Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/05/18I City of WheatP,idge PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA April 5, 2018 Notice is hereby given of a Public Meeting to be held before the City of Wheat Ridge Planning Commission on April 5, 2018 at 7:00 p.m., in the City Council Chambers of the Municipal Building, 7500 West 29th Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado. *Agenda packets and minutes are available online at http://www.ci.wheatridge.co.us/95/Planning-Commission 1. CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER 2. ROLL CALL OF MEMBERS 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 4. APPROVE THE ORDER OF THE AGENDA (Items of new and old business may be recommended for placement on the agenda.) 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES—March 15, 2018 6. PUBLIC FORUM (This is the time for any person to speak on any subject not appearing on the agenda. Public comments may be limited to 3 minutes.) 7. PUBLIC HEARING A. Case No. WZ-18-06: An application filed by Luis Bielich for approval of a zone change from Residential -Two (R-2) to Mixed Use -Neighborhood (MU -N) for property located at 4650 Wadsworth Boulevard. B. Case No. WZ-18-07: An application filed by Francesca Chrisp for approval of a zone change from Agricultural -One (A-1) and Commercial -One (C-1) to Mixed Use -Neighborhood (MU - N) for property located at 11221 West 44`h Avenue. 8. OLD BUSINESS 9. NEW BUSINESS 10. ADJOURNMENT Individuals with disabilities are encouraged to participate in all public meetings sponsored by the City of Whew Ridge. Call Sara Spaulding Public Information Officer at 303-235-2877 at least one week in advance of a meeting if you are interested in participating and need inclusion assistance. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. City of i�9r WheatMidge PLANNING COMMISSION Minutes of Meeting March 15, 2018 CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Chair OHM at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers of the Municipal Building, 7500 West 29a' Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado. ROLL CALL OF MEMBERS Commission Members Present: Commission Members Absent: Staff Members Present: PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Dirk Boden Alan Bucknam Emery Dorsey Janet Leo Scott Ohm Vivian Vos Amanda Weaver Lauren Mikulak, Planning Manager Zack Wallace Mendez, Planner 11 Jordan Jefferies, Civil Engineer II Tammy Odean, Recording Secretary APPROVE ORDER OF THE AGENDA It was moved by Commissioner BUCKNAM and seconded by Commissioner BODEN to approve the order of the agenda. Motion carried 7-0. APPROVAL OF MINUTES — March 1, 2018 It was moved by Commissioner DORSEY and seconded by Commissioner LEO to approve the minutes of March 1, 2018, as written. Motion carried 5-0-2 with Commissioners VOS and WEAVER abstaining. PUBLIC FORUM (This is the time for any person to speak on any subject not appearing on the agenda.) Planning Commission Minutes March 15, 2018 -I— No one wished to speak at this time. PUBLIC HEARING A. Case No. WZ-17-11: an application filed by SCHAL Investments for approval of a zone change from Agricultural -One (A-1) to Planned Residential Development (PRD) with an Outline Development Plan (ODP) for the property located at 5372- 5392 Quail Street. The ODP proposes a mix of single family homes and townhomes. Mr. Wallace Mendez gave a short presentation regarding the zone change, the ODP and the application. He entered into the record the contents of the case file, packet materials, the zoning ordinance, and the contents of the digital presentation. He stated the public notice and posting requirements have been met, therefore the Planning Commission has jurisdiction to hear this case..N Commissioner BODEN asked about the 30% open space in the townhome area because he didn't think it looked as though there was 30%. Mr. Wallace Mendez explained it includes not only the area labeled open space, but also the front and side yards areas around the buildings. Commissioner BODEN also asked if there was a trip generation report done. Mr. Jefferies said there was a trip generation report submitted, and the results were not significant enough to trigger an additional traffic impact analysis. Commissioner BUCKNAM asked if the paved right-of-way (ROW) is considered open space. He also asked if all of the open space is public Mr. Wallace Mendez stated the paved ROW is not open space, the open space begins at the back of sidewalk. The large open space areas shown on the plan are public, however, as mentioned earlier some of the open space extends around the front and sides of buildings, which will be people's homes, and those areas may not feel as public as the main open space areas. Commissioner BUCKNAM wanted to know if the people driving along 54"' Avenue and the resident at Skyline Estates will be looking at the backyards or a fence at Quail Run. Mr. Wallace Mendez said they will be backyards that will likely be fenced. Fencing will be determined during Specific Development Plan review. Commissioner DORSEY asked what the timeline of the development of Quail Street will be. Planning Commission Minutes -2— March 2— March 15, 2018 Mr. Wallace Mendez explained that Quail Street will need to be dedicated and constructed prior to any vertical improvements being approved within the Quail Run development. He added the City of Arvada currently has a land use application under review to develop the property to the west, that proposed development will accommodate a majority of Quail Street north of the existing Quail Ridge Estates development due to the lack of existing right-of-way in that area, and the fact that two properties will not be redeveloping, thus force Quail Street further west into the City of Arvada. Mr. Wallace Mendez added that be believes the applicant has been working with the neighboring developer in Arvada to potentially dedicate the Quail Street right-of-way prior to public hearings for the remainder of the proposed development and rezoning to the west. If this is true, and successful, it means Quail Run can begin construction regardless of the status of the development proposal to the west. Commissioner VOS asked why the 3 "fingers" of land that extend north that belong to the City of Wheat Ridge have not been annexed by Arvada. Mr. Wallace Mendez said he did not know and those three fingers that belong to the City of Wheat Ridge have been like that since incorporation in 1969. Commissioner VOS asked what the Code Enforcement issues have been that were mentioned on page 6 of the Staff Report. Ms. Mikulak explained that there were some junk/weed complaints and they were cooperative to clean it up, it was not a major issue. Commissioner VOS asked how close the nearest grocery store and schools are to this housing development as well as industrial zoning. She inquired because it seems to be very dense with housing. Mr. Wallace Mendez and Ms. Mikulak said they were unsure of the nearest schools, there is a Target Superstore and Natural Grocers on Kipling Street near Ridge Road. Industrial zoning can be found nearby, mainly south of Ridge Road, but Staff did not consider the majority of it to be heavy industrial. Commissioner VOS also inquired about the bulk plane in this development. Mr. Wallace Mendez said there is no bulk plane requirement for this area, as it only applies to single-family homes in the Rl-C and R-3 zone districts. Commissioner OHM asked if condition number 1 of the recommended motion was reviewed by the City Attorney for due process. Ms. Mikulak explained it did not need to be reviewed by the Attorney. The exact location and right-of-way required for Quail Street must be in place prior to Planning Commission Minutes -3— March 3— March 15, 2018 bringing a Specific Development Plan to public hearing, because without the ROW, the proposed development will not have adequate access or utilities. Commissioner OHM asked how far the RTD commuter rail station is. Mr. Wallace Mendez said a little more than 1/2 mile. Commissioner OHM asked where the porches and doors of the townhomes on Pierson Court will face. Ms. Mikulak explained that there is no provision in the ODP, but the homes will be alley loaded which would reasonably place front doors facing the right-of-way and open space. Commissioner BUCKNAM asked about drainage and the detention on the southeast side of the property, on the ODP the drainage note seems to be in conflict with the legend on the site plan, and he wondered if the detention pond is on the neighbor's property. F Ms. Mikulak said the detention pond does sit partially on the neighbor's property, but that area is not included in the rezoning boundary. That neighbor is required to sign this document, and any future documents, and will need to be part of the play in order to convey the portion of their property to the development for drainage purposes. Staff understands the concern over the drainage note wording on sheet 1 of the ODP, and agrees it can be clarified as a condition of approval. Commissioner OHM asked if on sheet 2 labels for Quail Street and 54"' could be added. Summer Clark, Applicant 5392 Quail Street Ms. Clark gave a brief explanation of the history and her time of growing up on the farm (the subject property). Although it has been in her family for 50 years and they love the open space, she is open to change and would like to see this development move forward for others to live and enjoy the beauty of this ridge. Commissioner VOS had concerns about the owls in the trees around the area. Ms. Clark explained that the Van Bibber trail is the closest significant open space that absorbed some of those habitats when recent housing developments were built and the owls have also moved to the trees further south of the property. Commissioner VOS asked about the traffic study and the time frame of when it was done and what area. Planning Commission Minutes -4— March 4— March 15, 2018 Mr. Jefferies explained that the trip generation report was produced in January, and that for this analysis no actual traffic counts are recorded. The ITE ("Institute of Transportation Engineers") Trip Generation Manual is utilized to develop an estimate of vehicular trips that the development scenario is anticipated to generate on the nearby streets. Based on the application of formulas in the manual, if the use generates more than 60 trips during the peak AM or PM hour, the City requires a traffic impact study. This development scenario did not reach that threshold having only 37 trips in the peak hour. Ms. Mikulak added some clarifying statements regarding the ITE analysis, and that it did not warrant further analysis for this development project. Susan Wilson 5373 Parfet, Arvada Ms. Wilson explained she has three major concerns: density, the location of her property line, and drainage. She likes the single family homes on the north side, but still worried about density. She asked if the fences on the west of Parfet Street is the boundary line between the City of Wheat Ridge and the City of Arvada. She want written authorization from the Parfet Street homeowners for any modification to the drainage in the easement. Tim Bottomly 11191 W. 54' Ave., Arvada Mr. Bottomly also appreciated the change to single family homes along 54"' Avenue. He still has concerns about traffic especially when the G line opens. He also wondered who will respond to 911 calls for this development. His final concern is with the old building on the site and the possible asbestos in it. Mike Welding 5006 Parfet Street, Wheat Ridge Mr. Wehling explained he grew up in this neighborhood also, has seen the area change and is in support of Ms. Clark's vision. Greg Dunkelberger 5320 Newcombe Street, Wheat Ridge Mr. Dunkelberger is opposed to this development and thinks there should only be single family homes because the townhomes are out of character with the neighborhood. He added he believes there is also a large amount of disagreement with the neighboring development proposal under review for the Haskins Station property in Arvada. Planning Commission Minutes - 5— March 15, 2018 Christia Chase and Chris Boubeck 3329 E. Bayaud Avenue, Cherry Creek They explained that they live in Cherry Creek with a child and two dogs and have one car. It is hard to live in the city and they would like to move to this new development to be close to the G line station and have a bigger yard. Terri Krieger -Heaney 11101 W. 54' Avenue, Arvada Ms. Krieger -Heaney would only like to see single family homes and no townhomes, the area is getting too populated. Joel Lubker 5352 Quail Street. Mr. Lubker thinks this is a good deal and likes the single family homes around the perimeter. Dennis Peter 11131 West 54" Avenue, Arvada Mr. Peter thanked staff and Ms. Clark for taking considerations seriously and for adding a buffer zone, but he has concerns about density and would like to see two- story townhomes rather than three-story. Julie Peter 11131 West 54" Avenue, Arvada 116611, Thank you to Ms. Clark for working with the neighbors. Ms. Peter has concerns about cross thru traffic on Quail Street and 54"' Avenue. She would also like to see more open space and is also concerned about density. Marianne Rodriguez 11171 West 54" Avenue, Arvada Ms. Rodriggez said she appreciates the single family homes around the perimeter, but wants to see more open space. She is also concerned about traffic and would like to see less density. Commissioner OHM closed citizen's forum and asked staff to respond to several of the public comments. • Parfet property line/City boundary Planning Commission Minutes -6— March 6— March 15, 2018 Mr. Wallace Mendez explained there was a survey for the property submitted with the ODP application. With the Specific Development Plan, Staff will work with the developer to provide a document, such as the survey, which identifies where neighboring fences and improvements are located. • Homeowner provide written authorization for drainage impacts Mr. Wallace Mendez and Mr. Jefferies said that because the drainage solution for this property will impact Parfet Street residents, those being impacted will have to provide written authorization during the SDP review. • Fencing along 54a' Avenue Mr. Wallace Mendez said fencing will be determined by the Specific Development Plan. He added that the current fence is owned by the Skyline Estates HOA and the applicant will need work with the HOA as the plans progress. • Requirement for open space Ms. Mikulak explained that minimum open space requirement of 30% was taken from the City's existing R-3 development standards. Mr. Wallace Mendez added that there is a large public component and the front doors will open to the open space. • Cottonwood trees Mr. Wallace Mendez said the large trees will most likely be removed. Ms. Mikulak added there is no tree protection ordinance in the City of Wheat Ridge and cottonwood trees are considered a nuisance tree because of the seeds it drops so they are not seen in new developments. • Emergency calls, code enforcement and maintenance of streets Mr. Wallace Mendez said that for emergencies 911 will be called and the new Jeffcom 911 Communications Center will dispatch. Code enforcement will be handled by the City of Wheat Ridge and the maintenance of streets will depend which City the street is in. Quail Street will have an agreement between Arvada and Wheat Ridge, similar to other streets throughout the City which sit on municipal boundaries. • Asbestos in old building Planning Commission Minutes -7— March 7— March 15, 2018 Mr. Wallace Mendez explained that a State of Colorado asbestos report is required to be submitted with a demolition permit through the City.. • Density concerns Ms. Mikulak said that this site sits between two light rail stations and is located in a changing area of the City. She added the City of Wheat Ridge has height and density limitations in the charter and the densities proposed are well under the maximum of 21 units per acre and this are compatible with the surrounding area, especially once the G line opens. It was moved by Commissioner BUCKNAM and seconded by Commissioner WEAVER to recommend APPROVAL of Case No. WZ-17-11, a request for approval of a zone change from Agricultural -One to Planned Residential Development with an Outline Development Plan (ODP) for property located at 5372 and 5392 Quail Street, for the following reasons: 1. The proposed zone change will promote the public health, safety, or welfare of the community and does not result in an adverse effect on the surrounding area. 2. The proposed zone change is consistent with the goals and objectives of the City's Comprehensive Plan. 3. The proposed zoning includes a circulation network that support the City's goals related to bicycle and pedestrian connectivity. 4. The proposed zoning establishes enhance design controls related to site design and architecture that will result in a high-quality development. With the following conditions: 1. The Quail Run specific development plan and subdivision plat shall not be reviewed at public hearing until Quail Street has been dedicated as public right-of-way on the adjacent property to the west or on the subject property. 2. If final utility and/or drainage designs affect off-site property owners, written authorization shall be provided from those owners prior to public hearings for the Quail Run subdivision plat. 3. Revise single-family detached minimum rear yard setback to 15 feet. 4. Revise the language on sheet 1 of the ODP regarding drainage to reflect the correct position as indicated on sheet 2 of the ODP of the drainage area. Motion carried 6-1 with Commissioner LEO voting against. Commissioner BUCKNAM appreciates the applicant's work with the neighbors regarding the single and multi -family alignment and will support motion. Planning Commission Minutes -8— March 8— March 15, 2018 Commissioner LEO agrees with the zone change but has issues with the multi- family because it takes up more surface land which can affect runoff and will not support motion. B. Case No. WSP-17-09: an application filed by Quadrant Wheat Ridge Corners, LLC for approval of a master sign plan for the Corners development at the southwest corner of West 381i Avenue and Wadsworth Boulevard including 7690 Yukon Court, 3765 Wadsworth Boulevard, 3637 Wadsworth Boulevard, 3545 Wadsworth Boulevard, and 3501 Wadsworth Boulevard. Ms. Mikulak gave a short presentation regarding master sign plan and the application. She entered into the record the contents of the case file, packet materials, the zoning ordinance, and the contents of the digital presentation. She stated the public notice and posting requirements have been met, therefore the Planning Commission has jurisdiction to hear this case. Commissioner VOS wanted an explanation of what channel letters are. Ms. Mikulak explained that instead of all of the writing being printed on a single plastic board, like a cabinet sign, channel letters are printed and installed each individual letter separately. Commissioner BUCKNAM added they are like a magnet letter found on a refrigerator. Commissioner VOS asked if the material for the freestanding signs will be brick and plastic and what the height of the buildings will be. Ms. Mikulak stated the signs materials will be compatible with the site's building which will be primarily brick, stucco and stone and said the B, C and D buildings will be 24 to 28 feet in height. Commissioner OHM asked if the leasing signs and if there is any potential issues with code enforcement because the signs are not in code compliance. Ms. Mikulak said the officers will have to double check with the planners for code compliance. Bob Turner, Quadrant Wheat Ridge Corners 981 Southpark Drive, Littleton Mr. Turner explained that a master sign plan has always been a consideration for the site and want it to match the architecture features of the buildings. He stated he wants the signs to tie the development together. He added the first three buildings should be turned over for tenant improvements by the end of May and Lucky's should open in mid-July. Planning Commission Minutes -9— March 9— March 15, 2018 It was moved by Commissioner VOS and seconded by Commissioner BODEN to recommend APPROVAL of Case No. WSP-17-09, a request for approval of a master sign plan for a unified development on property zoned Mixed Use - Commercial (MU -C) and located on the west side of Wadsworth between 35' and 38" Avenues, including 7690 Yukon Court and 3501, 3545, 3637 and 3765 Wadsworth Boulevard, for the following reasons: 1. The site is eligible for a master sign plan. 2. The master sign plan promotes well-planned and well-designed signage. 3. The master sign plan is consistent with the intent of the sign code and appropriate for the context of the development. Motion carried 7-0. Commissioner OHM thanked the staff for their hard work on this signage plan. C. Case No. WSP-17-09: an Ordinance amending Article VII (sign code) of Chapter 26 of the Code of Laws. Mr. Wallace Mendez gave a short presentation regarding the Ordinance. He entered into the record the contents of the case file, packet materials, the zoning ordinance, and the contents of the digital presentation. He stated the public notice and posting requirements have been met, therefore the Planning Commission has jurisdiction to hear this case. Commissioner BODEN asked if an existing business has a pole sign and the business changes ownership, can the new business use the same sign or will it have to be taken down. Mr. Wallace Mendez confirmed that the pole sign can have the new business information put on it. Commissioner BUCKNAM asked about the yard sign designation as defined and wanted to know what a limited period of time means and how it is enforceable. Ms. Mikulak said that temporary signs are defined by their construction rather than a specific period of time. Commissioner BUCKNAM confirmed that as long as the sign is removable the sign can stay for as long as possible. Ms. Mikulak and Mr. Wallace Mendez agreed that this is true. Commissioner VOS asked what category a flutter flag falls into. Planning Commission Minutes - 10— March 15, 2018 Mr. Wallace Mendez said this falls into the pennant category. Ms. Mikulak added that images will be included in the ordinance to help define the language. Commissioner WEAVER wanted to confirm that on a residential property multiple temporary signs could be placed, but only one of those can be for a home occupation, even though we can no longer look at content. Ms. Mikulak and Mr. Wallace Mendez agreed that this is true. Commissioner OHM asked that if the sign code passes all leasing signs will be prohibited unless there is a master sign plan. , Ms. Mikulak and Mr. Wallace Mendez concurred that leasing signs are regulated by the large yard sign regulations. Large yard signs are permitted for properties with active building permits or actively listed for sale or lease. The signs are considered temporary. Commissioner OHM then asked about what makes a sign temporary. Ms. Mikulak explained that a permanent signs needs a permit and is typically constructed of more durable materials than temporary signs. She added there will be continued education with Code Enforcement to distinguish between temporary and permanent signs, as well as all updates to the sign code. Mr. Wallace Mendez added there is a meeting in May with Code Enforcement to talk through the sign code updates. It was moved by Commissioner DORSEY and seconded by Commissioner LEO to recommend APPROVAL of the proposed ordinance amending Articles VII of Chapter 26 of the code of laws, concerning the sign code. Motion carried 7-0. Commissioner OHM stated he was fine with City Council's suggestion to allow for the school to have an LED through a process other than the sign code update. Commissioner BUCKNAM added that making an exception for school can be put into the code, but a variance could do the same thing, it would receive the same level of scrutiny. 8. OLD BUSINESS 9. NEW BUSINESS Planning Commission Minutes - 11 — March 15, 2018 Ms. Mikulak mentioned to the Commission that Commissioner KIMSEY did resign her seat so there is currently a vacancy. She also mentioned that City Council deferred the Board and Commission appointments until March 26, 2018. The neat Planning Commission meeting will be held April 5, 2018. 10. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Commissioner WEAVER and seconded by Commissioner DORSEY to adjourn the meeting at 9:42 p.m. Motion carried 7-0. Scott Ohm, Chair Tammy Odean, Recording Secretary Planning Commission Minutes March 15, 2018 -12— ♦�4le 1w Ir Wh6atRiLd e g TO: CASE MANAGER: CASE NO. & NAME: ACTION REQUESTED: CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE PLANNING DIVISION STAFF REPORT Planning Commission MEETING DATE: April 9, 2018 Zack Wallace Mendez WZ-18-07 / Chrisp Approval of a zone change from Agricultural -One (A-1) and Commercial -One (C-1) to Mixed Use -Neighborhood (MU -N). LOCATION OF REQUEST: 11221 W. 44' Avenue APPLICANT (S): OWNER (S): APPROXIMATE AREA: Francesca Chrisp SG Ventures LLC 97,879 square feet (2.25 acres) PRESENT ZONING: Agricultural -One (A-1) and Commercial -One (C-1) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Neighborhood Commercial Corridor ENTER INTO RECORD: (X) CASE FILE & PACKET MATERIALS (X) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN (X) ZONING ORDINANCE (X) DIGITAL PRESENTATION Locati Planning Commission CaseNo. WZ-18-07IChrisp Site JURISDICTION: All notification and posting requirements have been met; therefore, there is jurisdiction to hear this case. I. REQUEST The applicant and current owner of the property has submitted this application requesting approval of a zone change from Agricultural -One (A-1) and Commercial -One (C-1) to Mixed Use -Neighborhood (MU -N). II. EXISTING CONDITIONS/PROPERTY HISTORY The subject property is located at 11221 W. 44"' Avenue. The property is approximately 2.25 acres in size and located on the north side of 44"' Avenue, west of Pierson Street. The property currently contains a series of structures (Exhibit 1, Aerial). On the western half of the property, zoned Agricultural -One (A-1), there are four (4) single-family homes. The first home (the largest one nearest 44u' Avenue) was constructed in 1869, with the other three (3) homes all being constructed in 1909, according to the Jefferson County Assessor. The existing improvements on the property are considered non -conforming, as the A-1 zone district allows for only one (1) single-family home on a minimum of one acre of land. The construction of these homes pre -dates the City of Wheat Ridge, and zoning in general, as Jefferson County did not adopt its first zoning code until the early 1940s. On the eastern half of the property, zoned Commercial -One (C-1), there is one (1) structure, listed as a "Nightclub, Bar Lounge" by the Jefferson County Assessor, which was licensed by the City as a tavern until recently. This structure was constructed in 1942 and features a large parking lot to the rear of the building. The property currently consists of one parcel, despite the split zoning and multiple structures. The only land use case in City records is a zone change in 1977 from Agricultural -One to Commercial -One for the rear portion of the eastern half of the property, where the tavern parking lot is currently located. The case file notes the zone change for the rear portion of the lot was to allow for a parking lot to be constructed behind the tavern. At that point in time the tavern was already zoned C-1. Staff was unable to find record of any zone change for the tavern area of the property. Since this structure was constructed in the early 1940s, at the same time as Jefferson County was establishing its first zoning code, it is possible the commercial zoning has existed on this portion of the property since the County's first assignment of zone districts. As was previously mentioned, the site is zoned both Agricultural -One (A-1) and Commercial -One (C- 1). The surrounding properties include a variety of zoning designations and land uses. To the north of the subject property is the City of Wheat Ridge Public Works Maintenance Shop, zoned Public Facilities (PF). To the east are properties zoned Residential -Two (R-2) and Commercial -One (C-1), utilized for single-family homes and commercial businesses, respectively. To the south of the subject property is 44"' Avenue, and a series of properties zoned C-1 and utilized for a variety of commercial, retail, and office establishments, in addition to a Planned Residential Development (PRD), for the Parkside patio home development. To the southeast is the City of Wheat Ridge's Prospect Park, zoned A-1. To the west of the subject property are a series of properties zoned A-1 and Residential -One (R- 1), all utilized residentially. Further to the west and extending to Robb Street is zoned A-1 and contains the Baugh House, owned by the City of Wheat Ridge (Exhibit 2, Zoning Map). The Baugh house is a building of historical significance to the City, County, and State it is listed on the National Register of Historic Places and the Colorado State Register of Historic Properties. Planning Commission CaseNo. WZ18-071Chnsp III. PROPOSED ZONING The applicant is requesting the property be rezoned to Mixed Use -Neighborhood, a zone district intended to provide medium density mixed-use development. In addition to residential and office uses, it allows for a range of neighborhood -serving commercial and retail uses. MU -N zoning in intended for "neighborhood main streets," such as 44ffi Avenue and 38ffi Avenue. The property is currently zoned Agricultural -One (A-1) and Commercial -One (C-1). The A-1 zone district was established to allow for residential estate living within a quasi -rural or agricultural setting. This zone district allows single-family homes on a minimum of one acre of land in addition to a variety of agricultural related uses such as farming, farmers markets, produce stands, riding academies and public stables, in addition to governmental buildings and schools. The C-1 zone district was established to accommodate 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 applicant intends to rezone the property in order to better position the property for redevelopment, as the current split zoning does not easily lend itself to redevelopment opportunities (Exhibit I Applicant Letter). The zone change will allow the property to be developed with commercial uses, residential units, or a mix of the two. Additionally, in the short term, it will bring the existing site conditions more into compliance with the existing Code of Laws. The following table compares the existing and proposed zoning for the property, with standards for new development or major additions. In terms of permitted uses, MU -N allows commercial uses at a lesser intensity than the existing C-1 zoning, however it does allow for a wider range of uses than are permitted in the A-1 zone district. Planning Commission CaseNo. WZ18-07IChrisp IV. ZONE CHANGE CRITERIA Staff has provided an analysis of the zone change criteria outlined in Section 26-112.E. The Planning Commission shall base its recommendation in consideration of the extent to which the following criteria have been met: 1. The change of zone promotes the health, safety, and general welfare of the community and will not result in a significant adverse effect on the surrounding area. The change of zone will not result in adverse effects on the surrounding area. The rezoning would allow a less intensive range of commercial uses than the current C-1 zoning, and encourage more neighborhood -oriented businesses. The proposed zone change would allow for more intensive development than is currently allowed under A-1 zoning, however, the potential development intensity under the MU -N zoning is not out of character with 441' Avenue and the wide array of businesses and residences located in the vicinity of the subject property. Based on the existing character and land use patterns on 44"' Avenue, the MU -N zone district is more appropriate than the split zoning between A-1 and C-1. For that reason, the zone change should not have an adverse effect on the surrounding area. Planning Commission 4 CaseNo. WZ18-07IChrisp CURRENT ZONING CURRENT ZONING PROPOSED ZONING Commercial -One (C-1) Agricultural -One (A-1) Mixed Use -Neighborhood Allows a wide range of Allows for single-family Allows residential, commercial commercial uses including residential and a range of or mixed use — includes multi - Uses office, general business, retail agricultural and related uses family and live/work facilities, sales, and service including produce stands and excludes outdoor storage. establishments. farmers markets. Contemporary Overlay ASDM Mixed -Use standards apply, Architectural standards apply, including high No architectural standards including high quality Standards quality architecture, standards apply in agricultural zone architecture, standards related related to articulation, variation, districts. to articulation, variation and materials, and transparency. materials. 35' if the building has Max. Building 50' 35' residential use Height 50' for all other uses Max. Building 80% 25% 90% for mixed use coverage 1 85% for single use Min. 20% 25% 10% for mixed use Landscaping 15% for single use Build -to Area 0-12' along front property line Not applicable 0-12' along front property line Setbacks Side setback adjacent to single - Front See build -to above 30 feet family residential: 10 feet for Side 0 feet if nonflammable or 5 feet 15 feet the first 2 stories, additional 5 per story feet for each additional story. Rear 10 feet plus 5 feet per story 15 feet Must be landscaped. Side setback adjacent to commercial: 0 feet Rearsetback: 5 feet IV. ZONE CHANGE CRITERIA Staff has provided an analysis of the zone change criteria outlined in Section 26-112.E. The Planning Commission shall base its recommendation in consideration of the extent to which the following criteria have been met: 1. The change of zone promotes the health, safety, and general welfare of the community and will not result in a significant adverse effect on the surrounding area. The change of zone will not result in adverse effects on the surrounding area. The rezoning would allow a less intensive range of commercial uses than the current C-1 zoning, and encourage more neighborhood -oriented businesses. The proposed zone change would allow for more intensive development than is currently allowed under A-1 zoning, however, the potential development intensity under the MU -N zoning is not out of character with 441' Avenue and the wide array of businesses and residences located in the vicinity of the subject property. Based on the existing character and land use patterns on 44"' Avenue, the MU -N zone district is more appropriate than the split zoning between A-1 and C-1. For that reason, the zone change should not have an adverse effect on the surrounding area. Planning Commission 4 CaseNo. WZ18-07IChrisp The MU -N zoning is expected to add value to the subject property and also to the surrounding community. The mixed use development standards will support compatibility between future redevelopment and existing land uses. Staff concludes that this criterion has been met. 2. Adequate infrastructure/facilities are available to serve the types of uses allowed by the change of zone, or the applicant will upgrade and provide such where they do not exist or are under capacity. Infrastructure currently serves the property, and all responding agencies have indicated they can serve the property. In the event that the current utility capacity is not adequate for a future use, the property owner/developer would be responsible for utility upgrades. Staff concludes that this criterion has been met. 3. The Planning Commission shall also find that at least one 1 of the following conditions exists: a. The change of zone is in conformance, or will bring the property into conformance, with the City of Wheat Ridge comprehensive plan goals, objectives and policies, and other related policies or plans for the area. West 44th Avenue is a primary east -west thoroughfare in the City, is classified as a minor arterial, and is predominantly commercial in character. Envision Wheat Ridge, the City's 2009 comprehensive plan, identifies this corridor as a Neighborhood Commercial Corridor. This designation envisions a corridor with a broad mix of activities, including small-scale, pedestrian -friendly mixed-use retail, commercial businesses, and residential, with a focus on promoting a compatible mix of uses to supply daily services and meet the needs of adjacent residential areas. A stated goal in the comprehensive plan is to promote reinvestment in property and to promote a mix of neighborhood supporting uses, including residential and commercial. Additionally, the Fruitdale Subarea Plan was adopted for this area in 2007. The future land use map (Exhibit 6, Fruitdale Subarea Plan) denotes the area around 44"' Avenue between approximately Owens Street and Quail Street, including the subject property, as a mixed-use area. The subarea plan encourages redevelopment and revitalization of properties within this area and encourages mixed use developments to create a neighborhood center. The subarea plan speculates this neighborhood center could include neighborhood type retail or commercial on the ground floor with residential or office on the upper floors. This zone change request supports the comprehensive plan and subarea plan by enabling investment in the property and by aligning the zoning with the City's mixed use goals for this corridor. Staff concludes that this criterion has been met. b. The existing zone classification currently recorded on the official zoning maps of the City of Wheat Ridge is in error. Planning Commission CaseNo. WZ18-07/Chrisp Staff has not found any evidence of an error with the current A-1 and C-1 zoning designations as they appear on the City zoning maps. Staff concludes that this criterion is not applicable. c. A change of character in the area has occurred or is occurring to such a degree that it is in the public interest to encourage redevelopment of the area or to recognize the changing character of the area. Staff finds no evidence of significant changes in the area. The zone change request from A-1 and C-1 to MU -N neither responds to nor results in notable change of character. Staff concludes that this criterion is not applicable. d. The proposed rezoning is necessary in order to provide for a community need that was not anticipated at the time of the adoption of the City of Wheat Ridge comprehensive plan. The proposed rezoning does not relate to an unanticipated need. Staff concludes that this criterion is not applicable. Staff concludes that the criteria used to evaluate zone change support this request. V. NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING Prior to submittal of an application for a zone change, the applicant is required to hold a neighborhood input meeting in accordance with the requirements of section 26-109. A meeting for neighborhood input was held on February 7, 2018. Five members of the public attended the meeting in addition to the applicant and staff. Some concerns were raised regarding traffic, schools, potential uses, and the uncertainty of what might develop on the site. Staff addressed some concerns, which related to the development standards and permitted use list that would apply to the property if rezoned. The concerns and the discussion from the meeting are summarized in the meeting summary (Exhibit 7, Neighborhood Meering Notes). VI. AGENCY REFERRAL All affected service agencies were contacted for comment on the zone change request and regarding the ability to serve the property. Specific referral responses follow: Wheat Ridge Public Works Department: No comments. Fruitdale Sanitation District: No objection. Valley Water District: No objection. Wheat Ridge Police Department: No objection. Planning Commission CaseNo. WZ18-07/Chnsp Arvada Fire Protection District: No objection. Xcel Energy: No objection. Century Link: No objection. VII. STAFF CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION Staff concludes that the proposed zone change promotes the health, safety and general welfare of the community and will not result in a significant adverse effect on the surrounding area Staff further concludes that utility infrastructure adequately serves the property, and the applicant will be responsible for upgrades, if needed in the future. Finally, Staff concludes that the zone change is consistent with the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan by promoting a mix of uses along a neighborhood commercial corridor. Because the zone change evaluation criteria support the zone change request, staff recommends approval of Case No. WZ-18-07. VIII. SUGGESTED MOTIONS Option A: "I move to recommend APPROVAL of Case No. WZ-18-07, a request for approval of a zone change from Agricultural -One (A-1) and Commercial -One (C-1) to Mixed Use -Neighborhood (MU -N) for property located at 11221 W. 441i Avenue, for the following reasons: 1. The proposed zone change will promote the public health, safety, or welfare of the community and does not result in an adverse effect on the surrounding area. 2. Utility infrastructure adequately services the property. 3. The proposed zone change is consistent with the goals and objectives of the City's Comprehensive Plan and consistent with the character of 441i Avenue. 4. The zone change will provide additional opportunity for reinvestment in the area. 5. The criteria used to evaluate a zone change support the request." Option B: "I move to recommend DENIAL of Case No. WZ-18-07, a request for approval of a zone change from Agricultural -One (A-1) and Commercial -One (C-1) to Mixed Use -Neighborhood (MU -N) for property located at 11221 W. 441 Avenue, for the following reasons: 1. 2. ... Planning Commission CaseNo. WZ18-07IChrisp EXHIBIT 1: AERIAL Planning Commission CaseNo. WZ-18-07/Chrisp EXHIBIT 2: ZONING MAP Planning Commission CaseNo. WZ-18-07/Chrisp EXHIBIT 3: APPLICANT LETTER 2-24-2018 Good afternoon! I am proposing to rezone the site from its current split zoning agricultural -one (A-1) and commercial one (C-1) to mix use- neighborhood (MU -N). I would like to make the land more useful and have a vision of town home, row homes and/or apartment development with the potential of a storefront on 44th. This will benefit the city by bringing value to the city of Wheat Ridge and the surrounding neighbors. It will present nice curb appeal for 44th Street especially because everything is becoming more modernized. It will not have any negative affect on any public facilities. There will be not be an impact on traffic. It will have the necessary entrance and exits to the property. We are in hopes that the public hearing will present the opportunity to engage on this in endeavor. Regards, Francesca Chrisp 303 506 6155 Planning Commission 10 Case No. WZ-18-07 / Chrisp EXHIBIT 4: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 44" Avenue C IN Subject Property Parks and Neighborhoods dWir el/bieronf NNyPOmM1we rypec A __ _ Neighborhood t% Commercial Center Neighborhood Commercial Corridor (44a' Avenue) T 1 Planning Commission 11 Care No. WZI8-07/Chrisp EXHIBIT 5: FRUITDALE SUBAREA PLAN Planning Commission 12 Case No. W 18-0]/Chop EXHIBIT 6: SITE PHOTOS View of the subject property looking north from 44' Avenue. The residential portion of the property, zoned A-1, can be seen to the left, while the tavern, zoned C-1, can be seen to the right. Planning Commission 13 Case No. WZ-18-07 / Chrisp -] - -- -- __ View looking northwest from 44' Avenue. The tavern can be seen in the foreground with the residential portion of the property visible in the background. Planning Commission 14 Case No. WZ-18-07 / Chrisp EXHIBIT 7: NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING Meeting Date: February 7, 2018 Attending Staff: Zack Wallace Mendez, Planner II Location of Meeting: Wheat Ridge Municipal Center Property Address: 11221 W. 40 Avenue Property Owner(s): SG Ventures, LLC Property Owner(s) Present? Yes, Francesca Chrisp Applicant: Francesca Chrisp Applicant Present? Yes Existing Zoning: Agricultural -One (A-1) and Commercial -One (C-1) Existing Comp. Plan: Neighborhood Commercial Corridor Existing Site Conditions: The property is located on the north side of W. 40 Avenue, between Pierson Street and Quail Street. The western side of the property is zoned Agricultural -One (A-1) and contains four single-family homes. The eastern side of the property is zoned Commercial -One (C-1) and contains a vacant commercial building, formerly a bar. The largest home was built in 1869, and the other homes were built in 1909, according to the Jefferson County Assessor. The bar building was built in 1942. The lot is approximately 97,879 square feet (2.247 acres). Surrounding properties include a variety of commercial and residential uses. Properties to the east along W. 44"' Avenue are zoned C-1 and contain commercial uses, including several auto -oriented uses. Properties to the west along 44"' Avenue are mostly zoned A-1 and contain homes on large lots The City's Public Works shops are located to the north of the site and are zoned Public Facility (PF). Applicant/Owner Preliminary Proposal: The applicant has proposed to rezone the site from its current split zoning of A-1 and C-1 to Mixed Use -Neighborhood (MU -N). The zone change would allow for residential and/or commercial uses on the site, and allow for increased density on the site. While the applicant has no immediate plans for redevelopment, they envision a townhome or apartment development with a potential small storefront on W. 44ffi Avenue. The following is a summary of the neighborhood meeting: Planning Commission 15 CaseNo. WZ18-07/Chrisp • In addition to the applicant and staff, five members of the public attended the neighborhood meeting: • Staff discussed the site, and its current zoning. • The applicant and members of the public were informed of the process for the zone change. • The members of the public were informed of their opportunity to make comments during the process and at the public hearing. • The applicant spoke about her vision for the property: townhomes with some commercial activity along 441' Avenue. The applicant added that no developer is engaged, and she desires to update the zoning to better market the property to developers. The following issues were discussed regarding the zone change request: A question was raised regarding the land use and zoning of the property, as it already appears to be mixed use. Staff explained the property is one parcel but zoned with two different zoning designations. Under the current code, the Agricultural zoning allows for one single-family house on an acre of land. Currently the property has four homes, all of which pre -date the City of Wheat Ridge and the present zoning. The Agricultural zone is a bit antiquated, and a remnant from Jefferson County, and does not allow for much reinvestment in the property. The Mixed Use - Neighborhood zone district would permit a mix of uses across the site, and provides more options for reinvestment. • Concerns were raised that after the zoning is approved anything could happen with the site. Staff noted that while the exact future use of the property is undetermined, there is a defined list ofpermitted uses and development standards in the City Code that will need to be met. Additionally, future development will be subject to a site plan review to ensure it is in compliance with the Code requirements. • What school would children living here attend? The applicant and Staff were unsure of the closest school to the property. • Difference between MU -N and C-1 and A-1? The MU -N zone district encourages a mix of uses, and is flexible in allowing residential development, commercial development, or a mix of the two. The C-1 zone district primarily allows only commercial uses and development, and the A-] zone district has a very limited list ofpermitted uses that are more agricultural in nature. • Is there a need for housing here, have any studies been conducted regarding the need? The attendee added there is a perception of vacant residential buildings in area The City does not require market studies for zone changes or development applications. • Concerns were raised that the rezoning and development of the property would devalue nearby residential properties. The applicant suggested that redevelopment in this property would bring up property values in the area. • An attendee asked if after rezoning the property could be anything and not just residential? Staff noted that the development is not required to have any residential. But development must still follow the list ofpermitted uses within the Zoning Code. The MU -N is more limited in nature, in that it allows for a slightly more limited list ofuses than the current C -I zoning, and does not allow some uses, such as auto related uses. • Requirements that landscaping are upkept? Planning Commission 16 CaseNo. WZ18-07IChrisp Staff mentioned the landscaping requirements in the Zoning Code and the required landscaped setback buffers from adjacent single-family homes, and that maintenance of landscaping is required. If it is not upkept, Code Enforcement can take action. How long is the process? Once an application is submitted, the zone change process takes approximately 3 months. Additionally, once development is proposed, the developer will need to process a site plan and have building permits reviewed, each of which can take multiple months. Concerns regarding a proliferation of auto -related uses and `erotic' shops. Auto -oriented uses and adult entertainment uses are not allowed in the MU -N zone district. Traffic and parking concerns were raised. The City does not require any traffic information with a speculative rezone such as this. Traffic will be analyzed when a specific development proposal has been submitted to the City. There are minimum parking requirements in the City Code that will be reviewed and enforced as part of future site plan application. Aside from the five neighbors at the meeting, staff received no comment from others in the area regarding the proposal. Planning Commission 17 CaseNo. WZ18-07/Chrisp ♦�4le ® City of Wheat ��e CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE PLANNING DIVISION STAFF REPORT TO: Planning Commission MEETING DATE: April 5, 2018 CASE MANAGER: Scott Cutler CASE NO. & NAME: WZ-18-06 / Bielich ACTION REQUESTED: Approval of a zone change from Residential -Two (R-2) to Mixed Use - Neighborhood (MU -N). LOCATION OF REQUEST: 4650 Wadsworth Boulevard APPLICANT (S): Luis Bielich OWNER (S): ML Rentals LTD (Luis Bielich and Mike Nguyen) APPROXIMATE AREA: 14,505 square feet (0.33 acres) PRESENT ZONING: Residential -Two (R-2) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Primary Commercial Corridor ENTER INTO RECORD: (X) CASE FILE & PACKET MATERIALS (X) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN (X) ZONING ORDINANCE (X) DIGITAL PRESENTATION Location Map Planning Commission Case No. WZ-18-06/Bielich Site All notification and posting requirements have been met; therefore, there is jurisdiction to hear this case. I. REQUEST The owners of the property at 4650 Wadsworth Boulevard are requesting approval of a zone change from Residential -Two (R-2) to Mixed Use -Neighborhood (MU -N). The zone change will allow the property to be used for residential or commercial uses, as well as a mix of residential and commercial uses (mixed-use or live/work). IL EXISTING CONDITIONS The subject property is located at 4650 Wadsworth Boulevard. The property is approximately athird of an acre in size and located on the east side of Wadsworth Boulevard, between W. 46"' Avenue and W. 481' Avenue. Currently the property contains one structure, a duplex (Exhibit 1, Aerial). The duplex was built in 1951, per the Jefferson County Assessor. There is a parking area in the front of the duplex as well as additional space in the rear of the lot, which is currently gated. The property is zoned Residential -Two (R-2). Surrounding properties include a variety of commercial and residential uses. Properties along Wadsworth Boulevard are primarily commercial in nature, though north of W. 46"' Avenue, the Wadsworth corridor transitions to smaller lots and more residential uses. Properties to the east are zoned R-2 and contain mostly single-family homes, with some duplexes. This same condition applies to the properties beyond Wadsworth Boulevard to the west. Properties to the north and south are zoned Restricted Commercial (R -C) and contain light commercial uses. The property across Wadsworth to the west is zoned Residential -Three (R-3), and the property at the corner of W. 47"' Avenue and Wadsworth is zoned Mixed -Use Neighborhood (MU -N); both properties contain residential uses (Exhibit 2, Zoning Map). III. PROPOSED ZONING The applicants are requesting the property be rezoned to Mixed Use -Neighborhood, a zone district intended to provide medium density mixed-use development. In addition to residential and office uses, it allows for a range of neighborhood -serving commercial and retail uses. The property is currently zoned Residential -Two (R-2). This zone district was established to provide high quality, safe, quiet, and stable low to moderate -density residential neighborhoods. The applicant intends to rezone the property in order to potentially redevelop the rear portion of the property for residential use. However, no plans have been submitted, and any redevelopment of the property would require a Site Plan review which is a separate application process. The applicant has stated they believe the zone change would bring the property into conformance with the surrounding zoning designations, since most properties are zoned for mixed-use or commercial uses (Exhibit 3, Applicant Letter). The following table compares the existing and proposed zoning for the property, with standards for new development or major additions. hi terms of permitted uses, MU -N allows commercial uses whereas the R-2 zone does not (with the exception of approved home occupations). In terms of Planning Commission CaseNo. WZ-18-06IBielich residential uses, MU -N is more flexible because the R-2 zone district only allows single-family homes and duplexes. The MU -N zone district could allow approximately 6 residential units on the property, or 4 new dwelling units if taking into account the existing duplex, shown in Exhibit 4, Site Photos. IV. ZONE CHANGE CRITERIA Staff has provided an analysis of the zone change criteria outlined in Section 26-112.E. The Planning Commission shall base its recommendation in consideration of the extent to which the following criteria have been met: 1. The change of zone promotes the health, safety, and general welfare of the community and will not result in a significant adverse effect on the surrounding area. The MU -N zone district would allow the property owner to expand residential uses on the property. They could also incorporate neighborhood -serving commercial uses, which are currently prohibited on the property but permitted on the properties zoned RC to the north and south. Based on the existing character and land use patterns on Wadsworth Boulevard, the MU -N zone district is more appropriate than R-2 in terms of allowed land uses and intensity. For that reason, the zone change should not have an adverse effect on the surrounding area. Based on the small size of the property, many of the more intensive permitted uses in MU -N zone district are unrealistic (such as large apartment buildings or intensive commercial uses). The MU -N zoning is expected to add value to the subject property. The mixed use development standards will support compatibility between future redevelopment and existing land uses. In addition, any MU -N building containing residential is limited to 35 feet in height. Commercially -zoned properties (RC, C-1, and NC) may contain buildings up to 50 feet in height. The design standards for MU -N are stricter than for other zones, including setbacks, landscaping buffers, and architecture. Planning Commission CaseNo. WZ-18-06IBielich CURRENT ZONING PROPOSED ZONING Residential -Two (R-2) Mixed Use -Neighborhood (MU -N) Allows single-family homes and Allows residential, commercial or mixed Uses duplexes, and associated home use — includes multi -family and live/work occupations facilities Mixed -Use standards apply, including high Architectural Standards None quality architecture, standards related to articulation, variation and materials. Max. Building Height 35' 35' if the building has residential use 50' for all other uses Max. Lot coverage 40% 90°x% for mixed use 85% for single use 25% of lot at 100% of front yard 10% for mixed use Min. Landscaping P g exclusive of driveway and sidewalk 15% for single use Build -to Area 0-20' along front property line (property 0-12' along front property line s in Contemporary Overla dist ict Setbacks East (rear): 10' (1-2 story building) or 15' East (rear): 10' (3 -story building) North & South (side): 5' per story North & South (side): 0' (since the property abuts commercial uses) IV. ZONE CHANGE CRITERIA Staff has provided an analysis of the zone change criteria outlined in Section 26-112.E. The Planning Commission shall base its recommendation in consideration of the extent to which the following criteria have been met: 1. The change of zone promotes the health, safety, and general welfare of the community and will not result in a significant adverse effect on the surrounding area. The MU -N zone district would allow the property owner to expand residential uses on the property. They could also incorporate neighborhood -serving commercial uses, which are currently prohibited on the property but permitted on the properties zoned RC to the north and south. Based on the existing character and land use patterns on Wadsworth Boulevard, the MU -N zone district is more appropriate than R-2 in terms of allowed land uses and intensity. For that reason, the zone change should not have an adverse effect on the surrounding area. Based on the small size of the property, many of the more intensive permitted uses in MU -N zone district are unrealistic (such as large apartment buildings or intensive commercial uses). The MU -N zoning is expected to add value to the subject property. The mixed use development standards will support compatibility between future redevelopment and existing land uses. In addition, any MU -N building containing residential is limited to 35 feet in height. Commercially -zoned properties (RC, C-1, and NC) may contain buildings up to 50 feet in height. The design standards for MU -N are stricter than for other zones, including setbacks, landscaping buffers, and architecture. Planning Commission CaseNo. WZ-18-06IBielich Staff concludes that this criterion has been met. 2. Adequate infrastructure/facilities are available to serve the types of uses allowed by the change of zone, or the applicant will upgrade and provide such where they do not exist or are under capacity. Adequate infrastructure currently serves the property. All responding agencies have indicated they can serve the property. In the event that the current utility capacity is not adequate for a future use, the property owner/developer would be responsible for utility upgrades. A Site Plan review and building permits will be required for any new construction on the site, and will ensure compliance with current Building Codes, as well as the Fire Code. Staff concludes that this criterion has been met. 3. The Planning Commission shall also find that at least one 1 of the following conditions exists: a. The change of zone is in conformance, or will bring the property into conformance, with the City of Wheat Ridge comprehensive plan goals, objectives and policies, and other related policies or plans for the area. Wadsworth Boulevard is a primary north -south thoroughfare in the City, is classified as a major arterial, and is predominantly commercial in character. Envision Wheat Ridge, the City's 2009 comprehensive plan, identifies this corridor as a Primary Commercial Corridor (Exhibit 4, Comprehensive Plan). This designation envisions a corridor with a broad mix of activities, accommodating multiple transportation modes and exemplifying high quality urban design and appearance over time. Specifically for Wadsworth, the comprehensive plan notes the importance of improving the appearance and function of the corridor and working to redevelop outdated and underutilized properties. A stated goal in the comprehensive plan is to promote reinvestment in property and to promote a mix of neighborhood supporting uses, including residential use and office use. This zone change request supports the comprehensive plan by enabling investment in the property and by aligning the zoning with the City's mixed-use goals for this corridor. Staff concludes that this criterion has been met. b. The existing zone classification currently recorded on the official zoning maps of the City of Wheat Ridge is in error. Staff has not found any evidence of an error with the current R-2 zoning designation as it appears on the City zoning maps. Staff concludes that this criterion is not applicable. c. A change of character in the area has occurred or is occurring to such a degree that it is in the public interest to encourage redevelopment of the area or to recognize the changing character of the area. Planning Commission Case No. WZ-18-06/Bielich Commercial development along the Wadsworth Boulevard corridor continues to intensify. Staff believes low-density residential zoning along the Wadsworth corridor does not reflect the reality of Wadsworth as a major regional arterial. Based on recent intensification of land uses along Wadsworth, both residential and commercial, Staff concludes that there are changed conditions which make this property undesirable to be limited to low-density residential use. Staff concludes that this criterion has been met. d. The proposed rezoning is necessary in order to provide for a community need that was not anticipated at the time of the adoption of the City of Wheat Ridge comprehensive plan. The proposed rezoning does not relate to an unanticipated need. Staff concludes that this criterion is not applicable. Staff concludes that the criteria used to evaluate zone change support this request. V. PUBLIC NOTICING Prior to submittal of an application for a zone change, the applicant is required to hold a neighborhood input meeting in accordance with the requirements of section 26-109. A meeting for neighborhood input was held on February 13, 2018. Six members of the public attended the meeting in addition to the applicant and staff. In general, most of the attendees were supportive of the request. However, some concerns were raised by a neighbor over rear setbacks, increased density, and privacy; these concerns and the discussion from the meeting are summarized in the meeting summary (Exhibit 6, Neighborhood Meering Notes). One letter of support was received prior to the neighborhood meeting (Exhibit 7, Letter of Support). As of the date of distribution of this staff report, March 30, 2018, the City has not received additional comments or inquiries from surrounding property owners. VI. AGENCY REFERRAL All affected service agencies were contacted for comment on the zone change request and regarding the ability to serve the property. Specific referral responses follow: Wheat Ridge Public Works Department: No comments. Wheat Ridge Building Division: No comments. West Metro Fire Protection District: No concerns. Future site plans are subject to review by West Metro. Xcel Energy: No concerns. Century Link: No concerns. Planning Commission CaseNo. WZ-18-06IBielich Wheat Ridge Water District: No comments. Wheat Ridge Sanitation District: No comments. Colorado Department of Transportation: No comments. VII. STAFF CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION Staff concludes that the proposed zone change promotes the health, safety and general welfare of the community and will not result in a significant adverse effect on the surrounding area Staff further concludes that utility infrastructure adequately serves the property, and the applicant will be responsible for upgrades, if needed in the future. Finally, Staff concludes that the zone change is consistent with the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan by promoting a mix of uses along a primary commercial corridor. Because the zone change evaluation criteria support the zone change request, staff recommends approval of Case No. WZ-18-06. VIII. SUGGESTED MOTIONS Option A: "I move to recommend APPROVAL of Case No. WZ-18-06, a request for approval of a zone change from Residential -Two (R-2) to Mixed Use -Neighborhood (MU -N) for property located at 4650 Wadsworth Boulevard, for the following reasons: 1. The proposed zone change will promote the public health, safety, or welfare of the community and does not result in an adverse effect on the surrounding area. 2. Utility infrastructure adequately services the property. 3. The proposed zone change is consistent with the goals and objectives of the City's Comprehensive Plan and consistent with the character of Wadsworth Boulevard. 4. The zone change will provide additional opportunity for reinvestment in the area. 5. The criteria used to evaluate a zone change supports the request." Option B: "I move to recommend DENIAL of Case No. WZ-18-06, a request for approval of a zone change from Residential -Two (R-2) to Mixed Use -Neighborhood (MU -N) for property located at 4650 Wadsworth Boulevard, for the following reasons: 1. 2. ... Planning Commission CaseNo. WZ-18-06IBielich EXHIBIT 1: AERIAL Planning Commission Case No. WZ-18-06/Bielich EXHIBIT 2: ZONING MAP Planning Commission Case No. WZ-18-06/Bielich EXHIBIT 3: APPLICANT LETTER �M L 3161 Johnson Ln Erie, CO 80516 MLRentals.coloratloQgmail. com (720)507-1657 ML Rentals is proposing to rezone the property located at 4650 Wadsworth Blvtl from R2 to MU - N. The zone change promotes the health. safety, and general welfare of the community as i[ would enable further development in the backyard which is currently undeveloped and it is prone to dumping or collection of trash. This is especially true once the streets are widened and the sidewalk is located closer to the fence to the backyard. Tha infrastructure antl facilities nearby already serve commercially zoned properties to our next door neighbors. Since our surrountlings are already zoned as commercial, wa believe [hat rezoning the property as MU -N woultl bring the property into conformance with the City of Wheat Ridge comprehensive plan goals, objective antl policies and other city -approved policies or plans for the area. Best Regards, Luis Bielich S Mike Nguyen ML Rentals Planning co>...>...is.,-ion Case N¢ I�ZZB-06 /Bie$ch EXHIBIT 4: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Ole __44TH_ AVE Subject Property Parks and Wadsworth Corridor T T 1 _s -II ' J T Neighborhoods K�r� so Primary Gateway Primary Commercial (Intersection of Corridor Wadsworth & I-70) (Wadsworth Boulevard) Planning Commission 10 Case No. WZI8-06/Bielich EXHIBIT 5: SITE PHOTOS View of the subject property looking east across Wadsworth Boulevard. The existing duplex is in the middle of the photo, and the front yard landscaping box can be seen as well. The properties to the left and right of the subject property are zoned Restricted Commercial and contain commercial uses. Planning Commission 11 Case No. WZ-18-06/Bielich A view looking southeast down Wadsworth Boulevard, just south of the subject property. This photo was taken to show the increasingly intensive uses as you head south on Wadsworth Boulevard. Planning Commission 12 Case No. WZ-18-06/Bielich EXHIBIT 6: NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING Meeting Date: February 13, 2018 Attending Staff: Lauren Mikulak, Planning Manager Scott Cutler, Planning Technician Location of Meeting: Wheat Ridge Municipal Building Property Address: 4650 Wadsworth Boulevard Property Owner(s): ML Rentals, LLC Applicant: Luis Bielich Applicant Present? Yes Existing Zoning: Residential -Two (R-2) Existing Comp. Plan: Neighborhood Buffer / Primary Commercial Corridor Existing Site Conditions: The property is located on the east side of Wadsworth Boulevard, between W. 461i Avenue and W. 481' Avenue. The site is currently home to a duplex which was built in 1951, according to the Jefferson County Assessor. The lot is approximately 14,505 square feet. There is a parking area in the front of the duplex as well as additional space in the rear of the lot. The property is zoned Residential -Two (R-2). Surrounding properties include a variety of commercial and residential uses. Properties along Wadsworth Boulevard are primarily commercial in nature, though north of W. 46"' Avenue, the Wadsworth corridor transitions to smaller lots and more residential uses. Properties to the east are zoned R-2 and contain mostly single-family homes, with some duplexes. This same condition applies to the properties beyond Wadsworth Boulevard to the west. Properties to the north and south are zoned Restricted Commercial (R -C) and contain light commercial uses. The property across Wadsworth to the west is zoned Residential -Three (R-3), and the property at the corner of W. 471i Avenue and Wadsworth is zoned Mixed -Use Neighborhood (MU -N); both properties contain residential uses. Applicant Preliminary Proposal: The applicant has proposed to rezone the site from Residential -Two (R-2) to Mixed Use — Neighborhood (MU -N). The zone change would allow for residential and/or commercial uses on the site as opposed to strictly residential uses, and allow for increased density on the site. In the future, the applicant wants to build a quadplex behind the existing duplex, increasing the total units on the site to 6. The building would be 3 stories with garages on the first floor. Each unit is proposed to have 3 bedrooms. Planning Commission 13 Case No. WZ-18-06/Bielich The applicant bought the property in October 2014 and currently rents out both units. They intend to rent the additional units as well. The following is a summary of the neighborhood meeting: • In addition to the applicant and staff, 6 residents from the neighborhood attended the meeting; see attached sign-up sheets. • Staff explained the purpose of the neighborhood meeting, and informed the members of the public of the rezoning process. • Staff discussed the site, its zoning and land use. • The applicant presented their proposal and answered further questions, with help from staff. • The members of the public were informed of their opportunity to make comments during the process and at the required public hearings. • The purpose of the meeting was to discuss the zone change, but most questions from neighbors related to the applicant's potential future plans to develop additional units. The following issues were discussed regarding the zone change request and proposed future development: • What are the setbacks for the current and proposed zoning? What will the buffer look like at the rear of the property? The Residential -Two (R-2) zone district requires 5 foot per story side setbacks and 10 foot rear yard setbacks. Buildings must be set back 25 feet from public streets. The Mixed Use — Neighborhood (MU -N) zone district requires 15 foot rear setbacks for 3 -story buildings, so the required setbacks would be larger than under current standards. Side setbacks could be 0 feet because the property abuts commercial uses to the north and south; however the applicant noted they wish to provide some side setback. The applicant noted the desire to have a large buffer at the rear of the property to provide yard space and bring the building closer to the front of the property. • What are the adjacent zone districts? Properties to the north and south are both zoned Restricted Commercial (RC) and properties to the east are zoned Residential -Two (R-2). Multifamily, commercial, and mixed-use zone districts are across Wadsworth Boulevard to the west. • How tall would the buildings be? Likely 30 feet (3 stories) because of fire restrictions for any buildings that are taller. Staff noted that the maximum height for residential buildings in MU -N is 35 feet. • How many bedrooms in each unit? Three • What direction would be building face? The front doors would face south onto a shared driveway. • A resident whose property borders the site to the east was concerned about fitting everything on a relatively small site. They were concerned about the number of new residents and associated cars and pets. They did not want a tall building infringing on their privacy. The applicant responded to these concerns stating the windows would be facing north and south and side windows could be elevated so that residents could not look into neighboring Planning Commission 14 Case No. WZ18-06/Bielich properties. They also noted the proposed buffer space between the building and the resident's property and pointed out the required 15 foot rear setback. • Who are you trying to attract to this development? Young professionals and families. • Do you currently own the property? Do you own other properties too? Yes, and current tenants are young professionals. The applicant also owns other properties in the Denver Metro area. • What is the square footage per unit? There are no plans yet because a zone change must be successful. The target square footage is 1,300 to 1,400 square feet, 3 -bedroom units with a home office. • How will parking be accommodated? Each unit will have a garage and there will be additional parking stalls available. The applicant noted they are targeting 8 spaces total, maybe more if they can be accommodated. They also plan to provide bike racks. • Will there be balconies facing the back of the property? No balconies are planned for now. The building will be oriented north -south. • A neighbor noted they want to see the property kept up better. There have been issues in the past with weeds and dogs. The applicant described when they purchased the property (2014) and described some of the investments they have made (fences, upkeep, hiring a maintenance crew, and front yard improvements). • Staff discussed the Wadsworth Boulevard widening project and potential timing of construction. The property would be affected by the widening and a right-of-way acquisition by the City will be required, shrinking the lot and bringing the existing building closer to the street. • What is the square footage of the lot? The lot is approximately 14,500 square feet, but will shrink when right-of-way is dedicated for the Wadsworth project. • Can there be a condition of approval for the MU -N zone change related to setbacks? Adding conditions to straight zone changes is rare because they become hard to track and administer in the future. The MU -N rear setback requirements are greater than under current zoning. • Can there be commercial uses on the property under MU -N? Yes. • Are parking requirements for commercial higher than residential? Staff noted the varying parking requirements for commercial uses. Residential uses require at least 1 parking space per unit, with a maximum of 2.5 Commercial parking requirements are based on the specific use. • Staff explained the process specific to the zone change. Site design is not a component of the zone change process. Planning Commission 15 Case No. WZ18-06/Bielich EXHIBIT 7: LETTER OF SUPPORT ��i�►r���r r it 7sao wear arm- Awe. lI//ic aT �%�9c CD 80033 1 (oaf ,p (a nnc/'sl S have (rveJ ►rr uA ii ' JJA 7`4a L V-7�AV. whe,-> e;w CO 5... as, ap/6 't Planning Commission 16 Case No. WZI8-061Bielich