The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCouncil Agenda Packet 06-12-17CITY COUNCIL AGENDA: June 12, 2017 Page -2- Consent Agenda cont. b) Motion to award a contract and approve payment to Revenue Recovery Group, Inc. (RRG), for the Tax Audit of Four Major Construction Projects in an amount not to exceed $36,300 c) Motion to award ITB-17-03, 2017 Overlay Project Base Bid and Bid Alternates 1, 2, 4, and 5 to Martin Marietta Materials, Westminster, CO, in the amount of $1,504,856.39, with a contingency amount of $75,250 d) Motion to cancel the Study Session of the Wheat Ridge City Council on July 3, 2017, due to the Independence Day Holiday e) Resolution No. 18-2017 – approving an Intergovernmental Agreement with the City of Mountain View and the City of Lakeside providing for resurfacing of 44th Avenue between Harlan Street and Sheridan Boulevard f) Resolution 19-2017 – approving an amendment to the Intergovernmental Agreement with the City and County of Denver regarding Denver Water’s Ashland Reservoir PUBLIC HEARINGS AND ORDINANCES ON SECOND READING 2. Resolution 17-2017 – approving a Two-Lot Subdivision Plat with a Right-of-Way Vacation for property zoned Mixed Use Neighborhood (MU-N) and Mixed Use Commercial Transit Oriented Development (MU-C TOD) at 11818 W. 52nd Avenue (Case No. MS-17-03/Hance Ranch) 3. Council Bill 09-2017 - amending Chapter 26 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws to regulate and allow Small Cell Commercial Mobile Radio Service (CMRS) Facilities ORDINANCES ON FIRST READING 4. Council Bill 10-2017 – approving the rezoning of property located at 6610 West 31st Avenue from Residential Two (R-2) to Residential-One C (R-1C) (Case No. WZ-17- 02/Gustafson) 5. Council Bill 11-2017 – approving the rezoning of property located at 6375 West 44th Avenue from Commercial-One (C-1) to Mixed Use-Neighborhood (MU-N) Case No. WZ- 17-04/Conway) DECISIONS, RESOLUTIONS AND MOTIONS 6. Resolution 20-2017 – amending the Fiscal Year 2017 General Fund Budget to reflect the approval of a Supplemental Budget Appropriation in the amount of $100,000 for the purpose of funding the Wheat Ridge Business District Façade Plus Grant Program 7. Resolution 21-2017 – supporting Mayor Jay’s participation in the Mayors National Climate Action Agenda, continued support of the Wheat Ridge Environmental Sustainability Committee’s Mission , and a commitment to the goals of the Paris Agreement CITY COUNCIL AGENDA: June 12, 2017 Page -3- CITY MANAGER’S MATTERS CITY ATTORNEY’S MATTERS ELECTED OFFICIALS’ MATTERS ADJOURNMENT ITEM NO: DATE: June 12, 2017 REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION TITLE: MOTION TO AWARD A CONTRACT AND APPROVE PAYMENT TO REVENUE RECOVERY GROUP, INC. (RRG), FOR THE TAX AUDIT OF FOUR MAJOR CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $36,300 PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCES FOR 1ST READING BIDS/MOTIONS ORDINANCES FOR 2ND READING RESOLUTIONS QUASI-JUDICIAL: YES NO _______________________________ ______________________________ Administrative Services Director City Manager ISSUE: The audit of four construction projects will allow the City to determine if additional taxes and fees are due on the permits under which they were performed, if a refund of overpaid taxes is due, or if the projects were reasonably and accurately valued at the time of permit and require no further action. An analysis of the projects based on the valuation, project type, and the City’s knowledge and experience with the general contractors indicate that some recovery is expected. The contract is designed in two phases to ensure an efficient use of monetary resources. The first phase will be an initial discovery phase for each audit to determine if taxes and fees were reasonably paid in accordance with the City Code of Laws. The second phase will consist of a detailed review of records to determine additional taxes and fees due to the City or if a refund is due to the general contractor. PRIOR ACTION: None Council Action Form – Tax Audit Contract June 12, 2017 Page 2 FINANCIAL IMPACT: The 2017 budget includes $36,300 to fund the contract at $33,000 and a 10% contingency of $3,300. BACKGROUND: Section 22-68 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws authorizes the City to conduct audits of any permitted projects to re-compute tax and seek recovery from the taxpayer/general contractor. Section 5-41 of the Code authorizes recovery of fees on any additional valuation not included in the original permit. In 2015 the Tax Division analyzed nine large construction projects based on the valuation, project type, and the City’s knowledge and experience with the associated general contractors and identified four projects from which a recovery of additional taxes and fees is expected. The Purchasing Division published a formal solicitation for these audit services in April. The City received four responses to the solicitation. Following scoring, in-person interviews were conducted with the top two bidders. RRG was the successful bidder based on combined scores on their bid materials and interview presentation. The consultant proposed billing at reasonable hourly rates unique to the two phases of each audit, to be monitored regularly by the Sales Tax Supervisor and/or Administrative Services Director. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends that City Council approve a two-phase contract with Revenue Recovery Group, Inc., (RRG) not to exceed $36,300. RECOMMENDED MOTION: “I move to award a contract and approve payment to Revenue Recovery Group, Inc., (RRG) for the tax audit of four major constructions projects in an amount not to exceed $36,300.” Or, “I move to deny the award of a contract and payment to Revenue Recovery Group, Inc., (RRG) for the tax audit of four major constructions projects for the following reason(s) ______________________________.” REPORT PREPARED/REVIEWED BY: Kathy Franklin, Sales Tax Supervisor Heather Geyer, Administrative Services Director Jennifer Nellis, Purchasing Agent Patrick Goff, City Manager ATTACHMENTS: 1. Bid Tab Sheet 2. Fee Schedule , · City of • ;P"'"\VlieatRi_dge PROJECT: RFP-17-14 PROJECT NAME: 2017 TAX AND FEE AUDIT SERVICES DUE DATE/TIME: THURSDAY, MAY 4, 2017 BY TIME 1:00 P.M. LOCAL TIME REQUESTED BY: KATHY FRANKLIN -SALES TAX DIVISION _ ,. <tJ/{J OPENED BY: JENNIFER NELLIS, PURCHASING AGENT Gfw1TNESSED BY: CINDY RAIOLO, PURCHASING TECHNICIAN VENDOR BKD, LLP LOCATION Denver, CO ' ,�, " '' ., '. . , PROPOSER ACKNOWLEDGMENT FORM Yes ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF ADDENDA (0) Yes ILLEGAL ALIEN COMPLIANCE Yes NON-DISCRIMINATION ASSURANCE Yes NON-COLLUSION AFFADAVIT Yes QUALIFICATIONS Yes EXPERIENCE Yes APPROACH Yes MISCELLANEOUS Yes ATTACHMENT A -PRICE SCHEDULE Yes INSURANCE STATEMENT Yes Eide Bailly PReMA Corportation Denver, CO/Phoenix, AZ Centennial CO/Alabama Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes TBD Yes Yes Not Stated Not Stated Page 1 of 1 Revenue Recovery Group Baton Rouge, LA/Brighton, CO ,:.1:•· I Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes TBD Yes Yes -" .. " Attachment 1 Sales and Use Tax Auditing Services 4)Fee Schedule Proposed Fee Schedule for Phase 1 per Project The per hour billing rates for the personnel of RRG shall be $85 per hour for audit services plus reasonable reimbursable expenses. Phase 1 hours shall take no more than ten (10) hours to complete. City will determine whether to continue each audit based on the estimated costs and potential liabilities as determined by the Auditor in the Discovery Phase. Veterinary Hospital (1) Veterinary Hospital (2)· Private School Remodel Multi-Unit Tower $85per hour $85per hour $85 per .. hour $85 per hour Proposed Fee Schedule for Phase 1 and Phase 2 per Project The per hour billing rates for each of the four projects for the audit services outlined in this contract rendered by personnel of RRG shall be $85.00 per hour for phase 1 hours and $185.00 per hour for phase 2 hours. RRG will provide the City a report of preliminary audit findings at the conclusion of the phase 1. Phase 1 shall take no more than ten (10) hours to complete. The report shall provide the City information relating to significant errors, and estimates of outstanding tax due and costs to complete a full-scope audit of the taxpayer's records. Phase 1 may be extended to phase 2 only upon written approval of the City. Fixed Firm Price The Fixed Firm hourly rate equals $85 per hour for phase I and $185 per hour for phase 2, plus reasonable audit related expenses. Revenue Recovery Group, Inc. Attachment 2 ITEM NO: DATE: June 12, 2017 REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION TITLE: MOTION TO AWARD ITB-17-03, 2017 OVERLAY PROJECT BASE BID AND BID ALTERNATES 1, 2, 4 AND 5 TO MARTIN MARIETTA MATERIALS, WESTMINSTER, CO, IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,504,856.39, WITH A CONTINGENCY AMOUNT OF $75,250 PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCES FOR 1ST READING BIDS/MOTIONS ORDINANCES FOR 2ND READING RESOLUTIONS QUASI-JUDICIAL: YES NO _______________________________ ______________________________ Public Works Director City Manager ISSUE: The annual Street Resurfacing Program was developed to provide needed maintenance treatments to a number of selected streets by priority in accordance with the citywide maintenance plan. The program will extend the life of pavement on streets that are structurally sound. For the 2017 project, 44th Avenue east of Wadsworth Boulevard will be overlaid along with other selected local streets and alleys. The project also includes the following: striping maintenance of high volume streets throughout the City by priority, and spot pavement patching citywide. As for project packaging, this project also includes a joint paving project of 44th Avenue from Harlan Street to Sheridan Blvd. with the Town of Lakeside and the Town of Mountain View, along with a safety improvement at 47th Avenue and Allison Street. These were incorporated into the resurfacing project bid package (as Bid Alternates) to leverage more competitive bid prices for those particular projects, identified further in this report. Council Action Form – Overlay Project June 12, 2017 Page 2 Bids were opened on May 9, 2017, and were slightly higher than the engineer’s estimate but within the available budget. As a result, staff is recommending that the lowest responsive bidder, Martin Marietta Materials, be awarded a contract for the Base Bid and Alternate Bids 1, 2, 4 and 5 in the amount of $1,504,856.39. PRIOR ACTION: None FINANCIAL IMPACT: Funding for this program was approved in the 2017 Capital Improvement Program budget under Preventive Maintenance Projects, line item 30-303-800-884 in the amount of $2,000,000. In addition to street resurfacing (overlay work), this amount is also intended to cover other preventative maintenance contracts such as overlay, slurry seal and crack filling. By performing this project, the useful life of the treated streets is expected to increase from seven to fifteen years. Costs associated with work for the intersection safety improvement (Bid Alternate 5) will be paid out of the Neighborhood Traffic Management Project line item 30-304- 800-844. The cities of Lakeside and Mountain View will reimburse Wheat Ridge for their respective portions of the 44th Avenue work in accordance with an Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA). BACKGROUND: Bids for the 2016 Overlay and Concrete Rehabilitation Project were opened on May 9, 2017. All six bids received met the initial bid requirements and all six bids were 6 to 18% above the engineering estimate at various levels. The low bidder was Martin Marietta Materials, Westminster, CO, with the total bid amount of $1,853,699.38. Award is based on the lowest responsive and responsible bid that meets all of the bid requirements, on the firm qualifications and ability to perform the work, and that the bid is within the available budget. The 2017 Overlay Project is comprised of the following: • Base Bid - Pavement overlay and concrete replacement on 44th Avenue and a number of local streets throughout the City by priority. • Alternate 1 - Pave several alleys in the east part of the City • Alternate 2 - Pave the City of Mountain View’s portion of 44th Ave. from Sheridan Blvd. to Fenton St. The work will be managed by the City of Wheat Ridge • Alternate 3 - To repave 32nd Ave from Kipling St. and Union St., which includes the City of Lakewood’s side of 32nd Avenue. Lakewood also attained unit prices for paving 32nd Avenue (details explained further in this report). • Alternate 4 - This bid alternate is to pave the City of Lakeside’s portion of 44th Ave. from Sheridan Blvd. to Harlan St. The work will be managed by the City of Wheat Ridge. • Alternate 5 - This bid alternate is to reconstruct the intersection of Allison and 47th Ave. to better align the intersection and increase safety. Council Action Form – Overlay Project June 12, 2017 Page 3 Bid Ranges Engineer Estimate Base Bid: $941,481.76 - $1,051,080.25 $927,677.10 Alternates: #1 $291,480.50 - $321,199.04 $263,121.75 #2 $84,203.28 - $100,203.15 $79,823.85 #3 $348,842.99 - $409,716.15 $342,731.25 #4 $86,206.07 - $104,118.05 $80,665.75 #5 $63,236.79 - $85,506 $51,023.75 Staff created the bid alternatives listed above to add additional maintenance work for several separate minor projects with similar construction quantities. These were included as bid alternates in the base bid package in order to obtain more competitive prices, and for the ease of construction management as part of a larger project. Bid Alternates 2 and 4 were set up for the adjacent municipalities of Lakeside and Mountain View for participation in a joint paving project of 44th Avenue between Harlan St. and Sheridan Blvd., due to the shared boundaries. It was agreed a single paving project by one contractor would make more sense, both from a feasibility (cost) and logistical standpoint. Wheat Ridge had initially planned to repave its portion of 44th Avenue from Vance Street to Fenton Street. However, Lakeside and Mountain View expressed interest in extending the paving to Sheridan Avenue under Wheat Ridge’s contract and reimbursing Wheat Ridge accordingly for their shares. Both municipalities have reviewed the bid prices and agreed to participate in the project. The expected cost for Lakeside and Mountain View to participate is $86,206.07 and $92,732.73 respectively. The City is in the process of executing an IGA with each of the entities using a separate and concurrent process to formalize the funding aspect. Bid Alternate 3 was set up specifically for the City of Lakewood to participate in a joint paving project of 32nd Avenue between Kipling St. and Union St., due to the shared boundary. Concurrently, Lakewood obtained project pricing through their contract renewal pricing for the same segment. This process revealed that the cost is lower to perform the paving project through Lakewood’s contract. As a result, the City of Wheat Ridge’s staff has reviewed the bid prices through Lakewood contract procurement and has agreed to have this done under their contract. As a result, Bid alternate 3 is recommended for exclusion from Wheat Ridge’s contract. The City of Wheat Ridge recently executed an IGA with Lakewood, providing for reimbursement for Wheat Ridge’s share of the cost and management of the project by Lakewood. Bid Alternate 5 provides for intersection safety improvements that were initiated by the neighborhood at Allison and 47th Ave. through the Neighborhood Traffic Management Program Council Action Form – Overlay Project June 12, 2017 Page 4 process last year. Staff has scheduled to meet with the residents fronting the project for project support and their concurrence to the improvements. Even though the bids received were slightly above the estimate, staff recommends award of the project in full since the cost is within the available budget. The lowest responsible and responsive bidder, Martin Marietta Materials of Westminster, Colorado, has met the bid and qualification requirements. Martin Marietta Materials has also performed work satisfactorily in the City under previous contracts. The price for the Base Bid and Bid Alternates 1, 2, 4 and 5 is $1,504,856.39. In addition, a 5% contingency amount of $75,250 is requested to cover the cost of unforeseen or additional needed work items that may be encountered during the course of the project. RECOMMENDATIONS: Based upon the contractor's demonstrated capabilities and performance on previous projects and due to available budget, Staff recommends that a contract be awarded to Martin Marietta Materials that includes the Base Bid and Bid Alternates 1, 2, 4 and 5 as outlined above. RECOMMENDED MOTION: “I move to award ITB-17-03, 2017 Overlay Project Base Bid and Bid Alternates 1, 2, 4 and 5 to Martin Marietta Materials, Westminster, CO, in the amount of $1,504,856.39, with a contingency amount of $75,250.00 and that the Director of Public Works be authorized to issue change orders up to a total contract and contingency amount of $1,580,106.39.” Or, “I move to deny the award of ITB-17-03, 2017 Overlay Project Base Bid and Bid Alternates 1, 2, 4 and 5 to Martin Marietta Materials, Westminster, CO, for the following reason(s) _________________________________________________________________.” REPORT PREPARED/REVIEWED BY: Steve Nguyen, Engineering Manager Jennifer Nellis, Purchasing Agent Scott Brink, Director of Public Works Patrick Goff, City Manager ATTACHMENTS: 1. Bid Tab Sheet 2. Project Map Subject to review for completeness and accuracy. . ' � � City of_?°WlieatRi_dge PROJECT: ITB-17-03 2017 OVERLAY PROJECT DUE DATE/TIME: TUESDAY, MAY 9, 2017 BY 1 P.M. LOCAL TIME APC Construction Co., Asphalt Specialities ALLOWED VENDOR (PRIME) LLC Company, Inc. LOCATION Golden, CO Henderson, Co BIDDER ACKNOWLEDGEMENT FORM Yes Yes ACKNOWLEDGE ADDENDUM (2) Yes Yes CONTRACTOR'S QUALIFICATION FORM Yes Yes NON-DISCRIMINATION ASSURANCE FORM Yes Yes ILLEGAL ALIEN COMPLIANCE Yes Yes LIST OF SUB-CONTRACTORS Yes Yes NON-COLLUSION AFFADAVIT Yes Yes KEEP JOBS IN COLORADO Yes Yes BID BOND Yes Yes PRICING SCHEDULE Yes Yes TOTAL AMOUNT OF BID $1,012,983.12 $1,016,212.00 BID ALTERNATE #1 (PAGE 22) $320,946.25 $298,661.50 BID ALTERNATE #2 (PAGE 23) $84,203.28 $90,520.75 BID ALTERNATE #3 (PAGE #24) $381,391.48 $400,514.75 BID ALTERNATE #4 (PAGE #25) $88,574.88 $94,410.75 BID ALTERNATE #5 {PAGE #26) $84,616.29 $76,692.50 page 1 of 1 ft: REQUESTED BY: RUSS HIGGINS, PUBLIC WORKS ti/) OPENED BY: JENNIFER NELLIS, PURCHASING AGENT(<'fJ � WITNESSED BY: RUSS HIGGINS, PUBLIC WORKS The Perfect Patch Brannan Sand and Martin Marietta Asphalt Company, Gravel Company, LLC Materials, Inc. Inc. Denver, CO Lakewood, Co Commerce City, CO No, Allowed Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes $981,370.50 $941,481.76 $1,051,605.25 $291,480.50 $321,199.04 $314,996.05 $89,296.50 $92,732.73 $100,203.15 $391,514.25 $348,842.99 $409,716.15 $92,858.50 $86,206.07 $104,118.05 $85,506.00 $63,236.79 $80,514.80 Attachment 1 a UNINCORP.I JEFFCO UNINCORPORATED r JEFFERSON COUNTY l C TY OF 2017 r WHEAT R OGE OVERLAY "'. '" � r ity of ·?Wheat�ge....?"'ruRLIC WORKS Attachment 2 ITEM NO: DATE: June 12, 2017 REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION TITLE: MOTION TO CANCEL THE STUDY SESSION OF THE WHEAT RIDGE CITY COUNCIL ON JULY 3, 2017, DUE TO THE INDEPENDENCE DAY HOLIDAY PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCES FOR 1ST READING BIDS/MOTIONS ORDINANCES FOR 2ND READING RESOLUTIONS QUASI-JUDICIAL: YES NO ______________________________ City Manager ISSUE: The Independence Day holiday this year falls on Tuesday, July 4th. Staff recommends cancelling the study session scheduled on Monday, July 3rd. There are no items listed on the future agenda for July 3rd at this time. FINANCIAL IMPACT: None RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends the cancellation of the July 3, 2017 study session. RECOMMENDED MOTION: “I move to cancel the study session of the City Council on July 3, 2017 due to the Independence Day Holiday.” REPORT PREPARED/REVIEWED BY: Patrick Goff, City Manager ITEM NO: DATE: June 12, 2017 REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION TITLE: RESOLUTION NO. 18-2017 - A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW AND THE CITY OF LAKESIDE PROVIDING FOR RESURFACING OF 44TH AVENUE BETWEEN HARLAN STREET AND SHERIDAN BOULEVARD PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCES FOR 1ST READING BIDS/MOTIONS ORDINANCES FOR 2ND READING RESOLUTIONS QUASI-JUDICIAL: YES NO _______________________________ ______________________________ Director of Public Works City Manager ISSUE: The City of Wheat Ridge annually conducts pavement rehabilitation and resurfacing projects. For 2017, the City has programmed resurfacing of 44th Avenue between Vance Street and Fenton Street, a distance of approximately one mile. This segment includes 44th Avenue between Harlan Street and Fenton Street, shared with the City of Lakeside. In addition, the portion of 44th Avenue between Fenton and Sheridan Boulevard, shared by Lakeside and Mountain View, is also in need of resurfacing as assessed by those two cities. As a result, staff from the three cities have collectively agreed that a single paving project for 44th Avenue makes sense. Rather than three separate projects, a single project with the cost shared proportionately by each city would not only be constructed more efficiently, but would also be more cost effective and less disruptive to the traveling public. As a result, an Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) has been drafted, providing for a project to be administered by the City of Wheat Ridge with the Cities of Mountain View and Lakeside compensating Wheat Ridge for their appropriate share of the project costs. Council Action Form – IGA for 44th Ave. Paving June 12, 2017 Page 2 PRIOR ACTION: None FINANCIAL IMPACT: Funding for this work was approved in the 2017 Capital Improvement Program budget, Preventive Maintenance Projects (30-303-800-884). The total approved budget for this account is $2,000,000, which includes asphalt resurfacing, miscellaneous concrete work, patching, and crack sealing. As previously stated, resurfacing of the portions of 44th Avenue within the boundaries of Lakeside and Mountain View will be paid by the two cities as described in the IGA. Based on the contract unit prices received, the total cost to resurface 44th Avenue from Vance Street to Sheridan Boulevard is $491,694. Of that amount, $92,733 and $86,206.07 will be reimbursed from Mountain View and Lakeside respectively. BACKGROUND: The annual street resurfacing program was developed to provide needed maintenance treatments to a number of selected streets by priority and in accordance with the citywide maintenance plan. The program is intended to extend the life of pavement on streets that are structurally sound. For the 2017 project, 44th Avenue east of Vance Street will be overlaid along with other selected local streets. The overall program also includes the following: concrete and curb ramp replacements on streets being resurfaced, striping maintenance of high volume streets throughout the City by priority, spot pavement patching citywide, and crack sealing. Between Harlan Street and Sheridan Boulevard, 44th Avenue is shared in various locations among Wheat Ridge, Lakeside, and Mountain View, and all three cities have scheduled this street for resurfacing in 2017. The three cities have collectively determined that a single project administered by the City of Wheat Ridge with Lakeside and Mountain View contributing their respective fair shares would serve as the most feasible and efficient means of performing the rehabilitation work. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends approving the IGA with the Cities of Lakeside and Mountain View for the resurfacing of 44th Avenue. RECOMMENDED MOTION: “I move to approve Resolution No. 18-2017, a resolution approving an Intergovernmental Agreement with the Cities of Lakeside and Mountain View for resurfacing of 44th Avenue between Harlan Street and Sheridan Boulevard, conditional on same approval of the Intergovernmental Agreement by Lakeside and Mountain View” Or: Council Action Form – IGA for 44th Ave. Paving June 12, 2017 Page 3 “I move to postpone indefinitely Resolution No. 18-2017, a resolution approving an Intergovernmental Agreement with the Cities of Lakeside and Mountain View for resurfacing of 44th Avenue between Harlan Street and Sheridan Boulevard for the following reason(s):” _____________________________.” REPORT PREPARED/REVIEWED BY: Steve Nguyen, Engineering Manager Scott Brink, Director of Public Works Patrick Goff, City Manager ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution No. 18-2017 2. Intergovernmental Agreement CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO RESOLUTION NO. 18 Series of 2017 TITLE: A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW AND THE CITY OF LAKESIDE PROVIDING FOR RESURFACING OF 44TH AVENUE BETWEEN HARLAN STREET AND SHERIDAN BOULEVARD WHEREAS, 44th Avenue between Harlan Street and Sheridan Boulevard is shared in varying amounts between the Cities of Wheat Ridge, Mountain View, and Lakeside; WHEREAS, 44th Avenue is in need of maintenance and resurfacing work in accordance with the maintenance needs and policies of all three Cities; and WHEREAS, The Cities of Wheat Ridge, Mountain View, and Lakeside desire to complete said resurfacing work as a single project, with costs split in accordance with the amount of pavement surface located in each respective City; and WHEREAS, said project will be administered by the City of Wheat Ridge with the Cities of Mountain View and Lakeside compensating Wheat Ridge for their appropriate share of the cost, and WHEREAS, a standard Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) between the City of Wheat Ridge and the Cities of Mountain View and Lakeside has been prepared in accordance with the legal requirements of all three cities. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Wheat Ridge, Colorado, that: Section 1. Agreement Approved. The Intergovernmental Agreement between the City of Wheat Ridge, the City of Mountain View, and the City of Lakeside regarding resurfacing of 44th Avenue is hereby approved, conditional on same approval by the Cities of Mountain View and Lakeside. Section 2. Effective Date ____________. This Resolution shall be effective immediately upon adoption. DONE AND RESOLVED this _____ day of ____________, 2017. Joyce Jay, Mayor ATTEST: Janelle Shaver, City Clerk Attachment 1 AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into this _____ day of ____________________, 2017 (“Effective Date”), by and between the CITY OF LAKESIDE, COLORADO, a Colorado municipal corporation, (hereinafter referenced as "Lakeside"), the CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW, COLORADO, a Colorado municipal corporation, (hereinafter referenced as "Mountain View"), and the CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO, a Colorado municipal corporation (hereinafter referred to as "Wheat Ridge”). RECITALS WHEREAS, Lakeside, Mountain View, and Wheat Ridge are neighboring municipalities that share a common boundary line within certain public rights-of-way, including West 44th Avenue, as illustrated by Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference; and WHEREAS, the portions of West 44th Avenue that separate or are shared by the three jurisdictions must be maintained by repaving said portions in the future; and WHEREAS, the parties agree that the entire width of the paved portions of these rights-of-way should be repaved at one time by one party, rather than in pieces by multiple parties; and WHEREAS, the parties therefore wish to enter into an agreement under which each party assumes responsibility for portions of this Avenue upon terms and conditions that fairly reflect each party’s proportionate ownership in each. AGREEMENT NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the recitals, covenants, and promises herein set forth and other good and valuable consideration herein receipted for, the parties agree as follows: 1.0 Repaving. Wheat Ridge agrees to repave the entirety of the currently-paved portion of West 44th Avenue between Harlan Street and Sheridan Boulevard, as illustrated by Exhibit A. Lakeside and Mountain View consent to Wheat Ridge repaving the portions of West 44th Avenue that lie within their respective boundaries. 2.0 Repaving Operations. Repaving by the City of Wheat Ridge shall be performed by a qualified contractor (Contractor) retained by the City of Wheat Ridge through a public bidding process under the requirements of the State of Colorado and the City of Wheat Ridge. 3.0 Scope of Work. Pursuant to this IGA, the Contractor shall perform said repaving work on 44th Avenue as illustrated in Exhibit A, and as set forth in the Scope of Work in Exhibit B, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, and in accordance with the standards set forth in the contract between the Contractor and the City of Wheat Ridge. Attachment 2 -2- 4.0 Consideration. In exchange for the Contractor’s services, Lakeside and Mountain View shall pay Wheat Ridge in accordance with the following table. The table unit prices are actual unit bid prices. Payment shall be made in a lump sum within thirty (30) days following substantial completion and acceptance of the work by Wheat Ridge. Mountain View MOUNTAIN VIEW - W 44TH AVE. ASPHALT PLANING (2")4960 SY 2.37$ 11,755.20$ ADJUST MANHOLE TO GRADE 5 EA 65.51$ 327.55$ ADJUST VALVE TO GRADE 3 EA 42.46$ 127.38$ HMA OVERLAY 2" SP-100 PG (64-22) SX 1/2"580 TN 73.96$ 42,896.80$ HMA PATCHING 9" SP-100 PG (64-22) S 3/4'20 SY 96.86$ 1,937.20$ TRAFFIC LOOP 6' X 40'3 EA 1,516.51$ 4,549.53$ MARK ARROW LEFT (15.5 SF) TAPE (RECESS)4 EA 398.24$ 1,592.96$ WHITE MARKING TAPE 8" (RECESS)260 LF 8.58$ 2,230.80$ WHITE MARKING TAPE 24" (RECESS)185 LF 26.96$ 4,987.60$ WHITE PAVEMARK MODIFIED EPOXY (RECESS)400 SF 1.65$ 660.00$ YELLOW PAVE MARK MODIFIED EPOXY (RECESS)1400 SF 1.65$ 2,310.00$ WHITE PAVEMENT MARKING (TEMP)575 SF 0.55$ 316.25$ YELLOW PAVEMENT MARKING (TEMP) 1400 SF 0.55$ 770.00$ SANITARY FACILITY 1 EA 151.65$ 151.65$ MOBILIZATION 1 LS 9,750.43$ 9,750.43$ TRAFFIC CONTROL MANAGEMENT 1 IS 7,665.72$ 7,665.72$ MATERIAL SAMPING & TESTING 1 LS 703.66$ 703.66$ TOTAL 92,732.73$ Lakeside LAKESIDE - W 44TH AVE. ASPHALT PLANINING (2")6215 SY 2.26$ 14,045.90$ ADJUST MANHOLE TO GRADE 2 EA 65.51$ 131.02$ ADJUST VALVE TO GRADE 2 EA 41.25$ 82.50$ HMA OVERLAY 2" SP-100 PG (64-22) SX 1/2" 730 TN 72.31$ 52,786.30$ MARK ARROW LEFT (15.5SF) 5 EA 336.97$ 1,684.85$ WHITE MARKING TAPE 24" (RECESS)205 LF 26.96$ 5,526.80$ WHITE PAVEMARK MODIFIED EPOXY (RECESS)975 SF 1.65$ 1,608.75$ YELLOW PAVEMARK MODIFIED EPOXY (RECESS)240 SF 1.65$ 396.00$ WHITE PAVEMENT MARKING (TEMP)975 SF 0.55$ 536.25$ YELLOW PAVEMARK MARKING (TEMP)240 SF 0.55$ 132.00$ SANITARY FACILITY 1 EA 227.48$ 227.48$ MOBILIZATION 1 LS 3,653.33$ 3,653.33$ TRAFFIC CONTROL MANAGEMENT 1 IS 4,509.25$ 4,509.25$ MATERIAL SAMPING & TESTING 1 LS 885.64$ 885.64$ Total 86,206.07$ .0 Term. Terms of this Agreement shall remain in effect from the Effective Date until each party accepts repaving work and has paid its required cost share as set forth herein. 6.0 Liability. Each party shall be responsible for its own negligent acts. To the extent permitted by law, each party shall reimburse the other party for any costs, expenses or legal fees that either party may incur for any liability resulting from the -3- negligent acts of the other party in its performance of its obligations under this Agreement. 7.0 Notices. Any notices required or permitted hereunder shall be sufficient if personally delivered or if sent by First Class U.S. mail, postage prepaid, addressed as follows: City Manager City of Lakeside Lakeside, CO City Manager City of Mountain View Mountain View, CO City Manager City of Wheat Ridge 7500 W. 29th Avenue Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80033 8.0 No Waiver of Immunity. Each party, its officers and its employees are relying on, and do not waive or intend to waive by any provision of this Agreement, the monetary limitations or any other rights, immunities, and protections provided by the Colorado Governmental Immunity Act, C.R.S. § 24-10-101, et seq., as amended, or otherwise available to it, its officers and employees. 9.0 Amendments to Agreement. No changes, alterations or modifications to any of the provisions hereof shall be effective unless contained in a written agreement signed by all three parties. 10.0 Entire Agreement. This Agreement shall constitute the entire agreement between the parties hereto and shall supersede all prior contracts, proposals, representations, negotiations and letters of intent, whether written or oral, pertaining to the subject matter of this Agreement. 11.0 Situs, Venue and Severability. The laws of the State of Colorado shall govern the interpretation, validity, performance and enforcement of this Agreement. For the resolution of any dispute arising hereunder, venue shall be in the Courts of the County of Jefferson, State of Colorado. If any provision of this Agreement shall be held to be invalid or unenforceable, the validity and enforceability of the remaining provisions of this Agreement shall not be affected thereby. 12.0 Paragraph Headings. Paragraph headings are inserted for convenience only and in no way limit or define the interpretation to be placed upon this Agreement. 13.0 Binding Agreement. This Agreement shall be binding upon and for the benefit of the parties hereto, their successors and assigns. -4- 14.0 ARTICLE X, SECTION 20/TABOR The parties understand and acknowledge that each of them is subject to Article X, § 20 of the Colorado Constitution ("TABOR"). The parties do not intend to violate the terms and requirements of TABOR by the execution of this Agreement. It is understood and agreed that this Agreement does not create a multi-fiscal year direct or indirect debt or obligation within the meaning of TABOR and, therefore, notwithstanding anything in this Agreement to the contrary, the obligations of each party are expressly dependent and conditioned upon the continuing availability of funds beyond the term of the current fiscal period ending upon the next succeeding December 31. Financial obligations of each party payable after the current fiscal year are contingent upon funds for that purpose being appropriated, budgeted, and otherwise made available in accordance with the rules, regulations, and resolutions of such party and other applicable law. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement concerning termination or term, upon any party’s failure to appropriate such funds, this Agreement shall automatically terminate. Each party agrees to provide the others with thirty (30) days’ notice of its intent to fail to appropriate funds for purposes of this Agreement. -5- IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement on the day and year first above written. MOUNTAIN VIEW: ATTEST: By: City Clerk MOUNTAIN VIEW, COLORADO, a Colorado municipal corporation By: Mayor WHEAT RIDGE: ATTEST: By: Janelle Shaver, City Clerk WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO, a Colorado municipal corporation By: Joyce Jay, Mayor LAKESIDE: ATTEST: By: City Clerk LAKESIDE, COLORADO, a Colorado municipal corporation By: Mayor -6- EXHIBIT A -7- EXHIBIT B Scope of Work The Contractor retained by the City of Wheat Ridge shall perform the following work as described below, and per the items and quantities specified in 4.0 of the Agreement: • A two-inch (2”) full mill of 44TH Avenue between Harlan St. and Sheridan Blvd. o Necessary patching will follow the milling operation  Any patching required will be discussed among the parties and paid for by the responsible party o Once patching is complete, Contractor will overlay the milled portion of 44th Ave. with a two-inch (2”) final lift Overlay using SX 64-22 Hot Mix Asphalt o Striping and pavement markings as specified o Valve and manhole adjustments as required o Traffic Control ITEM NO: DATE: June 12, 2017 REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION TITLE: RESOLUTION NO. 19-2017 - A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER REGARDING DENVER WATER’S ASHLAND RESERVOIR PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCES FOR 1ST READING BIDS/MOTIONS ORDINANCES FOR 2ND READING RESOLUTIONS QUASI-JUDICIAL: YES NO ______ _________________________ ______________________________ Director of Public Works City Manager ISSUE: City Council approved a Special Use Permit (SUP) and an Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) with Denver Water on September 10, 2012, to allow reconstruction of the Ashland Reservoir on property located at 2901 Fenton Street. The project also includes street improvements to the adjacent streets. In conjunction with Denver Water’s project, the City planned to straighten 29th Avenue at Fenton Street. In order to simplify design and construction coordination, the City has reached an agreement with Denver Water to construct the street improvements and be reimbursed by Denver Water for their share. The City is well underway with the design work and construction is expected to start this fall. PRIOR ACTION: On September 10, 2012, the City Council approved a SUP with Denver Water to allow reconstruction of the Ashland Reservoir to replace the original concrete-lined ponds with two smaller tanks. At that same meeting, an IGA was approved that outlined the responsibilities of Denver Water and the City of Wheat Ridge for improvements to the adjacent streets. Just over a year ago, a neighborhood informational meeting was held to discuss the proposed improvements with neighboring property owners and stakeholders. Feedback received at the meeting was Council Action Form – Denver Water IGA Amendment June 12, 2017 Page 2 generally positive. A second neighborhood informational meeting will be held later this month to provide updates to the neighborhood and solicit any additional feedback. On April 24, 2017, the City Council designated the street width for the affected portions of 29th and 30th Avenues and Fenton Street. The petition period for the street-width designation to require a citizen vote ended on June 7, 2017. FINANCIAL IMPACT: Denver Water will reimburse the City for the portion of the project that was originally their responsibility. Denver Water will provide funding as pay requests are processed for the completed construction work. Funding for the City’s portion of the project has been approved in the minor street improvement project line item of the 2017 Capital Improvement Program Budget in the amount of $435,000. BACKGROUND: The City of Denver has maintained water storage reservoirs at the Ashland site since the 1890s. The previous 41-million-gallon reservoirs were replaced with two 10-million gallon concrete tanks. The SUP required Denver Water to add streetscape improvements to the adjacent streets - 29th and 30th Avenues and Fenton Street. The IGA required that Denver Water assist in the reconstruction of 29th Avenue to straighten the street. This also included dedication of right-of- way along 29th Avenue. Denver Water is responsible for reconstructing the north half of 29th Avenue along their frontage, and the City of Wheat Ridge is responsible for the remainder. As the project progressed, it was determined to be in the best interest of both entities to include Denver Water’s portion of the street and streetscape construction into the City’s project. This simplifies the design, construction coordination, and would result in better pricing since all of the work would be done as one large project. The City has been performing the majority of the design work and will provide the construction oversight. In order to provide a logical starting point for the straightening of 29th Avenue, the western limit has been extended to Ingalls Street, with the eastern limit at the alley between Fenton and Eaton Streets. The City is also working with the City of Edgewater to construct improvements on their side of 29th Avenue east of Ingalls Street. Edgewater is also contemplating installing a waterline on this portion of 29th Avenue towards Kendall Street, so the phasing for the work between Gray and Ingalls Streets may change. The construction was originally planned for this summer, but Denver Water has been delayed in completing the work behind the sidewalks, so the City is delaying the project until September 2017. The City Council designated the street width in April, 2017, and construction must commence within one year as required by City Code. Since staff is already well into the design process and expects to issue the notice to proceed by the end of September, 2017, the timeline and project delivery are currently on track pending any unforeseen issues. Council Action Form – Denver Water IGA Amendment June 12, 2017 Page 3 RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends approving the amendment to the IGA with the City and County of Denver. RECOMMENDED MOTION: “I move to approve Resolution No. 19-2017, a resolution approving an amendment to the intergovernmental agreement with the City and County of Denver regarding Denver Water’s Ashland Reservoir.” Or, “I move to postpone indefinitely Resolution No. 19-2017, a resolution approving an amendment to the intergovernmental agreement with the City and County of Denver regarding Denver Water’s Ashland Reservoir for the following reason(s) ________________________.” REPORT PREPARED/REVIEWED BY: Scott Brink, Director of Public Works Steve Nguyen, Engineering Supervisor Mark Westberg, Engineering Project Manager Patrick Goff, City Manager ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution No. 19-2017 2. Amendment to IGA regarding Ashland Reservoir Attachment 1 CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO RESOLUTION NO. 19 Series of 2017 TITLE: A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER REGARDING DENVER WATER’S ASHLAND RESERVOIR WHEREAS, City Council approved a Special Use Permit with Denver Water on September 10, 2012 to allow reconstruction of the Ashland Reservoir on property located at 2901 Fenton Street which included street improvements to the adjacent streets; and WHEREAS, the City and Denver Water have agreed to share the cost of the improvements; and WHEREAS, the City is completing construction plans and street specifications and will oversee construction of those street improvements; and WHEREAS, the City will be reimbursed by Denver Water for their share of the street improvements. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Wheat Ridge, Colorado, that: Section 1. Agreement Approved. The Amendment to the Intergovernmental Agreement with the City and County of Denver regarding Denver Water’s Ashland Reservoir is hereby approved and the Mayor and City Clerk are authorized and directed to execute the same. Section 2. This Resolution shall be effective immediately upon adoption. DONE AND RESOLVED this 12th day of June, 2017. Joyce Jay, Mayor ATTEST: Janelle Shaver, City Clerk Attachment 2 Page 1 AMENDMENT TO INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT REGARDING DENVER WATER’S ASHLAND RESERVOIR THIS AMENDMENT (“Amendment”), dated this ______ day of ___________, 2017, to the INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT (“Agreement”), dated the thirteenth day of September, 2012, is made and entered into by and between the CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, STATE OF COLORADO, a home rule municipality of the State of Colorado (the “City”), and the CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER, acting by and through its Board of Water Commissioners (“Denver Water”) a home rule municipality of the State of Colorado, together referred to as the Parties RECITALS 1. Denver Water owns and operates its Ashland Reservoir in the City of Wheat Ridge, Colorado. 2. Denver Water is in the process of replacing and improving its Ashland Reservoir facilities as described generally in the Agreement (the “Project”). 3. The Agreement required that Denver Water undertake certain obligations in the public rights-of-way of 29th Avenue, Fenton Street, and 30th Avenue as part of the Project. 4. The Parties wish to amend the Agreement to permit the City to complete the public improvements within the public rights-of-way of 29th Avenue, Fenton Street, and 30th Avenue, to better describe those improvements, and to clarify the financial responsibilities of the parties with respect thereto. AMENDMENT NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the covenants and conditions set forth herein, and for other good and valuable consideration, the sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the Parties agree to amend the Agreement as follows. • The Parties agree to replace paragraphs 1.c.i., ii., and iii. with the following: i. The City shall be responsible the design, construction, and construction oversight of public improvements within the public rights-of-way of 29th Avenue, Fenton Street, and 30th Avenue. ii. The costs for the public improvements shall be borne by the parties as follows: 1) The City shall be responsible for all costs of the improvements described in subparagraphs iii. and vii. 2) Denver Water shall be responsible for all costs of the improvements described in subparagraphs v., vi., and viii. (the “Denver Water Improvements”). iii. The City shall be responsible for the costs of any additional improvements to 29th Avenue south of the proposed centerline of Attachment 2 Page 2 29th or on 29th Avenue east of Fenton Street and west of Gray Street. The City shall be responsible for the removal of the traffic signal at the intersection of 29th Avenue and Fenton Street. • The Parties agree to add the following to sub-section 1.c.: v. 29th Avenue – Denver Water shall be responsible for the costs for the following improvements on the north side of 29th Avenue between Fenton and Gray Streets: 1) Asphalt pavement, eleven feet wide, north of the proposed centerline of 29th Avenue; and 2) Concrete curb/gutter, two feet six inches wide; and 3) Landscaped amenity zone, six feet wide, to include seven trees, bluegrass sod, and irrigation; and 4) Concrete sidewalk, six feet wide; and 5) Concrete driveway, sixteen feet wide, from the street to the back of sidewalk opposite Gray Street to provide access to the lower portion of the site. vi. Fenton Street – Denver Water shall be responsible for the costs for the following improvements on the west side of Fenton Street between 29th and 30th Avenues: 1) Paved amenity zone, four feet wide, to include seventeen trees, tree grates, colored patterned concrete, and irrigation; and 2) Concrete sidewalk, six feet wide. vii. Fenton Street – The City shall be responsible for the costs for the following improvements on the west side of Fenton Street between 29th and 30th Avenues: 1) Concrete curb/gutter, four feet six inches wide, to widen the street by two feet; and 2) Removal of existing curb/gutter and landscaped amenity zone. viii. 30th Avenue – Denver Water shall be responsible for the costs for the following improvements on the south side of 30th Avenue between Fenton and Gray Streets: 1) Concrete curb/gutter, two feet six inches wide; and 2) Landscaped amenity zone, six feet wide, to include twenty trees, bluegrass sod, and irrigation; and 3) Concrete sidewalk, six feet wide; and Attachment 2 Page 3 4) Concrete driveway, twenty feet wide, from the street to the back of sidewalk opposite Gray Street to provide access to the upper portion of the site; and 5) Modification of up to three existing storm sewer manholes along the south side of 30th Avenue to accommodate the revised location of the curb/gutter; and 6) Removal of asphalt pavement, approximately six feet wide to reduce the asphalt width to thirty four feet; and 7) Removal of existing curb/gutter, landscaped amenity zone, and sidewalk. ix. Denver Water shall provide the following irrigation mainline connections to the Project’s irrigation system as follows: 1) 29th Avenue – 1 ½” approximately forty five feet west the southeast property corner of the site; and 2) Fenton Street – 1 ¼” midway between 29th and 30th Avenues and 1 ½” approximately thirty five feet south of the northeast property corner of the site, and; 3) 30th Avenue – 1 ¼” approximately forty feet east of the northwest property corner and 1 ½” approximately fifteen feet east of the driveway on Fenton Street. x. Construction plans will be submitted to Denver Water for review prior to advertisement. Cost estimates will be prepared and submitted to Denver Water for each of the segments of work at design milestones and prior to advertisement. The work on each street will be advertised as separate bid alternatives in order to track the cost of each segment for comparison with the final cost estimates, which are attached as Exhibit I. • The Parties agree to add the following to section 3.: a. Payment Procedures. The procedure for payment to the City by Denver Water for the obligations detailed above shall be as follows: i. The City shall submit a requisition and any supporting documentation required by Denver Water, including but not limited to copies of any invoices from the contractors previously employed by the City to construct the Denver Water Improvements, which may be provided following the procedures set forth in the requisition. The City may submit requisitions as needed but no more frequently than once each month. ii. Denver Water shall pay to the City the amounts described therein within 30 days. Attachment 2 Page 4 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Amendment to the Agreement. ATTEST: Janelle Shaver, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: Gerald E. Dahl, City Attorney {S E A L} ATTESTED AND APPROVED: By: Robert J. Mahoney, Chief Engineering Officer APPROVED AS TO FORM: Office of General Counsel {S E A L} CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE By: Joyce Jay, Mayor Date: CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER, acting by and through its BOARD OF WATER COMMISSIONERS By: James Lochhead, CEO/ Manager Date: REGISTERED AND COUNTERSIGNED By: Auditor ITEM NO: DATE: June 12, 2017 REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION TITLE: RESOLUTION NO. 17-2017 – A RESOLUTION APPROVING A TWO-LOT SUBDIVISION PLAT WITH A RIGHT-OF-WAY VACATION FOR PROPERTY ZONED MIXED USE NEIGHBORHOOD (MU-N) AND MIXED USE COMMERCIAL TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT (MU-C TOD) AT 11818 W. 52ND AVENUE (CASE NO. MS-17-03/HANCE RANCH) PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCES FOR 1ST READING BIDS/MOTIONS ORDINANCES FOR 2ND READING RESOLUTIONS QUASI-JUDICIAL: YES NO _______________________________ _____________________________________ Community Development Director City Manager ISSUE: The applicant is requesting approval of a two-lot subdivision plat for property zoned Mixed Use Neighborhood (MU-N) and Mixed Use Commercial Transit Oriented Development (MU-C TOD) at 11818 W. 52nd Avenue. The request also includes a right-of-way vacation for Taft Street. The proposed platting area is approximately 7.3 acres. The purpose of the subdivision is to split the development parcel in accordance with the new zoning classifications, vacate existing right-of-way and dedicate new right-of-way in anticipation of property development. PRIOR ACTION: Planning Commission reviewed this request at a public hearing held on May 18, 2017, and gave a recommendation of approval for the following reasons: 1. All requirements of the subdivision regulations have been met. 2. The proposed plat will facilitate redevelopment of the site consistent with the zone change and concept plan. Council Action Form – Hance Ranch Plat June 12, 2017 Page 2 3. Utility districts can serve the property with improvements installed at the developer’s expense. 4. The criteria used to evaluate a right-of-way vacation supports the request. FINANCIAL IMPACT: Fees in the amount of $2,160 were collected for the review and processing of Case No. MS-17-03. BACKGROUND: Subject Property The property is located at the southwest corner of 52nd Avenue and Tabor Street. The property was rezoned from Residential-One (R-1) to MU-N and MU-C TOD in 2016. The purpose of the rezoning was to allow for the mix of land uses, densities and urban form as contemplated in the Northwest SubArea Plan and to simplify the review and approval for future development on the property. The property extends from West 52nd Avenue south to Ridge Road and from Tabor Street west to Taft Court. The site was most recently used agriculturally as home to Hance Ranch, and includes a house and several farm-related accessory structures. The southwest corner of the property is opposite the RTD Ward Road Station, the Gold Line commuter rail line’s end-of-line station, which is located at the southwest corner of Taft Court and Ridge Road. The Gold Line is slated to begin operation in 2017. The area has already seen a large amount of public improvement investment, including but not limited to the realignment of Tabor Street, installation of a traffic signal at Tabor Street and Ridge Road, the construction of Taft Court between 50th Place (soon to be renamed Ridge Road), and 52nd Avenue, and the construction of the commuter rail station and other infrastructure related to the commuter rail line. The property was originally subdivided in 1953 into 25 parcels pursuant to Hance’s Subdivision. The parcel layout and size of the subdivision resembles a typical R-1, single-family housing neighborhood. A full-width dedicated street (Taft Street) ran down the middle of the property with home lots on each side. Another row of lots faced east onto Tabor Street. However, the property was never developed and was used as a home site and for agricultural purposes. An administrative concept plan for the property was approved in early 2017. The concept plan shows the entire property being bifurcated by West 51st Avenue to create two planning areas, the northern and southern planning areas. The northern planning area corresponds with the MU-N zoning and the southern area corresponds with the MU-C TOD zoning. Uses approved for the northern planning area are up to 80 townhomes units. The southern planning area is approved for 250 multi-unit apartments or 60 townhome units. The concept plan also addresses traffic circulation, open space concepts and drainage. Council Action Form – Hance Ranch Plat June 12, 2017 Page 3 Surrounding zoning and land use The properties that surround the subject site include a variety of land uses and zoning designations. To the west is an RV storage lot and the parking lot for the commuter rail station, both with Industrial/Employment zoning. To the south is right-of-way for the Tabor/Ridge Road intersection and the rail line tracks. Abutting the property to the east across Tabor is a low-density residential neighborhood zoned R-2, which has a mix of single and two-family dwellings. Across W. 52nd Avenue to the north is a low-density residential neighborhood within unincorporated Jefferson County. Plat design Attached to the Planning Commission report is a copy of the proposed subdivision plat, which contains three sheets. Sheet 1 is the declaration page and contains the legal description, required signature blocks for property owners, a recording block and notes. Sheet 2 is the vacation sheet, which vacates all easements and the right-of-way for Taft Street dedicated by the 1953 plat. Sheet 3 illustrates the new lot configuration with the two parcels. Lot 1, the north parcel, contains 3.91 acres and encompasses the MU-N zoning. Lot 2, the southern parcel, contains 2.66 acres and encompasses the MU-C TOD zoning. The division line between the two zone districts is the right-of-way to be dedicated for W. 51st Avenue, which will be built as a full-width street between Taft Court on the west and Tabor Street on the east. The location and width of the new street is consistent with the planning areas depicted in the approved concept plan. This new east/west street is supported by the Northwest SubArea Plan. As properties to the west continue to develop, 51st will be required to be extended to Ward Road. This case has been through a standard referral process and all agencies can provide service subject to improvements installed at the developer’s expense. Public Works has reviewed and approved a drainage plan and report for the property. RECOMMENDED MOTION: “I move to approve Resolution No. 17-2017, a resolution approving a two-lot subdivision plat with a right-of-way vacation for property zoned Mixed Use Neighborhood (MU-N) and Mixed Use Commercial Transit Oriented Development (MU-C TOD) at 11818 W. 52nd Avenue (Case No. MS-17-03/Hance Ranch), for the following reasons: 1. City Council has conducted a proper public hearing meeting all public notice requirements, as required by Section 26-109 and 26-407 of the Code of Laws. Council Action Form – Hance Ranch Plat June 12, 2017 Page 4 2. The requested subdivision has been reviewed by the Planning Commission, which has forwarded its recommendation for approval. 3. All requirements of the subdivision regulations have been met. 4. The proposed plat will facilitate redevelopment of the site consistent with the zone change and concept plan. 5. Utility districts can serve the property with improvements installed at the developer’s expense. 6. The criteria used to evaluate a right-of-way vacation supports the request.” Or, “I move to deny Resolution No. 17-2017, a resolution approving a two-lot subdivision plat with a right-of-way vacation for property zoned Mixed Use Neighborhood (MU-N) and Mixed Use Commercial Transit Oriented Development (MU-C TOD) at 11818 W. 52nd Avenue (Case No. 08//MS-17-03/Hance Ranch), for the following reasons: 1. 2. 3. , and direct the City Attorney to prepare a Resolution of Denial, to be scheduled for Council consideration at the next available regular business meeting.” REPORT PREPARED/REVIEWED BY: Meredith Reckert, Senior Planner Kenneth Johnstone, Community Development Director Patrick Goff, City Manager ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution No. 17-2017 2. Planning Commission staff report AttAttachment 1tttttttttttt CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO Resolution No. 17 Series 2017 TITLE: A RESOLUTION APPROVING A TWO-LOT SUBDIVISION PLAT WITH A RIGHT-OF-WAY VACATION FOR PROPERTY ZONED MIXED-USE NEIGHBORHOOD (MU-N) AND MIXED-USE COMMERCIAL TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT (MU-C TOD) AT 11818 W. 52ND AVENUE (CASE NO. MS-17-03) WHEREAS, Chapter 26, Article I of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws establishes the procedures for the City’s review and approval of Subdivision Plats; and, WHEREAS, an application for a two-lot subdivision plat was received from Hance Ranch Development, LLC, to subdivide property located at 11818 W. 52nd Avenue in the Mixed Use-Neighborhood (MU-N) and Mixed Use-Commercial Transit Oriented Development (MU-C TOD) zone districts; and, WHEREAS, all referral agencies have reviewed the request and do not have concerns; and, WHEREAS, the application complies with the criteria used to evaluate a right-of-way vacation; and, WHEREAS, all required publishing, posting and notification requirements for a June 12, 2017, City Council public hearing have been met. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Wheat Ridge, Colorado, as follows: A RESOLUTION APPROVING A TWO-LOT SUBDIVISION PLAT WITH A RIGHT-OF-WAY VACATION FOR PROPERTY ZONED MIXED-USE NEIGHBORHOOD (MU-N) and MIXED-USE COMMERCIAL TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT (MU-C TOD) AT 11818 W. 52ND AVENUE (CASE NO. MS-17-03) FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: 1. City Council has conducted a proper public hearing meeting all public notice requirements as required by Section 26-109 and 26-407 of the Code of Laws. 2. The requested subdivision has been reviewed by the Planning Commission, which has forwarded its recommendation for approval. 3. All requirements of the subdivision regulations have been met. Attachment 1 AttAttachment 1tttttttttttt 4. The proposed plat will facilitate redevelopment of the site consistent with the zone change and concept plan. 5. Utility districts can serve the property with improvements installed at the developer’s expense. 6. The criteria used to evaluate a right-of-way vacation supports the request. DONE AND RESOLVED by the City Council this 12nd day of June, 2017. By: _____________________________ Joyce Jay, Mayor ATTEST: _________________________ Janelle Shaver, City Clerk TO: Planning Commission CASE MANAGER: M. Reckert DATE OF MEETING: May 18, 2017 CASE NO. & NAME: MS-17- /Hance Ranch ACTION REQUESTED: Approval of a two lot minor subdivision on property zoned Mixed Use-Neighborhood (MU-N) and Mixed Use-Commercial Transit Oriented Development (MU-C TOD) LOCATION OF REQUEST: 11818 W. 52nd Avenue PROPERTY OWNER: Hance Ranch Development, LLC APPROXIMATE AREA: 7.3 acres PRESENT ZONING: MU-N and MU-C TOD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: T.O.D. Site, Mixed Use Employment ENTER INTO RECORD: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CASE FILE & PACKET MATERIALS ZONING ORDINANCE DIGITAL PRESENTATION SITE Planning Commission MS-17-03/Hance Ranch 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 subdivision plat on property zoned Mixed Use – Neighborhood (MU-N) and Mixed Use-Commercial TOD (MU-C TOD) for property located at 11818 W. 52nd Avenue. The purpose of the subdivision is to split the development parcel in accordance with the new zoning classifications, vacate existing right-of-way and dedicate new right-of-way in anticipation of property development. (Exhibit 1, Applicant Letter) A neighborhood meeting is not required for a subdivision plat. II. EXISTING CONDITIONS/PROPERTY HISTORY Subject Property The property is located at the southwest corner of 52nd Avenue and Tabor Street. The property was rezoned from Residential-One (R-1) to Mixed Use-Neighborhood (MU-N) and Mixed Use – Commercial Transit Oriented Development (MU-C TOD) in 2016. The purpose of the rezoning was to allow for the mix of land uses, densities and urban form as contemplated in the Northwest Sub Area Plan and to simplify the review and approval for future development on the property. The MU-C TOD is intended for areas generally within ½ mile of fixed rail stations. It permits a wide range of commercial and residential uses to allow higher densities that support transit ridership and is intended to enhance accessibility to transit. The northern portion of the site is Mixed Use-Neighborhood (MU-N), a zone district that is generally located along neighborhood main streets and at neighborhood commercial centers. The zone district is established to encourage medium density mixed use development in which residential uses are permitted, in addition to a limited range of neighborhood-serving commercial and retail uses. The property extends from West 52nd Avenue south to Ridge Road and from Tabor Street west to Taft Court. The site was most recently used agriculturally as home to Hance Ranch, and has on it a house and several farm-related accessory structures. (Exhibit 2, Aerial Photo) The property was originally subdivided in 1953 into 25 parcels pursuant to Hance’s Subdivision. The parcel layout and size of the subdivision resembles a typical R-1, single-family housing neighborhood. A full width dedicated street called Taft Street ran down the middle of the property with home lots on each side. Another row of lots faced east onto Tabor Street. However, the property was never developed and was used as a home site and for agricultural purposes. (Exhibit 3, Hance’s Subdivision plat) The southwest corner of the property is opposite the RTD Wheat Ridge·Ward Road Station, the Gold Line commuter rail line’s end of line station, which is located at the southwest corner of Taft Court and Ridge Road. The Gold Line is slated to begin operation in 2017. Planning Commission MS-17-03/Hance Ranch The area has already seen a large amount of public improvement investment, including but not limited to the realignment of Tabor Street, installation of a traffic signal at Tabor Street and Ridge Road, the construction of Taft Court between 50th Place (soon to be renamed Ridge Road), and 52nd Avenue, and the construction of the commuter rail station and other infrastructure related to the commuter rail line. (Exhibit 4, Site photos) Surrounding zoning and land use The properties that surround the subject site include a variety of land uses and zoning designations. (Exhibit 5, Zoning Map) To the west is an RV storage lot and the parking lot for the commuter rail station, both with Industrial/Employment zoning. To the south is right of way for the Tabor/Ridge Road intersection and the rail line tracks. Abutting the property to the east across Tabor is a low density residential neighborhood zoned R-2 which has a mix of single and two-family dwellings. Across W. 52nd Avenue to the north is a low-density residential neighborhood within unincorporated Jefferson County, that includes both single family homes and townhomes. III. APPROVED CONCEPT PLAN An administrative Concept Plan for the property was approved in early 2017. The Concept Plan shows the entire property being bifurcated by West 51st Avenue to create two planning areas, the northern and southern planning areas. The northern planning area corresponds with the MU-N zoning and the southern area corresponds with the MU-C TOD zoning (Exhibit 6, Concept Plan). Uses approved for the northern planning area are up to 80 townhomes units. The southern planning is approved for 250 multi-unit apartments or 60 townhome units. The Concept Plan also addresses traffic circulation, open space concepts and drainage. IV. PROPOSED PLAT DOCUMENT Attached is a copy of the proposed subdivision plat, which contains three sheets. (Exhibit 7, Plat) Sheet 1 is the declaration page and contains the legal description, required signature blocks for property owners, a recording block and notes. Sheet 2 is the vacation sheet which vacates all easements and right-of-way for Taft Street dedicated by the 1953 plat. Sheet 3 illustrates the new lot configuration with the two parcels. Lot 1, the north parcel, contains 3.91 acres and encompasses the MU-N zoning. Lot 2, the southern parcel, contains 2.66 acres and encompasses the MU-C TOD zoning. The division line between the two zone districts is the right-of-way to be dedicated for W. 51st Avenue, which will be built as a full-width street between Taft Court on the west and Tabor Street on the east. The location and width of the new street is consistent with the planning areas depicted in the approved Concept Plan. Planning Commission MS-17-03/Hance Ranch This new east/west street is supported by the Northwest SubArea Plan. As properties to the west continue to develop, the goal is for 51st Avenue to extend to Ward Road. NORTHWEST SUBAREA PLAN – adopted 2006 – updated 2013 • Goal to increase the number of streets for internal access for businesses, residents and transit users • Encourages a grid of north-south and east-west internal streets with pedestrian amenities • Goal for implementation of “complete streets” with construction of roadway, curb, gutter, separated sidewalk with an amenity zone in accordance with the Streetscape Manual Below is an exhibit in the Subarea Plan which depicts Future Land Use for the are surrounding transit station. West 51st Avenue is shown in blue extending from Ward Road over to Tabor Street. Below is another figure from the document labeled the Proposed Bicycle and Pedestrian Circulation map for the area. West 51st Avenue is being shown as extending between Ward and Tabor with a sidewalk with buffer/amenity zone. The proposed 63’ of right-of-way dedication for 51st Avenue will be wide enough to accommodate these improvements. W. 51st Avenue Planning Commission MS-17-03/Hance Ranch If the plat is approved, the applicant would then submit for administrative site plan review and a subdivision plat further breaking down Lots 1 and 2 into individual townhome parcels, if needed. The subdivision plat will be reviewed at public hearings in front of Planning Commission and City Council. The site plan would be administrative and the design for the property would be held to the standards set forth in the zoning code and the Mixed Use zoning design standards. Staff concludes that all requirements of the subdivision regulations contained in Article IV of Chapter 26 have been met. IV. RIGHT-OF-WAY VACATION CHANGE CRITERIA An addition to the right-of-way dedication for West 51st Avenue, the plan also vacates right-of- way for Tabor Street dedicated by the original Hance’s Subdivision and as depicted on Sheet 2 of the plan set. Staff has provided an analysis of the vacation criteria outlined in Section 26-118.D. The Planning Commission shall base its recommendation in consideration of the extent to which the following criteria have been met: 1. That the proposed vacation will not leave any adjoining land without access to an established public right-of-way. W. 51st Avenue Planning Commission MS-17-03/Hance Ranch The vacation of the right-of-way for Taft Street and subsequent dedication for West 51st Avenue will result in a different development pattern from when originally platted in 1953. The intent of the rezoning of the property was to allow for medium density (MU-N) residential in proximity to the lower density neighborhoods to the north and east with the MU-C TOD with its higher densities closer to the commuter rail station. In addition to 51st Avenue, Ridge, Tabor and Taft Court will provide adequate access to the property. Staff concludes that this criterion has been met. 2. That the proposed vacation is in conformity with the most recently enacted goals and policies of the transportation section of the current comprehensive plan of the City of Wheat Ridge. While the vacation of Taft Street is not specifically addressed in the Northwest Subarea plan, the extension of 51st Avenue is addressed in both the future land use map and the bicycle/pedestrian plan. Staff concludes that this criterion has been met. 3. That the proposed vacation will not have a negative impact on the infrastructure of the City of Wheat Ridge. The Northwest subarea calls for both north/south and east/west connections within the superblock formed by Ward, Tabor, Ridge and West 52nd Avenue. North/south connections already exist with Tabor Street and Taft Court. If Taft Street is built, it will result in substandard block widths and will prohibit the density-sensitive development approved by the zone change and Concept Plan. Staff concludes that this criterion has been met. 4. That adequate easements have been reserved for use and/or maintenance by the city or other utility agencies. Since the property was never developed under the old plat document, no utilities were put into place except for service lines to the house and other structures. All responding agencies have indicated they can serve the property with improvements installed at the developer’s expense. Prior to issuance of a building permit, an administrative site development plan application will be required and referred to all impacted utility and service agencies. The property owner/developer will be responsible for utility installation and/or upgrades. Staff concludes that this criterion has been met. VI. AGENCY REFERRAL Planning Commission MS-17-03/Hance Ranch All affected service agencies were contacted regarding their ability to serve the property. The developer will be responsible for any needed upgrades to accommodate the proposed development. Specific referral responses follow. Arvada Fire Protection District: Can serve the property with upgrades required at the developer’s expanse. Jefferson County Planning: No comments. Valley Water District: Can serve the property. Will address water availability and specific improvements upon submittal of a specific redevelopment proposal. Wheat Ridge Public Works: Has reviewed and approved the plat. Will assess traffic and drainage upon submittal of a site development plan. Wheat Ridge Police: No concerns with crime or traffic. Xcel Energy: Has no objections to the plat. V. STAFF CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION Staff concludes that all requirements of the subdivision regulations have been met and that approval of the subdivision will facilitate development of the property. Approval of the plat will also facilitate the new street design configuration for the property by vacating and dedicating new right-of-way, as envisioned by the approved Concept Plan. Because all internal and external agencies can provide service to the property with improvements installed at the developer’s expense, a recommendation of approval is given for Case No. MS-17-03. VI. RECOMMENDED MOTIONS OPTION A: “I move to APPROVE Case No. MS-17-03, a request for approval of a two-lot subdivision plat for property generally addressed as 11818 W. 52nd Avenue, for the following reasons: 1. All requirements of the subdivision regulations have been met. 2. The proposed plat will facilitate redevelopment of the site consistent with the zone change and Concept Plan. 3. Utility districts can serve the property with improvements installed at the developer’s expense.” OPTION B: “I move to DENY Case No. MS-17-03, a request for approval of a two-lot subdivision plat for property generally addressed as 11818 W. 52nd Avenue, the following reasons: Planning Commission MS-17-03/Hance Ranch 1. 2.” Planning Commission MS-17-03/Hance Ranch Exhibit 1 – Applicant letter Planning Commission MS-17-03/Hance Ranch Planning Commission MS-17-03/Hance Ranch Planning Commission MS-17-03/Hance Ranch Planning Commission MS-17-03/Hance Ranch Planning Commission MS-17-03/Hance Ranch Exhibit 2 – Aerial Map Site Planning Commission MS-17-03/Hance Ranch Exhibit 3 – Hance’s Sub Planning Commission MS-17-03/Hance Ranch Exhibit 4 – Site Photos Looking west along 52nd Avenue Planning Commission MS-17-03/Hance Ranch Looking south from 52nd at front of house Looking south along Tabor – property is to the right Planning Commission MS-17-03/Hance Ranch Looking west from Tabor at property Looking southwest toward Tabor/Ridge intersection Planning Commission MS-17-03/Hance Ranch Exhibit 5 – Zoning Map Site Planning Commission MS-17-03/Hance Ranch Exhibit 6 – Concept Plan Planning Commission MS-17-03/Hance Ranch Exhibit 7 – Proposed Plat EXHIBIT 7 ITEM NO: DATE: June 12, 2017 REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION TITLE: COUNCIL BILL NO. 09-2017 – AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 26 OF THE WHEAT RIDGE CODE OF LAWS TO REGULATE AND ALLOW SMALL CELL COMMERCIAL MOBILE RADIO SERVICE (CMRS) FACILITIES PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCES FOR 1ST READING (05/22/2017) BIDS/MOTIONS ORDINANCES FOR 2ND READING (06/12/2017) RESOLUTIONS QUASI-JUDICIAL: YES NO _______________________________ ______________________________ Community Development Director City Manager ISSUE: During the 2017 Colorado state legislative session, the legislature adopted, and the governor signed, House Bill 17-1193 pertaining to small cell wireless service infrastructure. As it pertains to local governments, the bill does two significant things: 1. Makes such facilities a use-by-right in all zoning districts; and 2. Allows them to locate in public rights-of-way (ROW) and on utility and traffic signal poles in those locations, and in public utility easements, with some limitations and subject to City review and approval. Based on this action, staff recommends the City adopt local regulations pertaining to the design parameters and approval processes for such facilities. The bill is effective July 1, 2017, and staff has received some inquiries from the small cell industry, potentially interested in making application for facilities in the City ROW. As such, staff recommends prompt action to ensure the City has the ability to proactively regulate their design and location, particularly when wishing to locate in the ROW. PRIOR ACTION: Late in 2016, the City modified its regulations regarding commercial mobile radio service Council Action Form – Small Cell CMRS Facilities June 12, 2017 Page 2 (CMRS) facilities. This update was done principally to comply with updated Federal Communications Commission (FCC) regulations stipulating maximum local government review timeframes. City Council reviewed the draft ordinance at a study session on May 15 and directed staff to proceed forward to package for Council’s consideration at 1st Reading on May 22. Based on discussion at that meeting, staff added language in Section 1 of the ordinance, adding Section 26- 615.H.9 regarding “Permit Expiration.” Staff also identified one minor correction in the ordinance. In Section 1 of the ordinance on page 5, Section 26-615.D.7.e is duplicative of 26-615.D.7.c and has been recommended to be stricken from the ordinance. This is included in the draft ordinance. Planning Commission Public Hearing The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the ordinance on June 1 and recommended approval with the condition that several typos be addressed: • The code reference in the third recital be corrected to read 26-615 instead of 26-215, • The incomplete sentence in subsection D.7.e (on page 5 of the ordinance) be deleted, and • The spelling of “alternative” be corrected in subsection H.2.e (on page 7 of the ordinance). There was no further discussion and no public comment. The Planning Commission staff report is attached for additional reference. FINANCIAL IMPACT: The City collects building permit application fees for all new CMRS facilities. In some cases, new facilities require review and approval of a special use permit, which also have small application fees. When requesting to locate in public ROWs, the state legislation allows municipalities to assess application fees, which cannot exceed strictly direct cost recovery. Cumulatively, these are minor revenue sources for the City. BACKGROUND: Since the 1996 adoption of the Federal Telecommunications Act, both the federal and state governments have placed some limitations on the manner in which local governments regulate the installation of CMRS facilities. In addition to the previously mentioned new state regulations pertaining to small cell facilities, the FCC is also considering rulemaking that would limit the manner in which such facilities can be regulated at a local level. City staff has provided comment to the FCC on the draft regulations. The City has generally been permissive in regulating the industry, while maintaining reasonable design standards that ensure such facilities blend in with the community’s built environment. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff has met internally to consider modifications to local regulations that will comply with the new state legislation and provide reasonable design standards and a review process for small cell wireless facilities. Staff believes this can be accomplished with an ordinance proposing relatively minor amendments to Chapter 26 (Zoning and Development). Given that such facilities are now Council Action Form – Small Cell CMRS Facilities June 12, 2017 Page 3 mandated by the state to be allowed in public rights-of-way, staff believes it is particularly important to update City regulations to address the design parameters and location of such facilities. In order to have such regulations in place by the effective date of the legislation (July 1, 2017), the ordinance is drafted to take effect immediately upon Council adoption. After final review of the ordinance, staff has proposed a modification to subsection H, which will better clarify which regulations apply on private property versus public rights-of-way. This modification along with the Planning Commission recommendations are provided as redlines in Attachment 4. RECOMMENDED MOTION: “I move to approve Council Bill No. 09-2017, an ordinance amending Chapter 26 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws to regulate and allow small cell commercial mobile radio service (CMRS) facilities as amended on second reading, order it published, and that it take effect immediately.” Or, “I move to postpone indefinitely the ordinance amending Chapter 26 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws to regulate and allow small cell commercial mobile radio service (CMRS) facilities for the following reason(s) _________________.” REPORT PREPARED BY; Kenneth Johnstone, Director of Community Development Patrick Goff, City Manager ATTACHMENTS: 1. Council Bill No. 09-2017 (1st reading) 2. House Bill 17-1193 3. Planning Commission staff report 4. Council Bill No. 09-2017 Redlines Council Action Form – Small Cell CMRS Facilities June 12, 2017 Page 4 Attachment 1 CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WOODEN COUNCIL BILL NO. 09 ORDINANCE NO. _________ Series 2017 TITLE: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 26 OF THE WHEAT RIDGE CODE OF LAWS TO REGULATE AND ALLOW SMALL CELL COMMERCIAL MOBILE RADIO SERVICE (CMRS) FACILITIES WHEREAS, the City of Wheat Ridge, Colorado, is a Colorado home rule municipality, duly organized and existing pursuant to Section 6 of Article XX of the Colorado Constitution; and WHEREAS, pursuant to its home rule authority and C.R.S. § 31-23-101, the City, acting through its City Council is authorized to adopt ordinances for the protection of the public health, safety or welfare; and WHEREAS, in the exercise of this authority the Council has previously adopted Section 26-215 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws concerning commercial mobile radio service facilities; and WHEREAS, the Council wishes to amend Section 26-615 to address changes in state law affecting “small cell” facilities and to make conforming amendments in connection therewith; NOW THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO: Section 1. Section 26-615 of the Code, concerning commercial mobile radio service facilities, is hereby amended as follows: Sec. 26-615. – Commercial mobile radio service (CMRS) facilities. A. Purpose and intent. The purpose and intent of this section 26-615 is to accommodate the communication needs of residents and businesses while protecting the public health, safety, and general welfare of the community. These regulations are necessary in order to: 1. Facilitate the provision of wireless telecommunication services to the residents and businesses of the city. 2. Minimize adverse impacts of facilities through careful design, siting and screening standards. 3. Encourage and maximize colocation and the use of existing and approved towers, buildings, and other structures to accommodate new wireless telecommunication antennas in order to reduce the number of towers needed to serve the community. 4. Provide specific regulations related to the review processes for CMRS facilities. Attachment 1 5. Align the review and approval process for CMRS facilities with the FCC and any other agency of the federal government with the authority to regulate CMRS facilities. B. Applicability. The standards contained in this section shall apply to all applications for any CMRS facility. The applicant shall demonstrate in writing that its proposed CMRS facility meets all applicable standards and provisions of the code. Pre-existing CMRS facilities shall not be required to meet the requirements of this section, other than the requirements of subsection E. Changes and additions to pre-existing CMRS facilities must meet the applicable requirements of this section. C. Review and approval process. Proposed CMRS facilities shall be reviewed pursuant to the following procedures depending upon the facility type and/or proposed change: 1. Review procedure a. Building- or structure-mounted facilities in all zone districts shall be reviewed by the community development department through a building permit application for compliance with the requirements for such facilities. b. Roof-mounted facilities in all zone districts shall be reviewed by the community development department through a building permit application for compliance with the requirements for such facilities. c. New freestanding or alternative tower CMRS facilities must receive a special use permit, pursuant to sections 26-114, 26-204 and 26-1111. d. New freestanding or alternative tower CMRS facilities in all planned development zone districts (including planned residential districts) unless specifically listed or shown as such in the outline development plan, also require amendment of the outline development plan pursuant to Article III. At the sole discretion of the community development director, new freestanding or alternative tower CMRS facilities may be reviewed as a special use pursuant to sections 26-114, 26-204 and 26-309. e. Applications for colocation on any existing facility shall be reviewed by the community development department through a building permit application for compliance with the requirements for such facilities. f. SMALL CELL CMRS FACILITIES AND NETWORKS IN PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY AND EASEMENTS SHALL BE REVIEWED BY THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT AND SHALL REQUIRE A PERMIT UNDER SECTION 21-101, ET. SEQ.. g. SMALL CELL CMRS FACILITIES AND NETWORKS ON PRIVATE PROPERTY SHALL BE REVIEWED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT THROUGH A BUILDING PERMIT APPLICABLE FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS FOR SUCH FACILITIES. 2. Approval process a. The city shall review and act upon the application within the following time periods: Attachment 1 i. Within 30 days the city will give written notice of incompleteness if so determined, specifying the code section(s) that requires such missing information. This determination pauses the remaining deadlines until a complete application is filed. ii. Within 60 days the city will act on applications that are not a substantial change. iii. Within 90 days the city will act on APPLICATIONS FOR SMALL CELL FACILITIES OR colocation applications that are not a substantial increase in the size of a tower. iv. Within 150 days the city will act on applications for new CMRS facilities, colocation applications that are a substantial increase in the size of the tower or substantial increase of an existing CMRS facility. b. The final action of the city on any CMRS application shall be in writing and shall advise the applicant of the reasons for approval, approval with conditions, or denial. D. Standards for all CMRS facilities. The following are standards for all CMRS facilities. 1. Colocation. The shared use of existing freestanding or roof-mounted CMRS facilities shall be preferred to the construction of new facilities in order to minimize adverse visual impacts associated with the proliferation of towers. a. No CMRS application to construct a new freestanding or roof-mounted CMRS facility shall be approved unless the applicant demonstrates to the reasonable satisfaction of the city that no existing CMRS facility within a reasonable distance, regardless of municipal boundaries, can accommodate the applicant's needs. Evidence submitted to demonstrate that no existing facility can accommodate the applicant's proposed CMRS facility shall consist of one or more of the following: i. No existing CMRS facilities are located within the geographic area required to meet the applicant's coverage demands. ii. Existing CMRS facilities or structures are not of sufficient height to meet the applicant's coverage demands and cannot be extended to such height. iii. Existing CMRS facilities or structures do not have sufficient structural strength to support applicant's proposed antenna and related equipment. iv. Existing CMRS facilities or structures do not have adequate space on which proposed equipment can be placed so it can function effectively and reasonably. v. The applicant's proposed antenna would cause electromagnetic interference with the antennas on the existing CMRS facility, or the antennas on the existing facility would cause interference with the applicant's proposed antenna. vi. The applicant demonstrates that there are other compelling limiting factors, including but not limited to economic factors, that render CMRS facilities or structures unsuitable. Attachment 1 b. No CMRS facility owner or operator shall unreasonably exclude a telecommunication competitor from using the same facility or location. Upon request by the city, the owner or operator shall provide evidence and a written statement to explain why colocation is not possible at a particular facility or site. c. If a telecommunication competitor attempts to collocate a CMRS facility on an existing or approved CMRS facility or location, and the parties cannot reach an agreement, the city may require a third-party technical study to be completed at the applicant's expense to determine the feasibility of colocation. d. Applications for new freestanding CMRS facilities shall provide evidence that the facility can accommodate colocation of additional carriers. 2. Federal requirements. All CMRS facilities shall meet the current standards and regulations of the FAA, the FCC, and any other agency of the federal government with the authority to regulate CMRS facilities. Failure to meet such revised standards and regulations shall constitute grounds for revocation of city approvals and removal of the facility at the owner’s expense. 3. Safety standards. All CMRS facilities shall conform to the requirements of the international building code, and national electrical code, as applicable. 4. Abandonment. CMRS facilities which are abandoned by nonuse, disconnection of power service, equipment removal or loss of lease for greater than six (6) months shall be removed by the CMRS facility owner. Should the owner fail to remove the facilities, the city may do so at its option, and the costs thereof shall be a charge against the owner and recovered by certification of the same to the county treasurer for collection as taxes in the manner provided by code section 2-93, or by any other means available under article x of chapter 26. 5. Third party review. a. CMRS providers use various methodologies and analysis tools, including geographically based computer software, to determine the specific technical parameters of CMRS facilities, such as expected coverage area, antenna configuration and topographic constraints that affect signal paths. In certain instances there may be a need for expert review by a third party of the technical data submitted by the CMRS provider. The city may require such a technical review to be paid for by the applicant for a CMRS facility. The selection of the third party expert may be by mutual agreement between the applicant and the city or at the discretion of the city, with a provision for the applicant and interested parties to comment on the proposed expert and review its qualifications. The expert review is intended to be a site-specific review of technical aspects of the CMRS facilities and not a subjective review of the site selection. The expert review of the technical submission shall address the following: i. The accuracy and completeness of the submission; Attachment 1 ii. The applicability of analysis techniques and methodologies; iii. The validity of conclusions reached; iv. Any specific technical issues designated by the city. b. Based on the results of the third party review, the city may require changes to the application for the CMRS facility that comply with the recommendation of the expert. 6. All CMRS facilities are accessory uses to the structure upon which they are placed or to the primary use of the property on which they are constructed. WITH THE EXCEPTION OF SMALL CELL FACILITIES, no CMRS facility shall be located on a vacant lot devoid of any primary or main building. 7. Siting of CMRS facilities in residential areas. The city encourages the siting of CMRS facilities in nonresidential areas. a. The city prohibits freestanding CMRS facilities in the following zone districts: i. Residential-One (R-1), ii. Residential-One A (R-1A), iii. Residential-One B (R-1B), iv. Residential-One C (R-1C), v. Residential-Two (R-2), vi. Residential-Two A (R-2A), vii. Residential-Three (R-3), viii. Residential-Three A (R-3A), ix. Agricultural-One (A-1), x. Agricultural-Two (A-2), and xi. Mixed Use-Neighborhood (MU-N) zone districts. b. The city prohibits all CMRS facilities on properties where the principal use is a single or two-family dwelling. c. Alternative tower CMRS facilities may be located on a property containing a non-residential use, regardless of underlying zoning. d. Building, structure or roof-mounted CMRS facilities may be located on a property containing a nonresidential or multi-family use, regardless of underlying zoning. e. Alternative tower structures may be located on a property__________ f. SMALL CELL FACILITIES ARE PERMITTED IN ALL ZONE DISTRICTS. E. Standards for freestanding and alternative tower CMRS facilities. Freestanding and alternative tower CMRS facilities are subject to the following requirements and shall be evaluated as a special use. 1. Freestanding CMRS facilities shall be visually screened from adjacent residential development and public rights-of-way. 2. Freestanding and alternative tower CMRS facilities shall be permitted only as an accessory use, and are subject to accessory use setback development standards in the applicable zone district. 3. Freestanding and alternative tower CMRS facilities shall not exceed the permitted height for the principal use on the subject property. Attachment 1 4. Freestanding CMRS facilities shall not be permitted between the principal structure and the street. F. Standards for building or structure-mounted CMRS facilities. Building or structure- mounted CMRS facilities are subject to the following requirements and shall be evaluated as part of the community development department’s review process. 1. Such facilities shall be architecturally compatible with and textured and colored to match the building or structure to which they are attached. 2. The antenna shall be mounted as flush to the wall as technically possible. The maximum protrusion of such facilities from the building or structure face to which they are attached shall be two (2) feet. 3. Panel antennae shall not extend above the building wall or parapet to which they are mounted. 4. Whip antennae shall extend no more than ten (10) feet above the highest point of the building or structure to which they are attached. G. Standards for roof-mounted CMRS facilities. Roof-mounted CMRS facilities are subject to the following requirements and shall be evaluated as part of community development department’s review process. 1. All roof-mounted CMRS facilities and accessory equipment shall be set back from the roof or parapet edge so that visibility from the street or adjacent residential properties is minimized to the greatest extent possible. 2. If roof-mounted equipment is visible from the street or adjacent residential properties, CMRS facilities and accessory equipment shall be screened by materials that are architecturally compatible with and colored to match the building or structure to which they are attached. 3. No roof-mounted facility, including antenna or accessory equipment, shall exceed twelve (12) feet in height, as measured from the roof deck. 4. Roof-mounted accessory equipment shall not be permitted on a sloped roof, unless it can be demonstrated that it is not visible from the street or adjacent residential areas. H. STANDARDS FOR SMALL CELL FACILITIES AND NETWORKS. 1. APPLICABLE REQUIREMENTS. SMALL CELL FACILITIES AND SMALL CELL NETWORKS, SHALL COMPLY IN ALL RESPECTS WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THIS SECTION APPLICABLE TO ALL CMRS FACILITIES, WITH THE FOLLOWING EXCEPTIONS: a. SETBACK REQUIREMENTS; AND b. DESIGN REQUIREMENTS 2. LOCATION. SMALL CELL FACILITIES ARE PERMITTED IN CITY RIGHTS- OF-WAY, UPON FACILITIES IN THESE RIGHTS-OF-WAY AND ON PUBLIC EASEMENTS OWNED BY THE CITY UNDER THE FOLLOWING PRIORITY: a. FIRST, ON A CITY-OWNED UTILITY POLE, WHICH SHALL BE REMOVED AND REPLACED WITH A POLE DESIGNED TO CONTAIN ALL ANTENNAE AND EQUIPMENT WITHIN THE POLE TO CONCEAL ANY GROUND-BASED SUPPORT EQUIPMENT AND OWNERSHIP OF WHICH POLE IS CONVEYED TO THE CITY. Attachment 1 b. SECOND, A CITY-OWNED UTILITY POLE WITH ATTACHMENT OF THE SMALL CALL FACILITIES IN A CONFIGURATION APPROVED BY THE CITY. c. THIRD, ON A THIRD-PARTY OWNED UTILITY POLE, (WITH THE CONSENT OF THE OWNER THEREOF), WITH ATTACHMENT OF THE SMALL CELL FACILITIES IN A CONFIGURATION APPROVED BY THE CITY. d. FOURTH, ON A TRAFFIC SIGNAL POLE OR MAST ARM IN A CONFIGURATION APPROVED BY THE CITY, OR IN THE CASE OF A CDOT FACILITY, BY CDOT. e. FIFTH, ON A FREESTANDING OR GROUND-MOUNTED FACILITY WHICH MEETS THE DEFINITION OF AND REQUIREMENTS FOR AN ALTTERNATIVE TOWER STRUCTURE IN A LOCATION AND CONFIGURATION APPROVED BY THE CITY. 3. HEIGHT. ALL SMALL CELL FACILITIES SHALL NOT EXCEED TWO FEET ABOVE THE LIGHT POLE, TRAFFIC SIGNAL OR OTHER FACILITY OR STRUCTURE TO WHICH THEY ARE ATTACHED, OR THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT IN THE RELEVANT ZONE DISTRICT, WHICHEVER IS LESS. WHEN NEW UTILITY POLES ARE PROPOSED AS AN ALTERNATIVE TOWER, THEIR HEIGHT SHALL BE SIMILAR TO EXISTING UTILITY/LIGHT POLES IN THE VICINITY. 4. SPACING. NO SMALL CELL FACILITY SHALL BE LOCATED WITHIN ONE THOUSAND FEET (1000 FT) OF ANY OTHER SUCH FACILITY. 5. DESIGN. SMALL CELL FACILITIES SHALL BE DESIGNED TO BLEND WITH AND BE CAMOUFLAGED IN RELATION TO THE STRUCTURE UPON WHICH THEY ARE LOCATED (E.G.: PAINTED TO MATCH THE STRUCTURE OR SAME MATERIAL AND COLOR AS ADJACENT UTILITY POLES). 6. PERMITTING. SMALL CELL FACILITIES AND NETWORKS SHALL MAKE APPLICATION FOR A PERMIT FOR WORK IN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY UNDER CODE SECTION 21-11, ET. SEQ., AND FOR LOCATION AND MAINTENANCE OF SUCH FACILITY SHALL MAKE APPLICATION FOR A PERMIT FOR USE OF THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY UNDER CODE SECTION 21-101, ET SEQ. SMALL CELL FACILITIES AND NETWORKS SHALL MAKE APPLICATION FOR LOCATION ON PRIVATE PROPERTY THROUGH THE BUILDING PERMIT PROCESS. THE CITY MAY ACCEPT APPLICATIONS FOR A SMALL CELL NETWORK, PROVIDED EACH SMALL CELL FACILITY SHALL BE SEPARATELY REVIEWED. 7. INDEMNIFICATION. THE OPERATOR OF A SMALL CELL FACILITY WHICH IS PERMITTED TO LOCATE ON A CITY-OWNED UTILITY POLE, TRAFFIC SIGNAL OR OTHER STRUCTURE OWNED BY THE CITY SHALL, AS A CONDITION OF PERMIT APPROVAL, INDEMNIFY THE CITY FROM AND AGAINST ALL LIABILITY AND CLAIMS ARISING AS A RESULT OF THAT ATTACHMENT, INCLUDING REPAIR AND Attachment 1 REPLACEMENT OF DAMAGED POLES AND EQUIPMENT, IN A FORM APPROVED BY THE CITY ATTORNEY. 8. BONDING. ALL PERMITS FOR LOCATION OF SMALL CELL FACILITIES ON REAL PROPERTY NOT OWNED BY THE SMALL CELL PERMITTEE SHALL INCLUDE AS A CONDITION OF APPROVAL A BOND, IN FORM APPROVED BY THE CITY ATTORNEY, TO GUARANTEE PAYMENT FOR ANY DAMAGES TO THE REAL PROPERTY AND REMOVAL OF THE FACILITY UPON ITS ABANDONMENT. 9. PERMIT EXPIRATION. A PERMIT FOR A SMALL CELL FACILITY SHALL EXPIRE NINE (9) MONTHS AFTER APPROVAL UNLESS CONSTRUCTION OF THE PERMITTED STRUCTURE HAS BEEN INITIATED. I. Standards for ground-mounted accessory equipment. Ground-mounted accessory equipment that is associated with a freestanding, roof-mounted or building-mounted CMRS facility are subject to the following requirements and shall be evaluated with the associated CMRS facility application. 1. Ground-mounted accessory equipment shall be subject to the accessory structure setback requirements in the underlying zone district. 2. Ground-mounted accessory equipment or buildings containing accessory equipment shall not exceed 12 feet in height. 3. Ground-mounted accessory equipment not fully enclosed in a building shall be fully screened from adjacent residential properties and public rights-of- way. 4. Buildings containing ground-mounted accessory equipment shall be architecturally compatible with the existing structures on the property and character of the neighborhood. J. Definitions. 1. Alternative Tower CMRS facility. An existing or proposed structure that is compatible with the natural setting and surrounding structures and that camouflages or conceals the presence of the antennae and can be used to house or mount CMRS antenna. Examples include manmade trees, clock towers, bell steeples, light poles, silos, existing utility poles, existing utility transmission towers and other similar alternative designed structures. 2. Tower. Any freestanding structure designed and constructed primarily for the purpose of supporting one (1) or more Federal Communications Commission-licensed or authorized antennae, including self-supporting lattice towers, guy towers and monopole towers, radio and television transmission towers, microwave towers, common carrier towers, cellular telephone towers and other similar structures. The term also includes any antenna or antenna array attached to the tower structure. Attachment 1 3. Substantially Change. A modification which substantially changes the physical dimensions of an eligible support structure if it meets any of the following criteria, including a single change or a series of changes over time whether made by a single owner or operator or different owners/operators over time, when viewed against the initial approval for the support structure. The following are considered substantial changes: a. For towers other than towers in the public rights-of-way, it increases the height of the tower by more than 10% or by the height of one additional antenna array with separation from the nearest existing antenna not to exceed twenty feet, whichever is greater; for other eligible support structures, it increases the height of the structure by more than 10% or more than ten feet, whichever is greater; b. For towers other than towers in the public rights-of-way, it involves adding an appurtenance to the body of the tower that would protrude from the edge of the tower more than twenty feet, or more than the width of the Tower structure at the level of the appurtenance, whichever is greater; for other eligible support structures, it involves adding an appurtenance to the body of the structure that would protrude from the edge of the structure by more than six feet; c. For any eligible support structure, it involves installation of more than the standard number of new equipment cabinets for the technology involved, or more than four cabinets; or, for towers in the public rights- of-way and base stations, it involves installation of any new equipment cabinets on the ground if there are no pre-existing ground cabinets associated with the structure, or else involves installation of ground cabinets that are more than 10% larger in height or overall volume than any other ground cabinets associated with the structure; d. It entails any excavation or deployment outside the current site e. It would defeat the concealment elements of the eligible support structure; or f. It does not comply with conditions associated with the original siting approval for the construction or modification of the eligible support structure or base station equipment, provided however that this limitation does not apply to any modification that is non-compliant only in a manner that would not exceed the thresholds identified in paragraphs a through e of this definition. Section 2. The following definitions are hereby deleted from Section 26-123 and inserted within Section 26-615 under a new paragraph I: Building or structure-mounted commercial mobile radio service facility. A CMRS facility in which antenna are mounted to an existing structure (e.g., water tower, light pole, steeple, etc.) or building face. CDOT COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION. Attachment 1 Commercial mobile radio service (CMRS) accessory building or cabinet. An unmanned building or cabinet used to house equipment associated with a CMRS facility. Commercial mobile radio service (CMRS) site. An unmanned facility consisting of equipment for the reception, switching and transmission of wireless telecommunications, including, but not limited to, personal communications service (PCS), enhanced specialized mobile radio (ESMR), paging, cellular telephone and similar technologies. Freestanding commercial mobile radio service (CMRS) facility. A CMRS facility that consists of a stand-alone support facility (monopole and/or lattice structure), antenna, associated equipment, accessory buildings and equipment cabinets. Roof-mounted commercial mobile radio service (CMRS) facility. A CMRS facility in which antenna are mounted on an existing building roof. SMALL CELL CMRS FACILITY MEANS EITHER: 1. A PERSONAL WIRELESS SERVICE FACILITY AS DEFINED BY THE FEDERAL TELECOMMUNICATIONS ACT OF 1996,” AS AMENDED AS OF AUGUST 6, 2014; OR 2. A WIRELESS SERVICE FACILITY THAT MEETS BOTH OF THE FOLLOWING QUALIFICATIONS: a. EACH ANTENNA IS LOCATED INSIDE AN ENCLOSURE OF NO MORE THAN THREE CUBIC FEET IN VOLUME OR, IN THE CASE OF AN ANTENNA THAT HAS EXPOSED ELEMENTS, THE ANTENNA AND ALL OF ITS EXPOSED ELEMENTS COULD FIT WITHIN AN IMAGINARY ENCLOSURE OF NO MORE THAN THREE CUBIC FEET; AND b. PRIMARY EQUIPMENT ENCLOSURES ARE NOT LARGER THAN SEVENTEEN CUBIC FEET IN VOLUME. THE FOLLOWING ASSOCIATED EQUIPMENT MAY BE LOCATED OUTSIDE OF THE PRIMARY EQUIPMENT ENCLOSURE AND, IF SO LOCATED, IS NOT INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF EQUIPMENT VOLUME: ELECTRIC METER, CONCEALMENT, TELECOMMUNICATIONS DEMARCATION BOX, GROUND-BASED ENCLOSURES, BACK-UP POWER SYSTEMS, GROUNDING EQUIPMENT, POWER TRANSFER SWITCH, AND CUT-OFF SWITCH. SMALL CELL CMRS NETWORK. A COLLECTION OF INTERRELATED SMALL CELL FACILITIES DESIGNED TO DELIVER WIRELESS SERVICE. Section 3. Severability, Conflicting Ordinances Repealed. If any section, subsection or clause of this Ordinance shall be deemed to be unconstitutional or otherwise invalid, the validity of the remaining sections, subsections and clauses shall not be affected thereby. All other ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this Ordinance are hereby repealed. Attachment 1 Section 4. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect upon adoption and signature by the Mayor and City Clerk, as permitted by Section 5.11 of the Charter. INTRODUCED, READ, AND ADOPTED on first reading by a vote of 8 to 0 on this 22nd day of May, 2017, 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 June 12, 2017 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, 7500 West 29th Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado. READ, ADOPTED AND ORDERED PUBLISHED on second and final reading by a vote of ___ to ___, this _____ day of ______________, 2017. SIGNED by the Mayor on this _____ day of ____________, 2017. _________________________ Joyce Jay, Mayor ATTEST: _________________________ Janelle Shaver, City Clerk Approved as to Form _________________________ Gerald E. Dahl, City Attorney First Publication: May 25, 2017 Second Publication: Wheat Ridge Transcript Effective Date: Published: Wheat Ridge Transcript and www.ci.wheatridge.co.us HOUSE BILL 17-1193 BY REPRESENTATIVE(S) Kraft-Tharp and Becker J., Arndt, Becker K., Danielson, Ginal, Hansen, Hooton, Kennedy, McKean, Melton, Pabon, Van Winkle, Gray, Lontine, Wilson, Duran; also SENATOR(S) Tate and Kerr, Crowder, Donovan, Fields, Garcia, Guzman, Hill, Holbert, Jahn, Kefalas, Lundberg, Marble, Martinez Humenik, Merrifield, Neville T., Priola, Scott, Todd, Williams A., Zenzinger, Grantham. CONCERNING THE INSTALLATION OF SMALL WIRELESS SERVICE INFRASTRUCTURE WITHIN A LOCAL GOVERNMENT'S JURISDICTION, AND, IN CONNECTION THEREWITH, CLARIFYJNG THAT AN EXPEDITED PERMITIING PROCESS APPLIES TO SMALL CELL FACILITIES AND SMALL CELL NETWORKS AND THAT THE RIGHTS-OF-WAY ACCESS AFFORDED TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROVIDERS EXTENDS TO BROADBAND PROVIDERS AND TO SMALL CELL FACILITIES AND SMALL CELL NETWORKS. Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the State of Colorado: SECTION 1. In Colorado Revised Statutes, 29-27-401, add (2) as follows: 29-27-401. Legislative declaration. (2) THEGENERAL ASSEMBLY Capital letters indicate new material added to existing statutes; dashes through words indicate deletions from existing statutes and such material not part of act. Attachment 2 FURTHER FINDS AND DECLARES THAT: (a)SMALL CELL FACILITIES OFTEN MAY BE DEPLOYED MOST EFFECTIVELY IN THE PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY; AND (b) ACCESS TO LOCAL GOVERNMENT STRUCTURES IS ESSENTIAL TO THE CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE OF WIRELESS SERVICE FACILITIES OR BROADBAND FACILITIES. SECTION 2. In Colorado Revised Statutes, 29-27-402, amend (1 ), (4), and (7); and add (1.5), (3.5), and (6.5) as follows: 29-27-402. Definitions. As used in this part 4, unless the context otherwise requires: ( 1)"Broadband facility" means any h1fi. ast:I uctu1 e used to deliver b1oadband senice or fOI the provision ofbroadbat1d service. "ANTENNA" MEANS COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT THAT TRANSWTS OR RECEIVES ELECTROMAGNETIC RADIO FREQUENCY SIGNALS USED TO PROVIDE WIRELESS SERVICE. (1.5) "BROADBAND FACILITY" MEANS ANY INFRASTRUCTURE USED TO DELIVER BROADBAND SERVICE OR FOR THE PROVISION OF BROADBAND SERVICE. (3.5) 11MICRO WIRELESS FACILITY" MEANS A SMALL WIRELESS FACILITY TI-IA TIS NO LARGER IN DIMENSIONS TI-IAN TWENTY-FOUR INCHES IN LENGTH, FIFTEEN INCHES IN WIDTH, AND TWELVE INCHES IN HEIGHT AND THAT HAS AN EXTERIOR ANTENNA, IF ANY, TI-IA TIS NO MORE THAN ELEVEN INCHES IN LENGTH. (4)(a) "Small cell facility" means either: ta} (I) A personal wireless service facility as defined by the federal "Telecommunications Act of 1996", as amended as of August 6, 2014; or th] (II) A wireless service facility that meets both of the following qualifications: ffl (A) Each antenna is located inside an enclosure of no more than PAGE2-HOUSEB1LL 17-1193 three cubic feet in volume or, in the case of an antenna that has exposed elements, the antenna and all of its exposed elements could fit within an imaginary enclosure of no more than three cubic feet; and tff7 (B) Primary equipment enclosures are no larger than seventeen cubic feet in volume. The following associated equipment may be located outside of the primary equipment enclosure and, if so located, is not included in the calculation of equipment volume: Electric meter, concealment, telecommunications demarcation box, ground-based enclosures, back-up power systems, grounding equipment, power transfer switch, and cut-off switch. (b)"SMALL CELL FACILITY" INCLUDES A MICRO WIRELESS FACILITY. (6.5) "TOWER" MEANS ANY STRUCTURE BUILT FOR THE SOLE OR PRIMARY PURPOSE OF SUPPORTING ANTENNAS LICENSED OR AUTHORIZED BY THE FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION AND THE ANTENNAS' ASSOCIATED FACILITIES, INCLUDING STRUCTURES THAT ARE CONSTRUCTED FOR WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS SERVICES INCLUDING PRIVATE, BROADCAST, AND PUBLIC SAFETY SERVICES; UNLICENSED WIRELESS SERVICES; FIXED WIRELESS SERVICES SUCH AS BACKHAUL; AND THE ASSOCIATED SITE. (7)"Wireless service facility" means a facility for the provision of wireless services; EXCEPT THAT "WIRELESS SERVICE FACILITY" DOES NOT INCLUDE COAXIAL OR FIBER-OPTIC CABLE TIIA T IS NOT IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO, OR DIRECTLY AS SOCIA TED WITH, A PARTICULAR ANTENNA. SECTION 3. In Colorado Revised Statutes, 29-27-403, amend (1) and (3) as follows: 29-27-403. Permit-approval-deadline-exception. {l) A local government may take up to: (a)NINETY DAYS TO PROCESS A COMPLETE APPLICATION FOR: (I)LOCATION OR COLLOCATION OF A SMALL CELL FACILITY OR A SMA.LL CELL NETWORK;OR (II)REPLACEMENT OR MODIFICATION OF A SMALL CELL FACILITY OR PAGE 3-HOUSE BILL 17-1193 FACILITIES OR SMALL CELL NETWORK. ta} (b) Ninety days to process a complete application that involves a collocation of a tower, building, structure, or replacement structure 01HER TI-IAN A SMALL CELL FACILITY OR SMALL CELL NETWORK; or fl,:) ( c) One hundred fifty days to process a complete application that involves a new structure or a new wireless service facility, OTHER THAN A SMALL CELL FACILITY OR SMALL CELL NETWORK AND other than a collocation. (3)An applicant and a local government ENTITY may mutually agree that an application may be processed in a longer period than set forth in subsection (1) of this section. SECTION 4. In Colorado Revised Statutes, 29-27-404, amend (1) and (2) introductory portion; and add (3) as follows: 29-27-404. Permit process. (1) (a) For small cell networks involving multiple individual small cell facilities within the jurisdiction of a single local government ENTITY, the local government ENTITY shall allow the applicant, at the applicant's discretion, to file a consolidated application and receive a single permit for the small cell network instead of filing separate applications for each individual small cell facility. (b)FOR A CONSOLIDATED APPLICATION FILED PURSUANT TO SUBSECTION (l)(a) OF THIS SECTION, EACH SMALL CELL FACILITY WITHIN THE CONSOLIDATED APPLICATION REMAINS SUBJECT TO REVIEW FOR COMPLIANCE WITH OBJECTIVE REQUIREMENTS AND APPROV ALAS PROVIDED INTHISARTICLE27. THELOCALGOVERNMENT'S DENIALOF ANY INDIVIDUAL SMALL CELL FACILITY IS NOT A BASIS TO DENY 1HE CONSOLIDATED APPLICATION AS A WHOLE OR ANY OTHER SMALL CELL FACILITY INCORPORATED WITHIN THE CONSOLIDATED APPLICATION. (2)If a wireless service provider applies to LOCATE OR collocate several wireless service facilities within the jurisdiction of a single local government ENTITY, the local government ENTITY shall: (3)THE SITING, MOUNTING, PLACEMENT, CONSTRUCTION, AND OPERATION OF A SMALL CELL FACILITY OR A SMALL CELL NETWORK IS A PAGE 4-HOUSE BILL 17-1193 PERMITTED USE BY RIGHT IN ANY ZONE. SECTION 5. In Colorado Revised Statutes, amend 38-5.5-102 as foI1ows: 38-5.5-102. Definitions. As used in this ruticle ARTICLE 5.5, unless the context otherwise requires: (I)"Broadband" or "broadband service" has the same meaning as set forth in 7 U.S.C. sec. 950bb (b)(l) as of August 6, 2014, and includes "cable service", as defined in 47 U.S.C. sec. 522 (6) as of August 6, 2014. tt:z1 (2) "Broadband facility" means any infrastructure used to deliver broadband service or for the provision of broadband service. tf:-37 (3) "Broadband provider" means a person that provides broadband service, and includes a "cable operator", as defined in 4 7 U.S.C. sec. 522 (5) as of August 6, 2014. (4)"COLLOCATION" HAS THE SAME MEANING AS SET FORTH IN SECTION 29-27-402 (3). Er.'77 (5) "Political subdivision" OR "LOCAL GOVERNMENT ENTITY" means a county; city and county; city; town; service authority; school district; local improvement district; law enforcement authority; water, sanitation, fire protection, metropolitan, irrigation, drainage, or other special district; or any other kind of municipal, quasi-municipal, or public corporation organized pursuant to law. ffl (6) "Public highway" or "highway" for purposes of this aiticle ARTICLE 5.5 includes all roads, streets, and alleys and all other dedicated rights-of-way and utility easements of the state or any of its political subdivisions, whether located within the boundaries of a political subdivision or otherwise. (7)"SMALL CELL FACILITY" HAS THE SAME MEANING AS SET FORTH IN SECTION 29-27-402 (4). (8)"SMALL CELL NETWORK" HAS THE SAME MEANING AS SET FORTH IN SECTION 29-27-402 (5). PAGE 5-HOUSEBILL 17-1193 f.37 (9) "Telecommunications provider" OI "piovide111 means a person that provides telecommunications service, as defined in section 40-15-102 (29), C.R.S., with the exception of cable services as defined by section 602 (5) of the federal "Cable Communications Policy Act of1984", 4 7 U.S.C. sec. 522 (6), pursuant to authority granted by the public utilities commission of this state or by the federal communications commission. "Telecommunications provider" or "p1ovider" does not mean a person or business using antennas, support towers, equipment, and buildings used to transmit high power over-the-air broadcast of AM and FM radio, VHF and UHF television, and advanced television services, including high definition television. The term "telecommunications provider" is synonymous with "telecommunication provider". SECTION 6. In Colorado Revised Statutes, amend 38-5.5-103 as follows: 38-5.5-103. Use of public highways-discrimination prohibited -content regulation prohibited. (1) (a) Any domestic or foreign telecommunications provider or broadband provider authorized to do business under the laws of this state shall have HAS the right to construct, maintain, and operate conduit, cable, switches, and related appurtenances and facilities, AND COMMUNICATIONS AND BROADBAND FACILITIES, INCLUDING SMALL CELL FACILITIES AND SMALL CELL NETWORKS, along, across, upon, ABOVE, and under any public highway in this state, subject to thep1ovisions of this articleARTICLE5.5 and of article 1.5 of title 9. C.R.S., and (b)The construction, maintenance, operation, and regulation of snch TIIE facilities DESCRIBED IN SUBSECTION (l)(a) OF TilIS SECTION, including the right to occupy and utilize the public rights-of-way, by telecommunications providers and broadband providers are hereby declared to-be matters of statewide concern. Sttch THE facilities shall be so constructed and maintained so as not to obstruct or hinder the usual travel on sneh A highway. (2)No A political subdivision shall NOT discriminate among or grant a preference to competing telecommunications providers OR BROADBAND PROVIDERS in the issuance of permits or the passage of any ordinance for the use of its rights-of-way, nor create or erect any unreasonable requirements for entry to the rights-of-way for sneh TIIE PAGE 6-HOUSE BILL 17-1193 providers. (3)No A political subdivision shall NOT regulate A telecommunications p1ovide1s PROVIDER OR A BROADBAND PROVIDER based upon the content or type of signals that are carried or capable of being carried over the provider's facilities; except that nothing in this subsection (3) shall be const1tted to prevent snch PREVENTS regulation by a political subdivision when the authority to so regulate has been granted to the political subdivision under federal law. SECTION 7. In Colorado Revised Statutes, amend 38-5.5-104 as follows: 38-5.5-104. Right-of-way across state land. Any domestic or foreign telecommunications provider OR BROADBAND PROVIDER authorized to do business under the laws of this state shail have HAS the right to construct, maintain, and operate lines of communication, switches, and related facilities, AND COMMUNICATIONS AND BROADBAND FACILITIES, INCLUDING SMALL CELLFACILITIESANDSMALLCELLNETWORKS, and obtain A permanent right-of-way thc1efo1 FOR THE FACILITIES over, upon, under, and across all public lands owned by or under the control of the state, upon the payment of such just compensation and upon compliance with such reasonable conditions as may be reqtti:tcd b:y the state board of land commissioners MAY REQUIRE. SECTION 8. In Colorado Revised Statutes, add 38-5.5-104.5 as follows: 38-5.5-104.5. Use of local government entity structures. (1)EXCEPT AS PROVIDED IN SUBSECTION (2) OF THIS SECTION AND SUBJECT TO THE REQUIREMENTS AND LIMITATIONS OF THIS ARTICLE 5.5, SECTIONS 29-27-403 AND 29-27-404, AND A LOCAL GOVERNMENT ENTITY'S POLICE POWERS, A TELECO:MMUNICA TIONS PROVIDER ORA BROADBAND PROVIDER HAS THE RIGHT TO LOCATE OR COLLOCATE SMALL CELL FACILITIES OR SMALL CELL NETWORKS ON THE LIGHT POLES, LIGHT STANDARDS, TRAFFIC SIGNALS, OR UTILITY POLES IN THE RIGHTS-OF-WAY OWNED BY THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT ENTITY; EXCEPT THAT, A SMALL CELL FACILITY OR A SMALL CELL NETWORK SHALL NOT BE LOCATED OR MOUNTED ON ANY APPARATUS, POLE, OR SIGNAL WITH TOLLING COLLECTION OR ENFORCEMENTEQUIPMENT ATTACHED. PAGE 7-HOUSE BILL 17-1193 (2)IF, AT ANY TIME, THE CONSTRUCTION, INSTALLATION, OPERATION, OR MAINTENANCE OF A SMALL CELL FACILITY ON A LOCAL GOVERNMENTENTITY'SLIGHTPOLE,LIGHTSTANDARD, TRAFFIC SIGNAL,OR UTILITY POLE FAILS TO COMPLY WITH APPLICABLE LAW, THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT ENTITY, BY PROVIDING TIIE TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROVIDER OR THE BROADBAND PROVIDER NOTICE AND A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO CURE THE NONCOMPLIANCE, MAY: (a)CAUSE TIIE ATTACHMENT ON THE AFFECTED STRUCTURE TO BE REMOVED; AND {b) PROHIBIT FUTURE, NONCOMPLIANT USE OF THE LIGHT POLE, LIGHT STANDARD, TRAFFIC SIGNAL, OR UTILITY POLE. (3)(a) EXCEPT AS PROVIDED IN SUBSECTIONS (3)(b) AND (3)(c) OF THIS SECTION, A LOCAL GOVERNMENT ENTITY SHALL NOT IMPOSE ANY FEE OR REQUIRE ANY APPLICATION OR PERMIT FOR TIIE INSTALLATION, PLACEMENT, OPERATION, MAINTENANCE, OR REPLACEMENT OF MICRO WIRELESS FACILITIES THAT ARE SUSPENDED ON CABLE OPERATOR-OWNED CABLES OR LINES THAT ARE STRUNG BETWEEN EXISTING UTILITY POLES IN COMPLIANCE WITH NATIONAL SAFETY CODES. {b) A LOCAL GOVERNMENT ENTITY WITH A MUNICIPAL OR COUNTY CODE THAT REQUIRES AN APPLICATION OR PERMIT FOR TIIE INSTALLATION OF MICRO WIRELESS FACILITIES MAY, BUT IS NOT REQUIRED TO, CONTINUE THEAPPLICATIONOR PERMITREQUIREMENT SUBSEQUENTTO THEEFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS SECTION. ( c)A LOCAL GOVERNMENT ENTITY MAY REQUIRE A SINGLE-USE RIGHT-OF-WAY PERMIT IF THE INSTALLATION, PLACEMENT, OPERATION, MAINTENANCE, OR REPLACEMENT OF MICRO WIRELESS FACILITIES: (I)INYOL YES WORKING WITHIN A HIGHWAY TRAVEL LANE OR REQUIRES THE CLOSURE OF A IIlGHWAY TRAVEL LANE; {II) DISTURBS THE PA VEMENTOR A SHOULDER,ROADWAY,ORDITCH LINE; (Ill) INCLUDES PLACEMENT ON LIMITED ACCESS RIGHTS-OF-WAY; OR PAGE 8-HOUSE BILL 17-1193 {IV) REQUIRES ANY SPECIFIC PRECAUTIONS TO ENSURE THE SAFETY OF THE TRAVELING PUBLIC; THE PROTECTION OF PUBLIC fNFRASTRUCTURE; OR THE OPERATION OF PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE; AND SUCH ACTIVITIES EITHER WERE NOT AUTHORIZED IN, OR WILL BE CONDUCTED IN A TIME, PLACE, OR MANNER THAT IS INCONSISTENT WITH, THE APPROVAL TERMS OF THE EXISTING PERMIT FOR THE FACILITY OR STRUCTURE UPON WHICH THE MICRO WIRELESS FACILITY IS ATTACHED. SECTION 9. In Colorado Revised Statutes, amend 38-5.5-105 as follows: 38-5.5-105. Power of companies to contract. Any domestic or foreign telecommunications provider shall ha1v e OR BROADBAND PROVIDER HAS THE power to contract with any person 01 INDIVIDUAL; corporation; OR the owner of any lands, or any franchise, easement, or interest therein over or under which the provider's conduits; cable; switches; and COMMUNICATIONS OR BROADBAND FACILITIES, INCLUDING SMALL CELL FACILITIES AND SMALL CELL NETWORKS; OR related appurtenances and facilities are proposed to be laid or created for the right-of-way for the construction, maintenance, and operation of SttCh THE facilities and OR for the erection, maintenance, occupation, and operation of offices at suitable distances for the public accommodation. SECTION 10. In Colorado Revised Statutes, amend 38-5.5-106 as follows: 38-5.5-106. Consent necessary for use of streets. (1) (a) Nothing in This atticle shall be constroed to ARTICLE 5.5 DOES NOT authorize any telecommunications provider OR BROADBAND PROVIDER to erect, WITHIN A POLITICAL SUBDIVISION, any poles or construct any COMMUNICATIONS OR BROADBAND FACILITIES, INCLUDING SMALL CELL FACILITIES AND SMALL CELL NETWORKS; conduit; cable; switch; or related appurtenances and facilities along, through, in, upon, under, or over any public highway withh1 a political snbdivision without first obtaining the consent of the authorities having power to give the consent of snch THE political subdivision. (b) A telecommunications provider OR BROADBAND PROVIDER that, on or before Apxil 12, 1996 JULY l, 2017, either has obtained consent of the political subdivision having power to give SttCh consent or is lawfully PAGE 9-HOUSE BILL 17-1193 occupying a public highway in a political subdivision shal-l NEED not be requited to apply for additional or continued consent of sneh THE political subdivision under this section. (c)NOTWITHSTANDINGANYOTHERPROVISIONOFLAW,APOLITICAL SUBDIVISION'S CONSENT GIVEN TO A TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROVIDER OR A BROADBAND PROVIDER TO ERECT OR CONSTRUCT ANY POLES, OR TO LOCATE OR COLLOCATE COMMUNICATIONS AND BROADBAND FACILITIES ON VERTICAL STRUCTURES IN A RIGHT-OF-WAY, DOES NOT EXTEND TO THE LOCATION OF NEW FACILITIES OR TO THE ERECTION OR CONSTRUCTION OF NEW POLES IN A RIGHT-OF-WAY NO T SPECIFICALLY REFERENCED IN THE GRANT OF CONSENT. (2)(a) THE consent OF A POLIT ICAL SUBDIVISION for the use of a public highway within a political sobdhiision ITS JURISDICTION shall be based upon a lawful exercise of the ITS police power of sueh political subdivision and shall not be unreasonably withheld. nor (b)A POLITICAL SUBDIVISION shall NOT CREA TE any preference or disadvantage be created through the granting or withholding of such ITS consent. A POLITICAL SUBDIVISION'S DECISION THAT A VERTICAL STRUCTURE IN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY, INCLUDING A VERTICAL STRUCTURE OWNED BY A MUNICIPALITY, LACKS SPACE OR LOAD CAPACITY FOR COMMUNICATIONS OR BROADBAND FACILITIES, OR THAT THE NUMBER OF ADDITIONAL VERTICAL STRUCTURES IN THE RIGHTS-OF-WAY SHOULD BE REASONABLY LIMITED, CONSISTENT WITH PROTECTION OF PUBLIC HEAL TH, SAFETY, AND WELFARE, DOES NOT CREATE A PREFERENCE FOR OR DISADVANTAGE ANY TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROVIDER OR BROADBAND PROVIDER, PROVIDED THAT SUCH DECISION DOES NOT HA VE THE EFFECT OF PROHIBITING A PROVIDER'S ABILITY TO PROVIDE SERVICE WITHIN THE SERVICE AREA OF THE PROPOSED FACILITY. SECTION 11. In Colorado Revised Statutes, 38-5.5-107, amend (7)as follows: 38-5.5-107. Permissible taxes, fees, and charges. (7) As used in this section, "public highway" or "highway" as otherwise defined in section 38-5.5-102 tz, (6) does not include excess and remainder rights-of-way under the department of transportation's jurisdiction. PAGE IO-HOUSE BILL 17-1193 SECTION 12. In Colorado Revised Statutes, amend 38-5.5-108 as follows: 38-5.5-108. Pole attachment agreements -limitations onrequired payments. (1) No NEITHERA LOCALGOVERNMENTENTITYNOR A municipally owned utility shall request or receive from a telecommunications provider, BROADBAND PROVIDER, ora cable television provider, as defined in section 602 (5) of the federal "Cable Communications Policy Act of 19 84 ", in exchange for permission to attach SMALL CELL FACILITIES, BROADBAND DEVICES, OR telecommunications devices to poles OR STRUCTURES IN A RIGHT-OF-WAY, any payment in excess of the amount that would be authorized if the LOCAL GOVERNMENT ENTITY OR municipally owned utility were regulated pursuant to 47 U.S.C. sec. 224, as amended. (2)No A municipality shall NOT request or receive from a telecommunications provider ORA BROADBAND PROVIDER, in exchange for or as a condition upon a grant of permission to attach telecommunications OR BROADBAND devices to poles, any in-kind payment. SECTION 13. Effective date -applicability. This act takes effect July 1, 2017, and applies to permit applications received on or after said date. SECTION 14. Safety clause. The general assembly hereby finds, PAGE I I-HOUSE BILL 17-1193 determines, and declares that this act is necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, and safety. Crisanta Duran SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES �c{'d'c4dw., MarilynEds CHIEF CLERK OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES APPROVED ) L Q 1 p �(; \ PAGE 12-HOUSE BUL 17-1193 Kevin J. Grantham PRESIDENT OF THE SENATE EffieAm� SECRETARY OF THE SENATE ZOA-17-03/ Small Cell CMRS Facilities 1 MEETING DATE: June 1, 2017 TITLE: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 26 OF THE WHEAT RIDGE CODE OF LAWS TO REGULATE AND ALLOW SMALL CELL COMMERCIAL MOBILE RADIO SERVICE (CMRS) FACILITIES CASE NO. ZOA-17-03 PUBLIC HEARING CODE CHANGE ORDINANCE Case Manager: Kenneth Johnstone, Community Development Director and Lauren Mikulak, Senior Planner Date of Preparation: May 26, 2017 ______________________________________________________________________________ SUMMARY: During the 2017 Colorado state legislative session, the legislature adopted, and the governor signed, House Bill 17-1193 pertaining to small cell wireless service infrastructure. As it pertains to local governments, the bill does two significant things: 1. Makes such facilities a use-by-right in all zoning districts; and 2. Allows them to locate in public rights-of-way (ROW) and on utility and traffic signal poles in those locations, and in public utility easements, with some limitations and subject to City review and approval. Based on this action, staff recommends the City adopt local regulations pertaining to the design parameters and approval processes for such facilities, particularly when they might propose to locate in the public ROW. The bill is effective July 1, 2017, and staff has received some inquiries from the small cell industry, potentially interested in making application for facilities in the City ROW. As such, staff recommends prompt action to ensure the City has the ability to proactively regulate their design and location, particularly when wishing to locate in the ROW. BACKGROUND: Since the 1996 adoption of the Federal Telecommunications Act, both the federal and state governments have placed some limitations on the manner in which local governments regulate the installation of Commercial Mobile Radio Services (CMRS) facilities. In addition to the previously mentioned new state regulations pertaining to small cell facilities, the FCC is also considering rulemaking that would limit the manner in which such facilities can be regulated at a local level. City staff has provided comment to the FCC on the draft regulations. The City has generally been permissive in regulating the industry, while maintaining reasonable design standards that ensure such facilities blend in with the community’s built environment. Substantively, the draft ordinance would achieve the following: PLANNING COMMISSION LEGISLATIVE ITEM STAFF REPORT ZOA-09-01/ Residential Density in Planned Development Districts 2 • Define “small cell CMRS facilities” in line with state and federal definitions; which are primarily based on a defined maximum size • Comply with the new legislation by allowing small cell facilities as a use by right in all zoning districts and allow them to locate in public rights of way and utility districts under certain design and location parameters • Regulate the design of said facilities on private property in a manner similar to how all other CMRS facilities are regulated • Regulate the design of said facilities in public rights of way and utility easements as follows: o Prioritize the location of small cell facilities such that they generally go on existing utility poles or secondarily on new utility poles designed to mimic the appearance of any other existing utility poles in the vicinity o Minimize the number of facilities by requiring a minimum separation of 1000 feet, which is the equivalent of approximately two (2) blocks. o Establish a permitting process for facilities when locating in public rights of way The City most recently updated our CMRS regulations late in 2016. This update was done principally to comply with updated Federal Communications Commission (FCC) regulations stipulating maximum local government review timeframes. City Council reviewed the draft ordinance pertaining to “small cell facilities” at a study session on May 15 and directed staff to proceed forward to package for Council’s consideration at 1st Reading on May 22. City Council approved this ordinance on 1st Reading On May 22 and set the public hearing for June 12. A Planning Commission recommendation to City Council is required for all amendments to Chapter 26. This compressed timeline allows the ordinance to go into effect prior to the July 1 effective date of the legislation, at which time, the City may quickly receive applications for permits in our rights of way. RECOMMENDED MOTION: “I move to recommend approval of the proposed ordinance amending Chapter 26 concerning the design, location and approval process for small cell CMRS facilities.” Exhibits: Draft Ordinance House Bill 17-1193 Attachment 4 CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WOODEN COUNCIL BILL NO. 09 ORDINANCE NO. _________ Series 2017 TITLE: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 26 OF THE WHEAT RIDGE CODE OF LAWS TO REGULATE AND ALLOW SMALL CELL COMMERCIAL MOBILE RADIO SERVICE (CMRS) FACILITIES WHEREAS, the City of Wheat Ridge, Colorado, is a Colorado home rule municipality, duly organized and existing pursuant to Section 6 of Article XX of the Colorado Constitution; and WHEREAS, pursuant to its home rule authority and C.R.S. § 31-23-101, the City, acting through its City Council is authorized to adopt ordinances for the protection of the public health, safety or welfare; and WHEREAS, in the exercise of this authority the Council has previously adopted Section 26-615 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws concerning commercial mobile radio service facilities; and WHEREAS, the Council wishes to amend Section 26-615 to address changes in state law affecting “small cell” facilities and to make conforming amendments in connection therewith; NOW THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO: Section 1. Section 26-615 of the Code, concerning commercial mobile radio service facilities, is hereby amended as follows: Sec. 26-615. – Commercial mobile radio service (CMRS) facilities. A. Purpose and intent. The purpose and intent of this section 26-615 is to accommodate the communication needs of residents and businesses while protecting the public health, safety, and general welfare of the community. These regulations are necessary in order to: 1. Facilitate the provision of wireless telecommunication services to the residents and businesses of the city. 2. Minimize adverse impacts of facilities through careful design, siting and screening standards. 3. Encourage and maximize colocation and the use of existing and approved towers, buildings, and other structures to accommodate new wireless telecommunication antennas in order to reduce the number of towers needed to serve the community. 4. Provide specific regulations related to the review processes for CMRS facilities. Attachment 4 5. Align the review and approval process for CMRS facilities with the FCC and any other agency of the federal government with the authority to regulate CMRS facilities. B. Applicability. The standards contained in this section shall apply to all applications for any CMRS facility. The applicant shall demonstrate in writing that its proposed CMRS facility meets all applicable standards and provisions of the code. Pre-existing CMRS facilities shall not be required to meet the requirements of this section, other than the requirements of subsection E. Changes and additions to pre-existing CMRS facilities must meet the applicable requirements of this section. C. Review and approval process. Proposed CMRS facilities shall be reviewed pursuant to the following procedures depending upon the facility type and/or proposed change: 1. Review procedure a. Building- or structure-mounted facilities in all zone districts shall be reviewed by the community development department through a building permit application for compliance with the requirements for such facilities. b. Roof-mounted facilities in all zone districts shall be reviewed by the community development department through a building permit application for compliance with the requirements for such facilities. c. New freestanding or alternative tower CMRS facilities must receive a special use permit, pursuant to sections 26-114, 26-204 and 26-1111. d. New freestanding or alternative tower CMRS facilities in all planned development zone districts (including planned residential districts) unless specifically listed or shown as such in the outline development plan, also require amendment of the outline development plan pursuant to Article III. At the sole discretion of the community development director, new freestanding or alternative tower CMRS facilities may be reviewed as a special use pursuant to sections 26-114, 26-204 and 26-309. e. Applications for colocation on any existing facility shall be reviewed by the community development department through a building permit application for compliance with the requirements for such facilities. f. SMALL CELL CMRS FACILITIES AND NETWORKS IN PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY AND EASEMENTS SHALL BE REVIEWED BY THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT AND SHALL REQUIRE A PERMIT UNDER SECTION 21-101, ET. SEQ.. g. SMALL CELL CMRS FACILITIES AND NETWORKS ON PRIVATE PROPERTY SHALL BE REVIEWED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT THROUGH A BUILDING PERMIT APPLICABLE FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS FOR SUCH FACILITIES. 2. Approval process a. The city shall review and act upon the application within the following time periods: Attachment 4 i. Within 30 days the city will give written notice of incompleteness if so determined, specifying the code section(s) that requires such missing information. This determination pauses the remaining deadlines until a complete application is filed. ii. Within 60 days the city will act on applications that are not a substantial change. iii. Within 90 days the city will act on APPLICATIONS FOR SMALL CELL FACILITIES OR colocation applications that are not a substantial increase in the size of a tower. iv. Within 150 days the city will act on applications for new CMRS facilities, colocation applications that are a substantial increase in the size of the tower or substantial increase of an existing CMRS facility. b. The final action of the city on any CMRS application shall be in writing and shall advise the applicant of the reasons for approval, approval with conditions, or denial. D. Standards for all CMRS facilities. The following are standards for all CMRS facilities. 1. Colocation. The shared use of existing freestanding or roof-mounted CMRS facilities shall be preferred to the construction of new facilities in order to minimize adverse visual impacts associated with the proliferation of towers. a. No CMRS application to construct a new freestanding or roof-mounted CMRS facility shall be approved unless the applicant demonstrates to the reasonable satisfaction of the city that no existing CMRS facility within a reasonable distance, regardless of municipal boundaries, can accommodate the applicant's needs. Evidence submitted to demonstrate that no existing facility can accommodate the applicant's proposed CMRS facility shall consist of one or more of the following: i. No existing CMRS facilities are located within the geographic area required to meet the applicant's coverage demands. ii. Existing CMRS facilities or structures are not of sufficient height to meet the applicant's coverage demands and cannot be extended to such height. iii. Existing CMRS facilities or structures do not have sufficient structural strength to support applicant's proposed antenna and related equipment. iv. Existing CMRS facilities or structures do not have adequate space on which proposed equipment can be placed so it can function effectively and reasonably. v. The applicant's proposed antenna would cause electromagnetic interference with the antennas on the existing CMRS facility, or the antennas on the existing facility would cause interference with the applicant's proposed antenna. vi. The applicant demonstrates that there are other compelling limiting factors, including but not limited to economic factors, that render CMRS facilities or structures unsuitable. Attachment 4 b. No CMRS facility owner or operator shall unreasonably exclude a telecommunication competitor from using the same facility or location. Upon request by the city, the owner or operator shall provide evidence and a written statement to explain why colocation is not possible at a particular facility or site. c. If a telecommunication competitor attempts to collocate a CMRS facility on an existing or approved CMRS facility or location, and the parties cannot reach an agreement, the city may require a third-party technical study to be completed at the applicant's expense to determine the feasibility of colocation. d. Applications for new freestanding CMRS facilities shall provide evidence that the facility can accommodate colocation of additional carriers. 2. Federal requirements. All CMRS facilities shall meet the current standards and regulations of the FAA, the FCC, and any other agency of the federal government with the authority to regulate CMRS facilities. Failure to meet such revised standards and regulations shall constitute grounds for revocation of city approvals and removal of the facility at the owner’s expense. 3. Safety standards. All CMRS facilities shall conform to the requirements of the international building code, and national electrical code, as applicable. 4. Abandonment. CMRS facilities which are abandoned by nonuse, disconnection of power service, equipment removal or loss of lease for greater than six (6) months shall be removed by the CMRS facility owner. Should the owner fail to remove the facilities, the city may do so at its option, and the costs thereof shall be a charge against the owner and recovered by certification of the same to the county treasurer for collection as taxes in the manner provided by code section 2-93, or by any other means available under article x of chapter 26. 5. Third party review. a. CMRS providers use various methodologies and analysis tools, including geographically based computer software, to determine the specific technical parameters of CMRS facilities, such as expected coverage area, antenna configuration and topographic constraints that affect signal paths. In certain instances there may be a need for expert review by a third party of the technical data submitted by the CMRS provider. The city may require such a technical review to be paid for by the applicant for a CMRS facility. The selection of the third party expert may be by mutual agreement between the applicant and the city or at the discretion of the city, with a provision for the applicant and interested parties to comment on the proposed expert and review its qualifications. The expert review is intended to be a site-specific review of technical aspects of the CMRS facilities and not a subjective review of the site selection. The expert review of the technical submission shall address the following: i. The accuracy and completeness of the submission; Attachment 4 ii. The applicability of analysis techniques and methodologies; iii. The validity of conclusions reached; iv. Any specific technical issues designated by the city. b. Based on the results of the third party review, the city may require changes to the application for the CMRS facility that comply with the recommendation of the expert. 6. All CMRS facilities are accessory uses to the structure upon which they are placed or to the primary use of the property on which they are constructed. WITH THE EXCEPTION OF SMALL CELL FACILITIES, no CMRS facility shall be located on a vacant lot devoid of any primary or main building. 7. Siting of CMRS facilities in residential areas. The city encourages the siting of CMRS facilities in nonresidential areas. a. The city prohibits freestanding CMRS facilities in the following zone districts: i. Residential-One (R-1), ii. Residential-One A (R-1A), iii. Residential-One B (R-1B), iv. Residential-One C (R-1C), v. Residential-Two (R-2), vi. Residential-Two A (R-2A), vii. Residential-Three (R-3), viii. Residential-Three A (R-3A), ix. Agricultural-One (A-1), x. Agricultural-Two (A-2), and xi. Mixed Use-Neighborhood (MU-N) zone districts. b. The city prohibits all CMRS facilities on properties where the principal use is a single or two-family dwelling. c. Alternative tower CMRS facilities may be located on a property containing a non-residential use, regardless of underlying zoning. d. Building, structure or roof-mounted CMRS facilities may be located on a property containing a nonresidential or multi-family use, regardless of underlying zoning. e. Alternative tower structures may be located on a property__________ f. SMALL CELL FACILITIES ARE PERMITTED IN ALL ZONE DISTRICTS. E. Standards for freestanding and alternative tower CMRS facilities. Freestanding and alternative tower CMRS facilities are subject to the following requirements and shall be evaluated as a special use. 1. Freestanding CMRS facilities shall be visually screened from adjacent residential development and public rights-of-way. 2. Freestanding and alternative tower CMRS facilities shall be permitted only as an accessory use, and are subject to accessory use setback development standards in the applicable zone district. 3. Freestanding and alternative tower CMRS facilities shall not exceed the permitted height for the principal use on the subject property. Attachment 4 4. Freestanding CMRS facilities shall not be permitted between the principal structure and the street. F. Standards for building or structure-mounted CMRS facilities. Building or structure- mounted CMRS facilities are subject to the following requirements and shall be evaluated as part of the community development department’s review process. 1. Such facilities shall be architecturally compatible with and textured and colored to match the building or structure to which they are attached. 2. The antenna shall be mounted as flush to the wall as technically possible. The maximum protrusion of such facilities from the building or structure face to which they are attached shall be two (2) feet. 3. Panel antennae shall not extend above the building wall or parapet to which they are mounted. 4. Whip antennae shall extend no more than ten (10) feet above the highest point of the building or structure to which they are attached. G. Standards for roof-mounted CMRS facilities. Roof-mounted CMRS facilities are subject to the following requirements and shall be evaluated as part of community development department’s review process. 1. All roof-mounted CMRS facilities and accessory equipment shall be set back from the roof or parapet edge so that visibility from the street or adjacent residential properties is minimized to the greatest extent possible. 2. If roof-mounted equipment is visible from the street or adjacent residential properties, CMRS facilities and accessory equipment shall be screened by materials that are architecturally compatible with and colored to match the building or structure to which they are attached. 3. No roof-mounted facility, including antenna or accessory equipment, shall exceed twelve (12) feet in height, as measured from the roof deck. 4. Roof-mounted accessory equipment shall not be permitted on a sloped roof, unless it can be demonstrated that it is not visible from the street or adjacent residential areas. H. STANDARDS FOR SMALL CELL FACILITIES AND NETWORKS. 1. APPLICABLE REQUIREMENTS ON PRIVATE PROPERTY. SMALL CELL FACILITIES AND SMALL CELL NETWORKS ON PRIVATE PROPERTY SHALL COMPLY IN ALL RESPECTS WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE PRECEDING SUBSECTIONS E, F, OR G. THIS SECTION APPLICABLE TO ALL CMRS FACILITIES, WITH THE FOLLOWING EXCEPTIONS: a. SETBACK REQUIREMENTS; AND b. DESIGN REQUIREMENTS 2. APPLICABLE REQUIREMENTS IN PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY. SMALL CELL FACILITIES AND SMALL CELL NETWORKS IN PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY SHALL COMPLY IN ALL RESPECTS WITH THE FOLLOWING REQUIREMENTS: a. LOCATION. SMALL CELL FACILITIES ARE PERMITTED IN CITY RIGHTS-OF-WAY, UPON FACILITIES IN THESE RIGHTS-OF-WAY AND ON PUBLIC EASEMENTS OWNED BY THE CITY UNDER THE FOLLOWING PRIORITY: Attachment 4 i. FIRST, ON A CITY-OWNED UTILITY POLE, WHICH SHALL BE REMOVED AND REPLACED WITH A POLE DESIGNED TO CONTAIN ALL ANTENNAE AND EQUIPMENT WITHIN THE POLE TO CONCEAL ANY GROUND-BASED SUPPORT EQUIPMENT AND OWNERSHIP OF WHICH POLE IS CONVEYED TO THE CITY. ii. SECOND, A CITY-OWNED UTILITY POLE WITH ATTACHMENT OF THE SMALL CALL FACILITIES IN A CONFIGURATION APPROVED BY THE CITY. iii. THIRD, ON A THIRD-PARTY OWNED UTILITY POLE, (WITH THE CONSENT OF THE OWNER THEREOF), WITH ATTACHMENT OF THE SMALL CELL FACILITIES IN A CONFIGURATION APPROVED BY THE CITY. iv. FOURTH, ON A TRAFFIC SIGNAL POLE OR MAST ARM IN A CONFIGURATION APPROVED BY THE CITY, OR IN THE CASE OF A CDOT FACILITY, BY CDOT. v. FIFTH, ON A FREESTANDING OR GROUND-MOUNTED FACILITY WHICH MEETS THE DEFINITION OF AND REQUIREMENTS FOR AN ALTERNATIVE TOWER STRUCTURE IN A LOCATION AND CONFIGURATION APPROVED BY THE CITY. b. HEIGHT. ALL SMALL CELL FACILITIES SHALL NOT EXCEED TWO FEET ABOVE THE LIGHT POLE, TRAFFIC SIGNAL OR OTHER FACILITY OR STRUCTURE TO WHICH THEY ARE ATTACHED, OR THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT IN THE RELEVANT ZONE DISTRICT, WHICHEVER IS LESS. WHEN NEW UTILITY POLES ARE PROPOSED AS AN ALTERNATIVE TOWER, THEIR HEIGHT SHALL BE SIMILAR TO EXISTING UTILITY/LIGHT POLES IN THE VICINITY. c. SPACING. NO SMALL CELL FACILITY SHALL BE LOCATED WITHIN ONE THOUSAND FEET (1000 FT) OF ANY OTHER SUCH FACILITY. d. DESIGN. SMALL CELL FACILITIES SHALL BE DESIGNED TO BLEND WITH AND BE CAMOUFLAGED IN RELATION TO THE STRUCTURE UPON WHICH THEY ARE LOCATED (E.G.: PAINTED TO MATCH THE STRUCTURE OR SAME MATERIAL AND COLOR AS ADJACENT UTILITY POLES). e. PERMITTING. SMALL CELL FACILITIES AND NETWORKS SHALL MAKE APPLICATION FOR A PERMIT FOR WORK IN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY UNDER CODE SECTION 21-11, ET. SEQ., AND FOR LOCATION AND MAINTENANCE OF SUCH FACILITY SHALL MAKE APPLICATION FOR A PERMIT FOR USE OF THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY UNDER CODE SECTION 21-101, ET SEQ. SMALL CELL FACILITIES AND NETWORKS SHALL MAKE APPLICATION FOR LOCATION ON PRIVATE PROPERTY THROUGH THE BUILDING PERMIT PROCESS. THE CITY MAY ACCEPT APPLICATIONS FOR A Attachment 4 SMALL CELL NETWORK, PROVIDED EACH SMALL CELL FACILITY SHALL BE SEPARATELY REVIEWED. f. INDEMNIFICATION. THE OPERATOR OF A SMALL CELL FACILITY WHICH IS PERMITTED TO LOCATE ON A CITY-OWNED UTILITY POLE, TRAFFIC SIGNAL OR OTHER STRUCTURE OWNED BY THE CITY SHALL, AS A CONDITION OF PERMIT APPROVAL, INDEMNIFY THE CITY FROM AND AGAINST ALL LIABILITY AND CLAIMS ARISING AS A RESULT OF THAT ATTACHMENT, INCLUDING REPAIR AND REPLACEMENT OF DAMAGED POLES AND EQUIPMENT, IN A FORM APPROVED BY THE CITY ATTORNEY. g. BONDING. ALL PERMITS FOR LOCATION OF SMALL CELL FACILITIES ON REAL PROPERTY NOT OWNED BY THE SMALL CELL PERMITTEE SHALL INCLUDE AS A CONDITION OF APPROVAL A BOND, IN FORM APPROVED BY THE CITY ATTORNEY, TO GUARANTEE PAYMENT FOR ANY DAMAGES TO THE REAL PROPERTY AND REMOVAL OF THE FACILITY UPON ITS ABANDONMENT. h. PERMIT EXPIRATION. A PERMIT FOR A SMALL CELL FACILITY SHALL EXPIRE NINE (9) MONTHS AFTER APPROVAL UNLESS CONSTRUCTION OF THE PERMITTED STRUCTURE HAS BEEN INITIATED. I. Standards for ground-mounted accessory equipment. Ground-mounted accessory equipment that is associated with a freestanding, roof-mounted or building-mounted CMRS facility are subject to the following requirements and shall be evaluated with the associated CMRS facility application. 1. Ground-mounted accessory equipment shall be subject to the accessory structure setback requirements in the underlying zone district. 2. Ground-mounted accessory equipment or buildings containing accessory equipment shall not exceed 12 feet in height. 3. Ground-mounted accessory equipment not fully enclosed in a building shall be fully screened from adjacent residential properties and public rights-of- way. 4. Buildings containing ground-mounted accessory equipment shall be architecturally compatible with the existing structures on the property and character of the neighborhood. J. Definitions. 1. Alternative Tower CMRS facility. An existing or proposed structure that is compatible with the natural setting and surrounding structures and that camouflages or conceals the presence of the antennae and can be used to house or mount CMRS antenna. Examples include manmade trees, clock towers, bell steeples, light poles, silos, existing utility poles, existing utility transmission towers and other similar alternative designed structures. Attachment 4 2. Tower. Any freestanding structure designed and constructed primarily for the purpose of supporting one (1) or more Federal Communications Commission- licensed or authorized antennae, including self-supporting lattice towers, guy towers and monopole towers, radio and television transmission towers, microwave towers, common carrier towers, cellular telephone towers and other similar structures. The term also includes any antenna or antenna array attached to the tower structure. 3. Substantially Change. A modification which substantially changes the physical dimensions of an eligible support structure if it meets any of the following criteria, including a single change or a series of changes over time whether made by a single owner or operator or different owners/operators over time, when viewed against the initial approval for the support structure. The following are considered substantial changes: a. For towers other than towers in the public rights-of-way, it increases the height of the tower by more than 10% or by the height of one additional antenna array with separation from the nearest existing antenna not to exceed twenty feet, whichever is greater; for other eligible support structures, it increases the height of the structure by more than 10% or more than ten feet, whichever is greater; b. For towers other than towers in the public rights-of-way, it involves adding an appurtenance to the body of the tower that would protrude from the edge of the tower more than twenty feet, or more than the width of the Tower structure at the level of the appurtenance, whichever is greater; for other eligible support structures, it involves adding an appurtenance to the body of the structure that would protrude from the edge of the structure by more than six feet; c. For any eligible support structure, it involves installation of more than the standard number of new equipment cabinets for the technology involved, or more than four cabinets; or, for towers in the public rights-of-way and base stations, it involves installation of any new equipment cabinets on the ground if there are no pre-existing ground cabinets associated with the structure, or else involves installation of ground cabinets that are more than 10% larger in height or overall volume than any other ground cabinets associated with the structure; d. It entails any excavation or deployment outside the current site e. It would defeat the concealment elements of the eligible support structure; or f. It does not comply with conditions associated with the original siting approval for the construction or modification of the eligible support structure or base station equipment, provided however that this limitation does not apply to any modification that is non-compliant only in a manner that would not exceed the thresholds identified in paragraphs a through e of this definition. Attachment 4 Section 2. The following definitions are hereby deleted from Section 26-123 and inserted within Section 26-615 under a new paragraph I: Building or structure-mounted commercial mobile radio service facility. A CMRS facility in which antenna are mounted to an existing structure (e.g., water tower, light pole, steeple, etc.) or building face. CDOT COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION. Commercial mobile radio service (CMRS) accessory building or cabinet. An unmanned building or cabinet used to house equipment associated with a CMRS facility. Commercial mobile radio service (CMRS) site. An unmanned facility consisting of equipment for the reception, switching and transmission of wireless telecommunications, including, but not limited to, personal communications service (PCS), enhanced specialized mobile radio (ESMR), paging, cellular telephone and similar technologies. Freestanding commercial mobile radio service (CMRS) facility. A CMRS facility that consists of a stand-alone support facility (monopole and/or lattice structure), antenna, associated equipment, accessory buildings and equipment cabinets. Roof-mounted commercial mobile radio service (CMRS) facility. A CMRS facility in which antenna are mounted on an existing building roof. SMALL CELL CMRS FACILITY MEANS EITHER: 1. A PERSONAL WIRELESS SERVICE FACILITY AS DEFINED BY THE FEDERAL TELECOMMUNICATIONS ACT OF 1996,” AS AMENDED AS OF AUGUST 6, 2014; OR 2. A WIRELESS SERVICE FACILITY THAT MEETS BOTH OF THE FOLLOWING QUALIFICATIONS: a. EACH ANTENNA IS LOCATED INSIDE AN ENCLOSURE OF NO MORE THAN THREE CUBIC FEET IN VOLUME OR, IN THE CASE OF AN ANTENNA THAT HAS EXPOSED ELEMENTS, THE ANTENNA AND ALL OF ITS EXPOSED ELEMENTS COULD FIT WITHIN AN IMAGINARY ENCLOSURE OF NO MORE THAN THREE CUBIC FEET; AND b. PRIMARY EQUIPMENT ENCLOSURES ARE NOT LARGER THAN SEVENTEEN CUBIC FEET IN VOLUME. THE FOLLOWING ASSOCIATED EQUIPMENT MAY BE LOCATED OUTSIDE OF THE PRIMARY EQUIPMENT ENCLOSURE AND, IF SO LOCATED, IS NOT INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF EQUIPMENT VOLUME: ELECTRIC METER, CONCEALMENT, TELECOMMUNICATIONS DEMARCATION BOX, GROUND-BASED ENCLOSURES, BACK-UP POWER SYSTEMS, GROUNDING EQUIPMENT, POWER TRANSFER SWITCH, AND CUT-OFF SWITCH. Attachment 4 SMALL CELL CMRS NETWORK. A COLLECTION OF INTERRELATED SMALL CELL FACILITIES DESIGNED TO DELIVER WIRELESS SERVICE. Section 3. Severability, Conflicting Ordinances Repealed. If any section, subsection or clause of this Ordinance shall be deemed to be unconstitutional or otherwise invalid, the validity of the remaining sections, subsections and clauses shall not be affected thereby. All other ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this Ordinance are hereby repealed. Section 4. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect upon adoption and signature by the Mayor and City Clerk, as permitted by Section 5.11 of the Charter. INTRODUCED, READ, AND ADOPTED on first reading by a vote of 8 to 0 on this 22nd day of May, 2017, 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 June 12, 2017 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, 7500 West 29th Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado. READ, ADOPTED AND ORDERED PUBLISHED on second and final reading by a vote of ___ to ___, this _____ day of ______________, 2017. SIGNED by the Mayor on this _____ day of ____________, 2017. _________________________ Joyce Jay, Mayor ATTEST: _________________________ Janelle Shaver, City Clerk Approved as to Form _________________________ Gerald E. Dahl, City Attorney First Publication: May 25, 2017 Second Publication: Wheat Ridge Transcript Effective Date: Attachment 4 Published: Wheat Ridge Transcript and www.ci.wheatridge.co.us ITEM NO: DATE: June 12, 2017 REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION TITLE: COUNCIL BILL NO. 10-2017 – AN ORDINANCE APPROVING THE REZONING OF PROPERTY LOCATED AT 6610 WEST 31ST AVENUE FROM RESIDENTIAL TWO (R-2) TO RESIDENTIAL-ONE C (R-1C) (CASE NO. WZ-17- 02/ GUSTAFSON) PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCES FOR 1ST READING (6/12/2017) BIDS/MOTIONS ORDINANCES FOR 2ND READING (7/10/2017) RESOLUTIONS QUASI-JUDICIAL: YES NO _ ______________________________ __________________________________ Community Development Director City Manager ISSUE: The applicant is requesting approval of a zone change from Residential-Two (R-2) to Residential-One C (R-1C) for property located at 6610 W. 31st Avenue. The proposed rezoning area includes one parcel, which is approximately a third of an acre. The purpose of the zone change is to allow for the eventual construction of two single-family homes. The current R-2 zoning allows for a duplex, but the smaller minimum lot size established by the proposed R-1C zoning will allow the property to be subdivided into two parcels. The subdivision and rezoning will allow for the construction of two homes. PRIOR ACTION: Planning Commission heard the request at a public hearing on May 18, 2017, and recommended approval. The staff report and meeting minutes from the Planning Commission meeting will be included with the ordinance for second reading. Council Action Form – Gustafson Rezoning June 12, 2017 Page 2 FINANCIAL IMPACT: The proposed zone change is not expected to have a direct financial impact on the City. Fees in the amount of $871 were collected for the review and processing of Case No. WZ-17-02. BACKGROUND: The property is located at 6610 W. 31st Avenue in the southeast quadrant of the City. The property is currently zoned R-2, which primarily allows single-family homes and duplexes, depending on the lot size. Because the property is 15,760 square feet in size, it would meet the minimum requirements to allow either a single-family home or a duplex. Currently, only a foundation exists on the subject property, but this property was originally the site of a church, which was built in 1920. The applicants purchased the property in 2016 with the intention of renovating the church structure and adding a second story in order to utilize it as their home. The applicants obtained all of the appropriate building permits, but when they began renovations, the existing structure turned out to be less structurally sound than it had appeared, and they were forced to tear it down. Due to the increased costs now associated with the project, the property owners contemplated constructing a duplex on the R-2 zoned property in order to sell an additional unit. Under current zoning, a duplex would be allowed on the property, as it has adequate lot frontage and size. However, the owners felt a duplex would be inconsistent with the surrounding neighborhood, and that two single-family homes would be a better fit with the character of the predominately single- family neighborhood. Surrounding Land Uses The property is currently zoned R-2, as is much of the surrounding neighborhood to the west and north. To the east and southeast is a variety of single-family zone districts, including Residential- R-1, Residential-One A (R-1A), and R-1C, all of which are single-family zone districts. The majority of the surrounding land use is single-family, with the exception of a church located east of the subject property across Newland Street. Current and Proposed Zoning The proposed zone district, R-1C, allows for smaller single-family home lots than the current R-2 does; however, R-1C disallows duplexes. While R-2 is the predominant zoning in the area, single-family homes are the predominant land use, so the zone change and resulting development would be more in line with the character of the neighborhood despite having a slightly smaller lot size. RECOMMENDED MOTION: “I move to approve Council Bill No. 10-2017 an ordinance approving the rezoning of property located at 6610 W. 31st Avenue from Residential-Two (R-2) to Residential-One C (R-1C) on first reading, order it published, public hearing set for Monday, July 10, 2017, at 7 p.m. in City Council Chambers, and that it take effect 15 days after final publication.” Council Action Form – Gustafson Rezoning June 12, 2017 Page 3 REPORT PREPARED/REVIEWED BY: Zack Wallace Mendez, Planner II Kenneth Johnstone, Community Development Director Patrick Goff, City Manager ATTACHMENTS: 1. Council Bill No. 10-2017 ATTACHMENT 1 CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER __________________ COUNCIL BILL NO. 10 ORDINANCE NO. _________ Series of 2017 TITLE: AN ORDINANCE APPROVING THE REZONING OF PROPERTY LOCATED AT 6610 WEST 31ST AVENUE FROM RESIDENTIAL-TWO (R-2) TO RESIDENTIAL-ONE C (R-1C) (CASE NO. WZ-17-02 / GUSTAFSON) WHEREAS, Chapter 26 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws establishes procedures for the City’s review and approval of requests for land use cases; and, WHEREAS, Brenden Gustafson has submitted a land use application for approval of a zone change to the Residential-One C (R-1C) zone district for property located at 6610 West 31st Avenue; and, WHEREAS, the City of Wheat Ridge has adopted a comprehensive plan— Envision Wheat Ridge—which supports opportunities for home ownership and encourages investment in established neighborhoods; and, WHEREAS, the City of Wheat Ridge Planning Commission held a public hearing on May 18, 2017 and voted to recommend approval of rezoning the property to Residential-One C (R-1C) , NOW THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO: Section 1. Upon application by Brenden Gustafson for approval of a zone change ordinance from Residential-Two (R-2) to Residential-One C (R-1C) for property located at 6610 W. 31st Avenue, and pursuant to the findings made based on testimony and evidence presented at a public hearing before the Wheat Ridge City Council, a zone change is approved for the following described land: LOT 21, HALLER SUBDIVISION, COUNTY OF JEFFERSON, STATE OF COLORADO Section 2. Vested Property Rights. Approval of this zone change does not create a vested property right. Vested property rights may only arise and accrue pursuant to the provisions of Section 26-121 of the Code of Laws of the City of Wheat Ridge. Section 3. Safety Clause. The City of Wheat Ridge hereby finds, determines, and declares that this ordinance is promulgated under the general police power of the City of Wheat Ridge, that it is promulgated for the health, safety, and welfare of the public and that this ordinance is necessary for the preservation of health and safety and for the protection of public convenience and welfare. The City Council further determines that the ordinance bears a rational relation to the proper legislative object sought to be attained. Section 4. Severability; Conflicting Ordinance Repealed. If any section, subsection or clause of the 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 15 days after final publication, as provided by Section 5.11 of the Charter. INTRODUCED, READ, AND ADOPTED on first reading by a vote of __ to __ on this 12th day of June, 2017, ordered it published with Public Hearing and consideration on final passage set for Monday, July 10, 2017 at 7 p.m., in the Council Chambers, 7500 West 29th Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado, and that it takes effect 15 days after final publication. READ, ADOPTED AND ORDERED PUBLISHED on second and final reading by a vote of _____ to _____, this _____ day of ___________, 2017. SIGNED by the Mayor on this _______ day of _______________, 2017. ______________________________________ Joyce Jay, Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________________ Janelle Shaver, City Clerk Approved as to Form _______________________________________ Gerald Dahl, City Attorney 1st publication: 2nd publication: Wheat Ridge Transcript: Effective Date: ITEM NO: DATE: June 12, 2017 REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION TITLE: COUNCIL BILL NO. 11-2017 – AN ORDINANCE APPROVING THE REZONING OF PROPERTY LOCATED AT 6375 WEST 44TH AVENUE FROM COMMERCIAL-ONE (C-1) TO MIXED USE-NEIGHBORHOOD (MU-N) (CASE NO. WZ-17- 04/CONWAY) PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCES FOR 1ST READING (6/12/2017) BIDS/MOTIONS ORDINANCES FOR 2ND READING (7/10/2017) RESOLUTIONS QUASI-JUDICIAL: YES NO __________________________________ __________________________________ Community Development Director City Manager ISSUE: The applicant is requesting approval of a zone change from Commercial-One (C-1) to Mixed Use-Neighborhood (MU-N) for property located at 6375 W. 44th Avenue. The proposed rezoning area includes one parcel, which is approximately a quarter of an acre. The purpose of the zone change is to allow the property to be utilized solely as a residential use in the immediate future, and have the possibility of being utilized as a live/work space in the future. At this time, the applicant is not proposing any new development or modifications to the site. If the property is redeveloped in the future under the proposed MU-N zoning, an administrative site plan review would be required to confirm that proposed development meets the standards of the mixed use zone district. Council Action Form – Conway Rezoning June 12, 2017 Page 2 PRIOR ACTION: Planning Commission heard the request at a public hearing on May 18, 2017, and recommended approval. The staff report and meeting minutes from the Planning Commission meeting will be included with the ordinance for second reading. FINANCIAL IMPACT: The proposed zone change is not expected to have a direct financial impact on the City. Fees in the amount of $862 were collected for the review and processing of Case No. WZ-17-04. BACKGROUND: The property is located at 6375 W. 44th Avenue in the northeast quadrant of the City, immediately west of Hopper Hollow Park. The property is currently zoned Commercial-One (C-1) which allows a wide range of commercial uses, such as office, general business, retail sales, and service establishments, which are oriented towards the community or entire region. The primary structure on the property was originally built in 1942 and has served a variety of purposes over the years. It appears to have originally been constructed as a home. Based on the City’s business license and building permit records, the property was most recently used as a church, engineering office, adult daycare facility, and retail store. Surrounding Land Uses The site is zoned Commercial-One (C-1), and surrounding properties include a variety of zoning designations and land uses. To the north of the subject property is an area of residentially zoned properties, mostly Residential-Three (R-3), with some Residential-Two (R-2) in the periphery. The associated land uses to the northwest coincide with the zoning of several multi-family residential buildings. To the south of the property, along 44th Avenue, are properties zoned Restricted Commercial (RC) and Neighborhood Commercial (NC). Most of these properties were originally constructed as single-family homes in the 1950s, and have since been converted to small commercial offices. That being said, a residential presence still remains along 44th Avenue, with residences located to the southeast and southwest of the subject property. To the west of the subject property is a mix of commercial zoning designations, both Commercial-One (C-1) and Neighborhood Commercial (NC), with small scale commercial land uses. Immediately adjacent to the subject property to the west is a property zoned Mixed Use-Neighborhood (MU-N). This property was rezoned from Restricted Commercial (RC) to MU-N in 2014 in anticipation of utilizing the site as a mixed residential and commercial (live/work) property. To the east of the property is the City of Wheat Ridge’s Hopper Hollow Park, which was constructed in 2015, and has mixed zoning, Commercial-One (C-1) nearest 44th Avenue and a mix of Residential-Three (R-3) and Residential-Two (R-2) further north. Current and Proposed Zoning The proposed zone district, MU-N, is a less intensive commercial zone district because it limits or disallows several of the larger scale and auto-oriented uses which are permitted in current C-1 zoning. A significant difference is in the treatment of residential uses. In the C-1 zone district, Council Action Form – Conway Rezoning June 12, 2017 Page 3 residential uses are permitted on a very limited basis per section 26-626 of the city code. Existing residential uses may continue, but new residential uses must be accessory to a commercial use. Because the subject property was previously converted entirely to a commercial use, it cannot be converted back to a primary residential use under the current C-1 zoning. Unlike C-1 zoning, a new residence is a permitted use in the MU-N zone district. The zone change would allow the current owners and applicants to make this property and existing structure their home, while also allowing the option moving their small business to operate from the property at a future date. RECOMMENDED MOTION: “I move to approve Council Bill No. 11-2017 an ordinance approving the rezoning of property located at 637 5 West 44th Avenue from Commercial One (C-1) to Mixed Use-Neighborhood (MU-N) on first reading, order it published, public hearing set for Monday, July 10, 2017 at 7 p.m. in City Council Chambers, and that it take effect 15 days after final publication.” REPORT PREPARED/REVIEWED BY: Zack Wallace, Planner II Kenneth Johnstone, Community Development Director Patrick Goff, City Manager ATTACHMENTS: 1. Council Bill No. 11-2017 ATTACHMENT 1 CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER __________________ COUNCIL BILL NO. 11 ORDINANCE NO. _________ Series of 2017 TITLE: AN ORDINANCE APPROVING THE REZONING OF PROPERTY LOCATED AT 6375 WEST 44TH AVENUE FROM COMMERCIAL-ONE (C-1) TO MIXED USE-NEIGHBORHOOD (MU-N) (CASE NO. WZ-17-04 / CONWAY) WHEREAS, Chapter 26 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws establishes procedures for the City’s review and approval of requests for land use cases; and, WHEREAS, Ryan and Lisa Conway have submitted a land use application for approval of a zone change to the Mixed Use-Neighborhood (MU-N) zone district for property located at 6375 West 44th Avenue; and, WHEREAS, the City of Wheat Ridge has adopted a comprehensive plan— Envision Wheat Ridge—which calls for a mix of land uses along W. 44th Avenue by virtue of it being designated a neighborhood commercial corridor; and, WHEREAS, the City of Wheat Ridge Planning Commission held a public hearing on May 18, 2017, and voted to recommend approval of rezoning the property to Mixed-Use-Neighborhood (MU-N). NOW THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO: Section 1. Upon application by Ryan and Lisa Conway for approval of a zone change ordinance from Commercial-One (C-1) to Mixed Use-Neighborhood (MU-N) for property located at 6375 W. 44th Avenue, and pursuant to the findings made based on testimony and evidence presented at a public hearing before the Wheat Ridge City Council, a zone change is approved for the following described land: LOT 1, BLOCK 1, BRAUER SUBDIVISION, COUNTY OF JEFFERSON, STATE OF COLORADO Section 2. Vested Property Rights. Approval of this zone change does not create a vested property right. Vested property rights may only arise and accrue pursuant to the provisions of Section 26-121 of the Code of Laws of the City of Wheat Ridge. Section 3. Safety Clause. The City of Wheat Ridge hereby finds, determines, and declares that this ordinance is promulgated under the general police power of the City of Wheat Ridge, that it is promulgated for the health, safety, and welfare of the public and that this ordinance is necessary for the preservation of health and safety and for the protection of public convenience and welfare. The City Council further determines that the ordinance bears a rational relation to the proper legislative object sought to be attained. Section 4. Severability; Conflicting Ordinance Repealed. If any section, subsection or clause of the 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 15 days after final publication, as provided by Section 5.11 of the Charter. INTRODUCED, READ, AND ADOPTED on first reading by a vote of __ to __ on this 12th day of June, 2017, ordered it published with Public Hearing and consideration on final passage set for Monday, July 10, 2017 at 7:00 o’clock p.m., in the Council Chambers, 7500 West 29th Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado, and that it takes effect 15 days after final publication. READ, ADOPTED AND ORDERED PUBLISHED on second and final reading by a vote of _____ to _____, this _____ day of ___________, 2017. SIGNED by the Mayor on this _______ day of _______________, 2017. ______________________________________ Joyce Jay, Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________________ Janelle Shaver, City Clerk Approved as to Form _______________________________________ Gerald Dahl, City Attorney 1st publication: 2nd publication: Wheat Ridge Transcript: Effective Date: ITEM NO: DATE: June 12, 2017 REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION TITLE: RESOLUTION NO. 20-2017 – A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2017 GENERAL FUND BUDGET TO REFLECT THE APPROVAL OF A SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET APPROPRIATION IN THE AMOUNT OF $100,000 FOR THE PURPOSE OF FUNDING THE WHEAT RIDGE BUSINESS DISTRICT FAÇADE PLUS GRANT PROGRAM PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCES FOR 1ST READING BIDS/MOTIONS ORDINANCES FOR 2ND READING RESOLUTIONS QUASI-JUDICIAL: YES NO _______________________________ City Manager ISSUE: Consensus was reached by City Council at the June 5, 2017 study session to bring forward a resolution for a supplemental budget appropriation in the amount of $100,000 for the Wheat Ridge Business District (WRBD) Façade Plus Grant Program. PRIOR ACTION: City Council approved $45,000 in funding during the 2017 budget process for WRBD grant funding. FINANCIAL IMPACT: A supplemental budget appropriation from General Fund undesignated reserves is required to fund this request. The City’s Unrestricted Fund Balance Policy states that “The City will maintain a minimum unrestricted fund balance of at least two months or approximately 17% of its General Fund operating expenditures. Use of the unrestricted fund balance which causes that balance to fall below the minimum required level of 17% will require a super majority vote by Council.” CAF – Contribution to WRBD June 12, 2017 Page 2 On November 28, 2016, City Council approved a Development Agreement for the Fruitdale School property committing a $2,585,000 loan to the project. The Agreement also states that at no time will City obligations for payment be required to be paid to the extent that such payment would cause the City’s cash reserves to go below 17%, consistent with adopted Council policy. To date, the City has made payments in the amount of $1,757,800 to the Fruitdale project which has decreased the undesignated fund balance below 17%. In order for the City to pay the June invoice to the Fruitdale project, in the amount of approximately $310,000, the City needs an additional $800,000 in unanticipated revenues to keep the undesignated fund balance at 17%. Unanticipated permit fee and use tax revenues from building permits to repair hail damaged roofs totals approximately $31,000/day. If this trend continues, the City will realize an increase in revenues of approximately $800,000 within 25 business days which will maintain the minimum undesignated fund balance level of 17%. BACKGROUND: The WRBD was formed in a joint partnership between local business owners and the City of Wheat Ridge in 2002 to help revitalize 38th Avenue. The effort was expanded in 2005 to serve businesses throughout the City of Wheat Ridge. The WRBD administers several grant programs for Wheat Ridge businesses. The grant programs are matching grants up to specified limits, including the following: • Revitalization Incentive Program (RIP) provides assistance for façade (including architectural design fees) and sign improvements. • Accessibility Grant Program offers assistance for accessibility issues such as handicap bathrooms and ramps. • Commercial Exterior Paint Program is for businesses painting the exterior of their business. • Commercial Landscape Grant is a one-time grant for landscape improvements. The City has contributed funding to the WRBD beginning in 2011 in the following amounts: Year WRBD Contribution 2011 $95,000 2012 $40,000 2013 $90,000 2014 $45,000 2015 $45,000 2016 $45,000 2017 $45,000 CAF – Contribution to WRBD June 12, 2017 Page 3 RECOMMENDATIONS: None RECOMMENDED MOTION: “I move to approve Resolution No. 20-2017, a resolution amending the fiscal year 2017 General Fund budget to reflect the approval of a supplemental budget appropriation in the amount of $100,000 for the purpose of funding the Wheat Ridge Business District Façade Plus Grant Program.” Or, “I move to table indefinitely Resolution No. 20-2017, a resolution amending the fiscal year 2017 General Fund budget to reflect the approval of a supplemental budget appropriation in the amount of $100,000 for the purpose of funding the Wheat Ridge Business District Façade Plus Grant Program for the following reason(s) __________________________.” REPORT PREPARED BY: Patrick Goff, City Manager ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution No. 20-2017 CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO RESOLUTION NO. 20 Series of 2017 TITLE: A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2017 GENERAL FUND BUDGET TO REFLECT THE APPROVAL OF A SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET APPROPRIATION INTHE AMOUNT OF $100,000 FOR THE PURPOSE OF FUNDING THE WHEAT RIDGE BUSINESS DISTRICT FAÇADE PLUS GRANT PROGRAM WHEREAS, the Wheat Ridge Charter requires that amendments to the budget be effected by the City Council adopting a resolution; and WHEREAS, the WRBD was formed as a joint partnership between local business owners and the City of Wheat Ridge in 2002; and WHEREAS, the WRBD Facade Plus Grant Program serves businesses throughout the City of Wheat Ridge; and WHEREAS, the Council recognizes the value of the Façade Plus Grant Program in the revitalization of businesses in Wheat Ridge. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Wheat Ridge City Council, that: Section 1. A transfer of $100,000 is hereby approved from the General Fund budget designated reserves to account 01-105-700-710 and the 2017 revenues are amended accordingly. DONE AND RESOLVED this 12th day of June, 2017. Joyce Jay, Mayor ATTEST: Janelle Shaver, City Clerk Attachment 1 ITEM NO: DATE: June 12, 2017 REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION TITLE: RESOLUTION NO. 21-2017 – A RESOLUTION SUPPORTING MAYOR JAY’S PARTICIPATION IN THE MAYORS NATIONAL CLIMATE ACTION AGENDA, CONTINUED SUPPORT OF THE WHEAT RIDGE ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE’S MISSION, AND A COMMITMENT TO THE GOALS OF THE PARIS AGREEMENT PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCES FOR 1ST READING BIDS/MOTIONS ORDINANCES FOR 2ND READING RESOLUTIONS QUASI-JUDICIAL: YES NO __________________________ City Manager ISSUE: On June 1, 2017 President Donald Trump committed to pulling the US out of the Paris Climate Agreement. In spite of this decision, 248 mayors (as of June 1, 2017) have agreed to continue to honor and uphold the commitments to the goals of the Paris Agreement by signing a mayoral compact. Signing the agreement provides the City of Wheat Ridge an opportunity to join with the growing number of cities that stand with the Paris Agreement. Colorado mayors who have signed as US Climate Mayors include Aspen, Boulder, Breckenridge, Denver, Edgewater, Fort Collins, Lafayette, Lakewood, Longmont, Telluride and Vail. The Paris Agreement highlights the local, national and international concern and response to climate change. By signing the compact, the mayors are expressing their belief that protecting the environment falls on all levels of government, and that as leaders of their Cities, they will continue efforts to meet each of their cities’ sustainability goals. Council Action Form – Environmental Sustainability Support June 12, 2017 Page 2 FINANCIAL IMPACT: None BACKGROUND: On March 20, 2017, Mayor Joyce Jay and Mayor Pro Tem George Pond presented the concept of a citizen environmental sustainability committee as a way to involve the citizens in community- wide sustainability efforts. Council expressed support for formation of the committee. On May 8, 2017, the Mayor appointed 11 members to the committee. The purpose of the Wheat Ridge Environmental Sustainability Committee (WRESC) is to involve the community in recommending and prioritizing environmental sustainability goals for the City of Wheat Ridge municipal operations and other community-wide sustainability efforts. The committee will provide recommendations on effective environmental programs and policies to Council and serve as a forum for the community to offer input concerning environmental sustainability within the following six topic areas: • Green Building • Education & Communication • Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy • Solid Waste & Recycling • Transportation • Water RECOMMENDATIONS: None RECOMMENDED MOTION: “I move to approve Resolution No. 21-2017, a resolution supporting Mayor Jay’s participation in the Mayors National Climate Action Agenda, continued support of the Wheat Ridge Environmental Sustainability Committee’s mission, and a commitment to the goals of the Paris Agreement.” Or “I move to postpone indefinitely Resolution No. 21-2017, a resolution supporting Mayor Jay’s participation in the Mayors National Climate Action Agenda, continued support of the Wheat Ridge Environmental Sustainability Committee’s mission, and a commitment to the goals of the Paris Agreement, for the following reason(s) ______________________.” REPORT PREPARED/REVIEWED BY: Karen Van Ert, Executive Assistant Patrick Goff, City Manager Council Action Form – Environmental Sustainability Support June 12, 2017 Page 3 ATTACHMENT: 1. Resolution No. 21-2017 2. WRESC Mission and Goals CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO RESOLUTION NO. 21 Series of 2017 TITLE: A RESOLUTION SUPPORTING MAYOR JAY’S PARTICIPATION IN THE MAYORS NATIONAL CLIMATE ACTION AGENDA, CONTINUED SUPPORT OF THE WHEAT RIDGE ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE’S MISSION, AND A COMMITMENT TO THE GOALS OF THE PARIS AGREEMENT WHEREAS, the Wheat Ridge City Council has expressed support for general environmental sustainability within the City; and WHEREAS, President Donald Trump has committed to pulling the United States out of the Paris Climate Agreement; and WHEREAS, more than 248 mayors across the nation, including mayors from cities surrounding Wheat Ridge, have agreed to sign a mayoral compact to continue supporting the goals of the Paris Climate Agreement; and WHEREAS, City Council members are committed to the belief that all levels of government share some responsibility for protecting the environment; and WHEREAS, Mayor Jay appointed the Wheat Ridge Environmental Sustainability Committee on May 8, 2017 to promote sustainability goals within the City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Wheat Ridge, Colorado, that: 1. Mayor Jay has Council support to participate in the Mayors National Climate Action Agenda and sign the mayoral compact expressing support for the goals of the Paris Agreement. 2. The Council will continue to support the Sustainability Committee mission and goals. DONE AND RESOLVED this _____ day of ____________, 2017. Joyce Jay, Mayor ATTEST: Janelle Shaver, City Clerk Attachment 1 Attachment 2 Wheat Ridge Environmental Sustainability Committee (WESC) Purpose The purpose of the Community Environmental Sustainability Committee (WESC) is to involve the community in recommending and prioritizing environmental sustainability goals for the City of Wheat Ridge municipal operations and other community-wide sustainability efforts. The committee will provide recommendations on effective environmental programs and policies to the City Council and will serve as a forum for the community to offer input concerning environmental sustainability within the following six topic areas: • Green Building • Education & Communication • Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy • Solid Waste & Recycling • Transportation • Water Mission • Evaluating current City of Wheat Ridge sustainability practices and policies and creating metrics to track progress • Providing advice, support, and guidance to the Mayor and City Council regarding sustainability, climate change, and environmental management issues • Involve the community through engagement, outreach, and advocacy; supporting education, awareness, and stewardship • Assisting the City and the community to identify, adopt, develop and implement plans, programs, policies, strategies, and action Committee Membership The WESC is comprised of nine members appointed by the Mayor and ratified by a vote of the City Council. Each Councilmember will be encouraged to nominate between three and five applicants for the Mayor’s consideration. Primary consideration will be given to those applicants with environmental knowledge and/or interest with the aim of achieving a combination of experts and non-experts, reflecting the diversity of the community. The Mayor will give preference, where possible, to persons who are actively engaged with environmental sustainability issues. The Committee will serve for an initial, limited 6-month period. Direction from City Council Requested Confirm the desire to move forward with this commission; provide consensus on intent and mission, duration, and participation.