Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Minutes 03/26/2007 fIi\It"~'~ll ~~ ~~ \ttI._lI ~ .1URNIl._ CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO March 26. 2007 Mayor DiTullio called the Regular City Council Meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Councilmembers present: Karen Adams, Karen Berry, Dean Gokey, Lena Rotola, Wanda Sang, Larry Schulz, Mike Stites, and Terry Womble. Also present: City Clerk, Michael Snow; City Manager, Randy Young; Deputy City Manager, Patrick Goff; City Attorney, Gerald Dahl; Director of Community Development, Alan White; staff; and interested citizens. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF Februarv 26. 2007 Motion by Council Member Sang to approve the Minutes of February 26, 2007; seconded by Council Member Womble. Council Member Berry asked to change the term appointment date noted in the minutes for the District I Planning Commission appointment of Davis Reinhart; appointment date correction of 4/1/07. Motion carried 8-0. CITIZENS' RIGHT TO SPEAK Aaron Cordova from Jefferson Center for Mental Health, informed the City of the four office locations in Wheat Ridge and spoke of the Physical and Mental services provided. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Motion by Council Member Schulz to add to the agenda Item #5: Board & Commission Appointments; seconded by Council Member Sang; carried 8-0 PUBLIC HEARINGS AND ORDINANCES ON SECOND READING Item 1. PUBLIC HEARING ON RESOLUTION 06-2007 - A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE WADSWORTH CORRIDOR SUBAREA PLAN. (CASE NO. WPA-06-03) (Continued from February 12, 2007) Mayor DiTullio opened the public hearing. Resolution 06-2007 was introduced by Council Member Stites, who read the Executive Summary. Jeff Winston of Winston Associates shared a PowerPoint presentation outlining his arguments for adoption of the Plan. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: March 26, 2007 Page -2- Alan White presented a staff summary of points in support of the proposed Plan. Mayor DiTullio called for a break at 8:02 p.m.; resuming at 8:12 p.m. The following 21 speakers were present and spoke in opposition to the resolution: Wheat Ridge residents and business owners, Debbie Fidrich, Bruce Martinsen, Louise Turner, Shirley Walker, Patricia Fisher, Tom Slattery, Howard Gerelick, Kent Davis, Larry Merkl, Phil Plummer, David Ohmart, Claudia Worth, Janelle Shaver, Marty Skjordahl, Jed Lemmons, Susie Seeds, Nancy Snow, Roger Loecher, Nikolas Loecher, Bridgette Skjordahl and Virginia Tomko. Their comments included, but were not limited to: . No attempt has been made to identify and quantify impacts to residents and businesses within the subarea. . The effort to notify and involve the public in general and the residents and businesses affected by the Plan were inadequate. . The little information that residents and business owners have received or heard never mention that it will bring in large, high-rise apartment buildings. . Planning Commission members voted this down because it was ill-conceived. Council is urged to read the minutes. . The plan explicitly states that the City should acquire lots and condemn as necessary. This affects many of the residences all the way down to Teller Street. . Remove all language that mentions changing the Charter with respect to density and height restrictions or property condemnation. . Homes affected by this Plan, especially those potentially open to condemnation, will lose their value. . The result of this plan is in direct contradiction to NRS recommendations: Wheat Ridge has too many rentals, as stated in the NRS and as residents have said for over 30 years. This calls for high-density rezoning and development, which will eventually bring an increase of rentals. . Denver has shown in several recent articles that all the areas in its City that are similar to the design of this plan, have few to no children; the NRS study calls for changes that generate Strong Households, which includes families with children. . Council Members are encouraged to drive through Arvada Center and ask themselves whether they'd want to live there, raise children there and whether it is truly what they'd want in Wheat Ridge. . Twelve-foot sidewalks are not needed, they don't actually bring more people and aren't necessary to handle the volume of pedestrians that will need to use these sidewalks. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: March 26, 2007 Page -3- . The neighborhood meetings where participants were asked which plan option they would prefer were given documents that showed beautiful pictures only of the plan option that Winston Associates wanted, which greatly skewed the participants impressions of the options. . This plan is very much like Arvada's downtown plan, which eliminated necessary parking, created a serious hindrance to business viability and residences there are now having difficulty selling. . The plan brings in the same high-paced, high-density living that is present in the downtown area of Denver. Residents of Wheat Ridge like the slower pace identity of the City and do not want that changed. . There needs to be as much focus on the "vision" the residents of Wheat Ridge have as the Council has put on the vision for business and tax revenue improvements; Council owes this to its residents. . Such drastic changes should be done only based on citizen demand, of which there was none. . The expansion that CDOT will propose is unlikely to be any more than one lane on each side, not all the extra lanes and developments. . Under this Plan, no consideration was given to Federallntermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act - ISTEA, the intent of which is to allow communities to adopt plans that can restrain adverse impact on the community and demand mitigation of those impacts when federal funds are used for roadway improvements. The present proposals invite CDOT to adversely impact the corridor by providing a 150-162 foot right of way that will not fit in the existing urban fabric. . All that is required by CDOT for a six-lane roadway is 132 feet - why not adopt a plan with a roadway of 132 feet. . A recent article from DRCOG listing the top most-congested areas in the Metro area does not mention the Wadsworth corridor. . This plan is detrimental to the customer/vehicle access to the existing stores on Wadsworth. . Business owners cannot and do not want to give up any more of the area they currently have. . The roadway design in the Plan makes a bypass through Wheat Ridge, and right by all the businesses, which is why Arvada and Lakewood want this plan. . If properties are condemned because of this plan, the City should buy these properties at their current value, rather than the value they will have once they are condemned. . Other cities that have had these similar problem areas have adopted plans that preserve the characteristics and value of the neighborhoods - and residents and business owners are very happy. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: March 26,2007 Page -4- . The town center already has a roadway providing off-highway access and the parking there is already busy and heavily used; it's a good thing and this messes it all up. . Every roadway widening in the City's history has resulted in lower property values along its corridor. . The plan calls for help to business in the area, but it should be to support the existing businesses, not to wipe them out. . Increased density means increased crime and needed services, which means more needed Police, Fire, Sewer, Water and other services. The plan hasn't addressed this impact and compared it to its benefits. . No one would fault Council if it voted to postpone adoption of this plan to give it the additional attention and study it deserves. The following speakers were present and spoke in support of the resolution: Wheat Ridge residents and business owners, Brian DeLaet, Denise Waddell, Fran Langdon, Tracy Langworthy, Ryan Fisher, Britta Fisher, Katie Thorshein, Terrell Williams, Tom Abbott, Curt Gilmore, Thomas Ripp, Davis Reinhart, Gretchen Cerveny, and Kim Calomino. Their comments included, but were not limited to: . The Plan creates a "plan" for the vision of the city. . This Plan is a "community plan"; the result of the input of large numbers of citizens from different perspectives. If this is not passed, it says community members aren't valued. . To vote this down would throwaway over $100k invested in the study and stop the process of devising a plan. . The current condition of Wadsworth presents a negative image. This plan makes for a welcoming "front-door" presentation of the City of Wheat Ridge. . This is not a plan to widen Wadsworth. . The Plan will provide predictability as well as flexibility to investors and business owners, which adds value. . This plan expands Right-of-Way and build-able area by reducing setbacks, creating a more attractive community. . CDOT will be widening Wadsworth because of increasing traffic. This Plan gives Wheat Ridge the power to negotiate with CDOT when they approach the area for widening and improvements. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: March 26, 2007 Page -5- . City Staff and consultants met with hundreds of residents and business owners to get input into devising this Plan. . The plan provides for safe traffic flow, while providing a vision for commercial development and a Multi-use residential area that acts as a buffer to the neighboring lower-density residential areas. . The City needs some high-density commercial development in the City that will attract people to spend their money there. . This is a plan for the future - it will provide for guidance in a change process that will take many years. . The plan provides for the needs identified in the NRS. . The current roadway is too dangerous for pedestrian-based retail. This plan provides a welcoming design for pedestrian and vehicle retail that is safe. . Sidewalks next to the roadway are known as snow-throw zones and should be placed away from the roadway, as this plan does. . This plan does address the needs of the type of pedestrians who already visit the businesses in this area. . This plan could make Wheat Ridge one of the most progressive areas in the Denver area. . The plan calls for future citizen involvement and future engineering study, which the opposition says is the reason it should be voted down; but this is the first step in the process. . This plan sends the message that Wheat Ridge is a city that welcomes newcomers and businesses. . One resident, as a Civil Engineer and Planner of 25 years and participant in the development plan for the Lowry area, says no plan he ever worked on of this type ever negatively affected property values. . Wadsworth divides the City in half - this plan makes it friendly for pedestrians and would remove this division. Mayor DiTullio called for a break at 9:36 p.m., resuming at 9:46 p.m. At the request of Mayor DiTullio, Mr. Dahl reported that because a public hearing wasn't held for the adoption of the Wadsworth Corridor Plan as part of the Comprehensive Plan in 1999, which is required by law, its adoption at that time, as part of the Comprehensive Plan, does not stand. Council Member Gokey expressed his support for this plan, but that the width proposed is not necessary. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: March 26,2007 Page -6- Council Member Berry read into the record an e-mail sent to her by a resident in support of the Plan. Council Member Berry further asked Mr. White to expound on the means and manner used to inform and involve residents of the public meetings and hearings on the Plan when the study began. Council Member Womble stated his opposition to this plan because of the lack of discussion amongst the affected residents and business owners. Council Member Adams asked Mr. White whether the Council came to consensus to support the current plan during the July Study Session when Council first heard the Plan. Mayor DiTullio closed the public hearing Motion by Council Member Stites to: 1. Endorse the goals, land use concepts, urban design recommendations, and implementation steps of the proposed plan. 2. Delete any text references to 162 feet of right of way and frontage roads and to modify all maps and illustrations to delete depictions of the same. 3. Conduct further study of the right-of-way needed to widen Wadsworth, to: a. Assess whether the right-of-way should be 150 feet or less. b. Complement the general planning goals of the proposed draft plan. 4. Modify the current draft of the Plan to incorporate the above changes. Staff shall schedule a public hearing to adopt the modified Plan no later than September 26, 2007. 5. Allocate funding for the additional study requested and for the additional work to be performed to modify the plan and prepare a new draft. The allocation of additional funding shall be considered through a budget amendment request at a later date. Seconded by Council Member Gokey. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: March 26, 2007 Page -7- Motion by Council Member Berry to amend the previous motion as follows: 1. Endorse the goals, land use concepts, urban design recommendations, and implementation steps of the proposed plan. ~ Strike out Gelets c:ny-tsy.~ roferenC8::: t9--1-52 feot of right of 'Nay ~md fF~mt3go roads ~nE! modify all !;lC:~::: :ma--..Hk:lstr~ti~'l€ ~o delete depictions of the G-:::me-:- ~ Conduct further study of the right-of-way needed to widen Wadsworth, Strike out te;. C. "Ass:::ss whethor the right of 'J:ay should b8 180 f-eet or 13::::::-. b. G8m;::lemen~ ~he gonoral ;::Ia-nning goals of ths ;:xoposod draf. ;::I~ And Insert "including but not limited to detailed road design studies to assess the feasibility of the Multi-Way Boulevard and refine and finalize design concepts for intersections. Public input shall be gathered during all phases of the design process. Before October 23,2007, the final design concept shall be brought before the Planning Commission and City Council for ratification and inclusion into the subarea plan. 4. Strike out "Modify tho ~~rront draft of tho ;::1:Y.l ~o in~3r3te-tRe abovo E:,~c:ng3::;. Sffiff :::h311 3chodul€ c: ;::1::~lic hearing to adq~t ~he modifioc plcn na--later ~hsn Soptombsr 28, 29Q..7..; and Insert "Before October 23,2007, a public hearing shall be held to consider adoption of an overlay zone district that establishes structure "build to" lines." 5. Allocate funding for the additional Strike out "study requeste~ c:nE! ~he additional 'Nork to be perfocr.1eG-to r.1odify ths ;:I:::n :::m:i-i*s;::c:r8 c: new Gffif.. Tho allocation 8f c:fkHt.i8-.'lc:1 fl::nfi.i.A.g €hc:ll be considoroE! ~hr~ \3 ~I::~st 3mondm3n~ re€f**~st 3t 3 btor d3tO." and Insert "Multi-Way Boulevard and intersection study. Up to $40,000 shall be allocated for the study. The study shall be completed no later than September 1 , 2007." 6. Insert "Within 30 days of city council approval of the final design concept, the city shall consider, at a public hearing, adoption of an Art in Public Places ordinance for the area within the Wadsworth Subarea Plan. The ordinance shall designate one percent of the City's and State of Colorado's capital construction projects of $50,000 or more for the purchase of public art and the promotion of cultural events." Amendment seconded by Council Member Adams. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: March 26, 2007 Page -8- Motion by Council Member Sang to extend meeting past 11 p.m.; seconded by Council Member Schulz; carried 7-1, with Council Member Gokey voting No. Council Member Berry Called for the Question on the Amendment; seconded by Council Member Rotola; carried 8-0. Amendment tied 4-4 with Council Members Womble, Gokey, Sang and Stites voting No; Council Members Schulz, Rotola, Adams and Berry voting Yes; Mayor DiTullio broke the tie by voting yes. Motion carried 5-4. Orioinal Motion, as amended, tied 4-4 with Council Members Womble, Gokey, Sang and Stites voting No; Council Members Berry, Adams, Rotola and Schulz voting Yes; Mayor DiTullio broke the tie by voting yes. Motion carried 5-4. Mayor DiTullio called for a break at 11 :15 p.m., resuming at 11 :24 p.m. DECISIONS. RESOLUTIONS. AND MOTIONS Item 2. APPROVAL OF THE ANNUAL RENEWAL FOR THE COMPUTER AIDED DISPATCH AND RECORDS MANAGEMENT SYSTEM IN THE AMOUNT OF $55,135.00. Item 2 was introduced by Council Member Womble, who read the Executive Summary. Motion by Council Member Womble to approve the annual support and licensing renewal for the Computer Aided Dispatch and Records Management System in the amount of $55,135.00 to Logisys; seconded by Council Member Schulz; carried 7-1, with Council Member Gokey voting No. Item 3. AWARD ITB-07-17 2007 SLURRY SEAL PROJECT IN THE AMOUNT OF $302,108.41. Item 3 was introduced by Council Member Gokey, who read the Executive Summary. Motion by Council Member Gokey to award ITB-07-17, 2007 Slurry Seal Project, to Quality resurfacing of Henderson, Colorado in the amount of $302,108.41. I further move that a contingency amount of $30,210.84 be approved; seconded by Council Member Sang. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: March 26, 2007 Page -9- Motion by Council Member Berry to amend the Motion and add that the Director of Public Works be authorized to issue change orders up to a total contract and contingency amount of $332,319.25. I further move that all costs associated with this contract be paid from Acct. No. 30-303-800-884, and that these funds be encumbered for the length of the project in accordance with Ordinance 787, 1989 Series; seconded by Council Member Rotola; carried 6-2, with Council Members Womble and Gokey voting No. Original Motion as amended carried 7-1, with Council Member Gokey voting No. Item 4. APPROVAL OF A CONTRIBUTION TO WHEAT RIDGE 2020 (WR2020) IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,500,000 FOR THE PURPOSE OF IMPLEMENTING THE VISION AND MISSION OF THE CITY COUNCIL AS OUTLINED IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD REVITALIZATION STRATEGY. Item 4 was introduced by Council Member Adams, who read the executive summary. Motion by Council Member Adams to approve a contribution to Wheat Ridge 2020 in the amount of $1 ,500,000 for the purpose of implementing the vision and mission of the City Council as outlined in the Neighborhood Revitalization Strategy; seconded by Mr. Schulz; carried 8-0. Citizens present were Gretchen Cerveny and WR2020 Director, Rob Osborn who spoke in favor of the Motion. Item 5. BOARD & COMMISSION APPOINTMENTS. Motion by Council MemberBerry to appoint: Alan Bucknam to Board of Adjustment, representing District I; term to expire 3/02/09; seconded by Mrs. Rotola; carried 8-0. Motion by Council Member Sang to appoint: Jennifer Snow to Parks & Recreation Commission, representing District II; term to expire 3/02/08; seconded by Council Member Gokey; carried 8-0. Motion by Council Member Schulz to appoint: Lynne Moyer to Animal Welfare & Control Commission, representing District IV; term to expire 3/02/10; seconded by Council Member Rotola; carried 8-0. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: March 26,2007 Page -10- Motion by Council Member Stites to hold an Executive Session for a conference with the City Attorney and appropriate staff under Charter Section 5.7 (b) (1) and C.R.S. 24- 6-402 (4) (B) regarding advice on pending litigation: IBC lawsuit; I further move to adjourn the Council Meeting upon the completion of the Executive Session; seconded by Council Member Womble; carried 8-0. Meeting adjourned at 11 :50p.m. IIW~ Michael Snow, City Clerk APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL ON APRIL 9, 2007 BY A VOTE OF q; to 0 111 vdQic~ Mike Stites, Mayor pro tem The preceding Minutes were prepared according to S47 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. Recordings and DVD's of the meetings are available for listening or viewing in the City Clerk's Office, as well as copies of Ordinances and Resolutions.