Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/6/15City of WheatRoge PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA August 6, 2015 Notice is hereby given of a Public Meeting to be held before the City of Wheat Ridge Planning Commission on August 6, 2015 at 7:00 p.m., in the City Council Chambers of the Municipal Building, 7500 West 29th Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado. *Agenda packets and minutes are available online athttp://www.ci.wheatridge.co.us/95,Planning- Commission 1. CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER 2. ROLL CALL OF MEMBERS 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 4. APPROVE THE ORDER OF THE AGENDA (Items of new and old business may be recommended for placement on the agenda.) 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES—July 16, 2015 6. PUBLIC FORUM (This is the time for any person to speak on any subject not appearing on the agenda. Public comments may be limited to 3 minutes.) 7. PUBLIC HEARING A. Case No. WZ-15-03: An application filed by dcb Construction, Inc. for Carlson Associates, LLC., for approval of a zone change from Industrial -Employment (I -E), Commercial -One (C-1) and Agricultural -One (A-1) to Industrial Employment (I -E) for property located at 4901 Marshall Street. B. Continuance of Case No. ZOA-15-03: An ordinance adding a new Article XIII of Chapter 26 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws concerning repair of construction defects. (TMs case is continued from the public hearing on July 16, 2015. Enclosed are the original staff report, July 16 minutes, and a revised ordinance.) S. OTHER ITEMS A. "Back to School" 2015 Planning Refresher Workshop on August 22 9. ADJOURNMENT Individuals with disabilities are encouraged to participate in all public meetings sponsored by the City of neat Ridge. Call Heather Geyer, Public Information Officer at 303-235-2826 at least one week in advance of a meeting if you are interested in participating and need inclusion assistance. I City Of ]�9rWheatRoge PLANNING COMMISSION Minutes of Meeting July 16, 2015 CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Chair BUCKNAM at 7:03 p.m. in the City Council Chambers of the Municipal Building, 7500 West 29`" Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado. 2. ROLL CALL OF MEMBERS Commission Members Present: Alan Buckram Emery Dorsey Donna Kimsey Scott Ohm Steve Timms Pam Olson Amanda Weaver Commission Members Absent: Dirk Boden Staff Members Present: Meredith Reckert, Senior Planner Mark Westberg, Project Supervisor Gerald Dahl, City Attorney Kelly Stevens, Deputy City Clerk 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 4. APPROVE ORDER OF THE AGENDA It was moved by Commissioner TIMMS and seconded by Commissioner OHM to approve the order of the agenda. Motion carried 7-0. 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES—June 4, 2015 It was moved by Commissioner OHM and seconded by Commissioner DORSEY to approve the minutes of June 4, 2015, as written. Motion carried 5-0-2 with Commissioners OLSON and WEAVER abstaining. Planning Commission Minutes — 1 — July 16, 2015 6. PUBLIC FORUM (This is the time for any person to speak on any subject not appearing on the agenda.) No one wished to speak at this time. PUBLIC HEARING A. Case Nos. WZ-14-14 and WA -15-05: Commissioner OHM disclosed that he has worked with Regency Centers in the past. He is not currently working with them now and has had no recent contact with Mr. Scheckel or Regency Centers. There were no objections to Mr. Ohm voting on this item number. Ms. Reckert gave a short Power Point Presentation regarding the planned development process and the application. She entered into the record the contents of the case file, packet materials, the zoning ordinance, and the contents of the digital presentation. She stated the public notice and posting requirements have been met. The applicant is requesting approval of a Planned Commercial Development Specific Development Plan with a variance from the 0 to 20 -foot build -to line on the property located at 12525 W 32°d Avenue. This requires a two-step process: first the approval of the zone change and Outline Development Plan is done. The second step is the Specific Development Plan, which focuses on the details of the project such as lot layout, drainage, and street improvements. Commissioner OHM asked about some easements shown on the packet documents. He also wanted to know when a plat would be available. Ms. Reckert stated that staff is currently working on a plat and obtaining the necessary approvals. The easements in question will be vacated by the City. Commissioner TIMMS asked when this center was initially developed. Ms. Reckert said she believed the first development began around 1969 with more added in 1973. Commissioner TIMMS asked about the location of the existing detention basin for the center. Mr. Westberg answered that there currently is no drainage basin on site. Adequate drainage accommodation is one of the issues with the site and this new drainage basin will help alleviate this. Planning Commission Minutes —2— July 2— July 16, 2015 Commissioner TIMMS asked if the access from 32nd Avenue is offset. Perhaps offsetting the intersection would help make the intersection safer. What about signage? Are there plans for any more signs in the future? Mr. Westberg responded that the elevation and layout of the area make the entrance to the center awkward. City staff has looked at this intersection quite a bit. Ms. Reckert stated there would be no additional signs on the fueling site and the applicant is okay with this. Commissioner KIMSEY asked about emergency overflow for the proposed detention pond. Mr. Westberg stated the drainage will flow from Wright Court into the detention pond. Commissioner WEAVER stated she was concerned about walkable space around the detention pond. Will the pond area be fenced for safety? Ms. Reckert said that yes, the detention pond will be fenced for safety. In addition, there will be very little walkable space behind the proposed fueling station and the detention pond, which should help prevent accidents with pedestrians. Commissioner BUCKNAM asked about the potential increase in traffic at the center, especially in light of new housing developments going up in the area. Mr. Westberg responded that existing traffic before the addition of this new fuel center warrants adding a signal at 32nd Avenue. Staff is reviewing this and will have more information and reports in a few weeks. Commissioner BUCKNAM asked if the proposed signal would utilize a pressure pad. Mr. Westberg stated that it will utilize cameras and it will work with bikes and pedestrians as well as automobiles. Will Damrath, Regional Officer for Regency Centers, introduced himself to the Commission. He stated he was present to introduce the applicant and explain about the shopping center. He has worked for the last 4-5 years to consolidate the ownership of the entire center and improve drainage and circulation problems. This application is the first step toward this goal. He introduced Mike Scheckel with King Soopers. Mr. Scheckel explained this particular King Soopers opened in 1965 and the center grew up around it. This fuel center has been in the works for a long time. He stated how much he appreciated working with Wheat Ridge staff and believes this project will be an excellent addition to the center as well as to Wheat Ridge. He explained that King Soopers tries to keep the price of gas down and this project will help add to the convenience of the area. This project represents the "latest and greatest' of the King Soopers fuel centers. It will have state of the art pumps, and the latest technological features. The fueling center will help upgrade the area and improve traffic flow. Commissioner KIMSEY asked about the existing drainage pump behind Applejacks. Planning Commission Minutes —3— July 3— July 16, 2015 Mr. Damrath stated the current drainage puts the flow of drainage through the parking lot to 32°d Avenue. It is not an ideal arrangement for anyone. This project represents eight acres of total site area on the southern end of the shopping center. Commissioner KIMSEY asked if there would be a change in the elevation from the residential area. Mr. Westberg stated there would not be any change. Commissioner TIMMS asked how the applicant chose this site within the center for the fueling station and wondered about alternate locations. Mr. Schenkel stated this is a very successful store and they want to add a fuel center to improve it for the customers. The specific location for the fueling center is driven by Regency envisioning it as new pad. Visibility and proximity to the store made this site the best location. Commissioner OHM asked if there were any slopes for the detention pond that exceed 4:1. Mr. Schenkel answered that none of the grades exceed 4:1. Commissioner OHM asked how the photometrics are determined and whether they based on grade. Mr. Schenkel said his staff has worked heavily to measure photometrics at different times of day and from different site areas. They are based on the grade. They want to keep a balance of proper lighting for the retail center but not bother neighbors or interfere with street traffic. Commissioner OHM said the plans and photometrics look very good. He wanted to know if there were any concerns about safety around the detention pond if it fills up in the dark. Mr. Schenkel said there would be no walking access to the pond, so he doesn't see any potential concern. Commissioner BUCKNAM stated he appreciates the improvements —they will be a nice addition to the area. He asked about the difference between normal and security lights on the lighting plan. Mr. Schenkel responded that the security lighting is there to deter crime and prevent pedestrians tripping while the fueling center is closed. Regular lighting is there so they can conduct business efficiently when the center is open. They don't want the lighting to interfere with neighborhood. Their plan is flexible and they will work with the neighbors if there is a light that causes problems for them. Carl Schmidtlein of Galloway Architectural Engineering explained the photometric site plan. At lOpm, the lights closest to the neighborhood residences will go off, but other lights will stay on for safety and security. Commissioner BUCKNAM opened the public hearing. Planning Commission Minutes —4— July 4— July 16, 2015 Trevor Hall, 3155 Wright Court, Wheat Ridge — He is a fairly new resident of Wheat Ridge and a new father as well. He was initially concerned about the proposed lighting but now these concerns have been addressed by staff and the applicant. He is still concerned about increases in traffic in the area. A new signal at 32°d may possibly help the traffic flow. Many of the intersections in the area are perpendicular and at heavy traffic times, they can be difficult. The proposed traffic signal does not address problems for vehicles turning left from Wright Court. He and his neighbors are concerned about traffic flow and question the fueling center location choice. Mr. Westberg stated the traffic survey would be provided when available. It will address the impact of the 400 new homes proposed in Applewood on traffic in the area. Mr. Schenckel stated the planned landscaping will be mature in 5-10 years, but there will be some trees mature enough to provide some screening right away. He discussed the decision-making process regarding their choice of the location for the new fuel center. Mr. Damrath stated they had worked closely with City Staff and planners and studied all options in the area. Ultimately, this site was the best location available. The new traffic signal will aid traffic flow and left-hand turn concerns. The grade of the area worked in their favor to create the detention pond and buffer visibility for residents. Commissioner BUCKNAM asked about the cycle on the proposed traffic signal. Mr. Westberg said they will coordinate the signal with other signals in the area to help traffic flow for residents. Mr. Hall asked if there be crosswalk at 32°d for pedestrians. Mr. Westberg responded that they hadn't considered a crosswalk there, but feels it would be a good idea and will look at it. Chair BUCKNAM called for a 5 minute recess. The meeting reconvened at 8:26 pm Tiffany Manzo, 12495 W 3211-d Avenue, Wheat Ridge — Ms. Manzo wanted to know what type of chemicals will be draining into the detention pond and could potentially overflow onto neighborhood streets in the event of a flood. There are existing stairs that are used heavily by residents to access the shopping center by foot from Wright Court. She wondered whether there would be a new pedestrian access from the east. Mr. Westberg stated that detention ponds are inspected annually. The pond is there to clean out any drainage from the parking lots with can contain grease, oil and other Planning Commission Minutes —5— July 5— July 16, 2015 substances. This detention pond has a water quality "slow drain" component at the bottom to allow drainage to be cleaned by vegetation before it goes down stream. Mr. Schmidtlein stated the detention pond is designed to accommodate drainage from a 100 year storm and is a great improvement over the existing drainage of center. Regency maintenance staff inspects outlet structures every quarter to prevent problems. Mr. Damrath stated this proposal will address the concerns of neighbors. The existing buildings are currently obsolete. In addition, the Denver water easement which traverses the center creates challenges. The redevelopment of this area will make it safer for residents to walk to the center along 32°d Avenue. Chair BUCKNAM closed the public hearing. Commissioner OHM asked if there were any conditions on vacating the existing easements or will City staff take care of them. Ms. Reckert responded that City staff will vacate any easements with the platting process. It was moved by Commissioner OHM to recommend approval of Case Nos. WZ- 14-14 and WA -15-05, a request for approval of a Specific Development Plan (SDP) with a setback variance on property located at 12525 W. 32nd Avenue, for the following reasons: 1. The proposal is consistent with the City's guiding documents including the Neighborhood Revitalization Strategy, Envision Wheat Ridge, and the I- 70/Kipling Urban Renewal Plan. 2. The proposed SDP is consistent with the approved ODP document. 3. All requirements for an SDP have been met. 4. The criteria used to evaluate a variance have been met. 5. The criteria used to evaluate an SDP have been met. 6. The proposed SDP will result in redevelopment of the southern portion of the shopping center. With the following conditions: 1. Additional information be provided by the developer to demonstrate the difference in regular lighting and security lighting. 2. Public improvements along the Wright Court cul-de-sac to be extended to the eastern point of ownership along the cul-de-sac (about 25'). Commissioner KIMSEY seconded the amendment. Motion approved 7-0 Planning Commission Minutes —6— July 6— July 16, 2015 B. Case No. ZOA-15-03: City Attorney Dahl explained that at the request of Council he has drafted a construction defects ordinance. It affects Chapter 26 of the Code and the Planning Commission needs to make a recommendation to Council. There is the perception that there is not enough multifamily construction going on in Wheat Ridge currently. There are concerns in the legislature about construction defect claims brought by residents against builders. This proposed ordinance gives the builder the right to know when there is an issue and to repair it. Then the homeowner can take the issue to court. Many communities have enacted ordinances like this since the legislature has failed to enact one. This ordinance addresses the right to repair and the required plat notes on multifamily housing projects. City Council wants this ordinance to remove obstacles to multifamily construction in the City. Commissioner TIMMS asked if this ordinance would apply to multifamily rental apartments. Mr. Dahl responded that it would, but not for the tenants— just for the owners. Commissioner OHM stated this was an issue for him and wondered whether the statute of limitations would be 8 years on a project. If so, then would this add another 2 years to the statute of limitations. He thinks that the definition of "builder" is too broad. As a designer, the way this ordinance is written would open him up to liability that should be assumed by the actual builder. The intent is good, but there needs to be more specifics in the descriptions. Commissioner BUCKNAM stated the 2 year warranty for repairs concerns him because the definition of "builder" is too broad. Mr. Dahl responded that the 2 year warranty is built into many other ordinances from other communities. Also, a 2 year warranty is common for other projects done by the City. He indicated that he will check to see if the 2 year warranty is in the proposed state statutes. Commissioner BUCKNAM asked about the time frame for the notice period and remediation during the notice process. Mr. Dahl explained this ordinance just delays the homeowner from going to court. They can still go, but hopefully, the builder will fix the problem and court proceedings will not be necessary. Commissioner BUCKNAM opened the public hearing. Nancv Snow 11155 W 40 Avenue, Wheat Ridge - She stated when she worked with the Colorado Civil Rights Commission there were lots of cases where builders did not design/build correctly and there were problems for the residents getting resolution. It Planning Commission Minutes —7— July 7— July 16, 2015 bothers her that the City is making efforts to protect builders and had builders help write the ordinance. The State of Colorado has tried and failed to pass legislation like this twice. Where are the people that opposed this at state level? Were they not invited to give their input on this? She believes that this ordinance is written to protect the builders. Planning Commission and City Council should be protecting homeowners instead, not developers. She also does not agree with the condition in the proposed ordinance that "a majority of homeowners" must agree for Home Owners' Associations to take action. Many builders keep units back instead of selling them and this might skew votes in their favor. Why should Wheat Ridge stick their necks out by enacting this law? If it were to be enacted then homeowners could come after the city. This issue should be left at the state level. Mr. Dahl explained that the clause requiring HOA's to get consent by majority vote is normal for legislation. It isn't as easy to get signatures, but a majority vote is normal. He indicated that the State Senate bill is silent on the 2 year warranty. He also stated that not this entire ordinance benefits builders as the warranty requirement favors homeowners. Commissioner DORSEY said that he thinks the definition of "multifamily" is too broad. The ordinance does not include apartment renters and that maybe the ordinance should apply to condos and townhomes as well. Chair BUCKNAM closed the public hearing. Commissioner OHM stated from a professional liability standpoint, work on condominiums doubles the liability for builders and designers. He isn't opposed to the 2 year warranty, but feels the Commission needs to continue the discussion on this ordinance. It was moved by Commissioner OHM and seconded by Commissioner DORSEY to continue Case No. ZOA-15-03, an ordinance adding Article XIII to Chapter 26 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws, Concerning Repair of Construction Defects, until the next planning commission meeting on August 6u'. Commissioner TIMMS asked if the Commission was working under any time schedule with City Council. Mr. Dahl responded that there were no real schedule constraints. He has made detailed notes of the Commission's comments and suggestions and research and revise the ordinance accordingly. Motion to continue was approved 7-0 Planning Commission Minutes —8— July 8— July 16, 2015 C. Case No. ZOA-15-04: Mr. Westberg gave a short Power Point regarding the proposed modifications to Section VIII of the zoning and development code regarding Floodplain Control. The proposed revisions include: • Prohibiting new septic systems in the floodplain • Requiring lot surveys to show the limits of the floodplain • Requiring construction sites to stake the limits of the floodplain • Requiring landlords to disclose the floodplain status of their rental properties In recent years, City staff has been working with the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) to improve Wheat Ridge's class rating in the Community Rating System (CRS) program. The City's current rating is Class 6, which results in a 20% reduction of flood insurance rates for most homeowners within the floodplain. The City is actively working to improve this rating to a Class 5, which would result in a 25% reduction in flood insurance rates for homeowners. Commissioner OHM stated the proposed amendments sound great but wondered whether the City could lose some of its rating status if a landlord does not disclose to renters that a rental property is within the floodplain. Mr. Westberg responded that the city will not lose any status, but just to make sure tenants are well informed, the City will contact tenants as well as landlords with information about the floodplain. Commissioner OHM asked if the City could require landlords as well as renters sign an agreement disclosing the floodplain. Mr. Westberg stated this type of agreement is difficult to enforce. Commissioner OLSON stated as a landlord, this ordinance is good as it removes some of the liability from the landlords. Commissioner TIMMS asked how many properties in Wheat Ridge are in the floodplain. Mr. Westberg responded that there were between 400 and 500 Wheat Ridge properties in the floodplain. Commissioner TIMMS asked if any of these homes had septic systems. Mr. Westberg explained that existing septic systems can be repaired or replaced, but no new ones will be allowed in the flood plain. Commissioner KIMSEY asked where the floodplain maps were located. Planning Commission Minutes —9— July 9— July 16, 2015 Mr. Westberg said the City uses and electronic map system as well as paper. People can call in and request copies of the maps and floodplain verification. He indicated that there is an informational video about the floodplain on the City's website and YouTube is entitled "Wheat Ridge Floodplain". It is very informative if any of the Commissioners would like to view it. Commissioner BUCKNAM opened the public hearing. No one came forward to speak. Chair BUCKNAM Closed public hearing. It was moved by Commissioner WEAVER and seconded by Commissioner TIMMS to recommend approval of Case No. ZOA-15-04, an ordinance amending Sections 26-806 and 26-808 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws concerning special flood hazard area regulations and the administration of floodplain control regulations for the following reasons: 1. It improves public health, safety, and welfare. 2. It prevents future problems associated with new septic systems in the floodplain. 3. It communicates the floodplain limits by showing them on lot surveys. 4. It guards against construction within the floodplain by requiring the limits to be staked on construction sites. 5. It alerts tenants to the floodplain status of the property before signing a lease. Motion approved 7-0 8. OTHER ITEMS Ms. Reckert spoke about DOLA training on August 22nd. Commissioners are encouraged to sign up. The City has a new planner named Lisa Ritchey who was prior planning experience and is fitting in well. Commissioner TIMMS asked if Kim Waggoner had left the City. Ms. Reckert stated she had moved to Pennsylvania where her husband had a new job. Staff is reviewing resumes now for Kim's replacement. She thanked Kelly Stevens, Deputy City Clerk for filling in tonight. Planning Commission Minutes —10— July 10— July 16, 2015 9. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Commissioner Timms and seconded by Commissioner KIMSEY to adjourn the meeting at 9:40 p.m. Motion carried 7-0. Alan Bucknam, Chair Kelly Stevens, Recording Secretary Planning Commission Minutes July 16, 2015 —11— City of �Wheat�dge COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORT TO: Planning Commission DATE OF MEETING: CASE NO. & NAME: ACTION REQUESTED: LOCATION OF REQUEST: PROPERTY OWNER: APPROXIMATE AREA: CASE MANAGER: M. Reckert August 6, 2015 WZ-15-03/Carlson Approval of a zone change from Industrial -Employment (I -E), Commercial -One (C-1) and Agricultural -One (A-1) to Industrial -Employment (I -E) 4901 Marshall LSC Denver Colorado, LLC 6.5 acres PRESENT ZONING: Industrial -Employment (I -E), Commercial -One (C-1) and, Agricultural -One (A-1) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Employment ENTER INTO RECORD: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CASE FILE & PACKET MATERIALS ZONING ORDINANCE DIGITAL PRESENTATION All notification and posting requirements have been met; therefore, there is jurisdiction to hear this case. I. REQUEST This application is for approval of a zone change from Industrial -Employment (I -E), Commercial -One (C-1) and Agricultural -One (A-1) to Industrial -Employment (I -E) for property located at 4901 Marshall Street. The zone change is the first step of the process for approval for redevelopment of this site under I -E zoning. If approved, and prior to any construction, a site plan review will be required to confirm compliance with the city zoning code and the Architectural and Site Design Manual. This review would be administrative with no additional public hearings required. The purpose of the rezoning is to modify the list of uses and to simplify the review and approval for future development on the property. (Exhibit 1, Applicant Letter) II. EXISTING CONDITIONS/PROPERTY HISTORY The property is located in the northeast quadrant of the city at 4901 Marshall Street. The site is about 6.5 acres in size, is comprised of two parcels and has split zoning with three different zone districts covering the property. The western third of the site is zoned Industrial -Employment (I- E), the eastern third of the property is zoned Commercial -One (C-1) along the Marshall Street frontage, and the southern corner of the property is zoned Agricultural -One (A-1). (Exhibit 2, Zoning Map) The property is surrounded by a variety of land uses and zoning designations. Immediately to the west is CDOT right-of-way for Interstate -70, and across I-70 to the west is a residential neighborhood zoned R-2. To the north are parcels zoned Industrial -Employment and Commercial -One that are largely undeveloped, but include an Xcel transmission tower and an automotive collision repair shop. Further to the north is the Clear Creek Greenbelt. To the south of the site and across Marshall Street to the east are several commercial properties zoned C-1; these include a marijuana dispensary and infused products manufacturer and several building contractors. Creekside Park and ball fields are northeast of the subject property. (Exhibit 3, Aerial Photo) The site is currently unoccupied. Most recently it was used by Copper Fields events center for private events, weddings, receptions, and indoor music events. The southern half of the property is undeveloped and has a change in grade of about 40 feet. The middle portion of the site is the lowest point at which a paved parking area surrounds the former event hall. The building was originally constructed in 1930 and is about 9,420 square feet in size (per Jefferson County Assessor). A billboard is located on the eastern property line south of the existing event center building. (Exhibit 4, Land Survey Plat) The property has a grade change of about 20' from the southeast corner of the site to the north. It is outside of the regulatory 100 -year floodplain. (Exhibit 5, Site Photos) Planning Commission 2 WZ-15-03/Carlson III. PROPOSED ZONING The applicants are requesting the property be rezoned to Industrial -Employment (I -E), a zone district intended to provide light industrial and commercial uses that support employment. The property currently has three separate zonings on it — C-1, I -E and A-1. The C-1 zoning allows office, service and retail. The A-1 zoning has a very limited use list and includes single family residential and agricultural uses such as general farming, horse stables and landscape nurseries. The applicants intend on building an office/mini-warehouse facility on the property. Office/mini- warehouses are a permitted use in the I -E zone district but not in the C-1 and A-1 zone districts. The following table compares the existing and proposed zoning for the property. Development A-1 zoning C-1 zoning I -E zoning Standard Uses Single family Commercial uses Commercial and residential and (office, service and light industrial uses farming retail) — no light including mini - industrial or mini- warehouses uses warehouses Architectural None Determined by Determined by Standards Architectural and Architectural and Site Design Manual Site Design Manual (ASDM) (ASDM) Max. Building Height 35' 50' 50' Max. Lot coverage 40% 80% 80% Min. Landscaping N/A 20% 15% Min. Front setback 30' 30'/50' 10' If the rezoning is approved, the applicants would then submit for administrative site plan review. The design for the property would be held to the standards set forth in the zoning code and the Architectural and Site Design Manual. IV. ZONE CHANGE CRITERIA Staff has provided an analysis of the zone change criteria outlined in Section 26-112.D.2. The Planning Commission shall base its recommendation in consideration of the extent to which the following criteria have been met: 1. The change of zone promotes the health, safety, and general welfare of the community and will not result in a significant adverse effect on the surrounding area. Planning Commission WZ-15-03/Carlson The change of zone promotes the health, safety, and general welfare of the community and will not result in a significant adverse effect on the surrounding area. As outlined in the table above, the C-1 and I -E zone districts have similar development standards and permitted uses and while there are differences in allowed uses, the general intensity of use is similar. The portion zoned A-1 is at a location on the site where it would be difficult to build due to topography. Staff concludes that this criterion has been met. 2. Adequate infrastructure/facilities are available to serve the types of uses allowed by the change of zone, or the applicant will upgrade and provide such where they do not exist or are under capacity. All responding agencies have indicated they can serve the property with improvements installed at the developers' expense. Prior to issuance of a building permit, an administrative site plan review application will be required and referred to all impacted utility and service agencies Staff concludes that this criterion has been met. 3. The Planning Commission shall also find that at least one 1 of the following conditions exists: a. 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. 3nnect Arvada idsw01 Planning Commission WZ-15-03/Carlson Excerpt from Envision neat Ridge Structure Plan %Employment Envision Wheat Ridge, the City's 2009 comprehensive plan, identifies this area as an Employment zone, which is a designation intended to support existing industrial uses and encourage redevelopment. Goals met with the proposal include the redevelopment of underutilized commercial and industrial space with denser, high quality development. Another goal is for retention and diversification of opportunities for local employment and promotion of new primary employment. Staff concludes that this criterion has been met. b. The existing zone classification currently recorded on the official zoning maps of the City of Wheat Ridge is in error. Staff has not found any evidence of an error with the current I -E, C-1 or A-1 zoning designations as they appear on the City are zoning maps. Staff concludes that this criterion is not applicable. c. A change of character in the area has occurred or is occurring to such a degree that it is in the public interest to encourage redevelopment of the area or to recognize the changing character of the area. This is an area of the city that has historically been used industrially. It is comprised of a variety of uses including contractor offices, storage yards and auto body repair facilities. Many of these properties were developed in Jefferson County prior to incorporation of the City. The proposed redevelopment of 4901 Marshall Street could act as a catalyst for additional redevelopment and property investment in the area. A zone change will consolidate the zoning on the property and prepare it for redevelopment. Staff concludes that this criterion has been met. d. The proposed rezoning is necessary in order to provide for a community need that was not anticipated at the time of the adoption of the City of Wheat Ridge comprehensive plan. The Comprehensive Plan recognizes the need for upgraded industrial space. Construction of office and mini -warehouse facility will support existing industrial operations and promote incubator and start-up operations. In addition, the western portion of Jefferson County is lacking light industrial space which provides primary and secondary employment opportunities. The proposed development will help fill this gap. Additionally, the proposed storage facility is an Planning Commission WZ-15-03/Carlson identified need in the growing Denver market and is appropriate near an interstate highway. Staff concludes that this criterion has been met. Staff concludes that the criteria used to evaluate zone change support this request. V. NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING Prior to submittal of an application for a zone change, the applicant is required to hold a neighborhood input meeting in accordance with the requirements of section 26-109. A meeting for neighborhood input was held on April 8, 2015. One neighbor attended and the proposed zone change and development scenario were discussed. (Exhibit 6, Neighborhood Meeting Notes) VI. AGENCY REFERRAL All affected service agencies were contacted for comment on the zone change request and regarding the ability to serve the property. Specific referral responses follow: Wheat Ridge Economic Development: Supports the rezoning and development of the property. Wheat Ridge Fire Protection District: Can serve the property with improvements installed at the developers' expense to be assessed at the time of site plan review. Wheat Ridge Public Works: Has reviewed a preliminary traffic report. A drainage plan and report will be required to be reviewed as part of the site plan process. Wheat Ridge Sanitation District: Can serve the property with an existing 8" main line in Marshall. A lift station may be required. Xcel Energy: No objections, Comments received relate only to the zone change request. A separate referral process would be required in the future if the zone change is approved and a site plan is submitted. VII. STAFF CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION Staff concludes that the proposed zone change promotes the health, safety and general welfare of the community. Staff further concludes that the proposal is consistent with the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan. The zone change will consolidate zoning on the property, prepare it for redevelopment and may serve as a catalyst for other property redevelopment or improvements in the area. Planning Commission WZ-15-03/Carlson Because the zone change evaluation criteria support the zone change request, staff recommends approval of Case No. WZ-15-03 VIII. SUGGESTED MOTIONS Option A: "I move to recommend APPROVAL of Case No. WZ-15-03, a request for approval of a zone change from Industrial -Employment (I -E), Commercial -One (C-1) and Agricultural -One (A-1) to Industrial -Employment (I -E) for property located at 4901 Marshall Street, for the following reasons: 1. The proposed zone change will promote the public health, safety, or welfare of the community. 2. The proposed zone change is consistent with the goals and objectives of the City's Comprehensive Plan. 3. The zone change will consolidate zoning on the property, prepare it for redevelopment and may serve as a catalyst for other property redevelopment or improvements in the area. 4. The criteria used to evaluate a zone change support the request." Option B: "I move to recommend DENIAL of Case No. WZ-15-03, a request for approval of a zone change from Industrial -Employment (I -E), Commercial -One (C-1) and Agricultural -One (A-1) to Industrial -Employment I -E) for property located at 4901 Marshall Street, for the following reasons: 2. ... Planning Commission WZ-15-03/Carlson Exhibit 1 —Applicant letter C construction company, inc. 909 Ent 62nd Avenue • Denvor. Colorado 80216 • 303 297 5525 • Fax 303 287 • www abt.cora Written Request and Description of Proposed Change of Zone DEVELOPER: Carlson Associates, Inc. Contact: Clay Carlson P.O Box 247 Eastlake, CO 80614 LOCATION: 4901 Marshall St. Wheat Ridge, CO 80033 DATE: June 18, 2015 The site located at 4901 Marshall St is currently zoned Commercial -One (C-1), Agricultural -One (A-1), and Industrial -Employment (I -E). The C-1 zone district is established to provide for areas with a wide range of commercial land uses which include office, general business, and retail sales and service establishments. The A-1 zone district is established to provide a high quality, safe, quiet and stable residential estate living environment within a quasi -rural or agricultural setting. The I -E district is established to allow light industrial and commercial uses that support employment. The majority of the site area is currently zoned I -E with the remaining amount zoned C-1 and A-1. Consolidating the sites zoning into a single zoning type will allow the site to be fully utilized and eliminate ancillary spaces that impede the viability of the site. The I -E zone district allows both mini -warehouses and officetwarehouse flex space. At the direction of the staff of the City the property would be rezoned to Industrial Employment (1-E). The City's comprehensive plan, Envision Wheat Ridge, identifies the area as "Employment." This designation calls for light industrial uses including manufacturing, storage, and warehouse. The proposed use for this site is'private-start up' officelwarehouses with a combination of individually rentable self -storage units. The 'start-up' office component of the site will provide small businesses with storefront office space for their employees and clients. Their equipment, tools, etc. will be stored on site with them, behind their office space. The entrepreneurial programming of these office spaces with their associated warehousing meshes very well with the cities 'Employment" designation. This program coupled with the allowable use of self storage under the I -E zone district creates a property that fully capitalizes on the site; providing employment, business, and revenue for the city while simultaneously giving residents a place to keep their possessions within their community. The adjacent zoning area of C-1 to the east and south and Interstate 70 and 76 border the site to the north and west will integrate with the proposed rezoned area. The new development will raise the standard of the existing site with a forward looking architecture that compliments and responds to its neighborhood, Wheal Ridge, and the Rocky Mountain region. Nearby residential neighborhoods will be able to utilize the new development and benefit from it due to its close proximity by reducing commuting to other areas. As shown in the June 9" Traffic Impact Study conducted by LSC, the existing road network and Marshall Street is fully capable of handling the nominal increase of traffic volume well into the year 2035. Utilities are currently installed on site and were used for the now closed Copper Fields Event Center. These existing utilities should be sufficient for the new development. The new projects impact will not exceed the burden of resources previously placed on the city by Copper Fields but should be below them. The proposed redevelopment of 4901 Marshall Street will bring life and beauty back to the now derelict lot, providing excellent resources for the citizens of Wheat Ridge. It's integration of use with the surrounding neighborhood and generation of new businesses will benefit all in the community. Planning Comrmssion WZ-15-03/Carlson Exhibit 2 — Zoning Map Plmming Cmmmssion 10 W-15-W/Cmison Exhibit 3 — Aerial Photo Planning Commission WZ15-03/Carlson Exhibit 4 — Property Survey See enclosed 11x17 survey. Planning Commission 12 WZ-15-03/Carlson LAND SURVEY PLAT C.E.I. SITUATED IN THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER SECTION 13, T. 3 S. R. 69 W. $141513 TOWNSHIP 3 SOUTH, RANGE 69 WEST OF THE 6TH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN 1957 CITY OF WHEATRIDGE, COUNTY OF JEFFERSON, STATE OF COLORADO L.S. 23047 FIND. W1/4 SEC 13 3.25" ALUMINUM CAP 0.4' DOWN IN RANGE BOX THOMAS-&-ISABEL ABBOTT REC. NO. 8045-755 3\ „E y0s 6 132 - _ \ THOMAS & ISABEL ABBOTT— REC. NO. 2006132243A06. \ ✓ — — — - - \ — — — \ 1\ \ 56, — \ \ _5293--- A' -- I _5291 s290 COLORADO DEPT. OF TRANS. P.O.B. REC. NO. 79086148 X N \\ \ \ PARCEL 1� vT 250,898 SQ. FT. \ / I/ I ,A �E v / `v5.760 ACRES i // fi �E / /f / \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ a _<>_vm—vm—,np_vm—vm�vm'm` /'�wm—vm GAS, 13 F $14 $13 P.O.C. FND. SW COR SEC 13 3.25" BRASS CAP 0.5' DOWN IN RANGE BOX C'p N_ \ / / 16' SANITARY EASEMENT / .6P� /G,5 / 029 *49 V8" O -�A O\ / I \ / O BK. 750 — PG. 119 s� / / /L=478.51' / wi / // // ,CHB-S2T2036'E// /5303-- GAS 3 16) ,5304——� \\ \\ \\ /�P�il� vv v EXHIBIT 4 MAP LEGEND ' FIRE HYDRANT WATER VAVLE SANITARY MANHOLE \ \\ CURB INLET / svx` / ■ / // h .5 / / / / / / / / / _ 5306— — \ O D STORM MANHOLE -Y� LIGHT POLE ob�, - — �_S303 or w / \� \ � � \ � SIGN '35 60 —/--- /---- J� ?\ \�\ \ © MANHOLE COMMUNICATION 1q5301 — / / POWER POLE GUY ANCHOR / // / / / / // �— � O PERTYCORNER / $ET#5 REBAR WITH RED / / / // // / / // / // // --— — \ / / /-i \\ • PLASTIC CAP STAMPED "POINT j/%A)A LS 35311"EXCEPT AS SHOWN) //\� SECTION CORNER I I I II II I // // /////////J/ // II BOUNDARY LINE 358601 I I I I I / l / / / / / // / \ I ADJACENT BOUNDARY LINE vV� /VAA\I I \ V 1 V �� / /// // //I //A v SECTION LINE EASEMENTLINE ELE ELE ELE ELE ELE UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC LINE ��v vv vv�� vvvvv�v`vv v PARCEL2 / / tivv1111 N�V1111 \ � �_ \ \ 1 /35 262 S�/FT. / GAS- GAS- GAS- GAS- GnS GAS LINE COLORADO 1810DEPT. PG0252TRANS. �L6Oo� \ \ � - VA A \ V� VAAVA / 0.810 -ACRES ) I I I I lI l /Ili /lI S f : 1 111 11 \\ SAN- SAN- SAN- SAN- snN SANITARY LINE o?ywvv v�vvvvvvvv�v / // I I II II I II I I Ill 011111 STN srn STN STM srn STORM LINE s6 vvv�������v�vvvvvvvv / llll�l��l �II11 vi■-vm—vT■—vi■—vT■— WATERLINE TEL TEL rEL TEL TEL FIBER OPTIC LINE �V\ \ VAA V�ACCESS LNE11co \ REC. NO. 90024405 I I I I I I I I W 0040 /��/ / VAAAVA \V AI I I I 1111 II 11 I�I I &/c06e, ,'G ��zo TR4 r l J O v nro �L$ 132122 T R N. \ 1111111 1111111 r1��ll \ V���JP IIII 1 1 111 11 1 1 F1 \ 59513 • �l I s Know what's below.1 1 1 h 24 0111 before you dig. z +I I I I I II 40 20 0 40 I I I SCALE 1" = 40'y IIII FN D. S1/4 SEC 13 3.25" BRASS CAP N89"5936"E 2647.17' 0.4' DOWN N RANGE BOX $23 $24 ~ G 0 U T3$ R69W 1984 P.O.C. FND. SW COR SEC 13 3.25" BRASS CAP 0.5' DOWN IN RANGE BOX C'p N_ \ / / 16' SANITARY EASEMENT / .6P� /G,5 / 029 *49 V8" O -�A O\ / I \ / O BK. 750 — PG. 119 s� / / /L=478.51' / wi / // // ,CHB-S2T2036'E// /5303-- GAS 3 16) ,5304——� \\ \\ \\ /�P�il� vv v EXHIBIT 4 MAP LEGEND ' FIRE HYDRANT WATER VAVLE SANITARY MANHOLE \ \\ CURB INLET / svx` / ■ / // h .5 / / / / / / / / / _ 5306— — \ O D STORM MANHOLE -Y� LIGHT POLE ob�, - — �_S303 or w / \� \ � � \ � SIGN '35 60 —/--- /---- J� ?\ \�\ \ © MANHOLE COMMUNICATION 1q5301 — / / POWER POLE GUY ANCHOR / // / / / / // �— � O PERTYCORNER / $ET#5 REBAR WITH RED / / / // // / / // / // // --— — \ / / /-i \\ • PLASTIC CAP STAMPED "POINT j/%A)A LS 35311"EXCEPT AS SHOWN) //\� SECTION CORNER I I I II II I // // /////////J/ // II BOUNDARY LINE 358601 I I I I I / l / / / / / // / \ I ADJACENT BOUNDARY LINE vV� /VAA\I I \ V 1 V �� / /// // //I //A v SECTION LINE EASEMENTLINE ELE ELE ELE ELE ELE UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC LINE ��v vv vv�� vvvvv�v`vv v PARCEL2 / / tivv1111 N�V1111 \ � �_ \ \ 1 /35 262 S�/FT. / GAS- GAS- GAS- GAS- GnS GAS LINE COLORADO 1810DEPT. PG0252TRANS. �L6Oo� \ \ � - VA A \ V� VAAVA / 0.810 -ACRES ) I I I I lI l /Ili /lI S f : 1 111 11 \\ SAN- SAN- SAN- SAN- snN SANITARY LINE o?ywvv v�vvvvvvvv�v / // I I II II I II I I Ill 011111 STN srn STN STM srn STORM LINE s6 vvv�������v�vvvvvvvv / llll�l��l �II11 vi■-vm—vT■—vi■—vT■— WATERLINE TEL TEL rEL TEL TEL FIBER OPTIC LINE �V\ \ VAA V�ACCESS LNE11co \ REC. NO. 90024405 I I I I I I I I W 0040 /��/ / VAAAVA \V AI I I I 1111 II 11 I�I I &/c06e, ,'G ��zo TR4 r l J O v nro �L$ 132122 T R N. \ 1111111 1111111 r1��ll \ V���JP IIII 1 1 111 11 1 1 F1 \ 59513 • �l I s Know what's below.1 1 1 h 24 0111 before you dig. z +I I I I I II 40 20 0 40 I I I SCALE 1" = 40'y IIII FN D. S1/4 SEC 13 3.25" BRASS CAP N89"5936"E 2647.17' 0.4' DOWN N RANGE BOX W 0 Z J � O� O�zOC� U O O Z Q O 0 05- > 5-> o O o N Z W d O w 0 w Q Z O U O d U� U= m U 0 W W N O O O L0 O m O Z 0 U LU Q Z � 0 "U CLCL J � U VLU� Q Z N E W U U w O Z Z co � 'u � 0o0� Ci C�UW Lou�wUCo7 Q ~ C�— Z C V Q LU v) N O �0 Q zUz Q W I\ 3 z0 J Q Z co Q CO W 0 Z J � O� O�zOC� U O O Z Q O 0 05- > 5-> o O o N Z W d O w 0 w Q Z O U O d U� U= m U 0 W W N O O O L0 O m O N Ln I N r w Q Q W 0 0 . . . . V) Z 0 Q Z � 0 "U CLCL J � U VLU� Q Z 0 0 N Ln I N r w Q Q W 0 0 . . . . V) Exhibit 5 — Site Photos Looking west into the site with the existing structure and billboard in the background Looking north across the existing parking lot with auto body shop in the background Planning Commission 13 WZ-15-03/Carlson Looking southeast towards I-70 at the parcel currently zoned A-1 Looking east at the existing driveway to Marshall Street Planning Commission 14 WZ-15-03/Carlson Exhibit 6 — Neighborhood Meeting Notes NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING NOTES Meeting Date: Attending Staff: Location of Meeting: Property Address: Property Owner(s): Property Owner(s) Present? Applicant: Existing Zoning: Existing Comp. Plan: Existing Site Conditions: April 8, 2015 Meredith Reckert, Senior Planner City of Wheat Ridge Municipal Building 7500 W. 29th Avenue Wheat Ridge, CO 80033 4901 Marshall Street LSC Denver Colorado, LLC No Kent Carlson Kent6?4Carlsonland.net Industrial -Employment (I -E), Commercial -One (C-1), Agricultural -One (A-1) Employment The property is located in the northeast quadrant of the city at 4901 Marshall Street. The site is about 6.5 acres in size and has split zoning with three different zone districts covering the property. The western third of the site is zoned Industrial -Employment (I -E), the eastern third of the property is zoned Commercial -One (C-1) along the Marshall Street frontage, and the southern corner of the property is zoned Agricultural -One (A-1). The property is surrounded by a variety of land uses and zoning designations. Immediately to the west is CDOT right-of-way for Interstate -70, and across I-70 to the west is a residential neighborhood zoned R-2. To the north are parcels zoned Industrial -Employment and Commercial -One that are largely undeveloped, but include an Neel transmission tower and an automotive collision repair shop. Further to the north is the Clear Creek Greenbelt. To the south Planning Commission 15 WZ-15-03/Carlson of the site and across Marshall Street to the east are several commercial properties zoned C-1— these include a marijuana dispensary and infused products manufacturer and several building contractors. Creekside Park and ball fields are northeast of the subject property. The site is currently unoccupied. Most recently it was used by Copper Fields events center for private events, weddings, receptions, and indoor music events. The southern half of the property is undeveloped and has a change in grade of about 40 feet. The middle portion of the site is the lowest point at which a paved parking area surrounds the primary event hall. The building was originally constructed in 1930 and is about 9,420 square feet in size (per Jefferson County Assessor). A billboard is located on the eastern property line south of the existing event center building. The property has a grade change of about 20' from the southeast corner of the site to the north. It is outside of the regulatory 100 -year floodplain. Applicant/Owner Preliminary Proposal: The applicant is requesting a zone change to Industrial- Employment to consolidate and expand uses for the property. One of the permitted uses being considered is an office/ mini -warehouse development. Attendance from the neighborhood: One person from the neighborhood was in attendance: Tom Abbott — property owner of 4909 Marshall Street. The following is a summary of the neighborhood meeting: • In addition to staff and the applicant, 1 member of the public attended the neighborhood meeting. • Staff explained the site conditions, zoning in the neighborhood, and the reason for the rezoning request. • The applicant explained the reason for the zoning change and a proposed redevelopment scenario for the property. • The attendee was informed of the process for a zone change. • The attendee was informed of his opportunity to make comments during the process and at the public hearings. The following issues were discussed regarding the zone change request and proposed development: Why isn't a more commercial zoning and development being proposed? The property is designated as employment on the Comprehensive plan and while mini - warehouses don't provide a lot of jobs, they do support small business uses. Also, retail uses would likely be unsuccessful due to access difficulties. Planning Commission 16 WZ-15-03/Carlson The developer owns several mini -storage facilities in the metropolitan area. Who are your typical users? There are a variety of users who rent space including people in housing transition, small businesses and retailers who don't have enough room for storage, contractors and start- up manufacturers. Do you ever condominiumize and sell individual units? No. The one attendee is an adjacent land owner and indicated support for the proposal. No written correspondence was received regarding the neighborhood meeting notice. Planning Commission 17 WZ-15-03/Carlson 'Wheatpge PLANNING COMMISSION Com utnw DWEMPMfNT LEGISLATIVE ITEM STAFF REPORT MEETING DATE: July 16, 2015 TITLE: AN ORDINANCE ADDING ARTICLE XIII TO CHAPTER 26 OF THE WHEAT RIDGE CODE OF LAWS, CONCERNING REPAIR OF CONSTRUCTION DEFECTS CASE NO. ZOA-15-03 ® PUBLIC HEARING ® CODE CHANGE ORDINANCE Case Manager: Gerald Dahl, City Attorney Date of Preparation: July 9, 2015 SUMMARY: The ordinance creates a new Article XIII in Chapter 26 of the Code of Laws, providing builders of multi -family developments with a right to repair defects before the owners may bring suit for damages. The ordinance was prepared by the City Attorney's Office. The amendment affects Chapter 26 of the Code of Laws. Because the Zoning and Development Code is proposed to be modified, the Planning Commission has jurisdiction to review the ordinance and provide a recommendation. Notice of this public hearing was provided as required by the Code of Laws. For the past few years, the home building industry has raised concerns with current Colorado construction defect laws. Colorado's restrictive laws have greatly increased lawsuits and liability for developers. This has discouraged construction of needed new housing units. Last year, a coalition made up of the business community, CML, and affordable housing advocates attempted to move forward legislation to ease the liability born by developers. That legislation was unsuccessful in 2014 and in 2015. Consensus was reached by City Council to direct the City Attorney to bring forward options for the Council to consider which address the issue of construction defects locally. This issue was discussed with Council at study sessions on May 5 and May 18, 2015. ZOA-15-03 / Construction Defects STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES: A few other communities have chosen to adopt construction defect legislation, including Lakewood, Arvada, Lone Tree and Littleton. The attached ordinance is substantially similar to the Lakewood ordinance and is summarized below. Key Elements of this Ordinance: • The article applies only to new multi -family construction commenced after the effective date of the ordinance. The terms builder and homeowner are all defined as provided in the Lakewood ordinance, with the goal being to include within the definition of builder: persons and companies both constructing and designing housing units. The term construction defect is defined as it was in the Senate bill that was not adopted in 2015: "...any instance in which a structure or portion thereof does not conform in all material respects to the applicable section(s) of the Building Code, or does not conform to the manufacturer's specifications if those specifications are more strict than the applicable provisions of the Building Code, and the effect of which is to materially lower the value of the structure or pose a safety risk to its occupants. " • A claimant/homeowner must, after discovering an alleged construction defect, notify the builder. • The builder must, if requested, provide copies of plans, specifications, maintenance and warranty information. • The builder may inspect the property and has a right to repair the defect. • If the builder fails to acknowledge receipt of the notice, provide the information requested or make the repair, the homeowner is released from the requirements of the ordinance and may file an action in the District Court against the builder. • All repair work must be warranted for a period of two years. • Any amendment to remove from the declaration or rule or regulation of a common interest community (typically for condominium projects) the requirement that construction defect claims be submitted to mediation, is not effective with respect to any construction defect that predates that removal. • The ordinance requires homeowners to be kept informed by the board of the HOA when it considers filing litigation asserting a construction defect. That notice must include detailed information, including the nature of the relief sought, the expenses and fees which will be incurred for prosecuting the action, the cost of repairing the defect and the impact upon the marketability of units that are not subject to the action, including the ability of the owners to refinance the property. ZOA-15-03 / Construction Defects • The HOA board may not commence the action unless it obtains the written consent of a majority of the homeowners with voting rights. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Staff recommends that Planning Commission adopt the following motion: "I move to recommend approval of the proposed ordinance adding anew Article X111 to Chapter 26 of the Code of Laws concerning repair of construction defects." Exhibits: 1. Proposed Ordinance ZOA-15-03 / Construction Defects Revised Ordinance for August 6 PC Hearing CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER COUNCIL BILL NO. ORDINANCE NO. Series 2015 TITLE: AN ORDINANCE ADDING A NEW ARTICLE XIII CHAPTER 26 TO THE WHEAT RIDGE CODE OF LAWS CONCERNING REPAIR OF CONSTRUCTION DEFECTS WHEREAS, the City of Wheat Ridge is a home rule municipality having all powers conferred by Article XX of the Colorado Constitution; and WHEREAS, land use, planning and general business regulation are well established as matters of purely local concern, and therefore subject to regulation by home rule cities; and WHEREAS, the City's zoning ordinance and Comprehensive Plan both contemplate a diverse housing stock, consisting of a mix of single-family and multifamily developments, and both owned and rented units, designed to serve the needs of all Wheat Ridge residents; and WHEREAS, the introduction of electric commuter rail service via the Gold Rail Line has intensified the need for owner -occupied units, particularly in transit -oriented zones around transit rail stations; and WHEREAS, despite a genuine demand for such housing options, statistics show that almost no owner -occupied multi -family developments, or condominiums, are being developed in and around Wheat Ridge; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the scarcity of condominiums available for sale in Wheat Ridge is the result of a litigation climate that puts builders and developers at risk of substantial judgments, often including punitive damages, for alleged construction defects; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that risk of exposure to large damage awards has led insurance companies who would normally insure development projects to stop writing policies for owner -occupied multi -family projects; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the health, safety and welfare of Wheat Ridge residents is being negatively impacted by the lack of housing options; and WHEREAS, the City Council further finds that while the scarcity of new condominium projects is not unique to the City of Wheat Ridge, the City nevertheless experiences some unique impacts because of its proximity to the electric commuter rail line and the aging of its population, among other factors; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds there in a need for affordable housing in proximity to transit stations; and WHEREAS, the lack of such affordable housing is related, in part, to the cost of construction insurance: and. WHEREAS, the City Council therefore desires to take reasonable steps within its power as a home rule city to encourage the development of owner -occupied multi -family residential projects through the adoption of regulations designed to reduce the risk and exposure to builders and developers of such projects, while still protecting home- owners' ability to obtain corrective action for legitimate construction defect claims. NOW THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO: Section 1. Chapter 26 of the Code of Laws is amended to add a new Article 13 to read as follows: ARTICLE 13 REPAIR OF CONSTRUCTION DEFECTS 26-1301 Purposes and Applicability. A. The purposes of this Article are to: 1. Encourage the construction of high quality owner -occupied multi -family developments in Wheat Ridge; 2. Facilitate the implementation of the Wheat Ridge Comprehensive Plan and zoning ordinance, both of which contemplate owner -occupied multi -family developments in transit -oriented areas and throughout the city; 3. Reassure homeowners that most, if not all, construction defects will be promptly investigated and repaired by builders; 4. Motivate all parties to resolve disputes involving construction defects quickly and without the need for expensive and time-consuming litigation; and provide homeowners in communities with homeowners associations with an enhanced opportunity to participate in the governance of their community by empowering individual owners to give or withhold their informed consent with respect to actions the board of the homeowners association may desire to pursue regarding construction defects. B. Applicability. This Article shall apply only to new construction commenced after August 24, 2015. 26-1302 Definitions. 2 Association means a homeowners association governing certain owners' rights and responsibilities in an attached multi -family dwelling, a common interest community, a condominium or other multi -family development. Builder means any entity or individual, including but not limited to a builder, developer, general contractor, contractor, subcontractor, architect, engineer or original seller who performs or furnishes the design, supervision, inspection, construction or observation of any improvement to real property that is intended to be occupied as a dwelling or to provide access or amenities to such an improvement. Building Code means the current version of the International Building Code, as adopted by the city. Construction Defect means any instance in which a structure or portion thereof does not conform in all material respects to the applicable section(s) of the Building Code, or does not conform to the manufacturer's specifications if those specifications are more strict than the applicable provisions of the Building Code, and the effect of which is to materially lower the value of the structure or pose a safety risk to its occupants. Declarant shall have the meaning set forth in C.R.S. § 38-33.3-103(12). Homeowner means any person who owns a unit in an attached multi family dwelling, a common interest community, a condominium or other multifamily development, but shall not include any declarant or any person having an interest in a unit solely as security for an obligation. Declarant shall have the meaning set forth in C.R.S. § 38-33.3-103(12). 26-1303 Potential Claimants Original buyers or subsequent owners of a unit in an attached multi -family dwelling, a common interest community, a condominium or other multifamily development, or the governing homeowners association thereof, may assert the rights of a claimant under this Article by sending notice of a construction defect, provided the notice is sent within the applicable time period. 26-1304 Potential Respondents Any person or entity within the definition of a "Builder" as defined in Section 26-1302 of this Article is subject to the requirements of this Article. 26-1306 Claimant's Notice to Builder of Construction Defects; Builder's Acknowledgement; Inspection A. Claimant's notice. Upon the discovery of any alleged construction defect, a claimant must provide written notice via certified mail or personal delivery to the party alleged to have caused or contributed to the defect, in the manner 3 prescribed in this section, of the claimant's claim that one or more construction defects exists in his/her residence or, with respect to any homeowners association, that one or more construction defects exists in any residence or in any common areas or facilities. The notice must: 1. Provide the claimant's name, address and preferred method of contact; 2. Provide the name and address of the claimant's attorney, if any; 3. State that the claimant alleges a construction defect pursuant to this Article against the builder; and 4. Describe the claim in reasonable detail sufficient to determine the nature and location of the alleged Construction Defects. B. Builder's Responsibilities. After receiving notice of a potential construction defect claim, a Builder must do each of the following: 1. Acknowledge claim in writing. a. A builder who receives a notice under this Article shall acknowledge receipt of the notice, in writing, within 14 days after receipt. The acknowledgement shall be sent to the claimant and to any attorney the builder knows to be representing the claimant in connection with the notice. If the builder has retained legal counsel, said counsel shall thereafter communicate with the claimant's legal representative, if any. b. If the builder fails to acknowledge receipt of a notice within the time specified, this Article shall not apply and the claimant shall be released from the requirements of this Article and may proceed with the filing of an action against the builder. 2. Maintain an agent for notice with the Colorado Secretary of State if required by the form of the builder's corporate or business structure, and if not, otherwise provide an address and contact person for notices under this Article; and 3. If specifically asked to do so by the claimant and within 30 days of such a request, provide the claimant or his/her legal representative with: a. copies of all relevant plans, specifications, grading plans, soils reports and available engineering calculations pertaining to the claimant's residence; b. all maintenance and preventative maintenance recommendations pertaining to the claimant's residence; and c. limited contractual warranty information. 4. A builder responding to a claimant's request for documents may charge reasonable copying costs and may require the copies of the documents to be made at the builder's location. 0 5. Builder's election to inspect property. In addition to the requirements set forth in this Section, if the builder elects to inspect the claimed construction defect, the builder shall complete the initial inspection and testing, if any, within 30 days after the builder acknowledged receipt of the notice, and at a mutually agreeable date and time. The builder shall bear all costs of inspection and testing, including any damage caused by the inspection and testing. Before entering onto the premises for the inspection, the builder shall supply the claimant with proof of liability insurance coverage. The builder shall, upon request, allow the inspection to be observed and recorded or photographed. Nothing that occurs during a builder's inspection may be used or introduced as evidence to support a defense of spoliation of evidence by any potential party in subsequent litigation. 6. A builder who fails to comply with any of the foregoing requirements within the time specified is not entitled to the protection of this Article, and the homeowner is released from the requirements of this Article and may proceed with the filing of an action. 7. If a notice is sent to the builder in accordance with this section within the time prescribed for the filing of an action under any applicable statute of limitations or repose, then the statute of limitations or repose is tolled until sixty days after the completion of the notice process described in section 26-1305. If the builder elects to repair pursuant to 26-1306, then the statute of limitations or repose is tolled until sixty days after the completion of repairs. The tolling imposed by this section shall be limited only to the construction defect described in the notice. 26-1306 Builder's Right to Repair A. Within thirty (30) days of the initial inspection or testing, the builder may elect to repair the construction defect. If the builder elects to repair the construction defect, it has the right to do so and the claimant may not, directly or indirectly, impair, impede or prohibit the builder from making repairs. Any notice to repair shall offer to compensate the claimant for all applicable damages within the timeframe set for repair. Any notice of repair shall be accompanied by a detailed, step-by-step explanation of the particular defect being repaired and setting forth a reasonable completion date for the repair work. The notice shall also include the contact information for any contractors the builder intends to employ for the repairs. B. Claimant shall promptly cooperate with builder to schedule repair work by builder. C. Within ten (10) days after receipt of the builder's notice to repair, a claimant may deliver to the builder a written objection to the proposed repair if the claimant believes in good faith that the proposed repair will not remedy the alleged defect. The builder may elect to modify the proposal in accordance with the claimant's objection, or may proceed with the scope of work set forth in the original proposal. 5 D. Builder's failure to comply. If the builder fails to send a notice to repair or otherwise strictly comply with this Article within the specified time frames, or if the builder does not complete the repair within the time set forth in the notice to repair, the claimant shall be released from the requirements of this Article and may proceed with the filing of an action against the builder. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if the builder notifies the claimant in writing at least 5 days before the stated completion date that the repair work will not be completed by the completion date, the builder shall be entitled to one reasonable extension of the completion date, not to exceed 30 days. E. Completion of repairs. The builder shall notify the claimant when repairs have been completed. The claimant shall have ten days following the completion date to have the premises inspected to verify that the repairs are complete and satisfactorily resolved the alleged defects. An association claimant who believes in good faith that the repairs made do not resolve the defects may proceed with the notice required by section 26-1310. Any other claimant may then elect to file an action under C.R.S. § 13-20-803.5 or any other applicable statute or court rule. 26-1307 Warranty of Repairs The repair work performed by the builder shall be warranted against material defects in design or construction for a period of 2 years, which warranty shall be in addition to any express warranties on the original work. This section shall not apply to the extent any architect or designer is not permitted by law to warranty such work. 26-1308 Subsequently Discovered Defects Any alleged construction defect discovered after repairs have been completed shall be subject to the same requirements of this Article if the builder did not have notice or an opportunity to repair the particular defect. 26-1309 Alternative Dispute Resolution Provisions Nothing in this Article shall preclude the claimant and builder from reaching a mutual agreement regarding alternative dispute resolutions. If a provision found in the declaration, bylaws or rules and regulations of a condominium development or common interest community requires that construction defect claims be submitted to mediation or arbitration, that requirement constitutes a commitment on the part of the unit owners and the association upon which a developer, contractor, architect, builder or other person involved in the construction of the community is entitled to rely. Consequently, a subsequent amendment to the declaration, bylaws or rules and regulations that removes or amends the mediation or arbitration requirement shall not be effective with regard to any construction defect claim that is based on an alleged act or omission that predates that amendment. 26-1310 Association Obligation to Inform Homeowners. Homeowners are entitled to be kept informed by boards of homeowners associations of the board's consideration of actions regarding construction defects 2 and to have meaningful input and a right to make a considered judgment and give (or withhold) consent to institute an action asserting one or more construction defects. The association board must do each of the following: A. At least sixty (60) days before filing any action under C.R.S. § 13-20-803.5, or on any other statute or court rule, an association claimant must mail or deliver written notice to each homeowner at the homeowner's last known address. B. The notice must be signed by a person other than, and not employed or otherwise affiliated with, the attorney or law firm that represents or will represent the association in the construction defects claim. C. The notice required by this section must contain the following information: 1. The nature of the action and the relief sought; 2. The amount of expenses and fees the board anticipates will be incurred, directly or indirectly, in prosecuting the action, including attorney fees, consultant fees, expert witness fees and court costs, whether incurred by the association directly or for which it may be liable if it is not the prevailing party or if it does not proceed with the action; 3. The estimated cost of repairing the defect, or if the defect is not repaired, the estimated reduction in value of the unit; 4. The estimated impact on the marketability of units that are not the subject of the action, including any impact on the ability of the owners to refinance their property during and after the action; 5. The manner in which the association proposes to fund the cost of the action, including any proposed special assessments or the use of any revenues; 6. The anticipated duration of the action and the likelihood of success; 7. Whether the builder has offered to make any repairs and, if so, whether the builder has made repairs; and 8. The steps taken by the builder, if any, in accordance with this Article to address the alleged defect, including any acknowledgement, inspection, election to repair or repairs. D. The association claimant may not commence the action unless the board obtains the written consent of homeowners holding at least a majority of the total voting rights in the association after giving the notice required by this section. In the event the association governs units in more than a single building, the written consent required by this section shall be a majority of the units with voting rights only in the building or buildings in which the construction defect is alleged to be present. Homeowners may vote either directly or through a proxy directed in writing by the homeowner and confirmed in writing by the proxy. Such consent must be obtained within 60 days after such notice is provided, otherwise the owners shall be deemed to have declined to provide their informed consent to such action. 7 Section 2. The Code of Laws is amended by the addition of a new Section 26-420, to read: Sec. 26-420. Plat note concerning multi -family development. A.Contents. Only at the specific written request of the applicant, a final plat containing lots, blocks, or other land intended for the development of owner - occupied multi -family dwelling units or associated common areas, limited common elements, or improvements within a common interest community (the "multi -family development area") will include the following plat note, applicable to the property within such multi -family development area and the improvements thereon. THIS PLAT CONTAINS LOTS, BLOCKS, OR CHER LAND INTENDED FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF OWNER -OCCUPIED MULTI -FAMILY DWELLING UNITS OR ASSOCIATED COMMON AREAS, LIMITED COMMON ELEMENTS, OR IMPROVEMENTS (THE "MULTI -FAMILY DEVELOPMENT AREA"). TO THE EXTENT THAT THE FOLLOWING CLAIMS INVOLVE ANY MULTI -FAMILY DEVELOPMENT AREA (OR THE IMPROVEMENTS THEREON) WITHIN THE PROPERTY COVERED BY THIS PLAT, SUCH CLAIMS SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO BINDING ARBITRATION IN LIEU OF SUBMITTING ANY SUCH CLAIM TO A COURT OF LAW. ANY AND ALL CLAIMS THAT ALLEGE A CONSTRUCTION DEFECT AS DEFINED AT SECTION 26-1302 OF THE CODE OF LAWS AND: (1) ARE BETWEEN ANY TWO OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING PERSONS OR ENTITIES: (A) ANY OWNER OF ANY PORTION OF THE MULTI -FAMILY DEVELOMENT AREA, (B) ANY COMMON INTEREST COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION CREATED WITH RESPECT TO THE MULTI -FAMILY DEVELOPMENT AREA, (C) THE SUBDIVIDER, DEVELOPER, CONTRACTOR, OR ANYONE CLAIMING UNDER OR THROUGH ANY SUCH PERSONS, (D) ANY PARTY THAT CONSTRUCTS OR DESIGNS ANY PROTION OF ANY RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS UPON THE MULTI -FAMILY DEVELOPMENT AREA, AND (E) ANY CONSTRUCTION PROFESSIONAL AS DEFINED IN THE CONSTRUCTION DEFECT ACTION REFORM ACT, C.R.S. 13-80-802.5, ET SEQ. AS AMENDED ("CDARA"); AND (2) THAT PERTAINS TO ANY OF: (A) THE MULTI -FAMILY DEVELOPMENT AREA, (B) ANY DWELLING UNIT, COMMON AREA DEVELOPMENT STRUCTURE, LIMITED COMMON ELEMENTS, OR OTHER IMPROVEMENTS CONSTRUCTED ON THE MULTI-FAMIL 0 DEVELOPMENT AREA, (C) THE COMMON INTEREST COMMUNITY TO BE CREATED FOR THE MULTI -FAMILY DEVELOPMENT AREA OR ANY PORTION THEREOF, OR (D) THE DECLARATION OR OTHER DOCUMENTS GOVERNING SUCH COMMUNITY. THE FOREGOING SHALL NOT PRECLUDE ANY OF THE PERSONS OR ENTITIES DESCRIBED ABOVE FROM ENDEAVORING TO RESOLVE ANY SUCH CLAIM(S) THROUGH EITHER NEGOTIATION OR MEDIATION BEFORE SUBMITTING SUCH CLAIM(S) TO BINDING ARBITRATION. ADDITIONALLY, THE MULTI -FAMILY DEVELOPMENT AREA MAY ALSO BE SUBJECT TO A DECLARATION OF COVENANTS, CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS THAT MAY IMPLEMENT AND EXPAND UPON THE REQUIREMENTS OF THIS PLAT NOTE AND THAT MAY EXEMPT CERATIN CLAIMS FROM THE REQUIREMENT THAT SUCH CLAIMS MUST BE SUBMITTED TO BINDING ARBITRATION, PROVIDED, HOWEVER, THAT ANY SUBSEQUENT AMENDMENT OR CHANGE TO SUCH DECLARATION OF COVENANTS, CONDITIONS OR RESTRICTION SHALL NOT ELIMINATE THIS REQUIREMENT THAT CONSTRUCTION DEFECT CLAIMS SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO BIDING ARBITRATION IN LIEU OF SUBMITTING ANY SUCH CLAIM TO A COURT OF LAW. FOR PURPOSES OF THIS PLAT NOTE, BINDNG ARBITRATION SHALL MEAN SUBMISSION OF ANY CLAIM DESCRIBED ABOVE TO THE ARBITARTION SERVICE PROVIDER SPECIFIED IN THE DECLARATION OR OTHER GOVERNING DOCUMENTS OF THE COMMON INTEREST COMMUNITY, IF QUALIFIED PURSUANT TO THE UNIFORM ARBITRATION ACT, PART 2 OF ARTICLE 22 OF TITLE 13, C.R.S. AND, IF NOT, AN ARBITRATION SERVICE PROVIDER SO QUALIFIED IN SUCH ARBITRATION; THE COSTS AND EXPENSES OF ARBITRATION TO BE BORNE EQUALLY BY THE PARTIES. ALL FUTURE PURCHASERS OF ANY INTEREST IN THE MULTI -FAMILY DEVELOPMENT AREA ARE DEEMED TO HAVE ACCEPTED AND AGREED TO THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THIS PLAT NOTE AND SHALL BE BOUND BY THE PLAT NOTE, WHICH IS RECORDED IN THE JEFFERSON COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER'S OFFICE, DEEMED TO BE A COVENANT RUNNING WITH THE MULTI -FAMILY DEVLEOPMENT AREA, AND BINDING UPON ALL SUCCESSORS IN INTEREST, GRANTEES, OWNERS, HEIRS, ASSIGNS, AND ALL OTEHRS WHO ACQUIRE AN INTEREST IN 0 OR TO THE MULTI -FAMILY DEVELOPMENT AREA, TOGETHER WITH ANY COMMON INTERST COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION ASSOCIATED THEREWITH. B. Disclosure. If a plat, pursuant to subparagraph a above, contains the plat note described herein, then the developer, builder, or other person or entity engaged in the initial sale of a lot or dwelling unit within the multi -family development Area of such plat to the intended resident or end user shall be required to include in such contract for purchase and sale a disclosure statement in bold-faced type that is clearly legible and in substantially the following form: THE RECORDED PLAT OF THE PROPERTY WITHIN WHICH THIS LOT OR UNIT IS SITUATED CONTAINS A RESTRICTION REQUIRING MANDATORY, BINDING ARBITRATION FOR CERTAIN TYPES OF CLAIMS, IN LIEU OF SEEKING REDRESS IN A COURT OF LAW. PURCHASERS SHOULD CAREFULLY READ THE PLAT AND NOTE CONCERNING ARBITRATION, AS THEY ARE DEEMED TO HAVE ACCEPTED AND AGREED TO THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH PLAT NOTE. C. Applicability. A request for plat note, as provided for in this section, shall be permitted only as to a final plat concerning land for which an application is filed after August 24, 2015. Section 4. 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 5. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect upon approval on second reading as permitted by Section 5.11 of the Charter. INTRODUCED, READ, AND ADOPTED on first reading by a vote of _ to _ on this day of 2015, 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 , 2015 at 7:00 p.m., in the Council Chambers, 7500 West 29 Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado. READ, ADOPTED AND ORDERED PUBLISHED on second and final reading by a vote of _ to _, this day of 12015. SIGNED by the Mayor on this day of 2015. 10 Joyce Jay, Mayor r_TIOr:61M Janelle Shaver, City Clerk Approved as to Form Gerald E. Dahl, City Attorney First Publication: Second Publication: Wheat Ridge Transcript Effective Date: Published: Wheat Ridge Transcript and www.ci.wheatridge.co.us 11 A Workshop for: Planning Commissioners Elected Officials Planners Saturday, August 22 8:30 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. American Mountaineering Center 71010`h Street Golden, Colorado 80401 COLORADO AGENDA • Department of Local Aftaus 8:30-9:00 a.m. In collaborat on with: • Check-in & Networking 9:00-1130 a.m. • Planning Commission Essentials—Do's, Don'ts& ' Best Practices • Tips for Running Effective Meetings 1130 a.m.-12:45 p.m.—Lunch on your own CCI 12:45-3:30 p.m. • Demographic Trends for Planners CML • Water Supply& Conservation Planning • Lessons Learned in Regulating Marijuana For more information, contact Anne Miller (anne.miller@state.co.us, 303.864.7726) of Wemakelife better!E�