HomeMy WebLinkAbout10.07.24 - Study Session NotesSTUDY SESSION NOTES
CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO
Hybrid - Virtual Meeting
October 7, 2024
This meeting was conducted both as a virtual meeting and hybrid, where some members of the Council or City staff were physically present at the Municipal building, and some members of the public attended in person as well. A quorum of members of Council were present in Council Chambers for this session.
The Mayor explained the virtual/hybrid meeting format, how citizens will have the opportunity to be heard, and the procedures and policies to be followed.
1. Call to Order
Mayor Starker called the Special Study Session to order at 6:30 p.m.
2. Attendance
Council Members present: Jenny Snell, Rachel Hultin (via Zoom), Janeece Hoppe,
Amanda Weaver, Korey Stites, Dan Larson, and Scott Ohm.
Absent: Leah Dozeman
Also present: City Manager Patrick Goff, Deputy City Manager Allison Scheck,
Assistant City Manager Marianne Schilling, Community Development Director Lauren
Mikulak, Public Works Director Maria D’Andrea, Senior Planner Scott Cutler, and Senior
Deputy City Clerk Margy Greer, and other staff and interested residents.
3. Public’s Right to Speak
Public Comments from Wheat Ridge Speaks:
Item No. 2 - Memo- Lutheran Legacy Zoning Requirements
Posted by Robert H. Robinson
Oct 7, 2024, at 11:49am Address: 4 Hillside Dr Wheat Ridge, 80215-6609 Comment I approve ballot measure 2C.
Item No. 2 - Memo - Lutheran Legacy Zoning Requirements Posted by Kathy Smith Oct 7, 2024, at 11:32am
Address:
1917 Sage Circle Golden, 80401 Comment
As a member of the Jeffco Advocacy Network, I enthusiastically support the City of Wheat Ridge's ballot measure 2C, which asks voters to decide on building heights specifically for the rezoning of the former Lutheran Hospital Campus site. There is a
critical need for housing that is affordable for first-time buyers and older adults looking to downsize in Jeffco, and this site presents an excellent opportunity to address that need. Additionally, the passage of measure 2C would create open spaces for recreation and community gatherings, enhancing the quality of life in the neighborhood. It would also ensure that new developments adjacent to existing
neighborhoods remain low-density, featuring single-unit homes and duplexes. Given the rapidly rising costs of construction and materials, it is essential to seize this opportunity to foster a livable community that includes both housing and open space, with support from the private sector. Thank you for your consideration.
Item No. 2 - Memo - Lutheran Legacy Zoning Requirements
Posted by Matt Adler Oct 7, 2024, at 10:15am Address:
3605 Dudley St Wheat Ridge, 80033
Comment My name is Matt, and my family and I are Wheat Ridge residents that live on Dudley Street across from the Lutheran Medical Campus. We moved here over the summer, after reviewing the Lutheran Legacy Campus Master Plan. We were planning to attend
the Open House on September 17th but my wife went into labor that afternoon and so
we missed participating in the event. We have been keeping up with “What’s Up Wheat Ridge” and “Wheat Ridge Speaks” and we have a few comments, questions, and concerns regarding the zoning, mostly on Dudley Street. Due to us having 2 under 2, we are submitting a comment rather than attending the meeting, and plan to
watch the YouTube later. First, we fully support Ballot Question 2C and appreciate
keeping houses along existing neighborhoods similar size and spacing to what exists today. We also look forward to practical mixed-use space in the middle, and we hope for restaurants, coffee shops, an amphitheater, and plenty of things for families. We also would like to see municipal buildings or new City Hall on the west side of the
campus as that provides plenty of green space. Having read through the Item #2
Memo Lutheran Legacy Zoning Requirements for this meeting, it seems that Dudley St will be modified to be widened to allow street parking, have a 6’ sidewalk buffer, a 15’ setback for houses front doors, and then garages will be not along Dudley at all, but through an alleyway that will be accessed through the Lutheran Campus, to minimize
curb cuts on Dudley. As such this should keep most of the traffic off Dudley, which is
fantastic for the existing neighborhood. Can you please confirm if this is true, particularly for alley access. One concern we have is the 15’ setback, as it seems to be significantly smaller than the setback on the west side of Dudley. Can you confirm if Dudley will be widened to accommodate parking on the east side? Currently as a
two-lane road there is no room for parking. If Dudley is to be widened and have the 6’
sidewalk, then a 15’ setback seems more appropriate, otherwise a larger setback may be in order for aesthetics and practicality for existing residents. Finally, there are many
new families that have moved to Wheat Ridge, and an article in the October 2024 issue of 5280 Magazine mentions an influx of millennials that have moved to the city over the last decade. Many of these millennials have started families and are now
having kids. Having a sidewalk along Dudley St is most appreciated. However, there is currently no playground within walking distance from the north side of Dudley Street, and having a park or playground on the north side of Dudley, possibly connecting with the Rocky Mountain Ditch trail that is currently near the old medical campus Storage Shed would be great for pedestrian/bike/stroller access to the new development, and
also great for the new, growing families that live in the neighborhood. We strongly request a park/open space/trail in this area! Thank you for your time, Matt, and Kaitlin Item No. 2 - Memo - Lutheran Legacy Zoning Requirements Posted by Susan M. Motika Oct 7, 2024, at 10:09am
Address:
3651 Miller Court Wheat Ridge, 80033 Comment As a Wheat Ridge resident on Miller Court and a member of the Jefferson Unitarian Church Community Action Network, I strongly support the staff proposal for
redevelopment of the former Lutheran site. Affordable housing is desperately needed
in our community (with home prices still out of reach for first-time buyers) and the Lutheran campus site provides the current best opportunity to address this need. I was impressed that the plan proposes two height levels for buildings -- lower for areas near existing housing and higher for the interior of the campus, with a plan to surround this
(at least in part) with open space. I've been worried about the community impact of the
Lutheran site lying fallow for years -- or the site becoming an exclusive enclave of million-dollar+ houses. My family and I are eager to see this proposal developed.
Item No. 2 - Memo - Lutheran Legacy Zoning Requirements
Posted by
Margaret Robinson Oct 7, 2024, at 9:18am 4 Hillside Dr. Wheat Ridge, 80215 Comment
I am a Wheat Ridge resident. I am fully in support of 2C, as I see it as a great
opportunity to provide more affordable housing in Wheat Ridge. We need homes that are affordable for many of our citizens, including teachers, firefighters, grocery clerks, daycare workers, and the list goes on. Putting the taller buildings (which would still be shorter than the hospital buildings currently there) away from existing homes, will
maintain the character of the neighborhood, especially with the plan for some "open
space" within the campus. If 2C does not pass, I hate to see what will happen to that property. More luxury homes out of reach of the average Wheat Ridge citizen? Inadequate cleanup of the property? With our WR City Council providing guidance through 2C, we can ensure a great new development in Wheat Ridge. Thank you.
Item No. 2 - Memo - Lutheran Legacy Zoning Requirements
Posted by Chuck Reid Oct 7, 2024, at 9:12am
Address: 601 16th Street C-447 Golden, 80401 Comment Imagine my excitement as Wheat Ridge considers zoning changes that may allow my aging parents who have lived near the Lutheran Campus for almost 60 years, an
opportunity to move from their multi-level home to a single-story apartment. Thank you for considering this change! Now imagine my concern when I heard that a small group of residents are concerned about building heights. This is especially true when the site is planned for a 5-story building - 4 stories lower than the current situation In-lieu of the single-story option, townhomes (with stairs) are being encouraged. So, my
excitement and concern are battling, and I request the City Council stay with the PLAN and help those that want to age here have an other option. Thank you for your consideration and your care. Item No. 2 - Memo- Lutheran Legacy Zoning Requirements Posted by Mindy Mohr
Oct 4, 2024, at 4:03pm
Address: 11570 W 70th Pl Unit A, Arvada, 80004 Comment I am a member of the JeffCo Advocacy Network - a countywide housing advocacy
group that sees this as an excellent opportunity to provide affordable and accessible
homes for the entire east Jeffco community. Without 2C, the campus will most likely be high-priced homes – the city cannot afford to buy, clean up, and maintain the 100 acres of land on this site. We don’t need luxury homes on large lots; we need homes for first-time buyers, minimum wage earners, working families, and seniors wanting to
downsize. If 2C does not pass, it may result in a lost opportunity to build new homes at
a time when we are facing a critical shortage of housing options for residents in our community. The Lutheran site and all its buildings could remain empty and potentially abandoned while waiting years for “something” to happen. Could residents be taxed to pay for tearing down the existing medical buildings and cleaning up the site? How
much would that cost and who else would pay for that? This measure reduces the
building heights allowed by current zoning – both lowering residential maximum height in the areas closest to the existing neighborhood and limiting the height of buildings in the campus interior to 5 stories. 5 stories is a reasonable height and the neighborhood should NOT be afraid of this density in the interior, especially if combined with
preserved open spaces. Higher density means LESS water usage per capita, and will
provide more affordable housing for the essential workers who take care of the nearby residents in their single-family homes -- the day care providers, teachers, landscapers, home health aides, firefighters, restaurant workers, etc. This rezoning makes a future mixed-used development viable; once the site is purchased, the developer will be
required to follow the city’s community development process – which includes public
meetings to gather input from the community on what it wants to see. Thank you for your consideration.
Item No. 2 - Memo - Lutheran Legacy Zoning Requirements
Richard Cauchi (was unable to post to website and hand-delivered this comment)
3651 Miller Court, Wheat Ridge CO
Comment
As a 28-year resident on Miller court (Council District 3), I am submitting my
enthusiastic support for the 2C plan regarding the redevelopment of the former Lutheran
site. My spouse, Susan, summed up our view: “Affordable housing is needed in our
community (with home prices still out of reach for the first-time buyers) and the Lutheran
campus site provides the current best opportunity to address this need.” We are
committed to 2C, and our family will work for its implementation. As context I am semi-
retired and a sole proprietor working at home part-time, offering state policy research
and access to a 80-90 year old family painting collection.
In Person
Christie Denzy – Resident – stated she has lived in Wheat ridge for 27 years and owns
a 1957 ranch house. She said she has equity in her home due to the rising cost of
houses and although she does not plan on living her home, she appreciates the variety
of housing and affordable housing being proposed. She also stated that Jefferson
County is short by 40,000 units of affordable housing. She spoke in favor of the
proposal.
Janelle Shaver – Resident – stated that the reason more people were not testifying
tonight is because they believe Council will rubber-stamp the plan which is in the favor
of the developer. She stated that the City should demand preservation of the blue
house, chapel and patient cabins. She said ADUs should not be a use on this property;
low density should be single-family only; 30’ setback on the outer ring asked how much
is going to be open space; and spoke about the need for greater set back requirements.
Tamara Phalen – Resident – spoke to Ballot Question 2C, asking the residents to vote
on height restrictions and changing the charter for that specific property. She said her
concern was there is a lot of information before the election and was concerned that
there was not an analysis to and from. She stated she wanted citizens to scroll pass
the Ballot Question on the website and go directly to the text of the amendment, which
amends the City Charter. She asked people to pay attention to the last sentence of
Section h, stating that Council would still have to modify the zoning via an ordinance.
She said it sounds like it could be a loophole allowing Council to change the zoning
although the citizens may have voted differently. She asked citizens of Wheat Ridge to
read that amendment before voting on that ballot question.
Dororthy Archer – Resident – stated that there are too many unanswered questions and
to vote no on 2B and 2C. She said there is not enough input from the residents. She
said she was not for density, but she is for 3-4 stories, nothing higher. She stated
Council should not be competing with Denver regarding the homeless situation and
trying to house all of them. She asked Council why the City doesn’t approach Lutheran
to build a new city facility. She said the citizens and Council deserve it. She said she
would vote for a one-cent tax increase if a new city complex was built on that property
for the city. She spoke again against high density.
Via Zoom
Zack Ward -Resident – spoke on behalf of him and his partner Riley – spoke against the
tall building mandate. He stated that he wants residential, but not high density or
population growth. He spoke in favor of walking spaces to retail which will raise the
property value of those who already own homes here.
4. Contractor Licensing – Proposed Updates
Director of Community Development Lauren Mikulak and Director Public Works Maria
D’Andrea, explained the need for simplifying the specialty trades contractor licenses and
right-of-way permits and modifying the annual fees through the annual budget process.
Issue
The City of Wheat Ridge manages contractor licensing through both the Public Works and Community Development Departments. Contractors who complete work in the
City’s rights-of-way obtain a municipal contractor license through Public Works. Contractors who complete work on private property obtain a building contractor license through the Building Division. Staff from both departments are working on the implementation of the new OpenGov
software which will streamline permitting and licensing. In preparation for these changes,
staff has identified a need to simplify the contractor licensing framework. The purpose of
the October 7 study session is to seek Council concurrence on related code amendments
and fee changes for building and municipal contractors.
Council Comments
Council Member Hoppe stated her support of moving forward with the proposal.
Council Member Larson asked about mechanical contractors and if air conditioning was
included under mechanical contractors. Mikulak said yes, air conditioning would be under
Mechanical Contractors.
In answer to a question from Mayor Starker, D’Andrea stated that payment and
performance bonds are required by contractors hired by the City and others are required
to post a bond with their licensure, as well as insurance certificates.
Council Member Hultin asked if there is a review done prior to issuing contractor licenses.
D’Andrea stated that they have not turned down any license, but Public Works is planning
on having a lot more conversation with their contractors, especially those working in the
rights-of-way.
There was consensus from Council to move forward in accordance with the Memo
presented to Council.
5. Lutheran Legacy Campus Zoning Requirements
Director of Community Development Lauren Mikulak gave an update and overview of
the draft zoning amendments. She spoke to the amount of community outreach done,
the draft zoning presented to both Council and the Planning Commission, leading up to
tonight’s Study Session. Senior Planner Scott Cutler assisted with the zoning questions
and presentation.
She gave an overview of the zoning, stating that the Lutheran Legacy Campus would
create a new Mixed-Use zone titled “Mixed Use - Lutheran Legacy Campus (MU-LLC.).
She reviewed the highly customized recommendations of the master plan including
buffers between existing neighborhoods; existing assets on the site; and how the
interior is afforded more flexibility in terms of land use and height. She stated there
would be four sub-districts and explained the purpose and intent of each zone, heights,
building design, and parking. She stated that 20% of the net site development area
would be dedicated to publicly accessible open space. She showed the 38th Avenue
Frontage diagram which included sidewalk, parking setbacks, and height restrictions.
Mikulak showed a low-density overlay around the perimeter of the property. She
showed the proposal for the interior of the site and how homes were to be laid out; the
ped/bike connections; and the permitted uses for retail, office, and civic buildings. She
spoke to the requirement for the developer to submit a Concept Plan which would follow
the project from start to finish and be filed with the property at the County.
Staff requested consensus on moving forward with the draft zoning per the Memo to
Council. If consensus is reached, staff will finalize the zoning ordinance. After the
election, the zoning change will be brought to the Planning Commission and then to
Council for first and second readings, with possible adoption in March or April 2025.
City Council Comments
Council Member Ohm asked if the developer would be able to pay a fee in lieu of
providing the open space. Mikulak stated that the developer’s open space requirement
would add to the 20%. In answer to his question, Scott Cutler stated that the bulk plane
requirements are more strictive than other plans.
Council Member Hoppe stated that seven comments were received online, and all were
positive comments. She asked if the parks and open space would be available for
anyone to access. City Manager Patrick Goff stated that the residents could use the
parks; however, the City would not be taking on any maintenance of the properties or
streets. It would probably be done through a Metro District.
Council Member Hoppe asked if the hospital was kept and used, would the height of the
building remain. Mikulak said yes, it would remain as a non-conforming use.
Mayor Pro Tem Stites stated the height limitations throughout the property and on the
perimeter were well-thought out and he was supportive of the zoning. He especially
liked the setback requirements matching the height of the buildings. He then asked
what happens if the proposed charger change does not pass. Mikulak stated that they
would start over, as another plan would need to be done.
Patrick Goff stated that staff is looking at the possibility of moving some of the City
offices into the hospital building or perhaps another building on site. The developers
who have looked at the property over the last few months are aware of the City’s
interest.
Council Member Snell asked about the ditch and having sidewalk continue along side or
possibly enclosing the ditch. Mikulak stated that they engaged the ditch company
earlier in the process and will reach out to them again regarding possible easements, as
some areas are very narrow.
Council Member Larson thanked staff for their excellent work and forethought on the
zoning issues. He asked to have a discussion regarding parking, as parking spillover
into residential streets is a concern. Mikulak stated that there are minimum parking
requirements depending on land uses. With a property of this size, staff would look at
the parking in a more comprehensive manner, as there may be an opportunity for retail
and commercial to have shared parking lots. She stated that by now allowing vehicles
to pass through the property, it would hopefully cut down on parking outside of the
property.
Council Member Hultin asked if there was a way to talk about the amount of open space
in more relatable terms. She stated she was thankful to staff for listening to Council and
what the community wanted, as there were a lot of specific details in the zoning plan.
She was grateful that staff understood the big picture and the details as well.
Council reached consensus to move forward with the zoning as proposed.
6. 2024 Budget Update
Issue
In this document, we present a financial update on the 2024 Fiscal Year so that the
City’s decisionmakers can enter the 2025 budget process informed as to the current
financial picture. This update is required per sec. 10.11 of the City’s Charter. The focus of this update is the City’s General Fund operating budget.
City Manager Patrick Goff gave an overview of the 2024 Budget. He stated that one big
change moving forward would be to place the large one-time revenues into the Capitol
Projects Fund and no longer put them in the General Fund as part of long-term
revenues.
Goff stated there would be a Budget Study Session on October 21st. He stated the City
has been busy over the last five years. He reviewed where revenues in some areas are
up, they are down in building and use permits. He spoke to the 17% projected reserve
while trying to get to a 25% minimum. He stated that every department is looking at
whether vacancies need to be filled or provided differently. All departments are
evaluating fees to ensure the city is recouping costs of doing business. There have
been some large planning and public works projects and it’s time to step back and build
the reserves again. Goff stated that the City has a Standard & Poor AA rating, which
shows good financial stability.
Council Comments
Council Member Hoppe stated that while moving the one-time revenues into the CIP
Fund is good, that those revenues were used as part of the percentage of reserves and
perhaps moving back to a 17% reserve is enough cushion. It is a discussion which she
stated should take place with Council.
Council Member Weaver stated that she is in full support of the change and believes it’s
a smart way to manage. She stated how proud she was of the incredible things Wheat
Ridge has been able to accomplish in the last five years.
Council Member Larson stated that he agrees with the one-time revenues/expenditures
being in the CIP. In answer to a question he asked, Patrick Goff stated that during the
Council Budget Study Session, Council would be able to discuss their specific needs
and priorities and decide what to fund or not fund.
7. Staff Report(s)
City Manager Patrick Goff stated that the Council Legislative Committee consists of
Mayor Starker and Council Member Larson and asked if there was another council
member who wished to be on the committee. Council Member Hultin volunteered for
the position. Goff also confirmed the City Council Retreat schedule for January 31st
through February 1st, stating that the location was to be yet determined. However, it
would be at a restaurant inside the City limits.
8. Elected Officials’ Report(s)
Mayor and Council Members reported on recent meetings and events they attended
and upcoming activities in the community.
9. Adjournment
With no further business to come before Council, Mayor Starker adjourned the meeting
at 8:30 p.m.
_________________________________
Margy Greer, Senior Deputy City Clerk
_________________________________
Korey Stites, Mayor Pro Tem