Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/09/2007 6:30 p.m. Pre-Meeting ~~!~~~ CITY COUNCIL MEETING CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO 7500 WEST 29TH AVENUE, MUNICIPAL BUILDING Julv 9. 2007 7:00 p.m. CALL TO ORDER PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL OF MEMBERS APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF June 25. 2007 PROCLAMATIONS AND CEREMONIES Presentation of Colorado Association of Chiefs of Police Association (CACP) Awards Chief Chris Olson, PresidentCACP Board of Directors CITIZENS' RIGHT TO SPEAK 1. Citizens, who wish, may speak on any matter not on the Agenda for a maximum of 3 Minutes and sign the Public Comment Roster. 2. Citizens who wish to speak on Agenda Items. please sign the GENERAL AGENDA ROSTER or appropriate PUBLIC HEARING ROSTER before the item is called to be heard. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Item. 1. CONSENT AGENDA A. RESOLUTION 26-2007 - A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2007 PUBLIC WORKS OPERATIONS BUDGET TO REFLECT THE APPROVAL OF A SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET APPROPRIATION OF $180,000 TO FUND OPERATING SUPPLIES AND VEHICLE FUEL B. RESOLUTION 27-2007 - A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE ADOPTION OF THE AMENDMENT TO THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE MONEY PURCHASE PENSION PLAN FOR DESIGNATED POLICE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEES FOR THE PURPOSE OF CLARIFYING THE PARTICIPATION AND VESTING OF POLICE CHIEFS C. ACCEPTANCE OF 50TH AVENUE AND KIPLING STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY CITY COUNCIL AGENDA: July 9, 2007 Page -2- PUBLIC HEARINGS AND ORDINANCES ON SECOND READING Item 2. COUNCIL BILL 13-2007 -AN ORDINANCE DESIGNATING A STRUCTURE LOCATED ON THE PROPERTY AT 9201 W.44TH AVENUE AS A HISTORICAL LANDMARK (Case No. WHL 07-01) Item 3. COUNCIL BILL 16-2007 - AN ORDINANCE ADDING CODE OF LAWS SECTION 16-49; CONCERNING GRAFFITI Item 4. A REQUEST FOR AN AMENDMENT TO A FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 8300 WEST 38TH AVENUE (CASE NO. WA-07-02/EXEMPLA) Item 5. REQUESTS FOR APPROVAL OF LOT SIZE AND LOT WIDTH VARIANCES AND A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW EXPANSION OF A CATTERY WITH A WAIVER TO THE REQUIREMENT FOR RIGHT- OF-WAY DEDICATION AND PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS ESCROW ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 12410 W. 44TH AVENUE/4300 WRIGHT STREET (CASE NOS. WA-07-05 & SUP-07-03/CHRISTENSEN) DECISIONS. RESOLUTIONS. AND MOTIONS Item 6. RESOLUTION 15-2007 - A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE FISCAL Year 2007 GENERAL FUND BUDGET TO REFLECT THE APPROVAL OF A SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET APPROPRIATION FOR ADDITIONAL STUDY TO BE COMPLETED FOR THE WADSWORTH CORRIDOR SUBAREA PLAN IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $39,950.00 CITY MANAGER'S MATTERS CITY ATTORNEY'S MATTERS ELECTED OFFICIALS' MATTERS ADJOURNMENT mY.... '-.L.......... IDIJB.... ..... ;: .:: : , r ,/ i ': _::' ,i:/ ,;:::' . ::; ",: ,:'j i ! . '; """,' ":.' , ;,.",'-',,. .. CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO June 25. 2007 Mayor DiTullio called the Regular City Council Meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Councilmembers present: Karen Adams, Karen Berry, Dean Gokey, Lena Rotola, Wanda Sang, Larry Schulz, Mike Stites, and Terry Womble. Also present: City Clerk, Michael Snow; City Manager, Randy Young; Deputy City Manager, Patrick Goff; Executive Assistant to the Manager, Heather Geyer; Police Chief, Dan Brannon; City Attorney, Gerald Dahl; Director of Community Development, Alan White; Director of Public Works, Tim Paranto; staff; and interested citizens. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF June 11. 2007 Motion by Council Member Gokey for approval of the Minutes of June 11, 2007; seconded by Council Member Schulz; carried 8-0. PROCLAMATIONS AND CEREMONIES Mayor DiTullio recognized citizen and former Council Member Don Eafanti who recently received an award in Washington D.C. for his outstanding volunteer dedication and contributions to his community. Mayor DiTullio presented certificates for: Wheat Ridge 2020 Planning Academy Graduation Rob Osborn, WR2020 Director presented Planning Academy Graduates with certificates and accolades. D.I.R.T. Task Force Recognition Council Member Stites assisted Mayor DiTullio in presenting Task Force Members certificates for their participation and hard work on the committee. Mayor DiTullio called for a break and reception in the lobby at 7:12pm to resume at 7:27pm. CITIZENS' RIGHT TO SPEAK Ron Selstad, Golden, addressed a serious shortcoming that occurred as a result of a welfare check and hopes that Council will re-evaluate the criteria for welfare checks in the future. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: June 25, 2007 Page -2- Jill McGranahan thanked Tim Paranto and Public Works Department for the attention to fixing the manhole and drainage problem on her street. She also thanked Karen Berry and Mayor DiTullio for speaking on her behalf to get this taken care of and the Mayor for allowing her to participate on the D.I.R.T. task force. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Motion by Mr. Stites to pull Item D from the Consent Agenda and postpone it indefinitely; second by Mr. Rotola; carried 8-0. Item 1. CONSENT AGENDA Council Member Stites introduced the Consent Agenda and read the summary of items. A. RESOLUTION 19-2007 - A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE 2007 BUDGET TO REFLECT THE APPROVAL OF A SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET APPROPRIATION IN THE AMOUNT OF $229,595 FOR MARKET ADJUSTMENTS TO EMPLOYEE COMPENSATION PLANS. B. RESOLUTION 20-2007 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO APPROVING AN INTERGOVERNMENTAL/JOINT USE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE AND THE R-1 SCHOOL DISTRICT FOR THE USE OF THE WHEAT RIDGE HIGH SCHOOL SPORTS FIELDS. C. RESOLUTION 21-2007 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO AUTHORIZING SUBMITTAL OF THE APPLICATION FOR A JOINT VENTURE GRANT AND APPROVING A SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATION FOR THE 2007 OPEN SPACE BUDGET TO REFLECT FUNDS RECEIVED FROM JEFFERSON COUNTY OPEN SPACE FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONSTRUCTING SYNTHETIC TURF FIELDS AT WHEAT RIDGE HIGH SCHOOL IN THE AMOUNT OF $300,000. D. RESOLUTION 23-2007 - A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2007 GENERAL FUND BUDGET TO REFLECT THE APPROVAL OF A SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET APPROPRIATION IN THE NOT TO EXCEED AMOUNT OF $19,500.00 FOR KEN FELLMAN OF KISSINGER & FELLMAN TO SERVE AS THE CITY'S LEGAL COUNSEL FOR QWEST FRANCHISE NEGOTIATIONS. E. RESOLUTION 24-2007 - A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2007 GENERAL FUND BUDGET TO REFLECT THE APPROVAL OF A SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET APPROPRIATION IN THE AMOUNT OF $3,675 FOR TELEVISING PLANNING COMMISSION MEETINGS ON WHEAT RIDGE CHANNEL 8 GOVERNMENT ACCESS CHANNEL. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: June 25, 2007 Page -3- F. RESOLUTION 25-2007 - A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2007 GENERAL FUND BUDGET TO REFLECT THE APPROVAL OF A SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET APPROPRIATION IN THE AMOUNT OF $7,500.00 FOR CONTRIBUTION TO THE 2007 WHEAT RIDGE CARNATION FESTIVAL. Consent Agenda was introduced and read by Council Member Stites. Mr. Stites asked to pull Item A. Motion by Stites for approval of Consent Agenda Items B, C, E, and F; seconded by Mrs. Sang; carried 8-0. John Nichols, Lakewood, spoke in favor of passing Item A. He is a City worker and it will help him and other employees. Motion by Council Member Stites to approve Consent Agenda Item 1. A; seconded by Mrs. Sang; carried 7-1 with Mr. Gokey voting No. Mr. Gokey doesn't see how we can keep pace with the bigger cities around us. He understands this has to be done for the Police Department, but doesn't know how many employees we can afford. PUBLIC HEARINGS AND ORDINANCES ON SECOND READING Item 2. COUNCIL BILL 10-2007 - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 26- 711 OF THE WHEAT RIDGE CODE OF LAWS PERTAINING TO THE REGULATION OF BILLBOARDS. Mayor DiTullio opened the public hearing. Council Bill 10-2007 was introduced on second reading by Council Member Sang. City Clerk Michael Snow read the Executive Summary and assigned Ordinance No. 1390. Alan White presented the staff report. Citizens Jack Walker, Ted Redling and Jan Anderson spoke in favor of this ordinance. Their comments included, but were not limited to: the ordinance offers the owner the opportunity to have others bid on the rights to their billboard, etc. Citizens Dick Holme, Brett Kelley and Steve Richards spoke in opposition to the ordinance, citing that it hinders property values, city revenues and healthy competition; it is the first of its kind in the State of Colorado and introduces a dangerous precedent that serves an administrative solution while unnecessarily impacts the values of property owners; and that the current code does allow for healthy competition. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: June 25, 2007 Page -4- Council Member Schulz read aloud a letter submitted to Council by Richard Walker, a Wheat Ridge Citizen who wishes to build a billboard on his property in the future. Mr. Walker urged Council to oppose this Ordinance. Dan Schere, business owner, was on hand to answer questions from Council regarding the relative and actual values of billboards. Mayor DiTullio closed the public hearing. Motion by Council Member Sang to approve Council Bill 1 0-2007 (Ordinance 1390) on second reading and that it take effect 15 days after final publication; seconded by Mr. Womble. Motion by Council Member Gokey to postpone this item to a first available study session; seconded by Mrs. Adams; carried 6-2 with Mr. Stites and Mrs. Rotola voting No. Item 3. COUNCIL BILL 11-2007: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 11 OF THE WHEAT RIDGE CODE OF LAWS, ENTITLED LICENSES, PERMITS AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS REGULATIONS, SPECIFICALLY CODE SECTION 11-231 CONCERNING THE LICENSING OF MASSAGE THERAPISTS TO PROVIDE FOR THE PROVISIONAL LICENSING OF MASSAGE THERAPISTS. Mayor DiTullio opened the public hearing. Council Bill 11-2007 was introduced on second reading by Mrs. Adams; title read by City Clerk Michael Snow, who also assigned Ordinance No. 1390. Mayor DiTullio closed the public hearing. Motion by Mrs. Adams to approve Council Bill 11-2007 (Ordinance 1390) on second reading and that it take effect upon adoption; seconded by Mr. Womble and Mrs. Sang; carried 8-0. Item 4. COUNCIL BILL 12-2007: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING REAPPOINTING PRESIDING MUNICIPAL JUDGE CHRISTOPHER RANDALL AND INCREASING HIS BENEFITS AND HOURLY COMPENSATION. Mayor DiTullio opened the public hearing. Council Bill 12-2007 was introduced on second reading by Council Member Rotola who read the Executive Summary. City Clerk Michael Snow assigned Ordinance No. 1391. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: June 25, 2007 Page -5- Mayor DiTullio closed the public hearing. Motion by Council Member Rotola to approve Council Bill 12-2007 (Ordinance 1391) on second reading and that it take effect upon adoption; seconded by Council Member Gokey; carried 8-0. Item 5. COUNCIL BILL 14-2007 - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 16, ARTICLE III, SECTIONS 41 THROUGH 43 OF THE CITY CODE CONCERNING MISCELLANEOUS OFFENSES. Mayor DiTullio opened the public hearing. Council Bill 14-2007 was introduced on second reading by Council Member Sang who read the Executive Summary. City Clerk Michael Snow assigned Ordinance No. 1392. Chief Brennan presented the staff report. Mayor DiTullio closed the public hearing. Motion by Council Member Sang to approve Council Bill 14-2007 (Ordinance 1392) on second reading and that it take effect July 1, 2007; seconded by Council Member Gokey; carried 8-0. Item 6. COUNCIL BILL 15-2007 - AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING A COMPETITIVE CABLE FRANCHISE APPLICATION, REVIEW AND EVALUATION PROCESS IN CONNECTION WITH ANY FRANCHISE APPLICATION SUBMITTED PURSUANT TO 976.41 OF THE CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS. Mayor DiTullio opened the public hearing. Council Bill 15-2007 was introduced on second reading by Council Member Stites who read the Executive Summary. City Clerk Michael Snow assigned Ordinance No. 1393. Heather Geyer presented the staff report. Mayor DiTullio closed the public hearing. Motion by Council Member Stites to approve Council Bill 15-2007 (Ordinance 1393) on second reading and that it take effect upon adoption; seconded by Council Members Rotola and Womble. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: June 25, 2007 Page -6- Motion by Council Member Stites to amend Council Bill 15-2007 as follows: Amend Section 23-9 by deleting the first sentence and replacing the same with the following: "The City Council hereby sets the application fee to cover the reasonable cost of processing applications under this Article at $2000 per application, payable at time of application. The Council may amend this fee amount in future by resolution. " seconded by Council Members Rotola and Schulz; carried 8-0. Original Motion, as amended, carried 8-0. Item 7. RESOLUTION 22-2007 - A RESOLUTION ADOPTING AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN (CASE NO. WPA-07-01) Mayor DiTullio opened the public hearing. Resolution 22-2007 was introduced by Council Member Berry, who read the Executive Summary. Alan White presented the staff report. Mayor DiTullio closed the public hearing. Motion by Council Member Berry to adopt Resolution 22-2007; seconded by Council Member Womble; carried 8-0. Item 8. Public Input on 2008 Budget. Mayor DiTullio opened the public hearing. John Miks, Pat Roush, Rosemary Miks, and Claire Haas Claveau, urged Council to support funding in the 2008 budget for the development of a park on the City's park land known as the Einarson Property at 38th & Kipling. Jeff McCrory, Dempsey Andrews and Mike Stebritz spoke to Council about the serious flooding issues that affect their homes on Chase Street between 26th & 29th Avenues and urged Council to give the improvement of this area a higher priority in the 2008 budget. Mayor DiTullio closed the public hearing. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: June 25, 2007 Page -7- ORDINANCES ON FIRST READING Item 9. COUNCIL BILL 16-2007 - AN ORDINANCE ADDING CODE OF LAWS SECTION 16-49 CONCERNING GRAFFITI. Council Bill 16-2007 was introduced on first reading by Council Member Stites. Motion by Stites to approve Council Bill 16-2007 on first reading, order it published, public hearing set for Monday, July 9, 2007 at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, and that it take effect 15 days after final publication; seconded by Council Member Rotola; carried 8-0. ELECTED OFFICIALS' MATTERS City Clerk Michael Snow let citizens know that the City Clerk's Office will hold a Candidates workshop on July 12, 2007, 6:30pm. in Council Chambers. Everybody is invited to attend. We will talk about what is required to run for public office. Mr. Womble thanked the group that is working on the Wheat Ridge Carnation Festival for all their hard work that they have already done and will do. He also thanked D.I.R.T. committee members for all of their hard work. Mr. Gokey thanked citizens for their input on the budget process. Mr. Schulz thanked citizens for their input on the Budget process, and emphasized his support for creating a park at the Einarson property. Mr. Stites thanked the people speaking about the Einarson property. He announced that Clear Creek Trail has been recognized as one of the 40 trails across the Nation officially designated as a National Recreation Trail and that is quite an honor for Wheat Ridge. He encouraged people to visit the trail. He asked that people trim their weeds. As always, he added, find it and buy it in Wheat Ridge. Mrs. Rotola reminded citizens not to post garage sale signs on public property, along 44th Avenue particularly. If you do post it, take it down. Mrs. Rotola and Mrs. Berry extended their condolences to Pam Anderson and her family for the loss of her nephew in a go-cart accident. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: June 25, 2007 Page -8- Mrs. Berry thanked everyone on the Planning Academy and D.I.R.T. Task Force and encouraged them to serve on Boards and Commissions or to run for office. Mayor DiTullio thanked D.I.R.T. task force members for their devoted service. Meeting adjourned at 9:14p.m. /4/.0-..- Michael Snow, City Clerk APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL ON JULY 9, 2007 BY A VOTE OF _ to _ Mike Stites, Mayor pro tem The preceding Minutes were prepared according to 947 of Robert's Rules of Order, I.e. they contain a record of what was done at the meeting, not what was said by the members. Recordings and DVD's of the meetings are available for listening or viewing in the City Clerk's Office, as well as copies of Ordinances and Resolutions. ITEM NO: /. A. REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION ft'~ U~ I [j COUNCIL MEETING DATE: July 9, 2007 TITLE: RESOLUTION 26-2007 - A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2007 PUBLIC WORKS OPERATIONS BUDGET TO REFLECT THE APPROVAL OF A SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET APPROPRIATION OF $180,000 TO FUND OPERATING SUPPLIES AND VEHICLE FUEL o PUBLIC HEARING o BIDSIMOTIONS 1ZI RESOLUTIONS o ORDINANCeS FOR 1ST READING (Date: o ORDINANCES FOR 2ND READING ) Quasi-Judicial: o Yes 1ZI No -z:: ~ ~f Tim Paranto, Director of Public Works EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: As discussed at the July 31, 2006 City Council Study Session, the Public Warks D"l'cuL.uent proposed a 2007 budget that would fund the average cost of maintenance activities, such as snow removal. The 2007 Budget included $95,000 for snow and ice control chemicals. The City has expended over $155,000 for salt and liquid deicers so far this year. Anticipating an average winter for October through December of 2007, a supplemental budget appropriation of $108,000 is required for snow fighting chemicals for the remainder of 2007. The 2007 Oil and Gas budget of$190,000 anticipated an average fuel cost of$2.20 per gallon. With gasoline and diesel fuel costs approaching $3.00 per gallon, Staff requests an additional $72,000 to insure funding of fleet fuel for the remainder of the year. Staff recommends the approval of the attached resolution authorizing a supplemental budget al'l'Lvl'L;ation of $180,000 from General Fund Reserves to continue Public Works maintenance activities and operation of the City's fleet for 2007. COMMISSIONIBOARD RECOMMENDATION: N/A STATEMEN~ QF THE ISSUES: Snow and ice control activities are budgeted for an average year's needs, recognizing that there will be years in which additional funding is required. The winter of 2006-2007 was severe and the 2007 budget has been impacted, requiring a supplemental al'l'wl',;ation. Assuming an average 2007-2008 winter, the current funding need for operating supplies, which includes deicers, is $108,000. The existing Operating Supplies Account balance is approximately $20,000 and is projected to be exhausted in September. The City's fleet requires approximately 65-70,000 gallons of fuel each year. The recent fuel price increases were not anticipated when preparing the 2007 Budget. The current Oil and Gas Account balance is $95,000. Assuming gasoline costs of$3.00 per gallon and diesel fuel costs of $2.60 per gallon, an additional $72,000 will be required for the remainder of2007. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED: N/A FINANCIAL IMPACT: A $180,000 allocation of General Fund Reserves is requested. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "1 move to approve Resolution 26-2007 - A Resolution Amending the Fiscal Year 2007 Public Works Operations Budget to Reflect the Approval ofa Supplemental BudgetApywl,,:ation of$180,000 to Fund Street Maintenance Activities and, Operate the City's Vehicle and Equipment Fleet. 1 further move to amend the Public Works Operations Budget Account No. 01-303-660 from $216,500 to $324,000. . 1 further move to amend the Public Works Operations Budget Account No. 01-303-661 from $190,000 to $262,000." or, "1 move to deny approval of Resolution 26-2007 - A Resolution Amending the Fiscal Year 2007 Public Works Operations Budget to Reflect the Approval of a Supplemental Budget AYl'wy,:ation of $180,000 to Fund Street Maintenance Activities and Operate the City's Vehicle and Equipment Fleet for the following reason(s) " Report Prepared by: Tim Paranto, Director of Public Works Reviewed by: Patrick Goff, Deputy City Manager Attachments: 1. Resolution 26-2007 CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO RESOLUTION NO. 26 Series of 2007 TITLE: A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2007 PUBLIC WORKS OPERATIONS BUDGET TO FUND OPERATING SUPPLIES AND VEHICLE FUEL, AND IN CONNECTION THEREWITH, APPROVAL OF A SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET APPROPRIATION IN THE AMOUNT OF $180,000 WHEREAS, the recent winter street maintenance expenditures have depleted the 2007 Public Works Operations Budget; and WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to provide for the continued maintenance of the City's streets and drainageways; and WHEREAS, the recent increases in motor fuel costs have depleted the 2007 Public Works Operations Budget; and WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to provide for the continued operation of the City's fleet, and; WHEREAS, the existing deficiencies in the Public Works Operations Budget are $180,000. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Wheat Ridge City Council, that: Section 1.Budaet Amended. The following amendments to the 2007 Public Works Operations budget are hereby approved: (a) Increase account 01-303-660 by $108,000. (b) Increase account 01-303-661 by $72,000. Effective Date This Resolution shall be effective immediately upon adoption. DONE AND RESOLVED this day of July, 2007. Jerry DiTullio, Mayor ATTEST: Michael Snow, City Clerk ATTACHMENT 1 3 ~ ", k 0 - ~ o ~ C'OtOR"'ug ITEM NO: /.13. REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION COUNCIL MEETING DATE: July 9, 2007 TITLE: RESOLUTION 27-2007 - A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE ADOPTION OF In.!!. AMENDMENT TO THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE MONEY PURCHASE PENSION PLAN FOR DESIGNATED POLICE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEES FOR THE PURPOSE OF CLARIFYING Ttl.!!. PARTICIPATION AND VESTING OF POLICE LUI.!!.FS o PUBLIC HEARING o BIDSIMOTIONS ~ RESOLUTIONS o ORDINANCES FOR 1ST READING (Date: o ORDINANCES FOR 2ND READING ) Quasi-Judicial: o Yes ~ No f1~jJ~,,~;:; foseph E. Cassa, Pension Board President City~(jL)I'd- EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The sworn personnel of the police department participate in The City of Wheat Ridge Money Purchase Pension Plan for Designated Police Department Employees (the "Plan"). The Plan was originally established effective as of October 1, 1981, and was most recently amended and restated on January 8, 2007 effective January 1, 2007. The Plan is a money purchase pension plan intended to be a qualified governmental plan under the Internal Revenue Service Code of 1986. The Plan is governed by a seven member Pension Board, as required by the Wheat Ridge City Code of Laws. In the course of restating the plan, the Police Pension Board and counsel for the Plan conducted a survey that determined the current Plan document is potentially unclear regarding the participation rights of police chiefs, and additionally determined that a different vesting schedule is appropriate for the police chiefs from that applicable to other participants in the Plan. The vesting schedule will be: (a) for the police chief employed on the effective date of this amendment, 100% immediate vesting; and (b) for police chiefs employed after the effective date of this amendment, 50% after one year of service and 100% after two years of service. COMMISSIONIBOARD RECOMMENDATION: The Wheat Ridge Police Department Pension Board recommends approval of the proposed Resolution. STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES: As a result of the Pension Board's review, the following issues exist: . The Wheat Ridge City Code, 19-51 (a) defmes members of the plan to be full-time, paid, sworn police officers of the police department of the City. . The current Police Chief and former Chiefs have not been allowed the opportunity to elect which pension plan they wish to participate in. Confusion exists as to why such an election was provided in light of the above referenced City Code. . In order to comply with the City Code, the Plan should be clear with regard to the participation rights of police chiefs. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED,;, There are two alternatives available to the City Council. The first alternative is not to approve the amendment to the Plan. The result of not approving the amendment includes: . The current Plan document is potentially unclear with regard to the participation rights of police chiefs, which could lead to confusion or even future litigation. . Under the current Plan, the police chief would be required to meet the seven year vesting schedule. At the request of the police pension board, the city's Human Resources Department conducted a study of pension benefits offered to police chiefs of other cities. The cities used for this study were those which the city uses to compare employee salaries and benefit packages. None ofthe cities studied require a vesting schedule of this length. The second alternative is to approve the amendment. Upon approval, the amendment will: . Clarify that the police chief historically had the option of waiving participation in the Plan, but as of the effective date of the amendment and in the future, the police chief will be required to participate in the Plan. . The proposed accelerated vesting schedule is comparable to the vesting schedules currently provided by the cities studied. The accelerated vesting schedule is neither the shortest or longest vesting schedule of the cities studied, and will provide a competitive benefit package with regards to pension benefits. FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no known financial impact on the City at this time. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "1 move to approve Resolution 27-2007 - A Resolution Approving the Adoption of the Amendmentto the City of Wheat Ridge Money Purchase Pension Plan for Designated Police Department Employees for the Purpose of Clarifying the Participation and Vesting of Police Chiefs." or, "I move to table indefinitely Resolution 27-2007 - A Resolution Approving the Adoption of the Amendment to the City of Wheat Ridge Money Purchase Pension Plan for Designated Police Department Employees for the Purpose of Clarifying the Participation and Vesting of Police Chiefs, for the followingreason(s): .." Report Prepared by: Reviewed by: Joseph E. Cassa, Pension Board President Daniel G. Brennan, Chief of Police Attachments: 1. Adoption Agreement (as amended July 9, 2007) 2. Resolution 27-2007 ICMA RETIREMENT CORPORATION GOVERNMENTAL MONEY PURCHASE PLAN & TRUST ADOPTION AGREEMENT (as amended on July 9, 2007) PLAN NUMBER 10- 002 The Employer hereby establishes a Money Purchase Plan and Trust to be known as The City of Wheat Ridae Monev Purchase Pension Plan for Desianated Police Deoartment Emolovees (the "Plan") in the form of the ICMA RC Governmental Money Purchase Plan and Trust. This Plan is an amendment and restatement of an existing defined contribution money purchase plan. ..1L. Yes No If yes, please specify the name of the defined contribution money purchase plan which this Plan hereby amends and restates: The City of Wheat Ridae Monev Purchase Pension Plan for Desicnated Police Deoartment Emolovees I. Employer: The City of Wheat Ridae II. The Effective Date of the Plan shall be the first day of the Plan Year during which the Employer adopts the Plan, unless an alternate Effective Date is hereby specified: Januarv 1. 1997 III. Plan Year will mean: (x) The twelve (12) consecutive month period which coincides with the limitation year. (See Section 5.03(g) of the Plan.) () The twelve (12) consecutive month period commencing on and each anniversary thereof. IV. Normal Retirement Age shall be age ~ (not to exceed age 65). ATTACHMENT 1 V. ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS: 1. The following group or groups of Employees are eligible to participate in the Plan: All Employees All Full-Time Employees Salaried Employees Non-union Employees Management Employees Public Safety Employees General Employees x Other (specify below) Anv oerson who is a full-time oaid sworn oolice officer emoloved bv the oolice deoartment of the Emolover. as determined bv the Emolover under the Emolover's standard oersonnel oolicies and oractices as mav from time to time be in effect. Notwithstandino the foreooino, exceot for oersons emoloved as oolice chief on and after Julv 9. 2007. anv oerson who is emoloved as oolice chief of the oolice deoartment of the Emolover shall have the ootion of waivino or otherwise ootino out of oarticioation in the Plan in lieu of oarticioation in the seoarate clan maintained bv the Emolover for its deoartment heads. The group specified must correspond to a group of the same designation that is defined in the statutes, ordinances, rules, regulations, personnel manuals or other material in effect in the state or locality of the Employer. 2. The Employer hereby waives or reduces the requirement of a twelve (12) month Period of Service for participation. The required Period of Service shall be N/A (write N/A if an Employee is eligible to participate upon employment). If this waiver or reduction is elected, it shall apply to all Employees within the Covered Employment Classification. 3. A minimum age requirement is hereby specified for eligibility to participate. The minimum age requirement is N/A (not to exceed age 21. Write N/A if no minimum age is declared.) VI. CONTRIBUTION PROVISIONS 1. The Employer shall contribute as follows (choose one): (x) Fixed Employer Contributions With Or Without Mandatory Participant Contributions. The Employer shall contribute on behalf of each Participant 10 % of Earnings or $-=--. for the Plan Year (subject to the limitations of Article V of the Plan). A Participant is required 2 . to contribute (subject to the limitations of Article V of the Plan) (i) 10 % of Earnings, (ii) $ , or (iii) a whole percentage of Earnings, as designated by the Employee in accordance with guidelines and procedures established by the Employer for the Plan Year as a condition of participation in the Plan. (Write "0" if no contribution is required.) If Participant Contributions are required under this option, a Participant shall not have the right to discontinue or vary the rate of such contributions after becoming a Plan Participant. Effective for Plan Years beginning on or after January 1, 2006, the Employer hereby elects to "pick up" the Mandatory/Required Participant Contribution. --1L Yes No [Note to Employer: Neither an IRS advisory letter nor a determination letter issued to an adopting Employer is a ruling by the Internal Revenue Service that Participant contributions that are picked up by the Employer are not includable in the Participant's gross income for federal income tax purposes. The Employer may seek such a ruling. () Picked up contributions are excludable from the Participant's gross income under section 414(h)(2) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 only if they meet the requirements of Rev. Ruls. 81-35 and 81-36, 1981-1 C.B. 255, and 87-10, 1987-1 C.B. 136. Those requirements are (1) that the Employer must specify that the contributions, although designated as employee contributions, are being paid by the Employer in lieu of contributions by the employee; (2) the employee must not have the option of receiving the contributed amounts directly instead of having them paid by the Employer to the plan; and (3) the required specification of designated employee contributions must be completed before the period to which such contributions relate.] Fixed Employer Match of Participant Contributions. The Employer shall contribute on behalf of each Participant _% of Earnings for the Plan Year (subject to the limitations 3 of Article V of the Plan) for each Plan Year that such Participant has contributed _% of Earnings or $_. Under this option, there is a single, fixed rate of Employer contributions, but a Participant may decline to make the required Participant contributions in any Plan Year, in which case no Employer contribution will be made on the Participant's behalf in that Plan Year. ( ) Variable Employer Match Of Participant Contributions. The Employer shall contribute on behalf of each Participant an amount determined as follows (subject to the limitations of Article V of the Plan): % of the contributions made by the Participant for the Plan Year (not including Participant contributions exceeding _% of Earnings or $ ); PLUS % of the contributions made by the Participant for the Plan Year in excess of those included in the above paragraph (but not including Participant contributions exceeding in the aggregate _% of Earnings or $ ). Employer Contributions on behalf of a Participant for a Plan Year shall not exceed $ or _% of Earnings, whichever is more or less. 2. Effective for Plan Years prior to January 1, 2006, each Participant may make a voluntary (unmatched), after-tax contribution, subject to the limitations of Section 4.05 and Article V of the Plan. .lL Yes No Effective for Plan Years beginning January 1, 2006, voluntary (unmatched), after-tax contributions are not permitted. 3. Employer contributions and Participant contributions shall be contributed to the Trust in accordance with the following payment schedule: On a .oavroll bv oavroll basis. VII. EARNINGS Earnings, as defined under Section 2.09 of the Plan, shall include: (a) Overtime Yes .lL No 4 (b) Bonuses Yes .1L No VIII. LIMITATION ON ALLOCATIONS If the Employer maintains or ever maintained another qualified plan in which any Participant in this Plan is (or was) a participant or could possibly become a participant, the Employer hereby agrees to limit contributions to all such plans as provided herein, if necessary in order to avoid excess contributions (as described in Sections 5.02 of the Plan). 1. If the Participant is covered under another qualified defined contribution plan maintained by the Employer, the provisions of Section 5.02(a) through (f) of the Plan will apply unless another method has been indicated below. ( ) other Method. (Provide the method under which the plans will limit total Annual Additions to the Maximum Permissible Amount, and will properly reduce any excess amounts, in a manner that precludes Employer discretion.) 2. The limitation year is the following 12-consecutive month period: the twelve (12) consecutive month oeriod endina everv December 1. IX. VESTING PROVISIONS The Employer hereby specifies the following vesting schedule, subject to (1) the minimum vesting requirements as noted and (2) the concurrence of the Plan Administrator. Years of Service Percent Comoleted Vestina Zero 0 % One 0 % Two 0 % Three 20 % Four 40 % Five 60 % Six 80 % 5 Seven Eight Nine Ten 100% % % % Notwithstanding the foregoing, vesting for Participants who are employed as police chiefs on July 9, 2007 shall be 100% regardless of years of service completed, and vesting for Participants who are employed as police chiefs after July 9, 2007 shall be as follows: years of service comoleted percent vestina Zero One Two o % 50 % 100 % x. Loans are permitted under the Plan, as provided in Article XIII: Yes .1L No XI. The Employer hereby attests that it is a unit of state or local government or an agency or instrumentality of one or more units of state or local government. XII. The Plan Administrator hereby agrees to inform the Employer of any amendments to the Plan made pursuant to Section 14.05 of the Plan or of the discontinuance or abandonment of the Plan. XIII. The Employer hereby appoints the ICMA RC as the Plan Administrator pursuant to the terms and conditions of the ICMA RC GOVERNMENTAL MONEY PURCHASE PLAN & TRUST. The Employer hereby agrees to the provisions of the Plan and Trust. XIV. The Employer hereby acknowledges it understands that failure to properly fill out this Adoption Agreement may result in disqualification of the Plan. XV. An adopting Employer may rely on an advisory letter issued by the Internal Revenue Service as evidence that the Plan is qualified under section 401 of the Internal Revenue Code. 6 In Witness Whereof, the Employer hereby causes this Agreement to be executed on this 9th day of July, 2007. EMPLOYER ICMA RC By: By: Title: Title: Attest: Attest: 36277251DOC 7 \\GLGPRIM\CLIENTS\II070\Ol\MPPAA4.DOC RESOLUTION NO. 27 SERIES OF 2007 TITLE: A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE ADOPTION OF THE AMENDMENT TO THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE MONEY PURCHASE PENSION PLAN FOR DESIGNATED POLICE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEES FOR THE PURPOSE OF CLARIFYING THE PARTICIPATION AND VESTING OF POLICE CHIEFS WHEREAS, the City of Wheat Ridge established and maintains the Money Purchase Pension Plan for Designated Police Department Employees (the "Plan"), most recently amended and restated on January 8,2007 effective as of January 1,2007; and WHEREAS, the Plan's Pension Board (the "Board") has determined that it is in the best interest of the City of Wheat Ridge and the City of Wheat Ridge employees to amend the Plan to clarify the historical and future participation and vesting of persons employed by the police department of the City of Wheat Ridge in the position of police chief; and WHEREAS, in accordance with Municipal Code 9 19-52(e), a summary of the amendment has been provided to all members of the Plan, who have been polled regarding and have provided their approval of the amendment as provided in C.R.S. 9 31-30.5-101 et seq.; and WHEREAS, the City of Wheat Ridge is authorized to amend the Plan pursuant to Section 14.01 of the Plan and Municipal Code 9 19-52(e). NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE THAT: 1. Effective as of July 9, 2007 the City of Wheat Ridge Money Purchase Pension Plan for Designated Police Department Employees is hereby amended as reflected on the attached amended Adoption Agreement, which shall be substituted for the Adoption Agreement approved and adopted on January 8, 2007. 2. The City Manager or any other appropriate officer or officers of the City of Wheat Ridge be and they hereby are authorized to do all other acts and things necessary and proper to effectuate the terms and intent of this Resolution. No further actions are hereby consented to or taken. I ATTACHMENT 2 DONE AND RESOLVED at a meeting of the City Council of the City of Wheat Ridge, Colorado on the 9th day of July, 2007. Jerry DiTullio, Mayor ATTEST: Michael Snow, City Clerk 2 ITEM NO: /. e. REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION COUNCIL MEETING DATE: July 9,2007 IITLE: ACCEPTANCE OF 50TH AVENUE AND KIPLING STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY D PUBLIC HEARING [8J BIDS/MOTIONS D RESOLUTIONS D ORDINANCES FOR 1ST READING (Date: D ORDINANCES FOR 2ND READING ) Quasi-Judicial: D [8J Yes No -;;:: /..f Tim Paranto, Director of Public Works Ci~9-~Q.J~ EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The development of the Arvada Ridge Shopping Center required the construction of 50th Avenue from Kipling Street to Miller Street inside the Wheat Ridge Ci~ limits. Two additional parcels were purchased by the developer for an acceleration lane on a portion of Kipling Street within Wheat Ridge. The 2004 Wheat Ridge/ Arvada Intergovernmental Agreement required transfer of the 50th Avenue and Kipling Street property to the Ci~. Staff recornmends that the attached special warranty deed be accepted by the Ci~ Council to complete this action. COMMISSION/BOARD RECOMMENDATION: N/A STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES: The Arvada Ridge Shopping Center design included construction of 50th Avenue from Kipling Street to Miller Street. The developer proposed placing 50th Street along the southerly border of their property, which was within incorporated Wheat Ridge. 50th A venue was constructed, along with necessary lane improvements on Kipling Street. In accordance with the 2004 Wheat Ridge Arvada Intergovernmental Agreement, the street right-of-way must be provided to Wheat Ridge to allow full control of 50th A venue by Wheat Ridge. Title issues on the property have been cleared and a special warranty deed has been prepared transferring the right-of-way from the Kipling Ridge Metropolitan District to the City. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED: N/A FINANCIAL IMPACT: Acceptance of the special warranty deed will require a payment of $1 O. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to accept the Special Warranty Deed for West 50th Avenue and parcels along Kipling Street as described in the deed." or, "I move to deny acceptance of the Special Warranty Deed for the following reason(s) " .. ,"W ;.~. ". Report Prepared by: Reviewed by: Tim Paranto Randy Young Attachments: I. Special Warranty Deed 2. Vicinity Map ......=liliiii Whoo'Rldgo,CO'. NO DOCUMENTARY FEE - EXEMPT SPECIAL WARRANTY DEED .WITNESSETH THAT KIPLING RIDGE METROPOLITAN DISTRICT, a qua.i- municipal "".yv..~on and political subdivision of the State of Colorado ("Grantor") who.e address is 6399 S. Fiddler'. Green Cir #102, Greenwood Village, COU{lty of Arapahoe, State of Colorado, 80111, for the consideration ofTen and 001100 ($10.00), in hand paid, acceptance, sufficiency, and receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, does hereby gran~ bargain, .ell, and convey unto the City of Wheat Ridge, a municipal corporation in the' State of Colorado, whose address is 7500 West 29~ Avenue, Wheat Ridge, County of Jefferson, State of Colorado, 80033, the following real Y'Vy."J' situate, lying and being in the City of Wheat Ridge, County of Jefferson, State of Colorado, to wit: See Exhibit A attached hereto and incOIporated herein by this reference for legal description Also known by street and number as va~t land. With all its appurtenances, and warrants the title to the same against all persons claiming by, through or under the Grantor, subject to easements, rights of way and restrictions of record, if any. Signed this .3 to "'" day of fYItV-], 2007. KIPLING RIDGE METROPOUTAN DISTRICf, a quasi-municipal corporation and political subdivision of the State of Colorado Attest: By: /~ ~ ~~~~ Keunith W. Schmid~ J~. SecrelaIy B)' ~~-----. Richard A. Schierbllrg, p"~ STATE OF COL~O S SS. COUNTY O~le..^--) . The foregoing insJlllment was acknowledged hefore me,tl;rls 3D-fPaax ~A_ , 2007, byQ,lel1>llt.n ~_ _S.GUI~~ as President and by K;;V,kr.UV. ~as Assistant Secretary of Kipling Ridge Metropolitan District ..2Mfl. Witness my hand and officiai seal. fJ:i#r4 SEAL The dnlftet of this d~tion is ....l..n"~""''';,~"~,,,....,',."''~,'''- '.LS.. prepared on beb.al1'o(I..1<fiW...'i"I,\:.i,llh.""m.I, l~".....1"""'''.~ '....~l, _.Co1orado8~sndisuottobcCODSttucdu~entinga _"......~. ..: land survey {OOO863t1.DOCv-.3} AITACHMENT 1 J!.Anll)J J A PARCEL 1 -' A.POR11Ol/ OF lOT 1, BlUE GIWlS ~E..ACCORDlNG TO 11iE PLATlHEREOF, J6TERSOIl COUI/7Y, COlORADO, 8ElNG DESCRJDED AS FOllOWS: BEGIIlNIHG ATlliE soin'HEflST CORNER OF 81\10 lOT 1, AND CONSIDERING lHE SOUTH UNE OF SAID LOT 1 TO seAA HORn! aa DEGRl!I!ll U MlNlTTES 04 BEOONDS WEST, WI1H.ALI. BEAAlNGS CONTAINED HEREIN, REVil1\lETHEIlETO; , THalCE ALONG lliE SOU1H UNE OF SAID lOT 1, NOR1ll88 DEGREES 26 MllllITES 04 SECOIlDS WE;ST. 21.50 FEET; THEIICE OEPI\RlJIlG SAD SOUTH UHE NORlH GO 0""'"","0 08 r.lHU1ES 3' SECONDS Vol:ST, G0.01 FEET; . THEIICE NOR1H 01 OEGREEll41 MIHl1TES 38 SECONDS EAST, 112.40 FEET; THalCE NORlH 31 DEGREEs 61' MlNlITES 48' SECalOS WEST, MBl fEET TO lliE NOI\TH UHE . OFSAlO LOT 1; . lllENCE,IlONG lHE Il9R1lIAHll EAST U/IES OF SAID lOT l.lHE FOllOWlNG COURSES: Al.ONG II NON-TAHGEKJ" CURVE TO THE RIGHT, HAV/HlM DELTA OF 87 DEGREES Xl MINUTES 00. SECOllDS, II IWlCIlS OF 82.60 FEET, Nt ARC OF 73.68 FEET AND II CHOROWHICH sEI\Rll SOI1lli as DEGREES lIiI MINlITES 07l1EC01lOS EAST, BBAG FEET; , . TIIEIlCE SOU1'H 00 Dl;GREES 12 MlNlITES:z8 8ECOHIl$ EAST, GUB FEET;. " THEIICE SOIITH 03 DEGREES 504 MllllITES 47 SECONDS Vol:ST, 35.504 FEET TO 1HE POINT OF BEGINNING. . (OOO1SJ2t.ooc~1l PAGE 1 OF3 PARCEL 2 A PORllON OF LOT 2, BLUE GRASS TERRACE, ACCORDING TO THE RECORDED P\.ATTHEREOF, BEING DESCRiBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 2, AND CONSIDERING THE NORTH UNe OF SAID LOT 2 TO BEAR NORTH B8 DEGREES 2li MINUTES 114 SECONDS WEST, WITH AU. BEARING 5 CONTAINED HEREIN, REl..ATlVE THERETO; THENCE ALONG THE EAST UNE OF SAID LOT 2111E FOLLOWING COURSES: SOUTH 03 DEGREES 54 MINUTES 47 SECONDS WEST, 88.81 FEET; 'lllENCE SOUTH 15DEGREES.42 MINUTES 48 SECONDS v.EST, 38.59 FEET; lllENCE DEPARTlNG SAID EAST LINE, NORTHll!l DEGREES 00 MINUTES 00 SECONDS EAST, 66.79 FEET; . .1llENCE NORTH 08 DEGREES 33 MINUTES 17 SECOIJlOS v.EST. 48.18 FEET;, . '.' THENCE NORTH 00 OlEGREES 08 MINl/TES 39 SECONDS WEST, 9.17 FEET TO THE NORTH UNE OF SAID LOT 2; THENCE ALONG SAID NORTH LINE, SOUTH 88 DEGREES 25 MINUTES 04 SECONDS EAST, 21.50 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THIS DESC"" ,.w.l; . COUNTY OF JEFFERSON, .STATE OF COLORADO. PAGE20F3 -. PARCEL 3 A PARCEL OF LAND 100 FEET WIDE, BEING 50 FEET IN WlDm ON EACH SIDE OF .mfS. CENTER UNE OF mE ANAL LOCAnON OF mE GOlDEN EXTENSION OF mE DENVER AND NORlH~SJERN 'RAlLWAY, OVER AN9 ACROSS 1HE soumtAST QUARTER OF THE SOUlHEAST Ql)ARTER OF SECnON 16, TOIINSHIP 3 SOUlH, RANGE 69 M:ST OF lHE 6lH P.M.; SAID CENTER UNE BEING MORE PARnCULARL Y DESCRIBED AS FOllOWS: H ... '.. . COMMENCING AT lHE INTERSECnON WllH lHE EAST UNE OF SECnON 16, DISTANT 1284 FEET, MORE DR LESS, NORlH FROM lHE SOUlHEAST CORNER lHEREOF; lHENCE S 74'22' W, A DISTANCE OF 1387 FEET TO ANINTERSECnON WllH lHE M:ST UNE OF lHE' SOUlHEAST OUARTER 'OF lHE SOUlHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECnON 16, DISTANT 410 FEET, 'MORE OR LESS, SOU1l:t OF lHE NORlHllt:ST CORNER OF SAID 4D ACRE TRACT; COUNTY OF JEFFERSON, STATE OF COLORADO. SlJRVl'YOR'S CFRllF1CA lE I, MICHAEl. C. CREGGER, DO HEREBY CffinFY lHA T lHlS EXHIBIT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPER\1S1ON TO ILLUSTRATE lHE ABOVE LEGAl DESCRIPnON, \\HICH WAS COPIED FROM lHE . -SPECIAl WARRANTY DEED 8355", RECORDED AT ,,~<-<.r liON NO. F2144078. lHlS EXHIBIT DOES NOT CONSnlUTE A lAND SURVEY AS DEFINED BY COLORADO ST A lUTES.' 1111\\11""11//111' . #" 0 Rt;"u,,% ~~~\),...."GI.l'~ ~ $r;s,~~'{.\.C.Cke',~ ~. . ~iS'/~ ~..~~ i!!<'>:.!.! , "'~os , ~~ ;::t 22564 "'; E PROFESsiONAt. LAND SURVEYOR' . v::r:-\~'" ' 'ill COLORADO REGlSTRAnON NO. 22564 ~~d:..........~# ~VIi~L ll<lI\) /I."''' . Wlqlt1l11f1Ill\\\\\*~ , to/tA-IoG DATE I Ie" .. TST INO. OF DENVER Consulting Engineers PAGE30F3 ~' WH<.<,1'/ ~ 0 - 0 u ~ C'oLORf>,69 ITEM NO: :.. REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION , : ~~ ~ COUNCIL MEETING DATE: July 9,2007 TITLE: COUNCIL BILL NO. 13-2007, AN ORDINANCE DESIGNATING A STRUCTURE LOCATED ONIliJ!; PROPERTY AT 9201 W. 44TH AVENUE AS AN HISTORICAL LANDMARK (CASE NO. WHL-07-01) lZl PUBLIC HEARING o BIDS/MOTIONS o RESOLUTIONS o ORDINANCES FOR 1ST READING (June 11, 2007) IZJ ORDINANCES FOR 2ND READING Quasi-Judicial: IZJ Yes o No !L~ Community Deveiopment Director <':J~c..: CitYMana~4 ~XECUTIVE SUMMARY: On April 9, 2007, the City Comicil unanimously approved historic landmark designation on the structure located at 9201 W. 44th Avenue. The property is zoned Commercial-One, and the structure is currently being utilized as an office. City Council made the following findings to support the designation: 1. The property owner concurs with and is. a party to the application. 2. There has been information submitted that discloses the history of the family patriarch who originally owned the property and was prominent in settling the Wheat Ridge/ Arvada area. 3. John Juchem contributed significantly to the historic bnilt, social and economic enviromnent in the late 1800's and early 1900's. 4. The structure embodies distinguishing characteristics of an architectural type constructed in the Denver metropolitan area in the early 1900's. 5. The Wheat Ridge Historical Society Board of Directors has recommended approval of the designation. This request impacts or is related to Goal 3 of the Strategic Plan relating to creating a strong partnership between the city, the community and the region. COMMISSION/BOARD RECOMMENDATION: The Wheat Ridge Historical Society reviewed this request at a public hearing held on February 13, 2007. A motion to recommend approval of designation of the structure was made with all present Board of Directors supporting the motion. STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES: There are no outstanding issues. AL TERNA TIVES CONSIDERED: I. Approve the landmark designation ordinance. 2. Do not approve the landmark designation ordinance. FINANCIAL IMPACT: There are no review fees collected for the processing of this ordinance. There will be no direct monetary impact to the City if the ordinance is approved. RECOMMENDED MOTIONS: "1 move to approve Council Bill 13-2007, an ordinance validating historic landmark designation approval on a structure located at 9201 W. 44th Avenue, on second reading, and that it take effect 15 days after final publication." Or, "1 move to table indefinitely Council Bill 13-2007, thereby denying an ordinance validating historic landmark designation approval on a structure located at 9201 W. 44th Avenue." Report Prepared by: Meredith Reckert (303-235-2848) Reviewed by: Alan White Attachments: I. Council Bill No. 13-2007 2 CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER SCHULZ Council Bill No. 13-2007 Ordinance No. Series of 2007 TITLE: AN ORDINANCE DESIGNATING A STRUCTURE LOCATED ON THE PROPERTYAT 9201 W. 44TH AVENUE AS AN HISTORICAL LANDMARK WHEREAS, an application for the historic designation of a structure located on the property located at 9201 W. 44th Avenue in the City was submitted by the owner of the property; and WHEREAS, the application for historic designation was referred to the Wheat Ridge Historical Society for review and recommendation; and WHEREAS, the Wheat Ridge Historical Society reviewed the application at a public hearing held on February 13, 2007, and at the conclusion of such public hearing unanimously recommended approval of the application for historic designation; and WHEREAS, the City provided proper notice of a public hearing to consider the application for historic designation; and WHEREAS, the property owner did not file a written objection to the application; and WHEREAS, City Council held a public hearing on the application for historic designation on April 9, 2007, and based on the evidence and testimony received during' such public hearing, upon its conclusion determined that: 1. The property owner concurs with and is a party to the application; 2. The property owner will retain the ability to earn a reasonable return on the property that is the subject of the application; 3. The structure is of particular local historic significance in that the original builder/owner of the structure, John Juchem, was prominent in settling the Wheat Ridge/Arvada area and contributed significantly to the historic built, social and economic environment in the late 1800s and early 1900s; 4. The structure is of particular historical and architectural significance because it embodies the distinguishing characteristics of an architectural type (Craftsman bungalow) inherently valuable for the study ATTACHMENT 1 of a period (early 1900s in the Denver metropolitan area), style, method of construction or of indigenous materials or craftsmanship; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO: Section 1. Desianation. The structure located on the property at 9201 W. 44th Avenue is hereby designated an historic landmark in the City pursuant to Wheat Ridge Code of Laws, Section 26-906. Section 2. Safetl(, Clause. The City Council hereby finds, determines, and declares that this Ordinance is promulgated under the general police power of the City of Wheat Ridge, that it is promulgated for the health, safety, and welfare of the public and that this Ordinance is necessary for the preservation of health and safety and for the protection of public convenience and welfare. The City Council further determines that the Ordinance bears a rational relation to the proper legislative object sought to be attained. Section 3. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect fifteen days after final publication, as provided by Section 5.11 of the Charter. INTRODUCED, READ, AND ADOPTED on first reading by a vote of 8 to 0 on this 11th day of June, 2007, 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 July 9, 2007, at 7:00 o'clock 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 ,200 . SIGNED by the Mayor on this 200_. day of Jerry DiTullio, Mayor ATTEST: Michael Snow, City Clerk 2 First Publication: June 14, 2007 Second Publication: Wheat Ridge Transcript Effective Date: Approved As To Form Gerald E. Dahl, City Attorney 3 ITEM NO: 3. REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION COUNCIL MEETING DATE: July 9, 2007 TITLE: COUNCIL BILL 16-2007 - AN ORDINANCE ADDING CODE OF LAWS SECTION 16-49; CONCERNING GRAFFITI [gJ PUBLIC HEARING o BIDSIMOTIONS o RESOLUTIONS o ORDINANCES FOR 1ST READING (Date:) [gJ ORDINANCES FOR 2ND READING Quasi-Judicial: 0 Yes J1.,:I? ~~ P'olice Chief [gJ No ~...-a City ManagerA r EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: This ordinance adds a new section to the coverage of miscellaneous offenses in Code of Laws Chapter 16, prohibiting the possession of graffiti materials in defmed locations. 1'lTATEMENT OF THE ISSUES: The City of Wheat Ridge participates in the Northwest Alliance Anti-Graffiti Task Force. The Task Force promotes uniform anti-graffiti laws among its members. The Task Force has recommended that the City of Wheat Ridge prohibit the possession of graffiti materials by adults. At the March 19,2007 Council meeting, the Council directed the Police Department to draft such an ordinance. This ordinance is designed to make possession of graffiti materials a violation of law in public places where that possession is not authorized by the City and on private property where the possession is not authorized by the owner. COMMISSION/BOARD RECOMMENDATION: N/A ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED: N/A FINANCIAL IMPACT: N/A RECOMMENDED MOTION: "1 move to approve Council Bill 16-2007 - An Ordinance Adding Code of Laws Section 16-49; Concerning Graffiti on second reading, and that it take effect 15 days after final publication." or, "1 move to table indefinitely Council Bill 16-2007 - An Ordinance Adding Code of Laws Section 16-49; Concerning Graffiti for the following reason(s) " Report Prepared by: Gerald Dahl, City Attorney Attachments: 1. Memorandum from Police Chief 2. Council Bill 16-2007 STUDY Session March 19, 2007 Item 3 ; WHEAT RIDGE POLICE DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Jerry DiTullio and City Council VIA: FROM: Randy Young, City Manager ~ Daniel Brennan, Chief of Police DATE: March 14, 2007 SUBJECT: Overview - Model Anti-Graffiti Ordinances and Reward Program BACKGROUND The City of Wheat Ridge, like many other metro-area municipalities, has experienced an increase in graffiti-related calls for service. We allllnderstand graffiti has an impact on the col'flmunity and on the City. Much of the graffiti occurring in Wheat Ridge appears along transportation corridors and areas adjacent to the Clear Creek greenbelt (1-70). There are two types of graffiti: gang graffiti and tagging grgffiti. Eac;h .is distinctive from the other. Gang Graffiti is used to designate gang affiliation and gang members, and oftentimes tells what is going on~th the gang. Tagging Graffiti is used for gaining "Fame" with others who are into tagging. The taggingllsually shows the "Tag Name" or moniker and sometimes the name of. the Tagging Crew they pelong to. On March 23, 2006 a meeting of the Northwest Metro Alliance was held in Denver. One of many Jopics . presented during the mel:lting was a_ lecture from a member of thi'l - National Council to Prevent Delinquency (NCPD)Anti~Graffiti Project. Presented to attendees was a copy of the Model Anti-Graffiti Ordinance BackQrounder Nov. 12, 2004 Workina. Draft. The text pre~ents an overview of model ordinllnce provisions and language' used in ordinances from at least two municipalities; this was new work that built on the 1996 text publi~hed by the International Municipal Lawyers Association (IMLA), Model Anti-Graffiti Ordinance, The main divisions of the recommendations are: . Purpose/Legislative Determination . Definitions . Prohibited Acts . Possession of Graffiti Implements . Penalties . Rewards . Graffiti as Nuisance/Graffiti Prohibited . Property Owner Cleanup of Graffiti ATTACHMENT 1 .In Octob~r, 2006, D~nver Dis~rict 1 City Councilm~n Rick Garcia proviqed theWh~at Ridge Police Department a draft of local ordinance analysis completed by Bob Hills, of the National Council to Prevent Delinquency. The Police Department providtld City Council with a copy of the analysis in February 2007 to review for this Study Session. ANALYSIS Currently, the City of Wheat Ridge has ordinances which address Abatement, Defacing Property, and Possession of Graffiti Materials by a Minor, which can be found in Sections 15-8, 15-9 and 16-180 of the City Code of Laws respectively (see attached). The City of Wheat Ridge has adequate definitions for "graffiti" and "graffiti implements" currently in our City of Wheat Ridge Colorado Code of Laws. The only areas that the City of Wheat Ridge has chosen not to address are "Sales Restrictions" (page 12 of the document), and "Spray Paint Display Restrictions", which both place regulations on retailers. The City of Wheat Ridge has also not enacted any sort of rewards program that would pay informants who provide the police department with viable information that leads to the arrest and prosecution of graffiti vandals. To assist you, my staff has summarized a comparison of the descriptions in the report between the City Code of Laws pertaining to graffiti arid the local ordinance analysis: . Purpose/Legislative Determination - The report notes that our code carries a general statement irr this regard and that the purpose of the Code is tb prolTtotErhealth, safety and welfare in the commuriity. Definitions - (jefihition~are sufficiental1d do not need to be changed. Prohibite'd" Acts -The CitY ordinance proscribes prohibited acts; however, the analysis recommended language pertaining to the possession of graffiti implemehts with the intent to deface property. Accessibility to Graffiti Implements - Presently there is no ianguage in our ordinances that limit access to graffiti implements. The analysis foUnd that 00 .'While not a major component of anti-graffiti programming, a number of communities adopt supply side controls aimed at retail outlets for the consUmetprodUCts misused by vandals." Penalties - The analysis report noted that "...violations of the Code in general are punishable by up to $1,000 in fines and one year in jail. For minors, jail time is prohibited. Article 3, Section16-43, Criminal Mischief limits Code application to offenses causing less than $400 in damage. Our search did not find specific penalty language for graffiti. We are also unable to identify an ordinance base for community service sentencing, victim restitution or parental liability in the case of minor vandals" (Cases involving damage over $400 are filed in District Court). Rewards - The analysis correctly pointed out that a rewards system is not in place noting, "oo.while not critical to a comprehensive anti-graffiti program, citizen reward programs are believed to increase citizen interest in cooperating with law enforcement in catching graffiti vandals." . . . . . · Graffiti as Nuisance/Graffiti Prohibited - The report noted our ordinances are present ana sufficient. . · Cleanup of Graffiti - The report noted our current requirements for cleaning up graffiti. Our Code provides for notification of the need for removal of graffiti and seven (7) days for the property owner to correct the situation prior to the City coming on the property for the purpose of abatement. The Code also details a process to be followed, should access be denied. The analysis noted there was not a hearing procedure in the Municode data for Wheat Ridge. While the Backgrounder leaves something to be desired regarding this topic (pages 30 through 35), we are aware that some muniCipalities provide no-charge abatement services in exchange for continuing authorization to access private property for cleanup, whenever graffiti appears. The NCPD suggests exploration of this alternative as it has the potential to streamline property access, cut down the time graffiti stays up, reduce government costs in the notice-to-Iien bureaucratic process, and allow for the implementation of a zero tolerance abatement strategy, when the City has immediate authorized access to whole blocks of property." The analysis provided the following summary of Wheat Ridge's municipal ordinances: "A review of the Wheat Ridae Code indicates sufficientcoveraae of most kev issues in anti-araffitioropramming,. However, there are a few areas of omission and others that could benefit from revision. The NCPD recommendations would be to consider: (1) adding a prohibition against possession of graffiti implements by adults, with the intention to deface property; (2) expanding penalties language to allow for larger financial assessments for graffiti' crime and for more flexibility in sentencing; and (3) providing the option of municipal cleanup of graffiti on private property in exchange for open authorized access to that property. "Purpose/Legislative Determination" and "Rewards".language is largely discretionary. " In 2006, there were 1 ,447 reported incidents of graffiti in the City, compared to the 1 ,260 incidents in 2005. Of those 2006 incidents, 1,273 (or 88%) were on City or /}J!JdliSiJllQP~rty and the remaining 12%.Jm:,f14 reports) were on private propertY. Tti~!;:il~UQrJl:le_City t() remove the 1 ,273 incidents of graffiti in 2006 was approximately $,~~?,p . A .'review of the data of objects most likely to be tagged, by volume, indicated the follOwing objects are the primary targets of vandals: '~ Boxes - phone, utility and electric ~ Signs :1 ~ Poles 'I~ Walls y ~ Underpasses : ~ Parks - restrooms, playgrounds, etc. In apdition, the .departme!lt looked at the area~ of the City.were inci<lents of graffiti were . reported and found that the ~ ~fl;!a of th!l,.Qi!Y,~!'!~t 1, accounted for 62% (900 in_qtcl~nt~) of all the graffiti reported in the City. Beat 1 consists of tile area east of Teller 5110 Sheridan Blvd and north of W. 26th Ave to the City limits). ,!l~Clt4 l:!qcounts for tQ.fi%t-9fJtl~ incidents (aJea west of Kipling to the City boundary and north of W. 26th /iviJ, to the City boundary), Beat 3 (hotel/motel area) acCounts for 9.5%, and Beat 2 (north of W. 26th Ave to Clear Creek and Teller St. west to Kipling) accounts for 8.5%. There were 128 incidents (8.5%) in which a location was not listed. The first quarter (556) and second quarter (494) of 2006 accounted for 72% of the reported graffiti. In 2005, the reporting of incidents of graffiti were more evenly distributed between the second, third and fourth quarter of the year. RECOMMENDATIONS The Police Department believes the ordinances and penalty options already in use are effectively dealing with the very small percentage of graffiti vandals who are caught by the department and brought to court. fili9-qJ_restraints prohibit c:;ommunity service .~entencing including probatio(l. Viq!im restitution or parental liability in the case of minor '@od~Jl>Jalls !.lnd~r the purviewcifMimlclpal Court. . .- Developing ordinances that place rlilstrictiQ.IJ!Lon.fetClIlers who sell graffiti implements ~"""'_"'H'~'"""""""''''~'"'''h_ .~_,.,:.-..'., .,..... ..~. "_'",~ 'o',-."'~ (markers, spray paint, etc.) ~.~!:1~~~!to~t$lYli!iIClblE:l to .law,enforcem~nt.I:lUt I am n~ ~9l"1vinced Qfthe effectiveness.ofsuch restrictions: lfisniy uriderSlaridfiiig from my staff that a previous;CltyCouncildid not wlsli lcf adopt ordinances that regulated retailers in this area when these ordinances were implemented. Such an ordinance presents difficulties in enforcement, regulating compliance and would apply toa diverse group of retailers (hobby stores, grocery stores, Wal-Mart, convenience stores, etc.). The police departmenUs W,ju.ing,Jp,JOQ~ at re'lising Section 16.180 to include possession of graffiti .mme.rl.i:tlsby.an adult. As you qm see from the cleanup cpsts in 2006, cleaning graffiti will remain an annoying expense for the City; however, this approach has helped reduce graffiti damage to the city's public buildings and saves us money in the long term. The Police Department recommends atl:lm~..Jjw ..ClPp.roach .to thegr<\ffiji proble(TI~ m;~l(~ijij.qJ:l.,,~ofQrcement and remoyal. Prevention includes Du~tc~~.\.!catior;! pr!J!lIa~m~ dElli!i,gned to heighten awareness and sensitivity to graffiti;q "~ero tolerance" forgramti vandalism; soliciting innovative ideas for' graffiti' aba'tement .from the communitY; jlCOU(i;lgirig special landscaping near potential target areas to deter graffiti vandals.; m<iQ:yr;iginij tile design and construction or gnil'fifrf'eslstant structures; and encouraging publiC/privafe partnerships to respond to graffiti vandalism. A rewards system is another prevention tool but a funding and reporting mechani~m nelrcl~tobe place fori{ to lie e'ffectlve. e.m~e!Jtion programs require dollars, and' personnel to work effectivelY. Prevention programs require additional dollars and personnel to implement effectively. The .9llRl!rtmEmt r~rn~,n~ committed to the elimination of graffiti vandali~m an,d enforcement of applicable laws associatlil.9 wUh,.U, With the assistance of Public Works arnr-~lfrfd fteeteationdi3paHinerits we strive to document and investigate aU cases f!pd.!uJIx ~1!rosecuJ!:l J!JQ~~ JlJ)lQIy.ed ill..(;dnllnal - v'findaii~m , \Yh~I!~Y!!r: '!~ey can be if!~!l.tJtifJcj_, All three departments work together tolJave.Q!.!!!!!f~Jf':'!)gx~sL,as soon as ~swle. Research has proven that if graffiti is remoVeaTmmethately after it is applied, the victim location is less likely to be the target of continued vandalism. I hope this staff report answers any questions you might have regarding the graffiti issue. Please do not hesitate in contacting me should you have additional questions. DB cc: Management Team Sgt. Paula Balafas Attachments: Section 15-8; 15-9; Section 16-180 CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER !;'l'T'l'F.!; Council Bill No. 16 Ordinance No. Series of 2007 TITLE: AN ORDINANCE ADDING CODE OF LAWS SECTION 16-49; CONCERNING GRAJ:<1<Tl1 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Wheat Ridge (the "Council") is authorized to enact ordinances for the preservation ofthe public health, safety and welfare; and WHEREAS, the crime of defacing property, popularly known as graffiti, is injurious to the public welfare; and WHEREAS, the Council wishes 'to prohibit possession of graffiti materials in public places and closed private places within the City; BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO: Section 1. The Wheat Ridge Code of Laws is amended by the addition of a new Section 16-49, to read in its entirety: 16-49 - Prohibition on Possession of Graffiti Materials. (a) Public Places. It shall be unlawful for any person, except authorized city employees or individuals authorized by an individual or company under contract with the city, to have in his or her possession any prohibited graffiti material, as that term is defined in Seqtion 16-180, while in or upon any public park, playground, swimming pool, recreational facility, or other public building or structure owned or operated by the city. (b) Closed Private Places. It shall be unlawful for any person to have in his or her possession any prohibited graffiti material, as that term is defined in Section 16- 180, on private property not open to the public without permission from the owner or his or her lawful agent. Section 2. Safety Clause. The City Council hereby finds, determines, and declares that this Ordinance is promulgated under the general police power of the City of Wheat Ridge, that it is promulgated for the health, safety, and welfare of the public and that this Ordinance is necessary for the preservation of health and safety and for the protection of public convenience and welfare. The City Council further determines that the Ordinance bears a rational relation to the proper legislative object sought to be attained. GED\53027\412481.01 ATTACHMENT 2 Section 3. Severabilitv: Conflictinl! Ordinances Renealed. If any section, subsection or clause of this ordinance shall be deemed to be unconstitutional or otherwise invalid, the validity of the remaining sections, subsections and clauses shall not be affected thereby. All other ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance are hereby repealed. Section 4. ,Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect fifteen days after final publication, as provided by Section 5.11 of the Charter. INTRODUCED, READ, AND ADOPTED on first reading by a vote of il to o on this 25th day of June .2007, 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 July 9 .2007, at 7:00 o'clock 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 .2007. SIGNED by the Mayor on this day of ,2007. ,Jerry DiTullio, Mayor ATTEST: Michael Snow, City Clerk Approved As To Form Gerald E. Dahl, City Attorney First Publication: June 28, 2007 Second Publication: Wheat Ridge Transcript Effective Date: GED\53027\412481.01 ITEM NO: '-I. REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION ~~~ ~ COUNCIL MEETING DATE: JiIly 9, 2007 nILE: A REQUEST FOR AN AMENDMENT TO A FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 8300 WEST 38TH AVENUE (CASE NO. WZ-07-02/EXEMPLA) lZl PUBLIC HEARING D BIDSIMOTIONS D RESOLUTIONS D ORDINANCES FOR 1ST READING (Date:) D ORDINANCES FOR 2ND READING Quasi-Judicial: lZl D Yes No ~ IJJ~ ~(..)v-a City Mana~ t Community Development Director EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The Exempla Lutheran Medical Center is requesting consideration of an amendment to a Final Development Plan to allow an expansion of the existing hospital. The property is currently zoned Planned Hospital District (PHD) and is located at 8300 W. 38th Avenue. The subject parcel is approximately 96.2 acres in size. The site currently contains an existing hospital facility and multiple medical office buildings. The applicant plans on demolishing approximately 92,000 square feet of the existing hospital and reconstructing approximately 282,000 square feet; a net increase of 190,000 square feet. The expansion will increase the size of the hospital, but will not increase capacity. Parking will be relocated onsite, and the overall parking area will be decreased. Lutheran Parkway and the existing traffic signal will be relocated to the east to align with Balsam Street. Turn prohibitors will restrict traffic northbound from the campus into the neighborhood at Balsam Street. This request relates to City Council goals of the City being prepared for growth and opportunities and providing a strong partnership between the City and community. Planning Commission reviewed this request on June 21, 2007 and recommended approval without conditions. COMMISSIONIBOARD RECOMMENDATION: Planning Commission heard the request on July 6, 2006. Planning Commission recommended approval for the following reasons: I. The Final Development Plan meets the requirements listed in Section 26- 306 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws. 2. The Final Development Plan meets the standards established in Chapter 26, Article III of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws. Planning Commission did make a resolution that the construction traffic should use Wadsworth Boulevard, Sixth Avenue and 1-70, and avoid West 32nd Avenue and West 38th Avenue. Construction traffic will be reviewed at time of building permit. Staff will suggest traffic routes based upon traffic volumes and vehicle weight. STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES: The Final Development Plan is proposing a relocation of Lutheran Parkway. The Parkway will be aligned with Balsam Street. The traffic signal will be moved with the realigned Parkway. Balsam Street is currently a "T" intersection. and is not signalized. The realignment will create a four way signalized intersection. Several neighbors have expressed their concern over the relocation of the Parkway and signal. Their concerns are mostly related to increased traffic through the neighborhood and the relocation of parking areas adjacentto West 38th Avenue. The applicant has proposed turn prohibitors which would not allow hospital traffic to travel north onto Balsam Street. Southbound traffic from Balsam into the hospital campus would be allowed. A traffic study was submitted which indicates that there should not be an increase in traffic as a result of this construction. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED: Do not "l'l'W Ie the amendment to the Final Development Plan. FINANCIAL IMPACT: The City has received a one-time application fee for the land use application. Building permit fees and use taxes will be collected during construction of the new facility. RECOMMENDED MOTIONS: OPTION A: "I move to APPROVE Case No. WZ-07-02, a request for approval of a Final Development Plan for property located at 8300 W. 38th Avenue, for the following reasons: 1. The Final Development Plan meets the requirements listed in Section 26-306 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws. 2. The Final Development Plan meets the standards established in Chapter 26, Article ill of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws. OPTION B: "I move to DENY Case No. WZ-07-02, a request for approval of a Final Development Plan for property located at 8300 W. 38th Avenue, for the following reasons: 1. " Report Prepared by: Travis Crane Reviewed by: Alan White Attachments: 1. Planning Commission Staff Report (with exhibits) CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE PLA,,\HuIG DIVISION STAFF REPORT TO: Planning Commission CASE MANAGER: Travis Crane CASE NO. & NAME: WZ-07-02/Exempla DATE OF MEETING: June 21, 2007 ACTION REQUESTED: A request for a Final Development Plan to allow an expansion of the existing hospital LOCATION OF REQUEST: 8300 W. 38th Avenue APPLICANT (S): Exempla Lutherau Medical Center OWNER (S): Same APPROXIMATE AREA: 4,190,987 sq. ft. (96.2 ac.) PRESENT Z"'I.uIG: Planned Hospital District (PHD) "I" ."R INTO RECORD: ( ) (X) ( ) (X) (X) CASE FILE & PACKET MATERIALS DIGITAL PRESENTATION COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ZONING ORDINANCE SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS Location Map Subject Property Planning Commission WZ-07-02/ELMC ATTACHMENT 1 I All notification and posting requirements have been met; therefore, there is jurisdiction to hear this case. I. REQUEST The applicant is requesting approval of a Final Development Plan (Exhibit 1, Letter of Request). The current Planned Hospital District zoning designation allows medical uses. The applicant wishes to demolish 92,000 square feet of the existing hospital and reconstruct 282,000 square feet of new hospital area; an overall increase of 190,000 square feet. The disturbed area of the campus as a result of this expansion will be 14.5 acres. The property contains multiple existing hospital facilities. The property is bounded by West 32nd Avenue to the south and West 38th Avenue to the north, between Allison Street and Dover Street, app,v"imately. II. FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN The Final Development Plan (FDP) details the area of demolition and reconstruction. This proposal also includes a relocation of Lutheran Parkway to the east. The realigned Lutheran Parkway will move east to Balsam Street. The traffic signal will be moved to the east as well (Exhibit 2, FDP). The enlargement of the hospital will not increase capacity; rather, existing rooms will be made larger to comply with hospital industry standards. Typically, the Final Development Plan should meet the standards established on the Outline Development Plan. There is no Outline Development Plan for this property. In this case, the development standards established in Section 26-306 (Planned Hospital District development standards) should be followed. The most critical development standards listed in this section are setbacks, landscaping, parking and building height. Building Page two of the Final Development Plan shows the extent of the expansion. The new addition is shown on the site plan in a gray cross-hatch as letter "0". The building demolition and reconstruction will occur on the northeast comer of the existing building. The applicant is proposing an overall increase of 190,000 square feet of new hospital area. The new addition will match existing construction, and will be 91 feet tall. The PHO zone district allows additions to existing hospital buildings to be constructed to a height not to exceed the existing facility. The existing hospital building is 91 feet tall. The new addition will be located a.......v..imately 108 feet from the front (northern) property line and app'v"imately 484 feet from the eastern (side) property line. The PHD standards require a minimum front yard setback of 50 feet, and a minimum side yard setback of 25 feet plus 10 feet for each story. The building is six stories tall, equaling a required side yard setback of 85 feet. There will be no construction towards the western side property line or the rear (southern) property line. Landscaping The Planned Hospital District requires a minimum landscaped area of 25 percent of the lot. With the building addition and additional paved areas, the site will still maintain in excess of 50% open space area. New trees and shrubs will be installed along the realigned Lutheran Parkway and around the new parking areas. Staffhas requested that the applicant increase planting density atthe southwest comer of Lutheran Parkway and West 38th Avenue. ' Planning Coinmission WZ-07-02/ELMC 2 Additionally, a 5-foot ta11landscape berm will be constructed in this location. This increase in landscaping should help soften the effects of a parking lot adjacent to West 38th Avenue and the neighborhood to the north. Elevations The new addition will match the existing architecture of the hospital. The addition will be six stories and 91 feet in height. The existing hospital is six stories and 91 feet in height. The Charter (and Code of Laws) allows additions to existing hospitals buildings to match existing building height, even if the existing building height is in excess of 50 feet. Traffic The addition to the hospital will not result in new rooms, only increased room size. The submitted traffic study states that there should be no increase in traffic as a result. The major change to traffic patterns in the area is the signal relocation on West 38th Avenue. This proposal will relocate the traffic signal to the east to align with Balsam Street. The signal is currently located between Brentwood Street and Balsam Street. Anticipating interest from the neighborhood to the north, the applicant suggested a range of options which would restrict traffic from traveling north into the neighborhood. These options were discussed with staff and shown at the open house and ranged from prohibitors on the south side of West 38th Avenue to creating a cul-de-sac north of West 38th Avenue on Balsam Street. The Public Works Department reviewed the options in tandem with the comments received at the open house, and the option shown on the plans was selected. Drivers traveling northbound on Lutheran Parkway will only be able to turn left (westbound) or right (eastbound) on West 38th Avenue. A turn prohibitor will not allow any traffic to cross northbound and continue on Balsam Street. There is no restriction southbound into the hospital from Balsam Street. Parking The applicant is proposing to relocate some parking and remove some parking area. Based on size of buildings, a total of2,3ll parking spaces are required for the campus. There are currently 2,428 parking spaces on the campus. This proposal will reduce the number of parking spaces to 2,347, a reduction of81 parking spaces. The parking requirements will still be met, even with the reduction in total number of stalls. The applicant has submitted a parking analysis which confirms parking demand is being met. Lighting Any new lighting installed onsite must meet the requirements of Section 26-503 of the Code of Laws. The Code requires that all exterior light be contained onsite. A photometric lighting plan has been included in the Final Development Plan. All light will be contained onsite, and the levels of illumination are generally below 8 footcandles in the parking areas. The existing residential properties to the east should not be impacted by any light trespass. III. AGENCY REFERRAL All responding agencies have indicated that they can serve the property, and the applicant will bear the cost of upgrading any service to the property. The applicant submitted a preliminary drainage report with this Final Development Plan. A fmal drainage report and plan will be reviewed with the building permit application. RTD has requested that one interior parking island be enlarged to accommodate bus turning movements. Planning Cmnmission WZ-07-02/ELMC 3 IV. NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING A neighborhood meeting is not required for a Final Development Plan amendment. The applicant felt it necessary to hold an open-house type meeting to inform the neighborhood of the proposal and gain feedback. The open house meeting was held on May 2,2007. The meeting was well attended, and comments were taken in response to colored renditions and site plans on display. One letter has been received by a neighbor, and is attached as Exhibit 3. V. STAFF CONCLUSION & RECOMMENDED MOTION(S): Staff concludes that the Final Development Plan meets the standards established for the Planned Hospital District. The relocation of the traffic signal is potentially the largest impact to the surrounding neighborhood, and the applicant has installed measures to ensure the impact is mitigated. All landscaping and parking standards are being met. FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN OPTION A: "I move to recommend APPROVAL of Case No. WZ-07-02, a request for approval of a Final Development Plan for property located at 8300 W. 38th Avenue, for the following reasons: 1. The Final Development Plan meets the requirements listed in Section 26-306 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws. 2. The Final Development Plan meets the standards established in Chapter 26, Article III of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws. OPTION B: "I move to recommend DENIAL of Case No. WZ-07-02, a request for approval ofa Final Development Plan for property located at 8300 W. 38th Avenue, for the following reasons: 1. " Planning Commission WZ-07-02/ELMC 4 - 162118TH STREET, SUITE 110 DENVER, COLORADO 80202 (pi 303,295,1792 (f) 303.292.6437 info@hlarch.com www.hlarch.com 219 EAST COLORADO AVENUE COLORADO SPRINGS, COLORADO 80903 Ip1719.S78,9317 [11719.578.9548 info@hlarch.com www.hlarch.com - ARCH I TECTURE May 9,2007 Mr. Travis Crane City of Wheat Ridge Community Development 7500 W. 29th Avenue Wheat Ridge, CO 80033 Re: Exempla Lutheran Medical Center Northeast Wing Addition PHD Amendment Application Letter of Request H+L Project #177.202.02 Dear Travis: We are submitting herewith an application for an Amendment to the Planned Hospital Development (PHD) plan for the Exempla Lutheran Medical Center, located at 8300 West 38th Avenue in Wheat Ridge. The required Pre-Application Meeting was held on November 9th, 2006 and a Community Meeting was held on May 2, 2007. The enclosed application includes the necessary forms and documents required for the submittal per the Pre-Application Meeting Summary prepared by Wheat Ridge Community Development. Also enclosed is a check for $8,200 for the application fee. This submittal is for PHD Amendment #8 for a proposed new addition to the existing hospital. The last recorded amendmentto the PHD is Amendment #7, Case NumberWZ-05-15. The proposed new addition will be approximately 282,000 square feet and will affect approximately 14.5 acres of the existing campus currently zoned PHD. The proposed addition will be located in the northeast corner of the existing hospital, north of the main hospital entrance and west of the Chapel. Approximately 92,000 square feet of existing hospital will be removed to build the new addition. The new addition will be five stories plus a basement and a mechanical penthouse and will increase the Hospital land coverage by approximately 35,000 square feet. Associated site improvements for the expansion project include realigning the north end of Lutheran Parkway with Balsam Street, adding new parking and reconfiguring existing parking lots. A detailed parking analysis has been completed to determine the best allocation of parking assignments for visitors, patients, doctors and employees on the campus and is included in this amendment application. The complete development will prOVide approximately 190,000 square feet of new building area and 13,400 square feet of additional paved area. JEFfREY A. AMBROSE. AlA ROB DAVIDSON, AlA MICHAEL E. OSSIAN, AlA SCOTT KUEHN, AlA EXHIBIT 1 Page 2 Mr. Travis Crane May 9, 2007 We respectfully request your review of this application. We appreciate your assistance to date with this submittal process. If you have any questions or require additional information, please contact me. Sincerely, H+L ARCHITECTURE KaYe:~ Cc: AI Davis, ELMC Steve Catts, LHS Todd Kreinbrink, H+L KM/jIhk (r:\elmc.l77\northeast add.202\177.202.02-ne wing dly\correspondence\letters\phd letter of request 05 08 07.doc) , Kose M. t-eaorowlcz 3803 Balsam Street Wheat Ridge, CO 80033 303-423-7970 June 4, 2007 Travis Crane Planner City of Wheat Ridge 7500 West 29th Avenue Wheat Ridge, CO 80033 1Rl1E<CIE~VIED JlIN 0 4 2007 ~---------- Dear Mr. Crane: The proposed redesign of Lutheran Hospital's parking lots will have a profoundly negative impact on the residents of Balsam Street between West 381h Avenue and West 41st Avenue. These adverse implications include noise pollution, financial hardship, loss of aesthetic beauty, and potential safety concerns. Balsam Street is at present an idyllic, quiet, and peaceful side street occupied by a diverse mix of retired and working persons with young families. It is narrow and was never designed to be an arterial with a high traffic volume. Plans to place a stoplight on the corner of 38th and Balsam Street will limit available on street parking and create a significant inconvenience for residents and their guests. There will be more accidents and noise due to the increased traffic volumes and velocity. The residents of Balsam Street have for many moons enjoyed the mature landscaping that will be destroyed to create the new parking lot between Lutheran Parkway and Brendtwood Street on the south side of 38th Avenue. We have watched our children and these trees grow together. Replacing such beautiful trees with pavement is also an environmentally unsound decision. The foot traffic on 38th Avenue will increase if hospital's redesign plan is implemented. Although we are proud of Lutheran's commitment to providing care to the underserved, the number of automobile break-ins, vandalism, and public intoxication on our doorstep is sure to increase. The property values of our homes will decrease markedly when the butterfly that is now Balsam Street becomes a noisy and congested caterpillar. This will limit the ability of its senior citizens to utilize reverSe mortgages for their retirement and throw a significant stumbling block in front of families just starting out. We have been good neighbors of Lutheran Hospital for decades, we ask for the same consideration in return. The plans to redesign Lutheran's parking lots should be shelved. If it is not, the hospital should receive input from both an architect and environmental designer about how to minimize the negative impact on Balsam Street's residents. Homeowners that are unsatisfied by these proposals should have the opportunity to sell their homes to Lutheran Hospital for 110% of fair market value. Sincerely, Gl~ TY\. ~~~ Rose M. Fedorowicz cc: Robert Malte, President and CEO, Exempla Lutheran Medical Center Pam Porter, Exempla Lutheran Medical Center Jerry DeTullio, Mayor, Wheat Ridge Terry Womble, Wheat Ridge City Council, District I Karen Berry, Wheat Ridge City Council, District I Dean Gokey, Wheat Ridge City Council, District II Wanda Sang, Wheat Ridge City Council, District II Karen Adams, Wheat Ridge City Council, District III Mike Stites, Wheat Ridge City Council, District III Larry Shultz, Wheat Ridge City Council, District IV Lena Rotola, Wheat Ridge City Council, District IV EXHIBIT 3 ITEM NO: s-. REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION ~" ,".. ,'" ',. .~'t',~__ . COUNCIL MEETING DATE: July 9, 2007 TITLE: REQUESTS FOR APPROVAL OF LOT SIZE AND LOT WIDTH VARIANCES AND A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW EXPANSION OF A CATTERY WITH A WAIVER TO THE REQUIREMENT FOR RIGHT-OF- WAY DEDICATION AND PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS ESCROW ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 12410 W. 44TH A VENUE/4300 WRIGHT STREET (CASE NOS. W A-07-05 & SUP-07-03/CHRlSTENSEN) [8J PUBLIC HEARING D BIDS/MOTIONS D RESOLUTIONS D ORDINANCES FOR 1ST READING D ORDINANCES FOR 2ND READING ::~} Quasi-Judicial: [8J ~iL D No Community Development Director Ci~'~ EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Robert Christensen is requesting consideration oflot size and lot width variances and a special use pennit to allow expansion of an existing cattery at 12410 W. 44th Avenue/4300 Wright Street. Included in the request is a waiver to the requirement for a 19' right-of-way dedication and the submission of an escrow for the future installation of public improvements. The property is currently zoned Agriculture-Two (A-2) and is 41,796.5 square feet (.96 acre) in size. The applicant plans on constructing an addition to the existing cattery which has been in operation since 1956. Because the property is non-conforming relative to the minimum requirements for a kennel in the A-2 zone districts, variances must be approved before the Special Use Pennit can be granted. This request relates to the City Council goal of providing a strong partnership between the City and the community. COMMISSIONIBOARD RECOMMENDATION: There was no prior commission or board action; the request was forwarded directly to City Council for review. STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES: In February of2001 the zoning and development code was rewritten. Prior to the revisions, kennels and catteries were allowed uses in the A-2 zone district. Now, they are special uses. Although the minimum lot size and lot width have not changed, the existing parcel is currently substandard to both. There are concerns relative to Wright Street which extends south from W. 44th A venue. It is only 12' wide, is devoid of public improvements and functions more as an alley. Public Works is requesting a dedication of 19' for right-of-way and the submission of an escrow for the installation of future public improvements. The applicant is requesting a waiver ofthis requirement. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED: Do not approve the variances, special use permit or waiver. FINANCIAL IMPACT: The city has received a one-time application fee for the land use applications. Building permit fees and use taxes will be collected during construction of the addition. The City will receive sales tax revenues from any sales tax collected. RECOMMENDED MOTIONS: There are three separate requests with this application. Three separate motions are required in the order shown below. Variances for Lot Size and Lot Width Option A: "I move to approve Case No. W A- 07-05, requests for approval oflot size and lot width variances to allow for expansion ofa cattery at 12410 W. 44th A venue/4300 Wright Street, for the following reasons: 1. If the variances are granted, the business could be expanded. 2. The existing pre-fabricated building which is currently an "eyesore" would be installed as a permanent structure 3. Substantial investment in the property will occur as a result of the variances. 4. The hardship was created when the city modified the A-2 zone district regulations in 2001." OR Option B: "I move to deny Case No. W A- 07-05, requests for approval oflot size and lot width 2 variances to allow for expansion ofa cattery at 12410 W. 44th Avenue/4300 Wright Street, for the following reasons: 1.. .." If the variances are approved, the following motions can be considered. Special Use Permit Option A: "I move to approve Case No. SUP-07-03, a request for approval of a Special Use Permit to allow expansion ofa cattery at 12410 W. 44th Avenue/4300 Wright Street, for the following reasons: 1. Permanent installation of the modular structure as an addition to the existing cattery building should improve the aesthetics ofthe area. 2. The addition will appear residential in nature 3. There should be no negative impacts on area properties if the traffic properly mitigated. With the following conditions: 1. Access to Wright Street be prohibited with a physical barrier such as a fence. 2. The property be improved in accordance with Exhibit and as conditioned in #1. 3. A consolidation plat be processed at the time of building permit for the cattery expansion. 4. A building permit for the cattery expansion be submitted within 60 days City Council approval. 5. The grant of use shall be for the property and maybe inherited." OR Option B: "I move to deny Case No. SUP-07-03, a request for approval of a Special Use Permit to allow expansion ofa cattery at 12410 W. 44th Avenue/4300 Wright Street, for the following reasons: 1...." If the Special Use Permit is approved, the following motions can be considered. Waiver ofR-O-W Dedication and Escrow for Future Public Improvements Installation Option A: "I move to approve a waiver of the requirement for right-of-way dedication and for escrow for installation of future public improvements for Wright Street adjacent to 12410 W. 44th A venue/4300 Wright Street in conjunction with SUP-07-03, for the following reasons: 3 1. It is unlikely that Wright Street will be widened in the near future due to the impact on other properties adjacent to the street. 2. The absence of curb and gutter would not be unique to this property. Many streets in the area including Vivian and Xenon are devoid of public improvements." OR Option B: "1 move to deny a waiver of the requirement for right-of-way dedication and for escrow for installation of future public improvements for Wright Street adjacent to 12410 W. 44th Avenue/4300 Wright Street in conjunction with SUP-07-03, for the following reasons: 1.. .." Report Prepared by: Meredith Reckert (303-235-2848) Reviewed by: Alan White Attachments: 1. City Council staff report (with exhibits) 4 CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE PLANNING DIVISION STAFF REPORT TO: City Council DATE OF MEETING: July 9, 2007 CASE MANAGER: Meredith Reckert CASE NO. & NAME: Case Nos. W A-07-05/SUP-07-03/Christensen ACTION REQUESTED: Approval oflot size and lot width variances, a special use permit to allow expansion of a cattery with a waiver to the requirement for r-o-w dedication and escrow in lieu of installation public improvements in A-2 zoning LOCATION OF REQUEST: NAME & ADDRESS OF OWNER(S): 12410 W. 44th Avenue, 4300 Wright Street Robert Christensen APPROXIMATE AREA: 41,796.5 square feet (.96 acre) PRESENT ZONING: A-2, Agriculture-Two PRESENT LAND USE: Cattery, Vacant property ENTER INTO THE RECORD: (X) ZONING ORDINANCE (X) CASE FILE AND PACKET MATERIALS (X) DIGITAL PRESENTATION ~ SITE 8 a ~ ; ~ ~ A.~ I- ~ C> ~, ~ ~ ~ ij w ij City Council . Case No. W A -07 -05/SUP-07 -03/Christensen 1 ATTACHMENT 1 JURISDICTION: The property is within the City of Wheat Ridge, and all notification and posting requirements have been met, therefore, there is jurisdiction to hear this case. I. REQUEST The property owner owns two adjacent properties, both of which are zoned A-2, Agriculture-Two. These properties are addressed as 12410 W. 44$ Avenue and 4300 Wright Street. The combined acreage of the two parcels is just less than one acre at 41,796.5 square feet. Existing improvements on the front property (12410 W. 44th Avenue) include two single family residences both of which were built in 1939. A gravel driveway runs down the western property line of this parcel and provides access for the homes and the property to the rear. A concrete parking area is located to the rear (south) of the homes and provides parking for both residences and the cattery operation to the south. The property to the rear has a cattery (cat kennel) located on the eastern portion. The western portion is currently vacant; however, it does have a gravel parking area and drive and a modular building being stored on it. The cattery business has been in operation since 1956. The current property owner has owned the front piece (12410 W. 44th Avenue) since the early 1980's. In 1994, he acquired the adjacent property (4300 Wright Street). At some point the lot lines were modified so that the homes and associated property were separated off and the piece to the rear containing the cattery building was made larger. Staff would note that by state law, existing property lines cannot be reconfigured without going through a formal subdivision process. In February of2001 the zoning and development code was rewritten. Prior to the revisions, catteries and kennels were allowed uses in the A-2 zone district. Now, they are special uses. Although the minimum lot size and lot width have not changed, the existing parcel is currently substandard to both. The applicant is desirous of expanding the existing cattery. (Exhibits 1 and 2, Applicant Letters). In order for the cattery to be expanded the following actions must occur in the order listed: 1. Granting of variances to the minimum lot size and lot width standards for a cattery in the A-2 zone district to allow expansion of a nonconforming cattery. If this request is approved, then the following must occur. 2. Approval of a special use permit with a site plan to allow expansion of a cattery in A-2. If this request is approved then thefollowing must occur: 3. Waiver to the requirement for right-of-way dedication and an escrow in lieu of public improvements installation along Wright Street. In the fall of2006, the property owner was given a Notice and Order for Abatement of a Dangerous Building for the stored modular structure as it had become an attractive nuisance for transients. As the property owner initiated a land use ,case process, the dangerous building City Council Case No. WA-07-05/SUP-07-03/Christensen 2 abatement has been put "on hold". Should the variances and/or special use request be denied, the modular building will have to be removed from the property immediately. II. SITE PLAN A site plan has been submitted which details the improvements on the south portion of the property (4300.Wright Street). The site plan shows the pre.fabricated building as being attached to the existing cattery structure. (Exhibit 3, Site Plan). Drive access will be continued to be from W. 44th Avenue via the existing gravel driveway on 12410 W. 44th Avenue (front parcel). The property is abutted on the western side by Wright Street. Wright Street is considered a public street, is 12' in width and is paved with asphalt. The city's current standard for a typical local street would have 50' of right-of-way width with 34' of paving including curb, gutter and sidewalk. Due to the inadequate width, Wright functions more as a driveway and provides the access from 44th to two residences located at 4310 Wright Street and 4325 Wright Street. Although the applicant is showing setbacks from the "new" property line after the 19' of required dedication, he is opposed to dedicating this right-of-way which is subject to a waiver request. The proposed cattery expansion will utilize the stored modular building which has wooden siding and is a single story in height. It will have a residential appearance with a peaked roof, windows and a front entry feature (Exhibit 4, Building Elevation). No water or sanitary services are being proposed in the addition. Parking will be provided in front of the cattery expansion and is proposed to be graveled. Pursuant to Section 26-501Dl, all uses except single family dwellings in agricultural zones are required to have hard surfaced paving. Due to the nature of the business and the amount of traffic generated, staff has no problem with the graveled parking area as part of the site plan approval. The new parking area is shown as having direct access to Wright Street. A second future phase is depicted showing a single family residence for an on-site manager south of the cattery expansion. III. AGENCY REFERRALS The proposal was referred to all of the appropriate city departments and outside agencies. The following is a synopsis of their comments. Public Works: If access to Wright Street is desired, a 19' right-of-way dedication will be required. No public improvements (curb, gutter and sidewalk) will be required with the expansion but a monetary escrow for future construction of these improvements will be required. A drainage letter analyzing the new conditions will be necessary at the time of building pennit. Valley Water District: The existing cattery is using a well for water service and this may continue with the building expansion. Water service to the future manager's residence may require a water main line extension from W. 44th Avenue. . City Council Case No. WA-07-05/SUP-07-03/Christensen 3 Frnitdale Sanitation District: Current service to the cattery is from 44 tit Avenue and this can continue with the addition. Construction of the future manager's residence may require a line extension. Arvada Fire Protection District: The access drive to the new manager's residence may have to be widened for service when it is constructed. IV. NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING A meeting for neighborhood input was held on April 10, 2007. (Exhibit 5, Neighborhood Meeting Recap and Exhibit 6, Sign Up Sheet). The attendees were generally supportive of the proposed expansion; however, they reiterated that the existing modular which is being stored on the property pending SUP approval is a nuisance. Concern was expressed regarding the narrow width of Wright Street and conflicts with the kennel traffic. V. VARIANCE CRITERIA The applicant is requesting a 90' lot width variance to the 140' minimum requirement and a 1763.5 square foot variance to the one acre minimum requirement to allow expausion of a cattery in an A-2 zone district. Staff has the following comments regarding the criteria used to evaluate a variance request. City Council shall base its decision in consideration of the extent to which the applicant demonstrates a majority of the following criteria have been met: A. The property in question would not yield a reasonable return in use, service or income if permitted to be used only under the conditions allowed by regulation for the district in which it is located. If the requests are denied, the property may still receive a reasonable return in use. The property is currently being used as a cattery and that use may continue if the variances are denied. B. The variance would not alter the essential character of the locality. If the variances and special use are granted, the business could be expanded. The existing pre- fabricated building which is currently an "eyesore" would be installed as a permanent structure. However, since the property is surrounded by low density residential, care must be taken to minimize impact to theses residential properties. There is a kennel for dogs on a non-conforming lot on Xenon Street. C. The applicant is proposing a substantial investment in the property with this application, which would not be possible without the variance. If the variances and SUP are not granted, the applicant cannot expand the cattery Use. Substantial investment in the property will occur if the property owner is allowed to expand. City Council . Case No. WA-07-05/SUP-07-03/Cbristensen 4 D. The particular physical surrounding, shape or topographical condition of the specific property involved results in a particular and unique hardship (upon the owner) as distinguished from a mere inconvenience if the strict letter of the regulations were carried out. No, the lot is question has a typical rectangular shape and is relatively flat. E. The alleged difficulty or hardship has not been created by any person presently having an interest in the property. The hardship has not been created by the applicant. The City of Wheat Ridge changed the A-2 zone district requirements in 2001 which made the current property non-conforming. It is impossible for the business to expand without variance approvals. F. The granting of the variance would not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other property or improvements in the neighborhood in which the property is located, by, among other things, substantially or permanently impairing the appropriate use or development of adjacent property, impairing the adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property, substantially increasing the congestion in public streets or increasing the danger of fire or endangering the public safety, or substantially diminishing or impairing property values within the neighborhood. Granting of the variances would not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other properties or improvements in the neighborhood. Because the pre-fabricated building will be located farther away from existing homes there should be an improvement to the supply oflight and air to adjacent properties. G. The unusual circumstances or conditions necessitating the variance request are present in the neighborhood and are not unique to the property. There is a kennel for dogs in the area on Xenon Street which does not meet the lot width requirement. H. Granting of the variance would result in a reasonable accommodation of a person with disabilities. Approval of the variances would not result in the accommodation of a person with disabilities. I. The application is in substantial compliance with the applicable standards set forth in the Architectural and Site Design Manual. Properties with agricultural zoning are not subject to the requirements of the Architectural and Site Design Manual. VI. SPECIAL USE PERMIT CRITERIA City Council Case No. SUP-07-03/W A-07-05/Christensen 5 The applicant is requesting approval of a special use permit to allow the expansion of a cattery in an A-2 zone district. Staff would note that veterinarian hospitals, dog kennels and catteries are categorized together in the Agriculture and Public Facilities use chart. However, catteries have much less impact on adjacent properties due to noise generated by cats versus dogs. Staffhas the following comments regarding the criteria used to evaluate a special use. City Council shall base its decision in consideration of the VA;V"; to which the applicant demonstrates the following criteria have been met: A. 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. The expanded cattery use should not have a detrimental effect on the neighborhood if potential impacts are mitigated; of particular concern is the use of Wright Street. Due to the narrow width of the street there are potential traffic conflicts if someone is exiting Wright onto 44 th Avenue at the same time someone is trying to enter Wright from 44th. Without full width widening or at a minimmn a right-of-way dedication with escrow for future improvements, commercial cattery traffic should be prohibited from using Wright Street. Adequate full width access is already provided from a curb cut on the front parcel (12410 W. 44th Avenue). B. The special use will not create or contribute to blight in the neighborhood by virtue of physical or operational characteristics. Permanent installation of the modular structure as an addition to the existing cattery building should improve the aesthetics of the area. c. The special use will not adversely affect the adequate light and air, nor cause significant air, water or noise pollution. Catteries are less intensive than dog kennels from a noise perspective. Installation of the modular addition should not create any greater impact than is already occurring with it stored on the property. D. 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. Although the amount of increased traffic generated by the addition should be negligible, the neighborhood is currently being impacted when cattery customers enter and exit using Wright Street E. 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. City, Council , Case No. SUP-07-03/W A-07-05/Christensen 6 All setbacks, landscaping and the amount of parking provided is consistent with the zoning and development code. Being single story, the addition will be residential in nature. The new parking area is proposed as being gravel which is consistent with other agricultural properties in the area. F. The special use will not overburden the capacities of the existing streets, utilities, parks, schools and other public facilities and services. There is currently no public water and sanitation service to the rear part of the property. As this will be an addition to the existing facility, the existing well and ejector pump systems will be utilized. The future phase for a manager's residence will require installation of water and sewer main extensions in Wright Street. No permits for construction of the new residence will be used until utility service problems have been solved. G. 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. The storage of the modular building on the property for last five years is not permitted. The property owner has been aware of this violation. H. The application is in substantial compliance with the applicable standards set forth in the Architectural and Site Design Manual. Properties with agricultural zoning are not subject to the requirements of the Architectural and Site Design Manual. VII. WAIVER CRITERIA' Public Works has requested a 19' right-of-way dedication for Wright Street with a monetary escrow for future improvements in lieu of construction. Wright Street is considered a city public street even though it is 12' in width for the entire 600' extending south from 44th Avenue. The city's current standard for a typical local street is 50' of right-of-way width (or 25' for half-width) with 34' of paving including curb, gutter and sidewalk. Public Works is requesting a 19' dedication to bring the eastern half of Wright up to the 25' half-width standard for a local street. The applicant is requesting a waiver to the requested r-o-w dedication, as well as a waiver to the requirement for a monetary escrow for future Wright Street curb, gutter and sidewalk improvements. The requirement for dedication and installation of public improvements with land use applications can be assessed when substantial changes are proposed for a property. In lieu of construction ofthe necessary improvements, a monetary escrow can be required. The intent of the escrow collection is for the city to have adequate funds to construct public improvements in a particular location in the future. The escrow amount is retained by the city for a period of 10 years (for residential) or in perpetuity (for commercial). If the requirement for dedication and for a monetary escrow in lieu of installation of public improvements is not waived, both will be required at the time of building permit for the cattery expansion. City Council Case No. SUP-07-03/W A-07-05/Christensen 7 The location of this waiver request does have some history pertaining to its status with curb, gutter and sidewalks. An amendment to the Comprehensive Plan, Case No. WP A-87- 2 was passed to exempt particular streets from the requirement to construct curb, gutter and sidewalks. Wright Street at this location was included as one of those streets to become exempt. The intent of this amendment was to maintain the semi-rural character of the neighborhood. This local exempt street regulation was purposely taken out ofthe Comprehensive Plan when it was last adopted in 2000, therefore, it is no longer a regulation. Staffhas the following comments regarding the criteria used to evaluate a variance or waiver request. City Council shall base its decision in consideration of the extent to which the applicant demonstrates a majority of the following criteria have been met: A. The property in question would not yield a reasonable return in use, service or income if permitted to be used only under the conditions allowed by regulation for the district in which it is located. The cattery can still operate if the waiver is not approved. However, it is unlikely that Wright Street will be widened in the near future. To do so would impact other pLVp",.;;es adjacent to the street. (Exhibit 7, Wright Street widening) Wright Street extends south from W. 44th Avenue approximately 600' and is 12' in width for the entirety. B. The variance would not alter the essential character of the locality. Wright Street in this vicinity is devoid of any public improvements. All other properties abutting Wright are residential. Waiver of the requirement for dedication and escrow for public improvements would not alter the character of the area. C. The applicant is proposing a substantial investment in the property with this application, which would not be possible without the variance. The escrow requirement is based on a cost per lineal foot and depends on the extent of the missing public improvements. A typical cost for the installation of curb, gutter and sidewalk is around $65 per lineal foot. The property in question has 150' of frontage along Wright Street so at a minimum; the escrow requirement would be $9900. The large amount of paving for the additional 19' of street width would increase this figure substantially. D. The particular physical surrounding, shape or topographical condition of the specific property involved results in a particular and unique hardship (upon the owner) as distinguished from a mere inconvenience if the strict letter of the regulations were carried out. This criterion is not applicable to this request. E. The alleged difficulty or hardship has not been created by any person presently having an interest in the property. City Council Case No. SUP-07-03/W A-07-05/Christensen 8 It is standard procedure fot the city to request right-of-way dedication and installation of public improvements with property improvements. However, this situation is somewhat unique given the current status of Wright Street. F. The granting of the variance would not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other property or improvements in the neighborhood in which the property is located, by, among other things, substantially or permanently impairing the appropriate use or development of adjacent property, impairing the adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property, substantially increasing the congestion in public streets or increasing the danger of fire or endangering the public safety, or substantially diminishing or impairing property values within the neighborhood. None of these factors should be affected by approval or denial of this request. G. The unusual circumstances or conditions necessitating the variance request are present in the neighborhood and are not unique to the property. Many of the streets in the area including Xenon and Vivian are devoid of public improvements. The absence of curb and gutter would not be unique to this property. H. Granting of the variance would result in a reasonable accommodation of a person with disabilities, Approval of the waiver would not result in the accommodation of a person with disabilities. I. The application is in substantial compliance with the applicable standards set forth in the Architectural and Site Design ManuaL Properties with agricultural zoning are not subject to the requirements of the Architectural and Site Design Manual. VIII. RELATED CORRESPONDENCE Attached is correspondence received from the adjacent property owner to the south. (Exhibit 8, Letter) IX. STAFF CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Staff concludes that the requested variances and special use permit would allow a nonconforming use to expand and allow the property owner to invest in his business. The requests should not have a negative impact on area properties if traffic impacts are mitigated. Staff recommends APPROVAL of the lot size and lot width variances and the special use requests. Staff further recommends approval of the waiver for dedication and public improvements escrow with the condition that no cattery access be allowed on Wright Street as a condition of the SUP approval. The special,use permit should be a grant to the property. City Council Case No. SUP-07-03/WA-07-05/Cbristensen 9 X. RECOMMENDED MOTIONS Variances for Lot Size and Lot Width Option A: "I move to approve Case No. W A- 07-05, requests for aRproval oflot size and lot width variances to allow for expansion ofa cattery at 12410 W. 44 Avenue/4300 Wright Street, for the following reasons: I. If the variances are granted, the business could be expanded. 2. The existing pre-fabricated building which is currently an "eyesore" would be installed as a permanent structure 3. Substantial investment in the property will occur as a result of the variances. 4. The hardship was created when the city modified the A-2 zone district regulations in 2001. OR Option B: "I move to deny Case No. W A- 07-05, requests for approval oflot size and lot width variances to allow for expansion of a cattery at 12410 W. 44th Avenue/4300 Wright Street, for the following reasons: 1.. .." Special Use Permit Option A: "I move to approve Case No. SUP-07-03, a request for approval of a Special Use Permit to allow expansion ofa cattery at 12410 W. 44th Avenue/4300 Wright Street, for the following reasons: 1. Permanent installation of the modular structure as an addition to the existing cattery building should improve the aesthetics of the area. 2. The addition will appear residential in nature 3. There should be no negative impacts on area properties if traffic is properly mitigated." With the following conditions: I. Access to Wright Street be prohibited with a physical barrier such as a fence. 2. The property be improved in accordance with Exhibit and as conditioned in #1. 3. A consolidation plat be processed at the time of building permit for the cattery expansion. 4. A building permit for the cattery expansion be submitted within 60 days City Council approval. 5. The grant of use shall be for the property and may be inherited". OR City. Council Case No. SUP-07-03/W A-07-05/Christensen 10 Option B: "I move to deny Case No. SUP-07-03, a request for approval ofa Special Use Pennit to allow expansion of a cattery at 12410 W. 44th Avenue/4300 Wright Street, for the following reasons: 1...." Waiver for R-O-W Dedication and Escrow for Future Public Improvements Installation Option A: "I move to approve a waiver of the requirement for dedication and escrow for future public improvements for Wright Street adjacent to 12410 W. 44th Avenue/4300 Wright Street in conjunction with SUP-07-03, for the following reasons: 1. It is unlikely that Wright Street will be widened in the near future due to the impact on other properties adjacent to the street. 2. The absence of curb and gutter would not be unique to this property. Many streets in the area including Xenon are devoid of public improvements." OR Option B: "I move to deny a waiver of the requirement for dedication and escrow for future public improvements for Wright Street adjacent to 12410 W. 44th Avenue/4300 Wright Street in conjunction with SUP-07-03, for the following reasons: 1. ..." City Council Case No. SUP-07-03/W A-07-05/Christensen ,11 THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE REQUEST FOR VARIANCE The "Cat Spa Cat Kennel" celebrates its 50" Anniversary this year, offering quality care for cats only since 1956. I purchased the property and business in 1983. We have vastly improved the Kennel into one of the finest facilities and services in the metro area. Without any written notice to us, our zoning was changed from a Use by Right, offering us an optimistic future, to a Special Use, with no ability to expand or improve our business. This devastating change is catastrophic to our future plans and the value of my property and business. In investigating the 1 acre minimum requirement, there seems to be little reason a cat kennel was included, other than it was easier. I firmly believe, if I had been present, I would not have to spend $480 and lots of time now to try to save my future. Our original property was a half acre. It was only 50 ft. wide and over 400ft. long. We purchased the adjoining property (4300 Wright St., see survey) in 1991 in order to expand. We met with the City of Wheat Ridge and explored our expansion plans. We were encouraged and proceeded to purchase a modular building. When we submitted our plans for a building permit we discovered the zoning requirements had been changed in the interim and we were refused. Any examination of our use will clearly indicate that the one-acre minimum is far greater than needed. Our CtUTent facility covers about 1200 sq. ft. including outside runs. Even with the addition of the 1400 sq. ft. modular we would use little of the 30,000 sq. ft. available. Please note, the 200' width and 150' depth does meet all other requirements of size, and setback requirements. I. Minimum of one acre is excessive for a cattery's' needs, and the minimal impact of our operation on our neighbors. 2. We have been a part of Wheat Ridge for 50 years. We employ two full time staff and several part time employees. We believe we also provide a very valuable service to your residents. 3. We did not have a reasonable opportunity to influence the zoning changes, and if we had it seems a lower minimum would have been achievable. 4. Our 200 foot width and 150 depth allow us ample room to achieve CtUTent requirements and setback. We urgently request that you issue us a variance so we are able to proceed with our expansion and finish landscaping the whole property. Obviously your variance would have an enormous impact on us financially. All of our work and money spent on improvements over 23 years would have little value if we and future owners cannot make improvement as they are needed. - '> EXHIBIT 1 ~m October 9,2006 City of Wheat Ridge 7500 W. 29th. Ave. Colorado 80215 Dear Meredith; Thank you for meeting with me last week. I appreciate your suggestions and help. To summerize, I purchased the Cat Spa in 1983. We have operated it every since, and have made it into the premiere cat only kennels in the area. We purchased a parcel just west of our original land in order to enlarge and improve the kennel. About 2000 I came in an inquired about adding a building to the kennel. I was encouraged and proceeded to purchase a modular building. After some medical problems I submitted a building application in August 2001. I then discovered that the Zoning had been changed for my property. I had never received a single notice that anything was being discussed that would so radically effect my business and ultimately the future value of my labor. No one can explain why my use was changed from a use by right to a special use requiring a minimum of One acre. I am now facing a deadline to remove the modular after understanding that it was ok for awhile if I cleaned up the rest of the lot. I request to the city to restore my use as it was, and to require one half of an acre for cat kennels. My current kennel requires only about 14 by 70 feet, with none of the concerns of a dog facility. The Cat Spa has been in continual business since 1956. I have owned it for the last 23 years and have worked hard to improve the kennel. Please help me remedy my current situation, which has no avenue through a variance or petition. Sincerely yours, ",d Ian C2ttensen ~W~ EXHIBIT 2 7500 West 29th Avenue Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80033 303/235-2846 Fax: 303/235-2857 The City of "Wheat Ridge Date: April 10, 2007 City Staff Present: Meredith Reckert Location of meeting: Second Floor Conference Room, Wheat Ridge Municipal Building, 7500 W. 29th Avenue Property address: 12410 W. 44th Avenue, 4300 Wright Street Property owners: Robert Christensen Property Owner(s) present? Yes Applicant representatives: N/A Existing Zoning: Agriculture-Two Comprehensive Plan Designation: Community Commercial Center Existing Use/site conditions: The property owner owns two adjacent properties, both of which are zoned A-2, Agriculture-Two. These properties are addressed as 12410 W. 44th Avenue and 4300 Wright Street. Existing improvements on the front property (12410 W. 44th A venue) include two single family residences both of which were built in 1939. A gravel driveway runs down the western property line of this parcel and provides access for the homes and the property to the rear. A concrete parking area is located to the rear (south) of the homes and appears to provide parking for both residences and the cattery operation. The property to the rear has a cattery (cat kennel) located on the eastern portion. The western portion is currently vacant; however, it does have a graveled parking area with associated drive and a modular building being stored on it. The current property owner has owned the front piece since the early 1980's. In 1994, he acquired the adjacent property. At some point the lot lines were modified so that the homes and associated property were separated off and the piece to the rear containing the cattery building was made larger. Staff would note that by state law, existing property lines cannot be reconfigured without going through a formal subdivision process. In February of2001 the zoning and development code was rewritten. Prior to the revisions, kennels were an allowed use in the A-2 zone district. Now, they are a special use. The minimum lot size and lot width for a kennel in the A-2 zone are one acre and 140' respectively. The combined lots do not meet this standard. EXHIBIT 5 1 Applicant's Proposal: The applicant would like to expand the existing cattery operation on the rear of the site by installing the temporary buildings permanently and making landscaping and paving/parking improvements. A future house to be utilized as a manager' residence is also being considered. The following issues were discussed regarding the SUP request: . Will Wright Street be used as a part of the operation? The owner would like to utilize Wright Street as a one-way exit from the site. It was noted that Wright Street is very narrow and fire trucks will not come down it as there is no place to turn around at the end. . When are the cattery's heavy use times? There are usually 50-70 cats on the premises at any one time. The heaviest use times are before and during holiday weekends. Besides the heavy use times, there are only about five client cars entering and exiting the property per day. . How close will the new buildings be to the southern property line? The modular building will be located in the vicinity of the existing kennel. The fUture manager's residence will be located 24 ' north of the property's southern property line. . What improvements will be made to the modular? The modular is wooden sided and will be converted into a residential-looking structure. . Is any lighting being proposed? Low level, downcast lighting will be used. . Concern was expressed by the neighbors regarding transients breaking into the modular and using it for shelter. The police have contacted the property owner for permission to enter the property and ticket transients for trespassing when they are reported and found on the property. The owner indicated that the on-site personnel will try to keep an eye on the modular. . What is the timeline for the project? The property owner will be movingforward as quickly as possible. The attending area property owners were supportive of the project and proposed expansion; however, they reiterated that the existing modular is a nuisance and hazard as it is located very close to the common property line. 2 \;J ,,-..., \> - ~ - ~ ...... (\ -- ~ <j..;> .s:. 0- if) - --::Y "'" (/'\ co 0 - II) -J II) 'f- ~ , )::.- (' ~~ f;:' r , ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 'JJ :;t 19 ~ fl '\J ~\ ~ \': (2; 0 .... ~1(1l1"Bl'f 6 ,....:, 01 ()"\ ~ ().) N ~ ~ -f. ~ ~ ~ 'tJ ~ ~ D " . .-1 1- ~<J __ :, 1 - ;t- V ~ ""0 ~ ~ rn ""0 ~ ~ (/) "0 CO (') -' ~ C II) CO _' "'0 ~ CO "'" ~Q.)3 ~~ -. - 0')::0.... ' 0'0 '0 ~ ..., 0') ~. .c:. 0)".-- "",tol_O~ c'5g~c:>O :1' CO ii:, "'0 ~ .... ~N (/)a:~=-O ~ tp,. "0 ~ CO "","" - CO -.S ....~II) ~O' ~ 9... Q.) (') ~ CO ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ m ~ ~ W N ~ 0 ~0 Vu.. ;tf\ 11 <C' ~~. ~I c: r .,c 0" W 6 " ~ [/ E L?: ,1 1":f; '2{2 ~ . T" yt- ~l /, ('v P ,.. yl', I ..~ <.. r- ~ tv \'iH"". CITY OF WHL=.Ar RIIJGE , o~ /~ 110, i () ~ \ 1"'" OEP r OF PUBLIC Ij eNGINEERING 01' EXHIBIT 7 " C?L<,;.{,'\:\-' / . Richard A. Weber, Ph.D. . . July 2, 2007 Wheat Ridge City Council . C/O Mer~dith R~<;:kert, Senior Planner City of Wheat Ridge-Municipal Building 7500 W 29th Ave. Wheat Ridge, CO 80033-8001 Regarding Case No. WA-06...17 Expansion of Cattery on 4300 Wright Street Dear M~mbers ofthe City Council: Our family owns. the property at 4310 Wright Street adjoining the property where the proposed expansion of the Cattery is planned. Our northern lot line is the southern lot line of Cattery property. The purpose for this letter is to add testimony for your consideration relative to this expansion request. It is clear that the Cattery is not in compliance with City of Wheat Ridge ordinances nor has it been for some time, particularly, with the storage of a large doublewide trailer in the southwest portion of the lot adjacent to Wright Street. The structure is very deteriorated and is located to the detriment of the neighors both in terms of fire hazard and for transient activity, Both these conditions have been reported to the Wheat Ridge Police and to Code Enforcement without expedited action since the Cattery has filed for this expansion delaying code enforcement. With that said, the Cattery expansion plan, on its face, would improve the property if built and maintained with care. However, the plan for expansion has a major flaw, ingress and egress for the expansion area. The site plan shows two driveways. One of these dirt driveways has already been created for Cattery traffic even though the drive has not been properly designated for such use. The proposed plan also has a second driveway toward the south, again, using Wright Street as an access and exit for Cattery business. These drives are the focus of the flaw in the Cattery expansion proposal. Arguably, Wright Street is not a typical street. Although named and claimed by Wheat Ridge as a street, it has no characteristics that would .-- Phone (303) 422-1986 . 4310 Wright Street . Wheat Ridge, Colorado 80033 EXHIBIT 8 define it as a street via Wheat Ridge standards. It was originally created as a right of way to only service the properties at 4310, 4320 and 4325 Wright Street as designated in historical Deeds of Trust. When one visually inspects Wright Street, a common sense conclusion is reached that Wright Street was intended as a driveway and access for three properties nexus to 44th Avenue, speCifically, the properties mentioned above. Wright Street is only 10-11 feet wide its entire length! It would not even be characterized as a good driveway or ally by current standards. It can only accommodate one car going one direction at a time. If cars are entering and leaving Wright Street at the same time, one vehicle must back up onto 44th Avenue or back the other direction onto private property to allow for one vehicle to pass, There is no public accessible turn around areas on Wright Street. So, one must access private property when wishing to change directions or back onto 44th Avenue to leave Wright Street if you are not an invited guest to one of the properties Wright Street serves. Wright Street is also denied larger emergency vehicle access because of its narrowness and lack of turn around space, As with typical streets, Wright Street has no gutters for water run-off, no water lines or fire hydrant service for emergencies, or city sewer lines. The City of Wheat Ridge prOVides no road services to maintain Wright Street. The Bright family, at 4325 Wright Street, does all maintenance, including snow removal, weed mitigation and tree/brush pruning, without compensation. In addition, Wright Street appears to have only a thin layer of asphalt paving making its structure questionable for increased commercial traffic. Other than by name, Wright Street is only a minimal right of way access to several properties and does not have any characteristics that would make it an appropriate ingress or egress for commercial facility expansion. If the Cattery expansion is approved, it will dramatically and directly impact our property and the other two properties on the access by increasing vehicle traffic. That traffic will assuredly use private property for turn around when finding no legitimate turn around availability. In addition, increased vehicle traffic creates the expansion of "head on" vehicle issues causing a potential hazardous situation as expressed forward. Expansion of commercial activity without emergency services availability adequately supported by the infrastructure typically found on real "streets" e.g. fire hydrants, is very problematic and needs serious consideration. If the Cattery expansion is approved, it will be incombunant on the City to review and upgrade Wright Street both in its maintenance and services to make the street usable for commercial traffic. I assume, with expanded commercialization, the City will need to put proper fire hydrant available down Wright Street in case fire occurs, again, begging the question of whether emergency vehicles will even enter a 10 foot wide street to service a fire or emergency situation. The Council must foresee the impact of allowing this small right of way to service anything other than the residence that historically used it to enter and leave their property verses the impact of increased commercialization on a street never intended for such use. Herein lays our objections to the plan as proposed. I have included several pictures starting at 44th Avenue entering Wright Street down through our property. It becomes quite clear where the problems are by expanding any commercial activity onto Wright Street access. Your consideration of these comments is appreciated. ffJvI- . Richard A. Weber .~~I.~~".~i~(~~Zt:~~~~~~1~I~Ji~:lf~Is~~~'~:~0;:J~{~1~~r;~~~t~~~ Entrance to Wright st from 44th " As you enter Wright street off 44th Ave. From 44th Ave. heading south on Wright Sf \ 1/3rd the way down Wright Sf ,. ." '.!_ " .i~'c , . '~~ - Double wides stored on Cattery lot next to Wright st. and to be used as a building in the proposal. Enterinq property at 4310 Wriqht st ~\ '-"';c, ,;'.'~- ?-;i.~?! ;,,;~,it1z;'~'::!~~~~ "':~.,"~"~"'~ :~~ l€~~~, ,,; ,.""p" . (~~ /,."...... ,1 r ~.4:~ ;~~~.~,. .;::i..~i.!.:-' " "" .--:(~,Jo-:- ~~:-~~":' ~ \:f~~-..... View of Wright st. from most southern end of steet. Line shows street boundries. -0":'- Exiting Wright st. to 44th Ave + , What happens when leaving WrightSteet from my property at 4310 Wright street. This car is just coming in from 44th Ave and had to back out onto 44 th because there is no turn around! ITEM NO: ~. REQUEST- FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION . , COUNCIL MEETING DATE: July 9, 2007 . TITLE: RESOLUTION 15-2007 - A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2007 GENERAL FUND BUDGET TO REFLECT THl!; APPROVAL OF A SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET APPROPRIATION FOR ADDITIONAL STUDY TO BE COMPLETED FOR THE W ADSWORTHCORRIDOR SUBAREA PLAN IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $39,950.00 o PUBLIC HEARING o BIDS/MOTIONS ~ RESOLUTIONS o ORDINANCES FOR 1ST READING (Date: o ORDINANCES FOR 2ND READING ) Quasi-Judicial: 0 ~ Yes No ~~/1Jk City~~ \ Community Development Director , EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: On March 26,2007 City Council conducted a public hearing concerning adoption ofthe Wadsworth Corridor Subarea Plan. The motion adopted by Council that night, among other things, called for further study of the right-of-way needed to widen Wadsworth, including but not limited to detailed road design studies to assess the feasibility of the multi-way boulevard, and to refine and finalize design concepts for intersections. In the motion Council also allocated funding for the additional study in an amount up to $40,000.00. , Staffhas negotiated a scope of services with Charlier Associates which addresses the additional study Council directed to be completed and the amount allocated for the additional study. Approval of this resolution implements Council's goals of preparing for growth and opportunities and redeveloping major corridors. COMMISSION/BOARD RECOMMENDATION: None STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES: The original budget for implementation of the NRS did not include funds for hiring traffic engineers or transportation consultants, nor did the scope of work include detailed engineering. The draft Subarea Plan presented to Council on March 26th reflects this. Charlier Associates is a nationally recognized transportation planning consulting firm that has a reputation for developing unique solutions to difficult problems. They will be performing the work as a sub consultant to Winston Associates. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED: None. FINANCIAL IMPACT:. The fund balance of the 2007 General Fund will decrease by $39,950.00 as a result of this supplemental budget appwp,;ation. There are adequate funds in the General Fund unreserved fund balance to meet this request. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "1 move to approve Resolution 15-2007 - A Resolution Amending the Fiscal Year 2007 General Fund Budget to Reflect the Approval of a Supplemental Budget Appropriation for additional study to be completed for the Wadsworth Corridor Subarea Plan in an amount not to exceed $39,950.00." or, "1 move to postpone indefinitely Resolution 15-2007 - A Resolution Amending the Fiscal Year 2007 General Fund Budget to Reflect the Approval of a Supplemental Budget Appropriation for additional study to be completed for the Wadsworth Corridor Subarea Plan in an amount not to exceed $39,950.00 for the followingreason(s) " Report Prepared by: Alan White, Community Development Director Reviewed by: Attachments: 1. Scope of Services 2. Resolution 15-2007 1:\Comdev\Wadsworth Subarea Plan\Subarea Plan Supplemental Budget CAY (2).doc Wadsworth Boulevard Study May 7, 2007 1 v2 PROPOSED SCOPE OF SERVICES , Task 1. Technical advisors. Boulevards have implications for'several groups including RTD, CDOT, the Wheat Ridge Fire and Police Departments. a. Hold two technical adviser meetings with all of these entities invited to identify and address specific issues of a Boulevard Treatment. (Two meetings total) b. Develop design concepts reflecting technical input. c. Continue communication with CDOT throughout the project. TASK 1 DELlVERABLES: . Meeting Notes. Task 2. Intersection Treatment Catalogue. Wheat Ridge residents and business owners need more information about potential design treatments at intersections. a. Develop a catalogue of Viable boulevard intersection treatments. b. Evaluate and graphically explain the operations of each potential treatment, including through traffic, local access, potential points of connict and associated safety issues, and pedestrian and bicycle circulation; c. Publish the intersection catalogue in both printed document and PowerPoint format. d. Highlight vehicle access routes from through lanes on the boulevard to adjacent businesses. TASK 2 DELIVERABLES: . Intersection treatment catalogue: printed document (PDF). . Intersection treatment catalogue 'presentation (PPT). Task 3. Pedestrian Realm Guidelines. Good design of the pedestrian realm is critical for Wadsworth is to become a pedestrian place. a. Define components influencing the pedestrian environment. These include the furnishing zone, the sidewalk and the setback zone. Explicitly define which components are within the right of way a,nd which belong to the adjacent land uses. b. Set guidelines for widths of all components of the pedestrian realm. c. Use SketchUp to visually represent the pedestrian realm and its components. Use existing Sketch Up work as a f,JUndation, where appropriate. , TASK 3 DELlVERABLES: . Pedestrian Guidelines Printed Document (PDF). . Sketch Up Visualization Files (SketchUp). ~~ Charlier Associates, Inc. ATTACHMENT 1 Wadsworth Boulevard Study May 7,2007 2 v2 Task 4. Boulevard Alternatives a. Create two alternatives to the boulevard concept. (These have not been developed but one possibility is a parkway.) b. Use SketchUp to represent these boulevard alternatives in three dimensions. SketchUp diagrams will depict lane widths, pedestrian realm dimensions, transit stop locations and access routes to adjacent businesses. c. Use ITE's Context Sensitive Design Manual to explore alternative lane widths and other design parameters. d. In cooperation with the City and with Winston Associates, identify a recommended alternative. TASK 4 DELlVERABLES: . Plan view drawings of three alternatives printed document (PDF). . Sketch Up visualization files (SketchUp). Task 5. Community Involvement. Community, property owner and business operator support is critical to accepting any design alternative. a. Hold a day of meetings with individual landowners to go over the alternatives in one- onMone discussions. b. Hold one public workshop before returning to Council. Present project alternatives. c. Create a web resource site on Charlier Associates website. Website will contain design alternatives, press releases, maps, drawings, etc. d. Present the recommended alternative to City Council. TASK 5 DELlVERABLES: . Meeting notes. . Web Site. PROPOSED PROJECT SCHEDULE Task 1. Technical Advisors ITaSk 2. Intersection Treatment Catalogue ITaSk 3. Pedestrian Realm Guidelines ITaSk 4. Boulevard Alternatives ITaSk 5. Community Involvement a MAY 3 4 4 AuGUST Z * * Project Event Council Presentation r~ Charlier Associates, Inc. Wadsworth Boulevard Study May 7,2007 3 v2 ESTlMA TED BUDGET . Task 1. Technical Advisors Task 2. Intersection Treatment Catalogue Task 3. Pedestrian Realm Guidelines Task 4. Boulevard Alternatives Task 5. Community Involvement ,...- CAI- Proposed Time Allocation Staff Rate Task 1 Task 2 Task 3 Task4 Task 5 SUBTOTAL Charlier - Principal in Charge $220 8 6 2 8 16 40 McCarey - Transportation Planner $95 20 20 20 35 20 115 Malde - Transportation Planner $75 12 40 20 120 0 192 Musser - Transportation Planner $115 0 0 8 4 0 12 Johnson - GIS Analyst $50 0 0 0 40 0 40 ChoppinQ - Web DesiQn $55 0 0 0 0 30 30 Subtotal 42 66 81 110 70 429 eAI- Estimate of Fees Staff Ta51< 1 I Task 2 Task 3 Task 4 TaskS SUBTOTAL Charlier - Principal in Charge $1,760 $1,320 $440 $1,760 $3,520 $8,800 McCarey - Transportation Planner $1,900 $1,900 $1,900 $3,325 $1,900 $10,925 .' Malde - Transportation Planner $900 $3,000 $1,500 $9,000 $0 $14,400 Musser - Transportation Planner $0 $0 $920 $460 $0 $1,380 Johnson - GIS Analyst $0 $0 $0 $2,000 $0 $2,000 ChoppinQ - Web DesiQn $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,650 $1,650 Subtotal $4,5601 $6,2201 $4,760"1 $16,545 $7,070, $39,155 Direct Expenses. - Cost Basis I Roundtrip MileaQe (To Wheat RidQe) 40 I Cost per vehicle mile $0.485 I B & W Reproduction/PaQe - 8.5 x 11 $0.10 I B & W Reprodudion/PaQe - 11 x 17 $0.20 I Binding & Assembly/Copy $1.25 I Color Reproduction/PaQe -.8.5 x 11 $1.00 I Color ReproductionlPaQe - 30x40 $40.00 I Web-Based Teleconference/minute $0.441 CAI- Estimate of Expenses Task 1 Task 2 Task 3 Task 4 Task 5 SUBTOTAL Number of trips to City of Wheat Ridge 2 1 0 0 3 6 B&W pages (8.5 x 11) 250 250 250 250 250 1250 B&W pages (11 x 17) 50 50 50 50 50 250 Color pages (8.5 xii) 10 10 10 10 10 50 Color Reproduction/PaQe - 30x40 0 0 0 0 10 10 Printing, Reproduction, Binding $45 $45 $45 $45 $445 $625 Mileage Reimbursement $39 $19 $0 $0 $58 $116 Other (CDs, parcel shippinQ, etc.) $0 $18 $18 $0 $18 $54 TOTAL PROJECT $8~ $82 $63 $45 $521 $795 TOTAL BUDGET I Task 1 Task 2 TaskS Task 7 Task 8 SUBTOTAl~ Charlier Fees $4,560 $6,220 $4,760 $16,545 $7,070 $39,155 Direct Expenses $84 $82 $63 $45 $521 $795 TOTAL PROJECT $4,644 $6,302 $4,823 $16,590 $7,591 $39,9501 ri'~ Charlier Associates, Inc. .' RESOLUTION 15-2007 Series of 2007 TITLE: A RESOLUTION AMENDINGltlE FISCAL YEAR 2007 GENERAL FUND BUDGET TO REFLECT . THE APPROVAL OF A SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET APPROPRIATION FOR ADDITIONAL STUDY TO BE COMPLETED FOR THE WADSWORTH CORRIDOR SUBAREA PLAN IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $39,950.00 i WHEREAS, on March 26, 2007 City Council adopted a motion to conduct further study of the right-of-way needed to widen Wadsworth, including but not limited to detailed road design studies to assess the feasibility of the Multi-way Boulevard and refine concepts for intersections; and WHEREAS, the City Council further moved to allocate funding for the additional Multi-way Boulevard and intersection study up to the amount of $40,000.00; and. WHEREAS, City staff has negotiated a scope of work with a consultant that addresses City Council's motion. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Wheat Ridge, Colorado, as follows: A. The City of Whe'at Ridge fiscal year 2007 General Fund Budget be amended accordingly, specifically transferring a total of$39,950.00 from General Fund unreserved fund balance into account #01-105-700-750. DONE ANQ RESOLVED THIS day of July, 2007, Jerry DiTullio, Mayor ATTEST: Michael Snow, City Clerk ATTACHMENT 2 City of Wheat Ridge Office of the Mayor Memorandum TO: City Council cc: Planning Commission Randy Young, City Manager Alan White, Community Development Director Rob Osborn, Wheat Ridge 2020 Randy Jensen, Regional Transportation Director for CDOT Region Six FROM: Jerry DiTullio, Mayor DATE: 7/2/2007 SUBJECT: Wadsworth Corridor Plan Recommendations and Next Steps As you know, there have been ongoing discussions with citizens, property owners, CDOT staff, DRCOG staff, City staff, Councilmember Schulz, Council member Berry and the Mayor's Office with regards to the proposed Wadsworth Corridor Plan. The goal has to been to develop a common-sense and timely approach to the reconstruction of Wadsworth Blvd. and to examine the possibility offunding an Environmental Assessment (EA) or an Environmental Impact Study (EIS) in conformance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) by CDOT. Either study would eventually be required by CDOT before any actual reconstruction takes place on Wadsworth Blvd. Performing the required NEPA study would facilitate a more efficient time schedule and funding mechanism for the possible reconstruction of Wadsworth Blvd. A NEPA study by CDOT is a full and transparent public process that generally takes 12 -18 months to complete. I would like to thank Region 6 Director Randy Jensen from CDOT and his staff for attending multiple meetings with Wheat Ridge and providing valuable input. Based on these high level discussions, the following proposed action plan and motions are recommended to City Council for the July 9th City Council meeting: 2 Julv 9th City Council Meetina, I MOVE to indefinitely postpone City Council Resolution 15-2007 a resolution amending the 2007 budget for funding of a Wadsworth Blvd traffic study by the City. Council VOTE I MOVE to rescind parts of the motion made on March 26, 2007 directing staff to refine the road design concepts and present them to Council prior to October 23, 2007, and directing staff to prepare an overlay zone to establish a build-to line. Council VOTE I MOVE to direct the City Manager's Office to modify the draft Wadsworth Corridor Plan to read as follows: o Public road improvements along Wadsworth Blvd, within the plan area, shall not exceed 150 feet in width. o Language regarding the preferred alternative of a multi-way boulevard shall be amended to include the range of alternatives outlined in the Appendix: the multi-way boulevard, the modified 1999 template, and the asymmetrical boulevard. I FURTHER MOVE to direct that the City Manager's Office shall modify the Architectural and Site Design Manual to change the overlay area designation along Wadsworth Blvd, within the plan area, from Contemporary to Traditional. Within the setback range established for the traditional overlay area, The City Manager's Office shall set minimum and maximum building setbacks, so that the pedestrian features of the three Roadway Design Alternatives are preserved. I FURTHER MOVE that prior to August 27, 2007, the Planning Commission shall hold at least one public hearing on the modified Wadsworth Plan and forward its final recommendations on the plan to City Council. I FURTHER MOVE that on August 27,2007, in a public hearing, the City Council shall consider adoption of the modified Wadsworth Corridor Plan. 3 Auaust 27.2007 Public Hearinq (Public Hearing motions and resolutions to be drafted by the City Manager's Office as needed based on the following action plan below) . At a public hearing, City Council will act on the modified plan. City Council believes it is in the best interest of the community to further study the range of roadway alternatives for Wadsworth in conformance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). To that end, upon adoption of the Wadsworth Plan, the City Manager's Office shall: o Submit a Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) application to the Denver Regional Council of Governments for a Wadsworth Corridor NEPA study. o Prepare a budget amendment to the 2007 budget for 50% of the costs of the NEPA study. The monies will be taken out of the city's reserve and used as a 50% match. The monies will only be used if 50% funding from other sources, such as CDOT or DRCOG, is obtained. . In a separate resolution, approve a budget amendment to pay 50% of the costs of the NEPA study. This need not be done until CDOT is ready to do the study. Otherwise, a supplemental appropriation will have to be made each year to carry over the funds. . Direct the City Manager's Office to submit a copy of the 1999 Wadsworth Plan to CDOT as additional information to consider during the NEPA study. Please feel free to call with questions or clarifications. Thank you.