HomeMy WebLinkAboutStudy Session Agenda Packet 05-03-21STUDY SESSION AGENDA
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO
May 3, 2021 6:30 p.m.
This meeting will be conducted as a VIRTUAL MEETING. No members of the Council or City staff will be physically present at the Municipal building for this meeting; the public may not attend in person. The public may participate in these ways: 1. Provide comment in advance at www.wheatridgespeaks.org (comment by noon on May 3, 2021)
2. Virtually attend and participate in the meeting through a device or phone:
• Click here to join and provide public comment
• Or call +1-669-900-6833 with Access Code: 910 0053 2853 Passcode: 900563
3. View the meeting live or later at www.wheatridgespeaks.org, Channel 8, or YouTube Live at https://www.ci.wheatridge.co.us/view 4. Individuals who, due to technology limitations, are unable to participate in the meeting virtually (via the Zoom platform) or by calling in on the telephone may contact Danitza
Sosa, Assistant to the Mayor and City Council, at 303-235-2977 by noon on the day of the meeting. Arrangements will be made for those individuals to access City Hall during the meeting to view the meeting and provide public comment if desired. These comments will be heard and seen in real time by members of Council and City staff.
Individuals accessing City Hall must practice social distancing, wear a mask or other facial covering and be free of COVID-19 symptoms.
Individuals with disabilities are encouraged to participate in all public meetings sponsored
by the City of Wheat Ridge. Contact the Public Information Officer at 303-235-2877 or wrpio@ci.wheatridge.co.us with as much notice as possible if you are interested in participating in a meeting and need inclusion assistance.
Citizen Comment on Agenda Items
1. Contract Renewal – Judge Municipal Court
2. Strategic Plan workplan
a) New efforts in engagement of the community
b) Implement bulk plane in all residential zone districts
3. Staff Report(s)
a) New FTE for building permit reviews
4. Elected Officials’ Report(s) ADJOURNMENT
City of Wheat Ridge Municipal Building 7500 W. 29th Ave. Wheat Ridge, CO 80033-8001 P: 303.235.2835 F: 303.235.2829
www.ci.wheatridge.co.us
Item No. 1
April 23, 2021
Honorable Bud Starker, Mayor Members of the Wheat Ridge City Council Patrick Goff, City Manager City of Wheat Ridge 7500 W. 29th St.
Wheat Ridge, CO 80033 Mayor Starker, City Manager, and Members of City Council:
The City Charter creates a municipal court and directs the city council to appoint a presiding judge. The Charter requires that all municipal judges have been on the bench or have practiced law for a period of years. I have thirty-five (35) years in the practice of law and twenty-nine (29) years on the bench; nineteen (19) have been as the Presiding Judge in Wheat Ridge.
The Charter states that Council shall appoint a Presiding Judge for a term of two (2) years. By charter, the duties of the judge are to supervise court personnel and submit a yearly budget. The Supreme Court establishes a mandate as well: to justly determine all ordinance violations, ensure criminal law procedures, administer cases fairly, and follow city, state, and
federal laws and constitutions. Over the years there has been an explosion of legislation directed at municipal courts. As a result, the presiding judge reviews and incorporates new legislation into the operation of the court.
The Colorado Code of Judicial Conduct (Code) guides judicial ethics and requires
independence, impartiality, competence, and integrity. Inherent in the Code is the precept that judges must respect and honor the judicial office as a public trust and strive to maintain and enhance confidence in the legal system.
I began as Presiding Judge in Wheat Ridge in January 2002 and have been the Presiding
Judge since then. Each services agreement is for a two-year term. My most recent two-year contract for services began July 2019 and ends June 2021. I am requesting renewal of the contract. Please see the enclosed Memo for information about court, accomplishments, projects, and goals.
I work an average of thirty (30) hours per week. Regular court sessions take about twenty-four (24) hours a week, and most court days take nine hours to complete. Preparation for
jury trials and the jury trials add a few days per year. Other work hours are related to new
legislation, extended court sessions, managerial duties, director obligations, legal research, administrative matters, budget, personnel issues, and meetings. I am not requesting a change in contract provisions.
This is a dynamic City with an interesting court docket. I enjoy the challenge and energy of the City and the court. I look forward to another two years to continue to provide service.
Sincerely yours,
/s/ Christopher D Randall
Christopher D. Randall
Presiding Judge and Department Director Wheat Ridge Municipal Court ATTACHMENTS:
1. Memo
2. Purpose of City Code 3. Court Mission and Goals
Memorandum
TO: City Council, Mayor, and City Manager FROM: Christopher D Randall, Presiding Judge and Department Director DATE: April 26, 2021 (for May 3rd Study Session) SUBJECT: Presiding Judge and Department Director Contract Renewal
BACKGROUND I began as Presiding Judge and Department Director in 2002 and have been in that position for
nineteen (19) years. I am requesting renewal of the current two-year contract that expires June
30, 2021. COURT The Colorado Constitution and City Code provide for the creation of a municipal court. Wheat
Ridge Municipal Court is a court of record that handles a wide variety of mostly criminal
matters. Appeals are taken to the Jefferson County District Court. Municipal court is headed by a Presiding Judge. Court is in session Tuesday through Thursday, so there are approximately 150 court-sessions per year. I work on non-court days for judicial and administrative court business.
QUALIFICATIONS I have been licensed as an attorney in Colorado since 1987. I became an administrative law judge in 1991 and began judging in municipal courts in 1992. Wheat Ridge City Council appointed me as the Presiding Judge and Department Director in 2002. I have lived in the area,
including Wheat Ridge, since 1978.
PHILOSOPHY Municipal judges are obligated to follow the Constitutions of the United States and Colorado, some State laws, and the laws and ordinances of the City. Court rules, established by the
Colorado Supreme Court, require that municipal court provide for the just determination of
ordinance violations. Procedure is to be simple; the court administered fairly; and unjustifiable expense and delay eliminated. The court considers each case separately, and provides thorough, practical, and professional case management. The judiciary is independent of and acts as a check and balance on the executive and legislative branches of government. A healthy and responsible
government maintains an independent judiciary.
SENTENCING The city code provides for a general penalty of up to three-hundred and sixty-four (364) days of incarceration or up to a two-thousand six-hundred and fifty dollars ($2,650.00) fine or both. A
sentence of this severity rarely occurs. Restitution for pecuniary loss to victims is required
pursuant to city ordinance and state statute. (Due to prohibitory legislation restitution usually
ATTACHMENT 1
goes unpaid.) Probation is a possibility for those needing resources and supervision.
The purposes of sentencing are as follows: to assure fair and consistent treatment, deter crime,
promote respect for the law, promote rehabilitation, address the offender’s individual characteristics, reduce the potential that the offender will reoffend, promote responsibility and accountability, provide restoration and healing for victims and the community, and address the offender’s individual risks and needs. Judges use reason and common sense in sentencing. Each
sentence is tailored for that person’s background and circumstances.
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR The Presiding Judge in Wheat Ridge is also the Department Director. This expands the Presiding Judge’s duties. The Department Director responsibilities require not only presiding on
the bench three days a week, but administrative, operational, personnel, budget, security, legal,
legislative, and purchasing decisions. This adds to the complexity, responsibility, and workload of the Presiding Judge. As the Department Director, I also participate in various professional associations and committees regarding education, advocacy, legislation, and court improvement.
WHEAT RIDGE MUNICIPAL COURT
Wheat Ridge is a somewhat unique city from a municipal court perspective. It is surrounded by major cities and has traversing through it busy thoroughfares. This leads to a robust traffic docket and the entry of people from the metro area. Our client base for the most part is the people who live in the Denver metropolitan area. Due to the amount of retail business in Wheat
Ridge, there are a significant number of shoplifts. Certain locations in the City attract a diverse
and challenging population. This group often engages in various types of and repeat mischief. Many persons have mental health and/or substance abuse issues. Persons experiencing homelessness are common. The Court sees in-custody persons (jail detainees) around three times a week. There are usually court marshals for court security and prisoner transport.
However, currently the marshal positions are vacant. There is an active and challenging juvenile
docket. Wheat Ridge court handles animal, zoning, building code, licensing, and property nuisance violations. The adult criminal docket is significant and features individuals with lengthy and/or violent criminal histories. CHALLENGES FOR MUNICIPAL COURT
LOCAL CONTROL State legislation over the last few years has diminished local control. It has impacted the ability to collect fines and restitution. Jail policy and legislation has made it difficult to detain in or sentence to detention. Courts are now mandated to release most persons on personal recognizance bonds, regardless of their violence level, community or victim safety, number of
cases or charges, criminal history, or their number of failures to appear in court. State legislation has made it difficult to address local needs and concerns. HOMELESSNESS Homelessness has placed burdens on police calls for service, emergency rooms, detoxification
facilities, treatment facilities, businesses, courts, parks, and trails. Due to the inability to detain and address cases, persons experiencing homelessness engage in repeat behavior and accumulate dozens of cases. Wheat Ridge Municipal Court has recently retained a Homeless Navigator and established a session dedicated to the issues and problems of homeless persons. Sentencing focuses on reducing homelessness.
SUBSTANCE ABUSE
Substance use is a prominent and daily factor when arraigning, sentencing, and supervising
offenders. Many persons abusing substances use substances to self-medicate or engage in criminal activity while under the influence. Sentences usually require evaluation and treatment. Many however resist treatment and further harm themselves and society. Many persons experiencing homelessness have current substance-related charges or a background of substance
use.
INABILITY TO COLLECT RESTITUTION Legislation no longer permits the issuance of bench warrants for the arrest of persons who fail to pay restitution for the loss and harm they have done to others. Victim’s bills for property
damage, medical treatment, and veterinarian care go unreimbursed. The Court has begun a
program that initiates contempt of court proceedings to address nonpayers. JAIL BED LIMITATION The Jefferson County Jail has limited the number of beds available to Wheat Ridge. This
impacts sentences. The jail is also limiting the types of charges that it will accept for booking.
This leads to a cycle of charge, missed court date, new charge, missed court date, etc. One offender had 27 cases before the jail would accept him; another had 14 failures to appear for court. Some criminal histories are 60-70 pages long and cover several states. These are not park hour violators or jaywalkers, but are multi-state offenders with felonies, violent crimes, sex
assaults, and weapons violations.
MANDATORY PERSONAL RECOGNIZANCE BONDS A personal recognizance bond is one that does not require cash or surety. It is a person’s promise to appear. Legislation now requires personal recognizance bonds for many municipal
and state charges. This has led to a cycle of missed court appearances and case deadlock. Case
management is impossible, and cases do not come to resolution. ACCOMPLISHMENTS
CITY, COMMUNITY, AND PROFESSION ORIENTED ACHIEVEMENTS
• Engage in community service in Wheat Ridge
• Continue improvements to the Performance Management Program
• Past President of the Colorado Municipal Judges Association
• Facilitator for the Colorado Municipal Judges Association
• Colorado Municipal Judges Association Legislative Liaison
• Weekly COVID meetings
• Weekly Executive Management Team (EMT) meetings
• Attend monthly municipal judges’ meetings
• Support the ACTION core values
• Attend various City and community functions, events, and festivals
• Attend various Jefferson County functions and events
• Attend annual City sponsored legislative dinner
• Take advantage of the Wellness Program and take classes at the WR Recreation Center
• Attend city sponsored supervisor and employee trainings
• Recommend improvements to NeoGov annual evaluation template
• Assist front lobby/desk staff; provide security updates
• Monthly H.R. Business Partner meetings
• Attend annual employee awards banquet
• Cook at annual employee breakfast
• Provide court representation on boards and committees
• Host meetings with community members
• Volunteer for elementary school program
• Appointed as Relief Judge to Edgewater Municipal Court COURT-ORIENTED ACHIEVEMENTS
Increased used of audio-video connection for court sessions
36% staff reduction due to retirements and departures
Operate without Deputy Court Administrator and Court Marshals
Establish work at home schedules
Create goals and objectives for annual evaluations
Meet with Court Administrator regarding mid-year and annual evaluations
Write or edit annual evaluations.
Work with Colorado Municipal League
No court staff Covid cases due to contact with public or employees
Inform and educate state legislators
Revise job duties for Court Marshal position
Assist Court Administrator with budget
Hear cases involving persons in custody within state mandates; work on-call on non-court days
Appoint attorneys for persons in custody on fast track basis
Develop process to collect fines and restitution considering problematic legislation
Develop process to hold non-payers accountable for willful failure to pay restitution to
injured victims
Expand the “walk-in” warrant clearing court
Expand and improve alternatives in sentencing including the payment plan process
Use web databases to locate non-appearing defendants
Use web databases to determine accuracy of applications for services or counsel
Maintain legal library
Use special populations fund to help pay for sentencing conditions for indigents
Coach and mentor staff
Review motions (written requests) and issue written orders
Legal research
Resolve old cases particularly those involving Department of Corrections inmates
Improve court security with weekly meetings with marshals and security guards
Review effectiveness of G4S security guard service
Streamline crowd movement in and out of court
Modify court doors to require electronic pass key
Personal protective equipment for court staff and customers
Covid seating arrangement for customers; limit number of persons in court room
Construct two COVID compliant meeting rooms
Improve and add flexibility to bail bond process; increased use of personal recognizance
and low cash bonds
Monitor the appearance rate with various types of bonds
Determine bail bonds using risk factors
Develop new court forms to improve accuracy and efficiency or to comply with new legislation
Individualize sentencing, especially for the low-functioning, transient, homeless,
mentally ill, veteran, and substance abusing populations.
Attend legal and judicial seminars
Continue IGA that permits diversion from court for first time juvenile alcohol, drug paraphernalia, and marijuana possession
Improve program for sealing and expungement of juvenile and adult criminal records
Respond to requests for criminal justice records
Work with police department on court/police issues
Work with police department on body worn camera introduction
Meet with county law enforcement to discuss jail populations
Create process to make audio-visual detainee process more efficient and secure
Meet weekly with lobbyist
Moderate and attend monthly court staff meetings
Set up and facilitate bi-annual judicial conferences
Distribute and discuss WRPD Employee Safety bulletins
Organize team building events
Address protestors, auditors, and agitators
Create program for a guilty plea by mail for all traffic charges
Revise jury instructions
Work with city administration to create staffing for front lobby
Provide bus passes for eligible indigent individuals
Expand court date telephone reminder program to include texting
Staff membership in numerous professional organizations
Write veterans pamphlet
Court staff presentation for new ordinances
Note: I did not accomplish these things alone. These accomplishments would not have been possible without the assistance of the court administrator, court staff, IT, or city staff. 2021 PRIORITIES
Operate court given Covid restrictions
Hold jury trials given Covid restrictions
Hire Judicial Assistant II and Court Marshals
Recognize and retain good employees
Install or replace courtroom seating, bar, paint, and carpet
Improve courtroom security; add bullet resistant material
Investigate collection agencies
Investigate court software
Comply with new legislation; prepare for proposed legislation.
Suggest amendments to proposed legislation
Investigate new resources and services for probationers
Work with Homeless Navigator
Address homeless population, licensing violations, and property abatements
Operate special court session for persons experiencing homelessness
Train staff and seek outside training opportunities
Work with city departments
Thoughtfully address local matters
PROFESSIONAL MEMBERSHIPS
Colorado Supreme Court (1987-2021)
Colorado Municipal Judges Association (1992-2021) Municipal Judges of Jefferson County (2016-2021) Legislative Liaison Committee (2021) First Judicial District Bar Association (2001-2018; 2020-2021)
Colorado Bar Association (2001-2018; 2020-2021)
PROFESSIONAL BOARD MEMBERSHIPS Board of Governors for the First Judicial District Bar Association (2014-2015) Board of Directors and President of the Colorado Municipal Judges Association (2009-2015)
INTERNAL RECOGNITION I have given and received several “Give-A-Wow” awards. These recognize employees for contributions to the ACTION core values of accountability, change, teamwork, integrity, opportunity, and now! These
are available for review. CUSTOMER COMMENTS The court makes available to the public court evaluation forms. The comments below are available for
review. Comments about the Presiding Judge include: “The entire process was so awesome. I appreciate Judge Randall with his consideration of my situation,
which was very personal, and he recognized that. Thank you!” “First time that I felt like my personal information was important as I was a victim with no knowledge of what I could lose by bailing my husband out.” CLASSIFICATION I work an average of thirty (30) hours per week and am classified for benefits purposes as a 30-hour per week employee. Regular court sessions take about twenty-four (24) hours a week. Preparation for jury trials and the trials add a few days per year. Other hours are related to longer court sessions, managerial duties, legal research, administrative matters, budget, personnel, recruiting, interviewing, legislation,
training, jail detainees, and meetings. CONTRACT There is no request to modify the hourly rate or to amend contract provisions. CONCLUSION I request reappointment and would be honored to continue to sit as the Presiding Judge and act as the Department Director for the Wheat Ridge Municipal Court.
/s/ Christopher D Randall
CHRISTOPHER D RANDALL
PURPOSES OF A CITY CODE
The Court is to construe the City Code in such manner as to promote fulfillment of its general purposes,
namely:
1. To promote acceptance of responsibility and accountability by offenders.
2. To consider restitution to crime victims.
3. To provide safety and security for victims and the public.
4. To define offenses.
5. To give warning of the prohibited conduct.
6. To give warning of the penalties authorized upon conviction.
7. To forbid the commission of offenses.
8. To prevent their occurrence through the deterrent influence of a sentence.
9. To prevent crime.
State and Federal case law; sections 18-1-102 & 102.5 (C.R.S. 2020)
ATTACHMENT 2
WHEAT RIDGE MUNICIPAL COURT COURT GOALS AND MISSION
1. Provide efficient and professional service to customers. Assist customers to the extent permitted by the ethical rules of law.
2. Treat each customer equally regardless of gender, race, nationality, economic circumstances, or cultural background. 3. Provide a safe environment for employees and customers.
4. Attract, reward, compensate and retain exceptional employees. 5. Develop ways and means to provide services more effectively and efficiently. 6. Use various measurement tools as a process of evaluation to align customer service
expectations to available personnel and fiscal resources. 7. Develop a customer service action plan. 8. Increase customer’s access to information regarding court services through
maintenance and improvement of the court web site. 9. Develop strategies, programs, and sentences that mitigate crime, rehabilitate offenders, reduce traffic violations, and positively influence code issues.
10. Seek to upgrade old technologies and equipment within budgetary limits. 11. Remodel the courtroom and clerk’s office to increase security, improve customer service, and improve team member efficiency.
[Created by court staff]
ATTACHMENT 3
Item No. 2
Memorandum
TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Patrick Goff, City Manager DATE: April 28, 2021 (for May 3, 2021 Study Session) SUBJECT: Strategic Plan Update
The Mayor, City Council and staff work together periodically to develop and update a strategic
plan that includes a vision, goals and strategic priorities. On February 20, 2021 a retreat was held
to update strategic priorities for 2021 and 2022. Following is the City’s Vision 2035 statement that was last updated in 2017:
Wheat Ridge is an attractive and inviting city and community for families.
Wheat Ridge has great neighborhoods, is a hub of commerce with a choice of
economically viable commercial areas and has diverse transportation. Wheat Ridge is committed to environmental stewardship and its residents enjoy an active, healthy lifestyle and are proud of their hometown.
The vision statement includes the following eight vision topics from which goals and strategic priorities are developed and updated on a regular basis.
Vision Topics: 1. Wheat Ridge is an attractive and inviting City 2. Wheat Ridge is a community for families 3. Wheat Ridge has great neighborhoods 4. Wheat Ridge has a choice of economically viable commercial areas
5. Wheat Ridge has diverse transportation 6. Wheat Ridge is committed to environmental stewardship 7. Wheat Ridge residents enjoy an active, healthy lifestyle 8. Wheat Ridge residents are proud of their hometown
Among the eight vision topics, the Mayor and Council identified the following eight new strategic priorities for 2021 and 2022. Discrete New Tasks 1. New efforts in engagement of community in government and understanding of City
processes 2. Implement bulk plane in all residential zone districts 3. Reexamine and advance sidewalks on 38th Avenue 4. Review the vision, mission, and funding of Localworks
Major New Undertakings 1. Streamline permit processes
2. Commercial corridor code review
3. Policy on nonconforming accessory dwelling units 4. Homelessness and wrap-around services Staff will provide updates on each of the preceding strategic priorities to City Council starting on
May 3rd according to the following schedule:
May 3rd 1. New efforts in engagement of community in government and understanding of City processes
2. Implement bulk plane in all residential zone districts May 10th 1. Streamline permit processes
May 17th
1. Homelessness and wrap-around services June 21st 1. Review the vision, mission and funding of Localworks
3rd/4th Quarter 2021 1. Reexamine and advance sidewalks on 38th Avenue 2. Commercial corridor code review 3. Policy on nonconforming accessory dwelling units
Item No. 2a
Memorandum
TO: Mayor and City Council THROUGH: Patrick Goff, City Manager FROM: Allison Scheck, Administrative Services Director DATE: April 23, 2021 (for May 3 study session)
SUBJECT: Strategic Priority - Community Education and Engagement
ISSUE: At the strategic planning retreat on February 20, 2021, City Council identified new efforts of community engagement and education as a priority for the next two years. Staff is requesting feedback on a proposed workplan to realize this priority.
UNDERSTANDING THE PRIORITY: Prior to the retreat, councilmembers took a survey to identify priorities for discussion. Between the survey and the discussion, staff recorded the following notes associated with this priority:
• Implement community-building initiatives
• Increase community understanding of City functions
• Get the community involved in City programs
• New efforts of engagement
• Wheat Ridge 101
• Tracking development progress
• Increased civic involvement
• Communicate how we communicate with the community Based on these notes, staff’s understanding of the priority is to continue efforts to educate the
community about how their local government works and to broaden community engagement in
City processes. WORK CURRENTLY UNDERWAY: A summary of current programs, practices and initiatives follows.
Communications The City has a robust communications strategy which includes a multifaceted approach to distributing information widely among varied stakeholders through various mediums. This includes:
• Public relations focus with local and regional media including print, online news, television
and radio outlets
• Connections quarterly print newsletter mailed to every Wheat Ridge address
• Comprehensive website with built in email alert features and subscriber lists
• Mobile web application (launched December 2020)
• Monthly email newsletter – Mayor’s Matters
• Social media plan to encompass Facebook, Twitter, Nextdoor and Instagram with pages specific to City Government, Police Department and Parks and Recreation
• Channel 8, YouTube and other videos – the City has a public government channel for local
programming including City Council and Planning Commission meetings, video content and promotional messages; a YouTube channel to host and promote video content and talented staff to create and curate videos
• Partnerships with local organizations to share information with members including
Localworks, Wheat Ridge Business Association, Wheat Ridge Chamber, and area civic groups. In particular, the City’s partnership with Localworks ensures the amplification of the City’s messaging. Localworks maintains a growing database of over 3,500 highly engaged residents.
Community Engagement The City launched its Community Involvement Strategy in 2020, committing to a meaningful culture of public participation and community involvement. It provides a framework for city staff across all departments to ensure active, consistent and balanced public participation is achieved in decision making processes (see attached).
• The City formed an internal cross-functional team, the Community Involvement Task Force in January 2020. The Task Force meets monthly, is led by the Neighborhood Engagement Specialist and includes staff from a number of departments and specialty areas including
Communications, Police, Parks and Recreation, Homelessness, Sustainability, Engineering
and Planning. Additionally, Localworks is a member of this Task Force. Each member of the Task Force has access to International Association of Public Participation (IAP2) resources and is expected to build and develop skills in the area of community engagement. The team collaborates on engagement activities and keeps each other informed about initiatives in
Wheat Ridge.
• What’s Up Wheat Ridge (WhatsUpWheatRidge.com) is an online community engagement platform which allows virtual public participation, much as if a contributor were in
attendance at a community meeting. It launched in February 2020 with the Wadsworth
Improvement and Make Wheat Ridge Count (Census) projects. Since its launch, it has garnered significant participation through the Let’s Talk, Wheat Ridge Creates, Sustainability, #WRInThisTogether, Noise Ordinance and Lutheran Legacy Campus Master Plan projects with over 9,000 site visits and over 1,000 registered participants.
• Wheat Ridge Speaks (WheatRidgeSpeaks.org) was launched in late 2019 and allows participants to participate in public meetings virtually. It provides residents and other stakeholders with the opportunity to review presentations, watch live meetings and provide
written comments on agenda items as if they were in attendance at a Planning Commission or
City Council meeting. From January 2020 to April 2021, there were 70 public meetings posted on the platform; 4,005 unique visitors; and 239 written comments. One goal of using Wheat Ridge Speaks was to provide the opportunity for more representative participation, and Google Analytics data confirms that the age distribution of those who have visited the
site very closely mirrors the age distribution of the Wheat Ridge adult population as whole.
• Let’s Talk is a resident focused engagement program that was a primary recommendation of
the 2019 Neighborhood Revitalization Strategy update. The program breaks the City down
into 10 neighborhoods and covers two neighborhoods at a time for 4-5-month blitzes of engagement opportunities. In February 2021, the Let’s Talk team completed the first two blitzes in Bel Aire and East Wheat Ridge. Over 600 residents participated and provided feedback on their neighborhood. In April 2021, the program launched in the next two
neighborhoods – Applewood and Leppla Manor.
• Wheat Ridge 101 launched in partnership with Localworks in 2020. Fourteen residents completed the six-week program where they learned about all aspects of City government, the community and how they work together. Feedback was extremely positive.
• Localworks delivers “boots on the ground” community engagement events that are designed to be inclusive and meet residents where they live, work and play. These events provide opportunities for residents and businesses to connect, learn about their City and community,
and discover how to become involved and make a positive impact on their community. Legislative Action In 2020, City Council passed an ordinance updating the notification requirements for quasi-judicial public hearings by increasing the letter notice radius from 300 to 600 feet and similarly increasing
sign noticing requirements. PLANNED UPCOMING ACTIVITIES: Below is a summary of planned and budgeted upcoming activities to support this priority.
1. Website Redesign The City’s website (ci.Wheatridge.co.us) will be redesigned in collaboration with the provider, CivicPlus. This process will include a community involvement process to ensure it meets the community’s and stakeholders’ needs. The process will ensure the site is fully ADA compliant upon release.
Timeline: Begin work in Q3, 2021, Release in Q1, 2022 2. Continued Implementation of Let’s Talk The resident engagement program, Let’s Talk, is now in the second blitz, engaging with Applewood and Leppla Manor residents (neighborhoods 3 and 4 out of 10). This important
work is enabling a deeper level of engagement across a wide range of topics. A new component includes the Neighborhood Champion program, which seeks to identify residents who are willing to champion the program by talking with their neighbors directly and driving involvement in engagement efforts. Timeline: Initial program continues into 2023.
3. Continued Strategic Focus on Community Involvement The internal Task Force will continue its work in building skills and collaboration to bring a strategic approach to community engagement citywide. This includes leveraging participant lists to promote additional involvement opportunities.
Timeline: Ongoing
4. Wheat Ridge 101 The next Wheat Ridge 101 program will launch in September 2021. City and Localworks
staff are working to build on the success from the 2020 program.
5. Focus on Relationship Based Policing The Police Department has begun its work to pivot to a relationship-based policing model. This model encourages frequent interaction internally within the PD, with other city
departments and externally with the public to create a trusting and open dialogue that serves
to identify and address the needs and concerns of our community. A committee was formed to define the new approach, create training for all personnel and identify ways of measuring success.
IDEAS FOR NEW ACTIVITIES:
To further support this priority, staff presents the following ideas to Council for consideration. 1. Onboarding Program for Elected Officials, Boards, Commission and Committee Members
Review the City’s programs, communications, and opportunities for involvement with
existing members of council, boards, commissions and committees. Develop a toolkit to promote communication channels for members to use with neighbors, residents and stakeholders. Proposed Timeline: 2022
Resources Needed: None
2. Interactive Development/Construction Map Develop an interactive GIS based map that residents and other stakeholders can use to find out about land use cases, development activities and construction projects in Wheat Ridge
from initial application through completion.
Proposed Timeline: 2022
Resources Needed: Additional full-time position – GIS Technician, 2022 budget. Consultant funding to create initial tool.
3. Expand Notification Requirements
Council may consider expanding notification requirements to neighbors by policy or code amendment. This could include notifying neighbors upon submittal of certain kinds of development application and including tenants in notice of public hearings. Proposed Timeline: 2022-2023, following implementation of the development map
Resources Needed: None
4. Video Series – Demystifying Government Create a fun and engaging video series with a collection of short videos that touch on common topics and questions. For example
• How is an ordinance made? How do I advocate to change local laws?
• How do I navigate the City’s tax and licensing rules?
• How are decisions made about sidewalks and speedbumps?
• How do we get a Trader Joe’s? How does a vacant lot get developed?
Proposed Timeline: 2022 Resources Needed: Will require funding in 2022 budget if direction is provided to proceed
5. Annual “Get Involved” Mailer and Ongoing Communication Once per year, mail information to every Wheat Ridge address listing major ways to stay
informed and get involved with the City of Wheat Ridge. This could take the form of:
• Mailed postcard or letter
• Insert in Connections newsletter
• Content in Connections newsletter Additionally, prioritize ongoing messaging that summarizes the variety of ways in which a resident or stakeholder can get involved with the City and Localworks and/or stay informed. Proposed Timeline: 2022 Resources Needed: Depends on option selected.
RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff requests direction from Council to move forward with activities to support this priority. ATTACHMENTS:
1. Community Involvement Strategy
City of Wheat Ridge Community Involvement Strategy
June 2020
The City of Wheat Ridge is committed to a culture of meaningful public participation and community
involvement. Effective public participation provides decision makers with perspectives and opinions
shared by the community and seeks to ensure all voices are heard. The purpose of this Community
Involvement Strategy is to provide a framework for city staff across all departments conducting
community engagement to ensure active, consistent and balanced public participation in decision
making processes.
Guiding Principles
• Stakeholders affected by an issue or initiative will have the opportunity to participate and have
their say.
• Stakeholders can have their say in a manner that is convenient for them. This means barriers to
participation should be removed to the greatest degree possible by meeting residents where
they are; online, at existing gatherings and in places where they move as part of their daily lives,
in addition to designated public forums.
• Stakeholders have various needs in order to be able to have their say. This means needs such as
childcare, interpretation, nontraditional schedules and cultural norms must be considered as
factors in the community involvement process
• Stakeholders want to have their say in various ways. Not all residents are comfortable speaking
in front of an audience and their opinions and perspectives are valid regardless of how they
speak up.
Levels of Community Involvement
This Community Involvement Strategy acknowledges three levels of participation:
1. Inform/Educate/Celebrate
Promise: We will provide the community with balanced, accurate and objective information. We
will answer questions and keep the community informed.
Inform/Educate when: Contemplating temporary changes in service or facilities, or when the
change is unlikely to affect the quality of life of Wheat Ridge stakeholders, when change is
occurring as a result of a plan or strategy that has been adopted, to correct misperceptions, or in
the case of normal day-to-day business assigned to staff.
Tools & Tactics: Communication tools including City’s website, social media, public notices,
posters, press releases, announcements, e-newsletters, signage, videos and white papers. Can
also include information tables, presentations to groups, engagement webpage for easy sharing
of information and public open houses.
Example A: The 2020 Census is in process and Wheat Ridge is committed to educating and
informing residents about the safety of taking the census, the significance of the census and the
importance of being counted. The City’s engagement practice could involve presentations in the
ATTACHMENT 1
2
June 2020
community, signage, the dissemination of promotional material, promotion on social media and
a page on the engagement site where residents can post questions and receive answers about
the census.
Example B: Wadsworth Boulevard is being improved. Wheat Ridge is committed to educating
and informing residents about the lane shifts that will be in place, that businesses will be open
and how to use the new Continuous Flow Intersections. In addition to the tactics listed above,
the City’s engagement practice could involve a question and answer forum on the online
engagement site.
2. Consult
Promise: The community’s comments and feedback will be considered in the decision-making
process.
Consult when: Input or feedback from the community would be helpful in determining
alternatives, when the organization is considering a change in services or there is a need to
understand community desires.
Tools and Tactics: Online engagement activities including surveys, polls and virtual public
hearings, public meetings and open houses, interactive activities where the public can show a
preference (i.e. Chips in a bucket, sticker dots on a picture)
Example: The City is designing a streetscape and will consult the public on their visual
preferences. The City could conduct an open house and host similar activities online gather
feedback on a variety of design options.
3. Involve
Promise: To work directly with the community throughout a process to ensure that the public’s
concerns, aspirations and desires are understood and considered. Feedback contributes to the
outcome.
Involve when: The issue affects or has the potential to affect a significant number of residents,
has a lasting impact on property, community ownership is necessary, during the development of
strategic or comprehensive plans, the initiative creates or significantly changes public amenities,
the issue has the potential to significantly alter service levels.
Tools and Tactics: Convene a steering committee or task force that includes residents and
community members, design charrettes, online engagement activities including forums, Q&A,
storytelling.
Example: The City is anticipating an update to the 44th Avenue subarea plan in the short term as
resources allow. Residents and other stakeholders will be invited to participate in a year long
process involving multiple stages and milestones. The public will be invited to participate in a
wide range of on-going activities, including small group meetings, open houses, surveys, and
scenario planning. In-person meetings will be complimented with online activities for those that
choose to participate virtually.
3
June 2020
Polices and Guidelines for Notification
Currently, the Wheat Ridge Charter and/or Code of Laws specifies public notification and engagement in
specific circumstances and within a certain proximity of the location at issue. By way of example, a
neighborhood meeting is required prior to 1) a zone change, 2) a special use permit or 3) a concept plan
for land over 10 acres in size, the notification of which is mailed to land owners and tenants within 600
feet (Chapter 26). There are several other examples of specific cases in which notice is required to land
owners and/or tenants, such as related to public hearings or street width designation. Important to the
Community Involvement Strategy is the acknowledgement that engagement efforts will always satisfy
those required by the Charter and Code.
Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI)
As referenced in the Guiding Principles, providing equitable access for residents to have their say is
important. Guidelines must be developed and tailored for projects with significant community
involvement based on the affected area’s characteristics and attributes so that decisions around
translation, interpretation, facilitation techniques, meeting locations, child care offerings, catering
options etc. can be carefully considered. This will involve a deep dive into Wheat Ridge’s demographics
and training to understand typical behaviors, cultural norms and barriers.
Staffing Structure and Community Involvement Task Force
The 2019 Neighborhood Revitalization Strategy Update recommends two new positions to conduct
focused neighborhood engagement. As community involvement transcends traditional departments and
work groups, it is important that staff tasked with engaging on the neighborhood level understand the
totality of the issues and initiatives that interest the community. Therefore, the neighborhood planning
and engagement staff should lead a city-wide task force that includes members of each department
along with the city’s communications staff (the Community Involvement Task Force).
Members of the task force will act as liaisons to each department and workgroup. They will bring issues
affecting the public to the task force for consideration of a public process. Each public process will be
vetted by the task force, and an engagement plan will be developed to be led either by the
neighborhood engagement staff or department representative. Communications staff will assist with
the development and implementation of a communications strategy.
Depending on the issue or initiative needing community involvement, the Community Involvement Task
Force will inform the process to:
• Define the issue/problem/initiative;
• Define the stakeholders;
• Define the decision makers;
• Determine the appropriate level of community involvement based on the Level of Community
Involvement (Inform/Educate, Consult, Involve) and how the involvement will affect the
outcome;
• Determine the engagement plan, assigning roles and responsibilities to members of the task
force; and
• Launch the plan.
4
June 2020
Training and Educational Resources
The International Association of Public Participation (IAP2) is a worldwide resource for training and
development in the public engagement space. The three levels of engagement for Wheat Ridge are
based on IAP2’s spectrum of public participation as is the online engagement tool, Engagement HQ (i.e.,
What’s Up Wheat Ridge). As resources allow, the Community Involvement Task Force and others in the
organization will benefit from IAP2’s Foundations in Public Participation training where tools, techniques
and strategies for engagement are covered in depth. The city is a member of the IAP2 organization
which provides access to online resources, webinars and local events.
Online Community Engagement
The City has selected two online tools for community engagement.
Wheat Ridge Speaks is for public hearings. It provides residents the opportunity to review
presentations and provide virtual comments on land use cases as if they were in attendance at a
Planning Commission or City Council public hearing. Comments are entered into the public hearing
record and elected officials must review all comments prior to voting.
What’s Up Wheat Ridge is an online community engagement space owned by Bang the Table using the
Engagement HQ platform. On this site, residents can contribute to a public process, much as if they were
in attendance at a public meeting. Tools include the ability to ask and answer questions, provide input in
narrative form, complete a survey, take a poll, drop pins on maps, upload videos and photographs and
more. This platform can be utilized for a variety of planning efforts and special projects.
Item No. 2b
Memorandum
TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Kenneth Johnstone, Director of Community Development THROUGH: Patrick Goff, City Manager DATE: May 3, 2021 Study Session SUBJECT: City Council Strategic Priorities, Implementation of Bulk Plane
regulations in all Residential zoning district ISSUE: In 2016, the City Council adopted, by ordinance, new zoning regulations in Chapter 26 of the
Code pertaining to “bulk plane.” During the 2021 City Council strategic planning session, the potential to adopt such regulations in all residential zoning districts was identified as a priority. PRIOR ACTIONS: Historically, the City has only regulated single- and two-family homes in three ways:
1. By limiting the size of footprint of the home, 2. By limiting the overall height of the home, and 3. By requiring minimum separation, or setbacks, from the perimeter property lines. In 2016, the City added a fourth type of regulation called “bulk plane” which essentially requires
that as homes get taller, they must be located further from their perimeter property lines and thus further from neighboring homes. The addition of bulk plane regulations came after a series of study sessions and public hearings, including four study sessions with City Council (July 18, 2016; August 15, 2016; October 3, 2016; and October 17, 2016), two study sessions with Planning Commission (July 21, 2016; and September 15, 2016), one public hearing with
Planning Commission (October 20, 2016), and two public hearings with City Council (August 22, 2016; and November 14, 2016). All agenda packets and minutes for these meetings are available on the City’s website.
• Planning staff researched the topic in 2016 and in response to emerging development
trends in the City, particularly on the east side of the City, recommended consideration of adoption of new bulk plane standards for some or all “R” zoning districts.
• Ultimately, City Council adopted an ordinance (late 2016) applying the new bulk plane regulations to single-family development in all R-1C zone districts and for SF lots with
Residential-Three (R-3) zoning. R-1C is a zoning designation common on the east side of
Wheat Ridge. Since adoption, those regulations have been enforced through review and approval of building permits in applicable zone districts.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
None. Staff has capacity to bring forward an ordinance for City Council consideration.
BACKGROUND:
Bulk plane regulations were created in 2016 in reaction to infill construction that was occurring mostly in East Wheat Ridge. At the time, staff recommended City Council consider applying the bulk plane regulations in all residential zone districts. In zone districts with larger lots and larger setbacks, the bulk plane would not have a significant impact, but on smaller lots it would ensure
that single- and two-family development is scaled back as it gets taller regardless of zoning.
Because East Wheat Ridge is predominantly zoned R-1C and R-3 (with predominately smaller lots), City Council implemented bulk plane regulations in only those two zone districts.
During the course of considering adoption of new bulk plane regulations, the City conducted an on-line survey to gauge citizens’ views on that type of an approach, as well as whether building height should be further restricted. Summarizing, there was generally strong support for a bulk
plane regulation of some sort and not strong support to further restrict overall building height. RECOMMENDATIONS: Confirm City Council direction whether to draft an ordinance applying the regulations across all
residential “R” zone districts across the City. At City Council’s direction, a draft ordinance could go directly to Planning Commission and then to City Council first reading and public hearing in first or second quarter 2021. ATTACHMENTS:
1. 2016 Survey Results 2. Code Section 26-642
Houses in Wheat Ridge: What Should They Look Like?
The pages that follow include the contents and results the survey “Houses in Wheat Ridge: What Should
They Look Like?” This survey was published on Survey Monkey at the request of City Council and
included questions developed by City Council members. The purpose of the study was to gauge resident
preferences related to the development of single- and two-family homes in Wheat Ridge.
The survey was available online for just over two weeks from Friday, November 3, 2017 to Sunday,
November 19, 2017. It was shared on the City’s website and Facebook page, and shared by Council
members directly with constituents.
The results indicate that 286 people started the survey, and 233 people completed all survey questions.
Survey results were discussed at the City Council study session on November 20, 2017. A staff memo
prepared for that meeting provides background information and describes the City’s 2016 efforts related
to residential development standards and bulk plane. This background memo is available online.
Based on Council consensus at the November 20 study session, the following direction was provided:
•Discuss height limitations in the R-1C zone district at a future study session,
•Update the Neighborhood Revitalization Study in 2018 to provide a vision and policy direction
before any potential modification of residential development standards, and
•Include questions in the 2018 Citizen Survey related to height, bulk plane, accessory dwelling
units, and short-term rentals.
ATTACHMENT 1
Houses in Wheat Ridge: What Should They Look Like?
Background
The purpose of this survey is help identify community preferences related to the development and
appropriate scale of single- and two-family homes in Wheat Ridge, including new construction and
additions.
Historically, the City has only regulated single- and two-family homes in three ways:
1. By limiting the size of footprint of the home,
2. By limiting the overall height of the home, and
3. By requiring minimum separation, or setback, from the perimeter property lines.
In 2016, the City added a fourth type of regulation called “bulk plane” which essentially requires that as
homes get taller they must be located further from their perimeter property lines and thus further from
neighboring homes. The addition of bulk plane regulations came after a series of study sessions and
public hearings, including four study sessions with City Council (July 18, 2016; August 15, 2016; October
3, 2016; and October 17, 2016), two study sessions with Planning Commission (July 21, 2016; and
September 15, 2016), one public hearing with Planning Commission (October 20, 2016), and two public
hearings with City Council (August 22, 2016; and November 14, 2016). All agenda packets and minutes
for these meetings are available on the City’s website.
The series of 2016 meetings was based, in part, in response to infill development in East Wheat Ridge
where new homes were being constructed as large as allowed by the zoning (up to the maximum height
and minimum setbacks). While 35 feet has been the maximum height in all residential zone districts
since 1969, few homes in Wheat Ridge are built to that height, and residents testified that some new
homes were in stark contrast to the one-story bungalows built predominantly prior to 1955.
Staff completed an analysis of neighboring communities and confirmed that the City’s setback and
height standards were relatively consistent with Denver, Arvada, Edgewater and Lakewood; but also
concluded that we were the only community without a bulk plane standard.
The challenge in regulating residential development is in balancing the goals of the City’s guiding
documents such as the Neighborhood Revitalization Strategy (NRS) and the Comprehensive Plan. The
NRS was adopted in 2005 and encourages reinvestment in Wheat Ridge neighborhoods by recognizing
that the City’s housing stock tends to be older ranch-style construction that does not adequately meet
the demands of the modern homebuyer. The NRS and Comprehensive Plan recommend that
appropriate regulations should allow for reinvestment in and diversification of the City’s housing stock,
but also should maintain and enhance the quality and character of the existing neighborhoods.
Q1 If residential development standards were to be updated how would
you prioritize the following three goals of the City (1 being the most
important):
Answered: 286 Skipped: 0
21.68%
62
59.09%
169
19.23%
55
286
2.02
22.73%
65
26.92%
77
50.35%
144
286
1.72
55.59%
159
13.99%
40
30.42%
87
286
2.25
Support
reinvestment...
Supportdiversificat...
Maintain the
quality and...
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1 2 3 TOTAL SCORE
Support reinvestment in the City’s housing stock
Support diversification of the City’s housing stock
Maintain the quality and character of existing neighborhoods
1 / 34
Houses in Wheat Ridge: What Should They Look Like?
Houses in Wheat Ridge: What Should They Look Like?
What is bulk plane?
As mentioned previously, maximum heights and minimum setbacks have been used historically to
regulate residential construction (see Figure 1). Bulk plane adds a third constraint by adding a diagonal
line that also limits vertical construction (see Figure 2). By adding the diagonal limit, a building or upper
story is required to increase its distance from the property line as it gets taller. This typically still allows
multi-story construction, but it increases the separation between homes.
Figure 1:
The size of a home on
this lot is constrained by
the maximum building
height and by minimum
setbacks from the
property lines.
Figure 2:
The size of a home on
this lot is constrained by
the maximum building
height, by minimum
setbacks from the
property lines, and by the
diagonal bulk plane.
30.83%82
33.08%88
12.03%32
7.14%19
13.16%35
3.76%10
Q2 To what extent do you support bulk plane regulations?
Answered: 266 Skipped: 20
TOTAL 266
Strongly
support
Support
Neutral
Don't support
Strongly don't
support
I don't
understand b...
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Strongly support
Support
Neutral
Don't support
Strongly don't support
I don't understand bulk plane regulations
2 / 34
Houses in Wheat Ridge: What Should They Look Like?
Q3 Please explain why you do or do not support bulk plane regulations.
Answered: 186 Skipped: 100
#RESPONSES DATE
1 Urban spaces have two options: density or sprawl. The only way to address Denver’s housing
crisis is to build up.
11/19/2017 9:50 PM
2 No consideration for factors such as topography and orientation.11/19/2017 9:49 PM
3 I feel that the bulk plane regulations maintain the feel of a neighborhood and privacy 11/19/2017 9:33 PM
4 If you take the example of housing in northwest Denver it proves the importance of restriction and
regulation on new builds and remodels. Many of them look more like buildings than homes. The
height is too tall, etc. it changes the character of the family neighborhood in a bad way! Please
have restrictions of height, width, etc. I will be very upset if we follow the trend of northwest
Denver.
11/19/2017 9:13 PM
5 I feel the existing regulations do a good job of defining what should be allowed. A bulk plane
restriction would be too limiting to the design options available.
11/19/2017 8:41 PM
6 provides equitable relationship between height and property setbacks. provides equitable balance
between private property rights and neighborhood character.
11/19/2017 6:48 PM
7 Too many houses are being built that overwhelm their neighbors. Small homes are being left with
little to no direct sunlight in the winter.
11/19/2017 2:09 PM
8 Buildings will be too tall and not fit the neighborhood 11/18/2017 8:34 PM
9 As homes ?? get bigger, lots must increase to allow extra space.11/18/2017 3:37 PM
10 Comfort of neighbors 11/18/2017 3:07 PM
11 Helps maintain the character of a neighborhood 11/17/2017 7:38 PM
12 testing 11/17/2017 7:05 PM
13 In my opinion 45 degrees at 17 feet with a 35 foot max is acceptable. Any less causes problems
with building my quality home price per square foot.
11/17/2017 3:05 PM
14 increases separation between houses 11/17/2017 2:24 PM
15 I feel an appropriate setback determined by height is helpful to make development seem less
greedy - as it they've stuffed every inch possible on the lot. It looks too crowded for suburban
living.
11/17/2017 12:52 PM
16 I like the idea of having space between houses when a neighbor adds a story to their house.11/16/2017 3:52 PM
17 AS Land and Building gets more expensive. The need to put more on a lot is a must do.11/16/2017 2:47 AM
18 I do not wish to see residential homes get taller.11/15/2017 8:15 PM
19 Don't know enough about the impacts of this regulation. Am cautious to support this change until I
understand more.
11/15/2017 8:04 PM
20 Respect for the adjacent homes and impacted neighborhoods 11/15/2017 4:51 PM
21 property owners should have some flexibility to build up 11/15/2017 3:50 PM
22 Wheat Ridge is full of established neighborhoods whose homes enjoy views and sun.11/15/2017 3:08 PM
23 Bulk planes place unnecessary limits on density. The less housing we can build by right in our
community, the less affordable our housing stock will become as we will be limited in our ability to
meet increased housing demand with increased housing supply. Three stories is not outrageously
out of scale in a residential context. I want my community to support a variety of housing types and
to be welcoming to new residents with different housing preferences.
11/15/2017 12:14 PM
3 / 34
Houses in Wheat Ridge: What Should They Look Like?
24 I think that we need to be careful about this. We have many different types of zoning in our city
because we have a myriad of needs. We also need to consider who we want to live in our city. The
small houses in East WR limit the citizens (2 - 3 bedrooms doesn't keep families with resources
these days).
11/15/2017 11:29 AM
25 First of all, I do not at all support the notion of passing building restrictions using a broad brush that
applies to the whole city. Different parts of the city require different approaches. My guiding
principle in these discussions is a wish to support affordable housing, which means we need to
support appropriate density and diversity in our housing stock. Imposing bulk plane restrictions
inhibits density (by limiting upper floors) and essentially is about people wanting to control the
aesthetics of their neighborhoods, which I think is a far lower priority than affordable housing.
11/15/2017 11:06 AM
26 I support them to maintain the light/privacy of neighboring houses and to keep the feel of the
neighborhood
11/15/2017 10:17 AM
27 Bulk plane seems like it would minimize the chances of new housing to look ugly like in north
Denver and at least be less encroaching on neighbors.
11/15/2017 9:21 AM
28 Find a better way to describe it.11/15/2017 8:50 AM
29 Bulk plane regulations discourage architectural innovation and variety 11/15/2017 6:16 AM
30 i don’t want neighbors on top of my house, doesn’t work well for privacy or esthetics.11/14/2017 9:57 PM
31 A 3 story behemoth should not be allowed to completely overshadow its much smaller neighbors.11/14/2017 8:54 PM
32 I think building houses too large for lots is not only gentrifying and pushing out the character and
the residents of wheat ridge, but it is also taking away neighbor's natural light.
11/14/2017 8:34 PM
33 Ranch houses as the standard are no longer sustainable for a growing community, and plot
spacing of property make bulk plane regulations prohibitive to growth even as a family home
upgrade.
11/14/2017 7:11 PM
34 When you limit the height with this method you eliminate the new housing that is driving areas like
Sloans lake, Highlands and many others - which Wheatridge sorely needs
11/14/2017 5:06 PM
35 Once built a building tends to be with us for 50+ years. It is important to build it as right as we can.
some of the recent additions in Wheat Ridge have take full advantage of what they can get with
little recognition of the impact of what they are doing. These additions are an atrocious eyesore we
will have to live with for the afore mentioned 50+ years.
11/14/2017 4:25 PM
36 We don’t need houses being scraped and ugly tall 4 plexes being built right on the property lines
like what is happening in Denver
11/14/2017 4:02 PM
37 Light and views are very important to me. Without bulk plane regulations both of those are
severely compromised.
11/14/2017 3:32 PM
38 Families are growing and more space is preferred. The small one story homes are in the past and
this neighborhood needs to be able to grow like the surrounding neighborhoods.
11/14/2017 2:42 PM
39 As Denver grows I believe we be a part of the growth and the building regulations need to help
growth not prohibit it.
11/14/2017 2:19 PM
40 protection for houses on either side 11/14/2017 12:46 PM
41 If the minimum setback is the same for all levels of a home's construction, it can inhibit the quality
of life for neighbors and it is inconsistent with the majority of homes built in wheat ridge
11/14/2017 12:41 PM
42 i enjoy more room around the homes.11/14/2017 12:23 PM
43 The city has no right to dictate such strict bulk plane restrictions 11/14/2017 12:10 PM
44 Separation between homes is part of what brought us to Wheat Ridge from Highlands Ranch. We
don’t live there for a reason.
11/14/2017 12:04 PM
45 Otherwise really tall or big houses would obstruct views, shade street areas and could possibly
add noise to the surrounding area.
11/14/2017 11:56 AM
46 I support it on new construction but don't want to overly limit current homeowners in how they can
remodel/expand their existing home.
11/14/2017 11:39 AM
47 Support regulations that would prohibit or severely restrict 3 story flat roof houses in R-1 & R-2
Districts.
11/14/2017 11:19 AM
4 / 34
Houses in Wheat Ridge: What Should They Look Like?
48 Homes can be taller.11/14/2017 11:11 AM
49 Oversized neighboring structures usually cause neighbor complaining 11/14/2017 11:02 AM
50 It is the property owner's right to build as they wish on their land. As long as it doesn't pose a
danger to neighbors or their property, there should be no limits.
11/14/2017 11:00 AM
51 each property should be evaluated regarding the neighborhood - not an easy solution 11/14/2017 10:47 AM
52 I left a neighborhood that allowed such regulation, it damaged the quality of lives for the other
residents.
11/14/2017 10:31 AM
53 You should not have your view or sunshine blocked.11/14/2017 10:02 AM
54 Provides more privacy for outdoor living and enough sun for landscaping to thrive.11/14/2017 10:02 AM
55 I don't care for the style of the shoebox towers being built due to loss of privacy for neighbors and
the taller structures seem to block a lot of sunlight for neighboring structures.
11/14/2017 9:18 AM
56 retains the character of wheat ridge 11/14/2017 8:51 AM
57 Prevents the scum, greedy developers from ruining our city 11/14/2017 5:32 AM
58 To maintain the integrity and character of all neighborhoods.11/13/2017 9:58 PM
59 I agree with the concept that the taller the structure, the further from the property line it should be.
More simply, people want sunshine to get in their windows and some of the new square 3-story
homes block too much.
11/13/2017 9:25 PM
60 I think it is important to regulate the height of buildings so that a neighborhood does not become a
cluster of dense buildings that ruin the overall look of a neighborhood or city.
11/13/2017 9:04 PM
61 Tall houses tower over existing dwellings, and as more are built, they create a "cave" feel as
breeze and light are blocked out. Plus, privacy also disappears.
11/13/2017 8:25 PM
62 I do not see the sense of increasing setbacks for taller houses. If the maximum height also an
additional story why force the house to tall and narrow with wider setbacks?
11/13/2017 7:47 PM
63 the towering new homes in NW denver dwarf the original homes. a blend of some sort would
lessen the stark contrast of gentrification.
11/13/2017 6:34 PM
64 keeps some consistency in building codes 11/13/2017 5:52 PM
65 I think I would support this where lots are smaller and homes are already fairly close. I would NOT
want to see what Denver is allowing, for instance in the North Tennyson area.
11/13/2017 5:40 PM
66 In todays world, I would not want a 35 ft house with a 7 ft side setback looking down on my ranch
style home nor would I want the eternal blockage of sunlight if that house were located on the
south side of me. The bulk plan helps to alleviate some of those concerns and still allow a 35 ft
height
11/13/2017 4:42 PM
67 Bulk plane regulations help protect existing residential homes from having towering structures right
on top of them.
11/13/2017 4:36 PM
68 Not a fan of the modern construction method with tall houses too close together.11/13/2017 4:32 PM
69 Would help minimize building height 11/13/2017 4:14 PM
70 Buffer zones around houses allow for individual space. Personal space is a hallmark of single
family dwellings.
11/13/2017 4:05 PM
71 Like variety 11/13/2017 3:30 PM
72 It depends on how close it is to other houses.11/13/2017 3:09 PM
73 I would like to maintain the character of our neighborhoods and understand the apprehension of
having a neighbor's home tower over others. I also avidly support individual property rights and
limited government regulations on what someone can do on their private property.
11/12/2017 8:38 AM
74 Taller houses restrict the view of the skyline. Bulk plane regulations would restore some of the
skyline views and would prevent big houses from being built within spitting distance of each other.
11/10/2017 6:13 AM
5 / 34
Houses in Wheat Ridge: What Should They Look Like?
75 I like the idea of the extra setback but it should be based on where the homes are located on
either side of the new construction. Some W.R. homes are set far back on the lot - if that were the
case, then the bulk plane wouldn't be reasonable. Or, because District 1 lots tend to be deeper
(sometimes because of a vacated alley or similar situation) and the existing home is up on the
front of the lot, the new construction could be placed farther back and the bulk plane be applied to
the construction near the existing home. A one-size-fits-all response in such a diverse city as
Wheat Ridge isn't fair.
11/9/2017 12:37 PM
76 I've noticed a few houses in the neighborhood that don't fit in and look ridiculously out of scale.11/9/2017 11:08 AM
77 Including bulk plane requirements recognizes the impact a house size relative to property
boundary has on the adjacent property. Without this, the impact can be a negative intrusion.
11/9/2017 10:42 AM
78 I expanding my house, I found the inspectors inconsistent in height regulations. Also required was
a setback survey after the construction and inspections were complete. This is a very expensive
requirement at the end of a project for a homeowner and we were not aware of this.
11/9/2017 9:04 AM
79 Looks like bulk plane would allow more sunlight & it would also not look as fugly as a big square 11/8/2017 7:49 PM
80 I wouldn't support bulk plane for ADU on existing garages that meet the 5' setback at the back of a
large property. I want to be able to place a small ADU on top of an existing garage that is at 5'
setback on the back of the property. I might support bulk plane for new houses on small lots and
tear downs but not on existing garages. I might also support bulk plane for second story additions
to existing houses.
11/8/2017 3:19 PM
81 Helps to protect neighborhood light and continuity.11/8/2017 2:19 PM
82 Please just look at 3086 Fenton. It will answer your questions I believe.11/8/2017 1:58 PM
83 Keeping space between homes is ideal. Many historical Denver homes have limited spacing,
which allows Wheat Ridge homes to be more competitive in a housing market crunch.
11/8/2017 1:55 PM
84 Believe in protecting existing and new properties from encroachment.11/8/2017 1:07 PM
85 Set back and height restrictions 11/8/2017 11:36 AM
86 The regulations allow for taller structures while attempting to preserve open spaces between
homes.
11/8/2017 11:08 AM
87 It's complicated. What we've seen in Denver relating to form-based codes is that developers are
maxing out the available density within the bulk plane, and what we end up with are maximum
buildable envelope buildings that all look the same. This bulk plan regulation will do the same thing
I fear. I don't think home design implied by the bulk plane shape is anything we're after as a
community, and in the end doesn't do much for regulating architectural quality. I would prefer to
see home size regulated by height and FAR, which while an imperfect method, would at least
allow for more flexibility in home design, rather than incentivize the same general plan over and
over.
11/8/2017 10:27 AM
88 I do support bulk plane - imagine a new house of 2 or 3 stories built next door to you - terms like
'looming', 'in the shadow' or 'loss of privacy' come to mind.
11/8/2017 10:25 AM
89 possibility of 3 stories 11/8/2017 10:00 AM
90 A lot of the old neighborhoods are single-story, and it looks ridiculous to have a huge 3-story next
to it.
11/8/2017 9:55 AM
91 Due to developers disregard for neighborhood makeup (is a 3 story house really appropriate to
build next to single story homes) this type of regulation is highly important. A 3 story house
sandwiched between two single story homes poses more problems than aesthetics. There's
issues of privacy, settling, drainage, property values, fire concerns etc.
11/8/2017 9:43 AM
92 Wheat Ridge has small lots, bulk plane restrictions would excessively limit the size of homes. The
value in these neighborhoods is the proximity to downtown, Sloans, restaurants. The value is not
in the homes themselves. Most are not architectural gems or historically meaningful. They are
working class homes that are now too small and too poorly constructed for the modern family.
11/8/2017 9:18 AM
93 Allows for more natural sunlight and stops new homes being built from towering over the existing
stock.
11/8/2017 9:13 AM
94 High houses in the neighborhood take away from sunlight from other lower, more traditional, ranch
houses that Wheat Ridge was originally built with. Bulk plane will allow for structures to go high
only if they have the property to do this.
11/8/2017 9:08 AM
6 / 34
Houses in Wheat Ridge: What Should They Look Like?
95 I support because Figure 1 allows larger houses which block views and confine existing homes.11/8/2017 7:26 AM
96 Because it protects allow adjacent neighbors access to sunlight and to maintain privacy. Also
keeps neighborhood character by preventing excessive building height.
11/7/2017 10:15 PM
97 Please, no high tower homes in Wheat Ridge. Very ugly and will only destroy the charm of Wheat
Ridge.
11/7/2017 9:10 PM
98 Some scrape lots in east WR have been rebuilt with 35' tall monolithic slot houses that dwarf the
surrounding houses. These look extremely out of place in our bungalo neighborhoods and as such
are an eyesore.
11/7/2017 3:14 PM
99 I feel it's only fair to limit the amount a home can encroach on a neighboring property.11/7/2017 1:58 PM
100 They let more sun in, don't block views as much, and make the area seem less crowded.11/7/2017 1:06 PM
101 I'm a firm believer in property owners should be able to do what they want on their land.11/7/2017 11:38 AM
102 Different lots have different features, one size does not fit all.11/7/2017 11:14 AM
103 The bulk plane regulation assures that houses do not visually overcome the plot on which they
have been built.
11/7/2017 9:29 AM
104 I think it's fine to have bulk plane regulations in place for residential areas, but excluding
commercial areas such as 38th main street, Wads, Kipling, 44th ect but not for the regulations to
be too restricting to what property owners can do as far as popping the top or other remodeling to
their residence. Only to prevent maybe 3 story duplex development next to single family
residences.
11/7/2017 8:52 AM
105 I do not understand the question but what I do know if that Wheat Ridge needs to evolve and allow
for ADUs, diversity in housing, multiple housing units, taller houses etc.
11/7/2017 8:21 AM
106 preserve views, character, openness 11/6/2017 10:55 PM
107 They might block the construction of square, blocky loft-style buildings by encouraging traditional
profiles and rooflines.
11/6/2017 5:55 PM
108 It's an over reach by local government dictating what I can or can not do with my property.11/6/2017 4:40 PM
109 neutral 11/6/2017 3:38 PM
110 I generally support additional regulation of setback as buildings are permitted to be higher
depending on lot size.
11/6/2017 2:19 PM
111 Bulk plane regulations will help preserve the quality of life in the neighborhood as well as help
save the character of the neighborhood.
11/6/2017 12:32 PM
112 Build reasonably in the R-1C and R-3 districts.11/6/2017 12:01 PM
113 In general I support increasing the density of dwelling units and bulk plane regulations seems like it
could interfere with that. I would likely support regulations that prevent construction of 3-story
single-family home structures close to northern property boundaries that would shade existing
solar panel systems for much of the year on property to the immediate north.
11/5/2017 8:56 PM
114 Large homes are being built remarkably close. This creates a boxed in feeling of the homes.11/5/2017 8:13 PM
115 Advantages of bulk plane are to keep a neighborhood building form in context with neighboring
building. Disadvantages are that bulk planes can artificially limit quality design if constraints aren't
realistic
11/5/2017 6:58 PM
116 I suport bulk plane regulations because I think neighborhoods are ruined when very large, tall
buildings are sandwiched in next to older one story or story and a half homes. I am saddened by
what has happened in the Highlands neibhborhoods in North Denver and I don't want to see that
happen in Wheat Ridge.
11/5/2017 5:23 PM
117 I dont have a problem with the modern style of home and as a property owner why shouldnt i be
able to utilize that land
11/5/2017 4:01 PM
118 I do not believe adding additional regulations will solve the problem. The city needs to focus on
enforcing existing regulations
11/5/2017 12:30 PM
119 Like to retain some view 11/5/2017 12:01 PM
7 / 34
Houses in Wheat Ridge: What Should They Look Like?
120 I think the diversity in our neighborhoods are good. I also like to see some of the housing stock
updated. It is not always cost effective with some of these developments. I support some
regulation but not full restriction
11/5/2017 10:39 AM
121 have you seen how they have destroyed the tennyson area with way too high buildings and
buildings that are not scaled to the neighborhood
11/5/2017 9:12 AM
122 to prevent building homes from property line to property line, basically. The larger/higher a
structure, especially when built in an existing neighborhood, the more it should be restricted so
that they do not appear to "encroach" on their neighbor.
11/4/2017 9:26 PM
123 Bulk plane regulations allow owners to add square footage to an existing property while protecting
adjacent properties from being excessively impinged upon by the new structure. Bulk plane
regulations limit the shadow cast on an adjacent property. Bulk plane regulations allow property
owners in neighborhoods of smaller lots create housing suitable for larger families. Bulk plan
regulations limit the intrusion of new, larger and taller structures on the privacy of the existing,
adjacent and lower profile houses. New and taller houses built within a bulk plane regulation may
tend to harmonize with existing and lower houses; however, a bulk plane regulation alone will not
ensure that new houses will be architecturally similar to existing houses, though whether
architectural diversity is a good thing or bad thing is largely a matter of taste except in new build,
covenant protected developments. Architectural similarity in infill neighborhoods, in my opinion,
would be a practical and political impossibility.
11/4/2017 9:01 PM
124 I think neighboring properties should not have their privacy and sunlight drastically reduced by an
increase in height.
11/4/2017 8:48 PM
125 Things change, cities change. what was popular 50 yrs ago was unpopular 100 yrs ago, Cities and
neighborhoods need to be relevant to current trends as well as traditional styles.
11/4/2017 5:58 PM
126 There is a place for bulk plane, in the right location. People should be able to build and remodel
the type of home they desire. The city should not be an HOA.
11/4/2017 5:31 PM
127 It really depends on the neighborhood/context of the regulation. Bulk plane regs should not be
flatly imposed across the city. Appropriate architectural design can be unnecessarily hampered
with out flexibility and context.
11/4/2017 1:12 PM
128 Cities should be more focused on promoting a safe environment and improving infrastructure.11/4/2017 10:53 AM
129 Strongly support because we live in a community where residential neighborhoods are important
to the communities that live in them. We also live in a region of the country where "views" are
highly important and without these restrictions, new home construction or trends will block all of the
above.
11/4/2017 10:46 AM
130 If rather see some tall nice houses than some of the dumpy houses we have in wheat ridge.11/4/2017 10:01 AM
131 I like modern homes and have a growing family. If we are to stay in Wheat Ridge, we wouldn't
want our property rights taken away. I would hate to feel like we couldn't improve our Wheat Ridge
home to our taste.
11/4/2017 9:48 AM
132 I support this because it is consistent with the character of homes in WR. Those giant boxes that
are 3 stories tall and right on the property line not only look out of place, they also block sun and
views of the sky.
11/4/2017 8:41 AM
133 I support some regulation that is consistent. With neighboring communities but I don't want Wheat
Ridge regulation to hinder existing residents or potential buyers from moving to Wheat Ridge. I
think that a property owner should have rights. I don't want the city to become a.huge HOA.
11/4/2017 8:13 AM
134 Residential height restrictions should be in place. Building a new 3 story home or adding a story to
an existing home should not be allowed in a neighborhood of 1 story home. The new home just
looks out of place and causes privacy issues for the neighbors
11/4/2017 7:36 AM
135 We should not be restricting individuals private property rights.11/4/2017 7:12 AM
136 By imposing none standard bulk plane restrictions in any single-family housing district, the city
would dramatically reduce blight revival and redevelopment. It would stifle our city’s growth rates &
appeal for residents looking for an option to invest in a neighborhood close to Denver but still
affordable enough to purchase & rehab or rebuild.
11/4/2017 12:27 AM
8 / 34
Houses in Wheat Ridge: What Should They Look Like?
137 Who gets to fill out this survey? Property owners? this survey is very likely skewed because
ANYOne can take it. someone who didn't invest money can dictate how I am able to use the
property I invested in. I don't like mid-mod style homes, but I am not trying to have all those Homes
demolished because I don't like them. I am also not dictating how they have to renovate to get
them to be pleasing to my eye.
11/3/2017 8:54 PM
138 I’m unsure of why the height of a home is so concerning. Is it more about the aesthetic of the
neighborhood, the blocking of views, or something else I’m missing entirely.
11/3/2017 8:49 PM
139 It's more appealing to the eye than a three story box.11/3/2017 8:42 PM
140 LOOKS like it’s may cost more to pop the top compared to if you didn’t have to follow the bulk rule 11/3/2017 8:32 PM
141 They make sense to me 11/3/2017 8:30 PM
142 Increased construction costs make it impossible to build affordable single family homes or even
duplexes. The only way you will get reinvestment in Wheat Ridge is by allowing people to build the
type of homes they want if they're fortunate enough to be able to afford it. If that means sacrificing
a delapidated little 1950's ranch home in order to build a beautiful 3-story house with mountain and
city views, I'm all for it. On the other hand, if you want to preserve the past history of being a rather
unattractive inner-ring suburb with little retail or attractive housing and underperforming schools,
create more building restrictions. Those people that have money will continue to choose other
areas to build; They'll choose communities where they're welcomed and rewarded for their
investment.
11/3/2017 7:59 PM
143 The city needs less regulation.11/3/2017 7:48 PM
144 They keep the area beautiful 11/3/2017 7:46 PM
145 It affects the view of of the neighbours 11/3/2017 7:27 PM
146 The charm of our neighborhoods is based on small ranch style homes. Three story houses limit
the view and sunshine.
11/3/2017 7:22 PM
147 Can't answer #2 because no context. The house in 2 is great, and inherently on the 'right' side has
bulk plane. 2nd story stepbacks or bulk plane is ludacris.
11/3/2017 6:34 PM
148 I like modern 11/3/2017 5:58 PM
149 I’m tired of extremely tall duplexes being made in what used to be a single family home lot.11/3/2017 5:44 PM
150 I would hate to see remodel of one home dwarf a neighboring home 11/3/2017 5:30 PM
151 Separation is key to maintaining the feel of our neighborhoods.11/3/2017 4:31 PM
152 I like having trees in a neighborhood. When homes a build too close together it doesn’t allow for
mature trees to be part of the landscape.
11/3/2017 4:29 PM
153 Building tall buildings right up to the street seems claustrophobic. NW Denver is going crazy with
large buildings getting built right up to the propertly frontage, but I personally would prefer for
Wheat Ridge to remain a little more... bucolic.
11/3/2017 4:21 PM
154 I do support them 11/3/2017 3:29 PM
155 The beauty of wheat ridge is the open sky and huge lots. Crowding the skyline with McMansions
will change the entire appeal of the city.
11/3/2017 3:10 PM
156 7' setback isn't enough 11/3/2017 2:58 PM
157 I support the bulk plan regulations in the R1C and R3 zone districts only. No other updates should
be needed for the larger residential lots. This issue is a solution looking for a problem.
11/3/2017 2:49 PM
158 I support Bulk Plane in certain areas for certain types of property. I don't there should be a single
bulk plane restriction. It should be linked to existing zoning categories.
11/3/2017 2:32 PM
159 It is important that new construction or remodeling not encroach upon the light sources and views
of existing home and that they fit the aesthetics of the neighborhood.
11/3/2017 2:32 PM
160 It is imperative to maintain the character of the neighborhoods and to allow sun and open sky to be
visible from the existing yards.
11/3/2017 1:45 PM
161 Allows owners to expand their property and also considers the neighbors and neighborhood 11/3/2017 1:29 PM
162 I absolutely do not want Wheat Ridge turned into a Northwest (Highlands). They have torn down
and demolished too many beautiful homes
11/3/2017 1:26 PM
9 / 34
Houses in Wheat Ridge: What Should They Look Like?
163 I think it helps visually for it not to look so crowded.. not explaining it well..11/3/2017 1:21 PM
164 To a point. The current regulations are more than enough. It is not right to limit property rights so
much that the value of current properties decrease because residents cannot expand their
outdated 1950s homes.
11/3/2017 1:04 PM
165 I like that it prevents housing developments where large houses are sandwiched together with little
yard space
11/3/2017 12:49 PM
166 Keeps balance for all needs.11/3/2017 12:43 PM
167 I'd like to limit large, tall houses that fill up the lot's available space.11/3/2017 12:37 PM
168 N/A 11/3/2017 12:37 PM
169 Need to learn morei 11/3/2017 12:22 PM
170 Let people build what they can afford to build. If it blocks your view or sun, you can choose to
move elsewhere.
11/3/2017 12:14 PM
171 I support the concept, but think the spacing is wholly inadequate from fence line when moving into
an existing neighborhood, where you are stealing someone's solar access with these pop up
atrocities as big as possible on tiny lots, next to shorter houses.
11/3/2017 12:12 PM
172 Don’t want to see horrible slot homes built in Wheat Ridge next to existing stock. And separation
between houses is important for WR to maintain as much as possible.
11/3/2017 12:12 PM
173 I support allowing our homeowners ability to reinvest in our homes as we see fit, not making broad
rules citywide. This should be area/lot specific.
11/3/2017 11:55 AM
174 It would stop homes from getting too big.11/3/2017 11:44 AM
175 BPR regs would help to keep taller buildings from "overshadowing" smaller buildings allowing light
and air flow to be maintained around these shorter structures.
11/3/2017 11:42 AM
176 Infringes on individual property owner's rights.11/3/2017 11:34 AM
177 Bulk plane puts limits on private property rights.11/3/2017 11:31 AM
178 The bulk plane ensures houses have a proportional relationship to the size of the lot. But this
might not need to be a city wide restriction. We may want more dense infill in certain areas like
major transportation hubs, and less building density in our more rural feeling neighborhoods.
11/3/2017 11:31 AM
179 It will ruin the character of Wheat Ridge.11/3/2017 11:28 AM
180 Seeing the way the lack of this regulation has made an impact on smaller homes in west denver
who have been overshadowed by 3 story homes put on lots next door.
11/3/2017 11:28 AM
181 I think it's fair to assure folks that your neighbor's house isn't going to dwarf your existing structure
and ruin your view.
11/3/2017 11:14 AM
182 nanniesim.11/3/2017 11:04 AM
183 Because not all of Wheat Ridge is the same. I live in East on Ames/32nd with a 50ft wide lot. My
house is now 874 sq ft with no basement built in 1942. I have no choice but to scrape for more
space. So it might be better for me to leave and turn my house into a rental.
11/3/2017 11:04 AM
184 I don't support new development if it takes away from the standard of living for the neighbours 11/3/2017 11:02 AM
185 The images described in this are not accurate and do not reflect 50' lot. Question 4 is biased as it
does not allow an option for less restrictive
11/3/2017 10:52 AM
186 I feel people should be able to build the homes they want.11/3/2017 10:13 AM
10 / 34
Houses in Wheat Ridge: What Should They Look Like?
31.20%83
20.30%54
48.50%129
Q4 Do you think the current bulk plane regulations in the R-1C and R-3
zone districts are strict enough?
Answered: 266 Skipped: 20
TOTAL 266
Yes
No
I don't know
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Yes
No
I don't know
11 / 34
Houses in Wheat Ridge: What Should They Look Like?
Houses in Wheat Ridge: What Should They Look Like?
Where should bulk plane apply?
As mentioned previously, bulk plane regulations were created in 2016 in reaction to infill construction
that was occurring mostly in East Wheat Ridge. At the time, staff recommended City Council consider
applying the bulk plane regulations in all residential zone districts. In zone districts with larger lots and
larger setbacks, the bulk plane would not have a significant impact, but on smaller lots it would ensure
that single- and two-family development is scaled back as it gets taller regardless of zoning. Because
East Wheat Ridge is predominantly zoned R-1C and R-3 (with predominately smaller lots), City Council
implemented bulk plane regulations in only those two zone districts.
Figure 1:
Residential zoning covers
the majority of the City as
shown by the yellow in the
map to the right.
Figure 2:
R-1C and R-3 zoning
comprise a small portion of
the City’s residential zoning,
as shown by the yellow in
the map above. This area is
currently the only area in
which bulk plane
regulations apply.
53.09%129
32.51%79
14.40%35
Q5 As noted above, bulk plane regulations currently only apply in two of
the City’s eight residential zone districts. Do you wish to see bulk plane
regulations apply to single and two-family construction in residential zone
districts throughout the City?
Answered: 243 Skipped: 43
TOTAL 243
Yes
No
I don't know
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Yes
No
I don't know
12 / 34
Houses in Wheat Ridge: What Should They Look Like?
27.57%67
38.27%93
34.16%83
Q6 Are there any specific zone districts or areas of the City in which you
think bulk plane regulations should or should not apply?
Answered: 243 Skipped: 43
TOTAL 243
Yes
No
I don't know
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Yes
No
I don't know
13 / 34
Houses in Wheat Ridge: What Should They Look Like?
Q7 If you answered "yes" to the previous question, please explain where
you think bulk plane regulations should or should not apply.
Answered: 71 Skipped: 215
#RESPONSES DATE
1 The city needs to allow for increased density which means going up, particularly around transit
(esp. Ward Road)
11/19/2017 9:54 PM
2 should not be a blanket decision. too blunt a tool 11/19/2017 6:50 PM
3 They should be applied in all residential zones especially where they abut small lots or single story
homes.
11/19/2017 2:13 PM
4 Do not expand bulk plane restrictions to additional residential zone districts. This kind of broad-
brush approach is not helpful.
11/15/2017 1:33 PM
5 They should not apply throughout 11/15/2017 6:18 AM
6 Along main arteries where residential is already mixed with commercial bulk plain should not apply 11/15/2017 5:41 AM
7 Because the gentrification and taking away of natural light and neighborhood feel impacts all
neighborhoods, not just East Wheat Ridge, where Highlands is extending. Let's have Wheat Ridge
hold it own identity, not just sway to the fact that housing prices are increasing and therefore the
tax base will increase providing more resources to Wheat Ridge.
11/14/2017 8:36 PM
8 In District I where houses tend to be closer together 11/14/2017 3:34 PM
9 This question is really complicated 11/14/2017 2:40 PM
10 R-1C and R3 should be a sort of the growth of the city. The growth from the highlands is coming
west and if we place these regulations and choose to continue them we won’t be a part of the
amazing Denver growth. We need to seize the opportunity to grow and change and give ourselves
a better curve appeal.
11/14/2017 2:22 PM
11 be consistent for all residential zones.. 35feet without a bulk plane is outrageous with 50, 75, 100
foot front. 5 feet betwwn houses wirh 35 feet height is like being run over by a truck.
11/14/2017 12:51 PM
12 There are large areas on land which are currently undeveloped and I don't see a problem with
encouraging a denser construction strategy or higher square footage per footprint architectural
style if the property is question isn't a scrape off or popup of a home in an existing neighborhood.
The area near Ward Road and around 44th (and north) come to mind. There are acreages
available for development which would be suitable for a different architectural style which wouldn't
impact neighborhood consistency
11/14/2017 12:46 PM
13 Nowhere this false standard of acceptable housing isn’t currently in force 11/14/2017 12:11 PM
14 each property should be evaluated regarding the neighborhood 11/14/2017 10:49 AM
15 Mixed use, industrial and commercial zoned areas.11/14/2017 10:04 AM
16 I do not it matters as much to have stricter regulations in existing commercial and/or industrial
areas that are not near residential communities.
11/13/2017 8:28 PM
17 if we are focused on creating a "downtown" then perhaps the neighborhoods surrounding that
section of 38th could be able to be more condensed with bigger houses...
11/13/2017 6:39 PM
18 consistency in keeping neighborhoods attractive 11/13/2017 5:53 PM
19 Where lots are smaller and homes are closer together.11/13/2017 5:41 PM
20 As they are in 11/13/2017 3:35 PM
21 It makes sense where the lots are smaller. It's just over regulation where the lots are larger.11/13/2017 3:12 PM
22 Should apply to commercial builds that are directly adjacent to residential neighborhoods.11/12/2017 8:40 AM
14 / 34
Houses in Wheat Ridge: What Should They Look Like?
23 Should apply in East Wheat Ridge. We already have a couple oversized homes that should have
been better regulated.
11/8/2017 10:19 PM
24 I need more information 11/8/2017 3:21 PM
25 See my previous comment. I don't support bulk plane regs anywhere.11/8/2017 10:28 AM
26 Bulk plane and height regulations should be taken very seriously in R-1C and R-3 due to the
makeup of the neighborhoods.
11/8/2017 9:47 AM
27 East Wheat Ridge should not be subject to bulk plane regulations because of the small lots. The
regulations excessively limit the size of homes in this area and will push out families that need
more space. There will be less investment in the area and it will continue to be signifcantly less
desireable than Denver neighborhoods to the East of Sheridan.
11/8/2017 9:21 AM
28 In denser areas where homes are closer together and height is truly affecting your neighbors light
and in turn enjoyment of their home/space. In more rural areas, I don't think it needs to be applied.
It should be fluid and evolve over time as population increases and more houses are built in the
rural areas.
11/8/2017 9:17 AM
29 Closer to downtown 11/8/2017 9:03 AM
30 Apply everywhere 11/8/2017 1:48 AM
31 Any place where it might result in an large construction that will affect the light, privacy and quality
of living of the neighbors.
11/7/2017 10:28 PM
32 all homes should not higher than there area 11/7/2017 5:24 PM
33 I think the infill examples already in east WR stand as testament to how uncontrolled bulk plane
buildings ruin the look and feel of the neighborhood. Since there is no undeveloped land in WR,
then bulk plane should be applied to all zoning districts, as scrape and infill will happen in all zones
eventually.
11/7/2017 3:14 PM
34 Anywhere an existing neighbor's view would be obstructed. Anywhere a non-bulk plane building
would shade a street on its north side, more (to limit ice and snow buildup in winter). Flat, or nearly
flat roofed buildings have less, and inferior, space for solar installations. Non-bulk-plane building
would adversely increase population density.
11/7/2017 1:14 PM
35 I think bulk plane regulations should apply to the city as a whole including all residential and mixed
used zones.
11/7/2017 9:32 AM
36 They should not apply on larger lots if they wouldn't even have a significant impact as stated
above. Also along commercial cooridors such as 38th, 44th, Wads, Kipling, 32th, 29th.
11/7/2017 8:54 AM
37 R1-C and R-3 zones.11/6/2017 12:36 PM
38 Should not apply to zones that allow multifamily housing or retail.11/5/2017 8:58 PM
39 Bulk planes should be applied in areas where individual property forms could have an adverse
effect on neighbors. Views, sunlight, shading, etc.
11/5/2017 7:00 PM
40 Should not apply to r3 as that is for multi family and should allow larger developments 11/5/2017 4:04 PM
41 It should only be applied to R-1C and R-3. Only because it is already in place. Otherwise, bulk
planes should NOT be applied anywhere else in the city.
11/5/2017 12:34 PM
42 Only east of wads 11/5/2017 11:00 AM
43 As I explained above, I think a bulk plane regulation helps to strike a balance between the
interests of existing structures and the demand for larger structures in infill neighborhoods. If, as
explained above, the bulk plane would not have a significant impact on the redevelopment
potential of larger lots and larger setbacks--and if, as I have observed, lots of varying size are to
be found throughout Wheat Ridge--I see no reason not to adopt the staff staff recommendation
that City Council consider applying the bulk plane regulations in all residential zone districts.
11/4/2017 9:09 PM
44 In areas where taller apartment buildings allowed already.11/4/2017 8:49 PM
45 I think the bulk plane regulations should be repealed throughout the city. They make little to no
sense in R1 and seem punitive based on stylistic preference. I swear this town must have the
highest use of walkmans as digital music isn't in keeping with the character of the neighborhood
when they moved in and nothing should change.
11/4/2017 9:52 AM
46 I think bill plane should exist where it currently is.11/4/2017 8:15 AM
15 / 34
Houses in Wheat Ridge: What Should They Look Like?
47 If a neighborhood is built in a certain way, one house should not be able to pop the top and take
away views and create a barrier to the sun light.
11/4/2017 7:14 AM
48 I feel they should apply in all residential neighborhoods 11/3/2017 8:31 PM
49 I don't think there should be any bulk plane regulations. It discourages investment and puts wheat
ridge further behind the competition of neighboring communities that are running circles around us.
11/3/2017 8:03 PM
50 They should not apply anywhere.11/3/2017 7:48 PM
51 They should apply everywhere 11/3/2017 7:28 PM
52 Should not apply in most districts in WR, definitely not for 2nd story.11/3/2017 6:35 PM
53 Applewood 11/3/2017 5:59 PM
54 The more "urbanized" corridors in Wheat Ridge might be more acceptably built up with taller
buildings closer to the property line. I'm thinking of 38th between Sheridan and Wadsworth, 44th
between Harlan and Wadsworth, Sheridan and Wadsworth themselves.
11/3/2017 4:26 PM
55 I support the bulk plan regulations in the R1C and R3 zone districts only. No other updates should
be needed for the larger residential lots. This issue is a solution looking for a problem.
11/3/2017 2:49 PM
56 I do not think bulk plane restrictions should be implemented broadly. For instance I think that
properties/developments closer to business districts that can support infill should have fewer bulk
plane restrictions. I am comfortable with the current zoning but do not support a broad proposal
that implements similar zoning across the city.
11/3/2017 2:36 PM
57 It is important to maintain the integrity of light sources and views (if any) and that new
building/remodeling not dwart the existing homes and totally change the rural aspects of most of
our neighborhoods.
11/3/2017 2:35 PM
58 maybe the far southwest area (ie maybe 32nd and west of Kipling)11/3/2017 1:24 PM
59 Should not apply to major road ways such as Kipling, Wadsworth, and 38th and 44th street.
Should apply to all zoned residential neighborhoods.
11/3/2017 12:55 PM
60 R1c and R3 only 11/3/2017 12:46 PM
61 New construction on greenfield sites as well as preplanned infill in which prospective residents
understand what they are investing in.
11/3/2017 12:16 PM
62 It's fine if they want to build whole neighborhoods of atrocious mini mansions where you can see
in each other's bathrooms, but it's not okay to overshadow the solar access of shorter properties
with giant monstrosities next door crammed together with minimal setbacks.
11/3/2017 12:15 PM
63 PUD, mixed use, areas exempted from height and density restrictions 11/3/2017 11:54 AM
64 New business buildings 11/3/2017 11:41 AM
65 They should not be applied anywhere!11/3/2017 11:35 AM
66 I would like to remove all bulk plane regulations. They limit most of East Wheat Ridge, and infringe
on private property rights. I bought my house with the intention of popping the top as my family
grew, and with these regulations, I am no longer able to.
11/3/2017 11:33 AM
67 As stated before, ruining the character of this city 11/3/2017 11:29 AM
68 East Wheat Ridge on the alleyed lots. Now know I have limitations I will probably leave Wheat
Ridge. Migh be nice if you could provide pre-approved blueprints for a modern craftsman home etc
for smaller lots.
11/3/2017 11:08 AM
69 Should not apply at any location 11/3/2017 11:06 AM
70 They should apply to all of them 11/3/2017 11:04 AM
71 Question are not fair and biased 11/3/2017 10:54 AM
16 / 34
Houses in Wheat Ridge: What Should They Look Like?
Houses in Wheat Ridge: What Should They Look Like?
Other regulatory tools
As mentioned above, the City now has four ways to regulate the scale of single- and two-family
development and where structures can be located on a lot:
1. By limiting the total size of footprint of the home,
2. By limiting the overall height of the home,
3. By requiring minimum separation, or setback, from the property lines, and
4. By enforcing a diagonal limit on height, or bulk plane, in some zone districts.
There are several other tools that can be utilized to control residential development, including regulating
the massing or bulk of a structure, regulating architecture, and modifying the City’s height standard.
Massing
Currently the City regulates only the footprint of a home by limiting the percentage of a lot that can be
covered by a structure. The massing or bulk of a structure can be further regulated by limiting the total
square footage of the home. This can be done by limiting the size of a home as a proportion of the lot
area.
The image below illustrates this concept. For the orange houses, each of the four lots are the same size.
On some lots the total building size may appear to be more proportionate to the size of the lot, and on
other lots the homes may feel disproportionate to the lot area. This is a factor not only of height, but
also of the overall size or massing of the home.
36.91%86
26.61%62
10.73%25
12.45%29
12.45%29
0.86%2
Q8 To what extent would you support the City regulating the massing of a
home relative to its lot size?
Answered: 233 Skipped: 53
TOTAL 233
Strongly
support
Support
Neutral
Don't support
Strongly don't
support
I don't
understand...
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Strongly support
Support
Neutral
Don't support
Strongly don't support
I don't understand massing regulations
17 / 34
Houses in Wheat Ridge: What Should They Look Like?
Houses in Wheat Ridge: What Should They Look Like
Other regulatory tools
Architecture
Some communities regulate the architecture of a home, meaning they regulate features such as general
architectural style, color, roof pitch, garage placement, porches, siding materials, and roofing materials.
In Wheat Ridge, the City regulates the architecture and materials of multifamily and commercial
construction but have never regulated the architecture of single- and two-family homes due, in part, to
the wide variety of styles in the existing housing stock.
8.15%19
12.02%28
8.15%19
34.33%80
36.91%86
0.43%1
Q9 To what extent would you support the City regulating the architecture
of single- and two-family homes (such as exterior materials, colors, roof
pitch, and windows)?
Answered: 233 Skipped: 53
TOTAL 233
Strongly
support
Support
Neutral
Don't support
Strongly don't
support
I don't
understand...
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Strongly support
Support
Neutral
Don't support
Strongly don't support
I don't understand architectural regulations
18 / 34
Houses in Wheat Ridge: What Should They Look Like?
Houses in Wheat Ridge: What Should They Look Like
Other regulatory tools
Height
The maximum building height in all residential zone districts is 35 feet, and this has been the standard
since the City was incorporated in 1969. This height is relatively consistent with neighboring
communities:
• Arvada: 35-foot maximum height for single-family and duplex homes
• Lakewood: 35-foot maximum height for single-family and duplex homes
• Edgewater: 25-foot maximum height in small lot residential zone districts and 35-foot maximum
height in other residential zone districts
• Denver: 30 to 35-foot maximum height based on lot width (for the neighborhoods adjacent to
Wheat Ridge)
18.03%42
15.45%36
16.31%38
24.46%57
25.32%59
0.43%1
Q10 To what extent would you support the City lowering the maximum
height limitation to make it more strict?
Answered: 233 Skipped: 53
TOTAL 233
Strongly
support
Support
Neutral
Don't support
Strongly don't
support
I don't
understand...
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Strongly support
Support
Neutral
Don't support
Strongly don't support
I don't understand height regulations
19 / 34
Houses in Wheat Ridge: What Should They Look Like?
30.77%28
35.16%32
2.20%2
40.66%37
16.48%15
Q11 If you answered "support" or "strongly support" to the previous
question, please complete this phrase by selecting all that apply. "I'm
interested in reducing the City's residential height limitation..."
Answered: 91 Skipped: 195
Total Respondents: 91
#OTHER (PLEASE SPECIFY)DATE
1 If we limit the size of the house a person can build, we're limiting who lives in our community as
we move forward. Healthy households WILL NOT live in tiny houses once they change from
singles to families. Do we want to have healthy households built of families? Then we need to
consider how to allow for larger homes to be built in our city.
11/15/2017 11:31 AM
2 why can't I explain why I don't support it? This is a biased survey 11/14/2017 2:42 PM
3 If bulk plane formulae alone do not provide proper bulk and massing scale.11/14/2017 11:26 AM
4 The advantage of lowering the height restriction is to create an atmosphere in Wheat Ridge, where
everyone has a view of the foothills not just a selected few who live in towers for houses. It upsets
existing neighbors and blocks the sun from their property.
11/13/2017 4:58 PM
5 To the west 11/13/2017 3:40 PM
6 Case by case 11/12/2017 8:42 AM
7 Height restrictions are already in the city's charter, inappropriately so in my opinion. This is/should
be a zoning issue to allow for flexibility and consideration of context.
11/4/2017 1:18 PM
...in some
areas of the...
...in all
areas of the...
...instead ofbulk plane...
...in addition
to bulk plan...
Other (please
specify)
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
...in some areas of the City.
...in all areas of the City.
...instead of bulk plane regulations.
...in addition to bulk plane regulations.
Other (please specify)
20 / 34
Houses in Wheat Ridge: What Should They Look Like?
8 Those tall homes are monstrosities. I support height limits for all residences that are not
apartments.
11/4/2017 8:46 AM
9 Keep neighborhoods consistent is home height, new construction 3 story homes in one
neighborhood are fine, building 3 story homes in a 1 story neighborhood looks out of place
11/4/2017 7:42 AM
10 who put out this survey?11/3/2017 6:37 PM
11 I answered not supporting 11/3/2017 6:09 PM
12 I support some reasonable massing restrictions designed to protect the integrity of the surrounding
homes and to align with the surrounding areas.
11/3/2017 2:40 PM
13 Please ban flat roof building. They really don't fit the feel/look of Wheat Ridge.11/3/2017 12:45 PM
14 30 feet is sufficient.11/3/2017 12:20 PM
15 .11/3/2017 11:44 AM
21 / 34
Houses in Wheat Ridge: What Should They Look Like?
4.29%10
84.12%196
11.59%27
Q12 For single-family homes and duplexes, should the City prohibit the
construction of TWO-STORY homes?
Answered: 233 Skipped: 53
TOTAL 233
#MAYBE (PLEASE SPECIFY)DATE
1 Yes, If the bulk plane is not taken into account 11/19/2017 2:17 PM
2 Depending on asthetics of the neighborhood.11/18/2017 3:40 PM
3 Depends on the surrounding homes, views, etc 11/15/2017 9:24 AM
4 Depends on the lot size, the set back, etc 11/14/2017 8:38 PM
5 with small lots as small as 5 or 75 feet there nust be consideration to height. how much is
infringing on homes on either side. I am using north denveras criteria. many are sandwiched in
between leaving no privacy. no sun and no chance for that smaller home to feel they are a part of
anything.
11/14/2017 1:05 PM
6 all other set backs, etc. should be considered 11/14/2017 10:52 AM
7 depends on the neighborhood. New neighborhoods could have their own identity.11/13/2017 10:03 PM
8 Clever developers will create "two-story" homes that meet the height restrictions and then allow for
a roof top deck which could be excluded from the restrictions. All of this just creates angst in the
neighborhoods for folks who have been living in Wheat Ridge for decades. Please honor long-term
citizens who have contributed to Wheat Ridge over newbies, who want to scrape and rebuild
towers instead.
11/13/2017 4:58 PM
9 Depends on the setback from property lines. I wouldn't want to see homes formerly with sunny lots
becoming shady due to 2 story homes being built nextdoor.
11/12/2017 7:07 PM
10 need more information 11/8/2017 9:51 AM
11 As long as the build is stylistically consistent with other builds and established homes 11/8/2017 9:04 AM
Yes
No
Maybe (please
specify)
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Yes
No
Maybe (please specify)
22 / 34
Houses in Wheat Ridge: What Should They Look Like?
12 Two story would be acceptable, but anything beyond this causes limits for the current/existing
residents.
11/8/2017 7:29 AM
13 Only when interfering when bulk plane regulations.11/7/2017 9:35 AM
14 depends on surrounding homes.11/6/2017 3:43 PM
15 If there are limits on massing, 2 story homes could be appropriate. If there are no limits on
massing, 2 story homes could be massive!
11/5/2017 8:17 PM
16 This sounds like a taking 11/5/2017 4:04 PM
17 Lot infill ratios create enough restrictions. Again, imposing heavy restrictions will reduce the appeal
of blight revival.
11/4/2017 12:34 AM
18 Depends on neighbors 11/3/2017 7:30 PM
19 If the height impacts neighbors.11/3/2017 7:25 PM
20 Should not 11/3/2017 3:32 PM
21 I think these builds need to be regulated to protect existing homeowners from potential flip/scrape
scenarios
11/3/2017 3:16 PM
22 If we don't have bulk plane restrictions then yes we should not build two story homes.11/3/2017 1:51 PM
23 Depends on what if they are changing to the flattop mess in Northwest (Highlands)11/3/2017 1:31 PM
24 I think you need to be careful here. Maybe allow two story on an case by case basis... some two
stories are fine, but other two stories are just massive.
11/3/2017 1:27 PM
25 This is absolutely preposterous! If this were to happen property values would plummet and new
generations would no longer look at moving to the cramped homes in WR and probably people
would leave in droves so I guess the creators of this survey would have accomplished their goal of
keeping people out of Wheat Ridge and creating a ghost town! I just hope my husband and I would
not lose too much of our nest egg that we invested in our home.
11/3/2017 1:14 PM
26 If they overshadow solar access to existing structures.11/3/2017 12:18 PM
27 This survey is stupid. This question addresses all of Wheat Ridge equally. I am not a city planner,
and I can't imagine others taking this survey are either. There may be parts of our city that should
prohibit two story construction based on long term city planning, other parts of the city might
benefit from the development. This is not for average citizens to decide without comprehensive
study.
11/3/2017 11:40 AM
23 / 34
Houses in Wheat Ridge: What Should They Look Like?
42.06%98
37.77%88
20.17%47
Q13 For single-family homes and duplexes, should the City prohibit the
construction of THREE-STORY homes?
Answered: 233 Skipped: 53
TOTAL 233
#MAYBE (PLEASE SPECIFY)DATE
1 Allowance should take into consideration if contrasts with surrounding homes, or if it interferes
with the views of existing homes
11/19/2017 9:39 PM
2 Absolutely 11/19/2017 2:17 PM
3 Depending on lot size 11/18/2017 11:33 AM
4 Depends on the scope of the three story design. If it flows with in the 11/18/2017 11:10 AM
5 Depends on the surrounding homes, views etc 11/15/2017 9:24 AM
6 If within the height restrictions.11/14/2017 3:37 PM
7 two story is best, anything higher makes the apartment buildings to be too big.11/14/2017 2:45 PM
8 why doesn't the survey ask which of the 3 regulations best reflects the city: bulk plane, height or
number of stories?
11/14/2017 2:42 PM
9 if an owner has a half acre as wide as deep so you have no infringement on those homes around
it.
11/14/2017 1:05 PM
10 I am concerned with new construction impacting the quality of life of neighbors. If a lot is large or
not directly adjacent to a single story home or has a larger set back to neighboring property, I am
ok with it. We do need to fill in the metro area and wheat ridge would benefit from new construction
and additional density (property tax and sales tax revenue)
11/14/2017 12:49 PM
11 Only to those whose plans exceed the current 35’ restriction 11/14/2017 12:13 PM
12 only if bulk and massing are controlled as to scale 11/14/2017 11:26 AM
13 Using bulk plane standards.11/14/2017 10:17 AM
Yes
No
Maybe (please
specify)
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Yes
No
Maybe (please specify)
24 / 34
Houses in Wheat Ridge: What Should They Look Like?
14 I drove through several blocks of West Highlands between W 44th and W 40th near Raleigh. I was
shocked at the contemporary cookie cutter condos that are filling the neighborhood. Some houses
need to be scraped but there should be a variety of styles and single family homes rather than one
identical condo after another.
11/14/2017 10:13 AM
15 I would need more info. I don’t have a strong opinion on this.11/13/2017 9:13 PM
16 I would restrict them from smaller lots in dense neighborhoods.11/13/2017 5:44 PM
17 Depends on the height restriction and the lot size.11/13/2017 4:58 PM
18 Should be determined on a case by case basis 11/8/2017 1:54 PM
19 A blanket restriction may not be appropriate. There may be conditions where restrictions would
make sense.
11/8/2017 10:32 AM
20 need more information 11/8/2017 9:51 AM
21 I think bulk plane should be applied. If it fits within the guidelines, 3 story is fine.11/8/2017 9:34 AM
22 Depends on the height.11/7/2017 6:48 PM
23 If it doesn't fit with the rest of the neighborhood, eg on a street of 1 story bungalows 11/6/2017 10:59 PM
24 Yes, if they follow strict bulk plane requirements.11/6/2017 6:00 PM
25 Depends on surrounding homes.11/6/2017 3:43 PM
26 I would support adhering to the bulk plane restrictions in this case. And allow it where lot sizes
allowed this development.
11/6/2017 2:26 PM
27 Yes for single-family, no for duplexes 11/5/2017 9:02 PM
28 It depends on the context of the existing neighbors 11/5/2017 7:03 PM
29 This sounds like a taking 11/5/2017 4:04 PM
30 I think Ok, if they meet current requirements 11/5/2017 10:41 AM
31 I don't support a blanket prohibition. However, a conditional prohibition based on lot size and
setback might be useful in protecting the light and privacy of existing dwellings. On the other hand,
why would a blanket prohibition be needed in the other regulations just discussed (bulk plane,
height, mass) are in place?
11/4/2017 9:16 PM
32 Depends on the area. It is imporatnt to maintain the character of our neighborhood.11/4/2017 4:45 PM
33 Again in certain neighborhoods, keep existing character of neighborhood, a 3 story home in the
middle of ranch homes looks out of place and awkward. A subdivision of 3 story homes is fine as it
looks like a planned community not a hodge lodge of construction types
11/4/2017 7:42 AM
34 I’m not sure 11/4/2017 6:43 AM
35 Lot infill ratios create enough restrictions. Again, imposing heavy restrictions will reduce the appeal
of blight revival and empty lot development.
11/4/2017 12:34 AM
36 3-story adjacent to single-story homes typically feel too large and out of character for the
neighborhood. 3-story next to 2-story is less disruptive and out of character, or 2.5-story that looks
like 2-story next to single-story.
11/3/2017 8:09 PM
37 No, for 3rd story on small lots (less than 50' wide), do bulk plane.11/3/2017 6:37 PM
38 I think three-story homes would be acceptable along more "urbanized" corridors (38th and 44th
between Sheridan and Wadsworth, and along Sheridan and Wadsworth themselves), but not in the
off-main-street neighborhoods themselves.
11/3/2017 4:29 PM
39 2.5 story or 2 story with only roof deck 11/3/2017 3:35 PM
40 I think these builds need to be regulated to protect existing homeowners from potential flip/scrape
scenarios
11/3/2017 3:16 PM
41 Only in a new development or when the 3-story homes are on a large lot and does not affect the
light or visibility from surrounding homes, particularly existing homes and it should be zoned so as
to limit the number of unrelated residents in each unit.
11/3/2017 2:42 PM
42 It depends on the area.11/3/2017 2:40 PM
25 / 34
Houses in Wheat Ridge: What Should They Look Like?
43 Why does the city have the right to limit property rights???11/3/2017 1:14 PM
44 I think it depends on specific lots and neighborhoods 11/3/2017 12:26 PM
45 Should be tied to bulk plane 11/3/2017 11:57 AM
46 See answer 12 11/3/2017 11:40 AM
47 Depending on lot size.11/3/2017 11:33 AM
26 / 34
Houses in Wheat Ridge: What Should They Look Like?
Q14 If you have additional comments or suggestions related to single-
and two-family development in Wheat Ridge, please provide those below.
Answered: 63 Skipped: 223
#RESPONSES DATE
1 The last decade proved that suburban sprawl was unsustainable. The only way to accomodate
increased population will be by building up. Communities that embrace that fact will thrive while
those that resist it will find themselves lagging behind in property values and influx of new
residents.
11/19/2017 10:00 PM
2 I honestly feel that these questions (limiting 2- or 3- story houses, imposing limitations on
construction materials) are ridiculous. Wheat Ridge is growing and changing, and we need to be
flexible. We also need to work collaboratively to define our vision for a vibrant and inclusive city,
and grow our policies out of that -- not be reactive.
11/19/2017 8:34 PM
3 The most important to me is regulating the size of the house compared to the lot. If people were
building small houses, I wouldn't be so concerned, even if built on a very small lot, but the huge
houses that take up almost the whole lot are just too much. If the housing prices continue to go up
or even stay where they are, we need affordable housing. Wouldn't it be nice to have some single
family homes that are affordable? Slightly smaller 2 story homes can be luxury homes, too. The
monstrosities like they have built in NW Denver (between 38th and 44th and between Sheridan
and Tennyson is a good example) aren't attractive.
11/19/2017 8:11 PM
4 I tend to prefer the modern building style that we're seeing more of, especially on "scrapes" in
Denver. Many of these are 2 - 3 stories (going higher on smaller lots). I think Wheat Ridge would
really limit development potential by restricting residential building heights to single story.
11/19/2017 1:58 PM
5 Please don't make our city like North Denver. The homes,especially in the older areas need to
keep the city the way it is,
11/18/2017 9:05 PM
6 Be very careful in moving in a direction that proposes to legislate architectural aesthetics. It’s one
thing to direct footprint and bulk plane, but to assume the city knows best as to the design
parameters ( roof slope, materials, windows, etc.) is a mistake that would detract interest and
diversity in living here.
11/17/2017 7:48 PM
7 Again, do we want to have only old people, single people and poor people in our neighborhoods?
If yes, then limit what people can build. If no, then we need to retain the abilities of people to build
2 and 3 story homes.
11/15/2017 11:33 AM
8 Do more to help residents understand what this direction in city planning means.11/15/2017 8:52 AM
9 We moved to Wheat Ridge from Denver partly due to the variety of housing stock. Limiting
architectural expression as well as density is a mistake.
11/15/2017 6:22 AM
10 I hope that Wheat Ridge will prohibit what has overrun the highlands neighborhood in Denver,
those HUGE duplexes on every lot possible, just because it was zoned multi-family years ago,
doesn't mean it makes sense now.
11/14/2017 8:39 PM
11 As we watch the city of Denver grow I hope wheat ridge desires to join in the growth. If we prohibit
homes to be built that match the plans of other Denver homes we are limiting Wheat Ridge
growth. We will continue to stay the old neighborhood and watch as the neighborhoods around us
grow in this time of strength for Colorado. I believe we need to allow this change and be a part of
this change to better our community.
11/14/2017 2:26 PM
12 you said we needed to develop newer looks, why then are the 30 year olds moving into
wheatridge because they live it here. we never lost people wanting to be here because we don't
have the hightest and newest of homes. I have lived here for 50 years the homss on my street
have 5 new families all in the 30 year old bracket paying at least 300 a square foot and up.
11/14/2017 1:12 PM
13 I'd like to see inclusion of regs that allow people to add a tiny house to their property.11/14/2017 12:19 PM
14 Don’t let a single individual attempt to impose her own personal peeves on the rest of us!11/14/2017 12:14 PM
15 All four methods of controlling bulk and massing should be considered in final solution 11/14/2017 11:28 AM
27 / 34
Houses in Wheat Ridge: What Should They Look Like?
16 Let's clean it without losing character.11/14/2017 10:14 AM
17 Please respect long-term citizens in Wheat Ridge. Don't let developers ruin our city with homes
that are not sized properly for the lot in terms of mass or height.
11/13/2017 5:03 PM
18 Would be great if two-family development could be limited 11/13/2017 4:36 PM
19 If the lot has room, there is nothing wrong with a 3 story home. I also like all the different
architecture. We don't want to look like Highlands Ranch.
11/13/2017 3:16 PM
20 I believe that onerous restrictions would harm the future vitality of the City. Property owners should
be allowed to build what they wish as long as it meets code. Just the hint of further restrictions will
inhibit rehabilitation of the older parts of Wheat Ridge.
11/9/2017 12:42 PM
21 We have big back yards ,beautifully cared for and privacy, peace and tall buildings overshadow
and destroys this. One only need look at Denver.
11/9/2017 9:09 AM
22 Please see 3086 Fenton 11/8/2017 2:01 PM
23 We met two times regarding Alternative Housing Units last year, and I have contacted my council
woman, the mayor, been told it was on the docket, but have never heard what happened, and
watched the meetings on public TV when they told me it was being addressed. No word, not
addressed. Now we want to change zoning code without actually resolving THAT issue? Do we
need McMansions? NO. Do we need flexibility to help our families with housing, and perhaps
some extra income in our retirement? YES. Please approve this, or at least vote on it, so we know
who is thinking clearly, and who is not.
11/8/2017 7:58 AM
24 These huge houses are causing current home owners values to decrease because their views
have disappeared. Houses are built too close to current homes. The houses being built do not fit
into the current neighborhood and look displaced.
11/8/2017 7:31 AM
25 I understand the changes that come with growth and development in a city. However in Wheat
Ridge we are at a crucial point where if we let the growth by itself dominate the panorama, it will
affect negatively its character, which is precisely why people want to live here, why they are living
here. Massive buildings also create deep divisions in the neighbors relationships. It goes beyond
than heights, depths and perimeters.
11/7/2017 10:49 PM
26 Please no high rises in Wheat Ridge. It destroyed the Highlights.11/7/2017 9:14 PM
27 I believe in property rights. Restrictions need to be limited.11/7/2017 6:49 PM
28 I feel that any home built should complement the size of the neighboring homes, and increase the
square footage by no more than 30% of the original structure.
11/7/2017 2:09 PM
29 Let's look at all of Wheat Ridge, not just a single district!11/7/2017 11:41 AM
30 Focusing on the redevelopment and improvements of duplexes in the city would be great. A lot of
the properties are not kept up and provide a bad a view of the city.
11/7/2017 11:21 AM
31 Very supportive of all agricultural allowances within the city.11/7/2017 9:36 AM
32 Let's pass a generous ADU ordinance that encourages adaptive uses of existing housing stock.11/6/2017 6:01 PM
33 I am all for keeping our neighborhood “R1-C zone” enjoyable and keeping the quality of life to a
standard. If we don’t drop the height to a max of 25 feet I feel the standard I mentioned will
diminish. Please listen and act. Thank you.
11/6/2017 12:46 PM
34 Please prevent the boxification of our neighborhoods that has happened in the highlands! It is
starting to creep in and 3 story homes are towering over the charming small homes that we love.
11/5/2017 8:19 PM
35 This is a very complex issues and a one size fits all approach doesn't work. As a professional
Architect, bulk plane limitations can improve, or have an adverse effect.
11/5/2017 7:05 PM
36 I would prohibit what are called two and a half story homes which I see being built in Denver to get
around the three story building limit. The one I have seen in my friend's Denver neighborhood
towers over the one story ranches around it and spoils the look and feel of the neighborhood.
11/5/2017 5:31 PM
37 Why not encourage the housing variety that has existed for decades? Council wanted
reinvestments for years in the eastern neighborhoods. Now that it is here, some are unhappy.
11/5/2017 4:05 PM
38 KEEP YOUR HANDS OFF OUR PRIVATE PROPERTY!11/5/2017 12:37 PM
28 / 34
Houses in Wheat Ridge: What Should They Look Like?
39 Blanket regulations are not good for wheat ridge since the communities, style of homes and size of
lots are so diverse. What works on one block can literally have an opposite effect on the next
block over.
11/5/2017 11:04 AM
40 They city should not set such restrictions on housing development in order to leave some of the
shacks that currently exist. (And some council members call that preserving the neighborhood).
Sorry I would rather see a nice home rather than a rundown shack. I do not want them to dissuade
development, and improve property values and also the improved demographics.
11/5/2017 10:43 AM
41 this can be a great community without the greed of massive structures towering over your
neighbors blocking out site and sun. We dont need three story structures here. Just look at the
ugly mess of tennyson st. and the rest of the front range with big huge ugly housing that only
creates more problems
11/5/2017 9:18 AM
42 I have two concerns about this survey. First, some of the regulatory concepts are presented
without adequate explanation of how they would function in practice in the different situations
found in Wheat Ridge. This leads to people expressing opinions based on attitudes and general
impressions toward the language in the question and not on an visual image of how a regulation or
group of regulations would actually affect an infill situation with which they might be familiar. (An
exception is the illustration that accompanied the massing question; this was quite effective.) My
second point expands on the notion of providing the public with visual imagery that illustrates (with
what used to be called renderings, but taking advantage of new computer technology) the effect of
various regulations on housing in different infill situations. With so many visualization software
tools available today for doing this in meetings, online, and even to create animated renderings
that could be embedded in a survey like this, it calls into question the validity of this survey
instrument for measuring the actual level of acceptance the public might have for the various
regulatory regimes implied in the survey. So, my caveat would be, consider the results from this
survey to be an imperfect indicator. It may suggest the range of attitudes people hold toward the
language used to describe the regulations. However, I don't think it will result in a good
measurement of how acceptable or not the actual appearance and function of infill housing would
be to neighbors under the kinds of regulations suggested in the survey. Before going further, the
city should consider producing and presenting (say, on Channel 3) a series of animated renderings
that illustrate the differing impact of various regulations one at a time, and then in various
combinations, on a range of the infill situations residents actually face. In other words, I would
have more confidence in a poll based on peoples' response to visual imagery that illustrates the
regulations than to the abstract, language in which regulations are written.
11/4/2017 9:44 PM
43 We need diversity, affordable housing, greater density where possible. Let's take an incremental
and cautious approach to any additional regulations that would limit our opportunities toward those
goals
11/4/2017 1:19 PM
44 Homes are changing. Wheat Ridge has a long history of few HOAs and allowing individuality. This
America pick the car or bike you want or none at all accordong to your choice. If you want all the
houses to match there are HOA communities and Highlands Ranch. Keep Wheat Ridge free.
Regulate maintenance but not style. what's next, paint color regulation?
11/4/2017 9:58 AM
45 A neighborhood does not look well planned if a 3 story home is just plopped down in the middle of
ranch homes
11/4/2017 7:43 AM
46 If I wanted to live in a stepford wives town with matching homes, I would have bought a home
there where only one trash company, one doctor and lawn mowing company were allowed per the
city code under the shield of minimizing undo stress on roads. I would enjoy paying exessive taxes
to this fictional town to support keeping out anything that differed from my narrow point of view.
With everyone's head in their phones, what does it matter what things look like anymore. People
are glued to their own alternate reality.
11/3/2017 9:09 PM
47 Affordable housing. Rent control. I’d love to see a percentage limit put on how much a landlord
can raise rents each year. My who live in and love this city are being forced out due to rent
increases that are not proportionate to wage increases. Our city needs to be able to retain the
residents that make it a great place to live.
11/3/2017 8:56 PM
48 Consider architectural/site design standards to preserve traditional neighborhood character
(pitched roofs, front porches, large windows, masonry/wood, tree lawn, etc.). Incentivize restoring
and investment in existing homes rather than scrape and rebuild (allow additions, ADUs, garages,
etc.).
11/3/2017 8:17 PM
29 / 34
Houses in Wheat Ridge: What Should They Look Like?
49 We have an affordable housing crisis in the Denver area. Creating more restrictive zoning
regulations only makes the problem worse. Less density means more expensive housing; more
size restrictions means less investment in the community which is detrimental to improving the
quality of life in the community.
11/3/2017 8:10 PM
50 Permit ADUs, pronto 11/3/2017 6:38 PM
51 I would like to see regulation to avoid homes being torn down for the building of the "box looking
homes" being build all over the Denver area.
11/3/2017 5:42 PM
52 I support the bulk plan regulations in the R1C and R3 zone districts only. No other updates should
be needed for the larger residential lots. This issue is a solution looking for a problem.
11/3/2017 2:51 PM
53 Wheat Ridge needs to maintain its rural/small town "look" as much as possible while meeting the
needs for housing at all income levels. I totally oppose "big boxes" such as those dwarfing
neighborhoods in Denver and which destroy the historical areas of the city.
11/3/2017 2:45 PM
54 I think we should be very careful limiting what people can do to their own property.11/3/2017 2:41 PM
55 After watching the gentrification of north Denver, I think its extremely important that Wheat Ridge
do its best to keep the character of the neighborhood and not just let massive development occur
with no consideration of the neighborhood architecture.
11/3/2017 1:29 PM
56 No flat roof homes.11/3/2017 12:46 PM
57 Am not an opponent of growth. WR needs to be dynamic and flexible as far as new developments
may be concerned. Yet I would not like to see big box homes infecting established neighborhoods.
It’s a tough balance.
11/3/2017 12:24 PM
58 Solar access should be a right, given our need to get off fossil fuels. We are cruel to let people
move in and block roof exposure to their neighbors, and cram houses together as much as
possible when they aren't of similar heights.
11/3/2017 12:20 PM
59 Let people build what they can afford to build as far as new construction. What needs to be more
watched is the crummy way people take care of their current property.North of SRC on Chase is a
perfect example.
11/3/2017 12:16 PM
60 Average citizens are probably not aware of the implications or impacts of long term city planning
issues. The answers given on this survey most likely represent how a single homeowner feels
about his/her own property, but has nothing to do with city wide policy or development.
11/3/2017 11:47 AM
61 Wheat Ridge needs to protect private property rights, and allow for multi family development, and
ADU's to help provide affordable housing options in an area where real estate is quickly becoming
unaffordable for all but the upper classes.
11/3/2017 11:37 AM
62 This is a flawed and biased survey to newer residents and those of us in small houses. The people
that have a ranch house with large lot or have already have a larger home etc, will want to regulate
everyone else, because they already "got theirs". This limits everyone else unfailrly. I think this city
needs to wake up and smell the coffee on limiting growth in certain areas of the city. It very
obvious that a large group of lifteme residents still think this is a sleepy town and want to keep it in
the 80's. But in reality its 3.2 miles from the center of the fastest growing city in the United States.
11/3/2017 11:18 AM
63 PLEASE ADDRESS ADU's!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11/3/2017 10:06 AM
30 / 34
Houses in Wheat Ridge: What Should They Look Like?
39.13%90
20.87%48
26.09%60
12.61%29
1.30%3
Q15 In which City Council District do you live and/or own residential
property? (Refer to map below if you are unsure.)
Answered: 230 Skipped: 56
TOTAL 230
District I
District II
District III
District IV
I don't live
or own prope...
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
District I
District II
District III
District IV
I don't live or own property in Wheat Ridge
31 / 34
Houses in Wheat Ridge: What Should They Look Like?
0.00%0
0.43%1
9.57%22
26.52%61
20.87%48
20.87%48
16.52%38
5.22%12
Q16 What is your age?
Answered: 230 Skipped: 56
TOTAL 230
Under 18
18 to 24 years
25 to 34 years
35 to 44 years
45 to 54 years
55 to 64 years
65 to 74 years
75 years orolder
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Under 18
18 to 24 years
25 to 34 years
35 to 44 years
45 to 54 years
55 to 64 years
65 to 74 years
75 years or older
32 / 34
Houses in Wheat Ridge: What Should They Look Like?
12.61%29
46.96%108
18.70%43
16.96%39
3.48%8
1.30%3
Q17 Including yourself, how many people reside in your household?
Answered: 230 Skipped: 56
TOTAL 230
1
2
3
4
5
6 or more
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
1
2
3
4
5
6 or more
33 / 34
Houses in Wheat Ridge: What Should They Look Like?
26.96%62
16.96%39
16.52%38
38.26%88
1.30%3
Q18 How long have you lived in Wheat Ridge?
Answered: 230 Skipped: 56
TOTAL 230
0 to 5 years
6 to 10 years
11 to 20 years
21 years or
more
I do not live
in Wheat Ridge
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
0 to 5 years
6 to 10 years
11 to 20 years
21 years or more
I do not live in Wheat Ridge
34 / 34
Houses in Wheat Ridge: What Should They Look Like?
ATTACHMENT 2
Sec. 26-642. - Bulk plane.
A. Bulk plane. In addition to the height and setback standards of article II, building envelopes
are regulated by a three-dimensional bulk plane for the purpose of preserving neighborhood
compatibility, privacy, and the adequate supply of light and air.
1. Applicability. The bulk plane restrictions of this section shall apply to all structures on a lot
for which a building permit is applied for after the effective date of Ordinance No. 1613, Series
2016. The entirety of any building envelope shall be contained within the bulk plane, unless
otherwise exempted by subsection 4.
2. Measurement of bulk plane. The bulk plane is a plane that begins fifteen (15) feet above
every property line of a lot or parcel, which then slopes at a forty-five (45) degree angle until it
intersects the bulk plane from the opposite side of the lot or parcel. See figure 26-642.2.
Maximum building heights set forth in article II, chapter 26 shall apply regardless of the height at
which the two (2) opposite bulk planes intersect above the lot or parcel.
3. Measurement of base plane. The base plane (see figure 26-642.1) shall be measured from
the existing average grade of a lot or parcel. Average grade shall be calculated as the average
of the elevations taken at the midpoints of each property line. See figure 26-642.2.
4. Exceptions. Encroachments into the bulk plane shall be permitted as follows:
a. Chimneys.
b. [Railings.] Open-type railings compliant with adopted City Code.
c. Architectural features. Cornice, eaves, beltcourses, sills, canopies or other similar
architectural features, including bay window, may extend or project into the bulk plane
not more than thirty (30) inches.
d. Mechanical equipment. Vent pipes, solar panels, swamp coolers.
e. [Dormers.] Dormers measuring no more than eight (8) feet wide; six (6) feet tall, as
measured from the lowest point of intersection between the roof and the dormer to the
highest point of a flat roof or mean height level between eaves and ridge for a gable, hip,
gambrel or other roof; and, occupying no more than fifty (50) percent of the roof.
Figure 26-642.1. Section view of bulk plane building envelope, as measured from all
property lines.
Figure 26-642.2. Average Grade Calculation.
(Ord. No. 1613 , §§ 6—8, 11-21-16)
Item No. 3
Memorandum
TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Kenneth Johnstone, Director of Community Development THROUGH: Patrick Goff, City Manager DATE: May 3, 2021 Study Session SUBJECT: New temporary full-time position to conduct zoning related building
permit plan reviews ISSUE: The Building Division in the Community Development Department is experiencing record
volumes of permit activity, as outline further in the background section of this memo. This is a trend over the past several years. While all building permits necessitate building division review and approval, a majority also require review by Engineering and Planning/Zoning. This is a significant aspect of the job duties of three of the planner staff positions in the Planning Division. Because of the volume of permits and various other priorities and projects underway in the
Planning Division, it has been a struggle over the last few months to maintain our long established plan review customer service timeframes that commit us to reviewing residential permits in 2-4 weeks, a significant point of pride in the department. Based on the significant pipeline of permits we foresee over the next 2 years, we have a need to hire a temporary employee to meet the work volume and maintain customer service expectations. With Council’s
support, we would hope to bring a person on quickly to keep up with the expected typical summer uptick in permit volume. PRIOR ACTIONS: With the exception of the addition of two staff positions associated with the City’s new
neighborhood engagement program, the Planning Division has not added a staff position since 2007, when a long-range planner was added to the team. That position was a specific recommendation of the original NRS, which recommended that the City develop a series of subarea plans and eventually a new citywide comprehensive plan. In 2017, the City made a switch to 100% contract employees in the Building Division. One of the
advantages of that arrangement is that the contract team can (and does) ramp up (and occasionally down) their staffing to be responsive to the current volume of work. By example, we have recently added back a third building permit tech position to respond to current work volume. To date the zoning review portion has been absorbed by existing staffing. FINANCIAL IMPACT: With Council’s endorsement of this additional temporary position, staff would begin to work directly with Human Resources to develop a position description and salary range.
It is anticipated that the position, with benefits, will be in the neighborhood of $100,000 annually, but requiring roughly half that amount for the balance of 2021.
The building division generates fee-based revenues in three main categories, building permit fees, plan review fees and contractor licensing fees. As City Council likely recalls, our arrangement with Charles Abbott Associates (CAA) requires that we share a portion of those revenues with CAA. That contract is structured such that for the first $60,000 in
monthly revenues we share back 68% to CAA; for revenues between $60,000 and
$100,000 we share back 60% and for revenues in excess of $100,000, we share back 55%. Most months of late reach the 55% pricing scheme. For 2021, we budgeted the following revenues: contractor licensing - $130,000 ($34,100
in actual revenue through March); building permits - $1,000,000 ($349,029 through
March); and plan review - $300,000 ($95,795 through March). In total, year to date revenues through March represent 34% of budgeted revenues through 25% of the calendar year. It should also be noted that January through March are typically 3 of our slower revenue months in the building division. Conservatively, staff would estimate in
building permit revenues alone that we will generate $1,250,000 to $1,500,000, so an
increase of $250,000 to $500,000 over budgeted revenues. Also, we have not accounted for any SCL/Lutheran west campus permit revenues in our budget projections, though they do intend to start pulling permits and paying those associated revenues as early as June 2021.
BACKGROUND: As noted, all three functional divisions in Community Development (Planning, Building and Engineering) have a role in reviewing and issuing permits. Staffing in those divisions has been static for many years, even in the face of significant upward trends in relation to
land use applications and building permits. Because current and anticipated volume of
building permits is expected to remain very high, we have a need in the Planning Division to add a planner to be focused for the next 1-2 years on the processing of building permits. For reference, following are several charts that depict volume of building permits processed by the planning division over the past several months and
years.
In 2020, review of building permits by planning staff hit a record high since 2012 with 372
applications submitted for planning review. Planning reviews increased over the last few years
with the addition of commercial tenant finish and residential remodels, but this alone does not account for the increase from 2019 to 2020. Many residential entitlements from prior years resulted in permits in 2020 including numerous townhome and single-family projects including Clear Creek Terrace, Yarrow Gardens, Ridge at Ward Station, Hance Ranch, Station 53, and
Commons at 38.
The Planning Division is on track for a similar volume in 2021 with 107 permits submitted for Planning Division review to date.
372
260
206200
121
159180
155146
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
202020192018201720162015201420132012
Permit Review Volume by Planning Division, by Year
Bldg Permits
Plan reviews for the Planning Division has been trending up since 2016 and have started to rise more significantly since mid-2019 and even more precipitously since the third quarter of 2020.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Ja
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
Ap
r
i
l
2
0
1
6
Ju
l
y
2
0
1
6
Oc
t
o
b
e
r
2
0
1
6
Ja
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
7
Ap
r
i
l
2
0
1
7
Ju
l
y
2
0
1
7
Oc
t
o
b
e
r
2
0
1
7
Ja
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
8
Ap
r
i
l
2
0
1
8
Ju
l
y
2
0
1
8
Oc
t
o
b
e
r
2
0
1
8
Ja
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
9
Ap
r
i
l
2
0
1
9
Ju
l
y
2
0
1
9
Oc
t
o
b
e
r
2
0
1
9
Ja
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
2
0
Ap
r
i
l
2
0
2
0
Ju
l
y
2
0
2
0
Oc
t
o
b
e
r
2
0
2
0
Ja
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
2
1
Ap
r
i
l
2
0
2
1
Active Plan Review by Planning Division
2016 to Present, by Month
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Active Plan Reviews by Planning Division
2016 to Present, 7-Day Moving Average
The 7-day moving average of active permit reviews has consistently exceeded 20 since June 2020 and started consistently exceeding 30 in September 2020. Volumes increased to 40-60 at
the end of 2020 and have recently returned to those levels in April 2021. On April 21, 2021
there were 61 active plan reviews for the Planning Division. Based on pending and approved residential projects, the permit pipeline is not yet expected to slow down. Near the Wheat Ridge Ward Station alone, we expect to issue another 209
townhome and single-family home projects for the Toll, Remington, and Wonderland projects.
Another 17 smaller projects throughout the City could result in an additional 200 permits. From April 2020 to April 2021, there were 416 permits submitted for Planning Division review. Of those, six mid- to large-size residential projects accounted for 47% (196 permits) of the reviews (Clear Creek Terrace, Yarrow Gardens, Hance Ranch, Ridge at Ward Station, Station
54, Commons at 38.) The other half of permits reviewed (220 permits) included a wide range of
projects including residential additions and accessory structures as well as commercial signs, development, and façade changes. RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff is requesting authorization for an additional FTE in the Planning Division to focus
on building permit plan reviews and inspections. For the remainder of 2021, staff estimates the need for a supplemental budget appropriation in the amount of $50,000, which is tentatively scheduled for action at the May 10 City Council regular business meeting.