property may change ownership several times during 10 years, makmg it dIfficult to find the anginal permIttee. Staff Recommendation: Community Development and Public Works staff members have discussed the two regulations at length and are recommendmg a revision to the Chapter 5 provisions. The reasons for the recommendatIOn are several 2 1) As opposed to the current provision, the regulation would apply evenly to new development; minor permIts would be exempt, 2) Deleting the 10 year time frame to construct provides some fundmg to the City regardless of when a street may be mcluded in the capital investment program, 3) The 10% hmltatlOn, when Imposed, leaves 90% of the cost of the public improvements to be paid by the City, and the cost can be expected to escalate yearly, 4) Dramage IS a problem cItywide and water quality requirements make drainage an even more crucial public improvement, and 5) In most cases with mdJVidual building permits, we are dealing with the installatIOn of curb, gutter and sidewalk. The requirement to install along the frontage of the property should be treated like the requirements to provide the required number of parkmg spaces or trees. The requirement to construct these mmimallmprovements for all new construction IS reasonable and IS not an economic hardship in most cases. With permits for major residential or commercial projects, there is usually some other process required where a condition can be imposed to construct the needed public improvements. The City can usually meet the reasonableness and rough proportionality tests in these instances. Attached is a copy of the proposed revisions to SectIOn 5-45 Deleted language is shown in strikethrough and new language is shown m bold. Corresponding changes would need to be made m Chapter 26, Article IV, SubdiVision Regulations. The changes would consist of deleting the proVisions for development covenants and replacing them With legislation that enables the City to reqUIre a payment m heu of constructing improvements. Summary of Proposed Changes: . Public improvements are required to be installed with any new development, but are not required WIth mmor permits such as for remodeling, building additions, or accessory structures. . Improvements may not be required to be installed based upon the location and functionahty of public Improvements on adjacent property . If the Public Works Department determmes that it is better to install the improvements at a later date in conjunction with a capital investment project, a payment in lieu of construction IS required for the full amount of the pubhc Improvements. . Exceptions or waivers to the installation or payment in lieu of mstallation can be made in conjunction With a subdiVIsion approval. We are asking for direction from Council as to proceed with the changes to the regulations or not. Some issues to consider: 1) This is a major change in policy, The changes would reqUIre the installation of curb, gutter and SIdewalk for any new residential structure (or an escrow), even on a street currently Without curb and gutter 2) Remodeling is a major question for staff. We need to be able to require public improvements when warranted for changes in use in commercial areas. Some changes in use might create the 3 need for a turn lane, There may only be minor remodelIng Involved to convert the bUIlding, and thus the publIc improvement requirement would not be triggered. Residential remodels should be exempt, but some (all?) commercial remodels probably should not be exempt. 3) Currently Chapter 5 allows an apphcant to appeal a decision to reqUIre public improvements to the Board of Adjustment. Should there be an appeal process in connectIOn with building permits? ApplIcants already have the abilIty to request a WaIver of public improvements in the subdIVISIOn process. 4 Sec. 5-45. Public improvements required. (a) ApplicatIOns for building penmts shall be reviewed by the department of public works to determine whether the proposed construction WIll require the installatIon or construction of public Improvements includmg, but not limited to, street pavmg, curbs, gutters, SIdewalks, dram age facilitIes, or other public Improvements as may be required by ordinance or the subdivision regulations. (b) If it IS determined by the department of public works that any such public Improvements are necessitated by the proposed construction based upon the speCIfic adverse effects created by the proposed construction, includIng, but flat limited to, Any new developments shall be required to install public improvements, including but not limited to drainage, traffic, street continUIty, curb, gutter and sidewalk, relocation or undergrounding of utIlitIes, street lightmg, or roadway construction, deemed by the Public Works Department to be necessary to mitigate impacts of the new development in proportion to those impacts. the department of public works shall so inform the buildmg official, and in sHch event a condition shall be inserted in the building permit which shall require the constmctlOn of such public improvement or public improvements by the property owner and the dedication thereof to the city Any new developments shall be required to install public improvements along the entire frontage(s) of the subject property, except as described in subsection c. The requirement for installation of public improvements shall be based upon location and functionality of existing public improvements on directly adjacent properties. All such improvements are to be constructed In full compliance with the ~ engineenng dIVision department of public works regulations, design standards and construction speCIficatIOns kept on file with the department of public works. The cost of any such Improvements shall be borne by the property mmer permittee, and the constructIOn thereof shall be at the sole cost, risk and expense of the property owner permittee, subject to the provisions of any applicable city ordmance, regulations or poliCIes. Subject to the requirements of paragraph (c) below, failure to construct any such reqUIred public improvements shall entitle the city to Withhold any certificate of occupancy, (c) If it is determined by the department of public works, after consideration of the factors set f-orth below that such public impro'/ements may be placed at a later date. The department of public works may determine that the public improvements be placed at a later date, based on the circumstances listed below If the circumstances do not warrant their immediate installation, the installation of public improvements may be delayed, and a cash payment in lieu of installation of public improvements shall be required. The payment shall be in the an escrow amount equalmg to one hundred (100) percent of the estimated cost of the required public Improvements and shall be depOSited with paid to the city, The cost estImate shall will be prepared by the permittee and accepted by ensineering dIviSIOn department of public works, based upon cUITent construction costs a fee schedule kept on file with the department of public works pnor to issuance of a buildIng permIt. Payment to the city will fulfill any and all obligation for installation of public improvements. (1) Planning Commission (in the case of minor subdivisions or City Council (in all other cases) shall have the authority to waive the requirements for installation of public improvements associated with a subdivision plat approval pursuant to section 26-411 of the Code of Laws. The installatIOn of curbs, gutters and sldevialks and related roadway improvements may not be required where less than half of the properties on the street extending five hundred (500) feet from the lot lines of the property In questIon, on both sIdes of the fronting street, have In existence curbs, gutters and side'.valks. (2) No curbs, gutters and sIdewalks public improvements shall be required for a remodeling of an existing building, or in conjunction with minor building permits, such as building additions or construction or remodeling of accessory buildings. (3) Installation of curbs, gutters and sidewalks would be impractical or economically unfeasible or not in the best interest of the cIty at the time of issuance of the certificate of occupancy, Security for public improvements constructed shall be required as provided in Section 26-413 of the Code of Laws. - (d) In no event shall installation of curbs, gutters or sidewalks be required if the cost of Installation of such curbs, gutters, SIdewalks and other impro'lements exceeds ten (10) percent of the cost of tAe buildiFlg permit value. In this case, an escrmv In the amount of ten (10) percent of the value of the buildIng permit shall be deposited with the city by the property mvner prior to issuance of a building permit for the improvements. In addItion, the installation of curbs, gutters and SIdewalks shall neither be reqlmed nor allowed upon any street designated as an exempt local street in the cIty's comprehenSive plan nor shall the department reqUIre an escrow for publIc Improvements. (e) In any such event, a development agreement shall be signed by the mvner of the property, pursuant to the subdiviSIOn regulations of the CIty, whIch development agreement shall remain in full force and eff-ect for ten (10) years from the date of executIOn by the property owner, unless sooner released of record by the cIty. (f) ."'ny owner, contractor or de'ieloper who is aggrieved by a decision of the department of publie works requiring installation of such. publIc improvements or escrowmg of fHnds in heH of construction shall have the nght to appeal the department's determination to tHe board of adjustment pl.mmant to section 261 of the city's Code of LaViS. (Ord, No 1996-1039, ~ 1,7-29-96) Secs. 5-46--5-55, Reserved. City of Wheat Ridge Community Development Department Memorandum TO: ~ Randy Young, City Manager FROM: Alan WhIte, Community Development DIrector OOJJ SUBJECT: Vanance Votmg Rules DATE: January 24,2005 Sections 2-53, 2-61 and 26-115 of the MUnicipal Code reqUIre a "super maJonty" vote of the Board of Adjustment to approve various Items, chIef among them variances. The "super maJonty" vote is defined as 6 votes when 7 or 8 members are present; 5 when 6 are present; and 4 when 5 are present. This votmg reqUIrement applies to Planning Commission or City Council if a vanance is combined with another application, such as a subdivision. WhIle this votmg reqUIrement may have been needed m the past to make it more difficult to gam approval of what I would term use vanances, the amendments to the Code adopted m 2001 do not allow the City to grant a vanance to anythmg that IS prohibited, nor to anythmg other than development standards or Items specifically set out for vanances. We have had variance cases in front of the Board of Adjustment where the vote is 5-3 m favor of a motion to approve the request, but because of the votmg reqUIrement, the request is denied because It takes 6 affirmative votes to approve. If only 7 members are present, an application can be demed with a vote of 5-2! To make It even more confusing, If a motion to deny the request receives a 5-3 vote, the motIOn to deny fmls and under a stnct application of the voting rules the request IS approved WIth only 3 favorable votes. (If this occurs we encourage the Board to then make a motion to approve which then fails.) It is no wonder that applicants leave the heanngs bewildered. Smce 2000, we have had seven cases that were denied because a super majority vote was not obtamed. In one case we were sued, but the Court ruled m our favor. While this is not a large number, consider that the total is seven cases out of 62 total cases during the five years. There are other actions taken by the Planning CommIssion or City Council with far greater impact than a vanance, such as a rezoning, whIch reqUIres only a simple majority vote. Staff Recommendation: I would propose a code amendment which would revise the voting reqUIrement to require a sImple maJonty to approve the actIOn. I would like to receive direction from Council at their next study seSSIOn, These votmg rules are also embodied in the bylaws of the Board, Their bylaws would have to be amended. ~I G'\'30 f, HI '% (c"v\r,', c\ ~ 1\1I. '" o(h. \-- ry, . '1 l I~ \; \~-" ~ G\ \ lc(\)~~ \- \~ CVY\ f'lCi~ k t ~~\.- -lVII/'-^- ,:) y 'S ~V)\ .. ("-"G-~\ \ '\"\ 1- L~\,' C -r ~' lv0 J C' ;~\ 0 .~~ l !Y\ 4 (i' ~' ~ v 1\ , ~l \ ~\~ ,\)\ \J,~lr (\ ,~~ V', '\ C n ~lt'y\\~ II' ~ ( .J ., Q U \.\ (~ J ::..-' () \, ,\:-() i .'!-Iv ) ^, ^) '-.Q, } ^^) A ( ~!\ '- J 1\ ('\' ("--- \ \l Cvi $l;~ J ( , \jJ' ( "-dJ '.1 V , (" v :) ,cr" " I f'.... ') \Y' v'\\ c- t * ',-:Jr,,'...., "-C A-.c ) " ( , , '-'VI'...) ;., j' ! " ~ ,,""- \.A.,\,~)c,vy')\, ( \"..~, ,'~\ ,. . ~I J, 'Y)J-- \ '\ '. ~ ~ j_\~\'V ~C\ (\,"J ) 1'0'\ it: Vd'-. - C u,- \ '~(C"\ tv ('r'~'\ \ \ ~-,v,' ~ C\.., d,) ,) \-\ EL\i \ '-$\1') ,\ & ......... ~ I p r \, J ~ '\)u't.l- \ . ~ [r.v--J _. 'j ~!;;-'i '~~ \ \ \ -\j~\ 4' \ ~^-\~"" ,~" \i'.\C\ ~%\ 2\ r *() c." \- \ \.J * ~ 1"j'4-_, v'\./\ niL .' , <f-\r \.J,.,jt Y J i '0" Id\ r '\ ~ \\...-'lJ \-C. ... s-, (r' ~ , I ~ (, I \S '\ i' \\s, .. '- , ~,' U c - v.:r-=:> 'I \j). :{{,;;.,.oV) . . I \. T Ov' :) c.. ,}J,... ~~/. c\ (~~. C\ ~\vD\" ,j~:J) ,\" , j -- , l ~ \ \. JC '1,- J .\,::J i ~ G\;yj /v"" it \ v~ Lv,.) t c ~ y\ 'V' \. ,J ~ \,\\~{ '~~~\,\-_ ~L II '\ r\, \ \)l ~ c ~ V ''') i r ~ \ I '..f" ,\.'\ @ ~~, C \yJv\ie:; ~ ~G~ ~Y0VJ ~i t, "" ~~..Q 0, G~ G'y .:~c" \~, '\ I \ C~\V r, ~\. - 6 . I iJ ,j ""\ iV;,~0' l'j I it ()1S1 ~~\ ~hf1 '\ '-"oJ ,....,-<\..,\;-""] ~ >J ~,~ l'=~L C ~0-^A~~ \1 ,- ",' -\.. '\., ,-', ~ \. l'2("") \ S U-.)r..) , .....!v,-\ " ' "") ..j-, ,'.Q~\J- {} i\.. '-J '\J\~..\\ ,,'\..,~ ') \ ' \ ..... '/ ' i\~_) G~),._'\..../ ---.. \ \ '- \ IV (Y'y,......... C\ \.jY IS$--- '- , i ,> '''I ..!))o~"'" C''', \. l i.. C \ \... \'-li.. "-:\ ~\ -'~, :J co ( './ \: \) r ~'''""' ,r' ,; C ,,\j'J.. r\ ~ J)..,....v' '\ ...f V..;~\ \. ') \2.. (.."",,'-'2-l t ~ c\ c , ~ I I G G \.' '"\ '\' \ \ --------