Loading...
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