Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZOA-18-02fl6o, ,_D� Ci of � � �_J CHIA441,-S,6 Wheat i e Lx V -r r Ag -7— D ITEM NO: � • DATE: June 25, 2018 REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION WgZt ti TITLE: COUNCIL BILL NO. 15-2018 - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE WHEAT RIDGE CODE OF LAWS TO INCLUDE A NEW CRITERION FOR REVIEWING SPECIAL USE PERMITS (CASE NO. ZOA-18-02) ® PUBLIC HEARING ❑ BIDS/MOTIONS ❑ RESOLUTIONS QUASI-JUDICIAL: ❑ ORDINANCES FOR 1sT READING (06/11/2018) ® ORDINANCES FOR 2ND READING (06/25/2018) ❑ YES Community Developnient Director /1 • 4Ci Manager ISSUE: At a City Council study session earlier this year, Councilpersons Hoppe and Duran requested consideration of an ordinance potentially amending the City's special use permit regulations. More specifically, the request was to consider adding an additional review criterion to require consideration of an application's consistency with the City's adopted comprehensive planning documents. For all zoning districts, Chapter 26 of the Code of Laws lists various uses which are permitted and not permitted. The Code also lists uses which may be allowed, subject to review and approval of a special use permit application. Currently, there are eight (8) criteria against which special use permit applications are reviewed. If this ordinance were to be approved, a ninth review criterion would be added to that list. PRIOR ACTION: City Council provided preliminary direction on this matter at the May 7, 2018 study session. The ordinance was introduced on 1st reading at the June 11, 2018 City Council meeting. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on June 7 and forwards their recommendation of approval. Council Action Form — Special Use Permit Review Criteria June 25, 2018 Page 2 FINANCIAL IMPACT: None. BACKGROUND: City Council recently requested consideration of a potential Chapter 26 Code amendment related to the criteria against which special use permits are reviewed for approval. City Council discussed the draft ordinance at a study session on May 7 and directed staff to move forward with consideration of the ordinance, including consideration by the Planning Commission, as required by Code. The Planning Commission public hearing was held on June 7 and they forward a recommendation of approval. As drafted, the ordinance that would amend Chapter 26 of the Code of laws to add a 9"' special use permit review criterion, to read as follows: "The proposed special use promotes goals and outcomes from applicable portions of the city's comprehensive plan and any sub -area plan applicable to the subject property." As City Council is aware, in all zoning districts, there are uses that are permitted, not permitted and those that are allowed after review and approval of a special use permit (SUP). Special uses are considered "discretionary uses, which, if properly designed, developed, operated and maintained may be approved for a specific location..." The code further states: "The primary issues to be addressed are those related to justification of need and special design and operational considerations which mitigate potential detrimental impacts of a special use on surrounding land uses, the street system, or public services or facilities. In order to protect the public interest, a special use may be approved, approved with modifications (conditions) or denied. Previously approved special use permits may be revoked "if at any time the stipulations or conditions (of the previous approval) are not adhered to or are found to have been materially altered in scope, application or design..." Such revocation may only occur after a revocation hearing before City Council. Procedurally, special use permits begin as an administrative permit application eligible for review and approval by the Community Development Director (CDD), upon a finding that the application complies with the criteria for review in Section 26-114.D. In three (3) instances, SUPs are forwarded to City Council to be heard at a public hearing. • If the CDD finds that one or more of the criteria for review are not met • If a written objection is received during the public noticing period • If the CDD recommends a condition of approval, to which the applicant objects In taking action on a SUP, City Council also may approve, approve with conditions or deny said applications. Both the CDD and City Council, when approving a special use must decide whether a special use: • Runs with the land in perpetuity • Is personal to the applicant and may or may not be inherited; and/or • Shall be granted only for a defined period, after which time the special use permit shall Council Action Form — Special Use Pen -nit Review Criteria June 25, 2018 Page 3 expire unless renewed subject to all of the procedural requirements described above. Following are the codified criteria for reviewing special use permits: D. Criteria for review. The community development director or city council shall base its decision in consideration of the extent to which (underline added) the application demonstrates the following criteria have been met: 1. The special use will not have a detrimental effect upon the general health, welfare, safety and convenience of persons residing or working in the neighborhood. 2. The special use will not create or contribute to blight in the neighborhood by virtue of physical or operational characteristics. 3. The special use will not create adverse impacts greater than allowed under existing zoning for the property. 4. The special use will not result in undue traffic congestion or traffic hazards, or unsafe parking, loading, service or internal traffic conflicts to the detriment of persons whether on or off the site. S. The property is appropriately designed, including setbacks, heights, parking, bulk, buffering, screening and landscaping, so as to be in harmony and compatible with the character of the surrounding areas and neighborhood, especially with adjacent properties. 6. The special use will not overburden the capacities of the existing streets, utilities, parks, schools and other public facilities and services. 7. There is a history of compliance by the applicant and/or property owner with Code requirements and prior conditions, if any, regarding the subject property. 8. The application is in substantial compliance with the applicable standards set forth in the Architectural and Site Design Manual. It has been the City's practice in applying the above criteria to interpret the above underlined text such that it would be possible to approve (with or without condition) a SUP even if one or more of the above criteria have not been fully met. As noted, these permits are discretionary by design. RECOMMENDATIONS: The City's Comprehensive Plan and subarea plans are policy documents intended to guide various policy decisions of the City. Principally they inform land use and zoning policies pertaining to development on private property. However, they also include policy recommendations on housing, transportation, economic development, parks and other topical subjects. As it pertains to land use decisions, Chapter 26 specifically requires consideration of the Comprehensive Plan when the City takes actions on rezonings, both privately initiated and City -initiated legislative rezonings. The Comprehensive Plan is also considered in approving subdivision plats. The Comprehensive Plan also informs amendments to Chapter 26 of the Code of Laws, such as when the City adopted new mixed-use zoning districts shortly after adoption of the most recent Plan (Envision Wheat Ridge) in October 2009. It is logical to consider incorporating consideration of the Plan in making land use decisions on special use permits as well. Council Action Fonn — Special Use Permit Review Criteria June 25, 2018 Page 4 RECOMMENDED MOTION: ""I move to approve Council Bill No. 15-2018, an ordinance amending the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws to include a new criterion for reviewing special use permits (Case No. ZOA-18-02), on second reading and that it take effect 15 days after final publication," Or, "I move to postpone indefinitely Council Bill No. 15-2018 an ordinance amending the Code of Laws to add an additional criterion for review of applications for special use permit, for the following reason(s): " REPORT PREPARED/REVIEWED BY: Kenneth Johnstone, Community Development Director Patrick Goff, City Manager ATTACHMENTS: 1. Council Bill No. 15-2018 2. Planning Commission meeting minutes CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER HOPPE COUNCIL BILL NO. 15 ORDINANCE NO. Series 2018 TITLE: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE WHEAT RIDGE CODE OF LAWS TO INCLUDE AN ADDITIONAL CRITERION FOR REVIEW OF APPLICATIONS FOR SPECIAL USE PERMITS WHEREAS, the City of Wheat Ridge is a home rule municipality having all powers conferred by 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 (the "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 City Council has previously enacted Section 26-114 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws, which provides for the approval of special uses of real property under specific conditions; and WHEREAS, in the further exercise of this authority, the City has adopted a comprehensive master plan and several subarea plans to guide land use and development within the City; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that it is appropriate to include, within the criteria for review of special use applications under Section 26-114, an additional criterion concerning applicable planning documents. NOW THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO: Section 1. Code of Laws amended. Section 26-114.D of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws is amended by the addition of a new criterion (9), to read: D. Criteria for review. The community development director or city council shall base its decision in consideration of the extent to which the applicant demonstrates the following criteria have been met: (1)... (9) THE PROPOSED SPECIAL USE PROMOTES GOALS AND OUTCOMES FROM APPLICABLE PORTIONS OF THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ANY SUBAREA PLAN APPLICABLE TO THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. ATTACHMENT 1 Section 2. 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 3. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect fifteen (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 6 to 0 on this 11th day of June, 2018, 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 25, 2018 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 , 2018. SIGNED by the Mayor on this day of , 2018. Bud Starker, Mayor ATTEST: Janelle Shaver, City Clerk Approved as to Form Gerald E. Dahl, City Attorney First Publication: June 14, 2018 Second Publication: Wheat Ridge Transcript Effective Date: Published: Wheat Ridge Transcript and www.ci.wheatridge.co.us Motion Carried 6-0. D. Case No. ZOA-18-02: An Ordinance amending Chapter 26 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws to include an additional criterion for review of applications for special use permits. Mr. Johnstone gave a brief summary and background regarding the ordinance amendment. Commissioner OHM wanted to know if within this 9th criteria the developer has any control. Mr. Johnstone explained that City Council has softened the language and will use a standard of reasonableness. Commissioner OHM also asked if a special use permit would be granted in perpetuity. Mr. Johnstone said yes but a special use permit could also be granted specific to an applicant or limited in time. It was moved by Commissioner DORSEY and seconded by Commissioner LARSON to recommend approval of the proposed ordinance amending Chapter 26 to include an additional criterion for review of applications for special use permits. Motion carried 6-0. E. Case No. ZOA-18-03: An Ordinance amending Chapter 26 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws concerning electrically charged fences. Mr. Johnstone gave a short presentation regarding the ordinance amendment. Commissioner OHM asked if the Board of Adjustment recommended a 3 foot separation from a 6 foot perimeter fence for safety concerns, why has this been omitted from the ordinance. Mr. Johnstone said that due to the reality of the parties involved they say it is not acceptable to them. He explained the other issue is real estate that is not used and third the trash that collects between the two fences. Commissioner OHM also wanted to know if signage, warning people that the fence is electrified could be added to the ordinance. Mr. Johnstone said it can be a condition of approval. Planning Commission Minutes -12— June 12— June 7, 2018 ATTACHMENT 2 city of Wheat<idge I� r ITEM NO: DATE: June 11, 2018 REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION TITLE: COUNCIL BILL NO. 15-2018 — AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE WHEAT RIDGE CODE OF LAWS TO INCLUDE A NEW CRITERION FOR REVIEWING SPECIAL USE PERMITS (CASE NO. ZOA-18-02) ❑ PUBLIC HEARING ® ORDINANCES FOR 1sT READING (06/11/2018) ❑ BIDS/MOTIONS ❑ ORDINANCES FOR 2ND READING (06/25/2018) ❑ RESOLUTIONS QUASI-JUDICIAL: ❑ YES ® NO Community Developnient Director City Manager ISSUE: At a City Council study session earlier this year, Councilpersons Hoppe and Duran requested consideration of an ordinance potentially amending the City's special use permit regulations. More specifically, the request was to consider adding an additional review criterion to require consideration of an application's consistency with the City's adopted comprehensive planning documents. For all zoning districts, Chapter 26 of the Code of Laws lists various uses which are permitted and not permitted. The Code also lists uses which may be allowed, subject to review and approval of a special use permit application. Currently, there are eight (8) criteria against which special use permit applications are reviewed. If this ordinance were to be approved, a ninth review criterion would be added to that list. PRIOR ACTION: City Council provided preliminary direction on this matter at the May 7, 2018 study session. Council Action Form — Special Use Permit Review Criteria June 11, 2018 Page 2 FINANCIAL IMPACT: None. BACKGROUND: City Council recently requested consideration of a potential Chapter 26 Code amendment related to the criteria against which special use permits are reviewed for approval. City Council discussed the draft ordinance at a study session on May 7 and directed staff to move forward with consideration of the ordinance, including consideration by the Planning Commission, as required by Code. The Planning Commission public hearing was held on June 7 and their recommendation will be forwarded as part of the June 25 public hearing Council packet. As drafted, the ordinance that would amend Chapter 26 of the Code of laws to add a 0 special use permit review criterion, reads as follows: "The proposed special use promotes goals and outcomes from applicable portions of the city's comprehensive plan and any sub -area plan applicable to the subject property." As City Council is aware, in all zoning districts, there are uses that are permitted, not permitted and those that are allowed after review and approval of a special use permit (SUP). Special uses are considered "discretionary uses, which, if properly designed, developed, operated and maintained may be approved for a specific location..." The code further states: "The primary issues to be addressed are those related to justification of need and special design and operational considerations which mitigate potential detrimental impacts of a special use on surrounding land uses, the street system, or public services or facilities. In order to protect the public interest, a special use may be approved, approved with modifications (conditions) or denied. Previously approved special use permits may be revoked "if at any time the stipulations or conditions (of the previous approval) are not adhered to or are found to have been materially altered in scope, application or design..." Such revocation may only occur after a revocation hearing before City Council. Procedurally, special use permits begin as an administrative permit application eligible for review and approval by the Community Development Director (CDD), upon a finding that the application complies with the criteria for review in Section 26-114.D. In three (3) instances, SUPs are forwarded to City Council to be heard at a public hearing. If the CDD finds that one or more of the criteria for review are not met If a written objection is received during the public noticing period If the CDD recommends a condition of approval, to which the applicant objects In taking action on a special use permit, City Council also may approve, approve with conditions or deny said applications. Both the CDD and City Council, when approving a special use must decide whether a special use: • Runs with the land in perpetuity • Is personal to the applicant and may or may not be inherited; and/or Council Action Form — Special Use Permit Review Criteria June 11, 2018 Page 3 • Shall be granted only for a defined period, after which time the special use permit shall expire unless renewed subject to all of the procedural requirements described above Following are the codified criteria for reviewing special use permits: D. Criteria for review. The community development director or city council shall base its decision in consideration of the extent to which (underline added) the application demonstrates the following criteria have been met: 1. The special use will not have a detrimental effect upon the general health, welfare, safety and convenience of persons residing or working in the neighborhood. 2. The special use will not create or contribute to blight in the neighborhood by virtue of physical or operational characteristics. 3. The special use will not create adverse impacts greater than allowed under existing zoning for the property. 4. The special use will not result in undue traffic congestion or traffic hazards, or unsafe parking, loading, service or internal traffic conflicts to the detriment of persons whether on or off the site. S. The property is appropriately designed, including setbacks, heights, parking, bulk, buffering, screening and landscaping, so as to be in harmony and compatible with the character of the surrounding areas and neighborhood, especially with adjacent properties. 6. The special use will not overburden the capacities of the existing streets, utilities, parks, schools and other public facilities and services. 7. There is a history of compliance by the applicant and/or property owner with Code requirements and prior conditions, if any, regarding the subject property. 8. The application is in substantial compliance with the applicable standards set forth in the Architectural and Site Design Manual. It has been the City's practice in applying the above criteria to interpret the above underlined text such that it would be possible to approve (with or without condition) a SUP even if one or more of the above criteria have not been fully met. As noted, these permits are discretionary by design. RECOMMENDATIONS: The City's Comprehensive Plan and subarea plans are policy documents intended to guide various policy decisions of the City. Principally they inform land use and zoning policies pertaining to development on private property. However, they also include policy recommendations on housing, transportation, economic development, parks and other topical subjects. As it pertains to land use decisions, Chapter 26 specifically requires consideration of the Comprehensive Plan when the City takes actions on rezonings, both privately initiated and City -initiated legislative rezonings. The Comprehensive Plan is also considered in approving subdivision plats. The Comprehensive Plan also informs amendments to Chapter 26 of the Code of Laws, such as when the City adopted new mixed-use zoning districts shortly after adoption of the most recent Plan Council Action Form — Special Use Permit Review Criteria June 11, 2018 Page 4 (Envision Wheat Ridge) in October 2009. It is logical to consider incorporating consideration of the Plan in making land use decisions on special use permits as well. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to approve Council Bill No. 15-2018 an ordinance amending the Code of Laws to add an additional criterion for review of applications for special use permit, on first reading, order it published, public hearing set for Monday, June 25, 2018, at 7:00 p.m. in City Council Chambers, and that it take effect 15 days after final publication." Or, "I move to postpone indefinitely Council Bill No. 15-2018 an ordinance amending the Code of Laws to add an additional criterion for review of applications for special use permit, for the following reason(s): " REPORT PREPARED/REVIEWED BY: Kenneth Johnstone, Community Development Director Patrick Goff, City Manager ATTACHMENTS: 1. Council Bill No. 15-2018 CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER COUNCIL BILL NO. 15 ORDINANCE NO. Series 2018 TITLE: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE WHEAT RIDGE CODE OF LAWS TO INCLUDE AN ADDITIONAL CRITERION FOR REVIEW OF APPLICATIONS FOR SPECIAL USE PERMITS WHEREAS, the City of Wheat Ridge is a home rule municipality having all powers conferred by 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 (the "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 City Council has previously enacted Section 26-114 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws, which provides for the approval of special uses of real property under specific conditions; and WHEREAS, in the further exercise comprehensive master plan and several development within the City; and of this authority, the City has adopted a subarea plans to guide land use and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that it is appropriate to include, within the criteria for review of special use applications under Section 26-114, an additional criterion concerning applicable planning documents. NOW THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO: Section 1. Code of Laws amended. Section 26-114.D of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws is amended by the addition of a new criterion (9), to read: D. Criteria for review. The community development director or city council shall base its decision in consideration of the extent to which the applicant demonstrates the following criteria have been met: (1)... (9) THE PROPOSED SPECIAL USE PROMOTES GOALS AND OUTCOMES FROM APPLICABLE PORTIONS OF THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ANY SUBAREA PLAN APPLICABLE TO THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. ATTACHMENT 1 Section 2. 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 3. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect fifteen (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 day of , 2018, 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 , 2018 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 12018. SIGNED by the Mayor on this day of , 2018. Bud Starker, Mayor ATTEST: Janelle Shaver, City Clerk Approved as to Form Gerald E. Dahl, City Attorney First Publication: Second Publication: Wheat Ridge Transcript Effective Date: Published: Wheat Ridge Transcript and www.ci.wheatridge.co.us Cityyo Whe idge PLANNING COMMISSION COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT LEGISLATIVE ITEM STAFF REPORT MEETING DATE: June 7, 2018 TITLE: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 26 OF THE WHEAT RIDGE CODE OF LAWS TO INCLUDE AN ADDITIONAL CRITERION FOR REVIEW OF APPLICATIONS FOR SPECIAL USE PERMITS CASE NO. ZOA-18-02 ® PUBLIC HEARING ® CODE CHANGE ORDINANCE Case Manager: Kenneth Johnstone, Community Development Director and Meredith Reckert, Senior Planner Date of Preparation: June 1, 2018 SUMMARY: At a City Council study session earlier this year, Councilpersons Hoppe and Duran requested consideration of an ordinance amending the City's special use permit regulations. More specifically, the request was to consider adding an additional review criterion to require consideration of an applications consistency with the City's adopted comprehensive planning documents. BACKGROUND: As noted above, City Council recently requested consideration of a potential Chapter 26 Code amendment related to the criteria against which special use permits are reviewed for approval. City Council discussed the draft ordinance at a study session on May 7 and directed staff to move forward with consideration of the ordinance, including consideration by the Planning Commission, as required by Code. Attached is an ordinance that would amend Chapter 26 of the Code of laws to add a 9"' special use permit review criterion, as follows: "The proposed special use promotes goals and outcomes from applicable portions of the city's comprehensive plan and any sub -area plan applicable to the subject property." As Planning Commission is aware, in all zoning districts, there are uses that are permitted, not permitted and those that are allowed after review and approval of a special use permit (SUP). Special uses are considered "discretionary uses, which, if properly designed, developed, operated and maintained may be approved for a specific location..." The code further states: "The primary issues to be addressed are those related to justification of need and special design and operational considerations which mitigate potential detrimental impacts of a special use on surrounding land uses, the street system, or public services or facilities. In order to protect the public interest, a special use may be approved, approved with modifications (conditions) or denied. Previously approved special use permits may be revoked "if at any time the stipulations or conditions (of the previous approval) are not adhered to or are found to have been materially altered in scope, application or design..." Such revocation may only occur after a revocation hearing before City Council. ZOA-18-02/SUP Review Criterion Procedurally, special use permits begin as an administrative permit application eligible for review and approval by the Community Development Director (CDD), upon a finding that the application complies with the criteria for review in Section 26-114.D. In three (3) instances, SUPs are forwarded to City Council to be heard at a public hearing. If the CDD finds that one or more of the criteria for review are not met • If a written objection is received during the public noticing period • If the CDD recommends a condition of approval, to which the applicant objects In taking action on a special use permit, City Council also may approve, approve with conditions or deny said applications. Both the CDD and City Council, when approving a special use must decide whether a special use: • Runs with the land in perpetuity • Is personal to the applicant and may or may not be inherited; and/or • Shall be granted only for a defined period, after which time the special use permit shall expire unless renewed subject to all of the procedural requirements described above Following are the codified criteria for reviewing special use permits: D. Criteria for review. The community development director or city council shall base its decision in consideration of extent to which (underline added) the application demonstrates the following criteria have been met: 1. The special use will not have a detrimental effect upon the general health, welfare, safety and convenience ofpersons residing or working in the neighborhood. 2. The special use will not create or contribute to blight in the neighborhood by virtue ofphysical or operational characteristics. 3. The special use will not create adverse impacts greater than allowed under existing zoning for the property. 4. The special use will not result in undue traffic congestion or traffic hazards, or unsafe parking, loading, service or internal traffic conflicts to the detriment of persons whether on or off the site. S. The property is appropriately designed, including setbacks, heights, parking, bulk, buffering, screening and landscaping, so as to be in harmony and compatible with the character of the surrounding areas and neighborhood, especially with adjacent properties. 6. The special use will not overburden the capacities of the existing streets, utilities, parks, schools and other public facilities and services. 7. There is a history of compliance by the applicant and/or property owner with Code requirements and prior conditions, if any, regarding the subject property. 8. The application is in substantial compliance with the applicable standards set forth in the Architectural and Site Design Manual. It has been the City's practice in applying the above criteria to interpret the above underlined text such that it would be possible to approve (with or without condition) a SUP even if one or more of the above criteria have not been fully met. As noted, these permits are discretionary by design. ZOA- 1 8-02/SUP Review Criterion 11 RECOMMENDATION: The City's Comprehensive Plan and subarea plans are policy documents intended to guide various policy decisions of the City. Principally they inform land use and zoning policies pertaining to development on private property. However, they also include policy recommendation and housing, transportation, economic development, parks and other topical subjects. As it pertains to land use, Chapter 26 specifically requires consideration of the Comprehensive Plan when the City takes actions on rezonings, both privately initiated and City -initiated legislative rezonings. The Comprehensive Plan is also considered in approving subdivision plats. The Comprehensive Plan also informs changes to Chapter 26 of the Code of Laws, such as when the City adopted new mixed-use zoning districts shortly after adoption of the most recent Plan (Envision Wheat Ridge) in October 2009. It is logical to consider incorporating consideration of the Plan in making land use decisions on special use permits as well. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to recommend approval of the proposed ordinance amending Chapter 26 to include an additional criterion for review of applications for special use permits." Exhibits: Draft Ordinance ZOA-18-02/SUP Review Criterion ZOA-18-02/SUP Review Criterion CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER COUNCIL BILL NO. ORDINANCE NO. Series 2018 TITLE: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE WHEAT RIDGE CODE OF LAWS TO INCLUDE AN ADDITIONAL CRITERION FOR REVIEW OF APPLICATIONS FOR SPECIAL USE PERMITS WHEREAS, the City of Wheat Ridge is a home rule municipality having all powers conferred by 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 (the "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 City Council has previously enacted Section 26-114 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws, which provides for the approval of special uses of real property under specific conditions; and WHEREAS, in the further exercise of this authority, the City has adopted a comprehensive master plan and several subarea plans to guide land use and development within the City; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that it is appropriate to include, within the criteria for review of special use applications under Section 26-114, an additional criterion concerning applicable planning documents. NOW THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO: Section 1. Code of Laws amended. Section 26-114.D of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws is amended by the addition of a new criterion (9), to read: D. Criteria for review. The community development director or city council shall base its decision in consideration of the extent to which the applicant demonstrates the following criteria have been met - (1) ... et: (1)... (9) THE PROPOSED SPECIAL USE PROMOTES GOALS AND OUTCOMES FROM APPLICABLE PORTIONS OF THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ANY SUBAREA PLAN APPLICABLE TO THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. Section 2. 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 3. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect fifteen (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 day of , 2018, 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 , 2018 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 2018. SIGNED by the Mayor on this day of Bud Starker, Mayor ATTEST: Janelle Shaver, City Clerk Approved as to Form . 2018. Gerald E. Dahl, City Attorney First Publication: Second Publication: Wheat Ridge Transcript Effective Date: Published: Wheat Ridge Transcript and www.ci.wheatridge.co.us City of Wheat] ggc COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Memorandum TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Kenneth Johnstone, Community Development Director THROUGH: Patrick Goff, City Manager DATE: April 27, 2018 (for May 7 Study Session) SUBJECT: Special Use Permit Criteria ISSUE: At a City Council study session earlier this year, Councilpersons Hoppe and Duran requested consideration of an ordinance amending the City's special use permit regulations. Specifically, the request was to consider adding a criterion for approval relative to applicable comprehensive planning documents. PRIOR ACTIONS: None. FINANCIAL IMPACT: None. BACKGROUND: As noted above, City Council recently requested consideration of a potential Chapter 26 Code amendment related to the criteria against which special use permits are reviewed for approval. Attached is an ordinance that would amend Chapter 26 of the Code of laws to add a ninth special use permit review criterion, as follows: "The proposed special use is in substantial conformance with applicable portions of the City's Comprehensive Plan and any Subarea Plan applicable to the subject property." As City Council is aware, in all zoning districts, there are uses that are permitted, not permitted and those that are allowed after review and approval of a special use permit (SUP). Special uses are considered "discretionary uses, which, if properly designed, developed, operated and maintained may be approved for a specific location..." The code further states: "The primary issues to be addressed are those related to justification of need and special design and operational considerations which mitigate potential detrimental impacts of a special use on surrounding land uses, the street system, or public services or facilities. In order to protect the public interest, a special use may be approved, approved with Memo — Special Use Permit May 7, 2018 Page 2 modifications (conditions) or denied. Previously approved special use permits may be revoked "if at any time the stipulations or conditions (of the previous approval) are not adhered to or are found to have been materially altered in scope, application or design..." Such revocation may only occur after a revocation hearing before City Council. Procedurally, special use permits begin as an administrative permit application eligible for review and approval by the Community Development Director (CDD), upon a finding that the application complies with the criteria for review in Section 26-114.D. In three instances, SUPS are forwarded to City Council to be heard at a public hearing. If the CDD finds that one or more of the criteria for review are not met, If a written objection is received during the public noticing period, If the CDD recommends a condition of approval, to which the applicant objects. In taking action on a special use permit, City Council also may approve, approve with conditions or deny said applications. Both the CDD and City Council, when approving a special use must decide whether a special use: • Runs with the land in perpetuity, • Is personal to the applicant and may or may not be inherited; and/or • Shall be granted only for a defined period, after which time the special use permit shall expire unless renewed subject to all of the procedural requirements described above. Following are the codified criteria for reviewing special use permits: D. Criteria for review. The community development director or city council shall base its decision in consideration of the extent to which (underline added) the application demonstrates the following criteria have been met: 1. The special use will not have a detrimental effect upon the general health, welfare, safety and convenience of persons residing or working in the neighborhood. 2. The special use will not create or contribute to blight in the neighborhood by virtue of physical or operational characteristics. 3. The special use will not create adverse impacts greater than allowed under existing zoning for the property. 4. The special use will not result in undue traffic congestion or traffic hazards, or unsafe parking, loading, service or internal traffic conflicts to the detriment ofpersons whether on or off the site. S. The property is appropriately designed, including setbacks, heights, parking, bulk, buffering, screening and landscaping, so as to be in harmony and compatible with the character of the surrounding areas and neighborhood, especially with adjacent properties. 6 The special use will not overburden the capacities of the existing streets, utilities, parks, Memo — Special Use Permit May 7, 2018 Page 3 schools and other public facilities and services. 7. There is a history of compliance by the applicant and/or property owner with Code requirements and prior conditions, if any, regarding the subject property. 8. The application is in substantial compliance with the applicable standards set forth in the Architectural and Site Design Manual. It has been the City's practice in applying the above criteria to interpret the above underlined text such that it would be possible to approve (with or without condition) a SUP even if one or more of the above criteria have not been fully met. As noted, these permits are discretionary by design. Staff has taken the liberty of drafting language based on previous Council direction that would add a ninth criterion, as follows: "The proposed special use is in substantial conformance with applicable portions of the City's Comprehensive Plan and any subarea plan applicable to the subject property." RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff requests City Council direction on the attached draft ordinance. If Council desires to move forward, a recommendation from the Planning Commission will also be required. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Council Bill 11 - Draft Ordinance CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER COUNCIL BILL NO. 11 ORDINANCE NO. Series 2018 TITLE: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE WHEAT RIDGE CODE OF LAWS TO INCLUDE AN ADDITIONAL CRITERION FOR REVIEW OF APPLICATIONS FOR SPECIAL USE PERMITS WHEREAS, the City of Wheat Ridge is a home rule municipality having all powers conferred by 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 (the "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 City Council has previously enacted Section 26-114 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws, which provides for the approval of special uses of real property under specific conditions; and WHEREAS, in the further exercise of this authority, the City has adopted a comprehensive master plan and several subarea plans to guide land use and development within the City; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that it is appropriate to include, within the criteria for review of special use applications under Section 26-114, an additional criterion concerning applicable planning documents. NOW THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO: Section 1. Code of Laws amended. Section 26-114.D of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws is amended by the addition of a new criterion (9), to read: D. Criteria for review. The community development director or city council shall base its decision in consideration of the extent to which the applicant demonstrates the following criteria have been met: (1)... (9) THE PROPOSED SPECIAL USE IS IN SUBSTANTIAL CONFORMANCE WITH APPLICABLE PORTIONS OF THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ANY SUBAREA PLAN APPLICABLE TO THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. Section 2. 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 3. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect fifteen (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 day of , 2018, 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 , 2018 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 , 2018. SIGNED by the Mayor on this day of , 2018. Bud Starker, Mayor ATTEST: Janelle Shaver, City Clerk Approved as to Form Gerald E. Dahl, City Attorney First Publication: Second Publication: Wheat Ridge Transcript Effective Date: Published: Wheat Ridge Transcript and www.ci.wheatridge.co.us SUP Review Criteria • At a CC study session earlier this year, Council requested consideration of a code amendment adding a criterion to consider consistency with the City's comprehensive planning documents when reviewing Special Use Permits • Based on that direction, staff has drafted an ordinance that would add a 91h such criterion to the list of 8 criteria that are already included in the code • As noted in our Council memo, the language in the code requires that SUPs be evaluated "in consideration of the extent to which the application demonstrates the following criteria have been met... • This language has been interpreted to mean that not necessarily all of the criteria need to be met when granting approval of an SUP, whether that be an administrative approval or a City Council approval • In some cases, if there were to be a question whether one or more of the criteria might not be met, it also might lead to a condition of approval that brings the SUP application into greater compliance with said criteria • If Council wishes to move forward with consideration of an ordinance, the next step in the process would be to schedule the matter for a Planning Commission public hearing and they would forward their recommendation for CC consideration City of �Wheat �idge MUNITY DEVELOPMENT Memorandum TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Kenneth Johnstone, Community Development Director THROUGH: Patrick Goff, City Manager DATE: April 27, 2018 (for May 7 Study Session) SUBJECT: Special Use Permit Criteria ISSUE: At a City Council study session earlier this year, Councilpersons Hoppe and Dozeman requested consideration of an ordinance amending the City's special use permit regulations. Specifically, the request was to consider adding a criterion for approval relative to applicable comprehensive planning documents. PRIOR ACTIONS: None. FINANCIAL IMPACT: None. BACKGROUND: As noted above, City Council recently requested consideration of a potential Chapter 26 Code amendment related to the criteria against which special use permits are reviewed for approval. Attached is an ordinance that would amend Chapter 26 of the Code of laws to add a 9`h special use permit review criterion, as follows: "The proposed special use is in substantial conformance with applicable portions of the City's Comprehensive Plan and any Subarea Plan applicable to the subject property." As City Council is aware, in all zoning districts, there are uses that are permitted, not permitted and those that are allowed after review and approval of a special use permit (SUP). Special uses are considered "discretionary uses, which, if properly designed, developed, operated and maintained may be approved for a specific location..." The code further states: "The primary issues to be addressed are those related to justification of need and special design and operational considerations which mitigate potential detrimental impacts of a special use on surrounding land uses, the street system, or public services or facilities. In order to protect the public interest, a special use may be approved, approved with modifications (conditions) or denied. Previously approved special use permits may be revoked "if at any time the stipulations or conditions (of the previous approval) are not adhered to or are found to have been materially altered in scope, application or design..." Such revocation may only occur after a revocation hearing before City Council. Procedurally, special use permits begin as an administrative permit application eligible for review and approval by the Community Development Director (CDD), upon a finding that the application complies with the criteria for review in Section 26-114.D. In three (3) instances, SUPs are forwarded to City Council to be heard at a public hearing. • If the CDD finds that one or more of the criteria for review are not met • If a written objection is received during the public noticing period • If the CDD recommends a condition of approval, to which the applicant objects // WwG-\/ In taking action on a special use permit, City Council also Xpprove, approve with conditions or deny said applications. Both the CDD and City Council, when approving a special use must decide whether a special use: • Runs with the land in perpetuity • Is personal to the applicant and may or may not be inherited; and/or • Shall be granted only for a defined period, after which time the special use permit shall expire unless renewed subject to all of the procedural requirements described above Following are the codified criteria for reviewing special use permits: D. Criteria for review. The community development director or city council shall base its decision in consideration of the extent to which (underline added) the application demonstrates the following criteria have been met: 1. The special use will not have a detrimental effect upon the general health, welfare, safety and convenience of persons residing or working in the neighborhood. 2. The special use will not create or contribute to blight in the neighborhood by virtue of physical or operational characteristics. 3. The special use will not create adverse impacts greater than allowed under existing zoning for the property. 4. The special use will not result in undue traffic congestion or traffic hazards, or unsafe parking, loading, service or internal traffic conflicts to the detriment of persons whether on or off the site. 5. The property is appropriately designed, including setbacks, heights, parking, bulk, buffering, screening and landscaping, so as to be in harmony and compatible with the character of the surrounding areas and neighborhood, especially with adjacent properties. 6. The special use will not overburden the capacities of the existing streets, utilities, parks, schools and other public facilities and services. 7. There is a history of compliance by the applicant and/or property owner with Code requirements and prior conditions, if any, regarding the subject property. 8. The application is in substantial compliance with the applicable standards set forth in the Architectural and Site Design Manual. It has been the City's practice in applying the above criteria to interpret the above underlined text such that it would be possible to approve (with or without condition) a SUP even if one or more of the above criteria have not been fully met. As noted, these permits are discretionary by design. Staff has taken the liberty of drafting language based on previous Council direction that would add a 91h criterion, as follows: "The proposed special use is in substantial conformance with applicable portions of the City's Comprehensive Plan and any subarea plan applicable to the subject property." RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff requests City Council direction on the attached draft ordinance. If Council desires to move forward, a recommendation from the Planning Commission will also be required. ATTACHMENTS: Draft Ordinance Kenneth Johnstone From: Kenneth Johnstone Sent: Tuesday, May 8, 2018 11:14 AM To: Kenneth Johnstone Subject: City Council - May 7, 2018 City Council - May 7, 2018 All present Michael Pate, EGD/Camping World - described technology Charley Meyers - e -bikes, supports change in policy, bike JEFFCO, Mike Rabor, Evergreen, e -bike technology description Al Gallo, District I, e -bike rider on CC trail Joyce, e -bikes, Scott, Harlan Streetscape maintenance, - Pond, need to figure out long term maintenance, identify resources - Mathews, joint maintenance with Lakeside - Fitzgerald, historic maintenance understanding - Duran, cooperative solution - Urban, - Davis, happy medium, - Dozeman, burden should not fall too heavily on homeowners/property owners SUPS - Fitzgerald, duration of approvals - Hoppe, recent approvals in Fruitdale subarea plan, automotive uses recently - Duran, orchard district, - Urban, opposed - Mathews, what exactly is an orchard district?, - Pond, loosen up the language of substantial compliance language - "generally consistent with applicable sections of adopted subarea plans and the city's comprehensive plan" - Dozeman, comp plan is a guiding document, not a regulatory document, 44th is a very commercial road and land uses are consistent with that - Hoppe, discretionary uses I - Duran, - Fitzgerald, unhappy camper, duration of SUP is a concern for him, - Pond, don't be afraid to place time limits - Mathews, - Hoppe, consensus to direct staff, new language Electric Fences - Pond, doesn't like the legislative solution, Dahl response, possibly SUP for these fences - Mathews, clarifying comments on design details of fence - Urban, wants to support business, find a way to move it forward, SUP possibly - Hoppe, any other options? - Dahl, - Davis, find a solution, curious whether other cities allow these as "electric alarms", - Mathews, we allow barbed wire fences, which are more dangerous - Dozeman, crime a real issue in the area, school willing to compromise, supports SUP - Mathews, how quickly - June 11 1st, June 21st PC, June 25 PH - Fitzgerald, EGD not compromising, - Dozeman consensus for SUP Freestanding ERs - Duran, cost for out of network care. - Davis, need is questionable, restrict if not completely disallow, - Mathews, two pronged approach, would support total prohibition - Hoppe, limited amount of land left to "use" - need to use it correctly, possibly don't allow at all, - Dozeman, why not expressly define them as prohibited - Pond, look at options, up to an including prohibition, - Urban, regulate and license, statement of need, operating requirements, emergency medical treatment and labor act - Fitzgerald, - Duran, look at Arvada's reg's - Option 2 consensus to move forward Sent from my Wad z